Jump to content

Bradley Wright-Phillips

Master Bates

By Master Bates,
in The Saints

 Share

Recommended Posts

EastleighSoulBoy

EastleighSoulBoy

Posted
Posted
Saints stars Bradley Wright-Phillips and Nathan Dyer refused to help police track down the thieves who stole from barmaids at a Hampshire nightclub, the Daily Echo can reveal today.

 

http://www.thisishampshire.net/news/dailyechonews/display.var.2439428.0.saints_stars_refused_to_help_police.php

 

 

Does the charge of 'Perverting the course of justice' still stand? Could they have had this levelled at them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Boris Karloff

Boris Karloff

Posted
Posted
Saints stars Bradley Wright-Phillips and Nathan Dyer refused to help police track down the thieves who stole from barmaids at a Hampshire nightclub, the Daily Echo can reveal today.

 

http://www.thisishampshire.net/news/dailyechonews/display.var.2439428.0.saints_stars_refused_to_help_police.php

 

Absolute disgrace as far as I'm concerned. Protecting their mates even though they knew they did wrong. I'd be quite happy if they were thrown out of the club.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
oxfordshire_saint

oxfordshire_saint

Posted
Posted

Why are they both afraid of naming and shaming a bunch of petty theives? Why protect people who ended up putting both their careers in the balance? If they're the sort of twunts who go round stealing phones from handbags, they're hardly likely to be gun-toting underworld fiends are they? Idiots, they should be done for obstructing a police investigation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guan 2.0

Guan 2.0

Posted
Posted
not on about dyer...

 

I remember the milton singing and having a laugh about terry hurlock being a convicted drink driver.....wasnt Beattie the same???

 

where were the "principles" then???

 

Or McMenemy, with his Drink Driving Conviction. Especially dishonourable seeing as he was the promoting Barbican at the time...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
captainchris

captainchris

Posted
Posted
Because IMO there are probably people in the police force not unlike some posters on this forum (are you reading this John Wesley Tender?) who prefer to make judgements on what they think they know rather than the do some detailed investigation into the facts. Furthermore, and I hate to say this living a multi-cultural society, but IMO the colour of his skin and his young wealth probably had something to do with it. BWP clearly had no role in the theft and appears to have been accused merely on the fact he was in the wrong place at the wrong time. It was a champagne arrest that served no purpose IMO than to discredit BWP. Shall we arrest everyone who has simply walked into a room or place whilst a crime is being committed? A suspect or a witness by all means but arrested on the strength of that cctv footage?

 

Unfortunately, for Bradley who is a really decent bloke who has been well brought up the sh1t will stick because of the unforgiving prejudice of others and their inability to admit they were wrong. Personally, Bradley I wish you all the best and you get a club with fans more supportive of your decent nature and footballing abilities which have no doubt suffered because of this whole sorry saga.

 

What utter tosh and positive discrimination if ever I saw it. He was pictured in the blinkin Echo for Gods sake aiding and abetting - he was there AND refused to help police identify the other three people involved which is particularly distasteful.

Hands in his pockets in court too according to the Echo!!!! For this he was rightly reprimanded by the judge but more importantly it further shows a total lack of respect for any moral decorum and manners which further leads me to question his right to forgiveness.

Sorry but on the evidence I have seen and read this person does not deserve my respect and shall not receive it!

Whereas Nathan Dyer has taken his punishment and declared his remorse and deserves my forgiveness and respect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RobM

RobM

Posted
Posted
How long do you intend to wait on this bloke to 'start performing'? It it weren't for his name, he'd be playing non-league football.

 

How stupid must a chairman of a listed company be to pay somebody thousands of pounds a week based on their name alone? What sort of businessman would allow that? Some serious lessons to learn there, don't you agree Scooby? :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
captainchris

captainchris

Posted
Posted
is he guilty or innocent?

 

simple and pure and all things!!!

 

Loosing the argument so find another bandwagon to jump on. You would be better to justify your point which I believe you can't.

 

I will take up your point on 'guilty or innocent' never the less:

 

Two guys come into your house, they rob your lap top and steel the contents of your missus handbag. but only one carries the goods away. The police catch the other guy who refuses to tell them who took the loot away, is it justice that the guy who was caught receives no punishment at all?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thedelldays

Thedelldays

Posted
Posted
Loosing the argument so find another bandwagon to jump on. You would be better to justify your point which I believe you can't.

 

I will take up your point on 'guilty or innocent' never the less:

 

Two guys come into your house, they rob your lap top and steel the contents of your missus handbag. but only one carries the goods away. The police catch the other guy who refuses to tell them who took the loot away, is it justice that the guy who was caught receives no punishment at all?

 

 

mate, you saw a couple of seconds of video clip...the law says he is not guilty which in this country means innocent....

 

i guess that upsets some people on here and they wised he was guilty as hell...regardless of what the law says...

 

you have no idea if he has gave names to the police without the press knowing....you just dont...but then, he couldn't have as that will ruin people perception of him...

 

what a sad message board that seems to WANT our players to be guilty

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AndyNorthernSaints

AndyNorthernSaints

Posted
Posted
mate, you saw a couple of seconds of video clip...the law says he is not guilty which in this country means innocent....

 

i guess that upsets some people on here and they wised he was guilty as hell...regardless of what the law says...

 

you have no idea if he has gave names to the police without the press knowing....you just dont...but then, he couldn't have as that will ruin people perception of him...

 

what a sad message board that seems to WANT our players to be guilty

Racism IMO :-(

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wadesmith

wadesmith

Posted
Posted
Racism IMO :-(

 

I would agree that when the incident occured alot of posters seemed to have some other sort of agenda to push. At the time I thought I had stumbled on a Daily Mail message board. If I am being honest I'm not sure who made me more ashamed to be Saints supporters, BWP & Dyer, or some of the ,"Let's lynch em before it goes to court" brigade on here. It would have been interesting to see what the responses would have been if it had been Lallana & Surman (not that it ever would have been..they are such nice boys)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
chi saint

chi saint

Posted
Posted

Lets be fair to BWP, he is by any objective standard an average CC player who has consistently underperformed for us. Personally I am amazed with all the other changes over the past 12 months that he hasn't been let go either on a free or on loan.

 

He is clearly a very lucky man to still be drawing the wage that he is.

 

Added to this vein of good fortune is the news that he will not be convicted. He is clearly a criminal in so much as he's entered a private place (office) to which he had no right of access and at best has watched friends commit a burglary, at worst acted in concert, possibly acting as a lookout. No matter which way those apologists choose to portray it, this is a young man who earns more in one month than the national wage and presumably had no need other than for the thrill perhaps, to participate in the criminal act.

 

Therefore he needs to be condemned, he should never wear the jersey again and as far as I'm concerned he can rot. Any possible sympathy I may have had went out the window with the news (widely reported) that he and Dyer refused to identify those others with them. Hants police are directly quoted in various rags that he and Dyer refused to cooperate in the identification of their "friends" and therefore BWP endorsed and condoned the their actions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
benjii

benjii

Posted
Posted
Lets be fair to BWP, he is by any objective standard an average CC player who has consistently underperformed for us. Personally I am amazed with all the other changes over the past 12 months that he hasn't been let go either on a free or on loan.

 

He is clearly a very lucky man to still be drawing the wage that he is.

 

Added to this vein of good fortune is the news that he will not be convicted. He is clearly a criminal in so much as he's entered a private place (office) to which he had no right of access and at best has watched friends commit a burglary, at worst acted in concert, possibly acting as a lookout. No matter which way those apologists choose to portray it, this is a young man who earns more in one month than the national wage and presumably had no need other than for the thrill perhaps, to participate in the criminal act.

 

Therefore he needs to be condemned, he should never wear the jersey again and as far as I'm concerned he can rot. Any possible sympathy I may have had went out the window with the news (widely reported) that he and Dyer refused to identify those others with them. Hants police are directly quoted in various rags that he and Dyer refused to cooperate in the identification of their "friends" and therefore BWP endorsed and condoned the their actions.

 

I'm not being funny mate or picking on you (as plenty of others have failed to grasp this rather simple point also) but what part of "insufficient evidence" do you not understand?

 

He has been identified as being present. He has admitted being present. His mate has admitted being present. His mate has admitted that a crime occurred and that he perpetrated it. They have both been filmed on CCTV. He has been found not guilty. Don't you think that if there was any decent evidence against him a guilty charge would have been more likely than not?

 

Entering somewhere without right is trespass - a tort at common law. Not a crime. Witnessing a crime is not a crime. "Possibly" acting as a look out... Surely "possibly" should be all you need to refer to in order to support a not guilty verdict?

 

People need to face reality - BWP was out on a night out. He was possibly acting like an idiot. Man on night out acts like an idiot!! - OH NO!! Excuse me while I wax my cane of moral rectitude.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Saint_clark

Saint_clark

Posted
Posted
mate, you saw a couple of seconds of video clip...the law says he is not guilty which in this country means innocent....

 

i guess that upsets some people on here and they wised he was guilty as hell...regardless of what the law says...

 

you have no idea if he has gave names to the police without the press knowing....you just dont...but then, he couldn't have as that will ruin people perception of him...

 

what a sad message board that seems to WANT our players to be guilty

 

I wanted him to be guilty purely so we might find a reason to tell him to f*ck off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Greenridge

Greenridge

Posted
Posted
Saints stars Bradley Wright-Phillips and Nathan Dyer refused to help police track down the thieves who stole from barmaids at a Hampshire nightclub, the Daily Echo can reveal today.

 

http://www.thisishampshire.net/news/dailyechonews/display.var.2439428.0.saints_stars_refused_to_help_police.php

 

Honour amongst thieves. You can dress this up anyway people want and yes, in the eyes of the law there was insufficient evidence to proceed despite the police and CPS believing there was. Of course he knew exactly what was going on. He can distance himself on a technicality but it's only that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldNick

OldNick

Posted
Posted
Honour amongst thieves. You can dress this up anyway people want and yes, in the eyes of the law there was insufficient evidence to proceed despite the police and CPS believing there was. Of course he knew exactly what was going on. He can distance himself on a technicality but it's only that.
That is fair.I am sure you have high morals and this is not aimed at you Greenridge or any other poster here but would the uproar of his being aquitted been quite so rabid if it was Lallana,or Morgan or any other real hero on here.

I myself recall when Moran and Wright were accused of rape in Sweden I was preying they would get off as they were heroes and important to our team.That as Im older I see as being thoughtless, BWP is not popular and so many are prepared to throw him to the wolves because they think he is crap.

Forget not he's an asset of our club and reflects on the financial health.

The people we trust to run our justice have decided he's innocent

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sundance Beast

Sundance Beast

Posted
Posted
Honour amongst thieves. You can dress this up anyway people want and yes, in the eyes of the law there was insufficient evidence to proceed despite the police and CPS believing there was. Of course he knew exactly what was going on. He can distance himself on a technicality but it's only that.

 

He is not distancing himself on a technicality but on the fact there was no evidence to support his prosecution. Pictures may paint a thousand words and all that but I assume this CCTV had no sound and for all we know BWP was saying something to Dyer along the lines of 'Nathan wtf are you doing come on leave it'.

 

BWP was smiling but isn't he always plus he was a young bloke out on the beer which presumably has all made us grin at sometime, past, present or future. As for obstructing or perverting the course of justice, which is a crimial offence still isn't it? If the police thought that was the case would they not have charged him with this serious crime? Could it be that BWP was simply on a night out with Dyer and got hooked up with another bunch of blokes who happened to eventually turn out and to be the wrong crowd? Have you never gone on a night out and had a laugh and a joke with another group of people but beyond learning their first names, if that, you go home having shared a good night no more no less.

 

As Delldays has said this thread seems to exist purely to pure scorn and bile on one of our players in particular because he has not paid for whatever he has done in the eyes of the oh so mighty and righteous Saints fan. Ring up Talksport and give your suspect views to Ian Wright, he may put you right you sad little men.

