Scorrie Posted March 15, 2018 Report Share Posted March 15, 2018 Everyone is deserving of honesty and decency and the right to go about in this world without being hurt, do not hurt people for no reason and I am not commenting on this anymore, all you who have commented clearly do not have a heart at all it appears and love bullying fighters who have no reason to hurt anyone and have no right to do such things to take the law into their own hands, if they do they take the consequences whatever they may be for whatever they have done, that is why there is a law and I certainly hope that police and officials enforce it. I can't say that they do though in every case. You have just shown me what you are personally like on this topic and it is not very nice at all. If someone caused severe life threatening injuries to any of you who have commented, then clearly you would not care a damn at all and would live happily with it and think that person who caused that to you did right!!!!!!!! well, well, that is what you are saying. Say what you wish I will not be commenting anymore on this topic as you have shown what you are. Maybe some day you will live with any life threatening thing and then just make sure you are happy as that is the just of what you are saying and no-one requires to be taken to justice for hurting yourself then. I don't believe anyone is suggesting that the law is wrong. What folk are saying is that this clown ended up with a broken wrist through their own stupidity and repeated refusal to carry out a reasonable and lawful request. Not through a direct malicious action by the barman. Unfortunately the courts have taken a different view. If you're so keen on this 'everyone is nice and fluffy' stance, then I suggest you spend a fair chunk of time on the doors in any town centre on a night-time with the bar and door staff. You'll soon change your mind when you have to deal with it yourself. Claadehol 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Windwalker Posted March 15, 2018 Report Share Posted March 15, 2018 I don't believe anyone is suggesting that the law is wrong. What folk are saying is that this clown ended up with a broken wrist through their own stupidity and repeated refusal to carry out a reasonable and lawful request. Not through a direct malicious action by the barman. Unfortunately the courts have taken a different view. If you're so keen on this 'everyone is nice and fluffy' stance, then I suggest you spend a fair chunk of time on the doors in any town centre on a night-time with the bar and door staff. You'll soon change your mind when you have to deal with it yourself.I don’t think this is about ‘everyone is nice and fluffy’ it’s about what we are allowed to do within the law, it’s to do with taking the law into your own hands, and this is something that, if allowed to happen can blur the boundaries. Where do you draw the line.? You say ‘not through the direct malicious actions by the barman’ well perhaps he was not malicious, but he decided to take direct action, which resulted in the injury of someone else. The judge was right that an offence was committed, and could have also removed his licence, however I would think he carefully weighed up the circumstances of the case and accepted the the injured party had some responsibility in the case. Whilst I have every sympathy concerning the difficulty and stress related to the job of doormen, it is clear that they undergo comprehensive training to deal with these situations and they are required by law to deal with them in accordance to the rules that govern at the time. In the olden days we would have just taken this chap outside and taught him a lesson, but today this is not only frowned on but would put ourselves at risk of prosecution. Had the police been called, it would have been the other party facing the judge. I for one would not have the patience to deal with drunk annoying, mouthy people, which is why I would never become a doorman, but those who do choose this line of work must carry it out in full accordance with their training and the law. I remember the olden days where untrained body builder doormen dished out thumpings to idiots who were too drunk to defend themselves, thankfully things have moved on where doormen are concerned. Unfortunately there are still far too many drunk idiots. Suffererof1crankymofo 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Claadehol Posted March 15, 2018 Author Report Share Posted March 15, 2018 Considering the situation in Police Scotland, does anyone really believe they have the manpower to respond immediately to every drunken idiot demanding entry or refusing to leave licensed premises? There would need to be a full time task force, and the details of every persistent offender would need to be catalogued on that £60,000,000 computer that doesn't work. The SNP haven't had much luck with computers, have they? The barman and the doorman will always be at the sharp end here, join the real world! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Claadehol Posted March 15, 2018 Author Report Share Posted March 15, 2018 Or alternatively in a deeply caring and concerned society perhaps we could insist on there being a fully qualified social worker on the payroll. I'm sure such a person would cope perfectly well with this kind of individual, by talking and reasoning with him for an hour or two until the police arrive. No need for a doorman at all perhaps. If extra help was required could always phone the Samaritans or the Salvation Army. No need for a doorman at all perhaps at any venue, just make offenders a nice cup of tea to calm them down. No more ugly scenes with policemen struggling with drunken idiots, out of control crackpots spitting, lashing out and kicking at officers trying to arrest them. No more, (as Windwalker describes), muscle bound doormen thumping these people obviously too drunk to defend themselves. Really!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Windwalker Posted March 15, 2018 Report Share Posted March 15, 2018 Or alternatively in a deeply caring and concerned society perhaps we could insist on there being a fullyqualified social worker on the payroll. I'm sure such a person would cope perfectly well with thiskind of individual, by talking and reasoning with him for an hour or two until the police arrive. Noneed for a doorman at all perhaps. If extra help was required could always phone the Samaritans orthe Salvation Army.No need for a doorman at all perhaps at any venue, just make offenders a nice cup of tea to calm themdown.No more ugly scenes with policemen struggling with drunken idiots, out of control crackpots spitting,lashing out and kicking at officers trying to arrest them. No more, (as Windwalker describes), musclebound doormen thumping these people obviously too drunk to defend themselves. Really!!!Read what I said, muscle bound doormen thumping punters was, thankfully, a thing of the past..luckily we now see trained doormen who in the main operate on a professional level and do a great, albeit difficult job. Are you suggesting this was not an issue in the past. As for the position of police, I believe the Shetland force would have been on the scene relatively quickly and dealt with the situation. As for the waffle re social services etc, I never suggested that nor would I think a pub would be a suitable place for that to happen. Mind you if someone is causing this amount of constant problems, I would suggest help of some kind could be required. I do feel for staff who have to put up with this type of behaviour and I know how frustrating customers of this nature can be, but if we start a free for all as to how we deal with them, it will end in a disaster. Anyone with a drop o midder wit, will know if you shove a drunk person, they are likely to lose their balance, when they fall their reactions are slow and often they go down like a sack o tatties, and often the head can hit the ground hard. Had this chap not fallen and broken his wrist, no one would have shown concern that he was “helped” out the door, but when we decide to make contact with others we do so knowing there are risks and doormen unlike the rest of us are trained to know the risks. Would it be ok for police officers to shove annoying or drunk people over resulting in broken wrists? Somehow I don’t think so, and I’m sure the police have to deal with as many awkward individuals. Whilst it is regrettable that the wrong person ended in court, the law is there to protect us all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeyboy Posted March 15, 2018 Report Share Posted March 15, 2018 "I don't believe anyone is suggesting that the law is wrong. What folk are saying is that this clown ended up with a broken wrist through their own stupidity and repeated refusal to carry out a reasonable and lawful request. Not through a direct malicious action by the barman. Unfortunately the courts have taken a different view." Some people would say that but the truth is that the guy ended up with a broken wrist because he was assaulted. The courts took the only view they could because Mark Toka pled guilty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Posted March 15, 2018 Report Share Posted March 15, 2018 The bar manager was just that, a bar manager.. He was not a "doorman" and, as far as I am aware, wasn't trained as one. Either way, if you are in a position where you have to run a premises and are required to "eject" an unwanted intruder then, you should be allowed to use "reasonable force"? I do not think that the manager set out to break anyone's wrist and that the injury was accidental. The fine was ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Claadehol Posted March 15, 2018 Author Report Share Posted March 15, 2018 Exactly Colin! The voice of reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Windwalker Posted March 15, 2018 Report Share Posted March 15, 2018 The bar manager was just that, a bar manager.. He was not a "doorman" and, as far as I am aware, wasn't trained as one. Either way, if you are in a position where you have to run a premises and are