She looks as if she is servicing the invisible man in that shot, and has his brother in her left hand too!
Disgusting Racist Attck
- Thread starter FREDBINNEY
- Start date
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
She looks as if she is servicing the invisible man in that shot, and has his brother in her left hand too!
And there we have one: a good old "if it was the other way round..." argument with absolutely nothing to support it except personal opinion.
"They would say that, wouldn't they?". Yeah, they might say that even if it didn't happen. They would definitely say it if it did happen. I don't know if it happened; you don't know if it happened.
I quite clearly said - three times! - that it was a disgusting attack. To say that it might not have been a racist attack is not mitigating that.
Billy the Fish
Technocrat
Good question.
I think what is acceptable depends on the odds of the situation. If a bird by herself with no weapons attacks you then a quick backhand or submission hold would be acceptable. If she has a bottle of a knife then fists are acceptable. If there's loads of them attacking you or your missus then anything goes, as long as everyone is on their feet.
All of these situations assume the women are of average build and height, so therefore giving up a few stone and a few inches to me. I rekon I could floor pretty much anyone under 10 stone with a quick jab, unless they've trained to fight, so these rules also apply to teenagers. A few years ago I got attacked outside Burgess Hill station by 8 pissed up 17 year olds because I looked at them (no shit!) A couple of black eyes later and they were whinging that it wasn't fair because I was bigger and older than them
User removed 4
New member
Emma west , remanded in CUSTODY, over the youtube tram rant , tell me , which case do you think is the more serious offence ? which one is more deserving of either a custodial sentence or being remanded in custody?
Sobbing woman denies tram race rant - Crime - UK - The Independent
The assault is clearly the more serious offence.
I have no idea why you think this is relevant though; being remanded in custody awaiting trial is not the same as having been sentenced to a jail term after trial. It smacks of desperation that you'd to try to compare the two.
If Emma West is found guilty but given a lesser sentence than those involved in this assault, how will your comparison stack up then?
Good question.
I think what is acceptable depends on the odds of the situation. If a bird by herself with no weapons attacks you then a quick backhand or submission hold would be acceptable. If she has a bottle of a knife then fists are acceptable. If there's loads of them attacking you or your missus then anything goes, as long as everyone is on their feet.
All of these situations assume the women are of average build and height, so therefore giving up a few stone and a few inches to me. I rekon I could floor pretty much anyone under 10 stone with a quick jab, unless they've trained to fight, so these rules also apply to teenagers. A few years ago I got attacked outside Burgess Hill station by 8 pissed up 17 year olds because I looked at them (no shit!) A couple of black eyes later and they were whinging that it wasn't fair because I was bigger and older than them
Submission hold? Love it. I've got an image in my head of getting one in some kind of WWE submission move, while you bounce of the ropes twice and perform the peoples elbow.
Not sure it would stand up in court.
Billy the Fish
Technocrat
I'm quite partial to a sleeper or the sharpshooter.
User removed 4
New member
it's relevant because Emma West who is white has been remanded in custody for drunkenly mouthing off on a tram, physically harming nobody, whereas the 5 black girls who kicked the shit out of a white girl werent remanded and didnt receive a custodial sentence, why do YOU think the somalians werent remanded and the white woman was,for an offence that was nowhere near as serious ?
keaton
Big heart, hot blood and balls. Big balls
- Nov 18, 2004
- 10,200
Well the papers are saying she was remanded for her own protection
User removed 4
New member
Really? Which ones ? I cant find any.
I have no issue with hitting women (or anyone for that matter), if i had to.
What I do have issue with is assaulting another human. It's not a case of "Oh she's a girl, can't do that" its a case of "oh she's a human, I don't really want to hurt them since I don't want to get hurt my self" however if my better half was getting attacked like that, i'd be happy to swing.
Billy the Fish
Technocrat
She's served time on remand, so her punishment is already more severe. It is a fair comparison - you asked for a comparison and bushy provided it, you can't just rubbish it because it doesn't support your opinion.
If you want to do it your way then you need to be asking why the girls in Leicester weren't held on remand. Obviously there are loads of factors affecting this, not least what previous they've all got, but it certainly supports the theory that the courts wouldn't be so lenient in the Leicester case if the racial profiles were reversed.
