Steven Gerrard.....

[bkkjames]

Nice words from our resident Chihuahua

Thanks BJ, I am like an English Bull Terrier - sans the English and plus the intelligence

[EastSaxCol]

Act like a dick, get treated like a dick

2 keyboard warriors on one thread.

Next time you come to Thailand (if they let you in), and you want to start your 'I'm a friend of Harry Roberts' <deleted>, just let me know where you are

And before anyone starts getting on my case, I suggest you look up Harry Roberts, see what kind of scum bag he is, and understand that sanmiguellight is bang out of order

Harry Roberts is scum. Enuff said.

I remember the chant ""Harry Roberts is our friend, is our friend, is our friend. Harry Roberts is our friend, he kills coppers" being sung at Upton Park on a regular basis in the late 60's - early 70's.

Although never joining in myself, it was a catchy little number that somehow stuck in your head. I always thought it part of the historical antipathy in the East End to the Old Bill generally -- although only slightly odd seeing that Roberts was out of Acton, west London.

[bkkjames]

How many weeks until we can get back to talking about football? I see we won't get the community shield here in Thailand, suprise suprise.

What has this to do with Gerrard getting himself off? Nothing.

[EastSaxCol]

How many weeks until we can get back to talking about football? I see we won't get the community shield here in Thailand, suprise suprise.

What has this to do with Gerrard getting himself off? Nothing.

Gerrard didn't get "himself off", he was found to be not guilty the the jury. Unless you're suggesting that he somehow bought-off the jury with stolen hubcaps and car radios that is ?

[bkkjames]

How many weeks until we can get back to talking about football? I see we won't get the community shield here in Thailand, suprise suprise.

What has this to do with Gerrard getting himself off? Nothing.

Gerrard didn't get "himself off", he was found to be not guilty the the jury. Unless you're suggesting that he somehow bought-off the jury with stolen hubcaps and car radios that is ?

Careful there MC, he might send of his 'lightweights' to do a Meno Soprano on your car sometime.

Edited July 27, 2009 by bkkjames

[EastSaxCol]

How many weeks until we can get back to talking about football? I see we won't get the community shield here in Thailand, suprise suprise.

What has this to do with Gerrard getting himself off? Nothing.

Gerrard didn't get "himself off", he was found to be not guilty the the jury. Unless you're suggesting that he somehow bought-off the jury with stolen hubcaps and car radios that is ?

Careful there MC, he might send of his 'lightweights' to do a Meno Soprano on your car sometime.

Err, which language are you speaking James ? What is MC ( Master of Ceremonies ? ) And what have The Sopranos to do with Liverpool "scallies" ?

Tell you what though. Gerrard is a saint compared to Lee Bowyer and not only more palatable then Terry, but would also make a far better captain. But having said that, not doubt, he'll be at the receiving end of some chants and general banter throughout the Premiership grounds next season.

[Mossfinn]

Surely he used the 'Ken Dodd', defence,

That is being absolutely sure that no one in Liverpool would serve a guilty notice to one of their heroes, obviously only after ensuring that no Manchester or Everton fans are on the jury and they are easy to spot, they are unable walk without the aid of their hands

And if we are honest, it doesn't really matter that the guy had already been hit, if someone comes at you with the likelihood of throwing punches, you have every right to use reasonable force to stop the action.

By any judge of reality, you cannot say that about Barton.

Who on Earth is Harry Roberts?

Edited July 27, 2009 by Mossfinn

[nev]

come on lads stop defending him you know he got of because he is famous and has money, the other six guilty and only one threw a punch he threw three and admitted it.

now why did the bystanders in his group get found guilty just by being there.

It stinks that he gets let off there aremany cases where rich and famous get off and the average joe blow gets guilt.

I am not being biased here because he plays for liverpool i would say the same if aunited player got let off.

And also what is a profesional player going out and getting drunk he even admitted he was drunk said on a scale 7 out 10 bad example for the young kids, hey i am stevie g i can go out geet drunk smash a guy 3 times in the face with six of my mates with me and get off.

[JacknDanny]

Who on Earth is Harry Roberts?

