Bignall in trouble?

[RoyalBlue]

He definitely did it, IMHO

OK, that's Maguire on the jury. 11 to go.

Any more fair-minded, listen-to-all-the-evidence-first members of the public care to volunteer?

He should be fine if he ends up with a Gerrard type jury!

[The Rouge]

I thought I was the person that got to rain down justice.

[tink]

The third guy was and the CPS say they will now be presenting no evidence so the weapons charge is dropped.But that's not Bignall anyway

Technically, the weapons charge isn't dropped. It's lying on file, which means the judge decided it wouldn't be in the public interest to try the 3rd defendant on that charge, i.e. the other offences with which he has been charged are more serious. the weapons charge will stay on his file so in theory the CPS could pick it up again at a later date if they wanted to

[Row Z Royal]

But why "form an opinion" at all, without actual evidence,
presumably you weren't there, weren't the person attacked,
don't know anyone who was actually a witness, haven't seen
the police files or attended the first court hearing.


So on a very minimal newspaper report you "decide",
basically prejudice yourself, even though you're
"happy to be wrong..."

Why are you writing
like that?

[Maguire]

But why "form an opinion" at all, without actual evidence,
presumably you weren't there, weren't the person attacked,
don't know anyone who was actually a witness, haven't seen
the police files or attended the first court hearing.

So on a very minimal newspaper report you "decide",
basically prejudice yourself, even though you're
"happy to be wrong..."

Come on, it's not often these type of people are innocent.

[roadrunner]

The court have sentenced him to a months loan to Southampton.

[toppy]

The court have sentenced him to a months loan to Southampton.

[Muskrat]

But why "form an opinion" at all, without actual evidence,
presumably you weren't there, weren't the person attacked,
don't know anyone who was actually a witness, haven't seen
the police files or attended the first court hearing.


So on a very minimal newspaper report you "decide",
basically prejudice yourself, even though you're
"happy to be wrong..."

Why are you writing
like that?

Translated for you into Iambic pentameter:

Wherefore is thou opinion formest, without thine eyes informing thee?
If thou was not apparent nor wronged thineself,
Is ignorant of a witnesses testament
Or havest appeared 'fore the Sherriff.

And yet thy condemn on a mere hearsay
And prove thyself a knave who is yet,
"Contented to be proven wrong"..

HTH

[Snowball]

But why "form an opinion" at all, without actual evidence,
presumably you weren't there, weren't the person attacked,
don't know anyone who was actually a witness, haven't seen
the police files or attended the first court hearing.


So on a very minimal newspaper report you "decide",
basically prejudice yourself, even though you're
"happy to be wrong..."

Why are you writing
like that?

Why
not?

[Snowball]

But why "form an opinion" at all, without actual evidence,
presumably you weren't there, weren't the person attacked,
don't know anyone who was actually a witness, haven't seen
the police files or attended the first court hearing.

So on a very minimal newspaper report you "decide",
basically prejudice yourself, even though you're
"happy to be wrong..."

Come on, it's not often these type of people are innocent.

You mean cos they is ....?

[Snowball]

Translated for you into Iambic pentameter:

Wherefore is thou opinion formest, without thine eyes informing thee?
If thou was not apparent nor wronged thineself,
Is ignorant of a witnesses testament
Or havest appeared 'fore the Sherriff.

And yet thy condemn on a mere hearsay
And prove thyself a knave who is yet,
"Contented to be proven wrong"..

HTH

Cool, Suh!

[It Is What It Is]

Translated for you into Iambic pentameter:

Wherefore is thou opinion formest, without thine eyes informing thee?
If thou was not apparent nor wronged thineself,
Is ignorant of a witnesses testament
Or havest appeared 'fore the Sherriff.

And yet thy condemn on a mere hearsay
And prove thyself a knave who is yet,
"Contented to be proven wrong"..

[oldebiscuit]

yeah, and like leroy lita





bit of a pattern here...

rfcjoe, please tell me what that pattern is?

[Bill Oddie]

rfcjoe, please tell me what that pattern is?

yeah, and like leroy lita





bit of a pattern here...

rfcjoe, please tell me what that pattern is?

Get a life rather that fishing. It's people like you who have turned this country into the rubbish PC / walking on egg shell dump it has become. Take it for what it was, a humourous slightly dark comment and move on

[Victor Meldrew]

The third guy was and the CPS say they will now be presenting no evidence so the weapons charge is dropped.But that's not Bignall anyway

Technically, the weapons charge isn't dropped. It's lying on file, which means the judge decided it wouldn't be in the public interest to try the 3rd defendant on that charge, i.e. the other offences with which he has been charged are more serious. the weapons charge will stay on his file so in theory the CPS could pick it up again at a later date if they wanted to

Although we don't know the facts it is said that you judge people by the company that they keep so hopefully it will be a good thing that he has gone off to Southampton although that isn't exactly the South Pole.
Saints of course off-loaded Dyer and Wright-Phillips after their misdemeanour so they have experience of dealing with bad boys and probably would have sussed out whether Bignall is a bad boy before signing him on loan.

[oldebiscuit]

rfcjoe, please tell me what that pattern is?

yeah, and like leroy lita





bit of a pattern here...

rfcjoe, please tell me what that pattern is?

Get a life rather that fishing. It's people like you who have turned this country into the rubbish PC / walking on egg shell dump it has become. Take it for what it was, a humourous slightly dark comment and move on

Got a life pal, a good one at that. But for the record, I too don't like the PC nanny state that Britain has become. I am not racist ( in fact abhor racism and religious discrimination), and in private i enjoy a good 'Stereo-type' religious or race joke. But the post, almost certainly meant as a cheeky quip, should not have been posted publicly. It was naive at best, but ignorant. Ignorance is dangerous, and posts advising people to think it is ok are ignorant. If you thought it was ok, then you too should have kept that private, not advocate racist posting as some light hearted fun. Thats all.

[Percy's Rocket]

I have to say that for such a heavy subject this thread is a laugh a minute.

and there seem to be some very knowledgable people about.

[fireman_jules]

Fackin roit, and iyms wun ov thum

[Rawlie19]

I'm simply making the point that he was NOT charged with carrying an offensive weapon

Christ, I thought I was pedantic and argumentative........

Look, the original post clearly implied that Bignall
had been carrying an offensive weapon (eg a knife)

Anyone know anything about Nicholas Bignall being in trouble with the law?
There's a guy listed at Reading Crown Court soon of that name with the same date of birth
for AOABH and having an offensive weapon alongside two other guys.

that sort of "carelessness" shouldn't go unchallenged.

Unchallenged it ends up as "accepted fact" even though

(a) Bignall WASN'T charged with having an offensive weapon

(b) The charge against the other guy (for carrying a weapon) was shelved.

It's not "pedantic" to want the truth, especially when it might
involve a 20-year old's freedom or imprisonment.

SHUT UPPPPP!!!

[Forbury Lion]

Is a contract not legally binding once it's been torn up then?

I imagine player contracts contain behaviour clauses, one of them being that the contract can be torn up/cancelled if the player gets a positive drugs test result.