Ram-Alf Posted July 4 Share Posted July 4 4 hours ago, Crewton said: Good point. Most people would have chucked it in the sea. In Davy Jones locker 😁 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ram-Alf Posted July 4 Share Posted July 4 3 hours ago, alram said: if the prime minister was arrested and bailed for attempted murder would you want him to conintue running the country? it was never proven, The evidence shows I was at a party at Number 10 at the time archram, jono, Crewton and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
superfit Posted July 4 Share Posted July 4 3 hours ago, Mucker1884 said: 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. Taking a phone without the owner’s permission IS theft, it’s not a technicality. Taking it forcibly without the owners permission would make it aggravated theft. I have no doubt the owner of the phone was in all probability acting like a bell end but Lang and his wife could have simply removed themselves from the situation. That would’ve been the smart thing to do. IF it transpires that he is convicted of theft is that okay? Are we going to educate our children that acting in this manner is acceptable. Kathcairns 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elwood P Dowd Posted July 4 Share Posted July 4 8 minutes ago, superfit said: Taking a phone without the owner’s permission IS theft, it’s not a technicality. Taking it forcibly without the owners permission would make it aggravated theft. I have no doubt the owner of the phone was in all probability acting like a bell end but Lang and his wife could have simply removed themselves from the situation. That would’ve been the smart thing to do. IF it transpires that he is convicted of theft is that okay? Are we going to educate our children that acting in this manner is acceptable. It is only theft if NML intended to permanently deprive the woman’s of her phone. From what I have read it appears that he was only trying to stop her taking photons of him. I have no idea about the physical stuff as memories and accounts will probably differ. 🤷♂️ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phoenix Posted July 4 Share Posted July 4 Perhaps he should take up a musical instrument. Comrade 86 and Crewton 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimbobram Posted July 4 Share Posted July 4 20 minutes ago, superfit said: Taking a phone without the owner’s permission IS theft, it’s not a technicality. Taking it forcibly without the owners permission would make it aggravated theft. I have no doubt the owner of the phone was in all probability acting like a bell end but Lang and his wife could have simply removed themselves from the situation. That would’ve been the smart thing to do. IF it transpires that he is convicted of theft is that okay? Are we going to educate our children that acting in this manner is acceptable. If someone's harassing me or would be trying to take a picture of me without consent, I would be giving them a 4-piece combo to the face Crewton 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vidalslastapostle Posted July 4 Share Posted July 4 People are funny, the things they come out with. Mick Brolly 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gabby'sThighs Posted July 4 Share Posted July 4 50 minutes ago, jimbobram said: If someone's harassing me or would be trying to take a picture of me without consent, I would be giving them a 4-piece combo to the face Four-piece combo - yum! I'll have chips, barbecue sauce, and a Fanta please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramsbottom Posted July 4 Share Posted July 4 It's all a bit of a clusterf*** to be honest. IF the woman has been assaulted, regardless of whether she was being annoying, then it would be very hard to justify his continued employment. IF he took the phone, without any intention of giving it back, then it would be very hard to justify his continued employment. He's supposed to be a role model to young fans. And besides, who the hell goes to Magaluf in the off season??!?!?!!!!??! He's on a better wedge than that, even with late in the day bookings due to his international appearances, he could've found somewhere a bit more laidback. Also, what was he doing on the pictures and/or video to warrant such a reaction??? Makes you wonder doesn't it... Like I said, I real messy clusterf*** that the club doesn't need. I just hope this isn't a sign of a new banter era. Goldstar 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ram-Alf Posted July 4 Share Posted July 4 1 hour ago, Elwood P Dowd said: It is only theft if NML intended to permanently deprive the woman’s of her phone. From what I have read it appears that he was only trying to stop her taking photons of him. so it was all to do with his...Wang DE56Ram 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Day Posted July 4 Share Posted July 4 Bizarre all this, 9 pages of fan generated scenarios of what could have happened out there and whether or not he was in the right in these made up scenarios. Obviously having a player arrested is not an ideal situation to be in, regardless of the reason. Just think it’s worth waiting for this to play out and more details through the courts, not the tabloids before commenting further, as the club have done themselves. We have a new home shirt, 3 new signings, another rumoured to be on his way, new contract for our number 9, academy graduate that has left and the start of pre season just over a week away. I mean it’s not like it’s quiet on there. Donnyram, Rammy03, DE56Ram