Fare-Dodger 'may' take legal action……

He was sitting 6ft away, I think he understood the situation

dosent need to verify anything, he’d had enough of listening to the abusive language of the kid, and also was supporting the conductor who had clarified to the passengers that the kid did not have a valid ticket.

so best learn how to read and listen and observe before criticising people on this ere forum

next time i get thrown out of a night club no matter how i kick off the minute a bouncer touches me should i get him arrested for assault.

Poor analogy. Bouncers are employed by the night club, and are licenced, which includes specific guidance so that actions they take remain proportionate. This is more akin to someone else in the nightclub asking a bouncer if they would like it if they threw you out, and did it themself.

Sancho – Member

next time i get thrown out of a night club no matter how i kick off the minute a bouncer touches me should i get him arrested for assault.

so long s the force the bouncer uses is the minimum needed the bouncer is fine. Thats the point here. the scrote was being a nusience – he was not going to harm anyone one. there was no need to manhandle him.

kaesae – Member

HAHAHA! HEEHEEHEE!! HOHOHO!!!

I’m sure there will be a lot of mixed feelings and opinions on this matter/incident.

However the bigman did not check the ticket for himself or even attempt to understand what was going on, he looked over checked the size of the guy and then intervened.

Had it been necessary to call the police and had the smaller man/youth tried to leave the scene, then intervention would have been acceptable.

However to act like that, without even varifying the information on the ticket or trying to gain a better understanding of the situation before choosing a course of action, is illogical as well as irrisponsible and can only be applauded by fools.

THERE WILL BE NO SHORTAGE OF APPLAUSE!!!

It is necessary that we come to understand situations before we choose our courses of action, if your parents or culture has not taught you to respect that simple obvious fact, then they have failed to teach you something of great value and importance in life!

I would have to at this point wonder, what else they have failed to teach you
Posted 14 seconds ago # Report-Post

I think it’s a fair assumption by ‘big man’ that the ticket inspector knows how to do his job, no?

Me being drunk and swearing dosent harm anyone either
TJ the bouncer is not in any legal position to touch me.
if he manhandles me in the manner of the video then that’s assault in your book.

Train companies have unbelieveably strict guidelines for frontline staff regarding passenger confrontations, they cover their backsides and then some.

This sutuation isn’t as uncommon as people think. The only reason it’s gone viral is that half of it’s been filmed and gone on th’internet, then the scrote (who was laughing about it online originally) has then squealed. The guard isn’t going to risk his job for an abusive faredodging scrote, the quickest way of resolving the situation (and therefore more attractive option for most passengers) is guard goes away and does a PA announcement along the lines of “we’re not moving until the abusive faredodger is removed by the police”, which some passengers with problem-solving skills see as an invitation to cut out the middleman (ie the copper who’s on his way from 30 miles away).

Everyone wins except the squealing scrote. Maybe if everyone paid the right fare then the ‘thieving train companies’ thread would be redundant.

The crime had already been committed.

which one, verbal abuse? fare dodging? breach of peace?

there was no need to manhandle him.

because the video clearly shows he was getting off the train of his own free will?

No sancho – it depends on what you are doing – and also again its a different situation has the bouncer has the right to remove you from the premises using minimum force. Public space / priovate space.

teh big man only has the right to use force to prevent a crime and the force must be reasonable commensurate and proportionate.

the bouncer has the right to remove you from the premises using minimum force as well as the right to use force to prevent a crime.

the force used must be reasonable commensurate and proportionate. is the critical thing

“Assault” seems to be claimed nowadays even if you just touch somebody.
The lad provoked this and could have have walked away when he was ejected from the train.But no ! He wouldn’t leave it alone and got pushed over .So what.Happens every Saturday night in town centres.
If you’re prepared to be foul mouthed and abusive then someone at some point will shut you up.

The ticket inspector would probably be justified in using force to remove the fare dodger. As such, no charge is likely to be forthcoming.

The Big Man….sadly, although he was performing a public service in removing the oik, was, in my opinion, acting outside the law. He had no justication for being involved, nor was he acting to prevent an assault or battery on the ticket inspector. The mitigation would be that he was assisting a public official, and that the injuries to oik’s face are caused by his resisting his ejection. As such, they need not have happened. I reckon that Big Man will be questioned, cautioned, no further action taken.

