Manchester Airport police assault trial | Man found guilty of assaulting two female police officers

Man-chester copperpot said:
They were suffering with Mental Health at the time so set them both free.

Too soon? Have i beat their lawyer to it?


C*nts the both of them.

Stop their benefits and take their Audi & Merc vehicles (which they have through their parents PIP) away*







*this is a guess but you never know ;-)
Click to expand...
The irony of this post is that you’ve tried to stereotype these people, what with the Audi and the benefits, but have stereotyped those calling for them to be deported and to get them out of are country (sp).
 
mancityvstoke said:
I know loads on PIP and their kids use the car 99% of the time. I think they are allowed to though as long as they take Mum and/or Dad shopping or to appts etc .

Don't get me started on the druggies and alcys on pip though.
Click to expand...
A bit off topic but i work around North Manchester.
Young lads driving around in cars they would never afford or even get insured on is laughable.
Loss count of the amout of powerful german cars that have beem written off on Rochdale road due to speeding.
 
Man-chester copperpot said:
A bit off topic but i work around North Manchester.
Young lads driving around in cars they would never afford or even get insured on is laughable.
Loss count of the amout of powerful german cars that have beem written off on Rochdale road due to speeding.
Click to expand...
Most probably stolen to be fair mate. Burglary for cars is fuckin rife in Greater Manchester.
 
LangleyBlue1970 said:
The irony of this post is that you’ve tried to stereotype these people, what with the Audi and the benefits, but have stereotyped those calling for them to be deported and to get them out of are country (sp).
Click to expand...
If your going around punching & headbutting random people, assaulting armed police officers, breaking women noses without consideration of your job or going to jail, to me your a scally.

A stereotype of a scally round North Manchester is….
On benefits/does not work.
Smokes drugs.
Uses parents car (audi/bmw/merc).
Get’s into fights.
Had a nice little sleepover at Strangeways

We’ve had one from that list and hopefully they’ll be a second soon
 
Last edited:
Big Joe Corrigan said:
The twat in the blue outfit looks like he can handle himself. If he has trained in martial arts or boxing, does that add to the gravity of what he has done, would it likely increase his sentence. I’m asking this as my lad does both MMA and boxing, and the coaches have told him it stays in the gym.
Click to expand...
A number of years ago, probably 20, I had an account in Southport and the Dad was a former doorman and his lad, who was about 5ft 5 was a cage fighter
The lad had a night out in Southport and at the end of the evening was stood in the queue waiting for a taxi
A very tall athletic bloke jumped into the queue at the front and was told to get to the back. This guy was having none of it and announced "I'm a paratrooper. If anyone wants to start, then come on"
My customer's lad walked up and said "get to the back" The army lad made a mistake and took a swing, missed and the cage fighter smacked him. The para is now on his knees, starts to get up and the cage fighter hit him again, this time removing several of his teeth
It went to court with witnesses telling what had happened and the cage fighter received community service because the first punch was classed as self defence, the second was deemed unnecessary
 
west didsblue said:
2 years would be the maximum for something minor against an emergency service worker - something you’d normally get a few months for or a fine if it was anyone else. If it was a hammer or acid that would be GBH which is anything up to life.
Click to expand...

Exactly. So the two year maximum for assaulting an emergency worker is surely a bit of an irrelevance considering he (among other things) punched an officer full force in the face breaking her nose?
 
west didsblue said:
You seem obsessed with this Facebook story. It’s very unusual for anyone to get custodial sentences for posting shit online and it’s only when it’s extreme and has a large audience. I’d compare it to conspiracy rather than comparing it to an assault. Conspiracy to murder without actually doing it can get many years imprisonment, and arguably posting incitement online for someone else to commit murder is similar to this. Either way it’s fuck all to do with this case so I don’t know why you keep raising it.
Click to expand...

First of all there is no need to get angry and swear at me. I doubt you would speak to me like that in a pub over a pint, so I would appreciate it if you didn't on here.

Last summer people recieved custodial sentences for posting incitement on FB. Not all who received custodial sentences for doing so had lots if followers as you state. One person had I believe 6 followers.

Secondly I just dont agree with sentencing people to custodial sentances for posting words online, I didn't last summer and I dont now. I'm not alone in this opinion, I know many people feel the same, including people who have worked in the justice system.

