'Big man' vs Sam Main incident (final decision: no charges for either)

[Platform 1]

Provocation - "something that incites, instigates, angers, or irritates."

Telling someone to get off the train they want to be in certainly fulfils that criteria.

...but asking for a valid ticket does not.

 

[nedchester]

Looks like the old boy's pension may be a goner. If he's smart he'll go off with 'stress' until retirement.

Why would his pension be a goner?

 

[ReverendFozz]

We can argue about this till were blue in the face and still not come up with an answer that the majority of us agree on, I am not trying to condone the kids behaviour, but if he is telling the truth and he suffers diabetes, then that is a serious misjudgment the Guard has made and probably dug himself deeper in the brown stuff by letting a member of the public manhandle him off the train, if the kid is telling the truth then thr guard should be discipline, it as simple as that and the big fella spoken to by BTP, there is no excuse for swearing and belligerence towards the guard, so the kid should be spoken to by BTP no matter what, there really is no need for a bad attitide after all.

I do honestly think the kid is full of crap and is doing nothing more than lapping up his little moment in the spotlight, if his facebook statuses are anything to go by then he really is a clown

 

[68000]

Provocation - "something that incites, instigates, angers, or irritates."

Telling someone to get off the train they want to be in certainly fulfils that criteria. .

Stop scraping the barrel

 

[wintonian]

Except your prices are wrong. If he bought the tickets at 8am then it could still be true, fair enough (assuming he has a railcard).

2x singles Polmont to Edinburgh Park = £8.45 according to NRES
1x return Polmont to Edinburgh Park = £9.10 according to NRES

Your quite right I mistook SO5 for SOS in Avantix and an 5 does look like an S in some fonts at a high screen resolution.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Provocation - "something that incites, instigates, angers, or irritates."

Telling someone to get off the train they want to be in certainly fulfils that criteria.

You well may "want" to be on the train, but if you do not have a valid ticket to travel, this reverts the onus back on yourself.

I may "want" to have an excellent meal in a top restaurant, but I cannot do so if I do not have the money to pay for it....no "smart" comments about "washing up afterwards", please!!....

 

[68000]

You well may "want" to be on the train, but if you do not have a valid ticket to travel, this reverts the onus back on yourself.

I may "want" to have an excellent meal in a top restaurant, but I cannot do so if I do not have the money to pay for it

So the waiter asking you to settle the bill will obviously be provocation

 

[bAzTNM]

One of the newspapers today showed the mess of the "Sam Main" guy's face. It didn't look like he landed on the face when the guy tossed him out on the video.

The same newspaper is also hinting, or basically leading the reader into thinking the "big man" was something of a nutter. "He just stood silent, didn't move until he dived for the guy...Afterwards he just stayed silent"

The newspaper also claims that the "Big Man" is an investment banker.

 

[68000]

Itwas probably the 2nd time when the guy was trying to get back on the train

 

[Platform 1]

"He just stood silent, didn't move until he dived for the guy...Afterwards he just stayed silent"

:-? I don't remember it being like that. Typical tabloid rubbish. Are they suggesting he's a secret Scotrail project - android guards?

 

[Chew Chew]

I didn't notice that, but they have obviously watched the video so will be well aware something was thrown out at him. Maybe he had 2 bags? Of course they could be lying, but would have to be mind-numbingly incompetent for that to be the lie if he only had 1 bag.

If he had 2 bags they'd have commented on how he was chucked off the train and 1 bag was left behind on the train surely?

Do you have any medical background?

Nothing more than some basic first aid I did many many moons ago when I did the DoE award scheme.

I used to volunteer with a small first aid group - and even they had seen many cases of diabetics being ignored and dismissed as being drunk when in reality they were suffering from the condition. If that was the case then yes they should have, but they aren't being tried in the media so it's neither here nor there.

Plus they don't necessarily know they are having an "episode" - if that was indeed an "episode" taking place it was pretty mild.

I think you'll find they are, rightly or wrongly, being tried by the media. Some papers have already decided that Sam Main is a ned and Alan Pollock a hero.

It would have been in the interest of Sam Main to publicise the fact his was having an 'episode' as it would have gained him more public sympathy and the media would have reported it completely differently. The fact he hasn't made the claim speaks volumes.

I don't really need to prove anything

I've never asked you to prove anything.

you clearly haven't got all the facts on the matter.

Guy hasn't got valid ticket to travel
Guy refuses to get off train when requested
Guy is abusive to rail staff in front of young children

Those are the facts we can take from the video. The guy who filmed the video also says that Sam Main was verbally abusive to the examiner in front of young children for approximately 5 minutes before he started filming.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

Provocation - "something that incites, instigates, angers, or irritates."

Telling someone to get off the train they want to be in certainly fulfils that criteria. I said it was a fully justified act, but that doesn't remove it as being provocative.

That's nonsense. Please re-read the Regulations, See NRCoC S.2, S.22 & S.58, Byelaws 4, 24(2), 25 and Regulation of Railways Act S.5.

As I already said, I was just clarifying the stigma "public order offence" gives the event.

I'm not sure how 'stigma' is relevant here, but had this incident occurred in England or Wales then I am in no doubt that a POA S.5 Offence could be prosecuted, and even if based merely on video evidence!

 

[2Dogbox]

As an aside, that hat (fare dodgers) is appalling.

I was stuck for a Christmas present for my mother but having seen that video I will now be getting her a nice new tea cosy.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

On another site this is also being discuss and the following cropped up....

"I registered on the site expecting a thread about this I want to set the record straight. I'm the ex member fez and I'm the victims cousin(dont believe me check his facebook im there as his cousin). What happened was he had an exam and any student will know you cant use your railcard before 10am to travel, so he bought 2 singles, one for going there and one for comin back.

He done his exam, then had a few pints to celebrate then came home. Now he actually had the correct ticket in his pocket but was drunk and kept giving the wrong one, it's hard enough to determine the right one sober at the best of times!! The video didn't catch the start where he was trying to explain himself, and him being drunk thought in his head he was showing the right ticket since he actually had it on him.

What the "big man" did was out of order. The reason he was so keen to get back on the train was because hes diabetic and in his bag was his insulin, as well as the small matter of his uni notes, ipod and mobile phone!!"

....

"That isn't the first thing he says at all, was the conductor talking to himself for a good 40+ seconds? What my cousin's saying for the first part of the video are inaudible. He had already explained his situation to the conductor before recording began.

He was drunk can you not tell? People don't function right when drunk.

What about the women who says "that was uncalled for"? The clapping and cheering is actually cringeworthy. What kind of society do we live in where a grown man can assault a student out a train and be praised as a hero for it? The situation wasn't violent nor potentially violent until that big tink stood up.

Again he's drunk? I've came home in the back door once chapped everyone up saying I'm starving, had food, then walked out the house to the front door and chapped it, when answered again I said I was starving. We don't function right when drunk, he clearly never seen it.

He actually paid for his ticket, you can't use your railcard on a return before 10am so he got 2 singles and used his railcard on the return one. It works out cheaper, as a student who travels from Falkirk to Edinburgh 3 times a week I know cause I do the same!

And he never he actually pushed the conductor into him then pushed him. I'm not trying to convince everyone my cousin's an angel but I just wanted to give his side. He's not the bad guy he's being made out to be and its unfair the criticism he's receiving."

....

"Far from a ned, he's a 2nd year student at Heriot Watt Uni! And he stays a stones throw from Grahamston train station in Falkirk, not Linlithgow."

Make of that what you will. For me it leads to more questions than answers

 

[Vince]

I have written this, not to support the man, but to point out that I do not have all the evidence, and so cannot say whether or not he "deserved to be thrown off". We have many tales on here of guards being challenged and turning stroppy. Can anyone here put their hand on their heart and say that, if a guard tried to throw them off a train for which they held a valid ticket, they would meekly get off without arguing?

Then why did the guy not show him the ticket and stay on? No, the guard held the train up because he wouldn't get off this is the mans job.

He's just a cheeky little b@****d who was swearing at an older man and not respecting anyone on the train, swearing around kids and refusing to get off.

The "big man" did the right thing.

 

[GarethW]

Whats the betting the little toerag did it to himself thinking of a bit of compensation.

Its a pity the door was opened before he was ejected.

 

[bnm]

Make of that what you will. For me it leads to more questions than answers

On that point I agree. Everyone has gone to town on this 'ned' but is it not beyond possibility that he had a valid ticket?

The YouTube clip and the subsequent debate in the media and on forums (this one included) has painted Sam Main as being the villain of the piece. If we're going to speculate as to what occurred prior to the YouTube clip then we have to also consider the possibility that Sam Main may well have had a valid ticket for travel. Or if he didn't then it's equally possible he believed the ticket he held was valid for travel.

Initially, I was in agreement with the majority that this was just a chav/ned trying it on. But with more information coming to light I'm not so sure.

So, I'm sitting on the fence for the time being.....

 

[AlterEgo]

He didn't present a valid ticket. End of. That in itself is an offence. If he's too drunk to display his ticket, that is solely his responsibility.

The story keeps changing and changing.

 

[HLW]

The chance that this chap was having a hypo is pretty low, as he had just been (by his own admission) drinking alcohol. Alcohol contains sugar, and this would have increased his blood sugar level. Without knowing exactly when he took his medication it's difficult to say for sure, but he would be the best judge if whether he was having a hypo or not. If he was and if he did not take his hypoglycaemia medication (or sugar in some shape or form) very soon after leaving the train, his collapse into unconsciousness and subsequent admission to hospital would have been commented upon.

"Alcohol makes hypoglycaemia more likely to occur":
http://www.diabetes.org.uk/Guide-to-diabetes/Healthy_lifestyle/Alcohol_and_diabetes/Hypoglycaemia/

He may be hypo unaware, if he is, he would be unaware he was having a hypo.

If you have low blood sugar you don't immediately collapse and fall unconscious. It can take hours.

The only 'hypoglycaemia medication' he would have needed is something with sugar in.

 

[Chew Chew]

On another site this is also being discuss and the following cropped up....

"I registered on the site expecting a thread about this I want to set the record straight. I'm the ex member fez and I'm the victims cousin(dont believe me check his facebook im there as his cousin). What happened was he had an exam and any student will know you cant use your railcard before 10am to travel, so he bought 2 singles, one for going there and one for comin back.

He done his exam, then had a few pints to celebrate then came home. Now he actually had the correct ticket in his pocket but was drunk and kept giving the wrong one, it's hard enough to determine the right one sober at the best of times!! The video didn't catch the start where he was trying to explain himself, and him being drunk thought in his head he was showing the right ticket since he actually had it on him.

What the "big man" did was out of order. The reason he was so keen to get back on the train was because hes diabetic and in his bag was his insulin, as well as the small matter of his uni notes, ipod and mobile phone!!"

....

"That isn't the first thing he says at all, was the conductor talking to himself for a good 40+ seconds? What my cousin's saying for the first part of the video are inaudible. He had already explained his situation to the conductor before recording began.

He was drunk can you not tell? People don't function right when drunk.

What about the women who says "that was uncalled for"? The clapping and cheering is actually cringeworthy. What kind of society do we live in where a grown man can assault a student out a train and be praised as a hero for it? The situation wasn't violent nor potentially violent until that big tink stood up.

Again he's drunk? I've came home in the back door once chapped everyone up saying I'm starving, had food, then walked out the house to the front door and chapped it, when answered again I said I was starving. We don't function right when drunk, he clearly never seen it.

He actually paid for his ticket, you can't use your railcard on a return before 10am so he got 2 singles and used his railcard on the return one. It works out cheaper, as a student who travels from Falkirk to Edinburgh 3 times a week I know cause I do the same!

And he never he actually pushed the conductor into him then pushed him. I'm not trying to convince everyone my cousin's an angel but I just wanted to give his side. He's not the bad guy he's being made out to be and its unfair the criticism he's receiving."

....

"Far from a ned, he's a 2nd year student at Heriot Watt Uni! And he stays a stones throw from Grahamston train station in Falkirk, not Linlithgow."

Make of that what you will. For me it leads to more questions than answers

If he really is the cousin maybe he should have contacted him so they could get the stories straight!