This is my legal opinion as an accountant, so it’s as valid as a three-pound note.

“Assault” seems to be claimed nowadays even if you just touch somebody.

You’ve never needed to touch someone to assault them.

An assault is committed when a person intentionally or recklessly causes another to apprehend the immediate infliction of unlawful force.

A battery is committed when a person intentionally and recklessly applies unlawful force to another.

in your logic every copper removing a protester ar the gypsys site should therefore be up for assault, every copper remiving a demonstrator in london up for assault, the kid was manhandled but not assaulted

Police and court officers have special powers to use force as part of their duties. The general public do not.

the force used must be reasonable commensurate and proportionate.i’m a nurse and don’t really know what i’m talking about, but if i keep repeating myself people will think i’m right is the critical thing

https://www.facebook.com/sammain16?sk=wall

then what are you doing here? sorry but admitting to a lack of knowledge is simply not good enough. you have your opinions, state them as fact and be done with it. if any questions you, just post some numbers or invent a quote or two.

Sorry.

I’ll try again –

The force was reasonable, commensurate and proportionate. FACT

Better? 🙂

Nickf, that’s a reasonable enterpretation, but could big mans ‘justification for getting involved’ be that he clearly asked the conductor if he would like the oil removed, and that the conductor said yes? I would err on the side of yes, personally.

the bouncer dosent have the right to manhandle me and push me out the door as that would be assault as you have stated.
in fact they have the same rights as the big man in the video
and my being drunk and abusive and swearing is not a crime so by your logic we may see a string of assault charges being brought,

or maybe youre wrong on this one and nothing will happen.

Sancho – can you read?

the bouncer has the right to remove you from the premises using minimum force. its not a comparable situation.

there is also a right ( and duty) under common law to use force to prevent a crime. this force must be commensurate with the crime committed, it must be proportionate to the risk of harm if the crime is not stopped and it must be reasonable.

http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/s_to_u/self_defence/#Reasonable_Force
http://www.protectingyourself.co.uk/law-on-using-force-against-someone-committing-a-crime.html

Fair dodging is a cost the train company should choose to absorb, or they should implement better systems to deal with it. Stopping the train and inconveniencing the 99% who HAVE paid their fare is the wrong way to go about it, but of course Scotrail will see it as the right way as it costs them the least money… 🙄

There’d definitely be no legal justification if the guard had touched him. What will happen now in the internal investigation is that the guard will have submitted a written report, the CCTV of the train will be examined, the kid will be contacted and asked for evidence of what tickets he bought for his journey. The ticket(s) can be traced back to where they were sold, if it was a booking office (which it must have been from what the kid says – you can’t buy single tickets from elsewhere to Town A from a ticket machine in Town A) then the booking office staff will be asked what they remember.

If the train company decide to press charges he’ll end up with a fine of several hundred quid minimum (based on the entertaining accounts of selected prosecuations that appear in our company newsletter) and a criminal record for his fare evasion and abusive language.

‘Public servants’ rather than public officials if you don’t mind…

Oh and stopping the train even for five minutes would have cost Scotrail far more than the alleged fare owed, the amount per minute differs but can range from a few quid per minute to £££. Google ‘delay attribution’.

some good simple guidance here
http://sixthformlaw.info/01_modules/mod3a/3_50_non_fatal/04_assaults_defence_use_force.htm

Nice link TJ, doesn’t reeeally prove that you are right though, eh?

was the use of force necessary in the circumstances, i.e. Was there a need for any force at all?

that would be yes then…

and
was the force used reasonable in the circumstances?

yes again, bearing in mind that;

The courts have indicated that both questions are to answered on the basis of the facts as the accused honestly believed them to be (R v Williams (G) 78 Cr App R 276), (R. v Oatbridge, 94 Cr App R 367).

Cheers!

which one, verbal abuse? fare dodging? breach of peace?

The first and third questions are the same. Both crimes had already been committed. Could you explain how the fireman was helping to prevent a crime?

because the video clearly shows he was getting off the train of his own free will?

Non sequitur. You’ll ned to explain why he needed to be thrown off the train.

joeegg – Member

“Assault” seems to be claimed nowadays even if you just touch somebody.
The lad provoked this and could have have walked away when he was ejected from the train.But no ! He wouldn’t leave it alone and got pushed over .So what.Happens every Saturday night in town centres.
If you’re prepared to be foul mouthed and abusive then someone at some point will shut you up.

