BHAFC Fans given banning order....................

[The Guvnor]

I cant believe how clueless people really are, you would of had to of beem there from the very moment these russians came to the square, the video footage shows about 40seconds of russians being backed off after attacking first, thats why to contest it would be pointless. To a judge they can only see what is in front of them.

 

[Mr Blobby]

It seems from the NSC eye witness that these guys were luzzing some time before the main trouble in the the square. Seems like some people here are adding events some time after to justify their behaviour.

Your talking bollocks mate.Wait for the facts to come out before you judge them. Glad you have reached your conclusion without being there or having seen what happened? Are you a magistrate of football liaison Officer, you seam to have the perfect credentials!

 

[Guy Fawkes]

It seems from the NSC eye witness that these guys were luzzing some time before the main trouble in the the square. Seems like some people here are adding events some time after to justify their behaviour.

How do you know that the Russian fans weren't looking for English fans to fight before the Main square incident or did the Russian fans happen to come across this group and set on them before the main square confrontation? (a warm up so to speak?) Or are you implying that these Brighton fans instigated the trouble and that it would have been out of character for the Russians to have started on them first?

 

[daveinprague]

Your talking bollocks mate.Wait for the facts to come out before you judge them. Glad you have reached your conclusion without being there or having seen what happened? Are you a magistrate of football liaison Officer, you seam to have the perfect credentials!

No, I wasnt there, but an NSC poster was an eye witness, along with British police spotters. What facts will be coming out exactly?

 

[daveinprague]

How do you know that the Russian fans weren't looking for English fans to fight before the Main square incident or did the Russian fans happen to come across this group and set on them before the main square confrontation? (a warm up so to speak?) Or are you implying that these Brighton fans instigated the trouble and that it would have been out of character for the Russians to have started on them first?

On the evidence of an NSC eye witness, and the police spotters.
Those seem fairly strong
Since those were pointed out, a lot of people seem to be implying this issue was part of the main problems in the square (caused by the Russians)

 

[FalmerforAll!**]

It seems from the NSC eye witness that these guys were luzzing some time before the main trouble in the the square. Seems like some people here are adding events some time after to justify their behaviour.

Incorrect

 

[The Guvnor]

Incorrect

No luzzing

 

[daveinprague]

Incorrect

What is?

 

[Guy Fawkes]

On the evidence of an NSC eye witness, and the police spotters.
Those seem fairly strong
Since those were pointed out, a lot of people seem to be implying this issue was part of the main problems in the square (caused by the Russians)

The evidence against the Coventry fan seems fairly strong too, but he was innocent. Hard to judge fairly with incomplete information.

You see it in football a lot, player A kicks out at player B who retaliates, the officials only see player B's actions and send him off and player A gets away with it (unless there is video evidence of the whole incident which there won't always be) - the spotters evidence and video could be the defending of themselves and others after an initial assault which wasn't seen by the spotters and the filming.

Does the fact the first part wasn't seen mean that it didn't happen and the punishment to those seen in the second part is harsh as a result (possible self defence) - if there is no video evidence and only their word, are the authorities going to accept their word and not issue a banning order? How do you get justice if you have unfair evidence which doesn't show the whole thing but gives a biased view of events?

 

[FalmerforAll!**]

What is?

The accusation that "some people are adding events some time after to justify their behaviour". What has been added?

 

[The Guvnor]

who was actually there? If you wasnt then your opinion is a load of tripe. Russians attacked first, video filming starts when they get backed off, therefore it looks like brighton lads started it hence the bans. Russians return 200 handed and clump anyone in site. Then a few roads along it is running battles between england and russians.

 

[daveinprague]

The accusation that "some people are adding events some time after to justify their behaviour". What has been added?

if you read through the thread, its been implied that this issue was during the attack by Russian fans that we have all seen videos of, and they were just defending themselves during it. Eye witness on NSC says it was an hour or so before that.

 

[Saladpack Seagull]

I'm not commenting on the rights and wrongs of this case as I don't know any facts relating to it, but back in the early/mid Seventies when this sort of thing was pretty much a weekly event, I found that the best way of avoiding trouble was not to run away, as advocated by some posters, but to stand your ground with your group, exchanging insults and gestures with the opposing "mob", safe in the knowledge that only rarely would they "close" with us and actually come to blows. As a teenager then it was all about being accepted as a loyal member of your group, someone the others could rely on. Sounds daft now, I know, but that's how it was at that time and in that culture. To turn and run was to invite real trouble, especially in a strange town where you didn't know the area (just ask the West Ham ICF who didn't know their way round The Laines!). Inevitably the opposition would give chase, you'd lose your mates, and you'd get picked off individually. Thankfully the only time this happened to me all they did was nick my scarf. Today I might well have had a beating (or worse) to go with it. So, yes, if you can walk away, do it, and do it before any "situation" develops into a real confrontation. Turning and running from an opposing mob might have far worse consequences for you than standing relatively peacefully and fronting it out. Right or wrong I'm still here to tell the tale........

 

[bn1&bn3 Albion]

On the evidence of an NSC eye witness, and the police spotters.
Those seem fairly strong
Since those were pointed out, a lot of people seem to be implying this issue was part of the main problems in the square (caused by the Russians)

Yes, this was before the main confrontation with the Russians, this was with a small group who were on the hunt for English fans.

 

[FalmerforAll!**]

if you read through the thread, its been implied that this issue was during the attack by Russian fans that we have all seen videos of, and they were just defending themselves during it. Eye witness on NSC says it was an hour or so before that.

Yes, this was before the main confrontation with the Russian, this was with a small group who were on the hunt for English fans.

Ta.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

That's a good point. There are a number of "extra-territorial" offences (you can see a list here) but public order isn't one of them.
These FBOs have been awarded for what would, outside a football situation, probably result in a fine or discharge.
Forget all the "good lads" & "standing their ground" cobblers and take this outside the football bubble; if this was five pissed up plonkers having a bit of a to-do in Magaluf or Kavos, they'd be dealt with locally and that would be the end of it. If their behaviour was observed and videoed by british police who could identify them, there would be nothing they (the police) could do about it once they came home; they certainly couldn't get a court order preventing them from going on holiday for the next 5 years.
However, the biggest mistake these 5 made was not turning up at court and asking for an adjournment in order to examine the evidence, possibly take legal advice (it wouldn't cost thousands for an initial consultation) and prepare a rebuttal. If the application is presented and there is no-one there to oppose it then the magistrates are almost certain to allow it.

The Football Supporters Federation have a caseworker designed to deal with this.

I have bumped into a couple of these chaps in the past. No idea if they were reacting, over reacting, or starting trouble, but I have to say if I were with a group of friends and we came under attack, in any setting, I would fight back if I could. If I were on my own, I might use my legs more than my fists, but if you are in a group, you stick together, even if you are just providing company for your friends whilst you all get battered.
There was a recent case of a Coventry fan that fought for several years to clear his name from an incident originating inside the ground. Sometimes coppers lie, sometimes magistrates believe them.

It was the FSF who fought his corner for him. I read this case, and it was terrible the way that particular copper dealt with him (I know you posted further details in another post)

From the FSF website

If you are unjustly arrested, served with a banning order or get into any scrapes which you feel are unfair, contact Amanda Jacks, Caseworker for the FSF, via:
Email: amanda.jacks@fsf.org.uk
Twitter: [MENTION=14099]FSF[/MENTION]_faircop
Mobile: 07703 519555
Amanda is happy to take calls outside of normal office hours, including weekends.

- See more at: http://www.fsf.org.uk/campaigns/wat...-a-crime/fan-in-trouble/#sthash.jCpEZxGx.dpuf

It is not too late to appeal these banning orders, if you feel they have been given unfairly. I posted this yesterday, but nobody seemed interested. This is legal representation without cost.

 

[daveinprague]

Does he now?

According to Sussex, and Surrey police spotters, yes.

 

[The Guvnor]

According to Sussex, and Surrey police spotters, yes.

Where does it say this?

 

[daveinprague]

Where does it say this?

Not entirely sure what your asking?
FB profile pic or history of football related problems?

 

[The Guvnor]

Not entirely sure what your asking?

Where does it say he has a history of football related violence?