If he lives close to Grahamston then when did he have a Polmont to Edinburgh Park ticket on him?

Why is Sam Main saying he was given 2 Polmont to Edinburgh Park tickets when he bought tickets that morning?

Is his 'cousin' saying that Main got on the train at Grahamston and the examiner never came to him until after the train left Polmont so Main only bought a ticket from Polmont onwards?

 

[Flamingo]

"Alcohol makes hypoglycaemia more likely to occur":
http://www.diabetes.org.uk/Guide-to-diabetes/Healthy_lifestyle/Alcohol_and_diabetes/Hypoglycaemia/

He may be hypo unaware, if he is, he would be unaware he was having a hypo.

If you have low blood sugar you don't immediately collapse and fall unconscious. It can take hours.

The only 'hypoglycaemia medication' he would have needed is something with sugar in.

Alcohol can mask a hypoglycaemic attack as it mirrors the symptoms and reduces self-awareness. However, if he had been having one, I think that he would have screamed that from the rooftops afterwards.

Some diabetics who are prone to hypoglycaemic attacks carry high-glucose sweets or injection kits (glucagon the most usual).

It still doesn't explain or condone his behaviour.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I really think that if a guard got blasted by a passenger with a sawn-off shotgun, from behind while walking to a train and not talking to anybody, that there would be posters that would try to say the passenger was justified in doing so or had a valid excuse, or in some other way excuse the behaviour.

 

[Platform 1]

I'm afraid your probably right.

That sort of thing is pathetic.

 

[90019]

"Far from a ned, he's a 2nd year student at Heriot Watt Uni! And he stays a stones throw from Grahamston train station in Falkirk, not Linlithgow."

If he lives by Falkirk Grahamston, why did he have a Polmont to Edinburgh Park ticket?

I was stuck for a Christmas present for my mother but having seen that video I will now be getting her a nice new tea cosy.

Will you be trying it on beforehand?

 

[yorkie]

I said that I've seen abusive behaviour accepted (to the extent that nothing is done about it).

I've not seen behaviour like that accepted on a train that I can recall, and if you have that's most unfortunate.

I personally don't think a few swear words (which while the provocation was fully justified, was still in response to a provocation) and a possible £2ish fare evasion is grounds enough for it to be heroic to severely endanger someone.

Ridiculous, you're basically giving carte blanche for chavs to refuse to co-operate, and when moved to claim they are being "severely endangered". If a chav is refusing to co-operate then I fully support someone who moves them.

Incidently, the treatment diabetics receive can also be known to cause temporary bouts of aggression and confusion...

This is an appaling statement. I know diabetics and none of them have ever acted like this buffoon and would never do so. Please do not suggest otherwise.

As for how Sam Main fell, we can't see too much of the original push (which can't have been too bad as he immediately got back up), and the subsequent pushes were under extreme provocation as he was entering a carriage that he had no right to enter.

I have prevented someone boarding a train at Cardiff Central who was refused entry by the guard (because there were already loads of bikes on), as he was trying to get his bike on, I pushed the front wheel back while pressing the door close button. He was quite outraged, and also shocked that anyone would stand up to him. If someone is not allowed to enter a train I see absolutely nothing wrong with preventing them, and if that person tries to force their way on, then reasonable force can be used to prevent them. And before you say that the force used in the video was unreasonable, consider this: Sam Main was launching himself in. That had to be robustly defended. And, given that Sam Main was weak compared to the big man, the result was predictable... that is, to everyone except a chav who is not used to anyone standing up to him, and used to getting his own way.

If Sam Main wanted his bag he should ask for it, not try to force his way on! This chav doesn't appear to know how to communicate in a respectful manner. I hope he gets the book thrown at him, and my thoughts are with the big man and the guard, I hope common sense prevails (not always the case with legal matters sadly).

Why is Sam Main the liar and not the person doing the filming?

Sam Main originally said he was given "no time" to explain, then expanded this to "one minute". He's changed his story about various aspects of this case, not just this one, therefore it is a reasonable conclusion that he is a liar. If he isn't a liar then his memory is so bad I wouldn't expect him to pass any exam.

