Guest oa_exile Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 Anyway having spoke with him and I agreed, it's best just left alone and putting down to experience. That'll teach him to go to Football with Jacko and me! On a lighter note on what sounds like a pretty :censored:ty day for the lads concerned with the incident , did you get the return fare up front or are you now out of pocket ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego_Sideburns Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 I'd like to add in case anyone is in any doubt and was thinking we just left the lad. We made sure arrangements were made for Lee prior to leaving. I appreciate that. The point is that as a 17 year old he should not have been prevented from traveling back with you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lags Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 (edited) On a lighter note on what sounds like a pretty :censored:ty day for the lads concerned with the incident , did you get the return fare up front or are you now out of pocket ? I'd have gone to the Police Station if I hadn't! and Jacko polished off his Crisp and Pop on way home! Edited August 31, 2008 by Lags Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest oa_exile Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 I'd have gone to the Police Station if I hadn't! Good man ! Bet Richie was happy with the "Extra" petrol money and board on the way back as well Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego_Sideburns Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 (edited) EDIT: However they've covered their backs gaining Lee's signature so you'll not win on that score. You may well be surprised in due course. Sometimes signatures are no worth the paper on which they're written. Edited August 31, 2008 by Diego_Sideburns Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest oa_exile Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 You may well be surprised in due course. Sometimes signatures are no wortht the paper on which they're written. Could be right D_S , was Solicitor present ? Disclaimer : Not that I am an expert on these matters Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lags Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 You may well be surprised in due course. Sometimes signatures are no wortht the paper on which they're written. Aye even more so when it's a footballers! seriously I can't see anyone making great shakes for an incident what will be swept under the carpet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carling Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 Thugs the lot of you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego_Sideburns Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 Thugs the lot of you Better make sure your stewards don't step out of line, or I'll be adding them to my list! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest oa_exile Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 Better make sure your stewards don't step out of line, or I'll be adding them to my list! Not another D_S campaign ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego_Sideburns Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 Could be right D_S , was Solicitor present ? Disclaimer : Not that I am an expert on these matters Let's just say the legal intricacies of dealing with a 17 year old were not complied with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego_Sideburns Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 (edited) Not another D_S campaign ? Good way of boosting my number of posts! Edited August 31, 2008 by Diego_Sideburns Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest oa_exile Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 Good way of boosting my nimber of posts! lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stebuzz Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 crap stadium crap fans crap stewards crap run club stewards are one of the reasons some fans wont go to games, too much thuggery, i am not too fond of the ones at latics either, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carling Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 stewards are one of the reasons some fans wont go to games, too much thuggery, i am not too fond of the ones at latics either, GMP are scum your stewards are ok however I think with the current seating arrangements one or two of our fans might be ejected but probably not as many as two years ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
futchers briefs Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 GMP are scum Harsh??! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 If the lad decides he wants to take it further, there are plenty of people on here with some knowledge and experience that would be more than willing to help him. I saw an assault happening right in front of my eyes, I'm just glad that I managed to restrain myself from going and arguing the toss with them because I think I would have ended up in trouble myself. They knew full well they had crossed the line, why else was one of the stewards saying, "it wasn't me," to all of us? Cowards. What I would like to see happen is the lad asking for a copy of any footage they hold of the incident. They are legally obliged to supply it on request and can only ask for a nominal cost, usually about £10, and it can't have any repercussions regarding his caution. It would make a nice Youtube to let other sets of decent fans know what their admission money was spent on. Tossers. Anyway, I'll be writing to the Chief Constable of Essex, not all football fans are stupid thugs and there is no reason why we should let them treat us as such. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBigDog Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 (edited) If the lad decides he wants to take it further, there are plenty of people on here with some knowledge and experience that would be more than willing to help him. I saw an assault happening right in front of my eyes, I'm just glad that I managed to restrain myself from going and arguing the toss with them because I think I would have ended up in trouble myself. They knew full well they had crossed the line, why else was one of the stewards saying, "it wasn't me," to all of us? Cowards. What I would like to see happen is the lad asking for a copy of any footage they hold of the incident. They are legally obliged to supply it on request and can only ask for a nominal cost, usually about £10, and it can't have any repercussions regarding his caution. It would make a nice Youtube to let other sets of decent fans know what their admission money was spent on. Tossers. Anyway, I'll be writing to the Chief Constable of Essex, not all football fans are stupid thugs and there is no reason why we should let them treat us as such. Thanks to all involved for the updates - let's hope that we do get some feedback from both clubs and the police - the situation with stewards needs to be resolved. If anyone knows the lad, please get an update from him as to how he is, ta! Edited August 31, 2008 by TheBigDog Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue-Mist Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 typical old bill re football fans - they over-react and treat any minor incident twenty times worse than had it happened on a night out or in a town cwntre. Quiet warning would have been sensible but time and time again they offer a caution or otherwise threaten to keep you locked up for longer - problem is a caution is an admission of guilt and also counts as a persons criminal record if I am not mistaken. It means in order to get out of a trumped up charge you aquire a criminal record that may have to be disclosed at job interviews etc. Piss poor. Cautions are old bill's easy way of giving you a criminal record and getting your prints and DNA on the cheap. Scandalous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego_Sideburns Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 Quiet warning would have been sensible but time and time again they offer a caution or otherwise threaten to keep you locked up for longer - problem