A scumbag, who shot dead 2 policemen, in London, back in the 60s

[JacknDanny]

come on lads stop defending him you know he got of because he is famous and has money, the other six guilty and only one threw a punch he threw three and admitted it.

now why did the bystanders in his group get found guilty just by being there.

It stinks that he gets let off there aremany cases where rich and famous get off and the average joe blow gets guilt.

I am not being biased here because he plays for liverpool i would say the same if aunited player got let off.

And also what is a profesional player going out and getting drunk he even admitted he was drunk said on a scale 7 out 10 bad example for the young kids, hey i am stevie g i can go out geet drunk smash a guy 3 times in the face with six of my mates with me and get off.

I see where you are coming from nev, however you are missing the point.

Had Gerard been charged with assault, (probably at worst S47, as I didnt read about the guy having serious injuries), then there is a chance he could have been found guilty.

He was charged with Affray, which is a much more serious offence, and very difficult to prove.

There generally has to be much more involved than a few punches thrown, and it is a lot more difficult to prove (for example, it has to be proven that your average Joe would be in fear of his/her safety)

I believe the others involved, returned after Gerard had left, which would make it easier to prove the offence of Affray against them, hence the reason why they pleaded guilty

[rixalex]

I see where you are coming from nev, however you are missing the point.

Had Gerard been charged with assault, (probably at worst S47, as I didnt read about the guy having serious injuries), then there is a chance he could have been found guilty.

He was charged with Affray, which is a much more serious offence, and very difficult to prove.

There generally has to be much more involved than a few punches thrown, and it is a lot more difficult to prove (for example, it has to be proven that your average Joe would be in fear of his/her safety)

I believe the others involved, returned after Gerard had left, which would make it easier to prove the offence of Affray against them, hence the reason why they pleaded guilty

Good point Jack. It's weird that the prosecution went for the Affray charge. Surely they would have known the likely outcome?

[JacknDanny]

I see where you are coming from nev, however you are missing the point.

Had Gerard been charged with assault, (probably at worst S47, as I didnt read about the guy having serious injuries), then there is a chance he could have been found guilty.

He was charged with Affray, which is a much more serious offence, and very difficult to prove.

There generally has to be much more involved than a few punches thrown, and it is a lot more difficult to prove (for example, it has to be proven that your average Joe would be in fear of his/her safety)

I believe the others involved, returned after Gerard had left, which would make it easier to prove the offence of Affray against them, hence the reason why they pleaded guilty

Good point Jack. It's weird that the prosecution went for the Affray charge. Surely they would have known the likely outcome?

No bottle merchants.

Everyone passes the buck, so they cant be blamed.

I dont know the full facts, but from what I have seen and read, Gerard should never have been charged with Affray.

I mean even the main witness came across as being FOS. Gerard called him 'lad' . All the scousers Ive ever met its part of their vocabulary, so I dont see how someone can get upset by being called 'lad'

[bkkjames]

How many weeks until we can get back to talking about football? I see we won't get the community shield here in Thailand, suprise suprise.

What has this to do with Gerrard getting himself off? Nothing.

Gerrard didn't get "himself off", he was found to be not guilty the the jury. Unless you're suggesting that he somehow bought-off the jury with stolen hubcaps and car radios that is ?

Careful there MC, he might send of his 'lightweights' to do a Meno Soprano on your car sometime.

Err, which language are you speaking James ? What is MC ( Master of Ceremonies ? ) And what have The Sopranos to do with Liverpool "scallies" ?

Tell you what though. Gerrard is a saint compared to Lee Bowyer and not only more palatable then Terry, but would also make a far better captain. But having said that, not doubt, he'll be at the receiving end of some chants and general banter throughout the Premiership grounds next season.

MC Hammer - take a look mate, even dresses like you from what i heard http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2c4L4CPfQY8

Sopranos=Gerrard=mafia buddies

[redrus]

QUOTE (redrus @ 2009-07-24 19:07:49)

The 29-year-old was the only one of seven defendants to be cleared

Quote (JimJim)

Because the others all plead guilty.

After Gerrard's rather short incident and after left they evidently went back for more and thus felt they shouldn't even try to prove their innocence.

