Home  Forums |
|
|
|
|
Topic History of: Gerrard Acquitted - Another indictment on the British 'justice' system?
Max. showing the last 5 posts - (Last post first)
|
Pete Clarke |
So, you're saying that Gerrard's act of extreme violence is justified because of...?
BR's comment is perhaps valid because the guy threw an egg at old two-jags.
OK, so what did the DJ do that justified being hospitalised?
Oh, that's it.. He said 'no' to Stevie Fucking G, then didn't allow the egostistical, dances-like-yer-grandad, over-rated buffoon to intimidate him. |
|
JK2006 |
BR's point is valid - when the man threw an egg at him.
I'm sure it was a pretty unpleasant fracas but I know that celebrities now consistently get exaggerated against or invented against.
None are perfect. But few did what is claimed.
I think Stevie was provoked, acted wrongly but was correctly acquitted.
However it IS a dangerous precedent. |
|
Pete Clarke |
If there was no crime, then why did Gerrard's mates all plead guilty....?
Please explain that one.
And by the way, about 15 years ago, a friend of mine was involved in a mass pub fight in Kentish Town. There were two groups of mates fighting, someone got glassed, and my mate got banged up for 18 months on a charge of aggravated affray.
Justice has been served? My arse it thas. |
|
Pete Clarke |
What's John Prescott got to do with anything. You're trying to compare apples and pears????
Here's a question, which I can guarantee YOU will not give an honest answer to.
If six off duty coppers were facing the same charges as Gerrard and his mates, whose side would you be on then???????
I'd bet a million fucking dollars that, whatever the circumstances leading up to the attack, you'd come down in favour of the bloke who got his head kicked in, lost a tooth, and needed stitches in a facial wound.
No harm done? You fucking numpty. You and JK... |
|
BR |
So if you follow that line then John Prescott should have been convicted of assault.
Any night in any pub people get punched. 99% of these things never go to court because no damage is done and the pub - venue - school - college - tell the aggressor off and warn them.
Celebs sadly dont get that benefit of the doubt - it comes with the territory. People want to get famous OFF THE BACK of the celebrity.
This DJ character could be really nasty - after all none of us were in court. The jury saw both sides and I am happy that they came to the verdict that they came to. It was the right verdict for the case.
But I think that it shows that cases where no damage is caused to the other person should not end up in court. Our courts are too busy - they need to deal with real crimes which have caused harm. Not those that have been tiffs. Such as Amy Winehouse - a ridiculous claim.
Celebs get special treatment - they should not. They should be treated equally - they are human like us all and they carry a role model responsibility. |
|
|
|
