Two minors suspended by club for offensive chanting at Brighton game | 17 year old charged by GMP (p29)

[Matty M24blue]

I’d imagine section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986. Using threatening [or abusive] words with the intention of causing harassment alarm or distress. It has to be within either the hearing or the sight of anyone likely to be caused the harassment, alarm or distress, which will presumably include what was posted online and viewed there. I don’t know that for sure, because it’s been a while, but that makes absolute sense. The opposite would not be rooted in the reality of the modern world. I’m struggling to see how viewing something online would not be ‘in sight’. I could be wrong though. Wouldn’t be the first time!

There are three statutory defences to this offence, including whether the conduct was reasonable There’s loads of case law around this offence iirc. Including the fact that coppers should be caused less alarm and/or distress by people saying nasty things to them than the rest of us!

Maximum sentence is a level three fine.

I think the only thing they could try and say is it’s a malicious communication via the post. However the lads singing it didn’t post it so that also wouldn’t stand. It’s a piss poor charge to fuel what the media and social media cried for.


Tough lesson, also means unfortunately were expected to take more shit at that dump tomorrow without reacting. I can’t see that holding out.

Also nothing more liverpool and United fans love to do is grass on others.

 

[mexico1970]

I think the only thing they could try and say is it’s a malicious communication via the post. However the lads singing it didn’t post it so that also wouldn’t stand. It’s a piss poor charge to fuel what the media and social media cried for.


Tough lesson, also means unfortunately were expected to take more shit at that dump tomorrow without reacting. I can’t see that holding out.

If only the club would have said "We are looking at it" instead of rushing out of the offices with blue lights strapped to their heads.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

I think the only thing they could try and say is it’s a malicious communication via the post. However the lads singing it didn’t post it so that also wouldn’t stand. It’s a piss poor charge to fuel what the media and social media cried for.


Tough lesson, also means unfortunately were expected to take more shit at that dump tomorrow without reacting. I can’t see that holding out.

It should absolutely not end in a charge. A reprimand at most.

 

[Matty M24blue]

It should absolutely not end in a charge. A reprimand at most.

I don’t think it will any decent lawyer could have this boxed up. Bad news is he will have to fund that which at 17 dropping a couple grand could be a sticking point.

 

[waspish]

A young girl fan gets a cup of coins thrown at her face. Fuck all from the police. A couple of fans sing about a rag. Ban them and shoot the bastards

Thing with that is we passed all the evidence over to Liverpool! What gets me is they passed a plastic pint cup around in the away end to fill it knowing what it's for! Absolutely disgusting rancid vermin all those who added to it!

 

[i kne albert davy]

So if I complain when I get sent a video from a utd fan on one of their coaches about foe or Colin bell they will go after their fans? Would Liverpool or utd have done this?
We are soft as shit as a club, we let everyone walk all over us, why wouldn't a letter telling them not to do that again suffice?
This is fucking shite from city, a disgrace.

You’d hope so, wouldn’t hold your breath though.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

I don’t think it will any decent lawyer could have this boxed up. Bad news is he will have to fund that which at 17 dropping a couple grand could be a sticking point.

As a youth he will surely be entitled to legal aid.

 

[i kne albert davy]

I don't think anyone is arguing that it isn't, what they are saying is why is it always CITY fans who are highlighted when there is plenty of evidence to show the rags and scousers do it all the time with impunity?

Knuckle dragging is subjective, opinions are contrary and we don't need people re-educated in our social system, that's dystopian.

Of course there needs to be some sort of re education otherwise we’d still have knuckle draggers chucking bananas on to field amd making monkey noises, just look at Southern and Eastern Europe.

 

[mexico1970]

Of course there needs to be some sort of re education otherwise we’d still have knuckle draggers chucking bananas on to field amd making monkey noises, just look at Southern and Eastern Europe.

Laws prevent that, not some lecturing from a paid huffer and puffer.

If I sigh and tut tut in someones general direction because I don't agree with what they say or do it doesn't make me better than they are.

 

[halfcenturyup]

it’s been the law for 37 years so it’s not the law that’s changed, it’s society.

The test isn’t if the words are distasteful or offensive. In fact the word ‘insulting’ was removed from the section in 2014.

Just got this from the CPS website.

Which suggests I may be wrong about the broadcasting but was right about the case law in relation to coppers! Maybe they have to be actually present.

I was also wrong about there having to be any intention to cause the alarm or distress! No such intention is required.

But otherwise I was spot on!

It was a long time ago, but I think I remember Salman Rushdie couldn't be charged with a public order offence because the person reading the book was too far removed from the offence committed in writing the material that was alleged to be offensive.

Seems to me, Rushdie = the three lads, the book publisher = the guy who posted the tiktok and the people offended are still too far removed.

I wonder if they are being heavy-handed as part of a crackdown on "antisocial" behaviour at football grounds ..... and it will all blow over now the point has been made.

Otoh, what the fuck do I know.