Run along now, son.

Get a grip Jim....

redrus

[sanmiguellight]

I see where you are coming from nev, however you are missing the point.

Had Gerard been charged with assault, (probably at worst S47, as I didnt read about the guy having serious injuries), then there is a chance he could have been found guilty.

He was charged with Affray, which is a much more serious offence, and very difficult to prove.

There generally has to be much more involved than a few punches thrown, and it is a lot more difficult to prove (for example, it has to be proven that your average Joe would be in fear of his/her safety)

I believe the others involved, returned after Gerard had left, which would make it easier to prove the offence of Affray against them, hence the reason why they pleaded guilty

Good point Jack. It's weird that the prosecution went for the Affray charge. Surely they would have known the likely outcome?

They went for Affray as it was more then 2 people fighting, if it was 1 v 1 it would have been ABH i presume as the guy had a tooth knocked out ..... ABH is a worse offence then affray. But the point is no matter what they charged him with he'd never be found guilty in a Liverpudlian courtroom.

There is full clear footage of Gerrard hitting the guy 3 times, which was shown only once on TV after the trial im sure youll be able to google it. It was from a different camera angle to the one where Gerrard can just be made out, he never looked away for a split second and steamed in right after his friend hit him.

[rott]

'I thought he was going to hit me so I grabbed his jumper and smacked him three times...... it was clearly self-defence your honour'

Call me old fashioned, but that seems a perfectly reasonable defence for a multi-millionaire, international footballer to use in a English court of law these days.

Exactly, a professional athlete in peak physical fitness, digs a sedentary fat git three times in "self defence". Disgraceful verdict, hope the priest was pleased with himself.

[JacknDanny]

I see where you are coming from nev, however you are missing the point.

Had Gerard been charged with assault, (probably at worst S47, as I didnt read about the guy having serious injuries), then there is a chance he could have been found guilty.

He was charged with Affray, which is a much more serious offence, and very difficult to prove.

There generally has to be much more involved than a few punches thrown, and it is a lot more difficult to prove (for example, it has to be proven that your average Joe would be in fear of his/her safety)

I believe the others involved, returned after Gerard had left, which would make it easier to prove the offence of Affray against them, hence the reason why they pleaded guilty

Good point Jack. It's weird that the prosecution went for the Affray charge. Surely they would have known the likely outcome?

They went for Affray as it was more then 2 people fighting, if it was 1 v 1 it would have been ABH i presume as the guy had a tooth knocked out ..... ABH is a worse offence then affray. But the point is no matter what they charged him with he'd never be found guilty in a Liverpudlian courtroom.

There is full clear footage of Gerrard hitting the guy 3 times, which was shown only once on TV after the trial im sure youll be able to google it. It was from a different camera angle to the one where Gerrard can just be made out, he never looked away for a split second and steamed in right after his friend hit him.

Total and utter nonsense!!

In order for the offence of Affray to be brought, only 2 people need to be involved.

The important ingredient is the fact that OTHERS have to fear for their safety.

And for you information, even though Section 47 assault carries a potentially longer sentence, the courts in UK will generally take a dimmer view on someone convicted of Affray, than of someone convicted of Section 47, and as a result, in my experience, Affray will often produce longer sentences.

One other thing, is that although a NG verdict has been entered, it would be possible for Gerard to now be taken to the Civil court and sued for assault.

[sanmiguellight]

Total and utter nonsense!!

In order for the offence of Affray to be brought, only 2 people need to be involved.

I never said more then 2 needed to be involved, i said they went for it as more then 2, in this case 7 were involved, it would have been impossible to get that many on a ABH or assault charge.

Anyway good luck to Gerrard id get myself off if i was in his position, i think the average football fan will look at him in worse light for getting off when the CCTV footage quite clearly showed what happened, as this thread shows.

[Jimjim]

QUOTE (redrus @ 2009-07-24 19:07:49)

The 29-year-old was the only one of seven defendants to be cleared

Quote (JimJim)

Because the others all plead guilty.

After Gerrard's rather short incident and after left they evidently went back for more and thus felt they shouldn't even try to prove their innocence.

Run along now, son.