is a caution is an admission of guilt and also counts as a persons criminal record if I am not mistaken. It means in order to get out of a trumped up charge you aquire a criminal record that may have to be disclosed at job interviews etc. Piss poor. Cautions are old bill's easy way of giving you a criminal record and getting your prints and DNA on the cheap. Scandalous. My Google reveals: A police caution is an alternative to prosecution available to be administered by the police in the United Kingdom to less serious offenders. A caution is not a criminal conviction. The glossary published by the Criminal Justice System in England and Wales defines a caution as "A formal recording of guilt, given by a Police Officer, instead of a charge". According to the Home Office, a police caution is a formal warning given to adults who admit they are guilty of first-time minor offences, such as vandalism or petty theft. According to the Magistrates' Association, a minor offence is one triable only summarily. The purposes of a formal police caution are: to deal quickly and simply with less serious offenders; to divert them from unnecessary appearance in the criminal courts; and to reduce the chances of their re-offending. Cautions are not given to young offenders (those aged 17 and under), who instead are given ‘reprimands’ and ‘final warnings’. I presume it was one of the latter rather than a caution as the lad is only 17. A caution is not a criminal conviction but it will be recorded on the police database and may be considered in court in the event of the offender being tried for another offence. The record will remain on the police database for five years along with photographs, fingerprints and any other samples taken at the time. A caution is intended to act as a first official warning and to deter people from getting involved in crime. As a result of changes made by the Criminal Justice Act 2003, cautions can be administered in two forms: as a simple caution or as a conditional caution, which has specific conditions attached that the offender must satisfy - attending a course aimed at targeting offending behaviour, for example. Police and other Enforcement Agencies such as Local Authorities and Government Departments have the power to administer a simple caution, while conditional cautions can be administered by the police and by a person authorised by a relevant prosecutor. However, the Crown Prosecution Service has a role to play in helping the police to ensure that the Home Office Guidelines on the Cautioning of Offenders are applied consistently and fairly. CPS officers are instructed to refer to the police any case in which they consider a caution is the appropriate way of handling the offence. Where the CPS remains satisfied that a caution is appropriate but the police refuse to administer one, the CPS guidance recommends that the case is not accepted for the prosecution. In order to safeguard the offender's interests, the following conditions must be met before a caution can be administered: there must be evidence of guilt sufficient to give a realistic prospect of conviction; the offender must admit the offence; the offender must understand the significance of a caution and give informed consent to being cautioned. Where the available evidence does not meet the standard normally required to bring a prosecution, a caution cannot be administered. A caution will not be appropriate where a person does not make a clear and reliable admission of the offence (for example if intent is denied or there are doubts about his mental health or intellectual capacity). The Home Office recommends that cautions should never be used for the most serious (indictable only) offences. However, cautions are given for indictable-only offences; the CPS suggests that this might be a result of the police issuing a caution for the offence that was reported or first suspected, rather than the offence that is revealed by the evidence at the end of the investigation. However, a caution must be administered and recorded for the correct offence, that is, for the offence revealed by the evidence. The CPS goes on to say that it will only be in rare circumstances that a caution will be a suitable disposition for an indictable offence. Cautions can be administered in the case of an offence that is triable either-way or summarily. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 Where the available evidence does not meet the standard normally required to bring a prosecution, a caution cannot be administered. However, a caution must be administered and recorded for the correct offence, that is, for the offence revealed by the evidence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Markoasis Posted August 31, 2008 Author Share Posted August 31, 2008 typical old bill re football fans - they over-react and treat any minor incident twenty times worse than had it happened on a night out or in a town cwntre. Quiet warning would have been sensible but time and time again they offer a caution or otherwise threaten to keep you locked up for longer - problem is a caution is an admission of guilt and also counts as a persons criminal record if I am not mistaken. It means in order to get out of a trumped up charge you aquire a criminal record that may have to be disclosed at job interviews etc. Piss poor. Cautions are old bill's easy way of giving you a criminal record and getting your prints and DNA on the cheap. Scandalous. Wasn't anything to do with the police. The stewards are the ones in charge of inside the stadium and the Police only get involved if asked by the stewards. The Police caution was simply down to the Senior Stewards putting in a complaint that one of his team had been assaulted. This was is excuse to me after the game for their reactions / assault, he even had the cheek to ask me wht I would have done if one of my team was assaulted.... he really believed Lee started it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmr Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 All that way to get thrown out for nothing by some sad pathetic person on a power trip. What can you do about it? nothing really, i doubt that all the complaining in the world could get any of them sacked. Wont be going there again, what a :censored: hole. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatkinCUFC Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 As a Colchester fan I have to say that I am ashamed by the piss poor management of what should have been, lets be honest, a low profile game between two teams which to my knowledge have had no major disagreements in the past. The day had the potential to be enjoyable, with some light-hearted banter between two sets of fans. Yesterday sums up to me the madness that now surrounds the policing of professional football in this country. Both during and after the game me and my mates managed to drink in the Norfolk pub and met a number of Oldham fans, enjoyed friendly conversation and managing to avoid not getting into a fight (note sarcasm.) I believe I actually met one of the group of people who put up that lad in their hotel room last night. I hope someone makes a serious complaint to our club, I know that I will be writing a letter complaining about the treatment meted out to away fans. I noted yesterday that the spineless bastards didnt try and throw you out for standing once they had angered enough people to even up the odds. At the end of the day the stewards represent both our town and the club, what sort of impression have they made. Pissed off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoytonBlueLad Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 I noted yesterday that the spineless bastards didnt try and throw you out for standing once they had angered enough people to even up the odds. Aside from the lad being flung about by the steward that is what angered me most. The back few rows after the incident remained stood up, yet not one of the stewards dared to venture back up again. Plenty of older, taller lads stood up but none challenged. Strange eh. Experienced jumped up stewards on many occasions before but yesterday was just wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.