MalcSB
Well-Known Member
Just seen Zak has kissed and made up with Pete and Roger and is now re-employed by the Who.
Last edited:
Just seen Zak has kissed and made up with Pete and Roger and is now re-employed by the Who.Who?
Should imagine that it is statutory rape, which is having sex with a girl under the age of consent and unable to consent, rather than having sex with a woman who does not give consent.Rape can be difficult to prove in many cases too. Horrible c**t.
The circumstances surrounding his sacking were a little odd to say the least.Just seen he has kissed and made up with Pete and Roger and is now re-employed by the Who.
Just seen he has kissed and made up with Pete and Roger and is now re-employed by the Who.
Yep 22nd May at Warwick Crown Court. Hopefully he'll be going down two days before we go up.Been remanded in custody
I can feel a song coming onYep 22nd May at Warwick Crown Court. Hopefully he'll be going down two days before we go up.
You'll be surprised, legally you can talk about on going legal cases if you report the facts as per the case"Might be". I dont reckon they'll be arsed on here
I had no clue who the bloke was before now but I've had accounts who are posting screenshots of messages show up on my twitter feed. Is it wise to be putting that sort of thing into the public domain when there's an upcoming trial?You'll be surprised, legally you can talk about on going legal cases if you report the facts as per the case
You may not think it's much but this is a large Coventry City forum and it's the case against a semi famous Coventry fan. Defence lawyers have collapsed cases on less before.
Also due to the nature of the cases and the age of the victims they'll likely soon impose reporting restrictions.
This is it, most people like be fine but all it takes is one to even innocently post the wrong thing.I had no clue who the bloke was before now but I've had accounts who are posting screenshots of messages show up on my twitter feed. Is it wise to be putting that sort of thing into the public domain when there's an upcoming trial?
What forums you on?This is it, most people like be fine but all it takes is one to even innocently post the wrong thing.
Most forums I have been part of don't allow talk of upcoming and ongoing trials for that reason.
ones where all the cool kids hang outWhat forums you on?
That sounds a lot like giving an opinion on innocence or guilt in advance of a trial.Agree. He's a dirty little nonce sho will be rightly locked up.
Nope that sounds a lot like someone who saw the screenshots posted everywhere of someone texting a child.That sounds a lot like giving an opinion on innocence or guilt in advance of a trial.
Doubt it.Nope that sounds a lot like someone who saw the screenshots posted everywhere of someone texting a child.
We also don't know there will be a trial. He's most likely pleaded guilty since it's pretty indefensible and the court date is for sentencing since the magistrates didn't have the power to do so for crimes of such gravity.
Sounds like it to me but he may plead not guilty. I doubt he can pay for legal adviceNope that sounds a lot like someone who saw the screenshots posted everywhere of someone texting a child.
We also don't know there will be a trial. He's most likely pleaded guilty since it's pretty indefensible and the court date is for sentencing since the magistrates didn't have the power to do so for crimes of such gravity.
Key word there is the second “someone”.Nope that sounds a lot like someone who saw the screenshots posted everywhere of someone texting a child.
We also don't know there will be a trial. He's most likely pleaded guilty since it's pretty indefensible and the court date is for sentencing since the magistrates didn't have the power to do so for crimes of such gravity.
You kind of have to wait until they’re found guiltyI'm almost certain that calling someone a nonce for being charged with rape of a child wont be frowned upon. Mind you it is 2025
And the real key if we're being pedantic, is that my reply was in response to a quote about the texts and therefore I am referring to that 'someone' and haven't implied any namesKey word there is the second “someone”.
And even then a guilty verdict may not be definitive.You kind of have to wait until they’re found guilty
Pretty sure he was the one who asked him about the performance director and what she does, it definitely irked the owner a bitWas that guy where King clapped back at him pretty hard?
Shouldnt discuss ongoing trials as they might prejudice the outcome.
You'll be surprised, legally you can talk about on going legal cases if you report the facts as per the case
You may not think it's much but this is a large Coventry City forum and it's the case against a semi famous Coventry fan. Defence lawyers have collapsed cases on less before.
Also due to the nature of the cases and the age of the victims they'll likely soon impose reporting restrictions.
Imagine being a person that wants to be mates with somebody because they bang a drum, the woman on CWR couldn't get enough of him. Was quite obvious he was very strange after he wanted people to not walk to Wembley because he wasn't.
Didn't quite expect to that extent.
Yes Lorna Bailey - bit embarrasing
Sky Blues fans buy season ticket for Arena drummer
More than £840 has been raised by Coventry City fans to show appreciation for Lynden Holtom-Stott.www.bbc.co.uk
The police have announced publicly his name and what he's been charged with including a photo of him. It'd be a bit of a stretch to say people talking about it would prejudice the trial, otherwise why would the police release that information?
I was being sarcastic - the actual guy looks about 12
And this tbh is where I have an issue. Forget this case, more of a general point. Mud sticks (weirdly I remember Colin Stagg, Christopher Jefferies, yet not quite so easily the actual perpetrators). No details should be shared until conviction by the police, media etc in the same way there is rightly anonymity for the victim.The police have announced publicly his name and what he's been charged with including a photo of him. It'd be a bit of a stretch to say people talking about it would prejudice the trial, otherwise why would the police release that information?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?