Get a grip Jim....

redrus

Yes I've got a grip on the facts while you've got a firm grip on your bias and your silly emoticons. Cheers...

Meanwhile, prosecutor in Gerrard case is "happy" with result and says Gerrard had a strong case for defence. Ya, so he's probablyl a Liverpool fan (so what?) he's a professional and did his job. Jury found him not guilty. Can we stop talking about this now and wrongly comparing him to others like Joey Barton who in the past beat teammates unconscious and punched another man over 20 times in a drunken rage? This was a simple bar scuffle with p punches thrown which although not admirable on Gerrard's part it was found his defence was reasonable. But I suppose nobody here has punched another person ever in their life...Anyway, I'm out of here. Carry on with this travesty of justice akin to the O.J. Simpson trial.

[redrus]

QUOTE (redrus @ 2009-07-24 19:07:49)

The 29-year-old was the only one of seven defendants to be cleared

Quote (JimJim)

Because the others all plead guilty.

After Gerrard's rather short incident and after left they evidently went back for more and thus felt they shouldn't even try to prove their innocence.

Run along now, son.

Get a grip Jim....

redrus

Yes I've got a grip on the facts while you've got a firm grip on your bias and your silly emoticons. Cheers...

.... and you Sir, need to get a grip of your silly emotions.

I have made little comment on this subject apart from the OP, trying not to get too involved. Leave me out of your petty argumentative state, please.

redrus

[Jimjim]

QUOTE (redrus @ 2009-07-24 19:07:49)

The 29-year-old was the only one of seven defendants to be cleared

Quote (JimJim)

Because the others all plead guilty.

After Gerrard's rather short incident and after left they evidently went back for more and thus felt they shouldn't even try to prove their innocence.

Run along now, son.

Get a grip Jim....

redrus

Yes I've got a grip on the facts while you've got a firm grip on your bias and your silly emoticons. Cheers...

.... and you Sir, need to get a grip of your silly emotions.

I have made little comment on this subject apart from the OP, trying not to get too involved. Leave me out of your petty argumentative state, please.

redrus

God you're a bore. I only get emotional at weddings. I'll make sure to let you have the last word from now on as I"m obviously not allowed to respond to anything you say without being told to get a grip. The first sentence of my last post was to you, all the rest was obviously just general comment on the thread. You define petty, mate. cheers...

Edited July 28, 2009 by Jimjim

[mrbojangles]

We're all getting tense and twitchy lately. We all need to get a dose of football.....soon. Can't wait for the season to start

[StevieH]

are people really shocked by this or just pissing about? the gobshite manc dj was lucky he didn't get more of a pasting than he did anyway after some of the abuse he'd thrown at gerrard earlier in the evening.

it's over. millionaire footballer / celebrity gets off charge that average member of public probably would not. it's hardly news. move along.

[sanmiguellight]

are people really shocked by this or just pissing about? the gobshite manc dj was lucky he didn't get more of a pasting than he did anyway after some of the abuse he'd thrown at gerrard earlier in the evening.

it's over. millionaire footballer / celebrity gets off charge that average member of public probably would not. it's hardly news. move along.

Fair play ..... SteveH the voice of reason ... just wanted to get the last word on this subject in.

[nev]

We're all getting tense and twitchy lately. We all need to get a dose of football.....soon. Can't wait for the season to start

Same here should be a cracking season

[JacknDanny]

the gobshite manc dj was lucky

Hang on a minute.......... the aggrieved was a Manc?

In that case its a fckin disgrace, a travesty of justice, Gerard should have been sent down, fckin bent scousers.

:D

[bkkjames]

the gobshite manc dj was lucky

Hang on a minute.......... the aggrieved was a Manc?

In that case its a fckin disgrace, a travesty of justice, Gerard should have been sent down, fckin bent scousers.

Glad to see we agree on something.

:D

[StateSix]

I see where you are coming from nev, however you are missing the point.

Had Gerard been charged with assault, (probably at worst S47, as I didnt read about the guy having serious injuries), then there is a chance he could have been found guilty.

He was charged with Affray, which is a much more serious offence, and very difficult to prove.

