Bristol R*vers dustbin thread

[Guest]

6 hours ago, PHILINFRANCE said:

You are, of course, correct.

Whilst, regrettably, there may be just a few on here who take the thread seriously, the vast majority who post on the thread treat it with the irreverence it so clearly deserves, and their posts reflect their irreverence.

Read the title: it is a joke thread, the underlying purpose of which is to take the proverbial out of Bristol Rovers - nothing more, nothing less, but surely with none of the bitterness you insinuate. And, just remember if you would, (and this is just one of many examples) when a few crass idiots sprayed the Memorial Gates, it was some of those 'humourless boring people devoid of any intelligence' to whom you refer in your post who were instrumental in arranging and paying for the damage to be repaired - and, of course, you won't even think about mentioning getting an injured armed forces Rovers fan to Wembley.    

Unfortunately, I can't find it, but there is a cartoon somewhere of a Rovers fan thinking he is having a tattoo of the Rovers crest on on his back, when in fact it is a large turd. The cartoon is amusing and, undoubtedly, has been copied from a Liverpool/Everton or Man U/City or whatever site, but it is amusing: it is, obviously, puerile etc., but I am sure if any contribitors to your Gaschat thread had the skill, they would have produced the same cartoon, but with a City crest.

ManUre, City, Baadiff, of course it's all puerile rubbish, but why get so upset about it? Unlike your SadSlag site (You see, I am even doing it myself now), OTIB doesn't ban posters from other clubs, indeed it encourages and welcomes them.   

Puerile infantile rubbish, and long may it continue.

 

Some times less is more,when something is funny post it but just posting endless nothing seems pointless to me.

[HoldenBall]

6 hours ago, bobby kellard was go said:

Some times less is more,when something is funny post it but just posting endless nothing seems pointless to me.

Agreed, stop posting on here then. 

[Nicki's soulmate]

7 hours ago, bobby kellard was go said:

Some times less is more,when something is funny post it but just posting endless nothing seems pointless to me.

Irony alert!

[Miah Dennehy]

On ‎05‎/‎07‎/‎2018 at 22:32, JulieH said:

I am considering registering on that forum. I had a meeting with staff members at Bristol rovers last week and I mentioned how useful some city fans have found my contributions on this forum and I would be keen to do the same on the rovers one . The staff at rovers are keen as well, so I am hoping to make contact with admin for the site to see if it would work!

fingers crossed

 

 

You are welcome to join us, but your horse isn't.

[Bristol Rob]

4 minutes ago, Miah Dennehy said:

You are welcome to join us, but your horse isn't.

At least one of the moderators have already said Julie wouldn't be welcome. Which is a shame.

[Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan]

14 hours ago, Juan Kerr said:

I bet his clacker valve is going like a good 'un.

If he is then he only has his mate Oldslag to thank because none of this was happening until he raked it all back up earlier this week, thinking he was being clever.

Oh dear.....

Edited July 7, 2018 by Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan

[Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan]

Couple of gems on Gaschat this morning.

Henbury has been told that CCTV has been looked at and no incident appears to have taken place. HG wonders how she knows which match it happened at?

Because you told us in the original thread Henbury...last home game of the season (Barnsley).

Another one wants to know why the Old Bill aren’t investing us for saying that ‘Rovers are crap’ as its something they object to?

Perhaps that’s because saying ‘Rovers are crap’ is not the same as alleging a violent crime has taken place in a public area (with 20k potential witnesses and CCTV) leaving the victim, a disabled vulnerable man, badly injured and traumatised?.....FFS 

 

Edited July 7, 2018 by Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan

[Guest]

As all you blue few are looking in, can you at least get your facts correct please?

