Does this mean that Bowyer is going to start playing for England again?
Woodgate & Bowyer
- Thread starter ElmParkRed
- Start date
Originally posted by Fergiesarmy:
<strong>there will be trouble on streets this weekend, mark my words
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Leeds ain't Los Angeles mate.
Originally posted by Fergiesarmy:
<strong>sounds like a farce to me, the other guy who was not famous was found guilty of gbh
erm no actually. There was two 'guys' who arent famous. One got the SAME punishment as the 'famous' Jonathon Woodgate the other had sceintific, obvious, definite evidence that he had biten this blokes face - he was found guilty because of evidence not the fact that he isnt famous.
And don't act too surpised u all knew they were gonna 'get off' its hardly shocking.
this is pathetic
if you're a manc or (apparently) a scouser you want bowyer and woodgate send down for the dirty racist thugs that they are
if you're a leeds fans you think that butter wouldn't melt
bollocks to the lot of you. i just hope they jail the editor of the mirror
but what i want to know is
- do leeds fans really feel comfortable with bowyer and woodgate in the team, given their full criminal histories and their choice in friends?
- how do leeds fans feel about michael duberry?
- does anyone really believe this wasn't a racially motivated attack?
if you're a manc or (apparently) a scouser you want bowyer and woodgate send down for the dirty racist thugs that they are
if you're a leeds fans you think that butter wouldn't melt
bollocks to the lot of you. i just hope they jail the editor of the mirror
but what i want to know is
- do leeds fans really feel comfortable with bowyer and woodgate in the team, given their full criminal histories and their choice in friends?
- how do leeds fans feel about michael duberry?
- does anyone really believe this wasn't a racially motivated attack?
Bowyer was found innocent because their wasnt sufficient evidence. Contrary to R A Softlads claim of the video evidence, the only video they had was him hugging Caveney, the video evidence i suspect mr Softlad is referring to would be that of one of the other men 'putting the boot' in, as i believe there is a video evidence of someone actually jumping on Najeib. There was NO evidence to convict him that could have given justice to him going down, seriously there wasnt ANY, im doing this trial thing for my media coursework, ive read evry single boring article.
The charge of Affray basically means being invloved in a street fight. Woodgate was found guilty of this due to sufficient evidence to prove he was there and he did invlove himself in the fight. He did NOT cause GBH, or at least the evidence put forward suggests he didnt.
The charge of Affray basically means being invloved in a street fight. Woodgate was found guilty of this due to sufficient evidence to prove he was there and he did invlove himself in the fight. He did NOT cause GBH, or at least the evidence put forward suggests he didnt.
im just presenting the facts. I dont care either way.
Sorry Jo, but I did need to say Bowyer was found "not guilty" rather than "innocent," as that finding is not possible in a criminal proceeding. Newspapers tend to use 'innocent' in lieu of NG because of the fear of a typo that would omit the "not" and leave the aquitted as "guilty." [We know how these papers pride themselves on their accuracy].
What's the great outcry on the Island?--seems to me that the jury rendered its verdict. Those who disagree should consider that they weren't called upon to sit in the courtroom, get bored by the judge and attorneys, avoid newpapers, television, and radio for the duration of the trial, and render a decision based on a limited amount of information and the strictures of jury instruction specifying what to consider and how to apply the facts to the law.
Lousy system, trial by jury. Anyone want to propose an alternative. We have some splendid military tribunals being set up over here.
What's the great outcry on the Island?--seems to me that the jury rendered its verdict. Those who disagree should consider that they weren't called upon to sit in the courtroom, get bored by the judge and attorneys, avoid newpapers, television, and radio for the duration of the trial, and render a decision based on a limited amount of information and the strictures of jury instruction specifying what to consider and how to apply the facts to the law.
Lousy system, trial by jury. Anyone want to propose an alternative. We have some splendid military tribunals being set up over here.
ok, sorry i didnt realise u couldnt say innocent
the BBC did
the BBC did
Originally posted by jo:
<strong>
no</strong><hr></blockquote>
me either
Originally posted by elljay:
<strong>
me either
Originally posted by elljay:
<strong>
me either
Yes but that was fairly obvious
Originally posted by g4orce:
Wonder did ya, well cheers for your
consideration...
and personally i couldent give a shit what you think, cos i think that the brittish lagal system sucks arse big time, as long as you have a good brief then you can get away with absolute murder.
The verdicts were from a jury of 12 people with no axe to grind and the verdicts should be accepted. Nobody has got away with anything.
and incendently, "gay4orce" howd you come up with that one then? look in the dictionary like you every other time you open your mouth...<hr></blockquote>
Sorry, I thought the 'G' in G4orce stood for Gay.
