If Stokes is indeed the "hero" and saved the two gay guys from a bashing, then you can understand the jury siding with his account and finding him not guilty.
But how that also absolves the other two defendants involved in the affray, I have no idea. Well, I think I do. It all comes back to the...
I believe ABH is when someone receives a physical wound (a cut, a bruise, something that heals). GBH is when someone receives a serious or lifechanging one. The fact that in this instance he knocked 2 people to the floor unconcious, he's surely lucky that ABH wasn't on the chargesheet as well...
"Affray Definition: A fight between two or more persons in a public place so as to cause terror to the public. Related Terms: Mayhem, Duel, Chance Medley. A common law criminal offence comprised of the public fighting of two or more persons to the terror of the public."
Nothing about causing it.
"A person is guilty of affray if he uses or threatens unlawful violence towards another and his conduct is such as would cause a person of reasonable firmness present at the scene to fear for his personal safety"
If the jurors decided that they would not have felt personally threatened by...
I'm finding it bizarre that the two gay guys, who were at the scene and who Stokes claims to have been just having 'banter' with and later ended up defending, have not given testimony in this case. Can't get me 'ead round that. Were I on that jury, I'd be asking why.
"I took the decision for what I did very quickly. As soon as this episode started I knew not just myself but other people could be a target of these two men. He added: "As soon as I decided to get involved, everything I did was under self-defence. I did what I could to keep myself and those...
This is what I've been waiting to hear (dunno, maybe I've missed it). Stokes's defence seems to hinge on his claim that he stepped in and defended Barry and Kai after they were being abused by Ali and Hale, and then acted in self defence when he was threatened with a bottle. So whats Barry and...
I know. I can't believe they went ahead and published that, especially the one of her shoving it up her arse :lolol:
No mention of it whatsoever in the report. The dildo is clearly the elephant in the room.
LOL, I wasn't kidding !
She was charged with assault and ABH (not affray). I had her guilty all day long, but not all of the jurors I was with were convinced. I googled her shortly AFTER I sat on the case once it was ended, and clocked her previous. She's got a chargesheet as long as your arm...
UPDATE
Just googled her. Alex Capone - she was convicted in the retrial, got 2 years, the jury took less than an hour to convict her. We spent 2 days deliberating on that one ! I bloody KNEW she was a wrong-un, her story had more holes in it than Kyle Walkers sock.
The fact that she appears to...
Yes, I found it fascinating as well. I sat in on 3 cases in the end. The first one was the affray where we acquitted him. The second trial was attempted robbery where a guy tried to snatch money from a woman at a cashpoint, but she was a bit feisty and fought him off. He changed his mind and...
It is indeed. So (for me) I also had to weigh up whether I felt this guy was dangerous. But when he was in the dock he was honest and contrite, very articulate. He also had no previous convictions for violent disorder, so this was out of character. I DID have a problem with him breaking a glass...