Terrible loss of life,but to me clearly self defense.
I'm very relieved for the accused.
Josh's friend became involved
That involvement was described in court as a vicious sustained punishment beating to a man who could longer defend himself. i.e. a real risk of serious harm or death.
Josh then started throwing punches as were the rest of the extremely violent mob.
It begs the question what is the criteria for self defence within the DPP.
i feel the CCTV paints a bad picture for the attackers
without this it would much more difficult
what if this had happened to be a woman who was being robbed instead, by 2 guys one with a knife?
we are discussing an actual event not a hypothetical.
do we know the details so, on what they knew, when they became involved, it would give an idea of whether they got involved with good intentions or not
I read that Josh punched Bento only after Bento stabbed Josh's friend.
Where did you read that I didn't see that anywhere ? Also Bento only stabbed Josh's friend because....
,,
It's not what I'm describing.
do you even know what you are
What crime was committed?
You've lost me. My point was to do with when Josh became physically involved. I read that he only became physically involved after Bento had stabbed hi friend. Reading your post I didn't see that clarity.
yeah read that already
but the crux is why they became involved, if you saw 2 guys one with a knife out threatening someone on the street would you get involved
Listen, if you think the DPP should just give it a whirl, that's fair enough, but it's not the reality.
But he was there/involved prior to his friend being stabbed, then attacked Bento.
why exactly? be specific
The victims were the Deliveroo Riders.
and how do you discern that from a video? What we do know is that he grabbed hold of the bike and his mate then punched the deliveroo guy. The deliveroo guy then defended himself.
You don't appear to have much confidence in the system, i know little of how things work but i am surprised that there was a murder charge based on what has been said in the media.
You seem to think the system rarely works.
yes, but the whole decided to get involved thing
people are playing the who angel angle to make yer man to be some thug, when he might not be
I think motive is important
we dont see all the evidence of course
everything you said seems to be true ,
the system rarely works properly and you know little of how it works and i have little confidence in it.
if anything the wee scumbag who stole the bike in the first place should bare more responsibility for the death but he will not
They were victims, yes!
"George explained to the jury his thought process in confronting the thief. "It doesn't matter [that] it's not my bike; he is doing something wrong and I had the opportunity to stop him. I just tried to do as I consider myself a good person," he said."
he didnt even know who owned the bike! just playing busy body before killing a child, sickening
I think the deliveroo driver thought getting punched by people that approached him to be more important.
he knew it belonged to another deliveroo driver. and the guy who robbed was carrying it on his shoulder up the street while riding his own bike.
youd think the pulling a knife on someone who had not attacked you would be a bad idea
if they came to aid of someone who had a knife pulled on them it changes things
I do know a bit how it works but not in something like murder thankfully, i have a good grasp of normal daily life etc.
come again?
..
If George was a “busy body”, recovering his colleagues bike, what does that make the gang of men and teens that attacked him, during an altercation that had nothing at all to do with them?
