Oh how dissapointed some of you are....you so much WANTED him to be found guilty didn't you...a bit nasty if you ask me.....I honestly didn't care one way or the other....I just wanted a fair trial and an honest jury and would have accepted whatever their decision was.....as far as I can tell that's what we had.For some of you though that's not good enough though is it....you want blood.
Was at a meeting with a scouser last night who told me the rumour about playing the "annie" song over and over again. IF that's true then the bloke was bang out of order.
SoundAs, I didn't want him to be found guilty, just as I didn't want him to "get away with it".
I feel that after following the case (the best I could-watching Sky/BBC and reading the papers) it seems he was found Not Guilty simply because of his status.
He even admitted hitting the guy & apologised for it.
You're right 'soundas' I don't know all the facts.
However the CCTV footage is fairly conclusive in my eyes - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jRTmK7Mv1es - Still if 12 of Liverpool supporters find him not guilty then thats good enough for me. I mean he's Stevie G after all. 7/10 drunk according to himself the night in question. I wouldn't have cared if he'd said he did it and got a caution, but unfortunatly i doubt that would have pleased his sponsors. I'd do the same if it was one of our players and i was in their position. All i wondered was whether a local celebrity would recieve a fair trial in their home town, the blokes a god in Liverpool.
The rumour about his wife has been around for a while it's what the Everton fans dig him out about.
[cite]Posted By: Riscardo[/cite]The rumour mill continues. Story just received which in itself is funny, true or not ..
The reason why Steven Gerrard hit that dj is cos Steven's wife Alex is known to have had an affair with some big time villain while with Steven. It's rumoured his eldest daughter isn't his daughter but actually the villain's. The daughter is called Annnie and the dj is supposed to have played Kid Creole's "Annie I'm Not Your Daddy" five times in an hour and that's why Gerrard belted him.
Just so's you know.
Certainly funny, but sounds too much like a Peter Kay advert to be true.
I agree with you SoundAs to a degree but where i have a problem is that Gerrard and Co. threw the first blows and regardless of what was said, Gerrard's party escalated it from a verbal confrontation to a very physical confrontation, and Gerrard was a major part of this violence, by his own admission.The fact that all of his friends admitted to affray i thought said a lot about Gerrard's certainty that a jury in Liverpool would not convict him. My real problem is is that i believe he got off because of who he is and that genuinely upsets me.
(SoundAs, i don't want this to turn into a gang up on you thread. It's just a forum and a discussion.)
[cite]Posted By: guinnessaddick[/cite]How many of the 12 were Liverpool fans?
My thoughts exactly, the trial should never have been held in Liverpool. They should moved it to a neutral area, somewhere like.................Manchester
The alleged rumours of his wife and local gangster(s) has been around for a long time. lots gone on there that we dont know about...... exactly....
And if you had a wife like his would you not want to stand up to some local 'git' because he sometimes played there as a 'dj'..... ' or is okay to take the piss out of anyone's misses in front of your 'mates'.....
were his actions not 'intimidating' and provocative......or is it because he is who he is, a just reason to take any abuse by any one who feels they have a right to have a go.
The fact is Gerrard was buying drinks for people in the club, if he does he is flash, if he does not he is a mean, tight arsed.......
(apparently he bought some drinks for people he did not know, a group of young ladies.)
I am sure he is not proud of what he did, I was not on the jury, and I am not a Liverpool supporter.....
I am also in contempt for the likes of overpaid football 'gits' acting the arse, and being flash thinking they are royalty......
But he was found not guilty by a jury who heard the evidence, wether he was 'provoked' is a matter of opinion that he has to live with.
[cite]Posted By: RedZed333[/cite]Can't help wondering if it hadn't have been Gerrard involved would this have ever gone to court...?
Nevertheless, he was guilty and should have had the balls to admit to it and not let his mates take the rap for him...
You just want to hate him and slaughter the guy....I have absolutely no idea why....did he refuse to sign your autograph book or something?....Your biased opinion makes your argument null and void in my book....listen Red....he was found NOT guilty why don't you accept it or do you know better than 12 citizens and the judge....if you think you do then your being somewhat arrogant if I may say so?
[cite]Posted By: RedZed333[/cite]Can't help wondering if it hadn't have been Gerrard involved would this have ever gone to court...?
Nevertheless, he was guilty and should have had the balls to admit to it and not let his mates take the rap for him...
You just want to hate him and slaughter the guy....I have absolutely no idea why....did he refuse to sign your autograph book or something?....Your biased opinion makes your argument null and void in my book....listen Red....he was found NOT guilty why don't you accept it or do you know better than 12 citizens and the judge....if you think you do then your being somewhat arrogant if I may say so?
FYI, I think Gerrard is a fantastic footballer and have always admired his skills, determination and tenacity, if Charlton had a player with just one quarter of his ability we'd be a very lucky club....
If there's something I do hate though it's the way he's got off with something video evidence has clearly shown him to be guilty of plus the fact he's even admitted it himself, how could have possibly been not guilty....?
Next time you're in a Liverpool nightclub you and your mates go up to Gerrard, pull his jumper over his head, beat seven buckets of shiite out of him and see if you're found innocent, you'd probably be found in the Mersey...
I don't think it's right the way the case has been publicised but that's the price most famous people seem to have to pay these days, but I think you have to agree any other bloke would have been banged to rights...
Believe what you want...I'm not going to be able to reason with you...you've made up your mind on the one hand he's a celebrity therefore he's guilty....and by the same reason because he was found not guilty it was because he's a celebrity....you can't have it both ways....or maybe 'you' can? Thank fook you're not a judge or barrister.
And I'd hate to be up in front of the beak with you on the jury Red!
