• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Spurs fans charged

paxtonwolf

paxtonwolf

Tony Marchi
Sorry if already posted, just seen this on the BBC website

Three men have been charged with racial aggravation in connection with chanting the word "yid" at two football matches.
Gary Whybrow, 31, of west London, Sam Parsons, 24, of Amersham, and Peter Ditchman, 52, of Bishop's Stortford, were charged with using threatening, abusive or insulting words.
The word, meaning Jew, was allegedly used at Tottenham Hotspur matches against FC Sheriff and West Ham United.
The three men are due before Hendon Magistrates' Court on 4 February.
"The alleged offences were racially aggravated within the terms of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998", the Metropolitan Police said.


ffs, go out and find some proper criminals. what a joke
 
As always, it's simply a matter of context.

In itself, 'Yid' is not a threatening, abusive or insulting word.
 
If the court treat this in the way it should. The fact that it was not racially instigated and was in fact the opposite then they will dismiss the case or find them not guilty. This could then set a presidence for any future cases and make them not worth having.

So lets hope for some common sense from the Judge here.
 
Sandman said:
If the court treat this in the way it should. The fact that it was not racially instigated and was in fact the opposite then they will dismiss the case or find them not guilty. This could then set a presidence for any future cases and make them not worth having.

So lets hope for some common sense from the Judge here.
Click to expand...

Agreed!
 
Sandman said:
If the court treat this in the way it should. The fact that it was not racially instigated and was in fact the opposite then they will dismiss the case or find them not guilty. This could then set a presidence for any future cases and make them not worth having.

So lets hope for some common sense from the Judge here.
Click to expand...


Magistrate seeing sense? Chance would be a fine thing.
 
monkeybarry said:
Only.magistrates.

Probably being made spacegoats, fine and record, so police can say they didn't ignore the issue entirely.
Click to expand...

I don't think the police are interested in that. They've already made it clear they aren't sucked in by all this bluff caused by a Chelsea fan to distract from the overtly racist behaviour by their own gas hissing nazi fans:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...9/Tottenham-fans-told-police-Yid-Army-ok.html

I would bet my house on the fact that these three were acting idiots in some way and there is more to it than just using a three letter word. I've seen enough people acting like complete and utter pillocks in front of police at spurs, just because they have some issue with authority, to know that we've got our fair share of idiots.
 
chicken_badge said:
I don't think the police are interested in that. They've already made it clear they aren't sucked in by all this bluff caused by a Chelsea fan to distract from the overtly racist behaviour by their own gas hissing nazi fans:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...9/Tottenham-fans-told-police-Yid-Army-ok.html

I would bet my house on the fact that these three were acting idiots in some way and there is more to it than just using a three letter word. I've seen enough people acting like complete and utter pillocks in front of police at spurs, just because they have some issue with authority, to know that we've got our fair share of idiots.
Click to expand...

Thats a fair point. They could have been taunting the Police to see if they would re-act and they did. But we dont know the details and it was shortly after the whole thing blew up so could have just been a case of them doing what they were told to do. Probably they were on the concourse or outside where they could easily be identified and arrested.
 
Yea I have to agree, this seems a bit of a strange one, wouldn't be surprised if there's more to it. As the charge says it's relating to insulting, threatening and/or abusive language, yid on its own and in the normal sense spurs fans use it, could never be described as that, so I reckon there's more to it.
 
On TV when Defoe came onto the pitch they focussed on a teenage girl in the stand, she was standing up and shouting "Yiddo, yiddo" along with half of the stadium.

Surely she will be locked in the tower for the rest of her life for being so unruly in public? Poor girl.

What a joke, fingers crossed this is seen for what it is.
 
This is an important case, and I'd hope that the Trust and/or club was making sure that they had good legal representation, as even if this does not set a legal precedent due to the facts of the case (and it may well do) the media will treat it as such.

Harassment, alarm or distress.

(1)A person is guilty of an offence if he—

(a)uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour, or

(b)displays any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening, abusive or insulting,

within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress thereby.

(2)An offence under this section may be committed in a public or a private place, except that no offence is committed where the words or behaviour are used, or the writing, sign or other visible representation is displayed, by a person inside a dwelling and the other person is also inside that or another dwelling.

(3)It is a defence for the accused to prove—

(a)that he had no reason to believe that there was any person within hearing or sight who was likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress, or

(b)that he was inside a dwelling and had no reason to believe that the words or behaviour used, or the writing, sign or other visible representation displayed, would be heard or seen by a person outside that or any other dwelling, or

(c)that his conduct was reasonable.

(4)A constable may arrest a person without warrant if—

(a)he engages in offensive conduct which [F1a] constable warns him to stop, and

(b)he engages in further offensive conduct immediately or shortly after the warning.

(5)In subsection (4) “offensive conduct” means conduct the constable reasonably suspects to constitute an offence under this section, and the conduct mentioned in paragraph (a) and the further conduct need not be of the same nature.

(6)A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale.


I'd like to know who the "person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress thereby" was. And if S5 of the public order act was enforced at every football game what about all the "banter" between home and away supporters which I'm sure some fans find alarming and distressful?
 
Sandman said:
Thats a fair point. They could have been taunting the Police to see if they would re-act and they did. But we dont know the details and it was shortly after the whole thing blew up so could have just been a case of them doing what they were told to do. Probably they were on the concourse or outside where they could easily be identified and arrested.
Click to expand...

Case law has shown that police officers are supposedly more tolerant/less sensitive to abuse etc for the purposes of S5.. and for the racial aggravation element presumably they would have had to be Jewish police officers - or can anyone be racially offended these days, even if not of the relevant race.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back