Trouble in the East Stand??

[Longsight-memories]

Re: Re: Trouble in the East Stand??

Wrong. You can be arrested and not charged but that remains on record. So it means police believe an offence has been committed but lack the evidence to press charges.

Being de-arrested means the arrest record is expunged and generally signals the police are satisfied on the basis of subsequent evidence that the original arrest was incorrect and no offence was committed.

Look Colin, in the scheme of the thread, it doesn't fucking matter you tiny pedant.

According to section 30, subsection (7) and (7A) of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, to "de-arrest" is to allow that "a person who has been arrested under any act of law at a place other than a police station, shall be released before reaching a police station if a constable is satisfied that there are no grounds for keeping him under arrest".

Why do you think the police arrested the de-arrested the man? The police state it was due to an ending of the breach of the peace.

Is there anyway your pedantry, whether true or not, changes the fact that the police removed the man to end a breach of the peace?

My own take on this is that I don't believe the GMP did too much wrong for a change and much of the blame is down to the Showsec stewards being completely incapable of dealing with the incident. The police were requested as back-up after the situation had started to develop and probably arrested the bloke based on information given to them by the stewards. Later it transpired that the stewards had either got it wrong or lied and as such the police decided the bloke hadn't done enough to warrant being nicked and subsequently de-arrested him.[/quote]

So to be clear its Showsec who are in the wrong
You should not need to have a bloke lay on the floor needing first aid just to show how good you are at being a knowbody..

just an Idea (just thought of it) why not have a section fan person.. who can have dialouge with the stewards pre match/aftermatch to help sort out any problems? My newphew was a steward and as far as i knew he worked for city..

 

[r.soleofsalford]

Re: Re: Trouble in the East Stand??

Wrong. You can be arrested and not charged but that remains on record. So it means police believe an offence has been committed but lack the evidence to press charges.

Being de-arrested means the arrest record is expunged and generally signals the police are satisfied on the basis of subsequent evidence that the original arrest was incorrect and no offence was committed.

Look Colin, in the scheme of the thread, it doesn't fucking matter you tiny pedant.

According to section 30, subsection (7) and (7A) of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, to "de-arrest" is to allow that "a person who has been arrested under any act of law at a place other than a police station, shall be released before reaching a police station if a constable is satisfied that there are no grounds for keeping him under arrest".

Why do you think the police arrested the de-arrested the man? The police state it was due to an ending of the breach of the peace.

Is there anyway your pedantry, whether true or not, changes the fact that the police removed the man to end a breach of the peace?

My own take on this is that I don't believe the GMP did too much wrong for a change and much of the blame is down to the Showsec stewards being completely incapable of dealing with the incident. The police were requested as back-up after the situation had started to develop and probably arrested the bloke based on information given to them by the stewards. Later it transpired that the stewards had either got it wrong or lied and as such the police decided the bloke hadn't done enough to warrant being nicked and subsequently de-arrested him.

i though the club and the police videoed any trouble that breaks out in the ground surely the club can view the vids and take action against the over zealous showsec employees, this would go a long way in appeasing the fans

 

[Blue Punter]

A friend of mine was ejected for smoking a few seasons ago. As he was bundled out of the toilets by about 8 showsec staff, I accompanied him to arrange a meeting point. He lives overseas and had no means of communication as he had literally arrived in the country hours earlier.

As I was trying to sort this out, I was pushed through the concourse exits at block 'D 'by another 4 showsec staff. Obviously on a 2-4-1 mission.

We were both cattled and seperated into a really tight space and pushed up against a wall. My seasoncard was taken off me and we were both ejected.

I attend the game as a carer for someone who suffers from the disability of being Walking Ambulent (WA). When I explained this to the Showsec staff, they replied "Not my problem".

Fortunately there are several familty members in our block, so I was able to contact them and they were able to assist.

