|
Post by alftupper on Nov 15, 2021 13:46:11 GMT
I've seen Chris at plenty of games, usually around the East Terrace, just after you get through the turnstiles. If we were home tomorrow he'd probably be sporting his blue and white bar scarf. Jeffery (Jeffrey) Archer - never. If I see a Horfield Prison warden in Sainsbury's on Gloucester Rd I'll ask if they have Archer, he may be slammed up again? I`m surprised, he hasn`t claimed to be Joffra Archer`s biological father.
|
|
|
Post by emperorsuperbus on Nov 15, 2021 18:28:00 GMT
Wednesday it is then. Does anyone know what happens at these things? An early hearing for the court to identify and understand what the real issues in dispute are and to consider whether they can be narrowed before trial. The court will also usually exercise its broad case management powers to direct how the case should be conducted going forward, including making the first order for directions and setting a timetable for all the steps up to trial. There may be a number of CMCs during the course of a case. (taken from Thomson Reuters Practical Law (UK) Anyone remember what the charge was?
|
|
|
Post by emperorsuperbus on Nov 15, 2021 18:34:51 GMT
Wednesday it is then. Does anyone know what happens at these things? An early hearing for the court to identify and understand what the real issues in dispute are and to consider whether they can be narrowed before trial. The court will also usually exercise its broad case management powers to direct how the case should be conducted going forward, including making the first order for directions and setting a timetable for all the steps up to trial. There may be a number of CMCs during the course of a case. (taken from Thomson Reuters Practical Law (UK) what are the possible range of outcomes? Is there a range in the middle where the jury shrug “not enough evidence to uphold such a character shredding charge” so B***** walks out completely free to resume our good run and promotion push? It’s only this case that’s a problem for B***** IMHO the one off domestic case his wife wants nothing to do with won’t come to anything. And in the Barnsley case, when it ran before, it was clear there was no witnesses or evidence, so he was hardly going into bat on a sticky wicket.
|
|
Igitur
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 2,294
|
Post by Igitur on Nov 16, 2021 9:31:02 GMT
Wednesday it is then. Does anyone know what happens at these things? An early hearing for the court to identify and understand what the real issues in dispute are and to consider whether they can be narrowed before trial. The court will also usually exercise its broad case management powers to direct how the case should be conducted going forward, including making the first order for directions and setting a timetable for all the steps up to trial. There may be a number of CMCs during the course of a case. (taken from Thomson Reuters Practical Law (UK) Is it done behind closed doors and can reporters be present?
|
|
|
Post by Bath Gas on Nov 16, 2021 10:26:33 GMT
An early hearing for the court to identify and understand what the real issues in dispute are and to consider whether they can be narrowed before trial. The court will also usually exercise its broad case management powers to direct how the case should be conducted going forward, including making the first order for directions and setting a timetable for all the steps up to trial. There may be a number of CMCs during the course of a case. (taken from Thomson Reuters Practical Law (UK) Is it done behind closed doors and can reporters be present? My limited understanding is that it is behind closed doors, as it's usually just the Judge and the legal reps of both parties. It's to give the Judge a brief overview of the case, and both parties to indicate the evidence which they have available for trial. The Judge can then decide the best way forward, set trial dates, both parties aware of potential legal costs etc. The legal reps usually have full power of representation for their clients, so Joey and Mrs Joey may not attend in person. Don't take this as Gospel - I'm not a legal eagle of any sort!
|
|
|
Post by a more piratey game on Nov 17, 2021 19:09:01 GMT
I wonder how that went today then - more or less pressure on Joeybag?
and was the Starnes news timed to coincide? Will there be more announcements at each staging post?
