Gerrard...

Status
Not open for further replies.
There wasn't insuffient evidence, all the witness's said what he did, Gerrard admitted what he did with some tame completely unbelievable excuses.

Utter joke, the only reason he wasn't kicking the guy on the floor was because his friends(and possibly security/minder types) pulled him off the guy first. if it was one of his friends that was famous that guy would have been pulled away first and Gerrard, as just the friend of someone famous, would have gotten the same punishment as the rest of them.

Infact, for me, Gerrard did the nastiest thing, his friend may have elbowed him first, but while the guy is reeling, a little dazed maybe he pulled his jumper over his head and pushed him down and started punching him, the elbow could have maybe been dodged, the rest couldn't because Gerrard put him in an indefensible position before punching him repeatedly.

Absolute and utter joke.

As for saying the jury could have been Everton fans, what do you think an Everton fan would think, the City knows what you look like, you bump into a Liverpool fan in a dark alley, you'd be worried it was a nutter fan. Now put a Everton shirt on the guy in the same alley with the nutter liverpool fan, I'd be more worried about being attack as an Everton fan than an average non football supporter.

He got off because of who he is, nothing else.

Theres a video showing "man x" punching a guy after surrounding him with his friends. Man X was identified as Gerrard by multiple witness's including Gerrard himself. The fact that he didn't kick him while the guy was on the ground doesn't mean he wasn't part of the attack and doesn't mean he wasn't guilty.
 
The trial should have been held in a different part of the country in my opinion, due to the difficulty in finding an impartial jury on Merseyside.
 
Visionary said:
The CCTV wouldn't have been the only evidence though, to me Gerrard got off lightly.
Click to expand...
Absolutely, was in response to posts saying 'what the CCTV showed' - drawing a parallel that the CCTV is far from the be-all and end-all of what is taken into consideration, as you rightly say.
 
As people have said, must have been a canny defence team:


From:
Judge Henry Globe, told the footballer he had committed "a violent and cowardly act."
Click to expand...

And:
Judge Globe told him: "You have a high profile as a footballer and you know that draws attention to you. Yet you drank to excess and behaved in an aggressive, disgraceful manner."
Click to expand...

To:
Judge Henry Globe told him: "The verdict is a credible verdict on the full facts of this case, and you walk away from this court with your reputation intact."
Click to expand...

:p
 
dirtydog said:
But not as a lawyer. Perhaps the CPS and the top barrister they had prosecuting the case are more expert at the law than you, or at least we would hope so as that is their profession.
Click to expand...

Are you on a trolling mission again dd ?

I have no desires to consider myself in the same legal elite as a CPS senior prosecutor or a top CPS prosecutor and you and I know it would be complete rubbish to even suggest it.

I keep my head in the legal books, I have personal experience in affrays in terms of witnessing, arrest and interview process, CPS advice and subsequent trials.

I know the definition of Affray and the evidence and mens rea required and I am simply not convinced that Steven Gerrard is guilty of Affray.
 
drunkenmaster said:
As for saying the jury could have been Everton fans, what do you think an Everton fan would think, the City knows what you look like, you bump into a Liverpool fan in a dark alley, you'd be worried it was a nutter fan. Now put a Everton shirt on the guy in the same alley with the nutter liverpool fan, I'd be more worried about being attack as an Everton fan than an average non football supporter.
Click to expand...
:rolleyes: this thread has been truly ridiculous.
 
lol @ the laughable yet very predictable decision.

So all but one man gets charged, the multi millionaire footballer.

Haha, British justice take a bow.
 
Von Smallhausen said:
Are you on a trolling mission again dd ?

I have no desires to consider myself in the same legal elite as a CPS senior prosecutor or a top CPS prosecutor and you and I know it would be complete rubbish to even suggest it.

I keep my head in the legal books, I have personal experience in affrays in terms of witnessing, arrest and interview process, CPS advice and subsequent trials.

I know the definition of Affray and the evidence and mens rea required and I am simply not convinced that Steven Gerrard is guilty of Affray.
Click to expand...
Eh? Trolling? I'm pointing out to people that you aren't a lawyer; your posts implied you were and I wanted to disabuse people of that idea. Perhaps you intended people to infer it to give your views more weight, I don't know.

Do you think he acted in self defence, do you buy that?
 
anticonscience said:
There are Evertonians as well in Liverpool. :rolleyes:

Anyway, not guilty.

Move on.
Click to expand...

And there are people in Liverpool who don't follow football too. But any of them would be fearful of finding Gerrard guilty and suffering repercussions. That is why it should have been held in a different part of the country where the risks of that being a factor would be slim to none.
 
BaZ87 said:
Don't worry about him, he's just upset because of why Gerrard was out celebrating that night ;)
Click to expand...

I was trying to blot that out of my mind. :p

Back to Burned Alive's comment through, whilst Gerrard was let off in the eyes of law the jury's decision isn't always 'right'.

None of that matters now anyway, Gerrard is not guilty and can get on with his life...

...of missing out on trophies and beating up DJs.

;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom