RSS Feed Share on Facebook Send this to Twitter | Login Login | Register
City Independent
The Hull City Fanzine
 
Hull City Forum

Hull City Forum

Hull City Forum >> CI Fans Forum >> Ben Stokes, UK lottery winner
Deails Post
28 posts. < 1 2 > Show 15 30

New Back To Top

RichardCheatham - City AFC

User Image

7356 posts
First used 09/01/17

#1
14/08/2018 at 13:51

Not guilty, fook me.

Must have used $tevie G’s jury for that one.

Money or fame = free pass on any misdemeanour. He’s a lucky man, and firmly in the category of overpaid orrible obnoxious sporting shithead.

How many commentators will dare call it? Not many. Still, it was a noble feat by Stokes, mixing it with a couple of gays and two randoms who would have walked away from Frankie Bunn.

Respect. Arf!

Bunkers Hill - See you in the next life 

New Back To Top

sbwtiger tigers

User Image

1127 posts
First used 09/01/17

#2
14/08/2018 at 16:44

Turns out nobody was causing an afray. Makes you wonder what the people scrapping on the CCTV footage were doing.  

New Back To Top

exiled CITY AFC

User Image

11466 posts
First used 11/01/17

#3
14/08/2018 at 18:30

Affray is fighting in such a way to cause the terror of ordinary people.

Hence the prosecution using the ‘football hooligans’ descriptor.

No one who was there was terrified = doubt = not guilty

Move on nothing to see.  

Let it never be said that I was silent when they needed me - William Wilberforce 

New Back To Top

sbwtiger tigers

User Image

1127 posts
First used 09/01/17

#4
14/08/2018 at 19:57

Afray doesn’t have to be witnessed by a third party. A hypothetical witnessed can be assumed. The evidence put before the jury should have resulted in a conviction.  

New Back To Top

essexgull

8980 posts
First used 12/01/17

#5
14/08/2018 at 20:59

Proof that the jury system does not work adequately as the British public are not intellectually fit to judge fairly.

Time to scrap it and move to a three judge system.


ESSEX GULL  

New Back To Top

potential

2280 posts
First used 09/01/17

#6
15/08/2018 at 13:24

Many years ago, while passing time, I sat in the public gallery of the appeal court. Where sat three judges, and benches packed with barristers. All present had numerous reference works before them, each book seemingly marked at a relevant page. A full pad of post-its worth.

In turn each leader rose to his feet and volunteered that the Crown v whoever applied. Less a law court, more a tennis match as they played in turn.

Finally the defence cited Crown v ?? at which point the judge in the centre of three called the legal equivalent of game set and match. Something along the lines of "Wondered when you when get to that". The defendant was acquitted. Ah, I hear you say, acquitted of what?

Assault. He caught someone backing out of a ground floor window and laid one (or two) upon said removal man. The victim was, I assume, unable to fully defend himself due to carrying a television.

The authority that led to acquittal centered on the victims mind. The case was the nurse cleared of raping a patient as she could not say whether she yes or no or enjoyed it or not.

Yes, like you reading this, I'm still thinking eh? What?

But we do not possess the intellect to rationalise and arrive at the logical conclusion as those three judges did. I'll take my chance with the jury system in preference to be trialled by seemingly unconnected authorities. 

New Back To Top

potential

2280 posts
First used 09/01/17

#7
15/08/2018 at 13:25

Many years ago, while passing time, I sat in the public gallery of the appeal court. Where sat three judges, and benches packed with barristers. All present had numerous reference works before them, each book seemingly marked at a relevant page. A full pad of post-its worth.

In turn each leader rose to his feet and volunteered that the Crown v whoever applied. Less a law court, more a tennis match as they played in turn.

Finally the defence cited Crown v ?? at which point the judge in the centre of three called the legal equivalent of game set and match. Something along the lines of "Wondered when you when get to that". The defendant was acquitted. Ah, I hear you say, acquitted of what?

Assault. He caught someone backing out of a ground floor window and laid one (or two) upon said removal man. The victim was, I assume, unable to fully defend himself due to carrying a television.