|
|
Angas
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 2,068
|
Post by Angas on Nov 18, 2021 0:02:27 GMT
|
|
eppinggas
Administrator
Ian Alexander
Don't care
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 8,197
|
Post by eppinggas on Nov 18, 2021 9:53:41 GMT
Wimbledon Magistrates Court heard in July that B***** allegedly grabbed Mrs B***** by the throat and kicked her in the head during an altercation outside the Kew property, where they had been with two friends. She was left with a bloody nose following the alleged attack and then called the police and asked for her husband to be removed from the property. B***** allegedly became 'quite angry' while discussing a family-related matter, said prosecutor Nahiedh Khan. 'He grabbed the throat of Mrs B*****, and this caused her to move backwards, falling to the floor.' B***** allegedly kicked his wife to the right side of her temple 'resulting in a half golf ball sized bruise on the right side of her temple,' said Ms Khan. The former footballer denied he was violent towards his wife. Mrs Khan told the court: 'On 2 June at about 11.30pm in the evening, Mr B***** is with his wife Georgia B***** and they were talking to friends outside the property while they were having a small party together. 'These two friends witnessed the incident and refused to provide further information other than what was seen in the body worn footage.' She continued: 'Mrs B***** suffered a half golf ball-sized bruise on the side of the head. Richard Derby, defending, requested a case management hearing before the trial. He said: 'Categorically, this incident did not happen. There was no assault..' A Metropolitan Police statement read: 'The charge relates to an incident which took place at a residential property in Kew on Wednesday, June 2 in which a woman received a head injury. London Ambulance Service did not attend. 'A 38-year-old man was arrested on June 2, bailed pending further enquiries, and subsequently charged.'I'm a little confused. Who exactly is alleging "he grabbed the throat of Mrs B*****" and "kicked his wife in the right side of the temple"? Seems like this was the two friends who initially witnessed the incident, but they aren't prepared to testify / provide further information. Perhaps their words were caught on the Police bodycam? If not, it all sounds circumstantial and no case to answer. No jury (I understand) at Magistrates Court. Let justice be done. Hey ho. No such thing as bad publicity. Isn't that right Wael?
|
|
oldie
Joined: September 2021
Posts: 4,367
|
Post by oldie on Nov 18, 2021 10:00:45 GMT
Wimbledon Magistrates Court heard in July that B***** allegedly grabbed Mrs B***** by the throat and kicked her in the head during an altercation outside the Kew property, where they had been with two friends. She was left with a bloody nose following the alleged attack and then called the police and asked for her husband to be removed from the property. B***** allegedly became 'quite angry' while discussing a family-related matter, said prosecutor Nahiedh Khan. 'He grabbed the throat of Mrs B*****, and this caused her to move backwards, falling to the floor.' B***** allegedly kicked his wife to the right side of her temple 'resulting in a half golf ball sized bruise on the right side of her temple,' said Ms Khan. The former footballer denied he was violent towards his wife. Mrs Khan told the court: 'On 2 June at about 11.30pm in the evening, Mr B***** is with his wife Georgia B***** and they were talking to friends outside the property while they were having a small party together. 'These two friends witnessed the incident and refused to provide further information other than what was seen in the body worn footage.' She continued: 'Mrs B***** suffered a half golf ball-sized bruise on the side of the head. Richard Derby, defending, requested a case management hearing before the trial. He said: 'Categorically, this incident did not happen. There was no assault..' A Metropolitan Police statement read: 'The charge relates to an incident which took place at a residential property in Kew on Wednesday, June 2 in which a woman received a head injury. London Ambulance Service did not attend. 'A 38-year-old man was arrested on June 2, bailed pending further enquiries, and subsequently charged.'I'm a little confused. Who exactly is alleging "he grabbed the throat of Mrs B*****" and "kicked his wife in the right side of the temple"? Seems like this was the two friends who initially witnessed the incident, but they aren't prepared to testify / provide further information. Perhaps their words were caught on the Police bodycam? If not, it all sounds circumstantial and no case to answer. No jury (I understand) at Magistrates Court. Let justice be done. Hey ho. No such thing as bad publicity. Isn't that right Wael? The bit that intrigues me is why, if no assault occured, did Mrs B***** call the police?
