AN Ipswich teenager convicted of assault for attacking a man in an Ipswich street is today celebrating his conviction being quashed.Daniel Forbes was charged on October 6 last year with assaulting Alex Vickery in Woodville Road, Ipswich, on April 30, 2005.

AN Ipswich teenager convicted of assault for attacking a man in an Ipswich street is today celebrating his conviction being quashed.

Daniel Forbes was charged on October 6 last year with assaulting Alex Vickery in Woodville Road, Ipswich, on April 30, 2005.

But 18-year-old Forbes, of Marion Road, Ipswich, said that he was resting at his father's home from injuries sustained in a separate assault when the incident occurred.

Ipswich Crown Court heard that Mr Vickery confronted a group of youngsters who were leaning against his flatmate's car when he returned home late at night.

Mr Vickery said: “About a week before the incident my room mate had his wing mirror smashed off his car.

“I was coming home at about 10.30pm with a Chinese meal when I turned into my road and saw a group of youths leaning against his car.

“I asked them to step away from the car and a boy sat on a wall nearby said 'they are only girls' and I replied that I didn't care.”

It was at that point that Mr Vickery felt a blow to his head and was punched up to four times.

A neighbour who came to his rescue is said to have recognised Forbes as one of those involved.

The group ran away as he approached Mr Vickery.

Forbes told the court that on April 24 he had been the victim of an assault in Clapgate Lane, in Ipswich and was still using crutches a week later.

He said it was difficult to walk let alone run.

He said: “I was on crutches, with a splint on my leg and had a black eye and a footprint on my ribs.

“I did not leave the house for a week because I was scared of meeting the boys who did it again and I could not walk very well.”

Before quashing the original conviction of a 120-hour community punishment order, Judge John Devaux, said: “I was struck by the failure to call for medical evidence that should have been readily available.

“However, the prosecution were unable to say which one of the group Mr Forbes was in the attack and therefore cannot satisfy the court that he was the one who struck the victim.”