Jump to content

Saints fans jailed

Chez

By Chez,
in The Saints

 Share

Recommended Posts

Smirking_Saint

Smirking_Saint

Posted
Posted (edited)
Why on earth would a newspaper water down the charges? Papers make money on sensationalist stories. Both the Echo and News reported it exactly the same way.

 

And as for the 30k of damage, if any of them were involved in any criminal damage then they would have been charged with that too, or it would at the very least have been in the evidence and documented by the the Echo and News.

 

Nobody is defending them, but to put them in prison for a year is completely wrong, 14 people will lose their jobs, someone has lost their whole livelyhood, a mother has lost her son and husband for at least 4 months, what for? Shaking a fence.

 

Community Service, house arrest, massive fine, banned from St Marys for life - any of these sentences would have been acceptable punishment.

 

Just because people don't agree with the sentences, doesn't mean they don't agree that they don't think the offenders should have been punished.

 

Yeah ok, the paper bit was a bit of a misguided comment really.

 

As for the 12 months, in all honestly yeah it is a little harsh IMO. But these people will be out in under that time. Hopefully the time away allows them to rethink their direction and those at home them have let down.

 

Do i feel sorry for their children and wives etc ? Yeah of course but TBH they walked past and made a conscious choice TO get involved, they could have walked away, could have walked past, but they didn't. How did the 30k odd others manage to do it ?

 

Unfortunately football violence tends to draw higher sentances, and so it should. Was 12 months a tad harsh ? Yes, but then it was their choice to commit a crime and tbf the crime will carry a maximum sentance (5 years), the law cannot hand out higher sentances than that so it's not like they have not been warned.

 

Unfortunately for every over sentancing there will always will a few slack sentances, look at the yoevil incident. It is what it is.

Edited by Smirking_Saint
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dave Benson Phillips

Dave Benson Phillips

Posted
Posted

 

As for the 12 months, in all honestly yeah it is a little harsh IMO. But these people will be out in under that time. Hopefully the time away allows them to rethink their direction and those at home them have let down.

 

Do i feel sorry for their children and wives etc ? Yeah of course but TBH they walked past and made a conscious choice TO get involved, they could have walked away, could have walked past, but they didn't. How did the 30k odd others manage to do it ?

 

Is losing their whole livelyhood, business they have spent all their life building, house etc a worthy punishment for someone who shook a fence in ONE moment of drunkeness?

 

Yes or no?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Smirking_Saint

Smirking_Saint

Posted
Posted
Is losing their whole livelyhood, business they have spent all their life building, house etc a worthy punishment for someone who shook a fence in ONE moment of drunkeness?

 

Yes or no?

 

But that is not THE punishment is it, that is a consequence to the punishment, the punishment is the consequence to the action. Should the action have happened ? No, but it did. If i was in their situation i would be p*ssed off but it is what it is, the maximum sentance is 5 years. They were warned, they were WATCHED by the OB and filmed. There is no excuse.

 

Is it harsh that someone that drinks 2 pints gets in his car and gets done for drink driving loses his licence and livelihood ? Yes, its harsh, but it is the punishment to the crime. Everyone is aware of that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dave Benson Phillips

Dave Benson Phillips

Posted
Posted
But that is not THE punishment is it, that is a consequence to the punishment, the punishment is the consequence to the action. Should the action have happened ? No, but it did. If i was in their situation i would be p*ssed off but it is what it is, the maximum sentance is 5 years. They were warned, they were WATCHED by the OB and filmed. There is no excuse.

 

Is it harsh that someone that drinks 2 pints gets in his car and gets done for drink driving loses his licence and livelihood ? Yes, its harsh, but it is the punishment to the crime. Everyone is aware of that.

 

Answer the question.

 

Is losing your whole livelyhood an acceptable punishment for shaking a fence in the heat of the moment?

 

Do you think that a custodial sentence for shaking a fence is proportionate in relation to other crimes? ( don't come back with "we all know the punishments are more in football" because everyone doesn't, only us sad muppets who trawl the internet and live,eat,breath football do )

 

Simple yes or no... does the punishment fit the crime?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Smirking_Saint

Smirking_Saint

Posted
Posted
Answer the question.

 

Is losing your whole livelyhood an acceptable punishment for shaking a fence in the heat of the moment?

 

Do you think that a custodial sentence for shaking a fence is proportionate in relation to other crimes? ( don't come back with "we all know the punishments are more in football" because everyone doesn't, only us sad muppets who trawl the internet and live,eat,breath football do )

 

Simple yes or no... does the punishment fit the crime?

 

Shaking a fence and so IMO causing threatening behaviour towards a group of already aggrivated people is in essance incitement to violence.

 

So yes, the punishment is fitting.

 

The consequences that are loosing livelihood etc are a not entity really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dave Benson Phillips

Dave Benson Phillips

Posted
Posted
Shaking a fence and so IMO causing threatening behaviour towards a group of already aggrivated people is in essance incitement to violence.

 

So yes, the punishment is fitting.

 

The consequences that are loosing livelihood etc are a not entity really.

 

Let's hope you don't have too many beers and shake a fence or swear at someone at the football then shan't we? Otherwise prison it is for you.

 

Losing your whole livelyhood because of shaking a fence is not significant? Are you nuts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Smirking_Saint

Smirking_Saint

Posted
Posted
Let's hope you don't have too many beers and shake a fence or swear at someone at the football then shan't we? Otherwise prison it is for you.

 

Losing your whole livelyhood because of shaking a fence is not significant? Are you nuts?

 

But it depends in what context though doesn't it ??

 

And it depends how you describe the action and what other factors you choose to include or exclude.

 

If i go to football, have a skinfull and cause incitement then yes, i am going to face the consequences.

 

Don't get me wrong, i am no angel, and have been involved in enough scrapes etc, but esentially a public violent order offence will count against you for merely being involved with others throwing missiles etc and so you will essentially be getting similar sentances to standing next to someone.

 

It looked ugly, it could have gotten more ugly, if they were really worried about their livelihoods then they would have thought twice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CanadaSaint

CanadaSaint

Posted
Posted
Let's hope you don't have too many beers and shake a fence or swear at someone at the football then shan't we? Otherwise prison it is for you.

 

How about having too many beers and driving a car? If you're caught, that will result in a driving ban and - depending on your work arrangements - the loss of your job.

 

You caused no damage and didn't hurt anyone, but you were punished for what MIGHT have happened, given your stupidity and contempt for the law. The level of your punishment is based on society's revulsion for that particular offence.

 

I can see the parallels.

 

And I have no problem at all with any of that - even if, on the barest of facts - it might seem harsh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Smirking_Saint

Smirking_Saint

Posted
Posted
How about having too many beers and driving a car? If you're caught, that will result in a driving ban and - depending on your work arrangements - the loss of your job.

 

You caused no damage and didn't hurt anyone, but you were punished for what MIGHT have happened, given your stupidity and contempt for the law. The level of your punishment is based on society's revulsion for that particular offence.

 

I can see the parallels.

 

And I have no problem at all with any of that - even if, on the barest of facts - it might seem harsh.

 

Nice to see someone else sees my point of view

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JustMike

JustMike

Posted
Posted

not harsh at all really in the light of things. I dont want my kids seeing that sort of behaviour anywhere, let alone at football. They all knew what they were doing, an must have known, if caught would be punished. That said, they can't have too many brain cells between them to get involved with it in the 1st place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CanadaSaint

CanadaSaint

Posted
Posted
Then there's 5 years for RAPING A 13-MONTH-OLD BABY.

 

Thats right, if your a football fan and you shake 5 fences and you are as bad as this guy....

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/3078216.stm

 

Instead of sneering at people who don't share your view, and posting examples that - in your view - make your point, could you respond to the question I posed in Post 662?

 

I'm interested to see how your viewpoint stands up in a drunk driving case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Smirking_Saint

Smirking_Saint

Posted
Posted

Nice to see Aintforever sticking up for all the thugs.

 

Ye of little braincells stick together an all that.

 

If you can't tell the difference between incitement and 2 guys having a punch up you are a nob.

 

As for your 'evidence' like i said before, you are always going to get cases that are sentanced very very lenientely, but you can't use it as..... 'he got off why can't I'

Link to comment
Share on other sites
brmbrm

brmbrm

Posted
Posted

Well, we're on page 14, so that just proves the judge was 100% right: this is a "wake up" message and hopefully a deterrent. If the sentence had been £20 fine then no doubt these hooligans would see it as encouraging even more antisocial behaviour.

 

Its about time some of these so-called "grown-ups" actually matured a bit, developed some minimal sense of responsibiltuy for their actins and get their ****ing act together.

 

It Is Illegal. Break The law and go to gaol. Get the point? grow the Fark up FFS

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Turkish

Turkish

Posted
Posted (edited)
Nice to see Aintforever sticking up for all the thugs.

 

Ye of little braincells stick together an all that.

 

If you can't tell the difference between incitement and 2 guys having a punch up you are a nob.

 

As for your 'evidence' like i said before, you are always going to get cases that are sentanced very very lenientely, but you can't use it as..... 'he got off why can't I'

 

but they weren't charged with incitement, they were charged with violent disorder. Nowhere in the charges or press releases are the words incitement mentioned.

Edited by Turkish
Link to comment
Share on other sites
St. Jason

St. Jason

Posted
Posted
Nice to see Aintforever sticking up for all the thugs.

 

Ye of little braincells stick together an all that.

 

If you can't tell the difference between incitement and 2 guys having a punch up you are a nob.

 

As for your 'evidence' like i said before, you are always going to get cases that are sentanced very very lenientely, but you can't use it as..... 'he got off why can't I'

 

I don't think he's "sticking up for all the fug's" but simply saying the sentences are harsh, which they are.

 

He is also right to use examples of other violent crime and the sentences handed out for said crime. This was not a Saints mob, this was not organised football violence, this was simply fans leaving the stadium and walking home up Belvidere Road only to be greeted by gloating cheering Portsmouth fans the other side of the road. Yes fans ran to the fence, yes there was shouting and fence rattling and things were thrown. Everyone that threw things should of been arrested and charged but even then I think community service or a tag would of sufficed, as for the fence rattling, come on, please!

 

Was it inciting rival fans or goading? If we are saying chanting and rattling a fence is incitement then surely fans in the Northam and Itchen North stand will be next up in court because i'm sure I heard a few choruses of "my old man" and "when I was just a little boy"!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
chi saint

chi saint

Posted
Posted

Got exactly what they deserved, if you can't do the time etc etc....

 

Im sure on the day it was a case of the big I am, now how many are sat in a 6x8 wetting themselves where some serious villans reside not wannabees like this sad little lot.

 

When they get out and if they act like responsible ADULTS then fair enough what's done is done, but learn their lesson they must and I suspect they will.

 

I wanna go to footie with my kids and not have to witness such idiotic behaviour from frankly men who should know better.

 

Still perhaps I have misjudged them, perhaps they don't care about being banged up, perhaps cos they can beat up a car or two they are hard and can adapt to their change in life style......nah I doubt it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
aintforever

aintforever

Posted
Posted
Nice to see Aintforever sticking up for all the thugs.

 

Ye of little braincells stick together an all that.

 

If you can't tell the difference between incitement and 2 guys having a punch up you are a nob.

 

As for your 'evidence' like i said before, you are always going to get cases that are sentanced very very lenientely, but you can't use it as..... 'he got off why can't I'

 

LOL at being accused of having few braincells by someone who doesn't even know the meaning of incitement!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
chi saint

chi saint

Posted
Posted
They got it easy compared to these guys.

http://www.hooli-news.co.uk/researchitem.php?15

 

Blimey what a waste of pressing a key board that article is.

 

Whoever wrote it should be ashamed, biased is to kind a word....'I know him, he a good bloke, never seen him throw a punch'....oh yawn. I guess you have to try some sort of defence when your mates are found guilty but I certainly wouldn't want him as my character witness ha ha

Link to comment
Share on other sites
70's Mike

70's Mike

Posted
Posted

thing is it will not deter the same sort of behaviour the next time the skates visit SMS, UNLESS you lock em in and move saints fans on , then the same thing will happen again.

the stiff penaltys given to the lads at Charlton a few years back made no difference to this instance

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dune

dune

Posted
Posted
thing is it will not deter the same sort of behaviour the next time the skates visit SMS, UNLESS you lock em in and move saints fans on , then the same thing will happen again.

the stiff penaltys given to the lads at Charlton a few years back made no difference to this instance

 

That's because the impact of those sentences diminished with time. These latest sentences are what we might call a refresher.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
itchen

itchen

Posted
Posted

I'm amazed this thread is still running, Several pages ago somebody ridiculed the idea that rival fans could go off hand-in-hand and swapping scarves after the game. Well why not (OK maybe not the hand-in-hand bit)?

 

Most of the time, I can go to Saint Mary's in complete safety and I am sure this is true of most grounds in the country. But, because a lot of people in the past, and a few people today, cannot enjoy friendly rivalry without it turning to violence, football supporters are treated badly by police, stewards, the press and others. We're herded into our own areas. We're forced to sit down (actually I prefer that but I know many people don't) and we can't be trusted to enjoy a pint while we're in sight of the pitch. And we risk fairly tough sentence if we're caught misbehaving. Given that all this has happened because of the actions of a small minority, how can any football supporter defend the actions of the tiny minority of yobs?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mack rill

mack rill

Posted
Posted
thing is it will not deter the same sort of behaviour the next time the skates visit SMS, UNLESS you lock em in and move saints fans on , then the same thing will happen again.

the stiff penaltys given to the lads at Charlton a few years back made no difference to this instance

 

I think it will Mike, How many of our knuckle dragger's were up before the beak this time?

 

Oh and i see Stupid Romsy and his side kick Delight, have thrown there wight on the side of the window licker's,,,,,Bravo,

Mods I am a Full Member to this site but there must be some restrictions for the blue Few, I cannot find the Fred where Stuey and his side Kick are standing up for the 90 odd nawty fools who rushed off down Fratton RD being very silly in front of Old Bill with his camcorder. They all got to exchange there Nicotine for Vasallin, Both Saints and Pompey supporters were warned (play up) and the punishment would be server.FFS the witnessed what happened to our lot on the last Derby, And they still had to give it Large,,,,,,With luck Derby's will soon be back on the menu, the severity of the sentencing could help make sure all the Aggro is on the pitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
benjii

benjii

Posted
Posted

I haven't looked into what actually did or didn't happen in court as I don't really care. Based on some comments on here though it would seem that Violent Disorder is the charge the people were mostly found guilty of.

 

Here's the law on violent disorder:

 

 

2.-(1)

Where 3 or more persons who are present together

use or threaten unlawful violence and the conduct of them

(taken together) is such as would cause a person of reasonable

firmness present at the scene to fear for his personal safety,

each of the persons using or threatening unlawful violence

is guilty of violent disorder.

 

(2) It is immaterial whether or not the 3 or more use or

threaten unlawful violence simultaneously.

 

(3) No person of reasonable firmness need actually be, or be

likely to. be, present at the scene.

 

(4) Violent disorder may be committed in private as well as in

public places.

 

(5) A person guilty of violent disorder is liable on conviction

on indictment to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 5 years

or a fine or both, or on summary conviction to imprisonment for

a term not exceeding 6 months or a fine not exceeding the statutory

maximum or both.

 

So, clearly for anyone to have been convicted of this it would have been necessary for the Crown to show that they used or threatened unlawful violence. I don't think shaking a fence would suffice.

 

It's also interesting to note that the maximum sentence is 5 years and a fine. So they could have been given more.

 

As a final point, you cannot whinge about being banged up if you decide to go ape in the presence of most members of the county's police force and they are openly filming you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dune

dune

Posted
Posted
I think it will Mike, How many of our knuckle dragger's were up before the beak this time?

