Mendez Laing Arrested

[Eddie]

3 hours ago, alram said:

He should be out the club anyone that disagrees is quite frankly wrong

 

weve seen this before I am sick of these arrogant players bringing the name of derby into the mud

"Never mistake arrogance for intellect" - D B Harrop.

[BaianoPOTY98]

9 hours ago, alram said:

He should be out the club anyone that disagrees is quite frankly wrong

 

weve seen this before I am sick of these arrogant players bringing the name of derby into the mud

Have you been on drugs🤪

[RoyMac5]

10 hours ago, Inverurie Ram said:

Probably was a “push” then the story was “pushed” under some journalists noses, but their minds and fingers came into the equation and a “push” soon became a “punch”

sensationalism………..€@$¥ 

And 'nicking' the phone, just taking it home to recharge it for the woman?

[Crewton]

41 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

And 'nicking' the phone, just taking it home to recharge it for the woman?

Good point. Most people would have chucked it in the sea.

[Foreveram]

9 minutes ago, Crewton said:

Good point. Most people would have chucked it in the sea.

His name is Mendez-Laing not Vardy🙂

[alram]

i can remember similar cases of denial when the lawrence/other idiots story came out

 

we think the best of footballers but they have a habit of taking advantage of the faith shown in them

 

lets see but i think its obvious this is going to escalate into more. its amazing how easily football fans turn a blind eye to things like this. if it were not true the article would be gone and they would be getting sued for libel

Edited July 4 by alram

[Tamworthram]

13 hours ago, alram said:

He should be out the club anyone that disagrees is quite frankly wrong

 

weve seen this before I am sick of these arrogant players bringing the name of derby into the mud

Anyone who finds a person guilty without hearing the evidence, and even if he is guilty - determines a persons punishment without considering any mitigating circumstances or the full facts, is quite frankly wrong.

I just hope you never get called for jury service.

[alram]

7 minutes ago, Tamworthram said:

Anyone who finds a person guilty without hearing the evidence, and even if he is guilty - determines a persons punishment without considering any mitigating circumstances or the full facts, is quite frankly wrong.

I just hope you never get called for jury service.

nope but i dont want a person potentially guilty at the club playing whilst an investigation is ongoing. he should be suspended with a view to terminating his contract.

 

lets be clear he was arrested and bailed, it hasnt been made up in thin air

 

would you hold this sort of opinion on everyone? or is it because hes a footballer

 

if the prime minister was arrested and bailed for attempted murder would you want him to conintue running the country? or do you just pick and choose who you decide should be guilty until proven by a court

Edited July 4 by alram

[Tamworthram]

Just now, alram said:

nope but i dont want a person potentially guilty at the club playing whilst an investigation is ongoing. he should be suspended with a view to terminating his contract.

 

lets be clear he was arrested and bailed, it hasnt been made up in thin air

So everyone that is arrested is automatically guilty?

He shouldn't be suspended (certainly not "with a view to terminating his contract") until at least all the facts are known. Even then, the full circumstances need to be clearly understood and considered before any punishment (if any) is applied. If he punched a completely innocent and defenceless woman then yes, the punishment should be severe. If he took her phone of her for some good reason and didn't return it then, then there perhaps shouldn't be any punishment. What really happened is probably somewhere between these two extremes. Here's a novel idea, why don't we want to see how this pans out, rather than rely on trial by media, before hanging him out to dry?

It seems to me as if you have already found him guilty of a heinous crime. Call me old fashioned but, I quite like the good old  "innocent until proven guilty".

[Gabby'sThighs]

I've made a non-comprehensive list of when it's socially okay and not okay to punch people:

Okay:

- if the victim is Piers Morgan
- if you were in the Beatles
- if you're an ex-footballer who clings to relevance by being controversial on Twitter
- if the DJ won't play the Phil Collins song you like

Not okay:

- if the victim is a police horse

[Tamworthram]

21 minutes ago, alram said:

nope but i dont want a person potentially guilty at the club playing whilst an investigation is ongoing. he should be suspended with a view to terminating his contract.

 

lets be clear he was arrested and bailed, it hasnt been made up in thin air

 

would you hold this sort of opinion on everyone? or is it because hes a footballer

 

if the prime minister was arrested and bailed for attempted murder would you want him to conintue running the country? or do you just pick and choose who you decide should be guilty until proven by a court

In a sane person's mind there is a bit of a difference between being arrested for attempted murder and allegedly assaulting a woman and stealing her phone in a night club. Also, you can't compare "running the country" with being a professional sports person. Therefore, your final paragraph is frankly ridiculous. 

I think your opening paragraph exposes the conclusion you have already come to regarding this case. If he was suspended then it would be "pending conclusion of the investigation/ criminal case" not automatically "with a view to terminating his contract" which kind of assumes guilt.

