Liverpool Backing Gerrard. This Is Wrong?

[supaseagull]

Why should he never play for England again,

That's nothing to do with the alledged assault, that's all to do with the fact that he and Lampard can't play together

 

[BensGrandad]

If he is found guilty, he shouldn't play for England again.....LFC can do whatever they wish, but the FA should make sure that FOR ONCE, decency is observed. He should be stripped of his MBE and should not be considered a representative of his country..........

This has nothing to do with him and Lampard not being able to play together.

 

[Big G]

Just because of the charge it certainly has not proven anything. Agreed there had to be grounds for the arrest in the first instance, but this can be totally malicious but the police still have to follow it up and follow procedure. In this case of being charged with assault and affray then its seems he could been charged just because he was part of the group that was involved and the police cannot establish which individual did what, but the assault took place and by their actions an affray occured.
Having been on the receiving end of similar malicious allegations it annoys me when people automatically assume guilt.

 

[Lady Whistledown]

Innocent until PROVEN guilty.

Just because he's been charged does not guarantee that he's guilty. All it proves is that the police think he's guilty, but ultimately it's for a judge and jury to decide.

Uh-uh.

The police don't make the decisions over who gets prosecuted unless it's a very low level, open and shut case, usually where the defendant has already admitted the offence in interview. Probably a simple shoplifting or something like that.

Under any other circumstances, the police then have to put all the evidence together- witness statements, the suspect's account, CCTV, forensic stuff, whatever else- and present that to the CPS. The CPS lawyer then makes the decision to charge or not based on whether there is sufficient evidence for a reasonable prospect of conviction.

I don't see what else Liverpool can do at this point other than back him, pending the result of the court case. Unless he'd broken some kind of club curfew- which I don't think he did- or their code of conduct by being out drinking, then they can't really judge him until a court has done the same.

 

[drew]

Well, the Sun article never once says that Gerrard decked the guy so it is all supposition. What a surprise, broken glass and bottles on a club floor.

Virtually every other post on this thread is by muppets who want to be judge jury and executioner without knowing all the facts. It makes you laugh. As for the FA banning him it is ludicrous when he is still an innocent man. You fear for the jury justice system in this country with so many idiots walking the streets!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Lady Whistledown]

Quote your favourite bit from The Sun's article!

Mine is "Although he competes fiercely when playing for Liverpool and England...."

Well they got it half right...

 

[Rookie]

simple fact that is that he is innocent until/if found guilty so Liverpool have every right to back him, what else are they going to do? Ridiculous to suggest they are wrong to back him, even if found guilty they won't kick him out for what in reality is a minor assault

 

[The Spanish]

I think the point that everyone is missing in their haste to show off about their understanding of the law, is that it is so predictably Liverpool to 'back' him, rather than offer no comment or a more circumspect response to the media than 'we back our own'.

Expect Celtic to join in with a Justice For The Southport One, replica shirts tied by sobbing scousers to the cringy You'll Never Walk Alone gates, and a sickeningly insincere show of Scouse solidarity irrespective of whether they have crushed people to death, brained a Bulgarian barman, or been a pissed up dickhead in a crap provincial nightclub.

No need to debate the tits off the legal aspect of that, just on whether scousers are boring self righteous morally bankrupt c unts, which should take all of 10 seconds.

 

[Bry Nylon]

I think the point that everyone is missing in their haste to show off about their understanding of the law, is that it is so predictably Liverpool to 'back' him, rather than offer no comment or be more reticent to pitch in with more a more circumspect response to the media.

Expect Celtic to join in with a Justice For The Southport One, replica shirts tied by sobbing scousers to the cringy You'll Never Walk Alone gates, and a sickeningly insincere show of Scouse solidarity irrespective of whether they have crushed people to death, brained a Bulgarian barman, or been a pissed up dickhead in a crap provincial nightclub.

No need to debate the tits off the legal aspect of that, just on whether scousers are boring self righteous morally bankrupt c unts, which should take all of 10 seconds.

Get the Pringles off the "1067" thread and get them over here; We've got a 15-pager about to blow....

