Brace yourselves over Stokes...

AWAYDAY said:

Exactly my point. You think you own him like a product. Load of balls. He's a person some good, some bad like the rest of us.

Click to expand...

mothy said:

You can see 1 of them has a bottle & tries to use it at start.

+ now reported he may have been defending against 2 homophobes - which makes it all alright then to the PC brigade.

Click to expand...

marlowe said:

I don't believe the latest homophobe slant. I think it's just a desperate and cynical attempt by Stokes to portray himself as some sort of knight in shining armour standing up for the vulnerable. So we're expected to believe that he is a man of such strong moral conviction that he is prepared to risk a GBH charge to take a stand against the persecution of gays, while also considering it perfectly acceptable to publicly mock disabled children. Do me a favour. The man has just sunk to new depths with this latest desperate claim. It's despicable that he's now trying to exploit the genuine homophobia that gays have to endure for his own self interest.

Click to expand...

mothy said:

You can see 1 of them has a bottle & tries to use it at start.

+ now reported he may have been defending against 2 homophobes - which makes it all alright then to the PC brigade.

Click to expand...

lost in london said:

No I don't think that I own him.

You asked "who cares what he's done in his own time 36 hours before"

I said the people who care are those who pay him hundreds of thousands of pounds to represent their team / product. And that if you take that money, you have to accept to dance to their tune. And their tune is that they would rather you didn't get caught on camera knocking seven shades of sh*t out of someone, justified or not.

Click to expand...

Audax said:

From what we've seen, and heard, so far my opinion is that the initial sequence of events his actions were justified on grounds of self defence (which includes defending others). You can see the guy he went after has a bottle, and clear intent to use it as a weapon. Unfortunately for Stokes, however, the "self defence" defence also requires that any actions taken be a "reasonable use of force". Once the other guys were backing off, Stokes' actions in following them and then throwing the punch that decked the guy cannot be classed as reasonable use of force. At this point Stokes has switched from being the defender to being the aggressor, so he's going to find a self defence argument hard to justify.

Click to expand...

Thunder Bolt said:

Has he said it himself? Who released the latest news about it?

I hope you never serve on a jury, because you've got him hung drawn and quartered already on very little evidence.

Click to expand...

marlowe said:

Accusing me of having him hung drawn and quartered is taking what I said totally out of context. I was merely pointing out the obvious disparity between a man who openly mocks a child with severe physical and learning disabilities for other peoples' entertainment to then allegedly standing up for victims of homophobia.
As far as evidence is concerned I have seen the Harvey video with my own eyes so that is not in dispute. I have also seen various reports that he told friends he was incenced by homophobic taunts which he witnessed.
I should make clear to avoid any confusion that my comments did not in any way condemn his actions on the night but merely implied that if the homophobe argument was offered as a defence it would not in my eyes be very credible unless of course the victims of that abuse came forward as witnesses.
As far as my hanging drawing and quartering him with very little evidence if you refer back to one of my earlier posts you will see that I state quite clearly that I was prepared to accept that there may have been extenuating circumstances on the night in question which I still believe so your accusations that I have condemned him for the attack are way off the mark.
However it does not alter my opinion of him as a thoroughly unpleasant individual regardless of the motive for his actions which again I do not believe had anything to do with homophobia unless credible evidence emerges to that effect.

Click to expand...

hans kraay fan club said:

This /\/\/\

A lad I work with has a mate - lets call him Tom (because I've no idea what his actual name is).

Tom was in a local pub last year, when another local man, an absolute scrote by all accounts, started on him. A couple of seconds of handbags and they went back to their respective evenings.

When Tom left the pub an hour later, the other guy was waiting in the shadows, to punch him in the head, without warning. A brief fight followed, and Tom put the other guy on the deck. Then, as he walked away (and he'll regret this for a mighty long time) Tom gave the guy one last hard boot.

Tom is currently serving 18 months for GBH.

True story.

Click to expand...

Audax said:

FWIW, I play club cricket with an ex-cop who shares the same opinion as well. Based on what we've seen, that final punch can't be defended on grounds of "self defence". He's switched over to being the aggressor at that point. He's going to have a hard time convincing the police, CPS, and eventually a jury that he had a genuine belief that he was still acting in self defence.

Whether or not we believe his initial actions were justified (I personally believe they were, up to a point), the fact is the law is pretty specific on what can and can't be used in a "self defence" defence. Had he stopped throwing punches when his friends urged him to, he'd be in a bit of disciplinary (ECB) and media hot water, but the cops probably wouldn't be interested (because a. the injury wouldn't have happened, and b. the self-defence angle would have been strong).

Click to expand...

Thunder Bolt said:

Ah so, thoroughly unpleasant people are unpleasant in all things eh?

Click to expand...

Thunder Bolt said:

They're taking their time charging him, if it is so clear cut.

Click to expand...

Audax said:

The police will be conducting a thorough investigation before passing evidence to the CPS. It is the CPS who will issue charges if they believe there is a good chance of a conviction.

Click to expand...

Thunder Bolt said:

I know. Charging decisions can be done within 24 hours especially with cctv.

Click to expand...

marlowe said:

The police have issued a fresh appeal for two specific witnesses to come forward. Maybe they want to question them first before pressing charges. The appeal reads:
"Our enquiries into the disorder in the Queens Road/Clifton Triangle area of Bristol in the early hours of Monday are continuing. We believe there are two specific witnesses, both men, with information about what happened in the moments prior to the disorder who are yet to come forward and we'd appeal for them to do so as soon as possible."

Click to expand...

AmexRuislip said:

Only just seen video.
Stokes is a f**king idiot, I hope he gets everything he deserves thrown at him.
It pratts like this, that the younger generation of sports beginners will deem is the responsible way to act.
Absolutely mad

Click to expand...

Bry Nylon said:

Lucky he's a good cricketerist.

In any other walk of life he'd be out on his arse and scrapping about for a job. He needs to take a long hard look at where his decisions are taking him. He's in his mid-20s, not 17.

Click to expand...

Kaiser_Soze said:

I'm pretty sure that Stokes isn't the first or the last sportsperson to act like a ****. The difference is, in bygone era's camera phones didn't exist! Also, he hasn't taken the piss out of him. He's just repeated what Harvey has said!! He's not mocking him. Massive overreaction to be honest.

Click to expand...

AmexRuislip said:

I have to disagree, not an overreaction, just my honest opinion.

Click to expand...

Kaiser_Soze said:

And you've seen the link of price taking the piss out of her own son have you? Any view on that?

Click to expand...