englishman-in-wales Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 Ejecting a passenger from a train is assault, fact. The Transport Police should have been involved not "a big man" who did assault the lad. As previously stated, ANYONE can use "reasonable" force to prevent crime, and as far as i am aware, fare evasion is a criminal offence.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Holliday Posted December 13, 2011 Author Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 Interesting to see that libs says he's right wing when previously he's in defence of "the little guy getting picked on". I think he's confused. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J@mes Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 What about all bouncers, doormen or marshals who evict people from clubs, pubs, or events - are they committing assault? While I understand that these people are employed by the establishment which they are in, so does the conductor have the authority to recruit an "agent" as such to aid him in his duty of denying fair dodgers travel? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unapalomablanca Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 Interesting to see that libs says he's right wing when previously he's in defence of "the little guy getting picked on". I think he's confused. He's probably confused because of being in that tent so long outside st. pauls cathedral!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catweazle Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 As previously stated, ANYONE can use "reasonable" force to prevent crime, and as far as i am aware, fare evasion is a criminal offence.. Assault is a criminal offence, would it have been OK for me to deck "big man" to prevent the assault taking place ? That way lies anarchy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Holliday Posted December 13, 2011 Author Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 He's probably confused because of being in that tent so long outside st. pauls cathedral!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Holliday Posted December 13, 2011 Author Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 Assault is a criminal offence, would it have been OK for me to deck "big man" to prevent the assault taking place ? That way lies anarchy. For crying out loud! It was not an assault, as such. The kind of thing that you lot are bleeting on about as being assault is the kind of thing dreamed up by those who try and pass off those raisins they are packing as testicles. Assault, as per the OED is a violent attack. This was no such thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
englishman-in-wales Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 Assault is a criminal offence, would it have been OK for me to deck "big man" to prevent the assault taking place ? That way lies anarchy get a grip!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poontang Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 Assault, as per the OED is a violent attack. This was no such thing. It doesn't have to be a violent act. What happened on the train looked more like battery to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catweazle Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 Assault, as per the OED is a violent attack. This was no such thing. You can quote the OED all you like, but in law assault is different. Manhandling a youngster and throwing him off a train must qualify. As far as I can see the kid was no threat to anyone and the "big man" had no lawful or moral authority to intervene, he certainly wasn't protecting anyone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paddy Galore! Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 My god amighty! Some of you lot should hear yourselves! Talk about bitchy! It wasn't this guys job to get involved IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cannon Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 I am of the firm opinion that little scumbags like this should be taught lessons. The law stops crime prevention from occurring when it is sometimes needed. Anyone who believes the fare dodger should press charges needs to question their own morals. Once a crime has been committed intentionally, any rights should be forfeited. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silpig5 Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 if this was a driving / car forum i would say "he should be shot in front of his family ". but this isnt so i wont . the conductor should grow a pair and either bin him himself , or wait for the rozzers whilst inflicting pain on the soap dodgeing sweaty sock student . big guy and the others paid to go home , the scroat didnt . no harm done but the whole country needs to grow a backbone and stop letting wetnursed richards get away with their pathetic little games . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P~MX Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 if more people stood up against wrongful acts the country wouldn't be in the toilet like it is, the big man was right,he asked the scroat to move out and he wouldn't so he was ejected it was his own fault the situation arose and he turned it into violence Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlaserF3 Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 You patronisingly say 'in this day and age' as if things are so much harder to sort out now than in the past, wake up, things are rubbish because of all this excuse making that people like yourselves excel at. Listen mate.. I am not being patronising, years ago you could give someone a whack when they deserved it, but that bloke was a bully and I sincerely hope he gets done. The fare dodging had NOTHING to do with him at all. Think back to various news items such as a pensioner who threatened some kids who were misbehaving and was arrested, and the kids were let off, things are harder to sort out now, because even eight year olds know their rights, and the ordinary bloke in the street has very little back up from the Police. It's only recently that homeowners has been not charged after killing armed burglars in their own home. I have a saying, "I would rather be tried by twelve than carried by six". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garygreengrass Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 Well done that man Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdubya Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 I am of the firm opinion that little scumbags like this should be taught lessons. The law stops crime prevention from occurring when it is sometimes needed. Anyone who believes the fare dodger should press charges needs to question their own morals. Once a crime has been committed intentionally, any rights should be forfeited. scumbag? the poor lad was an innocent 19-year-old student ( surveying) who accidentally got sold the wrong ticket and according to his father and uncle would never dream of fare dodging, he did nothing other than sit there till he was assaulted by the big man, tut tut calling a poor lad who suffers from diabetes and was simply trying to get home, a scumbag. sad thing is some **** in a wig will believe the above claptrap and the big man will get done big time KW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Georgy Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 How about this... One person on the bus challenged the chav. Everyone else refused to get involved, thats the problem with our country people are too afraid to get involved for fear of being sued or prosecuted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Holliday Posted December 13, 2011 Author Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 You can quote the OED all you like, but in law assault is different. Manhandling a youngster and throwing him off a train must qualify. As far as I can see the kid was no threat to anyone and the "big man" had no lawful or moral authority to intervene, he certainly wasn't protecting anyone. I beg to differ. If you listen to the video, big guy asks the inspector/conductor if he needs him (the scrote) removed from the train. When the inspector says he does, the big guy picks scrote up by the jacket and carries him to the door where he is ejected from the train. Scrote isn't hurt as he tries to get back on only to be thrown off again. Not once is there anything like battery or violence. Scrote is ejected from the train and kept off with reaonable force, all on the instruction of the employee of the train company who is clearly not able to do the task himself. One thing is for sure, if big guy does get nabbed by the police and it all goes to court and he is unfortunate enough to be sent down for it by some lilly livered liberal who sympathises that scrotes human rights have been violated or some such, then I for one will be sending big guy a whole box of pickled onion monster munch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlaserF3 Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2073660/Big-Man-Scotrail-ticket-video-Alan-Pollock-throws-fare-dodger-Sam-Main-train.html The big fella hasn't got a leg to stand on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Holliday Posted December 13, 2011 Author Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 Listen mate.. I am not being patronising, years ago you could give someone a whack when they deserved it, but that bloke was a bully and I sincerely hope he gets done. The fare dodging had NOTHING to do with him at all. Think back to various news items such as a pensioner who threatened some kids who were misbehaving and was arrested, and the kids were let off, things are harder to sort out now, because even eight year olds know their rights, and the ordinary bloke in the street has very little back up from the Police. It's only recently that homeowners has been not charged after killing armed burglars in their own home. I have a saying, "I would rather be tried by twelve than carried by six". You're living in a dream world my friend. How on earth is that bloke a bully? Just because he has the height and weight advantage over the scrote which he used to prevent the journey from being needlessly delayed is all to his sense of doing the right thing, helping the conductor resolve an issue. As for not having nothing to do with him, as fir paying passenger I would certainly consider it my business and would want to know why the train or bus or airplane I was travelling on was delayed because of some selfish ***** gobbing off just because he felt he shouldn't have to pay. I would do the very same thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codling99 Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 well,awkward one this,very debateable.if the story is true,the poor young boy should never have been thrown off,but as write up says,should have been given chance to pay by post,not thrown off physically.if he was a lying fare dodger,well maybe deserved to be thrown off,but still not man handled by a fat bloke thinking its his job of the night.im al for helping out,and would and have stood in between arguments,fighting and other sorts of trouble to protect people or property,but would not have thrown a kid of a train for non payment,god if id did that in the rhondda id be doing it every day,youngsters do try and get away with things like that ,part of growing up.legally,that fella could get done for it,wasnt his job to do it full stop.thats why others didnt help,probably thought it wasnt warranted for a few quid fare.as for bouncers,know a few,some good blokes,doing a hard job,some total ***** enjoying their job. 6 of one half o dozen of the other me thinks,all depends on what the truth actually is Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Holliday Posted December 13, 2011 Author Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2073660/Big-Man-Scotrail-ticket-video-Alan-Pollock-throws-fare-dodger-Sam-Main-train.html The big fella hasn't got a leg to stand on. Common sense will prevail, I'm sure. He got nothing less than he deserved. Fair dodging and swearing at a train company employee in front of young children and other decent folk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fisherman Mike Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 Should give the guy an award from thePublic purse... Shame he didnt give the waster a good clip at the same time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Good shot? Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 I too would happily have gave him a tenner if he politely said to the conductor "sorry mate I cant afford the ticket" But to abuse the staff member and happily delay the train AND swear like that infront of youngster, he got exactly what he deserved! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.