A teenager influenced by an “associate” attempted to set light to a house in which two female inhabitants were asleep upstairs in the early hours of the morning.
Lewis Rutherford, then aged 18, tried to light a rag with an accelerant and push it through the letterbox of the house in Spennymoor, shortly before 3.40am on February 20, last year.
Durham Crown Court heard that despite “numerous” attempts, he failed to ignite the rag or push it through the letterbox, so he used a small hammer-like tool to smash the windows of the house, in Wood Drive, causing £ 3,000 worth of damage.
He then turned, climbed over the fence and walked away from the property.
The woman living there with her mother woke on hearing the windows smashing and looked out to see the culprit leaving on foot.
Johnny Walker, prosecuting, said on viewing CCTV they saw the footage capturing the incident.
Mr Walker said it was the fourth attack on their home, or on the car parked outside, since late December 2022.
It was reported to police who were able to pinpoint Rutherford as the perpetrator through links to DNA traces left at the scene.
When interviewed he chose not to respond to police questioning.
But at a hearing at the court in May, the, now, 19-year-old defendant, of York Hill Crescent, Spennymoor, admitted a charge of attempted arson being reckless as to whether life was endangered.
The case was adjourned for preparation of a background probation report and a psychiatric assessment of Rutherford.
Mr Walker said, somewhat “inexplicably” and to the “bewilderment” of all parties, Rutherford was dealt with by magistrates for the criminal damage to the windows and pleaded guilty.
He received a community order with a compensation requirement to pay for the damage to the windows.
Statements provided by the woman living at the house, with her mother, were then read to the court by Mr Walker.
She said their lives were “turned upside down” by the incident.
They were forced to flee their home and had to be found emergency accommodation, before being rehoused.
They had to be split up during their 15 weeks in temporary accommodation as they could not take their three pet dogs with them and the victim had to take five weeks leave from work.
Every time she left home in the aftermath of the incident she felt anxious and did not trust anyone.
She also altered her shift patterns at work, as it was near to Spennymoor and she took different routes to her new home in case she was followed.
The court heard that since the incident her mother has been diagnosed as suffering from PTSD.
In a more recent updated statement, she added that the 18-month wait for proceedings to be resolved has been “frustrating”, with it, “hanging over my head”, amid the constant worry the case would be dismissed.
Asked by Judge Geoffrey Marson KC what was the cause of the attacks on their previous home, Mr Walker said it was, “bad blood from a close associate of the defendant”, who, “adopted the poisonous view of his associate.”
Mairi Clancy, in mitigation, said there was “no evidence” linking the defendant with the three previous attacks at that address or any intimidation of the family living there on his behalf.
“He’s 19 now and almost 20, but he was 18 at the time, and immature and impressionable.
“He was influenced by others to commit this offence, but he accepts his culpability for his actions.
“By way of explanation, but not an excuse, he was suffering an extremely bad patch in his life with a number of family bereavements.
“He suffered with low mood swings and memory loss due to this trauma, with depressive disorder and possibly ADHD.
“Soon after this, he was placed on a course of anti-depressants addressing his underlying issues behind the commission of this offence.”
Miss Clancy said the defendant has stayed out of trouble since the incident and is now, “absent drugs and rarely drinks”.
She added: “He acknowledges the people living there would have been terrified and is deeply regretful, having had poor emotional control at the time.”
The court heard the defendant is in work, self-employed doing contracting work, in everything from, steel erecting and roofing, to general joinery.
Judge Marson said the victims in this case were entitled to feel safe in their own home without having to suffer the type of attacks that took place from December 2022, culminating in the attempted arson on February 20, 2023.
“These involved a close associate of yours and you decided to wreak revenge on these two perfectly innocent women in their own home at night.
“You made a determined attempt to put a rag covered in accelerant through their front letter box.
“Had you succeeded in doing that, undoubtedly there would have been a high risk of very serious physical harm.
“I have heard victim impact statements.
“What happened that night was bad enough, but what might have happened will be forever with your victims.
“They will be haunted by the prospect of what might have happened and there has been very serious psychological effects, affecting their daily lives.
See more court stories from The Northern Echo, by clicking here
- St Helen Auckland arsonist attacked victim in home
- Man set light to bedding in ex-partner's Leadgate home and walked away
- Homes evacuated in County Durham when woman started fire in her bath
Get more content including the stories that matter to your community from The Northern Echo for just £3 for 3 months for a limited time by clicking here.
“It was a determined revenge attack, under the influence of alcohol, on bail and while wearing a disguise.”
Imposing a 45-month young offenders’ institute sentence, Judge Marson told Rutherford that had he been an adult offender (aged 21 or above), “you would have been going to custody for a much longer period.”
He also put in place a restraining order prohibiting the defendant from approaching or trying to contact his victim, “until further order”, or, in other words, “without limit of time.”
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel