Prettytom Posted October 3, 2023 Share Posted October 3, 2023 1 hour ago, HeHasRisen said: Nice sentiment but you cant have convicted criminals working on wards in hospitals, the red tape would be ridiculous. Pretty sure what will happen here is that there will be some community service and likely a small fine, the world has gone mad if he is chucked into an overcrowded prison system. Agree entirely. The lad has lost his job and gained a criminal conviction. There’s no need for prison. A fine and a banning order will suffice. Mind you, I don’t think that the banning order will be needed, I can’t see him showing his face at Hillsborough for some time to come. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
owl.66 Posted October 3, 2023 Share Posted October 3, 2023 17 hours ago, Jack Grey said: I don't like your comment.....I find it offensive You should be arrested and locked up Sue me 😀👍 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Grey Posted October 3, 2023 Share Posted October 3, 2023 10 minutes ago, owl.66 said: Sue me 😀👍 Don't joke They're trying to make it law that it's criminal to offend someone This is what they want our future to be.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baron99 Posted October 3, 2023 Share Posted October 3, 2023 1 hour ago, Jack Grey said: Don't joke They're trying to make it law that it's criminal to offend someone This is what they want our future to be.... I'd give them both one of those 10 year season tickets as a further punishment. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Grey Posted October 3, 2023 Share Posted October 3, 2023 2 hours ago, Baron99 said: I'd give them both one of those 10 year season tickets as a further punishment. Give them the managers job and they'll probably kill themselves That would make a lot of people happy 🙄 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclunt Posted October 3, 2023 Share Posted October 3, 2023 9 hours ago, HeHasRisen said: "They"? Only one of them held the phone up and only one of them has been hauled before the courts, and rightly so. If the brother was arrested merely for laughing at the other, it would have been beyond ridiculous. Again, I still think they are both numpties. Yes, "They". You can't honestly believe that the other buttock didn't know what his brother was holding up? There is such a thing as being an accessory, and on this occasion the laughing Non Holder of the phone was exactly that. To excuse his behaviour as less serious than the buttock holding the phone is a more apt example of appearing beyond ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeHasRisen Posted October 3, 2023 Share Posted October 3, 2023 (edited) 25 minutes ago, Cyclunt said: Yes, "They". You can't honestly believe that the other buttock didn't know what his brother was holding up? There is such a thing as being an accessory, and on this occasion the laughing Non Holder of the phone was exactly that. To excuse his behaviour as less serious than the buttock holding the phone is a more apt example of appearing beyond ridiculous. Of course it's less serious ffs. That's like saying someone committing a murder is the same as someone who passed him the gun. The fact BOTH weren't up in court should tell you something. Edited October 3, 2023 by HeHasRisen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclunt Posted October 3, 2023 Share Posted October 3, 2023 3 minutes ago, HeHasRisen said: Of course it's less serious ffs. That's like saying someone committing a murder is the same as someone who passed him the gun. The face BOTH weren't up in court should tell you something. Really? And the addition of "ffs" nails your belief in the softly softly approach does it ? ""If you know someone committed an indictable offence and did nothing. Or assisted them by providing a means of evading justice, harboured or sheltered them you could be charged with assisting an offender. This an offence under section 4(1) of the criminal law act 1967."" No excuse for letting this pathetic excuse of a man off. And no excuse for defending him either. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
owl.66 Posted October 3, 2023 Share Posted October 3, 2023 3 minutes ago, Cyclunt said: Really? And the addition of "ffs" nails your belief in the softly softly approach does it ? ""If you know someone committed an indictable offence and did nothing. Or assisted them by providing a means of evading justice, harboured or sheltered them you could be charged with assisting an offender. This an offence under section 4(1) of the criminal law act 1967."" No excuse for letting this pathetic excuse of a man off. And no excuse for defending him either. 👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏 Well said 👍 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Grey Posted October 3, 2023 Share Posted October 3, 2023 19 minutes ago, Cyclunt said: Really? And the addition of "ffs" nails your belief in the softly softly approach does it ? ""If you know someone committed an indictable offence and did nothing. Or assisted them by providing a means of evading justice, harboured or sheltered them you could be charged with assisting an offender. This an offence under section 4(1) of the criminal law act 1967."" No excuse for letting this pathetic excuse of a man off. And no excuse for defending him either. So now in 2023 making an offensive joke is now a crime? Yes it was deplorable and not funny But he thought he was being offensive and funny That's why they were laughing These GREY laws on speech will eventually be applied to everything Maybe one day to something that is important to you 🙄 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now