Steven Gerrard,court case.

[clapham_gull]

was it assult

The assault charge was dropped

I have no idea what has happened here, but perhaps our boys and girls in blue can fill us in.

Theorectically, if a victim of "an assault" didn't want to make a complaint then the Police may still pursue an affray charge (which is a public order offence) if they think a fight in a public place is serious enough.

The charge of affray is much more serious than common assault.

Can anyone confirm...

 

[siclean]

i'm sure you're right, but i'm also sure that money will change hands somewhere down the line to ensure the best possible outcome.[/quo CHEERS STEVIE !!

 

[dougdeep]

I'm sure you're right, but I'm also sure that money will change hands somewhere down the line to ensure the best possible outcome.

But of course, it's the celebrity way.

 

[clapham_gull]

So I'd imagine that any talk of compensation, out of court settlements is completely irrelavent to the charge in hand.

 

[patchamalbion]

no chance hes going to prison!
a deal will be made and he will probably pay a large fine and costs

 

[beorhthelm]

how many boxers start throwing uppercuts at someone only after their mate has thrown 14 stone of elbow in their opponents face first. ...

...It's difficult to see from the CCTV footage what's exactly going on, but Gerrard made a statement in the police station saying he hit man, missed twice because he believed he was going to be hit.

so we have our resonable doubt don't we? someone else (who has pleaded gulity) has stuck the first blow, self defense (from misdirected attack) can be claimed and theres bugger all you can tell from the CCTV other than Gerrard was there, not in itself enough for affray.

 

[clapham_gull]

no chance hes going to prison!
a deal will be made and he will probably pay a large fine and costs

deal with who ?

 

[clapham_gull]

so we have our resonable doubt don't we? someone else (who has pleaded gulity) has stuck the first blow, self defense (from misdirected attack) can be claimed and theres bugger all you can tell from the CCTV other than Gerrard was there, not in itself enough for affray.

Not suggesting I know what happened, simply suggesting that he hasn't been charged with assault.

Jury aren't going to be deciding on whose fault it was, or who really hit who first.

It's a case of whether an affray took place.

Technically, I don't think you even have to hit someone to be charged with it.

It's going to have to be a case of deciding his degree of involvement in the charge the others have already pleaded guilty to.

 

[Leekbrookgull]

What did Micky Quinn go down for ? Remember him ?

 

[willingdon_seagull]

Send him down. He should be made an example of like the rest of the scumbags you see behaving like this in many towns over the course of a weekend evening.

 

[kevtherev]

What did Micky Quinn go down for ? Remember him ?

scoreing a 1st half hat-trick in front of the north stand wasnt it?......or was he pissed and drove in scouse land?

 

[Cheshire Cat]

Gerrard has been charged with affray, which is more serious than assault. The maximum penalty at a Crown Court is 3 years under Section 3 Public Order Act 1986.

Affray: Sentencing Manual: Legal Guidance: The Crown Prosecution Service

 

[clapham_gull]

Gerrard has been charged with affray, which is more serious than assault. The maximum penalty at a Crown Court is 3 years under Section 3 Public Order Act 1986.

Affray: Sentencing Manual: Legal Guidance: The Crown Prosecution Service

Has he been charged with affray ?

 

[Lady Whistledown]

I think you should all listen to Clapham here

In answer to some of the questions posed thus far:

-Gerrard is charged with affray, which is not the same as assault (public order offence as opposed to an offence against the person).

-the maximum sentence for affray summarily (in the magistrates' court) is 6 months, on indictment (in Crown Court, which I think is the case here, without looking) is 3 years. Nobody ever gets maximum sentences for anything, however, let alone a first conviction, as I assume this would be for Gerrard IF found guilty. Probably a trivial fine and a bit of community punishment.

-I don't know where this stuff comes from about having to prove someone entered a premises with the intent to do something to commit affray. The specific definition, should you be THAT interested, is thus:

a person is guilty of affray if he uses or threatens unlawful violence towards another and his conduct is such as would cause a person of reasonable firmness present at the scene to fear for his or her personal safety

Which basically means that the prosecution only have to prove the defendant behaved towards someone in such a manner that a hypothetical person looking on might be afraid. You don't have to prove a physical assault or even that someone looking on WAS afraid. Gerrard would have a nailed on defence to assault in that he could say he punched the other bloke because he was defending himself. His defence against the charge of affray will be slightly weaker because, from looking at the photos (and I haven't heard any of the other evidence so far so have no idea what that does to his case) he appears to be part of a group of blokes behaving in a threatening manner. He certainly doesn't appear to have detached himself from what his mates were doing as might be expected from a victimised celebrity who just wants to stay out of trouble.

As a famous footballer, however, it's no surprise he's opted for Crown Court trial: he clearly fancies his chances with a jury of Scousers as opposed to three magistrates.