I dont think anyone is saying he is guilty because he is a celebrity. They are just saying that he clearly attacks the bloke, who he admits has not hit him, and that whilst his friends are guilty of affray he gets found not guilty.
I used to work for the probation service in the 90's and around that time there was a massive increase in young males being given probation orders and vast majority were for affray....
It was a popular charge because it was so simplistic in terms of being applied that invariably the defendant would usually plead guilty and the sentence was most likely a community service order and a small fine, it was usually dealt with by the magistrates which would indicate most cases were no more than minor incidents...
I would say that despite the high profile of this case this too was a minor incident and would have attracted no more than a small fine and a suspended sentence of a few weeks if found guilty...
If Gerrard had been found guilty, which he should have been, and had had a small fine then that would have been justice, I'm not after his blood, just justice...
Stevie G has played a blinder yet again. Like I said the other day. He's used the 'Ken Dodd' precident. Went to Crown Court because he knew a Liverpool jury wouldn't convict him.
SG and his mates are well known for being 'pains' in the bars of Southport. He has some pretty dodgy hangers on. Should know better by now.
[cite]Posted By: RedZed333[/cite]And affray doesn't mean you have to physically attack someone, you only need to show intent....
Quite right that's always been the case because it has it's roots in the French "effroi", meaning dread or terror. So you only have to make someone affraid to commit affray.
Comments
No raz he didn't get off(sorry if you think this is pedantic)....he was not guilty.....there's a difference.
I feel that after following the case (the best I could-watching Sky/BBC and reading the papers) it seems he was found Not Guilty simply because of his status.
He even admitted hitting the guy & apologised for it.
However the CCTV footage is fairly conclusive in my eyes - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jRTmK7Mv1es - Still if 12 of Liverpool supporters find him not guilty then thats good enough for me. I mean he's Stevie G after all. 7/10 drunk according to himself the night in question. I wouldn't have cared if he'd said he did it and got a caution, but unfortunatly i doubt that would have pleased his sponsors. I'd do the same if it was one of our players and i was in their position. All i wondered was whether a local celebrity would recieve a fair trial in their home town, the blokes a god in Liverpool.
The rumour about his wife has been around for a while it's what the Everton fans dig him out about.
Certainly funny, but sounds too much like a Peter Kay advert to be true.
(SoundAs, i don't want this to turn into a gang up on you thread. It's just a forum and a discussion.)
Mmm....
My thoughts exactly, the trial should never have been held in Liverpool. They should moved it to a neutral area, somewhere like.................Manchester
lots gone on there that we dont know about.
Much better to have a row on a station ,not hit someone 3 times, get caught on CCTV and get sent down for 2/4 years-----------British justice
one earns millions and is a role model for kids and the others footbal fans-----------------------British justice.
Nevertheless, he was guilty and should have had the balls to admit to it and not let his mates take the rap for him...
How many of "his mates" will be driving around in new motors?
lots gone on there that we dont know about...... exactly....
And if you had a wife like his would you not want to stand up to some local 'git' because he sometimes played there as a 'dj'.....
'
or is okay to take the piss out of anyone's misses in front of your 'mates'.....
were his actions not 'intimidating' and provocative......or is it because he is who he is, a just reason to take any abuse by any one who feels they have a right to have a go.
The fact is Gerrard was buying drinks for people in the club, if he does he is flash, if he does not he is a mean, tight arsed.......
(apparently he bought some drinks for people he did not know, a group of young ladies.)
I am sure he is not proud of what he did, I was not on the jury, and I am not a Liverpool supporter.....
I am also in contempt for the likes of overpaid football 'gits' acting the arse, and being flash thinking they are royalty......
But he was found not guilty by a jury who heard the evidence, wether he was 'provoked' is a matter of opinion that he has to live with.
You just want to hate him and slaughter the guy....I have absolutely no idea why....did he refuse to sign your autograph book or something?....Your biased opinion makes your argument null and void in my book....listen Red....he was found NOT guilty why don't you accept it or do you know better than 12 citizens and the judge....if you think you do then your being somewhat arrogant if I may say so?
If there's something I do hate though it's the way he's got off with something video evidence has clearly shown him to be guilty of plus the fact he's even admitted it himself, how could have possibly been not guilty....?
Next time you're in a Liverpool nightclub you and your mates go up to Gerrard, pull his jumper over his head, beat seven buckets of shiite out of him and see if you're found innocent, you'd probably be found in the Mersey...
I don't think it's right the way the case has been publicised but that's the price most famous people seem to have to pay these days, but I think you have to agree any other bloke would have been banged to rights...
And I'd hate to be up in front of the beak with you on the jury Red!
His plea of acting in self defence was accepted. After he had hit him 3 times without being assaulted.
How often would 'the man in the street' get away with that defence?
What a fecking joke.
It was a popular charge because it was so simplistic in terms of being applied that invariably the defendant would usually plead guilty and the sentence was most likely a community service order and a small fine, it was usually dealt with by the magistrates which would indicate most cases were no more than minor incidents...
I would say that despite the high profile of this case this too was a minor incident and would have attracted no more than a small fine and a suspended sentence of a few weeks if found guilty...
If Gerrard had been found guilty, which he should have been, and had had a small fine then that would have been justice, I'm not after his blood, just justice...
As far as I am aware there is no new precident that has been set here. Self defence doesn't mean that you have to wait to be attacked.
SG and his mates are well known for being 'pains' in the bars of Southport. He has some pretty dodgy hangers on. Should know better by now.
Quite right that's always been the case because it has it's roots in the French "effroi", meaning dread or terror. So you only have to make someone affraid to commit affray.