I'm shocked that she's been remanded for a non violent crime to be honest. Trial by media is becoming more and more prevalent in this country.
This.
I'm not a racist or anti-immigration. Quite the opposite but equal rights means equal responsibilities. The girls should be in prision. Emma West needs to sort her life out and should be punished for her crime, but the white girl getting beaten up in a racially motivated attack (because it was racially motivated) is far worse.
Both are absolutely apprehensible though.
The Large One
Who's Next?
The Mirror is reporting it.
She was remanded in custody as she has been denied bail over fears of revenge attacks.
Mind you, that is the Mirror, and not a direct quote from the Court transcript.
=====
This was reported last week...
A WOMAN accused of a racist rant was questioned by transport police at the time – but only arrested when the 'My Tram Experience' footage was viewed by millions on YouTube.
The video of Emma West, 34, apparently racially abusing black, Asian and Polish passengers while holding her four-year-old son was watched by more than 2.2 million people after it was posted on the video sharing website.
The mother of two, from Grenville Road in New Addington, was subsequently arrested and charged with a racially aggravated public order offence.
Close friend Kerry Finch told the Advertiser how the British Transport Police (BTP) were made aware of the alleged tirade at the time of the incident, which is believed to have happened three weeks ago on a tram travelling between Wimbledon and New Addington.
Officers took her off the tram and waited with her for another one. They then travelled back to New Addington on the tram with her, to meet her waiting husband. West was only arrested after the video, taken by another passenger, was posted online on Sunday.
Miss Finch said: "The way the police have handled the situation is really poor. They were fully aware of what had happened at the time but they only decided to arrest her when everyone kicked up a fuss."
A BTP spokesman said it remained unclear when the incident took place and, therefore, whether anyone had reported it at the time.
Miss Finch, 31, has also told how West went to see a therapist at the Tamworth Road Resource Centre, in West Croydon, two days after being released from a psychiatric ward in Foxley Lane, Purley.
Croydon Magistrates' Court heard on Tuesday that West has suffered from depression since she was 18.
David Ewings, defending, told the court that she had been admitted to the psychiatric ward in September.
Police asked YouTube to remove the video, following West's arrest on Monday.
Wearing a white Adidas tracksuit top, West appeared visibly distressed throughout the hearing at Croydon Magistrates' Court on Tuesday. She has yet to enter a plea and was remanded in custody while psychiatric reports are prepared. West is due to appear before Croydon Magistrates' Court again on December 6.
fork me
I have changed this
Did you watch the video at the bottom though? Full CCTV footage of the whole thing. Watching it and reading the article they could have been two different events. It was not clear who actually started it and at no point in it did I see "4 people beating the shit out of one defenceless girl".
Out of interest, where are you seeing that they weren't remanded in custody prior to the trial?
But anyway, why do I think they weren't remanded (if they weren't)? I guess there are four possibilities:
1) Because the judge thought the crime was less serious
2) Just happened to be a more lenient judge and to compare the two isn't a straight comparison
3) Because they were Muslim
4) For any one of a myriad other reasons that we don't know about because the media didn't report them
What do I think? Either 2 or 4. I guess you think it's 3?
Last edited:
That can't be held against it - the original Mail article that started this thread wasn't a directly quoting from the Court transcript either...
User removed 4
New member
I think its a mixture really , but I'm CERTAIN that Emma West was remanded because it was an offence which is deemed to be racist againsta minority, whatever the papers might like to say.
Billy the Fish
Technocrat
Interesting. Previous mental health issues are the reason for being remanded then, wonder if they think she's a suicide risk. Still seems a bit harsh bearing in mind she's got children.
Sorry, I still don't see why you use the word "minority" there as I don't see anywhere that says the girls in this attack weren't initially remanded in custody prior to trial. It certainly doesn't say that in the Mail article.
Anyway, regarding Emma West - the BBC has now also reported that the magistrate denied bail "to protect her safety". Obviously if you want to believe the magistrate was lying, that's what you believe - but to say you're "certain" seems to be pushing it a little...