myol'man Posted March 18, 2022 Report Share Posted March 18, 2022 Delayed kick off Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaun Taylor Posted March 18, 2022 Report Share Posted March 18, 2022 His Mrs has gone for the sexy sultry pose Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weepywall Posted March 18, 2022 Report Share Posted March 18, 2022 7 minutes ago, Shaun Taylor said: Nice to see he's made an effort and dressed for the occasion! Looks like a character out of Porridge 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaun Taylor Posted March 18, 2022 Report Share Posted March 18, 2022 5 minutes ago, weepywall said: Looks like a character out of Porridge Let's hope he ends up eating it for a couple of years! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaun Taylor Posted March 18, 2022 Report Share Posted March 18, 2022 (edited) 16 minutes ago, myol'man said: Delayed kick off Waiting for his mates to arrive Edited March 18, 2022 by Shaun Taylor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
readie14 Posted March 18, 2022 Report Share Posted March 18, 2022 Lump the size of a golf ball' on her head Outlining the case for the prosecution, Helena Duong said Mrs Barton called 999 and said she has been hit in her house by her husband, and asked for police to attend urgently. They arrived at 11.38pm and spoke to her outside. "She gives her first account of what she says has happened," said Ms Duong. "She said she has gotten into a drunken fight and her husband has pushed her down. 'He;s got my head and pushed me down and kicked me in the head'," Ms Duong says Mrs Barton told police at the time. This is what will be viewed in the police bodycam footage. "The video shows injuries, a lump the size of a golf ball on her forehead. She puts her hand up to it and there's blood - she's also got a bloody nose," Ms Duong added. We're still in legal arguments about all this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myol'man Posted March 18, 2022 Report Share Posted March 18, 2022 Does she now want to be a witness for the defence? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bristol Rob Posted March 18, 2022 Report Share Posted March 18, 2022 5 minutes ago, myol'man said: Does she now want to be a witness for the defence? Does that mean she has to name their back 4? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galley is our king Posted March 18, 2022 Report Share Posted March 18, 2022 If he gets off because his wife says now (after all this time and the body cam footage) that was a mistake and it didn't happen that way then I feel sorry for EVERY woman in the future who will be bullied to do the same. Ludicrous to even discuss it. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myol'man Posted March 18, 2022 Report Share Posted March 18, 2022 Match Postponed Case adjourned After lengthy legal arguments, the district judge Andrew Sweet has adjourned the case for today, because the case cannot proceed. The trial will happen on a future date to be decided. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedRaw Posted March 18, 2022 Report Share Posted March 18, 2022 Case adjourned again, trial at later date. By the sounds of it, his defence may be trying to get it thrown out on a technicality that the CPS did not respond to an email from his wife. The scum will end up getting away with this again Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PHILINFRANCE Posted March 18, 2022 Report Share Posted March 18, 2022 Adjourned again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Hitler Posted March 18, 2022 Report Share Posted March 18, 2022 21 minutes ago, PHILINFRANCE said: Adjourned again. The justice system in this country is ridiculously inefficient. All the salaried staff turn up and then something that could easily have been incorporated into the case months ago means that everyone goes home for an early lunch. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BanburyRed Posted March 18, 2022 Report Share Posted March 18, 2022 2 hours ago, wendyredredrobin said: Jailbird Joey in the dock again today. The CPS must think they have a strong case even though his wife is not pressing charges. Hopefully the court will take the thug aff the streets this time. If found guilty, surely the beak will have to impose a custodial sentence bearíng in mind his previous. He's in the dock more often than a P&O ferry..... 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Port Said Red Posted March 18, 2022 Report Share Posted March 18, 2022 4 minutes ago, BanburyRed said: He's in the dock more often than a P&O ferry..... Not at the moment he isn't, bastards. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PHILINFRANCE Posted March 18, 2022 Report Share Posted March 18, 2022 26 minutes ago, Eddie Hitler said: The justice system in this country is ridiculously inefficient. All the salaried staff turn up and then something that could easily have been incorporated into the case months ago means that everyone goes home for an early lunch. One has to wonder why, not only did the CPS 'decline' to take the statement proferred by Mrs B some time ago (nor respond to her chase up mails), but why, apparently, their barrister didn't find out until this morning in Court that Mrs B had even written to the Police! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redsquirrel Posted March 18, 2022 Report Share Posted March 18, 2022 3 hours ago, weepywall said: Looks like a character out of Porridge indeed she does,joeybag dont look much better 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Hitler Posted March 18, 2022 Report Share Posted March 18, 2022 24 minutes ago, PHILINFRANCE said: One has to wonder why, not only did the CPS 'decline' to take the statement proferred by Mrs B some time ago (nor respond to her chase up mails), but why, apparently, their barrister didn't find out until this morning in Court that Mrs B had even written to the Police! It seems to me that because they have the guaranteed income whatever happens none of them have any interest in making the system work better. They're probably all down the pub or at home now which for them is a result: a day's pay for a half hour's work. Trebles all round This is more common than you would think in cases where the defendant can afford decent representation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fordy62 Posted March 18, 2022 Report Share Posted March 18, 2022 Interesting review of the evidence. I mean, does anyone believe it didn’t happen?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTRFTG Posted March 18, 2022 Report Share Posted March 18, 2022 Now I might just buy The Old Bill randomly fake emergency call records then randomly turn up at the home of failed, thuggish ex-footballers. I might even be persuaded they then proceed to Deep Fake video footage from body cams showing invented physical injury. Simply, they've nothing better to do, have they? But what no silk could ever persuade me to accept (me and the wife being partial to a glass or two,) is that at a dinner party for 6 between 24 & 30 bottles of wine were consumed. If we had friends who turned up with a half case each I think we might first sit them down and ask if things were "OK?" 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PHILINFRANCE Posted March 18, 2022 Report Share Posted March 18, 2022 OK, call me cynical, I prefer pragmatic, but I am now more convinced than ever that the JB case is going to die a death. We will all have our views as to the general circumstances, but, unless I am mistaken, none of us on this thread were present on that fateful night so, by extension, none of us really know what happened. The only ‘facts’, such as have been described in the media, are that, whilst entertaining friends back in June 2021, Mr and Mrs B got involved in a drunken argument (they drank four or five bottles of wine each!?); Mrs B (presumably under the influence of alcohol) telephoned the Police on the emergency number claiming she had been assaulted by Mr B; the Police arrived and found Mrs B with a lump on her head the size of a golf ball. Apparently, Mr B was upstairs, asleep and intoxicated, when the Police arrived. When the proceedings started in Court this morning, the first thing the Prosecutor’s barrister did was to request a short adjournment as she had discovered this morning that Mrs B had written to the CPS one month ago, and followed up her letter with two E-Mails, none of which had been acknowledged. I can imagine Ms Duong, prosecuting, was both embarrassed and absolutely furious, but I am curious; not only as to why the CPS didn’t respond to Mrs B, but also why they didn’t disclose the letter to the prosecuting barrister until this morning. The cynic in me wonders whether the last thing the CPS wanted in their file was a statement from Mrs B saying that she wasn’t actually assaulted at all (by Mr B) - this is a Victimless (or evidence-based) Prosecution, after all - and, by withholding the letter until today, they hoped to just present their case to the sole District Judge – not the usual Bench – basing their evidence on Mrs B’s 999 telephone call, made whilst in drink, and the Police video. Are the CPS not obliged to present all evidence, not just that which suits them? Might the fact they declined Mrs B’s request to provide a written statement be considered an Abuse of Process? I have not seen it mentioned that Mr and Mrs Clint Hill were in Court this morning, but I can imagine the Prosecution were not best pleased to see the alleged victim of this Victimless Prosecution arrive, arm in arm with the man accused of assaulting her. Anyway, the case has now been adjourned for a second time, and I wonder, yet again, whether it is really in the public interest to proceed with this prosecution. I am not in any way condoning the alleged crime, far from it, but Mr and Mrs B are (ostensibly) living a happy family life together with their children, and I wonder whether the Court really want to proceed and perhaps find him guilty, whereby he probably loses his job; very possibly is ostracised from football, but, most importantly, suffers disruption to his family life with the resultant distress to his wife and children. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaun Taylor Posted March 18, 2022 Report Share Posted March 18, 2022 10 minutes ago, PHILINFRANCE said: OK, call me cynical, I prefer pragmatic, but I am now more convinced than ever that the JB case is going to die a death. We will all have our views as to the general circumstances, but, unless I am mistaken, none of us on this thread were present on that fateful night so, by extension, none of us really know what happened. The only ‘facts’, such as have been described in the media, are that, whilst entertaining friends back in June 2021, Mr and Mrs B got involved in a drunken argument (they drank four or five bottles of wine each!?); Mrs B (presumably under the influence of alcohol) telephoned the Police on the emergency number claiming she had been assaulted by Mr B; the Police arrived and found Mrs B with a lump on her head the size of a golf ball. Apparently, Mr B was upstairs, asleep and intoxicated, when the Police arrived. When the proceedings started in Court this morning, the first thing the Prosecutor’s barrister did was to request a short adjournment as she had discovered this morning that Mrs B had written to the CPS one month ago, and followed up her letter with two E-Mails, none of which had been acknowledged. I can imagine Ms Duong, prosecuting, was both embarrassed and absolutely furious, but I am curious; not only as to why the CPS didn’t respond to Mrs B, but also why they didn’t disclose the letter to the prosecuting barrister until this morning. The cynic in me wonders whether the last thing the CPS wanted in their file was a statement from Mrs B saying that she wasn’t actually assaulted at all (by Mr B) - this is a Victimless (or evidence-based) Prosecution, after all - and, by withholding the letter until today, they hoped to just present their case to the sole District Judge – not the usual Bench – basing their evidence on Mrs B’s 999 telephone call, made whilst in drink, and the Police video. Are the CPS not obliged to present all evidence, not just that which suits them? Might the fact they declined Mrs B’s request to provide a written statement be considered an Abuse of Process? I have not seen it mentioned that Mr and Mrs Clint Hill were in Court this morning, but I can imagine the Prosecution were not best pleased to see the alleged victim of this Victimless Prosecution arrive, arm in arm with the man accused of assaulting her. Anyway, the case has now been adjourned for a second time, and I wonder, yet again, whether it is really in the public interest to proceed with this prosecution. I am not in any way condoning the alleged crime, far from it, but Mr and Mrs B are (ostensibly) living a happy family life together with their children, and I wonder whether the Court really want to proceed and perhaps find him guilty, whereby he probably loses his job; very possibly is ostracised from football, but, most importantly, suffers disruption to his family life with the resultant distress to his wife and children. Leapords don't change their spots it's just a case of waiting for the next incident to occur. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NcnsBcfc Posted March 18, 2022 Report Share Posted March 18, 2022 21 minutes ago, PHILINFRANCE said: OK, call me cynical, I prefer pragmatic, but I am now more convinced than ever that the JB case is going to die a death. We will all have our views as to the general circumstances, but, unless I am mistaken, none of us on this thread were present on that fateful night so, by extension, none of us really know what happened. The only ‘facts’, such as have been described in the media, are that, whilst entertaining friends back in June 2021, Mr and Mrs B got involved in a drunken argument (they drank four or five bottles of wine each!?); Mrs B (presumably under the influence of alcohol) telephoned the Police on the emergency number claiming she had been assaulted by Mr B; the Police arrived and found Mrs B with a lump on her head the size of a golf ball. Apparently, Mr B was upstairs, asleep and intoxicated, when the Police arrived. When