Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2021 12:04:08 GMT
Along with many others, I would be interested to know who wrote the statement, and who signed it off.
No further facts about the incident were proven yesterday, so the club only needed to issue a statement about JB being absent from the club for a few days to spend time with his family.
With regard to the awful "victimless crime" quote, I did see somewhere that the Standard's court reporter had mis-quoted the Crown Prosecutor, as he would have said "victimless prosecution", and Rovers then lifted the quote from the Standard. Which of course, in no way excuses how the club tried to manipulate people with it in their press release.
|
|
|
Post by baggins on Jul 27, 2021 12:04:54 GMT
I will be very surprised if we see JB again at the Mem unless he is in the 'Away' dugout. If he’s found guilty it will be the end of his managerial career. Unless he can pick a squad from a 6' x 4' cell.
|
|
|
Post by baggins on Jul 27, 2021 12:05:32 GMT
Another Trust Pilot review of the Shop? That's one of the better ones ! That one was from me.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2021 12:06:06 GMT
I will be very surprised if we see JB again at the Mem unless he is in the 'Away' dugout. If he’s found guilty it will be the end of his managerial career. I'm sure that, at the very least, he could get a job managing a team abroad. Football can be a very shallow business at times.
|
|
|
Post by baggins on Jul 27, 2021 12:10:16 GMT
If he’s found guilty it will be the end of his managerial career. I'm sure that, at the very least, he could get a job managing a team abroad. Football can be a very shallow business at times. Does he need to bother?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2021 12:10:48 GMT
There seems to be so much anger towards the clubs statement and I understand why - personally I think it’s a poorly structured announcement as everyone focuses on the ‘victimless’ word. However, whilst I would have released something worded differently if it was me writing it, the have been clear in that they are quoting the prosecutor and it is a statement of fact in that in a case where the victim has not brought the charge , there is legally no victim.
If you are quoting - especially in a legal case - you have to use the wording and phrasing verbatim…
Now the club are clearly sticking behind JB with the clear legal construct in this country of innocent until proven guilty. If they are seen not to and the media pick up on the sentiment and JBs role becomes untenable due to pressure; then they run the risk of him then being able to sue for constructive dismissal (which as well as damages under employment law, he could sue for reputation damages and slander).
Not saying he would do anything like this but it is a risk. This is why clubs normally do not issue any statements other than facts and that they will not comment further. Im guessing the clamour for something to be released by the club from fans and media has caused a hastily written statement to be released.
It’s a poor statement sentiment wise but it is factually and legally correct.
|
|
|
Post by Okebournegas on Jul 27, 2021 12:13:29 GMT
I will attend all games until the government make it mandatory to be double jabbed for entry , Then it’ll have to be iplayer.
|
|
|
Post by lastminutewinner on Jul 27, 2021 12:14:09 GMT
If he’s found guilty it will be the end of his managerial career. I'm sure that, at the very least, he could get a job managing a team abroad. Football can be a very shallow business at times. Would give him an opportunity to try out some new accents as well
|
|
|
Post by yetigas on Jul 27, 2021 12:26:50 GMT
Thank you Strange Gas for sharing this quote. Whilst many on this forum have made more-or-less the same point, it is very powerful when it comes from the experts at Refuge. Whilst the club's poorly-thought-out statement may impact on our reputation as many have said, that is really not the main point. The real point is implied by Refuge that we maybe be encouraging perpetrators of domestic abuse to think they can get away with it without consequence. For BRFC to do that is really terrible not least for the many Gasheads who will have suffered such abuse already or who may do in the future. I would like to see BRFC issue another statement today which apologises for the wording of yesterday's statement. It would also need careful wording so as not to exacerbate the situation and would need careful vetting from both PR experts and lawyers.
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Jul 27, 2021 12:33:10 GMT
There seems to be so much anger towards the clubs statement and I understand why - personally I think it’s a poorly structured announcement as everyone focuses on the ‘victimless’ word. However, whilst I would have released something worded differently if it was me writing it, the have been clear in that they are quoting the prosecutor and it is a statement of fact in that in a case where the victim has not brought the charge , there is legally no victim. If you are quoting - especially in a legal case - you have to use the wording and phrasing verbatim… Now the club are clearly sticking behind JB with the clear legal construct in this country of innocent until proven guilty. If they are seen not to and the media pick up on the sentiment and JBs role becomes untenable due to pressure; then they run the risk of him then being able to sue for constructive dismissal (which as well as damages under employment law, he could sue for reputation damages and slander). Not saying he would do anything like this but it is a risk. This is why clubs normally do not issue any statements other than facts and that they will not comment further. Im guessing the clamour for something to be released by the club from fans and media has caused a hastily written statement to be released. It’s a poor statement sentiment wise but it is factually and legally correct. Victims don't need to bring charges. If they did no one would ever be found guilty of murder! A victimless prosecution absolutely does not mean there was no victim. It just means the potemtual victim isn't the one pursuing the case.
