This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Ben Stokes
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
  SW19 CPFC  Addiscombe West 14 Aug 18 8.56pm |
  |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Cucking Funt
Ah, well. The jury must have been wrong, then Didn’t say that... Just saying that in my opinion he went beyond self defence and the use of reasonable force. He also kicked a man whilst he was down and was following up to the extent Hales told him ‘that’s enough’. I accept the verdict, but as mentioned I’m surprised he didn’t at least get his knuckles rapped for using excessive force. Who knows, that may not have even been an option given to the jury. Could have been custodial or free, no in between.
Did you know? 98.0000001% of people are morons. |
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
  |
| SW19 CPFC Addiscombe West 14 Aug 18 8.58pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Tom-the-eagle
You are spot on, the CPS are idiots. Twice in my life as a younger man I appeared in Crown Court avoiding bird each time. The CPS basically employ all the guys who can't make it in private practice whilst I was paying my guys £400 an hour to run rings round them. Sad but true, you buy justice. Yep. If you’ve got cash you certainly give yourself much more of a chance
Did you know? 98.0000001% of people are morons. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| steeleye20 Croydon 14 Aug 18 9.28pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Well they are wrong CF. Stokes drank a combination of vodkas and beers that would have rendered many of us senseless. Whatever happened he still brutally assaulted 2 people with long term physical damage, it was not self-defence he was not attacked himself. If it was you or I we could expect to be a guest of Her Majesty tonight. To pick him for Saturday while he has still to face disciplinary hearings is quite wrong. What are others in particular those coming through to think? What would be justice, is if Stokes were given a dose of his own medicine. This is not commensurate with the game of cricket IMO
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stuk Top half 14 Aug 18 9.30pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Tom-the-eagle
You are spot on, the CPS are idiots. Twice in my life as a younger man I appeared in Crown Court avoiding bird each time. The CPS basically employ all the guys who can't make it in private practice whilst I was paying my guys £400 an hour to run rings round them. Sad but true, you buy justice. They tried to add two charges of ABH to the trial on the eve of it, or thereabouts. Even the judge said something all the lines of "you've had 10 months". It was never in the public interest to bring this to trial. And it took them 4 months to decide to do that.
Optimistic as ever |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stuk Top half 14 Aug 18 9.41pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by SW19 CPFC
Pretty sure they were backing away before he sparked them and he definately followed up on of them while on the ground. There's backing away, as in wanting no part of things and then there is backing away, once you know you've bitten off more than you can chew.
Optimistic as ever |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stuk Top half 14 Aug 18 9.49pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by SW19 CPFC
Didn’t say that... Just saying that in my opinion he went beyond self defence and the use of reasonable force. He also kicked a man whilst he was down and was following up to the extent Hales told him ‘that’s enough’. I accept the verdict, but as mentioned I’m surprised he didn’t at least get his knuckles rapped for using excessive force. Who knows, that may not have even been an option given to the jury. Could have been custodial or free, no in between. Hales kicked the bloke, from my following of the case. The CPS went with affray, excessive force isn't part of the criteria like it is for self defence in a burglary, for instance. They tried to tag on ABH latterly as I've posted, as their case was terrible. The gay blokes are back in the papers telling their support for Stokes, now that they can be, despite doing so about a week after. Our daft justice system expects people to be able to forget these widely published things. As they did with the girl who went to France with her teacher. They appealed for days that she was a missing person and gave all the relevant details. Then when it went to court the same publications couldn't name her.
Optimistic as ever |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Direwolf Lincoln 14 Aug 18 9.52pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Was there some legal argument about the nature of 'affray' that meant that he could not be found guilty?
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| SW19 CPFC Addiscombe West 14 Aug 18 9.53pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by steeleye20
Well they are wrong CF. Stokes drank a combination of vodkas and beers that would have rendered many of us senseless. Whatever happened he still brutally assaulted 2 people with long term physical damage, it was not self-defence he was not attacked himself. If it was you or I we could expect to be a guest of Her Majesty tonight. To pick him for Saturday while he has still to face disciplinary hearings is quite wrong. What are others in particular those coming through to think? What would be justice, is if Stokes were given a dose of his own medicine. This is not commensurate with the game of cricket IMO Some of this is valid, but on balance I believe he was acting in self defence. My only gripe as mentioned is that in my opinion I think he went beyond reasonable force in self defence. Probably due to the amount he’d tucked away But we’re not in the courtroom, and a jury is of course random and subjective, so I’m sure if we knew all the facts the outcome would make perfect sense.
Did you know? 98.0000001% of people are morons. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| SW19 CPFC Addiscombe West 14 Aug 18 9.55pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stuk
Hales kicked the bloke, from my following of the case. The CPS went with affray, excessive force isn't part of the criteria like it is for self defence in a burglary, for instance. They tried to tag on ABH latterly as I've posted, as their case was terrible. The gay blokes are back in the papers telling their support for Stokes, now that they can be, despite doing so about a week after. Our daft justice system expects people to be able to forget these widely published things. As they did with the girl who went to France with her teacher. They appealed for days that she was a missing person and gave all the relevant details. Then when it went to court the same publications couldn't name her. Ah right. This makes more sense re. Affray. So potentially if they’d put in the ABH claim earlier it might have been open to a slightly different outcome? Edited by SW19 CPFC (14 Aug 2018 9.55pm)
Did you know? 98.0000001% of people are morons. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Mapletree Croydon 14 Aug 18 10.45pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stuk
They tried to add two charges of ABH to the trial on the eve of it, or thereabouts. Even the judge said something all the lines of "you've had 10 months". It was never in the public interest to bring this to trial. And it took them 4 months to decide to do that. This is the point. I believe the judge indicated that there was every likelihood those charges would have stuck. He was charged with affray. It relies on a logic that had a person of reasonable firmness witnessed the incident they would have been scared for their own safety Bizarre cock up on the charge sheet front
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| SW19 CPFC Addiscombe West 14 Aug 18 10.51pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Mapletree
This is the point. I believe the judge indicated that there was every likelihood those charges would have stuck. He was charged with affray. It relies on a logic that had a person of reasonable firmness witnessed the incident they would have been scared for their own safety Bizarre cock up on the charge sheet front Now it makes sense.
Did you know? 98.0000001% of people are morons. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| derby eagle Derby 15 Aug 18 1.37am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stuk
They tried to add two charges of ABH to the trial on the eve of it, or thereabouts. Even the judge said something all the lines of "you've had 10 months". It was never in the public interest to bring this to trial. And it took them 4 months to decide to do that. It was in the public interest IMO to prosecute given the CCTV footage. It appears that the CPS may have been over ambitious in the level of charge that could possibly have stuck. No one will know if the lesser charge would have been proven.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / RegisterNew users
Registration is now on our new message board
Existing users
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
Sponsors
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.