Henbury Gas FIRST said he is open to speak to JulieH...... THEN JulieH responded on here AFTER he had said that. JulieH said she would take up his offer and come and see him Tuesday 1500hrs! (exclamation mark on the end will tell you she wasn't just going to turn up on his doorstep at that day and time, that is obvious). They then have obviously spoke after and confirmed a day and time and all that has been said after they spoken is she is meeting him on Tuesday (not even a time or place has been mentioned) and nothing else will be said until whatever has been looked into has been completed. I really cannot see what she has done wrong.

This has all been dragged back up after "Oldgas" said "have you noticed how they've all gone quiet with regards to their witch hunt over the abused disabled fan".

Let's get one thing straight here - if anyone on here said at a match a Rovers fan openly knocked the teeth out of a vulnerable disabled fan, and nobody did anything bar watch on, none of you wouldn't care at all that a Ted has said that on here?

Hopefully the TRUTH will come out, and Henbury Gas  you told everyone which game it was as the CCTV was looked into at the time from what I recall.

[Bristol Rob]

Any idea if the original post from HG was pasted in to this thread?

Might save a bit of time confirming the facts.

[cidercity]

9 minutes ago, Gashead1981 said:

JulieH

Just wondering how you can investigate in an official capacity when:

(a) No official complaint has been made by the person who was allegedly assaulted? 

(b) Have no evidence a crime has been committed either by independent witnesses or real time cctv?

(c) There is no evidence to suggest the event took place. 

(d) If the offence did take place the person has chosen not to report the incident and press charges. 

(e) The person you are planning to see was not party to, or witnessed the incident.

Beyond settling an argument on an Internet forum, there is nothing to investigate or settle. 

If you are a well meaning copper, and I’m sure you are, in my opinion you are acting outside of the jurisdiction your warrant card gives you and you certainly can not operate this as an official line of enquiry. So you cannot proport it as such.

You even previously commenting on this forum means you have a conflict of interest or bias, which, if there ever was an official complaint made, would eliminate you instantly from being an officer in charge of the investigation or risk any potential court case (if it went that far) collapsing. You even identifying yourself as a police officer outside of duty can cause a conflict of interest as you should well know.  

And you can comment on all of the above without alluding to the case, commenting on individuals or being specific to this particular case.  

 

Are you the Lawyer that helped the Dog Walkers of Ashton Vale for no fee ?

If you are you have a cheek coming on here after all the lies the Village Greeners told to get it past.

 

If your not welcome.

[Guest]

a - I am sure someone can report it if need be although guess it doesn't need to be reported (do you think every football related incident by a FLO are all stemmed from official complaints)?

b - Exactly, these accusations need to be sorted out once and for all

c - As above

d - The person has reported it and I assume in confidence only for someone to put it out there for thousands to see though

e - Again as answer B & C - he/she should never have put it out there for starters without getting some facts.

 

Plenty to investigate imo, as someone has basically accused a club of letting a disabled fan get their teeth knocked out in a stadium with many fans, stewards and Police  and they have done nothing about it.

Surely it isn't official so she can look into it?

Julie would comment on your forum but has been told she isn't wanted

 

All in my opinion and I maybe wide of the mark.....

 

[Bristol Rob]

23 minutes ago, Gashead1981 said:

JulieH

Just wondering how you can investigate in an official capacity when:

(a) No official complaint has been made by the person who was allegedly assaulted? 

(b) Have no evidence a crime has been committed either by independent witnesses or real time cctv?

(c) There is no evidence to suggest the event took place. 

(d) If the offence did take place the person has chosen not to report the incident and press charges. 

(e) The person you are planning to see was not party to, or witnessed the incident.

Beyond settling an argument on an Internet forum, there is nothing to investigate or settle. 

If you are a well meaning copper, and I’m sure you are, in my opinion you are acting outside of the jurisdiction your warrant card gives you and you certainly can not operate this as an official line of enquiry. So you cannot proport it as such.

You even previously commenting on this forum means you have a conflict of interest or bias, which, if there ever was an official complaint made, would eliminate you instantly from being an officer in charge of the investigation or risk any potential court case (if it went that far) collapsing. You even identifying yourself as a police officer outside of duty can cause a conflict of interest as you should well know.  