I emailed Peter Fletcher (PF) about this appalling behaviour:-

1. I had been ejected and physically manhandled for nothing.
2. The person I assist was left alone for the second half.
3. The person I assist at no point had any contact from Showsec or MCFC to inform them what had gone on.

PF ignored my initial email and only replied after I responded with another email. In his reply, he accused me of neglecting my role as a carer by leaving the WA support unattended at HT.

I pointed out that he wasn't unattended as I left him with his brother, 2 sisters and 3 nephews. (Their seasoncards numbers in the same block were provided as evidence). I also questioned the logic of forcing a WA supporter to accompany me to the toilets, whether they needed to go themselves or not.

His next reply accused me of assaulting a steward. When I pointed out that I was previously a steward at Salford RLFC, I questioned why the punishment for such an serious offence of assault wasn't more severe than ejection.

I also asked for evidence of this alleged assault (Time, witnesses, when, where, on whom etc). I also requested evidence of any CCTV in operation and questioned why the police were not summoned. I offered to make a personal representation on the matter.

Peter Fletcher replied that he no longer wished to enter into dialogue, he believed the Showsec version of events, the matter was closed and he would not be replying to any further emails.

 

[bobmcfc]

A friend of mine was ejected for smoking a few seasons ago. As he was bundled out of the toilets by about 8 showsec staff, I accompanied him to arrange a meeting point. He lives overseas and had no means of communication as he had literally arrived in the country hours earlier.

As I was trying to sort this out, I was pushed through the concourse exits at block 'D 'by another 4 showsec staff. Obviously on a 2-4-1 mission.

We were both cattled and seperated into a really tight space and pushed up against a wall. My seasoncard was taken off me and we were both ejected.

I attend the game as a carer for someone who suffers from the disability of being Walking Ambulent (WA). When I explained this to the Showsec staff, they replied "Not my problem".

Fortunately there are several familty members in our block, so I was able to contact them and they were able to assist.

I emailed Peter Fletcher (PF) about this appalling behaviour:-

1. I had been ejected and physically manhandled for nothing.
2. The person I assist was left alone for the second half.
3. The person I assist at no point had any contact from Showsec or MCFC to inform them what had gone on.

PF ignored my initial email and only replied after I responded with another email. In his reply, he accused me of neglecting my role as a carer by leaving the WA support unattended at HT.

I pointed out that he wasn't unattended as I left him with his brother, 2 sisters and 3 nephews. (Their seasoncards numbers in the same block were provided as evidence). I also questioned the logic of forcing a WA supporter to accompany me to the toilets, whether they needed to go themselves or not.

His next reply accused me of assaulting a steward. When I pointed out that I was previously a steward at Salford RLFC, I questioned why the punishment for such an serious offence of assault wasn't more severe than ejection.

I also asked for evidence of this alleged assault (Time, witnesses, when, where, on whom etc). I also requested evidence of any CCTV in operation and questioned why the police were not summoned. I offered to make a personal representation on the matter.

Peter Fletcher replied that he no longer wished to enter into dialogue, he believed the Showsec version of events, the matter was closed and he would not be replying to any further emails.

that is an utter disgrace mate

 

[BringBackSwales]

A friend of mine was ejected for smoking a few seasons ago. As he was bundled out of the toilets by about 8 showsec staff, I accompanied him to arrange a meeting point. He lives overseas and had no means of communication as he had literally arrived in the country hours earlier.

As I was trying to sort this out, I was pushed through the concourse exits at block 'D 'by another 4 showsec staff. Obviously on a 2-4-1 mission.

We were both cattled and seperated into a really tight space and pushed up against a wall. My seasoncard was taken off me and we were both ejected.

I attend the game as a carer for someone who suffers from the disability of being Walking Ambulent (WA). When I explained this to the Showsec staff, they replied "Not my problem".

Fortunately there are several familty members in our block, so I was able to contact them and they were able to assist.