 

Oh and i see Stupid Romsy and his side kick Delight, have thrown there wight on the side of the window licker's,,,,,Bravo,

Mods I am a Full Member to this site but there must be some restrictions for the blue Few, I cannot find the Fred where Stuey and his side Kick are standing up for the 90 odd nawty fools who rushed off down Fratton RD being very silly in front of Old Bill with his camcorder. They all got to exchange there Nicotine for Vasallin, Both Saints and Pompey supporters were warned (play up) and the punishment would be server.FFS the witnessed what happened to our lot on the last Derby, And they still had to give it Large,,,,,,With luck Derby's will soon be back on the menu, the severity of the sentencing could help make sure all the Aggro is on the pitch.

 

Despite the illiteracy one would expect from a Skate i'm in total agreement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sotonjoe

sotonjoe

Posted
Posted
I haven't looked into what actually did or didn't happen in court as I don't really care. Based on some comments on here though it would seem that Violent Disorder is the charge the people were mostly found guilty of.

 

Here's the law on violent disorder:

 

 

2.-(1)

Where 3 or more persons who are present together

use or threaten unlawful violence and the conduct of them

(taken together) is such as would cause a person of reasonable

firmness present at the scene to fear for his personal safety,

each of the persons using or threatening unlawful violence

is guilty of violent disorder.

 

(2) It is immaterial whether or not the 3 or more use or

threaten unlawful violence simultaneously.

 

(3) No person of reasonable firmness need actually be, or be

likely to. be, present at the scene.

 

(4) Violent disorder may be committed in private as well as in

public places.

 

(5) A person guilty of violent disorder is liable on conviction

on indictment to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 5 years

or a fine or both, or on summary conviction to imprisonment for

a term not exceeding 6 months or a fine not exceeding the statutory

maximum or both.

 

So, clearly for anyone to have been convicted of this it would have been necessary for the Crown to show that they used or threatened unlawful violence. I don't think shaking a fence would suffice.

 

It's also interesting to note that the maximum sentence is 5 years and a fine. So they could have been given more.

 

As a final point, you cannot whinge about being banged up if you decide to go ape in the presence of most members of the county's police force and they are openly filming you.

 

 

I think the shaking of a fence fits the description of the law you have posted very well. The law has been carefully worded and suggests that violent disorder can be any act which, if performed within a certain context, could cause somebody fear. It also clearly states that the reasonable person who might be scared can be hypothetical; in other words, they don't actually need to be there. This negates those claims which say this was an unfair sentence because there was "nobody there", or "they weren't shaking a fence" at anybody. That is an irrelevent facor when trying somebody for violent disorder.

 

The police have clearly utilised the law to its potential here, even if they haven't actually handed out the maximum sentence. Now, debate the rights and wrongs of the violent disorder law if you will, but I don't think there's much to be said when it comes to debating whether or not this behaviour constituted violent disorder. It seems to fit your description very nicely indeed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
benjii

benjii

Posted
Posted

Yeah, I mean shaking a fence could be part of a threat to use violent behaviour.

 

If you are shouting, "come on you kaaaannntss let's ave it" then you might just be being gobby. If you are shouting that whilst apparently trying to circumvent blocades which exist for the express purpose of preventing violence then it is going to be somewhat easier to convince a court you were threatening violence.

 

The message is clear - if you are in a mob and being lairy in front of a big crowd of police, you're asking for trouble.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Turkish

Turkish

Posted
Posted
I think it will Mike, How many of our knuckle dragger's were up before the beak this time?

 

Oh and i see Stupid Romsy and his side kick Delight, have thrown there wight on the side of the window licker's,,,,,Bravo,

Mods I am a Full Member to this site but there must be some restrictions for the blue Few, I cannot find the Fred where Stuey and his side Kick are standing up for the 90 odd nawty fools who rushed off down Fratton RD being very silly in front of Old Bill with his camcorder. They all got to exchange there Nicotine for Vasallin, Both Saints and Pompey supporters were warned (play up) and the punishment would be server.FFS the witnessed what happened to our lot on the last Derby, And they still had to give it Large,,,,,,With luck Derby's will soon be back on the menu, the severity of the sentencing could help make sure all the Aggro is on the pitch.

