just been assaulted

in the USA you could have blown his brains out quite legally!! GO USA!!!

i would have just knifed the **** my self!!

Phil, forgot to say, Nice Hat!

Ticket or not, anyone wearing one of those needs to be assaulted immediately. With prejudice…

Do you have to buy a ticket before you board a train now? Or do you still purchase one from the conductor.

In Scotland you can buy one from the conductor

In Scotland you can buy one from the conductor

Im confused now. Its at least 20 years since I caught a train.
I read the first post in the thread
So the guy has not got a return ticket how is this bad? He can buy a return ticket can he not?

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/fare-dodger-train-tussle-internet-hit-043334186.html

compositepro – Member
Im confused now. Its at least 20 years since I caught a train.
I read the first post in the thread
So the guy has not got a return ticket how is this bad? He can buy a return ticket can he not?

Is Scotland the only place with unmanned stations?

What we don’t know is the conversation that went on before the video started. I think we have to assume that he was refusing to buy one, hence repeatedly using the excuse he already had a valid ticket.

He says in the video that he doesn’t have any money.

here’s a new angle.

because of the media furore about this, big man gets charged with assault and wee man gets a fine. all because a 3rd party put the vid on the internet without big man or wee mans consent.

in future, who is less likely to act as they did?

I once saw a bloke getting a good ticking off and fine for not buying a ticket on the platform In all honesty I never knew you had to buy a ticket on certain platforms before alighting a train.

Either way the guy who’s face is now all over t’internet might be facing an assault charge eh? wonder if it had been such a video hit if the yoof had towelled the bloke all over the inside of the carriage.

Big man didnt assault anyone

There’s a well founded clause in the law that anyone can use reasonable force in the prevention of crime – laddo was breaking the law by travelling without a fare, big man stopped him, job jobbed.

The big guy wont be getting charged with assault.

Hopefully he’ll get a mention in the Queen’s New Year Honours.

A wee dick, with no fear of anyone, is inconveniencing everyone else and acting the big man to an old guy.

Then the proper big man steps in. A refreshing sight when most people would avoid getting involved at all costs or wouldn’t touch him because it’s “assault” (genuine LOL at those that think that btw)

The wee roaster got all he deserved. In fact he probably deserved a slap but that would have been a step too far.

btw there’s no such thing as fare dodging up here, at least on Scotrail. You can travel without a pre-purchased ticket. You just have to buy it on the train and you won’t get a discounted price. There’s no penalty or fine. Buy a ticket or get off.

Oh, and for anyone that said the better option would be for someone to buy the little scroate a ticket to sort everything out, can you Paypal me a fiver each please?

Watched that a couple of times now and it seemed quite reasonable to remove the little shit, who was being highly offensive and aggressive, in the manner it was accomplished.

The other passengers, who unlike us watching the video were actually there and had witnessed the lead-up, all seemed happy with the outcome, which for me is more important than some of the righteous bleaters on here. Maybe they would have rather it was left to the ageing ticket inspector who had to put up with the abuse? Would they still be complaining in that situation if it had been their wives and children who had to listen to it?

Wee guy had already committed the crime by the time big man got involved – he stopped nothing bar it all being properly dealt with (presuming Rozzers were up the road/track)

I’m not convinced it’s really assault – there may be (English 😉 ) case-law to support it but would the Police investigate/Fiscal prosecute? – that’s a more meaningful test IMO. (IIRC swearing is a Breach of the Peace)

I’d have decked them both of course 😎

I’d have decked them both of course

I’d have done all three of them

Blimey you’ve made it on to the Jeremy Vine show.

And just been on ITV News too !

Of course its an assualt.

yes you can use reasonable force to prevent a crime – it must be commensurate, proportionate and reasonable – and a non voilent crime means that manhandling him is not reasonable.

Teh crime of not having a ticket and refusing to move is of less gravity thaqt the assult therefore it fails the test.

am i wearing my sexy hat?

Reasonable force TJ. The little guy actually had a clenched fist so he would have been justified in giving him a dig but to his credit merely restrained and ejected him..

Its not reasoanble. Where was the threat that meant he had to be manhandled?

Your opinion only. We’ll see if there are any proceedings brought against the big guy.

Are you just defending the little turd to show how ‘right-on’ you are, or do you really believe that ejecting him was wrong?

I would far rather that it was brought to a speedy end in the way that it was than inconvenience the other passengers.

