Ah, the old 'yeah I know I lost but it doesn't count because all laws here are invalid anyway mate' defence. The grifter's equivalent of a 7 year old shouting 'FORCEFIELD' when someone would catch them in tag. I'd love to see a balance sheet of what Barton has made off his attempts to reinvent himself as a controvery commenter and what he's lost in costs. I bet it would be very, very red.
One thing I find puzzling is that as he’s back with his wife why does he need to appeal? Presumably she could just say he didn’t assault her?
She knows he did (presumably), so what is she saying?
I suspect he's being prosecuted because she filed a report. She can't then later rescind that and say it didn't happen and stop a decision which may have been made to charge him.
One thing I find puzzling is that as he’s back with his wife why does he need to appeal? Presumably she could just say he didn’t assault her?
She knows he did (presumably), so what is she saying?
She made a report to the police and then it was the police/CPS who bought charges, not her. If she changes her mind/story it might weaken the case but it won't automatically drop it.
One thing I find puzzling is that as he’s back with his wife why does he need to appeal? Presumably she could just say he didn’t assault her?
She knows he did (presumably), so what is she saying?
She made a report to the police and then it was the police/CPS who bought charges, not her. If she changes her mind/story it might weaken the case but it won't automatically drop it.
Could also potentially cause problems for her, if she now claims it didn’t happen.
One thing I find puzzling is that as he’s back with his wife why does he need to appeal? Presumably she could just say he didn’t assault her?
She knows he did (presumably), so what is she saying?
Lots of reason I guess but its not unusual for the abused to want things to return to normal even if that normal isn't normal by most standards. Barton probably saying he has plans to appeal might just be talk, I think I'm correct in saying, you can't just appeal because you don't like the verdict, you need grounds to appeal. Its more and likely whizzed around his head having a criminal record for beating his wife may hinder his future prospects or maybe it could be as simple as it will hurt his ego that everyone he meets will regard him for what most think he has always been.
One thing I find puzzling is that as he’s back with his wife why does he need to appeal? Presumably she could just say he didn’t assault her?
She knows he did (presumably), so what is she saying?
Lots of reason I guess but its not unusual for the abused to want things to return to normal even if that normal isn't normal by most standards. Barton probably saying he has plans to appeal might just be talk, I think I'm correct in saying, you can't just appeal because you don't like the verdict, you need grounds to appeal. Its more and likely whizzed around his head having a criminal record for beating his wife may hinder his future prospects or maybe it could be as simple as it will hurt his ego that everyone he meets will regard him for what most think he has always been.
True - it's very difficult to break the abuse cycle. Especially if he's the 'provider' - just because they might not be in what people think of as the traditional situation (eg: they've probably got a lot more money), doesn't mean she won't feel trapped in the relationship.
One thing I find puzzling is that as he’s back with his wife why does he need to appeal? Presumably she could just say he didn’t assault her?
She knows he did (presumably), so what is she saying?
Lots of reason I guess but its not unusual for the abused to want things to return to normal even if that normal isn't normal by most standards. Barton probably saying he has plans to appeal might just be talk, I think I'm correct in saying, you can't just appeal because you don't like the verdict, you need grounds to appeal. Its more and likely whizzed around his head having a criminal record for beating his wife may hinder his future prospects or maybe it could be as simple as it will hurt his ego that everyone he meets will regard him for what most think he has always been.
Could still get a job as a Reform MP like Mc Dermott?
One thing I find puzzling is that as he’s back with his wife why does he need to appeal? Presumably she could just say he didn’t assault her?
She knows he did (presumably), so what is she saying?
Lots of reason I guess but its not unusual for the abused to want things to return to normal even if that normal isn't normal by most standards. Barton probably saying he has plans to appeal might just be talk, I think I'm correct in saying, you can't just appeal because you don't like the verdict, you need grounds to appeal. Its more and likely whizzed around his head having a criminal record for beating his wife may hinder his future prospects or maybe it could be as simple as it will hurt his ego that everyone he meets will regard him for what most think he has always been.
Could still get a job as a Reform MP like Mc Dermott?
Thats completely different. He was sorry and Reformed.
One thing I find puzzling is that as he’s back with his wife why does he need to appeal? Presumably she could just say he didn’t assault her?
She knows he did (presumably), so what is she saying?
Lots of reason I guess but its not unusual for the abused to want things to return to normal even if that normal isn't normal by most standards. Barton probably saying he has plans to appeal might just be talk, I think I'm correct in saying, you can't just appeal because you don't like the verdict, you need grounds to appeal. Its more and likely whizzed around his head having a criminal record for beating his wife may hinder his future prospects or maybe it could be as simple as it will hurt his ego that everyone he meets will regard him for what most think he has always been.