|
|
|
Post by albowlly on Jul 27, 2021 12:35:49 GMT
There seems to be so much anger towards the clubs statement and I understand why - personally I think it’s a poorly structured announcement as everyone focuses on the ‘victimless’ word. However, whilst I would have released something worded differently if it was me writing it, the have been clear in that they are quoting the prosecutor and it is a statement of fact in that in a case where the victim has not brought the charge , there is legally no victim. If you are quoting - especially in a legal case - you have to use the wording and phrasing verbatim… Now the club are clearly sticking behind JB with the clear legal construct in this country of innocent until proven guilty. If they are seen not to and the media pick up on the sentiment and JBs role becomes untenable due to pressure; then they run the risk of him then being able to sue for constructive dismissal (which as well as damages under employment law, he could sue for reputation damages and slander). Not saying he would do anything like this but it is a risk. This is why clubs normally do not issue any statements other than facts and that they will not comment further. Im guessing the clamour for something to be released by the club from fans and media has caused a hastily written statement to be released. It’s a poor statement sentiment wise but it is factually and legally correct. I think the club are desperate, as am I, that somehow Barton can still be manager when this season ends. Though at the moment it's more likely he won't even be manager when it begins. Hence the eagerness to jump on the misquote as it paints a brighter picture than the true quote. Mr Wael has spent a lot of money giving Barton exactly what he wants and doesn't want to have to start again if he can possibly help it. So I give the club a bit of leeway. If this turns out to be as bad as is feared only one person will have let down so many others.
|
|
pirate
Forum Legend
Posts: 18,621
|
Post by pirate on Jul 27, 2021 12:47:50 GMT
Another example of the ineptitude of Starnes. As CEO how much more of this can he preside over with impunity…the guy is a total cretin and should have fallen on his sword long ago. Disgrace.
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Jul 27, 2021 12:57:44 GMT
There seems to be so much anger towards the clubs statement and I understand why - personally I think it’s a poorly structured announcement as everyone focuses on the ‘victimless’ word. However, whilst I would have released something worded differently if it was me writing it, the have been clear in that they are quoting the prosecutor and it is a statement of fact in that in a case where the victim has not brought the charge , there is legally no victim. If you are quoting - especially in a legal case - you have to use the wording and phrasing verbatim… Now the club are clearly sticking behind JB with the clear legal construct in this country of innocent until proven guilty. If they are seen not to and the media pick up on the sentiment and JBs role becomes untenable due to pressure; then they run the risk of him then being able to sue for constructive dismissal (which as well as damages under employment law, he could sue for reputation damages and slander). Not saying he would do anything like this but it is a risk. This is why clubs normally do not issue any statements other than facts and that they will not comment further. Im guessing the clamour for something to be released by the club from fans and media has caused a hastily written statement to be released. It’s a poor statement sentiment wise but it is factually and legally correct. No. It isn't. It is a misquote and a terrible one at that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2021 13:03:00 GMT
There seems to be so much anger towards the clubs statement and I understand why - personally I think it’s a poorly structured announcement as everyone focuses on the ‘victimless’ word. However, whilst I would have released something worded differently if it was me writing it, the have been clear in that they are quoting the prosecutor and it is a statement of fact in that in a case where the victim has not brought the charge , there is legally no victim. If you are quoting - especially in a legal case - you have to use the wording and phrasing verbatim… Now the club are clearly sticking behind JB with the clear legal construct in this country of innocent until proven guilty. If they are seen not to and the media pick up on the sentiment and JBs role becomes untenable due to pressure; then they run the risk of him then being able to sue for constructive dismissal (which as well as damages under employment law, he could sue for reputation damages and slander). Not saying he would do anything like this but it is a risk. This is why clubs normally do not issue any statements other than facts and that they will not comment further. Im guessing the clamour for something to be released by the club from fans and media has caused a hastily written statement to be released. It’s a poor statement sentiment wise but it is factually and legally correct. No. It isn't. It is a misquote and a terrible one at that. I would like to think that the statement was prepared in conjunction with a legal expert, but, if so, surely they would have picked up on the fact that the Standard had either misquoted the Crown Prosecution or it was a typographical error?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2021 13:03:02 GMT
