Oh Stokesy......STOKESY!!!

Interesting theory. Jo Blow here would get time, given one punch laws. An Oz celeb would get off with a fine.

We have been looking for a nick for Ben Stokes (other than h's "pigsy") for a while now. "Drunky" stuck to Ponting all those years after the Bourbon and Beefsteak incident. So it's only fair that Stokes gets lumbered with "Thuggy".

Not guilty:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-45182868

I am shocked. I can't see how that has happened after the video.

I'm really disappointed by this. Our legal system is a f*cking joke. How can you behave like that and not even get a slap on the wrists? There's a VIDEO of the whole thing, it's not like there's a lack of evidence.

The jury agreed with the self defence claim.

Surprise (probably not really) outcome.

Juror: "Guys, he beat the living tripe out of a couple of guys after seemingly taunting them."

Jury foreman: "But guys, it's Stokesy".

Other jurors: "OK, clearly acting in self defence. Now get him up to Trent Bridge on the double."

I think the prosecution f'd up their case with the severity of the charges. At the beginning of the trial, they tried - and failed - to downgrade the charge to actual bodily harm, which suggests they realised they'd boxed themselves into a hard to prove case with a narrow remit.

Affray involves an element where the jury has to agree that there was a real danger to witnesses and bystanders, which they clearly didn't. It couldn't be anything other than a not guilty verdict from that point.

Stokes is very lucky boy. Judicial incompetence probably saved his ass.

vilkrang wrote:I'm really disappointed by this. Our legal system is a f*cking joke. How can you behave like that and not even get a slap on the wrists? There's a VIDEO of the whole thing, it's not like there's a lack of evidence.

Obviously there was.

Dello wrote:I think the prosecution f'd up their case with the severity of the charges. At the beginning of the trial, they tried - and failed - to downgrade the charge to actual bodily harm, which suggests they realised they'd boxed themselves into a hard to prove case with a narrow remit.

Affray involves an element where the jury has to agree that there was a real danger to witnesses and bystanders, which they clearly didn't. It couldn't be anything other than a not guilty verdict from that point.

Stokes is very lucky boy. Judicial incompetence probably saved his ass.

Maybe it was the intended outcome.

Let's see what the ECB inquiry does.

3 was probably the case killer, as it relates to bystanders not victims.

Affray was the wrong charge.

taipan wrote:Let's see what the ECB inquiry does.

It's going to be somewhat farcical if England pick him for the rest of this series and then the ECB - many months from now, when they finally pull their fingers out - ban him from playing for England for a while.

taipan wrote:

vilkrang wrote:I'm really disappointed by this. Our legal system is a f*cking joke. How can you behave like that and not even get a slap on the wrists? There's a VIDEO of the whole thing, it's not like there's a lack of evidence.

Obviously there was.

Dello has cleared it up I think. Clearly the wrong charge, what incompetence by the legal system.

Now look, lads - I'm not usually one who says " I told you so", but revisit page 6 to see this originally posted ...

Growler wrote:I won't hold my breath though. CPS doesn't really mean Crown Prosecution Service.

Most of the time it means

Couldn't Prosecute Satan

usually for lack of evidence.

I honestly can't say I'm in the least surprised

Disgusted, but not surprised.

skully wrote:We have been looking for a nick for Ben Stokes (other than h's "pigsy") for a while now. "Drunky" stuck to Ponting all those years after the Bourbon and Beefsteak incident. So it's only fair that Stokes gets lumbered with "Thuggy".  

I guess so... “Pigsy” was Hoggard originally (given Hoggy was taken by the Aussie version), and you can’t recycle nicknames on here, it’s confusing enough anyway!

Dello wrote:I think the prosecution f'd up their case with the severity of the charges. At the beginning of the trial, they tried - and failed - to downgrade the charge to actual bodily harm, which suggests they realised they'd boxed themselves into a hard to prove case with a narrow remit.

Affray involves an element where the jury has to agree that there was a real danger to witnesses and bystanders, which they clearly didn't. It couldn't be anything other than a not guilty verdict from that point.

Stokes is very lucky boy. Judicial incompetence probably saved his ass.

Isn’t ABH more serious? Not a legal expert but that one actually involves causing injury to someone else, which he clearly did but for whatever reason it wasn’t the basis of the charge held against him.

Nice analysis, D. And nice to see you.

Danny Cipriani. What a guy.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2018/aug/15/england-danny-cipriani-arrested-jersey

For the first time ever, perhaps the football team is the least quntish of the three major English national teams!

taipan wrote:Danny Cipriani. What a guy.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2018/aug/15/england-danny-cipriani-arrested-jersey

Another wasted talent in some ways. Bags of ability, but regularly in the news for off-the-field incidents, and generally considered more trouble than he was worth by a succession of international coaches.

It did look as though he finally had his shit together, and had a fair tour in summer.

I'm not sure he'll find it as easy as Ben Stokes to come straight back into the first team. Shame, as he could have been pushing for 100 caps by now, rather than the 16 he's actually been awarded.

Dello wrote:I think the prosecution f'd up their case with the severity of the charges. At the beginning of the trial, they tried - and failed - to downgrade the charge to actual bodily harm, which suggests they realised they'd boxed themselves into a hard to prove case with a narrow remit.

Affray involves an element where the jury has to agree that there was a real danger to witnesses and bystanders, which they clearly didn't. It couldn't be anything other than a not guilty verdict from that point.

Stokes is very lucky boy. Judicial incompetence probably saved his ass.

If Stokes is lucky, what does that make Alex Hales?

Both Stokes & Hales have been charged for bringing the game into disrepute by ECB. I suspect feathers will be drawn to give them a good thrashing.