Dear Forum.. Assaulted by a doorman

[gnvqsos]

for example?

 

---------- Post added 13-03-2013 at 08:11 ----------

 

 

thats not correct - sorry. You have a right to ask, not a right to view.

 

Well that must be a fake on the CD sitting in my drawer:loopy:.I think you lack legal knowledge and need to check the facts.Look up Data Subject Access Request.

[samshe]

So if I saw the bouncer walking towards a woman, I could presume he was going to assault her and use reasonable force against him?

 

I don't know. Only LoobyLou knows.

 

Chris you seem to be very defensive of her, are you trying to be a knight in shining armour by any chance??

 

If your bouncer was walking towards a woman, you could presume he/she was going to attack her if a) he (or she) deliberately refused a taxi when they noticed the woman and b) walked towards her saying "lets be havin ya" (btw this is an aborrent way for anyone to behave, let alone a mother).

 

Lou, you have my empathy, when I was your age I got into a few scrapes with bouncers when I was drunk, including a couple of stand up fights so I appreciate how you feel an injustice had been done. However, the bouncer didn't punch you, kick you, head butt you etc, he pushed you.

 

I would suggest that pushing someone who is drunk and screaming "lets be having you" is acceptable. The fact you fell over and broke your collar bone is a moot point. Had you been sober you would *likely* have either not fallen over or been able to break your fall.

 

Chalk this up as a lesson learnt. If I saw this on the street I would be on the side of the bouncer, and this is judging on the bias views of a drunk "victim". You intended to do harm to another person and harm was done to you, some people will be glad of that.

[natjack]

This thread is a good example of SF chinese whispers and people making up their own scenarios as they go along. Has samshe even read the same op as me? He's even changed a simple sentence to something that bears no resemblance to what the op says she remembers saying.

 

Are door staff still licensed through the local council? Get onto them and see if they can sort it out for you. Seems like this particular door staff was missing the old days of 'bouncing' and decided to 'bounce' you.

 

Also I'd ask the police to take another look at this incident, if you feel they were trying to fob you off. They're responsible for public order after all. In a totally different scenario recently that I know of, they put off going to watch some cctv for so long that the tape had been recorded over and that was then the excuse for not taking the case any further.

 

I hope you make a full recovery, as where there's blame, there's a claim, and he certainly seem to be to blame for your injuries. Hope he's well insured!

[geared]

You complain about others 'making up their own scenarios' and then go ahead and make your own little story up??

 

Seems like this particular door staff was missing the old days of 'bouncing' and decided to 'bounce' you.

 

Hello Pot, yes this is kettle.................

[andygardener]

This thread is a good example of SF chinese whispers and people making up their own scenarios as they go along. Has samshe even read the same op as me? He's even changed a simple sentence to something that bears no resemblance to what the op says she remembers saying.

 

Are door staff still licensed through the local council? Get onto them and see if they can sort it out for you. Seems like this particular door staff was missing the old days of 'bouncing' and decided to 'bounce' you.

 

Also I'd ask the police to take another look at this incident, if you feel they were trying to fob you off. They're responsible for public order after all. In a totally different scenario recently that I know of, they put off going to watch some cctv for so long that the tape had been recorded over and that was then the excuse for not taking the case any further.

 

I hope you make a full recovery, as where there's blame, there's a claim, and he certainly seem to be to blame for your injuries. Hope he's well insured!

 

"As I reached my taxi I heard a voice calling my name followed by shouting and swearing. I'd had, let's say, 'A history' with this person. This made me quite angry and I proceeded to walk in the direction of said person to 'have it out'. Probably not my wisest move ever. I seem to remember shouting back something along the lines of, 'Come on, let's sort this out'"

 

No chinese whispers. Just a drunk threatening violence by their own admission.

[Chris_Sleeps]

Chris you seem to be very defensive of her, are you trying to be a knight in shining armour by any chance??

How does that metaphor even work? The assault is over. My horse would arrive pretty late.