required to "eject" an unwanted intruder then, you should be allowed to use "reasonable force"? I do not think that the manager set out to break anyone's wrist and that the injury was accidental. The fine was ridiculous.I don’t think anyone thinks he set out to break anyone’s wrist and I agree the fine was over the top. Doorman or bar manager he should have been able to deal with the situation without injury to the other party. His employers have a duty to ensure he is capable and properly trained. As someone said above, he pled guilty, therefore accepted his actions were not reasonable force. It’s a very fine line. I dont believe it should have got to court, but I’m not the one making the decisions. No doubt the person who had to be ejected might cause further bother and will hopefully have his day in court as he needs to learn that he can’t conduct himself like that in public. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scorrie Posted March 15, 2018 Report Share Posted March 15, 2018 Regarding the guilty plea, he's probably been briefed that if he goes 'not guilty' and it doesn't pan out - then his licence is smoked. More of a damage limitation excersise as opposed to an outright admission of guilt............ as and Ghostrider 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostrider Posted March 15, 2018 Report Share Posted March 15, 2018 (edited) ^ Exactly, guilty pleas have more to do with damage limitation than admitting anything. How else can it be when trials are such a drawn out palaver with no guarantee the truth will out in the end, and there's such disparity between sentences for a guilty plea and for someone found guilty after a trial. The Scottish Court system as practiced in Shetland is all about getting work processed through the system with a result ASAP, regardless what that result is, rather than anyone getting fair and honest justice for anything. Edited March 15, 2018 by Ghostrider Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
audi-ya-do Posted March 15, 2018 Report Share Posted March 15, 2018 (edited) Posted by windwalker:Would it be ok for police officers to shove annoying or drunk people over resulting in broken wrists? Somehow I don’t think so, and I’m sure the police have to deal with as many awkward individuals.Whilst it is regrettable that the wrong person ended in court, the law is there to protect us all. Like the officer who pushed over an innocent newspaper seller causing his death? Like the several officers who, illegally, used a restraint belt around a mentally disturbed suspect- leading to his death? There are many more cases like this and these are real instances of the police overstepping the line. However no officer has yet been prosecuted for these offences (Or probably will be) or even Hillsbourgh yet!!! Maybe a blue uniform is a get out of trouble free card. Edited March 15, 2018 by audi-ya-do Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Windwalker Posted March 15, 2018 Report Share Posted March 15, 2018 Posted by windwalker:Would it be ok for police officers to shove annoying or drunk people over resulting in broken wrists? Somehow I don’t think so, and I’m sure the police have to deal with as many awkward individuals.Whilst it is regrettable that the wrong person ended in court, the law is there to protect us all. Like the officer who pushed over an innocent newspaper seller causing his death? Like the several officers who, illegally, used a restraint belt around a mentally disturbed suspect- leading to his death? There are many more cases like this and these are real instances of the police overstepping the line. However no officer has yet been prosecuted for these offences (Or probably will be) or even Hillsbourgh yet!!! Maybe a blue uniform is a get out of trouble free card.Unfortunately there are bad apples in all walks of life and as I said I don’t think it’s right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Posted March 15, 2018 Report Share Posted March 15, 2018 @windwalker"As someone said above, he pled guilty, therefore accepted his actions were not reasonable force. It’s a very fine line." There were reasons for his guilty plea but, just assuming that the guilty plea was an admission that his actions were not "reasonable force" is taking it a bit far. After all, how do you define reasonable force when (afaik) there is no "legal" definition? From my time working in a bar, reasonable force was a last resort but, it was always 10% more than the other guy was willing to use. Scorrie 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
playlist Posted March 15, 2018 Report Share Posted March 15, 2018 Like windwalker states if you push someone then you are guilty, and if they are intoxicated by whichever means, are likely to fall over and hit themselves, people really require to think about the consequences before taking action which can hurt others, as the consequences could be life changing for either party. with what can happen. The voice of sensibility- windwalker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts