Lads in court today!!!

Quoted from STB

29 stitched up, 71 genuine convictions.

The Birmingham 6
The Grimsby 29

Quoted from 1054

[quote=40]Ive been pretty forthright and consistent in my condemnation of any sort of footy violence, but it really does seem that some and I repeat some of those involved are getting the shitty end of the stick. quote]

Are you suggesting that people are convicted without evidence of any wrongdoing?  I would suggest that those people get legal representation because I am not sure how a person could be convicted without evidence of a crime having taken place. I am not so naive to think there could not be false convictions but it seems like everyone on here convicted seems to think they are innocent and this I can't believe!!!

Loads of folk on here bang on at length about their exploits over the years in Yorkshire, GY, Liverpool, Chesterfield etc etc but then complain bitterly that others get convicted and then blame it all on PC Dodds.  All coppers I have ever known look to nick people for crimes, that is their job and that is probably how their performance is judged by their bosses.

I have been to footie matches over the years and have never had any convictions or arrests. . . . . I put this down to not committing any crimes. . . . . Not being skilled at avoiding the wrong place at the wrong time.

Out of interest, I think we have around 100 on banning orders or in nick becasue of football related violence. . . . . .what number of these do you think have been stitched up and are actually innocent?  Serious question

Dodds can and has applied to have people banned without any criminal conviction, its guilty by association or some bollox like that, so be carefull who you stand next too next time your in the beer garden when his cameras come out! mind you, you strike me more of a flask and blanket man so no need for you to worry.

Quoted from 1054

[quote=40]Ive been pretty forthright and consistent in my condemnation of any sort of footy violence, but it really does seem that some and I repeat some of those involved are getting the shitty end of the stick. quote]

Are you suggesting that people are convicted without evidence of any wrongdoing?  I would suggest that those people get legal representation because I am not sure how a person could be convicted without evidence of a crime having taken place. I am not so naive to think there could not be false convictions but it seems like everyone on here convicted seems to think they are innocent and this I can't believe!!!

Loads of folk on here bang on at length about their exploits over the years in Yorkshire, GY, Liverpool, Chesterfield etc etc but then complain bitterly that others get convicted and then blame it all on PC Dodds.  All coppers I have ever known look to nick people for crimes, that is their job and that is probably how their performance is judged by their bosses.

I have been to footie matches over the years and have never had any convictions or arrests. . . . . I put this down to not committing any crimes. . . . . Not being skilled at avoiding the wrong place at the wrong time.

Out of interest, I think we have around 100 on banning orders or in nick becasue of football related violence. . . . . .what number of these do you think have been stitched up and are actually innocent?  Serious question

I made it clear that it was only some of those given banning orders had been possibly badly done by. There also seems to be little flexibility in the sentences. It seems you get three years for a relatively minor issue and three years for more serious ones. Justice is only justice of its fair and equitable, I'm not sure this is the case in this instance.

All this PC Dodds stuff, have you thought that it is the Magistrate that decides on guilt, and it is the Magistrate that hands out the sentence, although he gets guidance, but never the less they are playing a big part in the outcomes!

Quoted from Grantham_Mariner

All this PC Dodds stuff, have you thought that it is the Magistrate that decides on guilt, and it is the Magistrate that hands out the sentence, although he gets guidance, but never the less they are playing a big part in the outcomes!

"There is a statutory obligation on every court to have regard to this guideline in a relevant case and to give reasons when imposing a sentence outside the range identified."

"This guideline is the result of an intensive and consultative process, which has at all stages beneited from the involvement of key users of the guidelines."

"Sentencing Advisory Panel and, in particular, to the members of its advisory group,  for the extensive consideration they have given, not only to detailed matters of content but also to ensuring a proper balance in the assessment of the seriousness of all the offences involved."

Quote is from Magistrates guidelines so they are given set of guidelines submitted by an advisory group, so in a nutshell 3 year automatic ban for less serious and jail for more serious.  In it there is a "Football related offences" and it does not mention being banned but fined, from

crimeline.info/app/download/.../Football+banning+orders.doc

"a banning order should only be imposed where there are strong grounds for concluding that the individual subject of the order has a propensity for taking part in football hooliganism. "


CPS Guidance to Prosecutors and Managers - Football Related Offences
There are three routes for asking the courts to impose a football banning order:
•     When the police have evidence that an individual has previously caused or been involved in violence or disorder and continues to pose a threat they can ask a magistrate’s court to impose a football banning order on the basis of an array of evidence (e.g. video recordings gathered at home or abroad, overseas convictions for violence or disorder, police intelligence reports, etc).

•     When someone has been convicted of a football related offence (that can be almost any criminal offence connected with football, committed in any location, 24 hours either side of a match), the law requires that the court imposes a banning order if it is satisfied that an order will help to prevent further football-related violence or disorder.

•     During a control period – which starts five days before an overseas match or tournament and lasts until the event has finished – the police can intercept and prevent from travelling an individual (not already subject to a banning order) when they have evidence that the person has previously been involved in violence or disorder and grounds for suspecting that the individual continues to pose a risk. Any individual so intercepted must face banning order court proceedings within 24 hours.

I think PC Dodds conviction rate needs to be assessed by someones legal department.  I'm not someone who is involved with Football violence and I don't condone it but this over zealous policing is making distrust the police.

doddsy he is a liar. tried to stitch up my mate in court. him and the goofy ginger female fio officer with glasses.
stories didn't match and the judge for once told em to stop wasting his time and threw the case out.

Quoted from TownLad87

doddsy he is a liar. tried to stitch up my mate in court. him and the goofy ginger female fio officer with glasses.
stories didn't match and the judge for once told em to stop wasting his time and threw the case out.

" like ".....

oops... best be careful... dont want Pc Ploddy Dodd on my case....  

Quoted from Marinerz93

"There is a statutory obligation on every court to have regard to this guideline in a relevant case and to give reasons when imposing a sentence outside the range identified."

"This guideline is the result of an intensive and consultative process, which has at all stages beneited from the involvement of key users of the guidelines."

"Sentencing Advisory Panel and, in particular, to the members of its advisory group,  for the extensive consideration they have given, not only to detailed matters of content but also to ensuring a proper balance in the assessment of the seriousness of all the offences involved."

Quote is from Magistrates guidelines so they are given set of guidelines submitted by an advisory group, so in a nutshell 3 year automatic ban for less serious and jail for more serious.  In it there is a "Football related offences" and it does not mention being banned but fined, from

crimeline.info/app/download/.../Football+banning+orders.doc

"a banning order should only be imposed where there are strong grounds for concluding that the individual subject of the order has a propensity for taking part in football hooliganism. "


CPS Guidance to Prosecutors and Managers - Football Related Offences
There are three routes for asking the courts to impose a football banning order:
•     When the police have evidence that an individual has previously caused or been involved in violence or disorder and continues to pose a threat they can ask a magistrate’s court to impose a football banning order on the basis of an array of evidence (e.g. video recordings gathered at home or abroad, overseas convictions for violence or disorder, police intelligence reports, etc).

•     When someone has been convicted of a football related offence (that can be almost any criminal offence connected with football, committed in any location, 24 hours either side of a match), the law requires that the court imposes a banning order if it is satisfied that an order will help to prevent further football-related violence or disorder.

•     During a control period – which starts five days before an overseas match or tournament and lasts until the event has finished – the police can intercept and prevent from travelling an individual (not already subject to a banning order) when they have evidence that the person has previously been involved in violence or disorder and grounds for suspecting that the individual continues to pose a risk. Any individual so intercepted must face banning order court proceedings within 24 hours.

I think PC Dodds conviction rate needs to be assessed by someones legal department.  I'm not someone who is involved with Football violence and I don't condone it but this over zealous policing is making distrust the police.

Another thing to consider regarding this over zealous bafoon is the negative affect it has on our club, his obsession with banning fans through whatever means he can in order to propell us up the banning league table only increases our policing bill, which I've seen quoted somewhere is on par with some of the championship clubs which is absolutly ridiculous considering the teams we play and the gates we have.

I'm sure the club would like shut of this twit even just to increase player budget instead of throwing money away just so dodds can justify his job.

I will post some details and information from Amanda of The FSF.

If people are unhappy and want advice about how the police treat them at games please private msg me and I have permision to pass on her contact number.

If you are not going to stand up for your rights or our reputation as GTFC fans, how cbn you moan!

She read the article of Joshua and was not impressed and asked why he was not arrested for violent disorder, which is a serious offence!

I am a marked man so I am happy to stand against this.

Why has the number of orders increased? Is the policing causing more problems? You can look at statistics to ask more than one question

Is the pog

Quoted from gary_elton

" like ".....

oops... best be careful... dont want Pc Ploddy Dodd on my case....  

No excrement I've read his statements,  thing is they will go as far as stand on oath and lie out their back teeth and when it becomes obvious to everyone in court that they are full of excrement the case gets dropped but nothing happens them? (witnessed this myself) something needs to be done they should be charged for Perjury or something that would soon nip these lieing illegitimates in the bud.