|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2012 21:43:27 GMT
seems pretty unbelievable if letting off a smoke bomb is really all he did
|
|
|
Post by carefreeoufc on Aug 1, 2012 21:51:18 GMT
seems pretty unbelievable if letting off a smoke bomb is really all he did He didn't even let it off he was caught with it by the stewards at Plymouth and bundled off by OB. I was stood a couple of rows in front he hadnt even been drinking as I believe he was driving the lads back. Disgraceful.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2012 22:03:05 GMT
So is there a news article in the OM about this or something?
|
|
|
Post by roley on Aug 1, 2012 22:11:16 GMT
Not yet Friday's paper i hope.
|
|
|
Post by moobs on Aug 1, 2012 22:28:34 GMT
I reckon there's extenuating circumstances.
They wouldn't jail someone for something so trivial
|
|
|
Post by jammydodger on Aug 1, 2012 22:35:09 GMT
Is 6 years The normal for a football ban?
|
|
|
Post by roley on Aug 2, 2012 7:40:51 GMT
|
|
|
Post by wellypie on Aug 2, 2012 8:22:47 GMT
The problem is with an appeal it will take a couple of weeks probably and he will be released in 4 weeks. The law is an ass when it comes to punishing people. This is totally over the top for the crime he has committed, i.e carrying a smoke bomb.
|
|
|
Post by loveandpride on Aug 2, 2012 8:47:21 GMT
The judge defined it here as a 'weapon' this is why he's being so harsh. Is it a weapon? It's not like he was ballooning about with a Nunchaku or something!
|
|
|
Post by ianmoore82 on Aug 2, 2012 8:54:43 GMT
Interesting he pleaded guilty to being in possession of a 'firework or flare' yet the news article referred to it as a 'bomb' or 'grenade'.
If it was that dangerous why are they used, without licence, at paintballing venues?
It's just the usual bollocks of vilifying football fans as if it was still in the 80s
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2012 9:01:31 GMT
I reckon there's extenuating circumstances. They wouldn't jail someone for something so trivial I'd like to think so... Unless smoke bombs have moved on considerably since I was a kid, they are certainly not a dangerous explosive! By all means kick him out of the ground and possibly a short ban but jail is utterly ridiculous if thats really all he did.
|
|
|
Post by sarge on Aug 2, 2012 9:14:17 GMT
has the FSA been contacted regarding the ridiculous sentence and ban for possesing a smoke bomb- unlikely it may be, but I do wonder what might happen should plymouth ever play at home to any mainland european side- they wouldnt have enough stewards to cope with the smoke bombs and flares!
On a slightly different note, albeit connected, personally I think there should be a national standard for stewarding at football matches in England- Wycombe away last time we played there, Northampton away last season for instance. All door Supervisors (bouncers) have to hold a current SIA license and are by their license (displayed) are identifiable should they overstep their authority. Yet at football matches there is standardisation of stewarding from ground to ground, and stewards invariably have no form of identification on display, so should their actions while stewarding be illegal, provocative or uneccessarily confrontational its near impossible to report the individual concerned to any appropriate authority, which clearly isnt right or how it should be.
|
|
|
Post by John Lennon on Aug 2, 2012 9:31:51 GMT
I dont think the judge realises what it is. He has overeacted big time. He seems to think bad things would have happened if it went off. Well some smoke would have appeared and that's it. Yet another district judge out of touch with reality
|
|
|
Post by Best Mate on Aug 2, 2012 12:12:41 GMT
|
|
|
Post by mrdiaz on Aug 2, 2012 12:43:20 GMT
The only good thing to come of this is....Least no one will bring them into the stadium or take them to away games again.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2012 14:26:53 GMT
Judge is probably a f*cking swindon fan
|
|
|
Post by concretebob on Aug 2, 2012 16:51:26 GMT
Wow, that's an extreme sentence. Hooligans get less than that!
Also, a very cheeky headline from the BBC.
|
|
|
Post by WeAreTheResurrection on Aug 2, 2012 18:15:56 GMT
The only good thing to come of this is....Least no one will bring them into the stadium or take them to away games again. So no good things will come of this then.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2012 18:45:29 GMT
"Stuart Bell, 19, of Leven, set the flare in a street before his side's Scottish Cup tie against Aberdeen in January 2011.
He later pleaded guilty to culpable and reckless conduct and was fined £400. He was also banned for 15 months from attending any SPL or SFL matches."
This is a more reasonable outcome, and this is for actually setting it off, and in the street! A lot worse than what happened at Plymouth (ie nothing). A small fine and a 1 year ban would be sensible, this judge doesn't have a clue, it's not an army explosive for goodness sake!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2012 18:53:49 GMT
A small fine and kicking out the ground is what I think it should be, a length ban from football is over the top.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2012 19:15:20 GMT
Presumably this guy was legally represented in court? Why didn't his solicitor explain the difference between a "bomb/grenade" and a smoke bomb? The judge seems to think this device could have caused a fire, which is nonsense.
Are we sure there's not more to this? If not, the sentence seems incredibly harsh.
|
|
|
Post by roley on Aug 2, 2012 20:00:01 GMT
Presumably this guy was legally represented in court? Why didn't his solicitor explain the difference between a "bomb/grenade" and a smoke bomb? The judge seems to think this device could have caused a fire, which is nonsense. Are we sure there's not more to this? If not, the sentence seems incredibly harsh. Yes my brother was legally represented in court. The judge even critized his solicitor for trying to defend him. District judge done the case. The FSF has made a statement on the case in Friday's Oxford Mail. My mum spoke to him today and he's ok and he has made an appeal and i'm going to visit him next week. I hope his appeal dont take to long to come through.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2012 20:10:07 GMT
Presumably this guy was legally represented in court? Why didn't his solicitor explain the difference between a "bomb/grenade" and a smoke bomb? The judge seems to think this device could have caused a fire, which is nonsense. Are we sure there's not more to this? If not, the sentence seems incredibly harsh. Yes my brother was legally represented in court. The judge even critized his solicitor for trying to defend him. District judge done the case. The FSF has made a statement on the case in Friday's Oxford Mail. My mum spoke to him today and he's ok and he has made an appeal and i'm going to visit him next week. I hope his appeal dont take to long to come through. Sorry to hear it was your brother Roley, who I know by sight. It's disgraceful that a judge should criticise a solicitor for doing his job and ensuring the legal process is correctly carried out. Your brother must be very confident of success on appeal, but even if it's quick and he's out shortly he'll still have lost earnings and maybe even his job? Hell of a lot of ignorance towards football fans still.
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Aug 2, 2012 20:20:45 GMT
Look at Scales of Justice on the Oxford Mail website. Scum get away with robbing, shoplifting, beating, drug dealing ,paedos, drink drivers , all for a community order and tiny fine. The punishment Tank has got is completely disproportionate for a smoke pellet which wasn't even let off.
|
|
|
Post by hobooxy2 (RIP) on Aug 2, 2012 20:53:43 GMT
There must be some video evidence of one these smoke bombs being set off in a similar area to that at Plymouth's ground, which could have been used as evidence in Tanks case. Surely if the judge had seen what they do when set off , the sentence would've been so harsh
|
|
|
Post by roley on Aug 2, 2012 22:28:37 GMT
I hope his appeal is very soon. A group of 10 or so of us are going to catch the train down there to give him support. Will keep you all posted.
|
|
|
Post by mojofilter on Aug 2, 2012 23:57:01 GMT
Look at Scales of Justice on the Oxford Mail website. Scum get away with robbing, shoplifting, beating, drug dealing ,paedos, drink drivers , all for a community order and tiny fine. The punishment Tank has got is completely disproportionate for a smoke pellet which wasn't even let off. when do paedophiles get away with fines and community orders? or is 'paedos' just one of those things that gets thrown into any daily-mail-induced rant like this, usually about how things aren't as good these days or how political correctness is no longer sane.
|
|
|
Post by essexyellows on Aug 3, 2012 7:15:04 GMT
Age old rule..... don`t want to do the time don`t do the crime......or don`t get caught. It is an apparently harsh sentence but we don`t know all the evidence/defence that was presented in court ,previous convictions /cautions etc.
|
|
|
Post by ox4eva on Aug 3, 2012 7:40:52 GMT
Won't be in long, 3 weeks max i reckon
What nick is he in?
|
|
|
Post by concretebob on Aug 3, 2012 8:19:15 GMT
Didn't TVP get hold of a smoke bomb last season, examined it and found it to be non lethal?
|
|