Another City Fan Banned

[BingoBango]

What Really Bugs me is that the MUEN decided to Name & Shame him & stick his photo in the paper for what after all is a very Minor offence .But In Mondays MUEN .They would not even name a Convicted Rapist who got 5years because of Legal Reasons .Never mind stick his photo in

This argument is daft. They don't name/identify the offender in these sorts of cases in order to protect the identity of the victim.

 

[cyberblue]

And how would we know the Victim ? so you think it is Ok for football fans to be named & shamed for singing but Convicted Rapists not to be named . My Whole point is that the Police The Muen & Mcfc have gone well over the top with this lad .A word in his Ear should have been enough

 

[BingoBango]

And how would we know the Victim ? so you think it is Ok for football fans to be named & shamed for singing but Convicted Rapists not to be named . My Whole point is that the Police The Muen & Mcfc have gone well over the top with this lad .A word in his Ear should have been enough

People who know the offender are likely to know the victim, and vice versa. It gets out - it always does, and assuming it doesn't is extremely naive. The stigma for the victim is unimaginable, and not naming the offender to protect the victim is eminently sensible.

And no, I don't think someone should be arrested for 'singing', and the naming and shaming if that's all he did, is extremely heavy-handed. If the lad did nothing more than that, then he has my sympathy.

However, there was sod-all information in the newspaper article. I don't feel qualified to pass any more comment than that until I see the court reports, and throwing around accusations based on the paper reports is a bit irresponsible. None of us know what really went on.

 

[scorer]

What Really Bugs me is that the MUEN decided to Name & Shame him & stick his photo in the paper for what after all is a very Minor offence .But In Mondays MUEN .They would not even name a Convicted Rapist who got 5years because of Legal Reasons .Never mind stick his photo in

This argument is daft. They don't name/identify the offender in these sorts of cases in order to protect the identity of the victim.

Except that my eldest daughter got mugged two years ago by three pissheads.

The local Rag printed her name but couldn't print the name of the twat that did all the damage because he was only 15... she was 16. The other guys were 21 and 22.

Don't seem fair to me.

 

[cyberblue]

And how would we know the Victim ? so you think it is Ok for football fans to be named & shamed for singing but Convicted Rapists not to be named . My Whole point is that the Police The Muen & Mcfc have gone well over the top with this lad .A word in his Ear should have been enough

People who know the offender are likely to know the victim, and vice versa. It gets out - it always does, and assuming it doesn't is extremely naive. The stigma for the victim is unimaginable, and not naming the offender is eminently sensible.

And no, I don't think someone should be arrested for 'singing', and the naming and shaming if that's all he did, is extremely heavy-handed. If the lad did nothing more than that, then he has my sympathy.

However, there was sod-all information in the newspaper article. I don't feel qualified to pass any more comment than that until I see the court reports, and throwing around accusations based on the paper reports is a bit irresponsible.

Well then i plead Guilty to being irresponsible .ther are articles in the paper every day about Scroats getting ASBOs like badges of Honour & toe rags getting cautioned for commiting all sorts of Shite & dogooders jump to there aide but F**K me if you are a football fan The Book gets thrown at you & people dont give a shit

 

[BingoBango]

This argument is daft. They don't name/identify the offender in these sorts of cases in order to protect the identity of the victim.

Except that my eldest daughter got mugged two years ago by three pissheads.


The local Rag printed her name but couldn't print the name of the twat that did all the damage because he was only 15... she was 16. The other guys were 21 and 22.

Don't seem fair to me.

Sorry to hear that, I hope she's okay.

That doesn't seem right at all. Admittedly, there isn't the same stigma for victims of robbery as for sexual assault, but naming a minor in any case is seriously dodgy.

It sounds like some pretty irresponsible journalism from that paper. Were you able to raise an objection with them?

 

[cyberblue]

Bingo Mate you are missing the point Hundreds of people get Convicted every day for all sorts of offences .THe press are never slow at Giving out "juicy tit bits " insex cases .THey dont give a monkeys if the Victim is Recognised or not there job is to sell papers .A few weeks ago it was the turn of people falsely using blue badges to park ther car illigially to feel the full force otf the MUEN . Last week it was football Fans .I Still say it was miles over the top & i feel for Real Victims like Scorer s Daughter & the Family .Who was the victim with the Fan who was Singing

 

[cyberblue]

This argument is daft. They don't name/identify the offender in these sorts of cases in order to protect the identity of the victim.

Except that my eldest daughter got mugged two years ago by three pissheads.

The local Rag printed her name but couldn't print the name of the twat that did all the damage because he was only 15... she was 16. The other guys were 21 and 22.

Don't seem fair to me.

Sorry to hear that mate i hope the Bastards got a "VISIT"

 

[BlueMooney]

What Really Bugs me is that the MUEN decided to Name & Shame him & stick his photo in the paper for what after all is a very Minor offence .But In Mondays MUEN .They would not even name a Convicted Rapist who got 5years because of Legal Reasons .Never mind stick his photo in

They didn't name and shame him because he was a City fan, because he needed to be named and shamed, but because he appeared in court without a banning order. It's a court report and they're allowed to do it.

They aren't allowed to name the convicted rapist probably because the judge put a banning order in place. Not simply because he's a rapist.

Providing person X doesn't fall into restricted boundaries (a minor, a victim of a sexual assault, has a relationship that would tell you who the victim was) and a guilty verdict is delivered, then they can be named and pictured.

The MEN have done nothing wrong.

 

[ElanJo]

The MEN pissed me off a while ago when they were spying on drivers looking for people who were eating at the wheel etc and then splashed across the front page. They have a history of this crap.
If they want to pretend to be 007, do it in the police stations, government buildings etc. They are supposed to be the watchdogs, not the lapdogs.