I agree it's wrong and illegal and people should be brought to justice for posting and inciting violence on social media, but a suspended sentence, fines and community service is an appropriate sentence in my opinion.

I highlighted the discrepancy between the sentences because it is clearly wrong imo, that a person who may or may not have incited another to commit crime and violence, has a more severe sentence than someone who actually commits a violent crime.

You clearly think otherwise, that is your opinion, I have mine, and i will contine to highlight this when I like. I suggest you use ignore in future if you have such a problem with me highlighting one of the many sentencing irregularities in our justice system.
 
Churchlawtonblue said:
First of all there is no need to get angry and swear at me. I doubt you would speak to me like that in a pub over a pint, so I would appreciate it if you didn't on here.

Last summer people recieved custodial sentences for posting incitement on FB. Not all who received custodial sentences for doing so had lots if followers as you state. One person had I believe 6 followers.

Secondly I just dont agree with sentencing people to custodial sentances for posting words online, I didn't last summer and I dont now. I'm not alone in this opinion, I know many people feel the same, including people who have worked in the justice system.

I agree it's wrong and illegal and people should be brought to justice for posting and inciting violence on social media, but a suspended sentence, fines and community service is an appropriate sentence in my opinion.

I highlighted the discrepancy between the sentences because it is clearly wrong imo, that a person who may or may not have incited another to commit crime and violence, has a more severe sentence than someone who actually commits a violent crime.

You clearly think otherwise, that is your opinion, I have mine, and i will contine to highlight this when I like. I suggest you use ignore in future if you have such a problem with me highlighting one of the many sentencing irregularities in our justice system.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure his swear words were personally directed at you, more that they were used when addressing your post

On the face of it, some of the sentences dished out last summer were on the very harsh side but it needs to be taken in context of the situation at the time. Much harsher sentences are often handed out during riots than at any other time - the thinking being that this will help restore order. The Facebook posts you mention would've almost certainly resulted in little more than a slap on the wrist if they'd been made randomly when no riots were happening.

This is a good article from the 2011 riots about the kind of sentences that were handed out. Thinking back to the thread from 2011, I don't recall too many posters on here having much sympathy for all those involved:

www.theguardian.com

England riots: are harsh sentences for offenders justified?

The government says it wants to send out a message. But is there any moral justification for such tough punishments?
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
 
Last edited:
M18CTID said:
I'm not sure his swear words were personally directed at you, more that they were used when addressing your post

On the face of it, some of the sentences dished out last summer were on the very harsh side but it needs to be taken in context of the situation at the time. Much harsher sentences are often handed out during riots than at any other time - the thinking being that this will help restore order. The Facebook posts you mention would've almost certainly resulted in little more than a slap on the wrist if they'd been made randomly when no riots were happened.

This is a good article from the 2011 riots about the kind of sentences that were handed out. Thinking back to the thread from 2011, I don't recall too many posters on here having much sympathy for all those involved:

www.theguardian.com

England riots: are harsh sentences for offenders justified?

The government says it wants to send out a message. But is there any moral justification for such tough punishments?
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
Click to expand...
I have little sympathy for those who posted such things and no sympathy at all for rioters. I agree with what you say, but its the inconsistency that these type of sentences raise that I have the problem with.
 
Churchlawtonblue said:
First of all there is no need to get angry and swear at me. I doubt you would speak to me like that in a pub over a pint, so I would appreciate it if you didn't on here.

Last summer people recieved custodial sentences for posting incitement on FB. Not all who received custodial sentences for doing so had lots if followers as you state. One person had I believe 6 followers.

Secondly I just dont agree with sentencing people to custodial sentances for posting words online, I didn't last summer and I dont now. I'm not alone in this opinion, I know many people feel the same, including people who have worked in the justice system.

I agree it's wrong and illegal and people should be brought to justice for posting and inciting violence on social media, but a suspended sentence, fines and community service is an appropriate sentence in my opinion.

I highlighted the discrepancy between the sentences because it is clearly wrong imo, that a person who may or may not have incited another to commit crime and violence, has a more severe sentence than someone who actually commits a violent crime.