The authority that led to acquittal centered on the victims mind. The case was the nurse cleared of raping a patient as she could not say whether she yes or no or enjoyed it or not.

Yes, like you reading this, I'm still thinking eh? What?

But we do not possess the intellect to rationalise and arrive at the logical conclusion as those three judges did. I'll take my chance with the jury system in preference to be trialled by seemingly unconnected authorities. 

New Back To Top

The Prince of Munster

8468 posts
First used 20/01/17

Group
Hull City

#8
16/08/2018 at 00:36

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Rvf7Wv-5u0A

The above shows the full incident, which I’ve never seen released before. I’ve only seen the bit where Stokes knocks someone to the floor, which makes him look the aggressor.

From the above his actions are fully justified and reasonable, considering he was defending himself and others from someone armed with a bottle which had been used on another.

I’m amazed Stokes was charged, I’m further amazed the prosecution tried to get a further ABH on him on the first day of the trial and further still amazed the judge didn’t tell the prosecution to jog on. I’m guessing it was because of his fame rather than evidence.

New Back To Top

theotherphantom

User Image

12843 posts
First used 09/01/17

Group
Hull City

#9
16/08/2018 at 05:13

I'm with POM. 

>>>>> 12th season in exile <<<<< 

New Back To Top

RichardCheatham - City AFC

User Image

7356 posts
First used 09/01/17

#10
16/08/2018 at 10:19

Not sure he was defending himself per se. Thing is, he was involved in an affray, whether he started it or not is a mute point as 5e general direction from a judge is “could have walked away”.

Why didn’t the poofs get put up as witnesses? They say Stokes is a hero (absolutely!) so surely a decent amount of corroboration. As always, perhaps a bit more to it than meets the eye.

Bunkers Hill - See you in the next life 

New Back To Top

GENERAL POODLE

User Image

10905 posts
First used 09/01/17

Group
Hull City

#11
16/08/2018 at 20:03

defending the right to have meat in his eye? 

hull city tigers lions bears and aardvarks 

New Back To Top

The Prince of Munster

8468 posts
First used 20/01/17

Group
Hull City

#12
16/08/2018 at 22:20

Quote Quote by RichardCheatham - City AFC on 16/08/2018 at 10:19
Not sure he was defending himself per se. Thing is, he was involved in an affray, whether he started it or not is a mute point as 5e general direction from a judge is “could have walked away”.

Why didn’t the poofs get put up as witnesses? They say Stokes is a hero (absolutely!) so surely a decent amount of corroboration. As always, perhaps a bit more to it than meets the eye.



There’s something deeply uncomfortable about this case, Cheats old bean. This full video has not been shown - so far as I am aware - prior to the case. The footage changes quite a bit. The media edited version makes the story different.

It wouldn’t surprise me if the two chaps in the video did indeed give evidence but it’s not been reported fairly. That’s my issue.

My confidence in the media for unbiased reporting has taken a complete nose dive from zero. They knew the full story but changed things to sell ad space and papers. That is wrong. 

New Back To Top

essexgull

8980 posts
First used 12/01/17

#13
17/08/2018 at 07:27

A prescient take.

Thank you.


ESSEX GULL 

New Back To Top

exiled CITY AFC

User Image

11466 posts
First used 11/01/17

#14
18/08/2018 at 23:22

Quote Quote by RichardCheatham - City AFC on 16/08/2018 at 10:19
mute point


My learned friends there is no such thing the term is “a moot point”

Not a mute point.

Grated on me almost as much as when people say pacifically when meaning specifically  

Let it never be said that I was silent when they needed me - William Wilberforce 

New Back To Top

exiled CITY AFC

User Image

11466 posts
First used 11/01/17

#15
18/08/2018 at 23:24

On the media bias - it’s clear that they sensationalised the footage through their editing but this happens ALL the time.

Remember our media getting all uppity when some football hooligans trashed and ambulance but then forgot to cover this?

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/9892 89/world-cup-final-france-vs-croatia-riot s-Paris-French-celebrations

Let it never be said that I was silent when they needed me - William Wilberforce 

28 posts. < 1 2 > Show 15 30
Hull City Forum >> CI Fans Forum >> Ben Stokes, UK lottery winner