I was once on a jury involving a similar matter. The accused was supposed to have bitten a police officer outside a club in Basildon. As a jury, we heard the evidence available, then sent a note to the judge asking why the "injured" officer was not there to give evidence in person. The case was adjourned while we waited for the plod to pitch up. We then listened to his somewhat contradictory story and sent a note to the judge asking why there was no evidence from a police duty doctor or photographs of the bite marks. We were told there weren't any photos and the officer had not been examined by a doctor. We went out to consider the case and came back 10 minutes later with a not guilty verdict.
So, things of interest: [1] Why was "my" case dealt with in a Crown Court while this matter was with the Mags? Presumably it was much less serious and that might explain the lack of a prison term whether suspended or not? [2] If the footballer incident happened in the back of a police car, why was the arrested individual not already restrained in handcuffs to prevent this incident from occurring? (They always seem very keen to get the cuffs on in the countless episodes of the several thousand different but oh so similar fly-on-the-wall plod documentaries.) [3] Essex plod have a bit of a history of, how can I put this politely, manipulating the evidence.
Professional football gets a bad press but by the very nature of the game - it employs a vast army of young men - it is inevitable that a few of them will get into trouble in any one year. I don't really see that this shames either their club or the game.
But like few have previously mentioned, Tomkins gets named and shamed for this due to his profession when there would most likely be plenty of other w@nkers that do that kind of thing on a daily basis.
But like few have previously mentioned, Tomkins gets named and shamed for this due to his profession when there would most likely be plenty of other w@nkers that do that kind of thing on a daily basis.
Certainly no shock.
I agree it's not any more heinous than what you could see any club on any night in the country, but I can't feel too sympathetic for his naming and shaming as when it comes down to it, it's entirely down to him as the guilty plea acknowledges. On the other hand, he's hardly up there with the likes of Ched Evans, he's a young guy made a stupid mistake and I imagine he won't be so daft again.
Apart from the fact that West Ham have no shame. Just another twat of a footballer with too much time and money on his hands and too little grey matter.
I was once on a jury involving a similar matter. The accused was supposed to have bitten a police officer outside a club in Basildon. As a jury, we heard the evidence available, then sent a note to the judge asking why the "injured" officer was not there to give evidence in person. The case was adjourned while we waited for the plod to pitch up. We then listened to his somewhat contradictory story and sent a note to the judge asking why there was no evidence from a police duty doctor or photographs of the bite marks. We were told there weren't any photos and the officer had not been examined by a doctor. We went out to consider the case and came back 10 minutes later with a not guilty verdict.
So, things of interest: [1] Why was "my" case dealt with in a Crown Court while this matter was with the Mags? Presumably it was much less serious and that might explain the lack of a prison term whether suspended or not? [2] If the footballer incident happened in the back of a police car, why was the arrested individual not already restrained in handcuffs to prevent this incident from occurring? (They always seem very keen to get the cuffs on in the countless episodes of the several thousand different but oh so similar fly-on-the-wall plod documentaries.) [3] Essex plod have a bit of a history of, how can I put this politely, manipulating the evidence.
Professional football gets a bad press but by the very nature of the game - it employs a vast army of young men - it is inevitable that a few of them will get into trouble in any one year. I don't really see that this shames either their club or the game.
Maybe the accused in your case wanted to go for a crown hearing feeling he had a better chance with a jury than 3 magistrates. Risky in same ways if found guilty.
I believe there is different starting points depending also on how the officer was assaulted, for example a push being a less serious form to spitting and kicking being more serious. I would assume biting would be up there with the most serious.
It wasn't that long ago that assaulting a police officer was deemed so serious that an immediate custodial sentence was the starting point and the defence advocate had to persuade the magistrates otherwise. Now it seems that as long as you are 'in the public eye' the magistrates are happy with a 'selfie' with the defendant. Big smile James...
Ha young lad has too much booze and has a wrestle with a gavver. Sometimes I think some of our supporters either never leave their house or they were born at the age of 50.
It was obviously a stupid thing to do and it seems like a reasonable punishment but 'letting the game down'??...hardly.
Pretty sick of your laissez-faire attitude to law and order tbh Gary.
I don't get why people think this is ok ? He's meant to be a professional footballer and a role model and ambassador for his club I'm sure if I was x amount of thousands a week I'm sure I could behave myself? And yes with that on their record a lot of people would struggle at a lot of jobs once the hr dept check ur records?
Because getting pissed up and having a fight with a copper is what makes you a proper lad. Then you can get respect down the pub with the other lads. Can even have your own tankard behind the bar in 20 years.
Comments
We were told there weren't any photos and the officer had not been examined by a doctor.
We went out to consider the case and came back 10 minutes later with a not guilty verdict.
So, things of interest: [1] Why was "my" case dealt with in a Crown Court while this matter was with the Mags? Presumably it was much less serious and that might explain the lack of a prison term whether suspended or not? [2] If the footballer incident happened in the back of a police car, why was the arrested individual not already restrained in handcuffs to prevent this incident from occurring? (They always seem very keen to get the cuffs on in the countless episodes of the several thousand different but oh so similar fly-on-the-wall plod documentaries.) [3] Essex plod have a bit of a history of, how can I put this politely, manipulating the evidence.
Professional football gets a bad press but by the very nature of the game - it employs a vast army of young men - it is inevitable that a few of them will get into trouble in any one year. I don't really see that this shames either their club or the game.
He has learnt a lesson.
What probably really upset him was the bouncer responding "sorry, haven't a clue" to his question "don't you know who I am?".
But like few have previously mentioned, Tomkins gets named and shamed for this due to his profession when there would most likely be plenty of other w@nkers that do that kind of thing on a daily basis.
Certainly no shock.
I believe there is different starting points depending also on how the officer was assaulted, for example a push being a less serious form to spitting and kicking being more serious. I would assume biting would be up there with the most serious.
I can understand why he was so desperate to get in there though....
He's meant to be a professional footballer and a role model and ambassador for his club I'm sure if I was x amount of thousands a week I'm sure I could behave myself?
And yes with that on their record a lot of people would struggle at a lot of jobs once the hr dept check ur records?
the one on the left ..maybe.