 

[Lady Whistledown]

no chance hes going to prison!
a deal will be made and he will probably pay a large fine and costs

The only "deal", if you could call it that, would be if he agreed to plead guilty, which he isn't, therefore he cannot make a deal. Works in the USA, but not the same way here.

so we have our resonable doubt don't we? someone else (who has pleaded gulity) has stuck the first blow, self defense (from misdirected attack) can be claimed and theres bugger all you can tell from the CCTV other than Gerrard was there, not in itself enough for affray.

As I said, you only have to prove that he acted in a threatening manner towards another person, using evidence of his words and conduct. The CCTV shows he was there, it shows he was waving his fists around and being held back by someone, it doesn't show what he said or what was said to him. Nor does it show what went on before the parties involved stepped in front of the cameras. Therefore evidence is required from other witnesses to confirm what went on. I presume there are witnesses because otherwise it's unlikely there would be sufficient evidence to provide a reasonable prospect of conviction (the CPS test). CCTV alone can neither acquit nor convict him in this case.

 

[clapham_gull]

I think you should all listen to Clapham here

In answer to some of the questions posed thus far:

-Gerrard is charged with affray, which is not the same as assault (public order offence as opposed to an offence against the person).

-the maximum sentence for affray summarily (in the magistrates' court) is 6 months, on indictment (in Crown Court, which I think is the case here, without looking) is 3 years. Nobody ever gets maximum sentences for anything, however, let alone a first conviction, as I assume this would be for Gerrard IF found guilty. Probably a trivial fine and a bit of community punishment.

-I don't know where this stuff comes from about having to prove someone entered a premises with the intent to do something to commit affray. The specific definition, should you be THAT interested, is thus:

a person is guilty of affray if he uses or threatens unlawful violence towards another and his conduct is such as would cause a person of reasonable firmness present at the scene to fear for his or her personal safety

Which basically means that the prosecution only have to prove the defendant behaved towards someone in such a manner that a hypothetical person looking on might be afraid. You don't have to prove a physical assault or even that someone looking on WAS afraid. Gerrard would have a nailed on defence to assault in that he could say he punched the other bloke because he was defending himself. His defence against the charge of affray will be slightly weaker because, from looking at the photos (and I haven't heard any of the other evidence so far so have no idea what that does to his case) he appears to be part of a group of blokes behaving in a threatening manner. He certainly doesn't appear to have detached himself from what his mates were doing as might be expected from a victimised celebrity who just wants to stay out of trouble.

As a famous footballer, however, it's no surprise he's opted for Crown Court trial: he clearly fancies his chances with a jury of Scousers as opposed to three magistrates.

Ah yes, I've just remembered the "reasonable firmness" bit.

 

[Cheshire Cat]

Gerrard faces charges over 'brawl'
Jul 20 2009

Premiership star Steven Gerrard is due to appear in court to face trial over his alleged involvement in a nightclub brawl.

The Liverpool and England player faces a single charge of affray at Liverpool Crown Court.

It is alleged Gerrard, 29, was involved in a melee that saw businessman Marcus McGee, 34, lose a tooth and sustain facial cuts.

The midfielder was at the Lounge Inn, Southport, celebrating Liverpool's 5-1 win over Newcastle United when trouble flared in the early hours of December 29.

The married father-of-two will appear with six other defendants who are all also charged with affray.

They are Accrington Stanley players - goalkeeper Ian Dunbavin, 28, of Guildford Road, Southport, and midfielder Robert Grant, 18, of Enstone Avenue, Litherland - and John Doran, 29, of Woodlands Road, and Ian Smith, 19, of Hilary Avenue, both Huyton, Merseyside; John McGrattan, 33, of Rimmer Avenue, and Paul McGrattan, 31, of Linden Drive, both Huyton.

Liverpool Daily Post.co.uk - News - UK World News - Gerrard faces charges over 'brawl'

Liverpool Daily Post.co.uk - News - Liverpool News - Liverpool FCs Steven Gerrard claims bar attack was in self-defence

All the other defendants have already pleaded guilty to affray and threatening behaviour and will be sentenced on 7 August.

Liverpool Daily Post.co.uk - News - Liverpool News - Liverpool FC's Steven Gerrard court case: Six plead guilty to affray and threatening behaviour charges

 

[Lady Whistledown]

Ah yes, I've just remembered the "reasonable firmness" bit.

Yes, so not including people who are solely concerned with the delicate children of Mile Oak. They must be reasonably firm

 

[clapham_gull]

Yes, so not including people who are solely concerned with the delicate children of Mile Oak. They must be reasonably firm

I know that area of Southport very well and what with the high OAP population I'd imagine most of the residents havent experienced anything reasonably firm for years.

 

[auschr]

Stevie G is above the law