And you can comment on all of the above without alluding to the case, commenting on individuals or being specific to this particular case.  

 

(A) when there were suggestions that the police had been heavy handed in a home game last season, those on the receiving end of what looked like was robust policing never made a complaint, but following witness reports it was investigated.

(B) it might be that they have not yet found evidence based on a report that has changed several times since it was first published. 

(C) And this is why police investigate things. To try an establish the facts.

(D) Not all crimes require a victim to complain. If for example, the investigation shows people behaving in a way that would put others at risk, they might be charged for a different offence.

(E) The person who raised this has been quite clear that a former Bristol City season ticket holder was assaulted and had teeth knocked out, such was their distress and post traumatic stress, the were damaged sufficiently that they then wanted to watch the Gas.

Saying there is nothing to investigate is sweeping some pretty serious reports under the carpet. And if this did happen and they are able to identify those responsible, then the match day experience of others will likely be enhanced by those people no longer being welcome in the stadium.

[Stortz]

32 minutes ago, Gashead1981 said:

JulieH

Just wondering how you can investigate in an official capacity when:

(a) No official complaint has been made by the person who was allegedly assaulted? 

(b) Have no evidence a crime has been committed either by independent witnesses or real time cctv?

(c) There is no evidence to suggest the event took place. 

(d) If the offence did take place the person has chosen not to report the incident and press charges. 

(e) The person you are planning to see was not party to, or witnessed the incident.

Beyond settling an argument on an Internet forum, there is nothing to investigate or settle. 

If you are a well meaning copper, and I’m sure you are, in my opinion you are acting outside of the jurisdiction your warrant card gives you and you certainly can not operate this as an official line of enquiry. So you cannot proport it as such.

You even previously commenting on this forum means you have a conflict of interest or bias, which, if there ever was an official complaint made, would eliminate you instantly from being an officer in charge of the investigation or risk any potential court case (if it went that far) collapsing. You even identifying yourself as a police officer outside of duty can cause a conflict of interest as you should well know.  

And you can comment on all of the above without alluding to the case, commenting on individuals or being specific to this particular case.  

 

Watch out everyone, it's ******* Columbo.

The bold bit is exactly what we've been saying for months ffs.

[chinapig]

35 minutes ago, Gashead1981 said:

JulieH

Just wondering how you can investigate in an official capacity when:

(a) No official complaint has been made by the person who was allegedly assaulted? 

(b) Have no evidence a crime has been committed either by independent witnesses or real time cctv?

(c) There is no evidence to suggest the event took place. 

(d) If the offence did take place the person has chosen not to report the incident and press charges. 

(e) The person you are planning to see was not party to, or witnessed the incident.

Beyond settling an argument on an Internet forum, there is nothing to investigate or settle. 

If you are a well meaning copper, and I’m sure you are, in my opinion you are acting outside of the jurisdiction your warrant card gives you and you certainly can not operate this as an official line of enquiry. So you cannot proport it as such.

You even previously commenting on this forum means you have a conflict of interest or bias, which, if there ever was an official complaint made, would eliminate you instantly from being an officer in charge of the investigation or risk any potential court case (if it went that far) collapsing. You even identifying yourself as a police officer outside of duty can cause a conflict of interest as you should well know.  

And you can comment on all of the above without alluding to the case, commenting on individuals or being specific to this particular case.  

 

You may be mixing up evidence and corroboration. A person's word is evidence, even a third party's.

It may be dismissed as hearsay however in the absence of corroboration, e.g. cctv, an eye witness.

It would be quite wrong imo for the police not to investigate such a serious allegation, particularly Julie who would be subjected to accusations of bias.

[Bristol Rob]

14 minutes ago, Gashead1981 said:

 

A police officer can not investigate in an official capacity unless any of the criteria of points a-e have been met. 

