Bristol R*vers dustbin thread

[alexukhc]

31 minutes ago, Malago said:

I have the sense that even if he’s found guilty, provided he’s not imprisoned, Wally will prevaricate over dismissing Barton.  The Domestic Abuse case is the real problem for Joey.  Found guilty there and he’ll  never work in Football,  or for Bristol Rovers, again.

See I don’t get this, why haven’t Rovers suspended him pending the trial like the Welsh have with Giggs? They’ve really f’d themselves hard

[Kodjias Wrist]

13 minutes ago, PHILINFRANCE said:

I am not sure if calling someone Craut is racist.

Do you mean a Kraut? 

[slartibartfast]

Nothing to do with the "show trial", but happened to see a bit of Good Morning on ITV.  Some woman visiting a house (in Bristol) something about the xmas decs, blah blah, "   No red, I notice" the interviewer said. " No " piped up the squirt of a husband, " never have red in this house, nor no robins either" he vouched safe, pointing at his blue Santa is a slag head hat prowedly. His mrs/sister said that he hates the City and also stated that he had a job as a window cleaner.  I said to Mrs S "wonder what he uses for water, his tongue ?" The Mrs then informed me that she thought that was OUR window licker !     I proceeded to tell her that he WAS our window licker/cleaner and that if he comes round here wearing that stupid hat he'll get it stuffed up his arse !

Edited November 29, 2021 by slartibartfast

[NcnsBcfc]

47 minutes ago, Fordy62 said:

I’d be happy to bet £100 that he won’t go to prison. He has previous, but it’s very old plus he has a job and presumably dependents. So I’d say there’s little to no chance. 

If he were to be convicted however, that’d create a real problem for his domestic violence trial, which the courts take very seriously…

@Fordy62

In some ways though, the fact that he's already been to prison twice, limits the Judge's non-custodial sentencing options.

Anything under 2 years can be suspended anyhow. I'm going for 18 months, suspended for 2 years.

However what happens with the domestic trial.

Do they activate his suspended sentence, as it was committed whilst on bail for this offence.

The DJ can only sentence for 6 months as summary only offence. However he would be mindful of his previous, offence committed on bail.

It's rare for the CPS to keep pushing a battery charge on a victimless case. It's had 4 hearings where evidently the defence has tried to have it thrown out. All refused.

I've always thought he was more likely to get potted on that case.

[slartibartfast]

7 minutes ago, Kodjias Wrist said:

Do you mean a Kraut? 

THAT'S why Craut isn't racist  ! 

[PHILINFRANCE]

6 minutes ago, Kodjias Wrist said:

Do you mean a Kraut? 

Upon reflection, you are probably correct.

I read that the witness heard JB call Stendel a German C***, and Craut was the first word that came to mind - word association and all that.

[alexukhc]

10 minutes ago, Kodjias Wrist said:

Do you mean a Kraut? 

Bit sour 

[Fordy62]

9 minutes ago, NcnsBcfc said:

@Fordy62

In some ways though, the fact that he's already been to prison twice, limits the Judge's non-custodial sentencing options.

Anything under 2 years can be suspended anyhow. I'm going for 18 months, suspended for 2 years.

However what happens with the domestic trial.

Do they activate his suspended sentence, as it was committed whilst on bail for this offence.

The DJ can only sentence for 6 months as summary only offence. However he would be mindful of his previous, offence committed on bail.

It's rare for the CPS to keep pushing a battery charge on a victimless case. It's had 4 hearings where evidently the defence has tried to have it thrown out. All refused.

I've always thought he was more likely to get potted on that case.

Can’t wait to see what evidence they’ve got. It’s got to be the first accounts on body cam surely?

[Kodjias Wrist]

14 minutes ago, PHILINFRANCE said:

Upon reflection, you are probably correct.

I read that the witness heard JB call Stendel a German C***, and Craut was the first word that came to mind - word association and all that.

Yeah I didnt mean to come across a pedantic **** anyway haha.

[Selred]

1 hour ago, Malago said:

I have the sense that even if he’s found guilty, provided he’s not imprisoned, Wally will prevaricate over dismissing Barton.  The Domestic Abuse case is the real problem for Joey.  Found guilty there and he’ll  never work in Football,  or for Bristol Rovers, again.

Why will he never work in football again? Danny Simpson was found guilty of domestic abuse and plays for us. Football is a sport with no morals.

[NcnsBcfc]

8 hours ago, Fordy62 said:

Can’t wait to see what evidence they’ve got. It’s got to be the first accounts on body cam surely?

Will be 999 call, body cam accounts. Probably with Mrs Barton realising that Joey was already on bail for the Crown Court assault, and trying to back track what she initially said.