There generally has to be much more involved than a few punches thrown, and it is a lot more difficult to prove (for example, it has to be proven that your average Joe would be in fear of his/her safety)

I believe the others involved, returned after Gerard had left, which would make it easier to prove the offence of Affray against them, hence the reason why they pleaded guilty

Good point Jack. It's weird that the prosecution went for the Affray charge. Surely they would have known the likely outcome?

They went for Affray as it was more then 2 people fighting, if it was 1 v 1 it would have been ABH i presume as the guy had a tooth knocked out ..... ABH is a worse offence then affray. But the point is no matter what they charged him with he'd never be found guilty in a Liverpudlian courtroom.

There is full clear footage of Gerrard hitting the guy 3 times, which was shown only once on TV after the trial im sure youll be able to google it. It was from a different camera angle to the one where Gerrard can just be made out, he never looked away for a split second and steamed in right after his friend hit him.

Total and utter nonsense!!

In order for the offence of Affray to be brought, only 2 people need to be involved.

The important ingredient is the fact that OTHERS have to fear for their safety.

And for you information, even though Section 47 assault carries a potentially longer sentence, the courts in UK will generally take a dimmer view on someone convicted of Affray, than of someone convicted of Section 47, and as a result, in my experience, Affray will often produce longer sentences.

One other thing, is that although a NG verdict has been entered, it would be possible for Gerard to now be taken to the Civil court and sued for assault.

Affray is a public order offence rather than an offence against a person. It is usually used in situations like this as it is easier to prove than an actual assault. Rather than try to prove whose punch caused the actual assault it is easier to charge all involved with affray assuming they meet the points to prove of using/threatening unlawful violence and causing a person of reasonable firmness to fear for their safety. The person of reasonable firmness is theoretical and does not actually have to be present.

[StateSix]

How many people involved in a small scuffle even get arrested? The police are not even interested in these types of incidents and your average Joe is never going to see a day in court for this.

I did, and many tens of thousands of average Joes are in court for this type of offence every year.

In feb 09 i walked down a street of a quiet market town looking all scruffy in my gym gear ..... anyway the police stop me and ask me if im such and such a person who i wasnt ... so after a minute or so of this prick copper playing the tough guy i turned around and tried to walk away ....... within seconds im in handcuffs but they cant get me on the floor so one coward pigs punches me in the face a few times whilst im in handcuffs (he admits in his statement to hitting me once.)

Anyway long story short, they offered to drop this to the lowest charge where the max i could get was a fine, i refused this and went to trial last week and was found guilty by the magistrate, in what could only be described as a kangaroo court where they were allowed to use my 1 past conviction as evidence (called a bad character reference). (Because the maximum sentence i could get was 6 months i am refused the right to a trial by Jury both these new aspects that stop a fair trial are Nulabour legislation, so i had some up her ass middle class female Magistrate)

Its illegal for the police to stop and ask you for your name, and is perfectly legal to walk away if youve done nothing wrong, i had over 15 cuts and bruises on me, between the coppers they had none, CCTV footage shows me crouched over in handcuffs for 5 minutes, the coppers said i was on the floor.... complete fcuken joke.

Harry Roberts is my friend!

It is not illegal for a police officer to stop and ask you for your name, however they do not have the power to demand your name except in certain circumstances. If they have a reasonable belief that you are wanted for something or fit the description of a suspect then they are perfectly entitled to question you. If you refuse to stay then again, assuming they have reasonable proof they can detain you. Judging by the way you wrote up the story it is clear you have a dislike for the police and I am sure you showed this quite forcefully. I would also guess you were warned about your behaviour, continued and got arrested, which you resisted and so force was used.

The CPS, not the police, then offered to reduce the charge, which is pretty standard form for the CPS in the UK. If it is a summary offence then you have no right to trial by jury as it very expensive and the courts are blocked enough as it is. Past convictions are not allowed to be raised to determine guilt, unless the defence raises questions about the integrity of a prosecution witness. They can however be raised when it comes to sentencing.

As there was CCTV of it and you were still found guilty then I guess your version of events is pretty different than what actually happened as the magistrates are generally pretty lenient.

BTW Harry Roberts is a murdering c*nt