It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Banter Cafe, open 24hrs

page: 22
22
<< 19  20  21    23  24  25 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 10 2018 @ 10:28 AM
link   
a reply to: CornishCeltGuy



They are not from round here. They come down from Glasgow.




posted on Aug, 10 2018 @ 10:29 AM
link   
a reply to: oldcarpy



.... I know enough to know that as we have not seen all the evidence we can't form a proper opinion.


I'd agree with that.
MSM have tried to hang him out to dry in their 'unbiased' reporting of it.



Just going on blind prejudice mind, he's guilty as hell.


I'd heard through the grapevine before the trial had started that he'd been having a bit of craic with the two gay lads then the other two defendants had started being quite aggressive to the gay lads.
Stokes intervened and was then threatened with a bottle.

That's been pretty much backed up apart from Stokes has also been portrayed as quite loutish etc.

He's going down.



And Affray is a pretty serious charge.


I assure you, I know!

A couple of years ago I was supposed to start studying Criminology at a local University.
During one conversation I was informed that they had mock-up cells and courts so that students could familiarise themselves with the surroundings.
I told her not to worry as I had ample first hand experience of both....I think she was a bit taken aback and not used to people with practical knowledge of the subject!

I once represented myself at Magistrates Court down in York when charged with a very minor offence - I was in fact innocent, a friend of mine was the guilty party but I'd been arrested in a case of mistaken identity.
I was absolutely hopeless and was repeatedly informed that I couldn't ask that particular question, cost my mate twice what it should have done!

Good thing the days of me and courts are a thing of the past....I hope!



posted on Aug, 10 2018 @ 10:33 AM
link   
Anyway, I grow weary of extreme violence as I get older so if you like let me have a Knickerbocker glory on the house and I will call the boys off.

Wait a minute, I can't get through on their mobiles. Maybe no signal down there. Do you have private medical insurance?



posted on Aug, 10 2018 @ 10:38 AM
link   
a reply to: Freeborn


A long while ago when I did appear in the Magistrates Court quite a bit I got done for over 100 on the motorway. I made my way into the box and the magistrate said "Should you not be sitting over there, Mr Carpy?" I replied "Er, not today, Your Worship, I've been a naughty boy".



posted on Aug, 10 2018 @ 10:42 AM
link   
a reply to: oldcarpy
Glasgow eh? They'll be picked up at the border as soon as they open their mouths...and make sure you choose your boys well because they might not be able to resist popping into Buckfastleigh in Devon on the way for some 'tonic wine'.
We have a reciprocal agreement with Devon to resist 'outsiders', they are our buffer zone and we have zero tariffs on cream tea imports in return.
It works well...there is a special place in Dartmoor where 'rendition' of undesirables by the Devonians is commonplace, even the drug gangs from Liverpool know this. Most meetings don't make it past Taunton Deane services on the M5, Somerset boys obviously get a cut, but business is business in the South West...

EDIT
Haha, we got electricity a couple of years ago, but most deals are still done by public telephone box to public telephone box, and the pixie grapevine of course...resistance is futile mate, I hope you didn't pay your boys in advance, 'dead' money lol

edit on 10-8-2018 by CornishCeltGuy because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 10 2018 @ 10:46 AM
link   
a reply to: CornishCeltGuy


Buckfastleigh? That explains why they aren't answering their phones then.



posted on Aug, 10 2018 @ 11:02 AM
link   
a reply to: oldcarpy
Good story

I got nicked at 103 on the A30 once, had a fantastic solicitor, got 6 points on my licence and £200 fine.
I nearly skipped out of court with a beaming smile!



posted on Aug, 10 2018 @ 11:38 AM
link   
a reply to: LightSpeedDriver
Ooo, that's a new one on me, I'll have to try that. Thanks.



posted on Aug, 10 2018 @ 01:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: crayzeed
a reply to: LightSpeedDriver
Ooo, that's a new one on me, I'll have to try that. Thanks.
You never made bannofee pie???! Key ingredient, you haven't lived!



posted on Aug, 13 2018 @ 05:39 AM
link   
Is anybody there?




posted on Aug, 13 2018 @ 05:57 AM
link   
a reply to: Freeborn
Haha yes!
Top tune, totally sums up the 80's to me.
I'm hanging around like a bad smell. Doing some admin/paperwork, annual work of fiction for HMRC stuff.
Good result for Leeds on the weekend, keep it up and you could have a hell of a season. I remember when you were last top flight...yes, I'm that old lol, be good to see you back up though.