I will concede that there some very serious charges that should probably result in suspension (in all walks of life), for example, sex offences but this POTENTIAL crime doesn't meet that benchmark in my mind.

[Mucker1884]

28 minutes ago, alram said:

i can remember similar cases of denial when the lawrence/other idiots story came out

 

we think the best of footballers but they have a habit of taking advantage of the faith shown in them

 

lets see but i think its obvious this is going to escalate into more. its amazing how easily football fans turn a blind eye to things like this. if it were not true the article would be gone and they would be getting sued for libel

I don't think it's a case of anyone turning a blind eye.  Just that we don't know the facts.

#One cannot turn a blind eye to that which cannot be seen!  👀

 

 

The charge of phone theft "appears" to be taking it as some form of retribution out of anger/frustration (for the way he and his wife were being treated by the so-called victim). 
There seems to be no evidence that NML had spent the day trawling clubs and bars for the sole purpose of snatching as many phones/wallets/purses as he could pilfer!

There doesn't appear to have been any charges at all, relating to assault, be that a defensive swipe against an attack by a third party, a reactionary smack in the gob as revenge for receiving similar, or an out and out unprovoked attack on an innocent and unsuspecting victim.

I don't see it escalating beyond a small fine for "taking someone's phone without their permission". 

Theft on a technicality, one might say.

 

If I may, I'd suggest you are more guilty of over reaction, than anyone (on here) has been for turning a blind eye.  With that, I will bid you no more than a good day, sir.

 

 

 

 

 

[MadAmster]

If I've read the information correctly, he has been arrested and charged with theft. He has not been charged with assault. That would tend to point to his not having punched the woman.

Quite what he intended to do with the phone is unknown. Possibly that action wasn't all that well thought out, if at all.

There are things like extenuating circumstances. Are there any such as invasion of his privacy will come out in the wash.

Why don't we just wait until a verdict comes and we know all of the facts.  

[kevinhectoring]

1 hour ago, alram said:

if the prime minister was arrested and bailed for attempted murder would you want him to conintue running the country? 

Will let you know tomorrow

[Wolfie20]

1 hour ago, alram said:

nope but i dont want a person potentially guilty at the club playing whilst an investigation is ongoing. he should be suspended with a view to terminating his contract.

 

lets be clear he was arrested and bailed, it hasnt been made up in thin air

 

would you hold this sort of opinion on everyone? or is it because hes a footballer

 

if the prime minister was arrested and bailed for attempted murder would you want him to conintue running the country? or do you just pick and choose who you decide should be guilty until proven by a court

Favourite for Daftest Post Of The Year award

[BobdeBilder]

41 minutes ago, Wolfie20 said:

Favourite for Daftest Post Of The Year award

Polls are closed on that one. Won by a landslide.

[ram59]

2 hours ago, alram said:

nope but i dont want a person potentially guilty at the club playing whilst an investigation is ongoing. he should be suspended with a view to terminating his contract.

 

lets be clear he was arrested and bailed, it hasnt been made up in thin air

 

would you hold this sort of opinion on everyone? or is it because hes a footballer

 

if the prime minister was arrested and bailed for attempted murder would you want him to conintue running the country? or do you just pick and choose who you decide should be guilty until proven by a court

Comparing attempted murder with the 'confiscation' of a mobile phone is a bit much.

If you were in NML's position and somebody was taking photos and/or videos of you, probably with the intention of publishing them without your approval, what would you do in the heat of the moment if they refused to delete them?

His actions, whilst possibly not legal, would be understandable in those circumstances.

[Ramplinho]

The circus is back in town, just when we were starting to make the news for the right reasons again. 

Not going to go in too hard on him as we don't know the details, but he's old enough to know better and shouldn't be reacting even if he was wound up. It's not a good look for a layer who already has sacking and bans to his name. 

The club will investigate and perform due diligence before taking any action. I imagine an apology will be issued and it will blow over.

It's a bit like the joiners arms debacle - because it's NML we'll be more lenient, if it were someone on the periphery then we might have taken a harder stance (not withstanding the threat of a Keogh level payoff). 

[ramit]

Spanish law says a person needs permission before taking a photo of someone.  It seems an odd law actually and best workable when photographing one person, not in a public gathering or street scene for instance.

[YorkshireRam]

2 hours ago, alram said:

nope but i dont want a person potentially guilty at the club playing whilst an investigation is ongoing. he should be suspended with a view to terminating his contract.

 

lets be clear he was arrested and bailed, it hasnt been made up in thin air

 

would you hold this sort of opinion on everyone? or is it because hes a footballer

 

if the prime minister was arrested and bailed for attempted murder would you want him to conintue running the country? or do you just pick and choose who you decide should be guilty until proven by a court

This is a dangerously reductionist view of the judicial system, just be careful making snap judgements like this. Wrongful convictions are absolutely a thing and are more common than you may believe.