I emailed Peter Fletcher (PF) about this appalling behaviour:-

1. I had been ejected and physically manhandled for nothing.
2. The person I assist was left alone for the second half.
3. The person I assist at no point had any contact from Showsec or MCFC to inform them what had gone on.

PF ignored my initial email and only replied after I responded with another email. In his reply, he accused me of neglecting my role as a carer by leaving the WA support unattended at HT.

I pointed out that he wasn't unattended as I left him with his brother, 2 sisters and 3 nephews. (Their seasoncards numbers in the same block were provided as evidence). I also questioned the logic of forcing a WA supporter to accompany me to the toilets, whether they needed to go themselves or not.

His next reply accused me of assaulting a steward. When I pointed out that I was previously a steward at Salford RLFC, I questioned why the punishment for such an serious offence of assault wasn't more severe than ejection.

I also asked for evidence of this alleged assault (Time, witnesses, when, where, on whom etc). I also requested evidence of any CCTV in operation and questioned why the police were not summoned. I offered to make a personal representation on the matter.

Peter Fletcher replied that he no longer wished to enter into dialogue, he believed the Showsec version of events, the matter was closed and he would not be replying to any further emails.

Yet another example that fletcher thinks he is above the law and normal standards of decent and professional behaviour - did you try and bring this to the attention of anyone else at the club?

 

[borassic]

A friend of mine was ejected for smoking a few seasons ago. As he was bundled out of the toilets by about 8 showsec staff, I accompanied him to arrange a meeting point. He lives overseas and had no means of communication as he had literally arrived in the country hours earlier.

As I was trying to sort this out, I was pushed through the concourse exits at block 'D 'by another 4 showsec staff. Obviously on a 2-4-1 mission.

We were both cattled and seperated into a really tight space and pushed up against a wall. My seasoncard was taken off me and we were both ejected.

I attend the game as a carer for someone who suffers from the disability of being Walking Ambulent (WA). When I explained this to the Showsec staff, they replied "Not my problem".

Fortunately there are several familty members in our block, so I was able to contact them and they were able to assist.

I emailed Peter Fletcher (PF) about this appalling behaviour:-

1. I had been ejected and physically manhandled for nothing.
2. The person I assist was left alone for the second half.
3. The person I assist at no point had any contact from Showsec or MCFC to inform them what had gone on.

PF ignored my initial email and only replied after I responded with another email. In his reply, he accused me of neglecting my role as a carer by leaving the WA support unattended at HT.

I pointed out that he wasn't unattended as I left him with his brother, 2 sisters and 3 nephews. (Their seasoncards numbers in the same block were provided as evidence). I also questioned the logic of forcing a WA supporter to accompany me to the toilets, whether they needed to go themselves or not.

His next reply accused me of assaulting a steward. When I pointed out that I was previously a steward at Salford RLFC, I questioned why the punishment for such an serious offence of assault wasn't more severe than ejection.

I also asked for evidence of this alleged assault (Time, witnesses, when, where, on whom etc). I also requested evidence of any CCTV in operation and questioned why the police were not summoned. I offered to make a personal representation on the matter.

Peter Fletcher replied that he no longer wished to enter into dialogue, he believed the Showsec version of events, the matter was closed and he would not be replying to any further emails.

Fuckin hell that's a joke. When was that? Did you get your season card back?

 

[mancmackem]

This is becoming like a Liam Fox scenario, with such stories coming out in the open.

 

[bluevengence]

Re: Re: Trouble in the East Stand??

Look Colin, in the scheme of the thread, it doesn't fucking matter you tiny pedant.

According to section 30, subsection (7) and (7A) of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, to "de-arrest" is to allow that "a person who has been arrested under any act of law at a place other than a police station, shall be released before reaching a police station if a constable is satisfied that there are no grounds for keeping him under arrest".

Why do you think the police arrested the de-arrested the man? The police state it was due to an ending of the breach of the peace.

Is there anyway your pedantry, whether true or not, changes the fact that the police removed the man to end a breach of the peace?