TJ: would you not agree that “whit ye gonnae dae abit it?” is a pretty standard lead up to a fight and is at least threatening behaviour?

personally i think ejecting him was right, but not the way in which he was ejected. if it was that big of a deal then the police or some kinda scottish transport authority could have met him at the next stop and dealt with the situation using the policies and procedures that had been written after (hopefully) carefully considered risk assessments.

thats pretty much the only sensible thing i want to say on this thread.

In his statement on the radio it sounds like the little guy does not intend to press charges.

Threatening behaviour is not justification for laying on of hands.

I very much doubt the will be prosecuted for the assault. I do find it interesting how many people think this is justified tho

To lay hands on someone is a big step and to do so in this situation is clearly an assault. It cannot be otherwise. if the big man had not intervened what would have happened? Nothing. Therefore the assault is not justified. You can only commit a crime to prevent a more serious one.

I am quite happy to see him ejected and applaud public spirited citizens – and I have actually done similar including laying on of hands myself – however be under no illusions its an assault to do this. teh police had been called, no one was in any danger. No need to commit the assult

Waht about if it was a woman? A child? An OAP?

Throwing stuff at someone is also assault.

Would that be a justifiable response to someone littering?

TJ: would you not agree that “whit ye gonnae dae abit it?” is a pretty standard lead up to a fight and is at least threatening behaviour?

That actually sounds like posturing and is more of a lead up to no fight, hoping the other will back down. A smack in the mouth and no questions on the other hand…..

Waht about if it was a woman? A child? An OAP?

What if….what if….. it wasn’t 🙄

and I have actually done similar including laying on of hands myself – however be under no illusions its an assault to do this

So in effect, all you really want to do is argue!

Can’t be arsed………………

Threatening behaviour is not justification for laying on of hands.

Yes it is. You don’t have to wait for someone else to throw the first punch.

Waht about if it was a woman? A child? An OAP?

🙄

Yep. Play the emotive card if you like but if any one of them is travelling without a ticket, is caught but refuses to leave the train or buy a ticket and then starts shouting, swearing and getting aggressive with the conductor then yes, they should be put off the train or the police called.

That actually sounds like posturing and is more of a lead up to no fight,

Well YMMV but in Glasgow that’s the point where you start looking for either the door or something heavy.

Teh police had already been called. There was no need to assault the guy – what would have happened if the big guy had not put him off? Nothing.; therefore no justification

Graham – you have to have a genuine fear of assault to lay on hands- and yo still commit an assault if you do so

Guys – dress it up anyway you want but its a clear assault with no defense as no crime was prevented by the assult

Threatening behaviour is not justification for laying on of hands.

Great, can you tell that to every bouncer in the country please.

TJ thinks everyone on the train should have been delayed whilst the BTP attended (plus potentially train company would have been fined for causing delays on the line by Network Rail). Others are quite happy little scum was ejected, small minority feel that scum was assaulted and big man should be charged.

Well YMMV but in Glasgow that’s the point where you start looking for either the door or something heavy.

They’d have been dropped before getting to the end of the sentence in some of the fisty-cuffs I’ve seen. Bless ’em.

TJ –

druidh – Member
Throwing stuff at someone is also assault.

Would that be a justifiable response to someone littering?

bigyinn – Member

TJ thinks everyone on the train should have been delayed whilst the BTP attended

I said that where?

Its an assult – there is no doubt. An assault occurs when you put your hands on someone without their consent.

You can claim a defence that it was justified by the need to prevent a crime. I cannot see that washing in this case as the crime prevented is lessor than the assault.

You cannot go around manhandling people simply because you have been inconvenienced

Teh police had already been called

How do you know? That isn’t mentioned in the video.

If that was the case then surely the big man was doing the wee scrote a favour? Better to have a bit of a walk home than a criminal record.

Graham – you have to have a genuine fear of assault to lay on hands- and yo still commit an assault if you do so

It may be technically “assault” (as is any form of unwanted touching I believe), but it would never be prosecuted and I seriously doubt the CPS would be remotely interested in it. (Although they might be forced to now its made the BBC News).

Druidh – pretty marginal I would say. Was it handed back to them or thrown at them or thrown into the car?

Don’t know is the answer. Handed back – no assault, thrown at them – probable assult, thrown into eh car – no assault

Not that its relevant.