 

 

 

Absolute bobbins.

"Help! Our bank has been cyber-robbed!"

"Any evidence?"

"Nothing. They were clearly very careful."

"Well, according to Chief Justice Gashead we aren't allowed to investigate".

Idiot.

Edited July 7, 2018 by Bristol Rob

[glynriley]

Here come the deputies...... 
If of course Henbury is able to provide the evidence and parties concerned to substantiate his claim I'm not sure how OTIB will ever be able to live this down. It would be a case where you engineered your own downfall and put you own club to shame once again. 

 

So according to at least one gAsshole, trying to identify a thug who knocks vulnerable people's teeth out is something we'd never live down..?!

I suppose if the shoe was on the other foot, they'd all close ranks and protect the perpetrator.

 

[Guest]

Exactly - if this has happened the person who done the crime needs punishing!

[Bristol Rob]

2 minutes ago, glynriley said:

Here come the deputies...... 
If of course Henbury is able to provide the evidence and parties concerned to substantiate his claim I'm not sure how OTIB will ever be able to live this down. It would be a case where you engineered your own downfall and put you own club to shame once again. 

 

So according to at least one gAsshole, trying to identify a thug who knocks vulnerable people's teeth out is something we'd never live down..?!

I suppose if the shoe was on the other foot, they'd all close ranks and protect the perpetrator.

 

Are you suggesting that 99% of Catholic priests are Gashead?

[Guest]

JulieH

Just wondering how you can investigate in an official capacity when:

(a) No official complaint has been made by the person who was allegedly assaulted?

You do not need the actual 'victim' to make a complaint - I assume you have heard of prosecutions for Assaults/ABH/GBH etc where the victims do not wish to press any charges at all haven't you?

A police officer can not investigate in an official capacity unless any of the criteria of points a-e have been met.

Well point A has not been met but it can still be investigated - that is a certainty

Ps - idiot

[SimonR]

2 minutes ago, Gashead1981 said:

A persons word is evidence if he has actually witnessed a crime or offense or the lead up or aftermath to an offense. 

But if there is no complainant then there is nothing to investigate further. 

If it was immeasurably witnessed at the scene then the person can be arrested, interviewed and then cautioned, the injured party could then choose not to press charges and then no further action would be taken.

 

Well at last we will find out the Truth. Which is most likely that the serial liar henbury is now caught up in a web of his own making, and may be cautioned or worse for wasting police time.

[GrahamC]

When can we go back to laughing at the fact Wael is a fraud?

[glynriley]

1 minute ago, GrahamC said:

When can we go back to laughing at the fact Wael is a fraud?

We never stopped mate...

[GreedyHarry]

13 minutes ago, Gashead1981 said:

A persons word is evidence if he has actually witnessed a crime or offense or the lead up or aftermath to an offense. 

But if there is no complainant then there is nothing to investigate further. 

If it was immeasurably witnessed at the scene then the person can be arrested, interviewed and then cautioned, the injured party could then choose not to press charges and then no further action would be taken.

 

Offence is spelt with a C love.

[Bristol Rob]

Just now, Gashead1981 said:

JulieH

I am a mod on gaschat and I have seen no application for you to join our forum. I have spoken with the other mods and no one has denied you access. 

So if you mean gaschat is unhappy to have you because of a couple of posters saying you aren’t wanted because of your red persuasion, then your post here is distorted and misleading. 

Come and join us, I’ll verify you, and you can receive your own welcome every ted gets over there. And it will be nothing to do with you being a police officer!! 

It is one of the sad things about your forum that you don't allow us to register and have some banter. It's almost as if you are embarrassed to be Gas.

[BCFC11]

7 minutes ago, Gashead1981 said:

a) only if it was witnessed by a third party or a police officer which led to a direct arrest or with hard digital evidence which could substantiate the arrest and subsequent caution given pre interview and the charge post interview. 

