I went to see Dorchester play Eastleigh last Friday, it made me realise, I've underestimated works do's.
On 'Not606' today, I posted for the 1st time on the Arsenal board.
I got this private message from goonercymraeg an Arsenal moderator:
"You are starting to become a pain with your persistant wumming on the Arsenal board.If you don't start curtailing it, action will be taken to have you permanently banned from the Arsenal board "
I replied:
" Mate, don't get above yourself! A photo of a box of After Eight mints is a perfectly acceptable form of banter, if you think differently then you have had a very sheltered life.
I've posted 5 replies in total on the Ar-se (banter Matey) board and never before today, so it's obvious that 'persistent' is a concept that you plainly do not understand.
Moderators have to be fair and even handed, it sounds like you are neither.
My suggestion to you is hand in your Sheriffs badge or I'll be reporting you for abuse of privilege.
Clear?"
Maybe i should have messaged " Fc uk Off!"?
saints -
are you under the same guise on not606? I shall look out for you and your wums
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Morning chaps
i used to love transfer deadline day - not any more! I have a strange feeling that either Davis or Jella will be going today it will be the last straw for many fans if one of them go. The rejected bid for Jella last night though shows that Whyte has ambitions so i cling on to all hope that any bidders today will be told where to go!
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Couple of interesting deals outwith the EPL bubble.
Lugano signs for PSG, the sort of no nonsence central defender that Arsenal could have done with and at a fraction of the price they would be quoted for a no mark English defender.
Elia signs for Juve for 8m, amazing when you think what Sean Wright Phillips has cost in transfers.
Owen Hargreaves' move to Manchester City has broken down amid another injury scare.He fell out of the transfer window.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
http://sport.stv.tv/football/scottish-premier/celtic/268460-celtic-defender-jos-hooiveld-set-for-southampton-switch/
*****
saints - you have a treat in store this season !
I'm telling you this guy is the dutch glen loovens. Oh wait...
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Hey curly. From what I'm reading its the sectarian part of the charge which has caused the confusion. Would be interested to hear the legal perspective on it. Paul mcbride hasn't been shy with his thoughts as usual
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
No. He is not.
BT will know more about the legal technicalities, I know lennon isn't the most likeable of characters but he doesn't deserve all of this. I would like to think the Scottish justice system is there to protect the victims and prosecute the criminals. Maybe I hope for too much though
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Lol wouldn't surprise me.
I think the guy has still be found guilty for breech of the peace and have feeling he will get a tough sentence. Although again BT would be in a better position to say if that sort of "evening up" would be likely in the courts. Probably not.
Anyone seen the news today??
Colonal Gadaffi has said that he will hand himself in aslong as he can be tried at Edinburgh Sheriff Court.....................
Been recommended for a new job today by a mate so might be switching soon, will know more next week
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
This is a post I put up yesterday:
The lack of knowledge on this thread means things are not being understood properly so here is my input.
A jury delivered the verdict. In Scots law for the most serious cases a jury is used in either the Sheriff Court or the High Court. For less serious cases a Sheriff sits on their own. The difference is sentencing powers. A Sheriff on their own can only sentence someone up to 12 months. With a jury the limit is 5 years, anything above that can only be imposed by the High Court. Whoever prosecuted this decided it was worthy of more than 12 months but less than 5 years imprisonment. That suggests he mibbe has previous convictions for assault but that is speculation.
An assault is a common law crime. An act of parliament allows crimes to be aggravated either by racist or sectarian behaviour. This is an add on/rider to the main charge. Assaults can also be aggravated by other factors like serious injury, permanent disfigurement etc. What though is important is that any crime needs corroborated evidence in Scots law. This means there has to be two sources of evidence identifying the crime and the perpetrator. Nobody can be convicted on the testimony of only one witness.
Not all part of a charge needs to be corroborated, aggravations only need one source of evidence. Therefore the sectarian add on only needed one source of evidence. The jury though have to be satisfied that the evidence is both credible and reliable.
The fact the case was allowed to go to the jury means that there was sufficient evidence in law. This though does not mean the case is proven.
An assault is the attack on a person of another with intention to cause harm. Even if your attack does not connect it is still an assault. Example, you swing a pool cue and it misses you still get done with an assault. There is no such thing as an attempted assault.
Seems to me the jury made mistake. The guys defence counsel when cross examining Lennon said it was only the sectarian add on that was disputed. That read to me he accepted the assault. The jury should have found him guilty under deletion of the aggravation. This is a competent verdict. They would have been told by the trial judge that they could do this.
The only thing is though it is a jury decision, they have to assess credibility and reliability and as none of us were there and heard every piece of evidence you can only speculate to an extent. For what it is worth though it seems to me they made a mistake but ad it is an imperfect system mistakes do happen.
Sign in if you want to comment
Hello
Page 21 of 35
22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26
posted on 30/8/11
I went to see Dorchester play Eastleigh last Friday, it made me realise, I've underestimated works do's.
posted on 30/8/11
On 'Not606' today, I posted for the 1st time on the Arsenal board.
