Here is a round up of some of the cases heard at the Isle of Wight Magistrates' Court, for the week commencing March 29.

Francisco Alverez, 45, of Partridge Road, Newport.

Assault, found guilty following a trial.

Fine £537, surcharge £54, costs £650.

Michael James Barnes, 31, of Forest Road, Winford.

Used threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour with intent, and failed to comply with supervision requirements.

18-month community order to include 100 hours of unpaid work, surcharge £95, costs £85.

Bradley Kyle Sparshot, 29, of Furrlongs, Newport.

Breach of criminal order entering an area of Ryde he was prohibited from. Criminal damage to a prison van.

Eight weeks in custody.

Darren John Clements, 51, of Hendy Road, East Cowes.

Arson.

12 weeks in custody, suspended for 12 months. Restraining order. Surcharge £128, Costs £85.

Read about the case here

Rodney Phillip Travis, 37, of Green Street, Ryde.

Possession of cocaine.

12-month conditional discharge, surcharge £22, costs £85.

Read about the case here

Kevin Junior Wadey, 18, of Main Road, Rookley.

Possession of cannabis.

Six-month conditional discharge, surcharge £22, costs £85.

Read about the case here

Kevin Lawrence Gallagher, 54, of Newport Street, Ryde.

Drunk and disorderly.

Fine £40, surcharge £34, costs £40.

Read about the case here

Bradley Edgington, 22, of Chichester Walk, Newport.

Driving without care and attention. Used a vehicle without insurance, without a licence, and failed to report an accident.

Disqualified from driving for 12 months. 18-month community order, to include 200 hours of unpaid work. Surcharge £95, costs £85.

Read about the case here

Johnathan Paul Driver, 51, of Horestone Rise, Nettlestone.

Driving without due care and attention.

Five penalty points. Fine £243, surcharge £34, costs £85.

Read about the case here

The publication of these listings is covered by a legal defence called qualified privilege.

When a court is sitting in the open, the press can report on anything that happens, unless there are specific reporting restrictions.

As a principle, we do not remove a defendant's identifying information (such as name, age and address) from court reports. To do so would be set a precedent and damage the foundations of open justice. It could also defame someone innocent, who happens to have the same name.