 

Oh and as for the example of BWP and Dyer breaking into your house and nicking your laptop and your wife's handbag just think about how far from the real thing that analogy is especially with regard to intent.

 

As always on this forum 99% of us clearly don't know the facts yet as head of some kangaroo court we all feel qualified and justified on condemning an individual based on our perception. On issues as serious as this, questioning the integrity of a player of good character and from a well known and respected family I suggest your words should be as meaningful as your silence would have been.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Window Cleaner

Window Cleaner

Posted
Posted (edited)

Oh and as for the example of BWP and Dyer breaking into your house and nicking your laptop and your wife's handbag just think about how far from the real thing that analogy is especially with regard to intent.

 

.

 

they can come round to my place,we're out every afternoon from about 1pm

till 9pm when we go to work. My laptop has a sticky keyboard, cut out those jokes when I'm drinking my Capucciono lads,and they'd better bring a fork lift

for the wife's handbag. Insurance is a marvellous thing nowadays with all those new for old sales gimmicks isn't it.

What happened to all those rent a robbers that you could usually find in most pubs, nick your car,your TV or your granny, dump them in a pond somewhere

so that you could get the insurance, ahh for those blissful 80's again.

Edited by Window Cleaner
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chi saint

chi saint

Posted
Posted

What those who seek to support or justify BWP actions or lack of are failing to grasp is the moral aspect.

MORAL 1 a lesson about right or wrong that can be derived from a story or experience. 2 (morals) standards of behaviour, or principles of right and wrong.

 

Whether he's convicted or not hardly seems the point. The point is what kind of example is he setting and has he shown any kind of remorse.

 

The pictures don't lie, what you have is a young man and his mate/s, in an area of a club where they shouldn't be. BWP sees his mates then rummaging in another persons possessions.

 

Amongst some of the posts on here I've read that BWP wasn't watching, oh hum, perhaps this lack of vision and intelligence goes some way to explaining his performances if you can call them that on the pitch. What did he think they were doing in the staff office? applying for jobs? (if only).

 

No the whole point of this is that these young men were caught at it and BWP has been fortunate to be let off. Which ever way you put it they then had a moral obligation to assist the prosecuting authorities with furthering their enquiries. I.E. identifying those others present. The idea put forward by one poster, that perhaps he was on a night out and simply met up with these fellows is stretching things. The Police have said he refused to assist, not that he tried and was unable, nor that he gave info which led them no where, HE REFUSED.

That says it all, so to those you back him up, the next time you engaged in some deep meaningful conversation regarding the judicial process and how it's better that ten guilty men go free than one innocent man be convicted, keep your wallet in your hand!

 

If he never plays for us again it will be too soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Secret Site Agent

Secret Site Agent

Posted
Posted
That's not true is it! The 'experts' who investigated the case brought the charge! It was on a technicality of evidence that the case was weak.

 

Sorry to be a bit pedantic but.......

 

There is no such thing as a 'Technicality' in the British Justice System. If there is not a prima facie case then there is no case to answer. In this instance the charges were not able to be proved, therefore he is, to all intense and purposes, not the thieving lying scumbag that we all think he is. Allegedly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thedelldays

Thedelldays

Posted
Posted
Sorry to be a bit pedantic but.......

 

There is no such thing as a 'Technicality' in the British Justice System. If there is not a prima facie case then there is no case to answer. In this instance the charges were not able to be proved, therefore he is, to all intense and purposes, not the thieving lying scumbag that we all think he is. Allegedly.

or (some) want him to be...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wadesmith

wadesmith

Posted
Posted

Lets be honest, if BWP was any good on the pitch we would all be saying, "He's innocent, lets move on". The fact is he's crap, so people see this as an excuse to say, "He's a scumbag" or "let him rot" . Trust me if he was having a decent season the responses on this thead would be very different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldNick

OldNick

Posted
Posted
What those who seek to support or justify BWP actions or lack of are failing to grasp is the moral aspect.

MORAL 1 a lesson about right or wrong that can be derived from a story or experience. 2 (morals) standards of behaviour, or principles of right and wrong.

 

Whether he's convicted or not hardly seems the point. The point is what kind of example is he setting and has he shown any kind of remorse.

 

The pictures don't lie, what you have is a young man and his mate/s, in an area of a club where they shouldn't be. BWP sees his mates then rummaging in another persons possessions.

 

Amongst some of the posts on here I've read that BWP wasn't watching, oh hum, perhaps this lack of vision and intelligence goes some way to explaining his performances if you can call them that on the pitch. What did he think they were doing in the staff office? applying for jobs? (if only).

 

No the whole point of this is that these young men were caught at it and BWP has been fortunate to be let off. Which ever way you put it they then had a moral obligation to assist the prosecuting authorities with furthering their enquiries. I.E. identifying those others present. The idea put forward by one poster, that perhaps he was on a night out and simply met up with these fellows is stretching things. The Police have said he refused to assist, not that he tried and was unable, nor that he gave info which led them no where, HE REFUSED.

That says it all, so to those you back him up, the next time you engaged in some deep meaningful conversation regarding the judicial process and how it's better that ten guilty men go free than one innocent man be convicted, keep your wallet in your hand!

 

If he never plays for us again it will be too soon.

Again I wish all these things could be played out, but if that is the case you and I have supported many players who have broken the law, many of them heroes.We cannot pick and choose who we make examples of.

Fernandes was done for drink driving and refusing to stop. To me that was a life threatening offence.Many of our players have been over the limit but have we campaigned against them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Greenridge

Greenridge

Posted
Posted
Again I wish all these things could be played out, but if that is the case you and I have supported many players who have broken the law, many of them heroes.We cannot pick and choose who we make examples of.

Fernandes was done for drink driving and refusing to stop. To me that was a life threatening offence.Many of our players have been over the limit but have we campaigned against them?

 

Very good point Nick. I don't think there is a witch-hunt going on here as some like to suggest I just feel people are making observations on the situation as they see it. Again, none of us are armed with the full facts so it's very difficult to comment with absolute certainty. He did however have an opportunity to help the police by providing names of the uncaught offenders and he didn't take it.

 

It's also worth remembering that a number of people will have reviewed the case (several levels of increasing seniority within the police force and the Crown Prosecution Service) and all of which felt there was a case to answer. It was a lone magistrate who decided there wasn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldNick

OldNick

Posted
Posted
Very good point Nick. I don't think there is a witch-hunt going on here as some like to suggest I just feel people are making observations on the situation as they see it. Again, none of us are armed with the full facts so it's very difficult to comment with absolute certainty. He did however have an opportunity to help the police by providing names of the uncaught offenders and he didn't take it.

 

It's also worth remembering that a number of people will have reviewed the case (several levels of increasing seniority within the police force and the Crown Prosecution Service) and all of which felt there was a case to answer. It was a lone magistrate who decided there wasn't.

I do agree he should have helped the police find the others.After all it was stated on here (i think) that at least 1 was on Dyers friends on facebook.Since removed no doubt.

I was told there was a lot more cctv stuff and that was not shown on the Mirror piece.Whether that made it look less suspicious or more guilty is impossible to tell without seeing it.

As you say the CPS thought it was worth going forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sundance Beast

Sundance Beast

Posted
Posted
Very good point Nick. I don't think there is a witch-hunt going on here as some like to suggest I just feel people are making observations on the situation as they see it. Again, none of us are armed with the full facts so it's very difficult to comment with absolute certainty. He did however have an opportunity to help the police by providing names of the uncaught offenders and he didn't take it.

 

It's also worth remembering that a number of people will have reviewed the case (several levels of increasing seniority within the police force and the Crown Prosecution Service) and all of which felt there was a case to answer. It was a lone magistrate who decided there wasn't.

 

And the magistrate is the only one without any arrest or prosecution quotas to reach. The man is innocent why can't you and others simply accept that FACT. His only crime seems to have been getting hooked up with the wrong crowd on a night out and being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

 

Since the change from TSF it seems to me some users feel they should get their fiver's worth by increasing their posts and the amount of rubbish they post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...