|
|
eppinggas
Administrator
Ian Alexander
Don't care
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 8,197
|
Post by eppinggas on Nov 18, 2021 10:11:20 GMT
Wimbledon Magistrates Court heard in July that B***** allegedly grabbed Mrs B***** by the throat and kicked her in the head during an altercation outside the Kew property, where they had been with two friends. She was left with a bloody nose following the alleged attack and then called the police and asked for her husband to be removed from the property. B***** allegedly became 'quite angry' while discussing a family-related matter, said prosecutor Nahiedh Khan. 'He grabbed the throat of Mrs B*****, and this caused her to move backwards, falling to the floor.' B***** allegedly kicked his wife to the right side of her temple 'resulting in a half golf ball sized bruise on the right side of her temple,' said Ms Khan. The former footballer denied he was violent towards his wife. Mrs Khan told the court: 'On 2 June at about 11.30pm in the evening, Mr B***** is with his wife Georgia B***** and they were talking to friends outside the property while they were having a small party together. 'These two friends witnessed the incident and refused to provide further information other than what was seen in the body worn footage.' She continued: 'Mrs B***** suffered a half golf ball-sized bruise on the side of the head. Richard Derby, defending, requested a case management hearing before the trial. He said: 'Categorically, this incident did not happen. There was no assault..' A Metropolitan Police statement read: 'The charge relates to an incident which took place at a residential property in Kew on Wednesday, June 2 in which a woman received a head injury. London Ambulance Service did not attend. 'A 38-year-old man was arrested on June 2, bailed pending further enquiries, and subsequently charged.'I'm a little confused. Who exactly is alleging "he grabbed the throat of Mrs B*****" and "kicked his wife in the right side of the temple"? Seems like this was the two friends who initially witnessed the incident, but they aren't prepared to testify / provide further information. Perhaps their words were caught on the Police bodycam? If not, it all sounds circumstantial and no case to answer. No jury (I understand) at Magistrates Court. Let justice be done. Hey ho. No such thing as bad publicity. Isn't that right Wael? The bit that intrigues me is why, if no assault occured, did Mrs B***** call the police? www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-57969765 (July 26th) "The court heard Mrs B***** was left with a bloody nose following the altercation. Mrs B***** then called the police and asked for her husband to be removed from the property, the court heard".
|
|
eppinggas
Administrator
Ian Alexander
Don't care
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 8,197
|
Post by eppinggas on Nov 19, 2021 9:29:48 GMT
So here's what it looks like to me. Four people are drinking together at a small party. At some stage an argument broke out. Ms B***** suffered a facial injury. She called the Police and requested that they remove Mr B***** from the property. The Police arrived and saw the extent of Ms B*****'s injuries. The Police cam heard 'something' said by 'someone' that led them to allege: "that he (Mr B*****) had grabbed the throat of Ms B*****... this caused her to move backwards, falling to the floor... and kicked his wife to the right side of her temple." Ms B***** subsequently said that she did not want to press charges. The two witnesses have refused to supply further information regarding the alleged assault. Conclusion: The CPS think their is enough evidence to prosecute Mr B***** based on what the Police saw, and what was said at the time, caught on the Police cam. Historically there is a conviction rate of around 84% at Magistrates Court. www.statista.com/statistics/1100769/conviction-rate-in-england-and-wales/
|
|
|
Post by a more piratey game on Nov 19, 2021 9:49:25 GMT
So here's what it looks like to me. Four people are drinking together at a small party. At some stage an argument broke out. Ms B***** suffered a facial injury. She called the Police and requested that they remove Mr B***** from the property. The Police arrived and saw the extent of Ms B*****'s injuries. The Police cam heard 'something' said by 'someone' that led them to allege: "that he (Mr B*****) had grabbed the throat of Ms B*****... this caused her to move backwards, falling to the floor... and kicked his wife to the right side of her temple." Ms B***** subsequently said that she did not want to press charges. The two witnesses have refused to supply further information regarding the alleged assault. Conclusion: The CPS think their is enough evidence to prosecute Mr B***** based on what the Police saw, and what was said at the time, caught on the Police cam. Historically there is a conviction rate of around 84% at Magistrates Court. www.statista.com/statistics/1100769/conviction-rate-in-england-and-wales/ that sounds about right based on what has come out so far. We'll see your true powers of deduction when it all gets real Sherlock! not long now...
|
|
|
Post by a more piratey game on Nov 22, 2021 19:11:31 GMT
Stendel case is Friday in Sheffield Crown Court I think. Anyone, maybe Gasmacc or someone a bit local to it, going?
|
|
harrybuckle
Always look on the bright side
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 5,430
|
Post by harrybuckle on Nov 22, 2021 20:27:07 GMT
Saw Sanigar at the recent Northampton home match.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2021 20:28:23 GMT
Stendel case is Friday in Sheffield Crown Court I think. Anyone, maybe Gasmacc or someone a bit local to it, going? I've been to court more than most. The rules are different to the match, mind. Chanting 'you don't know what you're doing' from the gallery is 'contempt', apparently.