There seems to be so much anger towards the clubs statement and I understand why - personally I think it’s a poorly structured announcement as everyone focuses on the ‘victimless’ word. However, whilst I would have released something worded differently if it was me writing it, the have been clear in that they are quoting the prosecutor and it is a statement of fact in that in a case where the victim has not brought the charge , there is legally no victim. If you are quoting - especially in a legal case - you have to use the wording and phrasing verbatim… Now the club are clearly sticking behind JB with the clear legal construct in this country of innocent until proven guilty. If they are seen not to and the media pick up on the sentiment and JBs role becomes untenable due to pressure; then they run the risk of him then being able to sue for constructive dismissal (which as well as damages under employment law, he could sue for reputation damages and slander). Not saying he would do anything like this but it is a risk. This is why clubs normally do not issue any statements other than facts and that they will not comment further. Im guessing the clamour for something to be released by the club from fans and media has caused a hastily written statement to be released. It’s a poor statement sentiment wise but it is factually and legally correct. Victims don't need to bring charges. If they did no one would ever be found guilty of murder! A victimless prosecution absolutely does not mean there was no victim. It just means the potemtual victim isn't the one pursuing the case. Completely agree Hugo and just like the club statement, my post was poorly worded! As I said, it’s a poor statement but they are quoting the prosecutor so had to use the word. Personally I wouldn’t have quoted the prosecutor but I’m guessing they’ve done that to try and show support of JB with an innocent until proven guilty concept due to the way it’s been reported and probably the amount of messages and challenges they’ve been receiving? It’s a bad statement and has backfired but they have used a quote (naively) and the anger towards the use of the word victimless shouldn’t necessarily be solely on them - it was poor from the prosecutor to use it too in my eyes. I guess all I’m saying is before everyone jumps on a lynching bandwagon, we should hear the full story and judge actions from there
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Jul 27, 2021 13:14:23 GMT
No. It isn't. It is a misquote and a terrible one at that. I would like to think that the statement was prepared in conjunction with a legal expert, but, if so, surely they would have picked up on the fact that the Standard had either misquoted the Crown Prosecution or it was a typographical error? I think the Standard have edited the online article because I can't find reference to it there now so someone may have realised the balls up. I doubt very much though that the Standard nor the club are bothering to spend money on legal costs to write a newspaper article or put out a simple statement.
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Jul 27, 2021 13:16:15 GMT
Victims don't need to bring charges. If they did no one would ever be found guilty of murder! A victimless prosecution absolutely does not mean there was no victim. It just means the potemtual victim isn't the one pursuing the case. Completely agree Hugo and just like the club statement, my post was poorly worded! As I said, it’s a poor statement but they are quoting the prosecutor so had to use the word. Personally I wouldn’t have quoted the prosecutor but I’m guessing they’ve done that to try and show support of JB with an innocent until proven guilty concept due to the way it’s been reported and probably the amount of messages and challenges they’ve been receiving? It’s a bad statement and has backfired but they have used a quote (naively) and the anger towards the use of the word victimless shouldn’t necessarily be solely on them - it was poor from the prosecutor to use it too in my eyes. I guess all I’m saying is before everyone jumps on a lynching bandwagon, we should hear the full story and judge actions from there No they're not. They were quoting an article in the Standard which appears to have now been amended to remove that line - probably because it was a misquote.
|
|
|
Post by legas on Jul 27, 2021 13:29:35 GMT
Not read every post so apologies if I’ve missed it but do we know when Joey let his employers know that this was coming up? If only at the weekend then I can kind of forgive a bit a headless chicken response (although would question whether withholding the information is a sackable offence). If they’d had plenty of notice to consider all eventualities and prepare a considered response to each, then it really is a sad state of affairs.
|
|
|
Post by mariobalotelli on Jul 27, 2021 13:31:45 GMT
The way I see it is innocent until proven guilty, in which case if he’s proven guilty we’ve got no choice but to terminate his contract. For sure, but while there’s a investigation of this nature pending he should have been suspended. The club have handled this horribly.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2021 14:04:31 GMT
I would like to think that the statement was prepared in conjunction with a legal expert, but, if so, surely they would have picked up on the fact that the Standard had either misquoted the Crown Prosecution or it was a typographical error? I think the Standard have edited the online article because I can't find reference to it there now so someone may have realised the balls up. I doubt very much though that the Standard nor the club are bothering to spend money on legal costs to write a newspaper article or put out a simple statement. To add to your post LJG they actually picked one word and posted it, Victimless. The prosecutor also said that Mrs Barton had been grabbed by the throat, pushed to the floor and kicked in the head resulting in a bloody nose and a golf ball size bruise to the side of the head. The true and legal sense of the word Victimless has now been explained and most understand the legal meaning although I would prefer it if they came up with a different terminology in case some other crass media boffin tries to use it as some form of excuse again.
|
|