I got this private message from goonercymraeg an Arsenal moderator:
"You are starting to become a pain with your persistant wumming on the Arsenal board.If you don't start curtailing it, action will be taken to have you permanently banned from the Arsenal board "
I replied:
" Mate, don't get above yourself! A photo of a box of After Eight mints is a perfectly acceptable form of banter, if you think differently then you have had a very sheltered life.
I've posted 5 replies in total on the Ar-se (banter Matey) board and never before today, so it's obvious that 'persistent' is a concept that you plainly do not understand.
Moderators have to be fair and even handed, it sounds like you are neither.
My suggestion to you is hand in your Sheriffs badge or I'll be reporting you for abuse of privilege.
Clear?"
Maybe i should have messaged " Fc uk Off!"?
posted on 31/8/11
saints -
are you under the same guise on not606? I shall look out for you and your wums
posted on 31/8/11
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 31/8/11
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 31/8/11
Morning chaps
i used to love transfer deadline day - not any more! I have a strange feeling that either Davis or Jella will be going today it will be the last straw for many fans if one of them go. The rejected bid for Jella last night though shows that Whyte has ambitions so i cling on to all hope that any bidders today will be told where to go!
posted on 31/8/11
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 31/8/11
Couple of interesting deals outwith the EPL bubble.
Lugano signs for PSG, the sort of no nonsence central defender that Arsenal could have done with and at a fraction of the price they would be quoted for a no mark English defender.
Elia signs for Juve for 8m, amazing when you think what Sean Wright Phillips has cost in transfers.
posted on 31/8/11
Owen Hargreaves' move to Manchester City has broken down amid another injury scare.He fell out of the transfer window.
posted on 31/8/11
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 31/8/11
http://sport.stv.tv/football/scottish-premier/celtic/268460-celtic-defender-jos-hooiveld-set-for-southampton-switch/
*****
saints - you have a treat in store this season !
posted on 1/9/11
I'm telling you this guy is the dutch glen loovens. Oh wait...
posted on 1/9/11
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 1/9/11
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 1/9/11
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 1/9/11
Hey curly. From what I'm reading its the sectarian part of the charge which has caused the confusion. Would be interested to hear the legal perspective on it. Paul mcbride hasn't been shy with his thoughts as usual
posted on 1/9/11
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 1/9/11
No. He is not.
BT will know more about the legal technicalities, I know lennon isn't the most likeable of characters but he doesn't deserve all of this. I would like to think the Scottish justice system is there to protect the victims and prosecute the criminals. Maybe I hope for too much though
posted on 1/9/11
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 1/9/11
Lol wouldn't surprise me.
I think the guy has still be found guilty for breech of the peace and have feeling he will get a tough sentence. Although again BT would be in a better position to say if that sort of "evening up" would be likely in the courts. Probably not.
posted on 1/9/11
Anyone seen the news today??
Colonal Gadaffi has said that he will hand himself in aslong as he can be tried at Edinburgh Sheriff Court.....................
posted on 1/9/11
Been recommended for a new job today by a mate so might be switching soon, will know more next week
posted on 1/9/11
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 1/9/11
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 1/9/11
This is a post I put up yesterday:
The lack of knowledge on this thread means things are not being understood properly so here is my input.
A jury delivered the verdict. In Scots law for the most serious cases a jury is used in either the Sheriff Court or the High Court. For less serious cases a Sheriff sits on their own. The difference is sentencing powers. A Sheriff on their own can only sentence someone up to 12 months. With a jury the limit is 5 years, anything above that can only be imposed by the High Court. Whoever prosecuted this decided it was worthy of more than 12 months but less than 5 years imprisonment. That suggests he mibbe has previous convictions for assault but that is speculation.
An assault is a common law crime. An act of parliament allows crimes to be aggravated either by racist or sectarian behaviour. This is an add on/rider to the main charge. Assaults can also be aggravated by other factors like serious injury, permanent disfigurement etc. What though is important is that any crime needs corroborated evidence in Scots law. This means there has to be two sources of evidence identifying the crime and the perpetrator. Nobody can be convicted on the testimony of only one witness.
Not all part of a charge needs to be corroborated, aggravations only need one source of evidence. Therefore the sectarian add on only needed one source of evidence. The jury though have to be satisfied that the evidence is both credible and reliable.
The fact the case was allowed to go to the jury means that there was sufficient evidence in law. This though does not mean the case is proven.
An assault is the attack on a person of another with intention to cause harm. Even if your attack does not connect it is still an assault. Example, you swing a pool cue and it misses you still get done with an assault. There is no such thing as an attempted assault.
Seems to me the jury made mistake. The guys defence counsel when cross examining Lennon said it was only the sectarian add on that was disputed. That read to me he accepted the assault. The jury should have found him guilty under deletion of the aggravation. This is a competent verdict. They would have been told by the trial judge that they could do this.
The only thing is though it is a jury decision, they have to assess credibility and reliability and as none of us were there and heard every piece of evidence you can only speculate to an extent. For what it is worth though it seems to me they made a mistake but ad it is an imperfect system mistakes do happen.
Page 21 of 35
22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26