My own take on this is that I don't believe the GMP did too much wrong for a change and much of the blame is down to the Showsec stewards being completely incapable of dealing with the incident. The police were requested as back-up after the situation had started to develop and probably arrested the bloke based on information given to them by the stewards. Later it transpired that the stewards had either got it wrong or lied and as such the police decided the bloke hadn't done enough to warrant being nicked and subsequently de-arrested him.

i though the club and the police videoed any trouble that breaks out in the ground surely the club can view the vids and take action against the over zealous showsec employees, this would go a long way in appeasing the fans

According to Fletcher in this article they would have the camera already
trained on the man before the nazis went in..

"The flexibility the system provides in terms of archiving has already proven itself in terms of stadium safety and security. Peter continues: “For events and concerts we now burn disks the following day and this is often used to provide supplementary evidence to help us push through our enforcement policies - from filming fans drinking alcohol in the stadium bowl, to enforcing the no-smoking ban or recording troublemakers. If a steward spots someone causing trouble, for example, we insist that they call the event control room first, so we can make sure our cameras are capturing footage when the steward goes in to sort it out. This way we can back up the steward’s evidence.”

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.ad-group.co.uk/projects.php?projectID=20&row=1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.ad-group.co.uk/projects.php? ... D=20&row=1</a>

 

[Blue Punter]

There was a 3 match ban on my card and on my mums (That's the one my mate from overseas used).

He entered into no correspondence with my mam whatsoever about her 3 match ban. She simply recieved the seasoncard back in a brown envelope when the ban was up.

At the time, I was liasing with the "Bluebirds" on here in relation to potentially organising a charity 5-a-side tournament to run alongside the christmas party.

As such I attended meetings etc with Danny Wilson and didn't want to be seen rocking the boat.

 

[M18CTID]

A friend of mine was ejected for smoking a few seasons ago. As he was bundled out of the toilets by about 8 showsec staff, I accompanied him to arrange a meeting point. He lives overseas and had no means of communication as he had literally arrived in the country hours earlier.

As I was trying to sort this out, I was pushed through the concourse exits at block 'D 'by another 4 showsec staff. Obviously on a 2-4-1 mission.

We were both cattled and seperated into a really tight space and pushed up against a wall. My seasoncard was taken off me and we were both ejected.

I attend the game as a carer for someone who suffers from the disability of being Walking Ambulent (WA). When I explained this to the Showsec staff, they replied "Not my problem".

Fortunately there are several familty members in our block, so I was able to contact them and they were able to assist.

I emailed Peter Fletcher (PF) about this appalling behaviour:-

1. I had been ejected and physically manhandled for nothing.
2. The person I assist was left alone for the second half.
3. The person I assist at no point had any contact from Showsec or MCFC to inform them what had gone on.

PF ignored my initial email and only replied after I responded with another email. In his reply, he accused me of neglecting my role as a carer by leaving the WA support unattended at HT.

I pointed out that he wasn't unattended as I left him with his brother, 2 sisters and 3 nephews. (Their seasoncards numbers in the same block were provided as evidence). I also questioned the logic of forcing a WA supporter to accompany me to the toilets, whether they needed to go themselves or not.

His next reply accused me of assaulting a steward. When I pointed out that I was previously a steward at Salford RLFC, I questioned why the punishment for such an serious offence of assault wasn't more severe than ejection.

I also asked for evidence of this alleged assault (Time, witnesses, when, where, on whom etc). I also requested evidence of any CCTV in operation and questioned why the police were not summoned. I offered to make a personal representation on the matter.

Peter Fletcher replied that he no longer wished to enter into dialogue, he believed the Showsec version of events, the matter was closed and he would not be replying to any further emails.

Of all the stories I've heard down the years regarding people being ejected and Fletcher's responses to them, that is arguably the most outrageous of the lot. I seriously wonder how that twat sleeps at night.