True - it's very difficult to break the abuse cycle. Especially if he's the 'provider' - just because they might not be in what people think of as the traditional situation (eg: they've probably got a lot more money), doesn't mean she won't feel trapped in the relationship.
You only have to look at Greenwood when he was Man Utd, to see what people will put up with.
One thing I find puzzling is that as he’s back with his wife why does he need to appeal? Presumably she could just say he didn’t assault her?
She knows he did (presumably), so what is she saying?
Lots of reason I guess but its not unusual for the abused to want things to return to normal even if that normal isn't normal by most standards. Barton probably saying he has plans to appeal might just be talk, I think I'm correct in saying, you can't just appeal because you don't like the verdict, you need grounds to appeal. Its more and likely whizzed around his head having a criminal record for beating his wife may hinder his future prospects or maybe it could be as simple as it will hurt his ego that everyone he meets will regard him for what most think he has always been.
True - it's very difficult to break the abuse cycle. Especially if he's the 'provider' - just because they might not be in what people think of as the traditional situation (eg: they've probably got a lot more money), doesn't mean she won't feel trapped in the relationship.
You only have to look at Greenwood when he was Man Utd, to see what people will put up with.
Yes and it's a serious point. Those who stay in abusive situations aren't weak or stupid people (regardless of gender, sexuality etc as it can happen to anyone). Systematic abuse happens over a long time and is extremely pervasive and damaging. From the outside it might seem ridiculous that anyone would put up with it but to them that is their reality.
One thing I find puzzling is that as he’s back with his wife why does he need to appeal? Presumably she could just say he didn’t assault her?
She knows he did (presumably), so what is she saying?
She made a report to the police and then it was the police/CPS who bought charges, not her. If she changes her mind/story it might weaken the case but it won't automatically drop it.
Exactly this. They prosecuted based on her original 999 call and the fact she repeated her complaint when police went to their house. Just because she then withdrew the complaint (and even defended him in court) doesn't mean it didn't happen, and the judge basically didn't believe her.
Judge Paul Goldspring found Barton guilty of assault, saying he believed the former footballer and his wife had lied to the court about what happened that night.
“I believe the veracity of the first account and it is supported by other evidence”, he said. “The account on the telephone in the 999 call and to the attending officer is true. I reject the account by Mrs Barton over eight months later and repeated in the witness box by her.”
He said a later explanation put forward by Mrs Barton that the injuries were suffered accidental was “unbelievable”. The judge said the couple had contradicted themselves during their evidence in trial, because “they were not being truthful about what happened”.
Am I right in thinking Aluko studied Law as well? When I saw him in a pub in Wimbledon a few years back with my late friend. he didn't cause any trouble. had a few wines (I think) and left the pub without a fuss. I saw him chatting with "what looked like David Speedie" at the time, but don't how they are connected. This was in the evening after tennis.
Am I right in thinking Aluko studied Law as well? When I saw him in a pub in Wimbledon a few years back with my late friend. he didn't cause any trouble. had a few wines (I think) and left the pub without a fuss. I saw him chatting with "what looked like David Speedie" at the time, but don't how they are connected. This was in the evening after tennis.
Indeed she did, she is probably the worst possible choice if you going to target someone to try and score cheap points. But no-one is ever going to describe Barton as being particularly bright anyway...
Fucking love the fact that Widnes is in Cheshire. For anybody fortunate enough to have never been, it is quite possibly the absolute arsehole of the world. People in St Helens, Wigan and even Leigh (Leigh, ffs!) look down on it - which gives you an idea of how much it's got to offer 🤣
Fucking love the fact that Widnes is in Cheshire. For anybody fortunate enough to have never been, it is quite possibly the absolute arsehole of the world. People in St Helens, Wigan and even Leigh (Leigh, ffs!) look down on it - which gives you an idea of how much it's got to offer 🤣
Comments
Barton probably saying he has plans to appeal might just be talk, I think I'm correct in saying, you can't just appeal because you don't like the verdict, you need grounds to appeal. Its more and likely whizzed around his head having a criminal record for beating his wife may hinder his future prospects or maybe it could be as simple as it will hurt his ego that everyone he meets will regard him for what most think he has always been.
Systematic abuse happens over a long time and is extremely pervasive and damaging. From the outside it might seem ridiculous that anyone would put up with it but to them that is their reality.
Judge Paul Goldspring found Barton guilty of assault, saying he believed the former footballer and his wife had lied to the court about what happened that night.
“I believe the veracity of the first account and it is supported by other evidence”, he said. “The account on the telephone in the 999 call and to the attending officer is true. I reject the account by Mrs Barton over eight months later and repeated in the witness box by her.”
He said a later explanation put forward by Mrs Barton that the injuries were suffered accidental was “unbelievable”. The judge said the couple had contradicted themselves during their evidence in trial, because “they were not being truthful about what happened”.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvgppp6pmymo