Jake Manthorpe
You anoy me
makes me sick
Your Avatar might aswell be Ian Huntley..
....COCK
makes me sick
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/merseyside/7788070.stm
A few of you on here seem to know all the facts and will presumably expect Jack Straw to ratify the Bulgarian Court's judgement.
Justice must be done for the victim, but the scumbag who did it to him should be the one doing the time. That might be Shields but it looks as though there is a fair chance it wasnt.
How you can compare this with the Norris/McCormick situation is beyond me. I guess to some everything is just black and white!
Just beacuse Shields has been found guilty it does not mean he is
Im sorry but he was foung guity by the Bulgarian Law system
These are the facts. A few nights after Liverpool’s Champions League win in Istanbul a waiter was attacked in Varna and police went to a nearby hotel to arrest the culprit. He wasn’t there, so they tried the adjacent room where 18-year-old Shields was sleeping.
They made him put on a white T-shirt (same colour as the attacker’s) and drove him to the crime scene where witnesses viewed him.
At the police station he was handcuffed to a radiator for 16 hours, while witnesses walked past to an ID parade. A parade made up of Shields and three swarthy Bulgarians.
There was no DNA or forensic proof, four witnesses swore he was asleep, the hotel concierge said he saw Shields go to his room, and another man, Graham Sankey, signed a confession (which his solicitors made him retract).
ITV’s Tonight show employed a retired senior UK detective to re-examine the case who said he was “appalled” at the conviction. Fair Trials Abroad called it a blatant miscarriage of justice.
Get Your Facts Right
If you think he is gulity why are the British Governmet trying to get him his deserved freedom?
Football matches should not be used as platforms for political messages. .
Just beacuse Shields has been found guilty it does not mean he is
Im sorry but he was foung guity by the Bulgarian Law system
These are the facts. A few nights after Liverpool’s Champions League win in Istanbul a waiter was attacked in Varna and police went to a nearby hotel to arrest the culprit. He wasn’t there, so they tried the adjacent room where 18-year-old Shields was sleeping.
They made him put on a white T-shirt (same colour as the attacker’s) and drove him to the crime scene where witnesses viewed him.
At the police station he was handcuffed to a radiator for 16 hours, while witnesses walked past to an ID parade. A parade made up of Shields and three swarthy Bulgarians.
There was no DNA or forensic proof, four witnesses swore he was asleep, the hotel concierge said he saw Shields go to his room, and another man, Graham Sankey, signed a confession (which his solicitors made him retract).
ITV’s Tonight show employed a retired senior UK detective to re-examine the case who said he was “appalled” at the conviction. Fair Trials Abroad called it a blatant miscarriage of justice.
Get Your Facts Right
If you think he is gulity why are the British Governmet trying to get him his deserved freedom?
makes me sick
Personally, I'm not arguing about his innocence, just that football clubs shouldn't be campaigning for those convicted of crimes. If you think that they should be able to do so if they believe the party to be innocent then that's fine, but you surely have to recognise that's a nonsense in terms of an enforcable law?
Surely anyone is entitled to state their views, political or otherwise. When Robbie Fowler wore his 'Support the Dockers' T Shirt at a match I thought he had a right to do it if it was something he believed in. It's not as if Carra and Stevie Geeeeeeee are promoting paedophilia or rape is it?
Non violent direct action was a cornerstone of the fight against Archer, and that took place at matches. I recall the Doncaster players at the final match at the Goldstone walking around with a banner offering us support, would you have fined them for that gesture?
I was talking about this last night, I cannot understand why they are showing support for a man that attempted to kill someone, whether or not he succeeded is irrelavant. For them to be showing support to someone like this is a disgrace in my opinion and should be punished heavily. As far as I can see, it was the whole Liverpool team wearing the t-shirts, does anybody know whether it was the players themselves or the clubs idea?
Do some research before posting-you never know, you might actually learn what really happened.
Somebody else wondered why a football club would campaign for somebody wrongly convicted? Probably because he was supporting the football club when he was wrongly arrested and they are now supporting him in his fight to be released. Don't condemn Liverpool players and make comparisons with an idiot like Norris who made a public gesture of support for a proven killer-the two incidents are so different. One show of support is for somebody wrongfully jailed for a crime he didn't commit-the other was an idiot showing total disrespect towards the surviving members of a family devastated by a drunk driving killer.
Also, to compare Norris's actions with the Doncaster players' support is ridiculous. Showing support for a kid killer and footballers showing support for another football club aren't remotely comparable.
I probably should have quoted more carefully... El Pres was saying that he believes that anyone should be entitled to show their views, political or otherwise. I was saying, if that is the case, why was Norris fined?
The problem, as I tried to highlight earlier, with your viewpoint is that it is entirely unenforceable. Either footballers are allowed to support whatever causes they want, or they are not allowed to support any publically.
Norris was fined because of pressure from the curtain twitching moaners who work for and complain to the FA.
I don't agree with what Norris did, but the right to free expression comes at a price. In my view his actions made him look like a twat, and 99% of people will probably share that view. Fining him is an irrelevance.
Why is the fine irrelevant when the whole topic of discussion (at least from my perspective) is asking why the FA treated one case different to another?
I agree it made him look like a twat, and I agree that this Liverpool fan is most probably innocent. I'm honestly not trying to be deliberately obtuse, I just cannot fathom any logical reason that the FA take action against one and not the other. That's what I'm trying to discuss, not the guilt or otherwise of a Liverpool fan or the correctness or otherwise of Norris' actions.