the proceedings started in Court this morning, the first thing the Prosecutor’s barrister did was to request a short adjournment as she had discovered this morning that Mrs B had written to the CPS one month ago, and followed up her letter with two E-Mails, none of which had been acknowledged. I can imagine Ms Duong, prosecuting, was both embarrassed and absolutely furious, but I am curious; not only as to why the CPS didn’t respond to Mrs B, but also why they didn’t disclose the letter to the prosecuting barrister until this morning. The cynic in me wonders whether the last thing the CPS wanted in their file was a statement from Mrs B saying that she wasn’t actually assaulted at all (by Mr B) - this is a Victimless (or evidence-based) Prosecution, after all - and, by withholding the letter until today, they hoped to just present their case to the sole District Judge – not the usual Bench – basing their evidence on Mrs B’s 999 telephone call, made whilst in drink, and the Police video. Are the CPS not obliged to present all evidence, not just that which suits them? Might the fact they declined Mrs B’s request to provide a written statement be considered an Abuse of Process? I have not seen it mentioned that Mr and Mrs Clint Hill were in Court this morning, but I can imagine the Prosecution were not best pleased to see the alleged victim of this Victimless Prosecution arrive, arm in arm with the man accused of assaulting her. Anyway, the case has now been adjourned for a second time, and I wonder, yet again, whether it is really in the public interest to proceed with this prosecution. I am not in any way condoning the alleged crime, far from it, but Mr and Mrs B are (ostensibly) living a happy family life together with their children, and I wonder whether the Court really want to proceed and perhaps find him guilty, whereby he probably loses his job; very possibly is ostracised from football, but, most importantly, suffers disruption to his family life with the resultant distress to his wife and children. A district Judge would sit by themselves not as a panel. They sre normally reserved for the more serious magistrates Summary only trials. The Crown is under a duty to disclose to the defence any material that assists the defence or undermines the prosecution as part of the disclosure act (CPIA). However given that the defence seemed to be unaware until today of the actions of Mrs B. I would guess that she had unilaterally written to "someone", or emailed "someone". Certainly the process should have been done through Barton's defence team as some sort of Defence Case Statement. In these type of prosecutions. The "victim" is invariably hostile to the thought of prosecuting their partner for a whole multitude of reasons. Ultimately:- - She phones the Police, and says she has been assaulted. - Police arrive she has some injuries consistent with her 999 call, and further disclosures are made on video. - These are captured on BWV, thus the need for a statement or some sort of evidence of the injury from a hostile witness is no technically neceasary. The Crown only opened the case with a summary, before the objections started. No doubt large amounts of footage would have been played. Probably documenting the accounts of the other people present (standby on Mr & Mrs Hill there). This was always going to be a much trickier case to defend than the Barnsley manager case. It's still got some legs in it i reckon 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petehinton Posted March 18, 2022 Report Share Posted March 18, 2022 Yeah, I’m sure he doesn’t have it in him to do it…..just like he didn’t flood the Barnsley manager too….never his fault 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan Posted March 18, 2022 Report Share Posted March 18, 2022 1 hour ago, PHILINFRANCE said: I am not in any way condoning the alleged crime, far from it, but Mr and Mrs B are (ostensibly) living a happy family life together with their children, and I wonder whether the Court really want to proceed and perhaps find him guilty, whereby he probably loses his job; very possibly is ostracised from football, but, most importantly, suffers disruption to his family life with the resultant distress to his wife and children. Whether he loses his job is neither here nor there. Why that would ever be taken into consideration when deciding when to persue a prosecution or not is beyond me? Yes, he probably will get away with it, whether that actually turns out to be the best thing for his wife and children remains to be seen. IF you kick you’re wife in the head (or kick anyone in the head ) you should face consequences, not have everything swept under the carpet for a ‘quiet life’. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexukhc Posted March 18, 2022 Report Share Posted March 18, 2022 Makes you wonder why Clint Hill left the sags very quickly 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTRFTG Posted March 18, 2022 Report Share Posted March 18, 2022 2 hours ago, PHILINFRANCE said: OK, call me cynical, I prefer pragmatic, but I am now more convinced than ever that the JB case is going to die a death. We will all have our views as to the general circumstances, but, unless I am mistaken, none of us on this thread were present on that fateful night so, by extension, none of us really know what happened. The only ‘facts’, such as have been described in the media, are that, whilst entertaining friends back in June 2021, Mr and Mrs B got involved in a drunken argument (they drank four or five bottles of wine each!?); Mrs B (presumably under the influence of alcohol) telephoned the Police on the emergency number claiming she had been assaulted by Mr B; the Police arrived and found Mrs B with a lump on her head the size of a golf ball. Apparently, Mr B was upstairs, asleep and intoxicated, when the Police arrived. When the proceedings started in Court this morning, the first thing the Prosecutor’s barrister did was to request a short adjournment as she had discovered this morning that Mrs B had written to the CPS one month ago, and followed up her letter with two E-Mails, none of which had been acknowledged. I can imagine Ms Duong, prosecuting, was both embarrassed and absolutely furious, but I am curious; not only as to why the CPS didn’t respond to Mrs B, but also why they didn’t disclose the letter to the prosecuting barrister until this morning. The cynic in me wonders whether the last thing the CPS wanted in their file was a statement from Mrs B saying that she wasn’t actually assaulted at all (by Mr B) - this is a Victimless (or evidence-based) Prosecution, after all - and, by withholding the letter until today, they hoped to just present their case to the sole District Judge – not the usual Bench – basing their evidence on Mrs B’s 999 telephone call, made whilst in drink, and the Police video. Are the CPS not obliged to present all evidence, not just that which suits them? Might the fact they declined Mrs B’s request to provide a written statement be considered an Abuse of Process? I have not seen it mentioned that Mr and Mrs Clint Hill were in Court this morning, but I can imagine the Prosecution were not best pleased to see the alleged victim of this Victimless Prosecution arrive, arm in arm with the man accused of assaulting her. Anyway, the case has now been adjourned for a second time, and I wonder, yet again, whether it is really in the public interest to proceed with this prosecution. I am not in any way condoning the alleged crime, far from it, but Mr and Mrs B are (ostensibly) living a happy family life together with their children, and I wonder whether the Court really want to proceed and perhaps find him guilty, whereby he probably loses his job; very possibly is ostracised from football, but, most importantly, suffers disruption to his family life with the resultant distress to his wife and children. Residing in the land of the I believe, Phil, you are best placed to advance justice in proving said theory that one can consume 5 bottles of and then dial, having first managed to locate one's & remembered the applicable number, the emergency services. Perhaps you might upload an audio file to prove this possible? God forbid you attempt to inform the call-handler of the toppings you'd prefer on your or worse, inform them upon hanging up that," I loves you, I do........." 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GlastonburyRed Posted March 18, 2022 Report Share Posted March 18, 2022 Regardless of what happens in this case, and I imagine the charges will be dropped...I am a big believer in such alleged offenders having to live with themselves at the end of the day. This will be on the record for any children of JB, and they can they reach their own conclusions once they reach majority. A more telling judgment than any 18 month suspended sentence could ever seek to be, I suspect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WessexPest Posted March 19, 2022 Report Share Posted March 19, 2022 Whatever the outcome of this trial, Barton is incontrovertibly a massive dark stain on a pair of new white underpants and “Bristol” Rovers are a pox on humanity. In all my years of judging I have never heard before Of someone more deserving Of the full penalty of law To be exposed before your peers is my sentence Tear down the tents! Tear down the tents! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wanderingred Posted March 19, 2022 Report Share Posted March 19, 2022 Crowing again…. 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.