Okay I have no proof that the person fiming is telling the truth, but there's no reason to believe he isn't. Also, I doubt the passengers would be getting that fed up after "one minute", so the five minute claim sounds far more likely.

There is every reason to believe that Sam Main is lying as he and his family have made so many contradictions I'm struggling to keep track of them all!

I suspect some people on this thread have not come across chavs ('neds') acting like this. If you're in that fortunate position, then you are really very lucky! But one day your luck will run out, and I wonder if you may reconsider.

 

[LondonJohn]

As I have said before I don't condone fare evaders but none of us know the truth we are jumping to conclusions based on a You Tube video and what we have seen on Facebook, on tv and in the papers. Lets hope if any of you that do go on trial for a crime get a jury that looks for proof rather than go on hearsay.

The Scotrail guard did not follow company procedure when dealing with an unruly passenger and a member of the public intervened and is being classed as a hero.

From what I see the guy's actions are tantamount to assault.

I can picture now the thread on here if someone got thrown off a train violently when they had a valid ticket for their journey by a member of the public.

When the public start endorsing a vigalante style of justice a very thin line between what is right and wrong has happened.

 

[Platform 1]

Sam Main is nothing but a twit; if he thinks what he's done is "funny" he is a stupid twit; if he thinks he's going to get any compensation/proper sympathy he is an ignorant, stupid twit.

 

[yorkie]

As I have said before I don't condone fare evaders but none of us know the truth we are jumping to conclusions based on a You Tube video and what we have seen on Facebook, on tv and in the papers. Lets hope if any of you that do go on trial for a crime get a jury that looks for proof rather than go on hearsay.

It's quite possible the guy did originally purchase the correct tickets, but his attitude, behaviour and language was disgraceful and constituted at least one byelaw offence. For that alone, irrespective of tickets held/purchase, he should be removed from the train and he should move when told.

The Scotrail guard did not follow company procedure when dealing with an unruly passenger and a member of the public intervened and is being classed as a hero.

From what I see the guy's actions are tantamount to assault.

I disagree. He escorts him off the train in a peaceful manner, yes there is a stumble, but it is only because Sam Main resists (which he had no right to) and because Sam Main repeatedly attempts to illegally board (trespass) that he ends up being hurt.

If someone constantly tried to enter your front door, and you kept chucking them out, I doubt you'd be impressed if someone accused you of assault.

Sam Main kept coming back for more, wasn't really hurt as he thought it was all a big joke, then started crying to the media when his Daddy told him that there may be some compensation in order if he acts like he's been badly hurt.

Disgusting.

I can picture now the thread on here if someone got thrown off a train violently when they had a valid ticket for their journey by a member of the public.

I would certainly hope no-one here would spend 5 minutes swearing at a guard, irrespective of tickets held or not held.

When the public start endorsing a vigalante style of justice a very thin line between what is right and wrong has happened.

And this is the problem, chavs know that most people will let them do whatever they want and are too scared to intervene. In reality, people are not just scared of the chavs, but scared of legislation and what people who defend the chavs will say. Quite a sad state of affairs and it just lets the chav problem get worse as they think they are invincible!

 

[Flamingo]

I wonder what the posters who are condemning this, and saying the guard should have waited for police (which the guard was willing to do) would be posting if they had been on the train, or the one behind, held up for 30 minutes waiting for BTP to turn up, and then sweet-talk the passenger into leaving while he drunkenly insists "I have a **** ticket".

 

[Platform 1]

IF,IF,IF,IF,IF.

Innocent until proven guilty.

Sam Main was proven guilty when he did not provide a valid ticket - he has not yet.

The "big man" has been proven guilty of nothing.

The guard has been proven guilty of nothing.

 

[nedchester]

And this is the problem, chavs know that most people will let them do whatever they want and are too scared to intervene. In reality, people are not just scared of the chavs, but scared of legislation and what people who defend the chavs will say. Quite a sad state of affairs and it just lets the chav problem get worse as they think they are invincible!

And that is the problem. These chavs thing they can get away with it because they (or think they) have rights. Their selfish attitude does not extend to the rights of others. I see it every day at work as a teacher!