In the past, we wouldn't have been able to evidence the injury (head injury i believe) or her account; but with the BWV nowadays, it's a classic victimless prosecution. Where a violent offender (due to his previous) has allegedly assaulted his wife.

In front of a District Judge in a Magistrates Court with no jury. He will have sight of all of this. She will obviously give evidence (if he's not already in prison), to say it was an accident, and they were all drunk etc. But unlike a jury, the Judge will have seen this all before.

I would find it bizarre, if the Judge was to find that it was indeed an accident; particulary when you consider the violence against women movement at the moment; and the fact that it has already been through a number of hearings.

Barton's alleged drunken demeanour will also play a big part ( all on BWV as well).

Interesting times ahead....

[Mike Hunt-Hertz]

9 hours ago, slartibartfast said:

Nothing to do with the "show trial", but happened to see a bit of Good Morning on ITV.  Some woman visiting a house (in Bristol) something about the xmas decs, blah blah, "   No red, I notice" the interviewer said. " No " piped up the squirt of a husband, " never have red in this house, nor no robins either" he vouched safe, pointing at his blue Santa is a slag head hat prowedly. His mrs/sister said that he hates the City and also stated that he had a job as a window cleaner.  I said to Mrs S "wonder what he uses for water, his tongue ?" The Mrs then informed me that she thought that was OUR window licker !     I proceeded to tell her that he WAS our window licker/cleaner and that if he comes round here wearing that stupid hat he'll get it stuffed up his arse!

He'd probably enjoy it.

[Unan]

“So if I was defending I would be saying he tripped or Barton bumped into him. Given there was clearly an issue between them he then took the opportunity of Barton being in tunnel to accuse Barton of assault. Of the witnesses how many are actually independent and how many work for Barnsley and had a close friendship with the accuser ? If they were on the payroll at Barnsley they are hardly impartial. This really does seem a case of one man and his friends word against Barton. Might be different if there are any actual independent witnesses.”

**** me they really are the scum aren’t they. Next they’ll be saying his wife was asking for it 

[The Dolman Pragmatist]

10 hours ago, weepywall said:

It has always baffled me how anyone is happy to make a living defending the likes of Creghan.

Our legal system entitles anyone to mount a defence, and quite right too.  However heinous the crime of which someone is accused, someone has to represent them.

[Galley is our king]

Surely though if found guilty, whether he goes to prison or not,  the FA would charge him with something? Bringing the game into disrepute?

Can the FA charge him with being a horrible little knob?

 

[TheReds]

56 minutes ago, Marcus Aurelius said:

“So if I was defending I would be saying he tripped or Barton bumped into him. Given there was clearly an issue between them he then took the opportunity of Barton being in tunnel to accuse Barton of assault. Of the witnesses how many are actually independent and how many work for Barnsley and had a close friendship with the accuser ? If they were on the payroll at Barnsley they are hardly impartial. This really does seem a case of one man and his friends word against Barton. Might be different if there are any actual independent witnesses.”

**** me they really are the scum aren’t they. Next they’ll be saying his wife was asking for it 

Didn't he say he never touched him though. The issue he has with "one man and his friends word against Barton" is the fact that he has injuries. Did Stendel just think "I really hate him and want him to get into trouble so I will smash my face into that metal bar". As much as we may want him to be guilty, if this was any City player or staff I would think the same as it looks pretty obvious he has pushed him. Did he want him to smash his face into a metal pole, maybe, maybe not, but he did. Was probably hoping for Stendel to have a go back and then have a row - especially if he thought nobody else was around, ends up getting split up and it's a 50:50 thing and no charges at all and everyone walks their own ways.

[RedRock]

1 hour ago, The Dolman Pragmatist said:

Our legal system entitles anyone to mount a defence, and quite right too.  However heinous the crime of which someone is accused, someone has to represent them.

But there’s a proper defence and a Bristol City type-defence.

I left my employers on a matter of principle, as I opposed Government policy. Pity solicitors/QCs have few morals. They should look at the evidence/previous and delegate cases that are ‘clear and obvious guilt’ to  a £10 hour work experience person rather than creaming the public for £500 an hour to line their own pockets defending the indefensible. 