You clearly think otherwise, that is your opinion, I have mine, and i will contine to highlight this when I like. I suggest you use ignore in future if you have such a problem with me highlighting one of the many sentencing irregularities in our justice system.
Click to expand...
I didn’t swear at you.
I used the word fuck as a pronoun for emphasis not as an expletive directed at you.
If you’re uncomfortable with that then maybe this forum’s not for you.
 
west didsblue said:
I didn’t swear at you.
I used the word fuck as a pronoun for emphasis not as an expletive directed at you.
If you’re uncomfortable with that then maybe this forum’s not for you.
Click to expand...

FFS

tear-clothes-strong-man.gif
 
M18CTID said:
I'm not sure his swear words were personally directed at you, more that they were used when addressing your post

On the face of it, some of the sentences dished out last summer were on the very harsh side but it needs to be taken in context of the situation at the time. Much harsher sentences are often handed out during riots than at any other time - the thinking being that this will help restore order. The Facebook posts you mention would've almost certainly resulted in little more than a slap on the wrist if they'd been made randomly when no riots were happened.

This is a good article from the 2011 riots about the kind of sentences that were handed out. Thinking back to the thread from 2011, I don't recall too many posters on here having much sympathy for all those involved:

www.theguardian.com

England riots: are harsh sentences for offenders justified?

The government says it wants to send out a message. But is there any moral justification for such tough punishments?
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
Click to expand...
Thanks for posting the excellent article by Julian Baggini, he has expressed my disquiet with the harsh sentencing far better than I ever could.
 
west didsblue said:
I didn’t swear at you.
I used the word fuck as a pronoun for emphasis not as an expletive directed at you.
If you’re uncomfortable with that then maybe this forum’s not for you.
Click to expand...
If that is how how you would speak to someone in a pub and that is your defence, then we are different people. I queried why, as you dont normally respond in this manner, but clearly I misjudged you.
 
Churchlawtonblue said:
If that is how how you would speak to someone in a pub and that is your defence, then we are different people. I queried why, as you dont normally respond in this manner, but clearly I misjudged you.
Click to expand...
Yes I use the word fuck occasionally in daily life. Obviously it depends on who I’m with but it’s not uncommon.

As for your point about the comparison between sentencing guidelines, I’m sure there are thousands of what you or I may see as anomalies but I’d rather leave it to the judiciary to develop these guidelines as they are far more qualified than either of us. I really don’t see it as relevant to this thread which is about two scrotes who I’m sure we all hope will get locked up as long as possible.
 
west didsblue said:
Yes I use the word fuck occasionally in daily life. Obviously it depends on who I’m with but it’s not uncommon.

As for your point about the comparison between sentencing guidelines, I’m sure there are thousands of what you or I may see as anomalies but I’d rather leave it to the judiciary to develop these guidelines as they are far more qualified than either of us. I really don’t see it as relevant to this thread which is about two scrotes who I’m sure we all hope will get locked up as long as possible.
Click to expand...
You dont see it as relevant, but I note many others do! Therfore, perhaps it is you that should just scroll past in future ? Alternatively you could read the article in the Guardian M18 posted. Its very good.
 
Churchlawtonblue said:
First of all there is no need to get angry and swear at me. I doubt you would speak to me like that in a pub over a pint, so I would appreciate it if you didn't on here.

Last summer people recieved custodial sentences for posting incitement on FB. Not all who received custodial sentences for doing so had lots if followers as you state. One person had I believe 6 followers.

Secondly I just dont agree with sentencing people to custodial sentances for posting words online, I didn't last summer and I dont now. I'm not alone in this opinion, I know many people feel the same, including people who have worked in the justice system.

I agree it's wrong and illegal and people should be brought to justice for posting and inciting violence on social media, but a suspended sentence, fines and community service is an appropriate sentence in my opinion.

I highlighted the discrepancy between the sentences because it is clearly wrong imo, that a person who may or may not have incited another to commit crime and violence, has a more severe sentence than someone who actually commits a violent crime.

You clearly think otherwise, that is your opinion, I have mine, and i will contine to highlight this when I like. I suggest you use ignore in future if you have such a problem with me highlighting one of the many sentencing irregularities in our justice system.
Click to expand...
Apart from the pub and pint nonsense and the over sensitivity at a sweary word.
I agree.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top