Originally posted by elljay:
this is pathetic
if you're a manc or (apparently) a scouser you want bowyer and woodgate send down for the dirty racist thugs that they are
if you're a leeds fans you think that butter wouldn't melt
bollocks to the lot of you. i just hope they jail the editor of the mirror
but what i want to know is
- do leeds fans really feel comfortable with bowyer and woodgate in the team, given their full criminal histories and their choice in friends?
- how do leeds fans feel about michael duberry?
- does anyone really believe this wasn't a racially motivated attack?<hr></blockquote>
Yes I feel perfectly comfortable with both Woody and Bowyer in my team - Lee is innocent of all charges and Woody was an arse fuelled by alcohol. They are not the first people to let things get out of hand under the influence of drink and yes they have done things in the past. So wnat? Are we all whiter than white?? Have we all on here never done anything we are ashamed of or regretted at a later date?
Duberry was cleared of all charges and did what he saw fit - I have no problem with him.
The clearest of evidence was there for all to see - IF they could be bothered to read what the judge said in both trials. As far as I can see the ONLY people making this into a racist attack are from Sarfraz side. The vile speech made by his representaive and his father on Sky was appalling and simply could not have been made by a white person.
There were rumours that this had more to do with Sarfraz wanting a big compensation payout and now he has not got it his family scream "justice was not done".
It has to be remembered that, whilst Clifford in particular and Woody and Caveney to less extent do deserve their punishments, they would not have been in the dock if Sarfraz, his brother and others had not taunted them and had not thrown the first punch.
B4E
well actually the first punch was said to be done by Najeib but only in self-defence.
and ure right about the only people still thinking this is racist is the najeib family for some reason (oh and football supporters with a little 2 much time on their hands) it may have been racist, it may not have been noone can tell - all i know is that the prosectuation conceded it was NOT racist, the judge said it was NOT racist, every fecking person invloved with the trial (cept Najeibs) has said it NOT racist.
and ure right about the only people still thinking this is racist is the najeib family for some reason (oh and football supporters with a little 2 much time on their hands) it may have been racist, it may not have been noone can tell - all i know is that the prosectuation conceded it was NOT racist, the judge said it was NOT racist, every fecking person invloved with the trial (cept Najeibs) has said it NOT racist.
Originally posted by elljay:
<strong>
i don't think that's right about the judge. he told the jury that from a legal point of view the attack could not be considered to be racially motivated. that's not the same thing as saying it's not racist</strong><hr></blockquote>
I agree with that. We'll never know if it was a racist attack whether they are racist is another matter. Bowyer has been caught on tape throwing chairs at an Asian... in the Isle of Dogs, hot bed of racial hatred
Originally posted by elljay:
<strong>
and your own racism (however sublimated) is showing. "when things have not gone their way" indeed!</strong><hr></blockquote>
must be a yarkshire thing
It always kinda makes me laugh to hear how outraged other people get at the verdict in any trial, they always seem to think that they (through reading about the trial in the paper) know better that the twelve good men and true in the jury......
These twelve good men and true that were selected for the jury have actually seen all the evdence as it was presented in the trial and therefore I would think that they should have a much better idea about the innocence or guilt of the men being prosecuted.......
The trial's over and I'm very ambivalent about the result of it, justice has served its course and punishment has been laid down, I didn't give the trial much thought before and now I'll get back to not caring about it at all........
These twelve good men and true that were selected for the jury have actually seen all the evdence as it was presented in the trial and therefore I would think that they should have a much better idea about the innocence or guilt of the men being prosecuted.......
The trial's over and I'm very ambivalent about the result of it, justice has served its course and punishment has been laid down, I didn't give the trial much thought before and now I'll get back to not caring about it at all........
Originally posted by marchingontogether:
<strong>
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laugh Out Loud]" /> A voice of reason from Middle Earth</strong><hr></blockquote>
Us Hobbits ain't daft you know......
Originally posted by giggzy:
<strong>
so that means that we should be happy with the OJ verdict.
the system stinks..here and in the US</strong><hr></blockquote>
I hate to say it but I'm afraid we have to be, yes.......
I myself through reading about the evidence in the paper and also seeing some of the trial on TV am sure OJ is guilty, but I'm not in the jury......
I'm sorry, I honestly can't think of a better way than having twelve impartial jurors........
Any suggestions.......
Originally posted by Martin Henry:
<strong>
Any suggestions.......
chop thier hands off
wont do it again
Look forward to seeing them pull on the white shirts again,they will match their pointed hats nicely .
If I shoplift but no-one see s me do it Im still a thief!!!
.If I shoplift but no-one see s me do it Im still a thief!!!