 

Edited November 30, 2021 by RedRock

[Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan]

12 hours ago, slartibartfast said:

Nothing to do with the "show trial", but happened to see a bit of Good Morning on ITV.  Some woman visiting a house (in Bristol) something about the xmas decs, blah blah, "   No red, I notice" the interviewer said. " No " piped up the squirt of a husband, " never have red in this house, nor no robins either" he vouched safe, pointing at his blue Santa is a slag head hat prowedly. His mrs/sister said that he hates the City and also stated that he had a job as a window cleaner.  I said to Mrs S "wonder what he uses for water, his tongue ?" The Mrs then informed me that she thought that was OUR window licker !     I proceeded to tell her that he WAS our window licker/cleaner and that if he comes round here wearing that stupid hat he'll get it stuffed up his arse !

I happened to be off yesterday and saw the bit at the beginning when that Josie woman was stood outside their house with the great big Gas flag hung up on the wall behind her.

I just thought you sad ******* penis.

Such needy attention seekers. 

 

 

[Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan]

2 hours ago, Marcus Aurelius said:

**** me they really are the scum aren’t they. Next they’ll be saying his wife was asking for it 

The same fans who were singing that Joey “hits who he wants” earlier in the season.

 

[Red-Robbo]

13 hours ago, Malago said:

I have the sense that even if he’s found guilty, provided he’s not imprisoned, Wally will prevaricate over dismissing Barton.  The Domestic Abuse case is the real problem for Joey.  Found guilty there and he’ll  never work in Football,  or for Bristol Rovers, again.

 You'd think so, but..... Danny Simpson, to name but one of a number of possible examples.

[TheReds]

1 hour ago, Red-Robbo said:

 You'd think so, but..... Danny Simpson, to name but one of a number of possible examples.

Lee Hughes and Luke McCormick seemed to walk straight back into football after being released from prison after causing death by dangerous driving.

[BrightCiderLife]

4 hours ago, RedRock said:

But there’s a proper defence and a Bristol City type-defence.

I left my employers on a matter of principle, as I opposed Government policy. Pity solicitors/QCs have few morals. They should look at the evidence/previous and delegate cases that are ‘clear and obvious guilt’ to  a £10 hour work experience person rather than creaming the public for £500 an hour to line their own pockets defending the indefensible. 

 

We have trial by a jury of our peers. What you’re proposing is trial by lawyers. If juries knew the work experience kid had it because silks has declined the case, juries would convict in those cases. 
Neither you or I want trial by lawyer, we want to be judged, if at all, by our equals. 
The right to representation at a fair trial is the hallmark of a free society. 

[Fordy62]

So the next witness is the assistant coach to Stendel. He says he found Stendel bloodied and shocked. Defence put it to him that he deliberately antagonised during goal celebrations to put Barnsley 3-1 up. He denied. 

Jury have been told they’ll retire to consider verdicts on Thursday. A lot of Wednesday will be taken up by closing speeches and judge’s summing up.

That doesn’t leave a lot of time for anyone to speak in Barton’s favour and if that’s the case, there really is only one way this is going. 

[Red-Robbo]

3 minutes ago, Fordy62 said:

So the next witness is the assistant coach to Stendel. He says he found Stendel bloodied and shocked. Defence put it to him that he deliberately antagonised during goal celebrations to put Barnsley 3-1 up.

 

That is a pathetically weak line of defence. "He annoyed me".

[CodeRed]

13 minutes ago, Fordy62 said:

So the next witness is the assistant coach to Stendel. He says he found Stendel bloodied and shocked. Defence put it to him that he deliberately antagonised during goal celebrations to put Barnsley 3-1 up. He denied. 

Jury have been told they’ll retire to consider verdicts on Thursday. A lot of Wednesday will be taken up by closing speeches and judge’s summing up.

That doesn’t leave a lot of time for anyone to speak in Barton’s favour and if that’s the case, there really is only one way this is going. 

Indeed

[slartibartfast]

17 minutes ago, Red-Robbo said:

 

That is a pathetically weak line of defence. "He annoyed me".

Absolutely...........He didn't do it, M'lud, but even if he did he deserved it !

[Lanterne Rouge]

19 hours ago, Stortz said:

 

He said: "I heard the word German coming from Mr Barton. I heard the word c***."'

 

Did he accuse him of bombing our chippy as well?

[slartibartfast]

46 minutes ago, BrightCiderLife said:

Neither you or I want trial by lawyer, we want to be judged, if at all, by our equals. 
The right to representation at a fair trial is the hallmark of a free society. 

So they've sworn in 12 dollops of pond slime, have they ?

[bcfc01]

47 minutes ago, Red-Robbo said:

 

That is a pathetically weak line of defence. "He annoyed me".

Its up there with "I was suddenly took drunk m'lord"

[TheReds]

48 minutes ago, Red-Robbo said:

 

That is a pathetically weak line of defence. "He annoyed me".

First thing I thought when reading that. That's basically an admission of guilt isn't it.