 

Hilarious twist on our user names, how long did it take you to think that up? I think you need to read my posts againpal, never once have i defended their actions. What i have said time and time again is that a year upwards in jail for shaking a fence is over the top. Anyway, i'm getting bored with this thread now as most seem to think that if you dont sit on the lock them up and throw away the key side you fully support their behaviour and are incapable of grasping that i dont but compared to other sentances given out, as posted on this forum, theirs were grossly excessive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
alehouseboys

alehouseboys

Posted
Posted

It'll be interesting when Saints travel to Havant for the pre-season punch-up...uh, I mean match.

 

As this 'friendly' fixture has seen a little unrest amongst the locals in the past no doubt Hampshire Constabulary will be as equally intolerant of fence shaking and the like from those present.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thorpe-le-Saint

Thorpe-le-Saint

Posted
Posted

It will be interesting to see how far the Police go with this case: Will they continue until all stone or chair throwers/ car smashers/ fence rattlers are convicted? Or will they not rest until all the above are convicted plus all those that were 'having a nose'? For example, I know that a mate of mine was in that melée that day looking for his twin to stop him doing the sorts of things that people have been sent down for: he found him and pulled him out: From what I've read on here, some of you would have him sent down for being 'guilty by association'!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Wiltshire Saint

Wiltshire Saint

Posted
Posted
When will we hear from the Club that they have been banned for life?

 

Knowing the clubs record in informing fans about things, I wouldn't surprised if it's not until the morning of the first day of the season.

 

Anyway, back on topic, in the first time in years all of my family have got season tickets because they all feel safe in attending the games now that they have seen that their is a detterent for behaving badly. My parents, grandparents, kids and neices and nephews have all got season tickets. A total 18 extra sales because these scum have been dealth with in the correct way. a big well done to the Police and hopefully the club will do the right thing, like Saintribbie says, and ban them for life. If I were the club I would focus in on the friends of these criminals and be looking to find a way of banning them as well, even if there has been no criminal act that the police can deal with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
70's Mike

70's Mike

Posted
Posted
I think it will Mike, How many of our knuckle dragger's were up before the beak this time?

 

Oh and i see Stupid Romsy and his side kick Delight, have thrown there wight on the side of the window licker's,,,,,Bravo,

Mods I am a Full Member to this site but there must be some restrictions for the blue Few, I cannot find the Fred where Stuey and his side Kick are standing up for the 90 odd nawty fools who rushed off down Fratton RD being very silly in front of Old Bill with his camcorder. They all got to exchange there Nicotine for Vasallin, Both Saints and Pompey supporters were warned (play up) and the punishment would be server.FFS the witnessed what happened to our lot on the last Derby, And they still had to give it Large,,,,,,With luck Derby's will soon be back on the menu, the severity of the sentencing could help make sure all the Aggro is on the pitch.

 

i would like to think you are right but people have been arrested at saints v skates games ever since i started watching some 50 years ago and i just cannot see it stopping , when we were top dogs your lot kicked off , now it is our lots turn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hamster

hamster

Posted
Posted

I once pinched a Pompey fan in the stomach and then jumped on him, pulling his jumper over his head I then yanked out a handful of hair and stood over him asking if he had had enough.

 

I avoided a custodial sentence mainly due to me showing remorse and crying. My punishment? Made to say sorry by Mum and not allowed to borrow his Pink Floyd LP's.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I should point out that he started it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SaintRobbie

SaintRobbie

Posted
Posted (edited)
would it make you feel better?

 

Yep. I don't want to take my kids to matches that have small minded idiots behaving like this associated with them. Would it bother you if these so called fans were not banned by the club?

 

I expect the Club to impose some sort of ban to set an example and demonstrate that they do not condone such behaviour.

Edited by SaintRobbie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...