Talented young footballer Reggie Devonne Lowe, 21, has been spared a jail sentence despite being jointly found guilty of unlawful wounding and house-breaking.

When he and co-defendant Elroy Jermaine Dill, 24, appeared before Chief Justice Richard Ground to be told what punishment they would receive for an attack on David Leroy Burchall at his home address in Southampton in January 2005, they were warned the offences would normally result in time behind bars.

But lawyers presented reasons in court why they felt Lowe and Dill should be spared prison terms. After hearing the arguments Mr. Justice Ground gave both men 18-month prison sentences suspended for three years, ordered them to do 500 hours of community service and made them the subjects of probation orders.

Social inquiry reports recommended an alternative to prison be used to punish the men in view of them having no past criminal convictions and both being gainfully employed with good job prospects and character references.

Mention was also made of North Village footballer Lowe?s prospects of succeeding as a professional footballer.

The pair, both from Fork Lane, Southampton, were last month found guilty by a jury of unlawfully wounding Mr. Burchall after breaking into his apartment through an unlocked front door.

Lowe and Dill had gone to the property to confront Mr. Burchall about Dill?s missing motorbike and a scuffle ensued involving a machete, which left Mr. Burchall with cuts to his head, arms, wrist and a fractured skull.

Lawyer Justin Williams, representing Lowe, said of his client: ?He is 21, has no previous convictions and has a supportive family structure. His father is a respectable businessman and Mr. Lowe is an apprentice mechanic.

?He has been forthright in his role in the offences and realises the errors in taking matters into his own hands and approaching the complainant in the manner that he did. He has learned from the experience.?

Mr. Williams said his client?s age, the fact he had no previous convictions, that he did not go to the premises with the intent of carrying out an assault and that he was employed with good prospects, were all reasons he should not go to prison.

On behalf of Dill, lawyer Larry Scott, said the circumstances of both defendants were similar. He explained: ?In an interview with social services he admitted in retrospect it was the wrong thing to do. The community they were living in was being impacted by an individual that everyone thought was inappropriate.

?They did not mean to cause harm, but harm was caused. After the injury everyone left because it was a frightening experience. These two men are not likely to be before the courts ever again. This is a salutary lesson for them.?

The Chief Justice said: ?I recognise that both these men are not part of a gang. They both have jobs as air conditioning technicians. Mr. Lowe has a promising career as a soccer player with a real chance to be a professional.?

The offences took place before the introduction of mandatory jail terms for possession of a bladed article.

Mr. Justice Ground pointed out that normally an offence of wounding with a machete would attract a prison sentence, but went on: ?However, the problem is if you send the wrong people to jail you can do more harm than good.

?To send them to prison risks turning two promising young men into misfits.?

He said he was not going to do that and went along with the recommendations of the social services reports, making a few modifications of his own.

For the offence of unlawful wounding he gave Dill and Lowe 18-month jail terms suspended for three years and a three-year probation order that included the instruction not to associate with criminals or anyone involved with illegal drugs.

For house-breaking both men were ordered to complete 500 hours of community service.