Pretty sums up my thinking. Far too much hand wringing about the lads rights and not enough about everybody elses on the train who had to put up with the consequencies of his actions.

I can TJ, but I dont think youre taking in what is being said.
you are sticking to your belief which is fine, but I feel you will be proved wrong that an assault was committed.

Also a bouncer does not have any rights different to the big man.
both civilians no legal difference.
if this is assault then a bouncer removing someone from a club is assault purely because they manhandled them in your logic.

“was the use of force necessary in the circumstances, i.e. Was there a need for any force at all?”

that would be yes then…

Errmmm- why was there a need for force? what would have happened if the big man did not use force?

Personally whislt I don’t condone violence I do wholeheartedly support common sense. Frankly from what I’ve seen and heard ejecting the scrote from the train was common sense, and frankly if a bit more common sense were to be applied a bit more frequently without endless droning afterwards about rights we’d probably all rest a little easier in our beds.

No sancho. its you that is not taking it in.

The situation is different because the bouncer is removing you from private premises.

Seems to me from accounts so far that the conductor who held up the train in some bizarre form of collective punishment and the (according to my paper)investment banker who threw the university student off the train have both acted way more improperly and disproportionately compared to what it is claimed the kid did.

So its actually a case of burly investment banker (probably used to pushing people around) bullies young kid..I’d be anticipating a successful assault prosecution on this one.

Berm Bandit – Member

Personally whislt I don’t condone violence I do wholeheartedly support common sense. Frankly from what I’ve seen and heard ejecting the scrote from the train was common sense, and frankly if a bit more common sense were to be applied a bit more frequently without endless droning afterwards about rights we’d probably all rest a little easier in our beds.

Amen

HAHAHA!

retro83 – Member

kaesae – Member

HAHAHA! HEEHEEHEE!! HOHOHO!!!

I’m sure there will be a lot of mixed feelings and opinions on this matter/incident.

However the bigman did not check the ticket for himself or even attempt to understand what was going on, he looked over checked the size of the guy and then intervened.

Had it been necessary to call the police and had the smaller man/youth tried to leave the scene, then intervention would have been acceptable.

However to act like that, without even varifying the information on the ticket or trying to gain a better understanding of the situation before choosing a course of action, is illogical as well as irrisponsible and can only be applauded by fools.

THERE WILL BE NO SHORTAGE OF APPLAUSE!!!

It is necessary that we come to understand situations before we choose our courses of action, if your parents or culture has not taught you to respect that simple obvious fact, then they have failed to teach you something of great value and importance in life!

I would have to at this point wonder, what else they have failed to teach you
Posted 14 seconds ago # Report-Post

I think it’s a fair assumption by ‘big man’ that the ticket inspector knows how to do his job, no?

I’m gonig to go with NO, D’OH!

Simply because he just gave authorisation for a complete stranger to have control over the situation 😯

Not only is he responsible for everything the bigman does after that point, he has also escalated the situation and lost all the control that he had.

Genius!!!

Q. Was fair dodger being a prick?

A. Yes

Q. Should he have been thrown off train?

A. Yes.

Only problem I can see is that the train wasn’t moving.

Gawn the Big Man!

removing him was fine IMHO the throwing him to the floor twice was the assault bit.

Could you explain how the fireman was helping to prevent a crime?

Can someone explain who “the fireman” is please ?

Is there some new chapter to this that I haven’t seen …….

the carriage is arguably a private premise too. not a public space.
yes its a public space but its owned by a private company so a bit grey on that one.

assault in private premises is no different to assault in the street TJ

Sancho – the bouncer has an absolute right to remove you from the premises using the minimum force required, the big man does not have. its not a comparable situation.

Errmmm- why was there a need for force? what would have happened if the big man did not use force?

Well as it has to be based on the facts as believed by big man at the time, we can only surmise, but he could say that it was to prevent an escalation to violence, or that it was to prevent the crime of fare dodging continuing. He could also say he was assisting the agent of the owner of the property in the eviction of an unwanted person from private property, like a bouncer, as trains are owned by someone, you have to pay to get on them, so are not just a public space. In my opinion…

Trains are called public transport. Probably for a reason.

But I still think the little gobshite should have been thrown off sooner.