A RECENTLY qualified nurse is likely to lose her job after being convicted of an alcohol-fuelled assault on a fellow passenger on a Saturday night Newcastle to Carlisle train.

The trouble erupted during the return journey to Carlisle on Saturday, March 5, after Emily Scott celebrated her 21st birthday party by visiting bars in Newcastle with friends, including fellow NHS worker Sophie Graham-Mackie.

Both women became involved after a row broke out with fellow passengers over whether a window in their carriage should be left opened or closed.

Both Scott, who spent three years studying at university to qualify as a nurse, and Graham-Mackie, each denied a common assault and a public order offence. Scott, of Regent Street, Carlisle, was convicted of both offences,

Graham-Mackie, 22, also of Regent Street, was cleared of the public order offence but convicted of the assault charge. During an all day trial, the court heard evidence from the couple who were the victims.

The birthday party group accused the man of verbally abusing Scott after he and his wife disagreed with them over whether their carriage window should be open or closed: he wanted it open but the women, in party gear, were cold and wanted it closed.

But the couple, on their way back from watching a Newcastle United match, were sitting near the women and they felt the carriage was hot.

The man’ wife, an experienced probation officer, said things “got a bit silly” as her husband opened the window and it was closed two or three times by the women.

Sitting next to her husband, she recalled seeing an arm “aggressively slam” the window shut and then Scott yelled at her husband. Words were exchanged, and she then saw an arm “lunge” towards her husband’s face.

This left him with a scratch on his chin.

It happened as the train was near to Hexham, the court heard. There was  verbal abuse from Scott, the court heard. The victim's wife denied that her husband was verbally abusive towards the defendant.

As the situation escalated, his wife had got out her mobile phone because she wanted proof of what was happening.

She also wanted to remind Scott that she could get into trouble. Asked if she was aggressive, the woman said: “Absolutely now: I’ve worked for 25 years with violent offenders in prisons and I don’t become aggressive; we do everything possible to calm the situation.”

Scott had then snatched her phone from her hand, she said.

Scott claimed she did this because she feared the phone would be thrown at her, though prosecutor Andy Travis said this claim was simply not credible.

The court heard that Graham-Mackie was not involved in the row over the window but she did get involved after Scott and the man had a verbal exchange. Rejecting the defendant’s claim that her husband insulted her friend, the woman said: “What started it was her friend being extremely drunk and being abusive and aggressive.”

The woman described how Graham-Mackie jumped on to a seat and threw fruit cider over her, though the court heard the defendant was aiming for the woman’s husband.

In her evidence, Scott said she had drunk eight cocktails and that she was “six out of ten” drunk. She accused the man she assaulted of insulting her because of her weight, saying: “He was swearing at me and really intimidating me.” 

She denied scratching his face.

Graham-Mackie, admitting she was “nine out of ten drunk,” told the court she recalled everything that happened. She admitted throwing drink towards the couple but she felt threatened and feared being attacked.

She said she was "disgtusted" by the language the Scott's victim used towards her friend. Yet both women accepted that they had not contacted the police after the incident.

Giving his verdicts, District Judge John Temperley noted that both defendants were of previous good character but he ruled that the couple who were assaulted gave evidence that was credible and plausible.

Though had each consumed three drinks over several hours, the defendants sought to exaggerate the alcohol consumption of the victims. The judge did not accept that the man used the offensive language claimed by the defendants.

By contrast, the defendants had been drinking all day. “They are highly unlikely to have good recollection,” said the judge. “I am quite satisfied that they have minimised their alcohol consumption and minimised their behaviour.”

Scott did cause the scratch the man’s face while she was angry about something she believed he had said, commented the judge, ruling that she had been verbally abusive and aggressive and that she had grabbed the woman’s phone.

The judge ruled that Graham-Mackie had recklessly thrown the drink at the man, though it spilled over his wife; and that the defendant “lunged” towards the couple but was then pulled away by a bystander.

Scott was given a 12-month community order with 100 hours of unpaid work; and must pay £100 compensation to the man she assaulted as well as costs of £300 and a £95 victim surcharge. Graham-Mackie was fined £300, with £200 costs and a £34 victim surcharge.