The police also do not press the charge, the crime prosecution service do. The police merely report the facts and present the evidence. 

In this instance it would be down to the force districts inspector or lead Sargent to decide whether there is something to be officially investigated, but that can only be done if an official complaint is made as it would be considered a historic allegation and that would need a statement from the complainant.

I take it idiot is a term of acknowledgement around here, so it would be rude not to join in. Idiot.

 

Atleast your welcome on here, unlike your sad excuse of a forum who ban anyone for being a 'ted'

[Guest]

Someone has said they have had their teeth knocked out, this has then been reported on numerous forums.

"The hard digital evidence" will or can be looked at once the facts have been revealed - hence the point of investigation in the first place. How do you know there isn't a complainant now as fact, who may also have made some sort of statement (if indeed what you are saying is true)?? There may well be a statement and complainant now due to all the pathetic mud slinging - and that would not need to be the victim either.

Ps - the idiot comment was redirected due to you calling someone on here one beforehand:

Umm..

If it was cyber crime it would have a digital footprint. Therefore evidence.  

Idiot. 

[glynriley]

4 minutes ago, Gashead1981 said:

JulieH

I am a mod on gaschat and I have seen no application for you to join our forum. I have spoken with the other mods and no one has denied you access. 

So if you mean gaschat is unhappy to have you because of a couple of posters saying you aren’t wanted because of your red persuasion, then your post here is distorted and misleading. 

Come and join us, I’ll verify you, and you can receive your own welcome every ted gets over there. And it will be nothing to do with you being a police officer!! 

Hugo the Elder Moderator     Posts: 7,854   Posting Level

yesterday at 9:26am via mobile manorfarmgas, philbemmygas, and 10 more like this Quote   Post by Hugo the Elder on yesterday at 9:26am 1) BRFC cannot, does not and has never sought to control this forum. 2)We are open to conversation with the club at all times. 3) Anyone is welcome to make an account on this forum provided they follow the rules. 4) Shitheads will continue to be banned from this forum regardless if they work for the Police or not. 5) Anyone making an account deliberately to stir up trouble or to score points with Bristol Sport Men's Soccer Division will be banned. 6) As you were.

[redcityman]

Gashead1981 I would'nt botther getting offended when being called an idiot, afterall at least you get the chance to air you oppinion on our forum, whereas the opposite cannot be said of a forum where such allegations have been gleefully discussed without any proof or debate from those that are being castigated as the villians.

But hey as Hugo says anyone is welcome! 

[chinapig]

15 minutes ago, Gashead1981 said:

A persons word is evidence if he has actually witnessed a crime or offense or the lead up or aftermath to an offense. 

But if there is no complainant then there is nothing to investigate further. 

If it was immeasurably witnessed at the scene then the person can be arrested, interviewed and then cautioned, the injured party could then choose not to press charges and then no further action would be taken.

 

In a sense we may be violently agreeing. 

I'm not talking here about the standard required for the police to refer to the CPS or the latter to proceed to prosecution, least of all to be acceptable to a court. None of those is met by what is in the public domain imo.

Rather I mean evidence sufficient for the police to investigate. I have been in the position of knowing a crime had been committed in the absence of a complainant and felt it  my duty to report it. The police investigated, though it went no further because they could not gather the kind of evidence to which you refer.

[chinapig]

14 minutes ago, Gashead1981 said:

JulieH

I am a mod on gaschat and I have seen no application for you to join our forum. I have spoken with the other mods and no one has denied you access. 

So if you mean gaschat is unhappy to have you because of a couple of posters saying you aren’t wanted because of your red persuasion, then your post here is distorted and misleading. 

Come and join us, I’ll verify you, and you can receive your own welcome every ted gets over there. And it will be nothing to do with you being a police officer!! 

Julie doesn't say she was denied access, she says her presence was not welcomed by forum users.

No point in her being there if she's just going to get abuse. Perhaps if the mods put a stop to that a constructive relationship could be established?