posted on Aug, 14 2018 @ 07:55 AM
link   
a reply to: Freeborn


Hey - Ben Stokes found not guilty. How about that?



posted on Aug, 14 2018 @ 08:14 AM
link   
a reply to: oldcarpy
Haha no way!
He looked guilty as sin from the CCTV to me!
Meh, I've been found not-guilty for loads of things in my previous life...didn't mean I was innocent though, just the Crown couldn't prove it beyond reasonable doubt lol



posted on Aug, 14 2018 @ 08:19 AM
link   
a reply to: CornishCeltGuy


I thought so too. Great song. I got to drive a mates 79 Trans Am once and he put this on as I was putting my foot down.



posted on Aug, 14 2018 @ 08:36 AM
link   
a reply to: oldcarpy
That is true Americana! I saw an old Trans-Am pass me the other day...I was a bit jealous I must admit.
Stoke's said all the right things in court though "I feared for my safety" and "I was defending the safety of others" lol, it's a really hard one to prove otherwise, especially if you have been sensible enough to say the same from the initial police contact to cross examination in court.
I learned many years ago that the only excuse for violence is fear in the eyes of the law, so everytime I've been involved in violence it has always been defensive and born of fear, obviously.

It's funny when US members say our self defence laws are authoritarian and restrictive, because I reckon if you are not a totally stupid muppet then the law is easy to navigate and get a not-guilty verdict, or even 'no further action' at the police station when the cops realise they are going to struggle winning a conviction.
Just never ever say you were angry, only scared lol

EDIT


edit on 14-8-2018 by CornishCeltGuy because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 14 2018 @ 08:39 AM
link   
a reply to: oldcarpy

Amazing.

I like Ben Stokes and would have done exactly the same as him in that situation, only difference is I'd now have at least three years stuck up my arse!

Just goes to show how one-sided the reporting has been.
MSM has tried its best to demonise Stokes and make him out to be some sort of enraged psychopath.

Both Stokes and Alex Hales now have to face an ECB disciplinary committee.....what's the betting they deem themselves to know better and find him guilty of something.
Innocent in the eyes of the law but guilty in the eyes of the old school tie.



posted on Aug, 14 2018 @ 08:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: FreebornInnocent in the eyes of the law but guilty in the eyes of the old school tie.

Nah, he's too important a player to lose, and he said all the right things in court.
I've got a tenner says he'll have no sanctions from the cricket authorities.

...and I don't think it's a judgement for the rich compared to the 'common man', like I said, I've been found not guilty plenty of times to know it's what you say that makes the difference. The law is easy to negotiate if you don't convict yourself by saying stupid things.
I've had transcripts of police interviews read out in court and the cops at the time strangely didn't believe what I was saying. But cut to the lawyer reading your words out to a judge and any sarcastic or insincere tone which could be intepreted from the audio tape is absent...the words themselves are the evidence, so if one is consistent to the court hearing then 'beyond reasonable doubt' is difficult to prove.



posted on Aug, 14 2018 @ 08:47 AM
link   
a reply to: Freeborn


The CPS have to show he was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt so I suppose the disciplinary thing is a lower standard of proof. Whatever, he sure is not setting a good example.



posted on Aug, 14 2018 @ 08:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: Freeborn


The CPS have to show he was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt so I suppose the disciplinary thing is a lower standard of proof. Whatever, he sure is not setting a good example.
Perhaps the cricket authorities use 'balance of probabilities' like the civil court.
That is a whole other matter, give me 'beyond reasonable doubt' anyday.
...he was drunk and messed up, no worse than I see every weekend in bar/clubland, not condoning it, but when people use ethanol they often become violent. Such is the nature of that legal recreational drug.



posted on Aug, 14 2018 @ 09:05 AM
link   
a reply to: CornishCeltGuy

To be fair, and as I think you know by now I've spent a lot of time around drinkers and drunks etc, but as a percentage the amount of drinkers who commit acts of violence is very, very small.
The amount who become complete knobheads is considerably higher!

He'll be banned for the rest of this series against India, already 2-0 up.

Don't see how they can possibly reprimand Alex Hales for anything.

My allusion to the old school tie was more about the stuffy nature of the ECB and their perception that Stokes is something of an oik.



new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 19  20  21    23  24  25 >>

log in

join