 

[Frutos]

Get the Pringles off the "1067" thread and get them over here; We've got a 15-pager about to blow....

Allow me:

 

[Rookie]

I think the point that everyone is missing in their haste to show off about their understanding of the law, is that it is so predictably Liverpool to 'back' him, rather than offer no comment or a more circumspect response to the media than 'we back our own'.

Expect Celtic to join in with a Justice For The Southport One, replica shirts tied by sobbing scousers to the cringy You'll Never Walk Alone gates, and a sickeningly insincere show of Scouse solidarity irrespective of whether they have crushed people to death, brained a Bulgarian barman, or been a pissed up dickhead in a crap provincial nightclub.

No need to debate the tits off the legal aspect of that, just on whether scousers are boring self righteous morally bankrupt c unts, which should take all of 10 seconds.

oh my, is someone slightly anti Liverpool by any chance.

 

[willingdon_seagull]

I think the point that everyone is missing in their haste to show off about their understanding of the law, is that it is so predictably Liverpool to 'back' him, rather than offer no comment or a more circumspect response to the media than 'we back our own'.

Expect Celtic to join in with a Justice For The Southport One, replica shirts tied by sobbing scousers to the cringy You'll Never Walk Alone gates, and a sickeningly insincere show of Scouse solidarity irrespective of whether they have crushed people to death, brained a Bulgarian barman, or been a pissed up dickhead in a crap provincial nightclub.

No need to debate the tits off the legal aspect of that, just on whether scousers are boring self righteous morally bankrupt c unts, which should take all of 10 seconds.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

No it's not.

It's for Sefton Magistrates to decide.


Unless Gerrard can persuade them that he'd rather risk the consequences of a jury trial.

Trial by 'no smoke without fire' NSC should be the preferred mode of justice.

 

[Juan Albion]

Heaven help anyone who has his day in court - only to find 12 adrian29uks on the jury.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

SO WHAT?! As numerous others have pointed out, that doesn't mean anything. People can be charged with a crime and then found innocent you know.

Like you when you raped me

 

[Beach Hut]

Why should he be banned from ever playing for his country again, was Tony Adams ?

 

[brightonlass2009]

Because he has done something wrong that's why. It sends out the wrong message.

But he hasn't been proved to be guilty. Yes he has been charged but the law doesn't work in such a way that 'if you are charged you must be guilty'. It's not sending out the wrong message, it's just Liverpool wish to stick by him until he's found innocent or guilty.

If he's found guilty and they stick by him then it is sending out the wrong message.

And to be honest, what he's done is no worse than what Joey Barton has done.

 

[The Merry Prankster]

I think the point that everyone is missing in their haste to show off about their understanding of the law, is that it is so predictably Liverpool to 'back' him, rather than offer no comment or a more circumspect response to the media than 'we back our own'.

Expect Celtic to join in with a Justice For The Southport One, replica shirts tied by sobbing scousers to the cringy You'll Never Walk Alone gates, and a sickeningly insincere show of Scouse solidarity irrespective of whether they have crushed people to death, brained a Bulgarian barman, or been a pissed up dickhead in a crap provincial nightclub.

No need to debate the tits off the legal aspect of that, just on whether scousers are boring self righteous morally bankrupt c unts, which should take all of 10 seconds.

Beautiful Boris, beautiful.

 

[Paxton Dazo]

Throw the **** in a cell and throw away the key!!!

 

[SpidersLegs]

I think the point that everyone is missing in their haste to show off about their understanding of the law, is that it is so predictably Liverpool to 'back' him, rather than offer no comment or a more circumspect response to the media than 'we back our own'.

Expect Celtic to join in with a Justice For The Southport One, replica shirts tied by sobbing scousers to the cringy You'll Never Walk Alone gates, and a sickeningly insincere show of Scouse solidarity irrespective of whether they have crushed people to death, brained a Bulgarian barman, or been a pissed up dickhead in a crap provincial nightclub.

No need to debate the tits off the legal aspect of that, just on whether scousers are boring self righteous morally bankrupt c unts, which should take all of 10 seconds.

You are a complete f***ing twat