|
|
GasMacc1
Les Bradd
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 1,423
|
Post by GasMacc1 on Nov 22, 2021 20:52:37 GMT
Stendel case is Friday in Sheffield Crown Court I think. Anyone, maybe Gasmacc or someone a bit local to it, going? You haven't considered that the Northern Powerhouse / cross-Pennine links are not yet in place (and won't be anytime soon) so I would have to set off about now! I'll be going to Salford City tomorrow night, though.
|
|
eppinggas
Administrator
Ian Alexander
Don't care
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 8,197
|
Post by eppinggas on Nov 23, 2021 9:35:04 GMT
An early hearing for the court to identify and understand what the real issues in dispute are and to consider whether they can be narrowed before trial. The court will also usually exercise its broad case management powers to direct how the case should be conducted going forward, including making the first order for directions and setting a timetable for all the steps up to trial. There may be a number of CMCs during the course of a case. (taken from Thomson Reuters Practical Law (UK) what are the possible range of outcomes? Is there a range in the middle where the jury shrug “not enough evidence to uphold such a character shredding charge” so B***** walks out completely free to resume our good run and promotion push? It’s only this case that’s a problem for B***** IMHO the one off domestic case his wife wants nothing to do with won’t come to anything. And in the Barnsley case, when it ran before, it was clear there was no witnesses or evidence, so he was hardly going into bat on a sticky wicket. Domestic Violence Case This is a victimless prosecution. Just because Ms B***** doesn't want to testify, doesn't mean it "won't come to anything". Sometimes victims of domestic violence don't want to come forward out of fear. I'm not saying that is necessarily the case here. Alleged Assault of the Barnsley Manager 1. We were only in possession of a few details in the Stendel case, certainly not the full picture. 2. If there are no independent witnesses or evidence, the CPS would not have supported the criminal proceedings. Stendel saying "he pushed me" and B***** saying "no I didn't", does not present a very compelling case. So we'll have to wait for the full story to come out before further speculation. No kangaroo Courts here. It's not like ancient Rome...
|
|
|
Post by emperorsuperbus on Nov 23, 2021 15:57:02 GMT
what are the possible range of outcomes? Is there a range in the middle where the jury shrug “not enough evidence to uphold such a character shredding charge” so B***** walks out completely free to resume our good run and promotion push? It’s only this case that’s a problem for B***** IMHO the one off domestic case his wife wants nothing to do with won’t come to anything. And in the Barnsley case, when it ran before, it was clear there was no witnesses or evidence, so he was hardly going into bat on a sticky wicket. Domestic Violence Case This is a victimless prosecution. Just because Ms B***** doesn't want to testify, doesn't mean it "won't come to anything". Sometimes victims of domestic violence don't want to come forward out of fear. I'm not saying that is necessarily the case here. Alleged Assault of the Barnsley Manager 1. We were only in possession of a few details in the Stendel case, certainly not the full picture. 2. If there are no independent witnesses or evidence, the CPS would not have supported the criminal proceedings. Stendel saying "he pushed me" and B***** saying "no I didn't", does not present a very compelling case. So we'll have to wait for the full story to come out before further speculation. No kangaroo Courts here. It's not like ancient Rome... Ah. I was proud to be the first Roman Emperor to introduce Kangaroos to court, by appointing some few as judges. And introducing lions. To act as jurors. If the lions merely sniffed the accused, they were Clearly guilty! If the lions ate them, they were innocent. Very discerning eaters my pet lions. Anyway, thanks for the posts keeping us informed. But remember, you said it yourself he pushed me" "no I didn't", does not present a very compelling case.
|
|
Angas
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 2,068
|
Post by Angas on Nov 25, 2021 16:58:31 GMT
The Crown Court at The Law Courts West Bar Sheffield
Daily Courtroom List for Friday 26 November 2021
Court 7 -
SITTING AT 10:30 am For Trial T20190839 B***** Joey 14XT1031419 BARNM CPS t/e 5 days Resvd to HHJ Richardson QC
|
|
|
Post by rideintothesun on Nov 25, 2021 17:24:37 GMT
Its Interesting that in the second case B***** has outright denied being violent. Its not as if there is a grey area here - either he was or was not.
Quite clearly (and rightly) the court will come down more strongly if this is indeed found to be the case.
His legal advisers would hardly tell him to deny something that could be easily demonstrated in court.
This makes me think that the story is more complicated than we have initially been led to believe. Also remember that he was allowed to stay in the family home by the police.
|
|