Two teenagers face a total of 16 years in prison for an attack of “nauseating brutality” on an Oxford student.

Craig Knowles and Thomas Mack were jailed on Friday for assaulting Kentaro Ikeda, a postgrad student at St Edmund’s Hall, as he cycled home through University Parks in July last year.

The youths, both 18, dragged Ikeda from his bike before striking him on the head with a metal bicycle lock, Oxford Crown Court heard. They fled with his laptop, mobile phone, rucksack and bike, leaving the victim semi-conscious and bleeding.

Ikeda was found by passers-by, and rushed to the John Radcliffe Hospital for emergency surgery. The attack has left him semi-paralysed and with serious brain damage.

Knowles was jailed for 9 years after he confessed to causing actual bodily harm, grievous bodily harm with intent, and robbery. Mack denied all charges and faces 7 years in prison.

Ikeda now resides in a rehabilitative centre near Tokyo, where he receives permanent care. He spends his days in a wheelchair and is only able to type on a computer with one hand.

During the trial, Ikeda communicated with the jury via recorded interviews from his hospital bed. He told the court, “this attack has left me partly paralysed on my left side. I have no movement from my left elbow to the fingertips. This makes is very difficult to perform everyday actions. I have difficulty in concentrating.”

However he added, “I remain optimistic for the future and one day I would like to resume my studies.”

Judge Terence Maher told the court, “this man’s life has effectively been stolen from him.”

“It is no exaggeration to say this is an offence of the utmost gravity which has had life-changing consequences for the victim. All this from a few moments of nauseating brutality.”

The Judge described the attackers as “exalting” in the crime, shown in text messages they sent to friends shortly after the attack.

These messages allegedly included the phrase, “mate, you missed out… we saw a Chinese man on the way back and beat the shit out of him,” and, “that’s how Marston boys roll.”

Detective Chief Inspector George Bain, who led the investigation, commented, “the drunken behaviour of these two men has left the life of a promising academic changed forever.”

Friends of the victim expressed satisfaction that the case has been resolved, but concern at the length of his attackers’ sentences.

Evan Innis, also a postgrad at Teddy Hall, said, “on the one hand, I am happy that the case has been resolved, but on the other hand, the sentence itself is too light, as it seems that they could have intentionally killed him… The verdict feels very light.”

Chernein Oon, a student at Merton, added, “9 years of imprisonment for a life that might never be the same again… Not quite fair, but at least justice has been served.”

Mrs Ikeda, the victim’s mother, said, “Kentaro would like to thank everyone for their help in his case. He feels that both his attackers should be given appropriate sentences as his life has been very much changed due to this incident.”

The incident has had irreversible consequences for Ikeda’s family, who had relied upon the money invested in his education to provide for their future. Ikeda’s father died several years ago. After the attack, his mother had to take early retirement to become his full-time carer.

A friend of Ikeda from Merton College said that he is recovering, but that it is still unknown whether he will return to Oxford.

Oxford’s rowers have emerged triumphant from a dramatic boat race, coming back from an early Cambridge advantage to claim a convincing victory.

Cambridge powered ahead in the first minutes of the race, establishing a three-quarter length lead over their rivals. But an Oxford push at around the halfway point, following a clash of oars, allowed the Dark Blues to pull ahead.

Their light blue opponents proved unable to close the gap, with Oxford eventually winning by a distance of three and a half lengths.

The result justifies bookkeepers’ faith in Oxford. The team, the heaviest ever fielded in a university boat race, had been the overwhelming favourites.

Oxford cox Colin Groshong said he had been confident of victory. “I knew we had the guns for the whole course,” he said. “It was a great feeling knowing I had that at my fingertips.”

The race began with bad luck for Oxford as Cambridge won the toss, allowing them to choose which side of the river to race on. They opted for the south or “Surrey” station, which is the faster side of the river early in the course.
However, their attempts to build an unassailable lead before halfway suffered an early blow when they failed to respond immediately to referee Boris Rankov’s starting shout.

The team managed to draw ahead at the three minute mark, following aggressive demands for a push from cox Rebecca Dowbiggin. But their fragile advantage was lost at the halfway point of the race as Rankov was forced to separate the crews after a clash of oars. Groshong chose the moment of confusion to order a push, and his men responded by increasing their stroke rate to a steady 38 strokes a minute. The Oxford team gradually pulled ahead as Cambridge proved unable to match the surge.

By the time the crews reached Chiswick Steps, the Dark Blues’ power and the late advantage of the north side of the river had opened a two-length gap between the crews. The Oxford team crossed the line several seconds ahead of their rivals to win the race in a total time of 17 minutes, the fastest winning time since 2005.

Oxford president Colin Smith told press “It was a really tough race, especially by halfway and Cambridge came close to making it their day.”

“By choosing the Surrey station they had to win by halfway, but as long as we hung in there and rowed with rhythm, it was going to be tough for them.”

Oxford’s victory means they have now won four of the last five races. However, Cambridge still lead once the event’s 180-year history is taken into account: they have won a total of 79 boat races to Oxford’s 75.

Oxford students have joined the national outcry against tuition fee hikes, as OUSU followed student unions across the country in condemning a raise in payments.

Over two-thirds of universities would like to charge students at least £4,000 per year, a recent survey by the BBC showed. Some universities even called for fees of up to £20,000, or for complete removal of the fee cap.

The national cap on fees is due to be reviewed this year as the first cohort of students charged at the current rate graduate.

National Union of Students president Wes Streeting denounced the suggestion of fee rises. “In the context of the current recession, it is extremely arrogant for university vice chancellors to be fantasising about charging their students even higher fees and plunging them into over £32,000 of debt,” he said.

His views were echoed by prominent figures in OUSU. “OUSU currently opposes a lifting of the cap on tuition fees,” said OUSU President Lewis Iwu, “the student community needs to work together to ensure that our voices are heard in this crucial debate.”

A facebook group calling for a petition against fee raises has gathered over 130,000 members.

Lord Patten, Oxford’s Vice-Chancellor, has been a prominent voice in favour of raising the limit on fees. He recently told the Government that “such a low level” of fees was “intolerable” for University administrators.

Patten said he did not feel universities should serve as engines of social mobility, accusing the government of treating them like “local social security offices.”

Supporters of raising fees have pointed to a recent report by Universities UK, a group which represents the interests of University vice-chancellors. The report suggested that a rise in tuition fees up to £5,000 would not significantly affect numbers of students applying to university.

Jonny Medland, OUSU’s Vice-President-Elect for Academic and Access Affairs, questioned the report’s findings, “rising tuition fees will inevitably deter students from attending many universities as they consider whether they will see enough benefits to make entering into vast sums of debt worthwhile.”

Average student debt would soar to around £32,000 if tuition fees rose to £7 000, the report’s researchers predicted.

The report’s compilers also note that 59% of school leavers who do not go to university cite the costs of university as a primary factor in their decision.

Many Oxford students have spoken out in support of the Student Union’s opposition to any increase in fees. First-year undergraduate Carla Thomas said she felt many middle-income students might struggle to pay fees even if the poorest were supported by bursaries, saying “raising fees would hit the people in the middle hardest.”

Others, however, felt an Oxford education was worth potentially higher fees. Tim Kelly, a St Anne’s law student, stated that he would be willing to pay provided the extra money was spent on improved facilities and teaching. “For an Oxbridge degree, £7 000 is definitely worth it,” he said.

The NUS last week organised a mass lobby of MPs by students, demanding ministers to scrap the current system of tuition fees and student loans, and instead introduce a “graduate tax.” This would make university free at the point of entry, but would mean that graduates would pay for university out of their income.

According to NUS President Wes Streeting, graduates would make “a contribution depending on how much they are benefiting financially from their own use of the system.”

The University and College’s Union, which represents lecturers and academics, has strongly opposed any potential raise in fees. Secretary Sally Hunt told press, “increasing fees or the other financial barriers that so many students and parents come up against when considering university is certainly not the way to deliver a world-class university system.”

She pointed to a survey showing that the majority of British citizens wanted to see tuition fees abolished, not raised.

Oxford University has declined to comment on the matter, stating that “we have no established policy at the moment.”

Oxford applicants for 2010 and 2011 will not have to face the additional hurdle of achieving the new A* grade at A-Level, the University has announced.

A spokesperson for Oxford University said, “as with any new grades/qualifications we are interested to see how they correlate with our own selection procedures.”

The University has not ruled out the possibility of using A*s in the future. “If it becomes apparent that A* grades are a good indication of aptitude for Oxford courses, we will be interested in looking at them,” said a University spokesperson.

Several students have praised Oxford’s decision to delay using the new grade, which carries a pass mark of 90%.

Elena Lynch, the chair of Target Schools, which is an OUSU initiative aiming to improve access to Oxford, said, “the A* grade is a new grade for A-levels and we should wait to see how it works and which students are getting this grade before we make offers on it.”

But she expressed her support for the introduction of the grade, saying that it could help universities distinguish between the numerous straight-A students.

She said, “Oxford currently receives thousands of applications a year, and an A* grade, provided the university’s concerns are satisfied, would probably help to choose between them but only along with the whole process of interviews, personal statements and academic work.”

Another student commented that Oxford’s decision not to immediately use the A* grade, “prevents the students at this present moment in time who are the ‘guinea pig’ year from worrying about the new system and the effects it will have on their application to Oxford.”

Oxford’s decision comes after Cambridge University announced that it would require at least one A* from 2010 onwards. Cambridge’s criteria are set to rise to two A*s and an A “in the fullness of time.”