Wick man warned of 'caveman attitude' after assault on ex-partner
Mark Mackay was said to have adopted a "caveman attitude" with regard to his obligations to his partner after they split up.
The comparison was drawn by Sheriff Andrew Berry who added: “Things have moved on since then.”
The sheriff made the comment before sentencing the 30-year-old at Wick, on Monday, for an assault on his ex, Zoe Anderson. Mackay pleaded guilty and admitted a record.
The court was told that Ms Anderson had warned her colleagues at Wick’s Tesco store that Mackay might appear, following the end of their 13-year relationship, and wanted to “stay out of his way”.
Her prediction proved right as the accused arrived at the store on March 25 having sent Ms Anderson a text message saying that there was “something he wished to discuss with her”.

Ms Anderson had taken the view it would be best to avoid Mackay on the basis that “feelings were a bit raw” and went to a private staff area. However, Mackay guessed where she was.
Fiscal David Barclay described what happened next. He said that CCTV cameras recorded Mackay pushing Ms Anderson and raising his hand as if to strike her. Mackay, of Henrietta Street, Wick, was escorted from the store.
The sheriff said that Mackay was typical of some offenders in domestic abuse cases who regarded themselves as the victims.
Sheriff Berry, who saw a background report on Mackay, told him: “You are saying that this lady got what she deserved. You are also saying that you paid for the property when you were 18 and you think she has no rights to the former family home or financial claims.
"It’s a kind of caveman attitude. Society has moved on since then but you don’t appear to have moved on with it.”
Mackay, an offshore worker, was made subject to a year-long supervision order and will carry out 65 hours of unpaid community work.
The sheriff warned him that if he didn’t comply with the court orders or if there was any repetition of a domestic nature, he would be “in serious trouble”.
The accused was said to be complying with a bail condition banning him from having any contact with his ex-partner except for pre-arranged family meetings, so the court took the view that a non-harassment order was not necessary.