 

Secondly, make your point or do one. There's no need to dress up these petty allusions. Other people are trying to be a judge, jury and executioner.

Just a drunk threatening violence by their own admission.

The evasive power of euphemism.

 

To "have it out" and "sort it out" don't automatically mean 'I walked over with the intention of inflicting physical harm upon another person'.

 

Finally, because it is getting a bit boring now - in court we'd have one person's narrative and then pick at it. Then a witness or two. Then maybe the defence would produce a witness or two. All we have here is one person, and then we can speculate on the rest. It's not a path that leads to any truth.

[verona]

Sorry I've not read through all the threads but let me get this right.

 

You was about to walk over to someone and potentially start a fight. The bouncer steps into prevent this, you come of worse, are now disgruntled, and you want to blame the bouncer for your drunken bafoonery. In my opinion the bouncer has used his common law powers that we all have to prevent a crime taking place.

 

My advice is, man-up, and don't drink as much next time.

[Bewerley]

Interesting thread if in fact it was a genuine occurance.

There have been at least 12 good men/women and true, posting. A consensus has been arrived at.

By your own admission you have been intoxicated and involved in drunken loud mouthed banter. Your actions caused you to be pushed by another person whose job it was to keep order in a certain vicinity.

Res ipsa loquiter. The facts speak for themselves. On this Forum without evidence to the contrary you have been found wanting in social behavior .

On a 12:2 verdict you are found guilty of wasting the bouncers time, Police time. Doctors time, and Forum members time whilst providing a bit of entertainment to bored posters.

Your punishment is to write out 100 times

'When drunk I put myself and others at risk. I am still responsible for my actions therefore in consideration of others I must understand my limit and become a more rounded citizen.'

[skinz]

Interesting thread if in fact it was a genuine occurance.

There have been at least 12 good men/women and true, posting. A consensus has been arrived at.

By your own admission you have been intoxicated and involved in drunken loud mouthed banter. Your actions caused you to be pushed by another person whose job it was to keep order in a certain vicinity.

Res ipsa loquiter. The facts speak for themselves. On this Forum without evidence to the contrary you have been found wanting in social behavior .

On a 12:2 verdict you are found guilty of wasting the bouncers time, Police time. Doctors time, and Forum members time whilst providing a bit of entertainment to bored posters.

Your punishment is to write out 100 times

'When drunk I put myself and others at risk. I am still responsible for my actions therefore in consideration of others I must understand my limit and become a more rounded citizen.'

 

What do you mean?.."when drunk". It's obvious you're nothing but...even ar 6:57 in the morning.

[quisquose]

Your punishment is to write out 100 times

'When drunk I put myself and others at risk. I am still responsible for my actions therefore in consideration of others I must understand my limit and become a more rounded citizen.'

 

I don't think anybody would claim that being drunk makes somebody less answerable for their actions, and that is not what the OP is asking for if her story is as she tells it.

 

But what were her actions that deserved a badly broken collarbone exactly? In the absence of any witness statements it's rather difficult to make the judgement that many here have, therefore for the purposes of the discussion put before us we must assume, for the purposes of that discussion, that the OP is telling the truth.

 

What is undeniable is that a 3rd party, a person totally unconnected with the people involved, took action which resulted in a broken collarbone for the OP.

 

Just as a drunk person is answerable for their actions, I think we can agree so is a sober one. A sober person ought to know that a strong push on a drunk person, who is half his size, might lead to hurt to that person. If the OP had hit her head in the fall and been killed, it is inevitable that there would now be an imminent court case where witness testimonies would be heard, and a court would rule on whether his actions were reasonable.

 

We can't do that here, Halibut, Chris_Sleeps and myself might think his actions amounted to assault, and others might think his actions were reasonable, but we do not know.

 

What I do know is that there is the usual nasty taste of "victim blaming" that always seems to appear in these discussions that makes me somewhat sad. "She deserved it because she was drunk", or "she deserved it because she looked like she might have a fight", fits right alongside the old favourites "she deserved it because of what she was wearing" or "she deserved it because of where she was at that time in the morning".