and 1 other 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crewton Posted July 4 Share Posted July 4 1 hour ago, superfit said: Taking a phone without the owner’s permission IS theft, it’s not a technicality. Taking it forcibly without the owners permission would make it aggravated theft. I have no doubt the owner of the phone was in all probability acting like a bell end but Lang and his wife could have simply removed themselves from the situation. That would’ve been the smart thing to do. IF it transpires that he is convicted of theft is that okay? Are we going to educate our children that acting in this manner is acceptable. Never did me any harm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caerphilly Ram Posted July 4 Share Posted July 4 He looks nice and relaxed back in training. Mucker1884, Crewton, Premier ram and 1 other 2 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mucker1884 Posted July 4 Share Posted July 4 1 hour ago, superfit said: Taking a phone without the owner’s permission IS theft, it’s not a technicality. Taking it forcibly without the owners permission would make it aggravated theft. I have no doubt the owner of the phone was in all probability acting like a bell end but Lang and his wife could have simply removed themselves from the situation. That would’ve been the smart thing to do. IF it transpires that he is convicted of theft is that okay? Are we going to educate our children that acting in this manner is acceptable. Perhaps he was just mad at her, because she was sending a “You’ll never guess who I’ve been talking to” WhatsApp message to her mate, and spelled his name wrong! 🤷♂️👀 Crewton and DE56Ram 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mucker1884 Posted July 4 Share Posted July 4 8 minutes ago, Caerphilly Ram said: He looks nice and relaxed back in training. So would you be, after a 20 stretch in El Cells! *minutes, not years! 😁 Caerphilly Ram 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramit Posted July 4 Share Posted July 4 (edited) 8 hours ago, ramsbottom said: It's all a bit of a clusterf*** to be honest. IF the woman has been assaulted, regardless of whether she was being annoying, then it would be very hard to justify his continued employment. IF he took the phone, without any intention of giving it back, then it would be very hard to justify his continued employment. He's supposed to be a role model to young fans. And besides, who the hell goes to Magaluf in the off season??!?!?!!!!??! He's on a better wedge than that, even with late in the day bookings due to his international appearances, he could've found somewhere a bit more laidback. Also, what was he doing on the pictures and/or video to warrant such a reaction??? Makes you wonder doesn't it... Like I said, I real messy clusterf*** that the club doesn't need. I just hope this isn't a sign of a new banter era. I'll leave out addressing the two starting ifs, as they are iffy. What's it to you or me where he spends his time off? No, it doesn't make me wonder what he was doing on the pictures, it's none of my business. We only know what is said to have happened and from one side, it's not messy yet or a cluster something. I don't care about banter from other club's fans. Edited July 4 by ramit typo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tamworthram Posted July 4 Share Posted July 4 2 hours ago, superfit said: Taking a phone without the owner’s permission IS theft, it’s not a technicality. Taking it forcibly without the owners permission would make it aggravated theft. I have no doubt the owner of the phone was in all probability acting like a bell end but Lang and his wife could have simply removed themselves from the situation. That would’ve been the smart thing to do. IF it transpires that he is convicted of theft is that okay? Are we going to educate our children that acting in this manner is acceptable. It isn't acceptable but who is suggesting "we educate our children" that it is? Didn't Mucker suggest that, IF that is what happened, a small fine might be incoming. We're all speculating, which is never a good idea, but I do wonder if he took her phone off her (because of her behaviour) and refused to give it back. Not quite the same as ferreting through her bag and stealing her phone. The thing several of us are having difficulty with is suggesting a person be suspended, with a view to being sacked, for what appears to be a relatively minor offence, when that person hasn't been found guilty. It's probably better to close this thread until we know: 1) What, if anything, he is found guilty of. 2) What, if any, mitigating circumstances there may be. 3) What, if any, legal consequences there may be for him. 4) What, if any, action the club may take. DE56Ram, Mucker1884 and BucksRam 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimtastic56 Posted July 4 Share Posted July 4 The one thing going against NML is his past behaviour. If it had been Max Bird we would have all cried Lies ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kathcairns Posted July 4 Share Posted July 4 6 hours ago, Tamworthram said: 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". Im on the fence with this, but there is another old saying,, no smoke without fire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobdeBilder Posted July 4 Share Posted July 4 Let he who is without sin, lob the first brick. Or something like that. Phoenix 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account.
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now