-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
'Big man' vs Sam Main incident (final decision: no charges for either)
- Thread starter scotsman
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
MidnightFlyer
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 16 May 2010
- Messages
- 12,857
The fare dodger's father wants the bloke who chucked his son off charged for assault:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ollock-throws-fare-dodger-Sam-Main-train.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ollock-throws-fare-dodger-Sam-Main-train.html
ralphchadkirk
Established Member
If what the Dad says is true then a battery (possibly ABH if that injury is one he sustained in the video) charge is possible.
In any case, in this country we have the doctrine of innocent until proven guilty so it would be an issue for the courts to sort. He can raise the public defence of Self defence. From the point of view of someone who is interested in Law it would be interesting to see how this one plays out.
I still personally agree with Mr. Pollock's actions, but we shall see what happens.
In any case, in this country we have the doctrine of innocent until proven guilty so it would be an issue for the courts to sort. He can raise the public defence of Self defence. From the point of view of someone who is interested in Law it would be interesting to see how this one plays out.
I still personally agree with Mr. Pollock's actions, but we shall see what happens.
MidnightFlyer
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 16 May 2010
- Messages
- 12,857
I note the father claims that his son had diabetes medication and university essentials in his bag and had to get back on the train to get it, but wasn't that thrown off after him?
AlterEgo
Veteran Member
I have actually seen a security agent on the Dublin LUAS tram forcibly remove (by picking up) a young troublemaker. So, I agree fully with this guy.
I've noticed most of the Daily Mail reader comments are sensible for once! Hallelujah!
the sniper
Established Member
- Joined
- 4 Sep 2007
- Messages
- 3,499
Are there any relevant byelaws or Acts relating to LUAS or public vehicles in Ireland? Sadly I don't know anything about Irish law.
Veolia (who run the system) were sick of trouble (it was quite bad I believe on one line), and I don't think the Gardaí in Ireland have 'transport police' (I could be wrong). So, Veolia use a security company, who employ ex-service personnel from Eastern Europe. They are known for being 'tough'.
Sorry for the slight tangent there....
nedchester
Established Member
- Joined
- 28 May 2008
- Messages
- 2,093
I suspect the injury was not sustain during the initial throwing off but when he tried to rejoin the train by running at Pollock (assault on big man??) and then Pollock ejected him onto the platform and he seem to fall sidewards.
Either way as far as I am convinced the youth got what he deserved. If a claim of assault is made then a counter claim of travelling without a ticket can be brought against the fare evader.
Last edited:
ralphchadkirk
Established Member
Quite possibly, but it's a tangle for the courts to sort out if it ever gets that far!
That's very likely to happen as well. Or bartering down for a lesser offence that he would probably get discharged for.
scotsman
Established Member
- Joined
- 6 Jul 2010
- Messages
- 3,252
Only by ScotRail. A counter-claim of assault or breach of the peace could be brought. Given that these claims would almost certainly result in a conviction (as opposed to big man's "assault"), then he would likely drop his own claim.
Sam Main had previously claimed "I did have a ticket but I must have handed over the wrong one to the conductor. The next thing I know this big guy is manhandling me to the door and throwing me off" but this is quite unbelievable as the guard could see the ticket said "SGL", if Sam Maim was telling the truth the ticket would have said "OUT" if it was the "wrong portion".
His Dad, Lenny Main has come up with another excuse, after the previous excuse was obviously found out to be false. "Sam went to the railway station at Polmont at 8am to buy a return ticket, but was told two singles would be cheaper as he planned to return off peak."
This is theoretically possible if he got an SDS (£5.10) and then used a Railcard to get a discounted CDS (£3.35), total would be £8.45. However surely the guard wouldn't chuck someone off if they held such tickets and explained the situation? But did this polite student studying for an exam explain the situation? No. A rude chav ("ned" in Scotland) was foul mouthed and showed disregard for everyone on board the train.
If it looks like a chav, sounds like a chav, and acts like a chav, the chances are... it is a chav. The excuses do not wash and are a contradiction: he swore because he had a drink, yet was concentrating for an exam?! Yeah right! As if!
I do think it was wrong for the person who filmed this to put it online. Chavs usually get their way, here we had a case where a chav did not get his way, which is quite unusual in cases like this. So what does he do? Give the chav a chance to win by getting his Daddy to get bloodsucking lawyers involved and use the video as evidence. :roll:
I'm all for defending the rights of passengers, and totally opposed to guards abusing their power, but what I see here is nothing more than an abusive, disrespectful foul-mouthed lout who thinks he can get away with anything and that the world owes him respect yet he has to respect nobody.
All the best to the guard, the big man, and as for Sam Maim: shame on you. Now go and learn some manners.
Still, at least he won't be getting a job surveying now, as no-one would employ him in a job like that. Imagine that! "Can you adjust the angle a couple more degrees please?" "F*** off! I've already adjusted the f***ing angle! I am not moving it! Now leave me alone, I'm drunk, and I'll get my Daddy on to you"
nedchester
Established Member
- Joined
- 28 May 2008
- Messages
- 2,093
sam main had previously claimed "i did have a ticket but i must have handed over the wrong one to the conductor. The next thing i know this big guy is manhandling me to the door and throwing me off" but this is quite unbelievable as the guard could see the ticket said "sgl", if sam maim was telling the truth the ticket would have said "out" if it was the "wrong portion".
His dad, lenny main has come up with another excuse, after the previous excuse was obviously found out to be false. "sam went to the railway station at polmont at 8am to buy a return ticket, but was told two singles would be cheaper as he planned to return off peak."
this is theoretically possible if he got an sds (£5.10) and then used a railcard to get a discounted cds (£3.35), total would be £8.45. However surely the guard wouldn't chuck someone off if they held such tickets and explained the situation? But did this polite student studying for an exam explain the situation? No. A rude chav ("ned" in scotland) was foul mouthed and showed disregard for everyone on board the train.
If it looks like a chav, sounds like a chav, and acts like a chav, the chances are... It is a chav. The excuses do not wash and are a contradiction: He swore because he had a drink, yet was concentrating for an exam?! Yeah right! As if!
I do think it was wrong for the person who filmed this to put it online. Chavs usually get their way, here we had a case where a chav did not get his way, which is quite unusual in cases like this. So what does he do? Give the chav a chance to win by getting his daddy to get bloodsucking lawyers involved and use the video as evidence. :roll:
I'm all for defending the rights of passengers, and totally opposed to guards abusing their power, but what i see here is nothing more than an abusive, disrespectful foul-mouthed lout who thinks he can get away with anything and that the world owes him respect yet he has to respect nobody.
All the best to the guard, the big man, and as for sam maim: Shame on you. Now go and learn some manners.
Still, at least he won't be getting a job surveying now, as no-one would employ him in a job like that. Imagine that! "can you adjust the angle a couple more degrees please?" "f*** off! I've already adjusted the f***ing angle! I am not moving it! Now leave me alone, i'm drunk, and i'll get my daddy on to you"
+1 :d
ralphchadkirk
Established Member
Apparently he had that exam that day and had had a drink to celebrate. Not that that excuses him.he swore because he had a drink, yet was concentrating for an exam?! Yeah right! As if!
table38
Established Member
I suggest they both go and argue it out on the Jeremy Kyle Show 
Lampshade
Established Member
Pathetic. If my father had seen me do that he'd have personally sent a thank you letter to this guy, then punished me even more.
Ah, yet another change of story!
So, let's get this straight, first he was studying for an exam? Then they realised they needed an excuse for the swearing, so it changed to having a drink celebrating after an exam?
Quite frankly the way they change their story is laughable and in my opinion the lad and his Dad lack all credibility. But that's not uncommon behaviour. They aren't the brightest sparks and they don't seem to understand the basic concept that others can actually look up their claims and work out that they don't make sense or are impossible! That's how people who pick tickets up of the floor are found out: they can't answer questions like "Where did you buy this ticket? How did you pay?" but it never occurs to them that someone can actually catch them out. If this guy was a footballer, he'd probably do something like this.
Even when found out, they still can't face the truth, and the hardest word for them is "sorry". They just can't say it, let alone mean it. It's all about "respect" - that's the world having to respect them, not them giving any.
Sadsmileyface
Member
Love it, dragging the staff at Polmont into this now- claiming they made not one, but TWO staggering ballsups.
It's now everybody's fault BUT this little fuds.
I think he probably finds it harder to say "One return ticket to Edinburgh Park, please".
It's now everybody's fault BUT this little fuds.
I think he probably finds it harder to say "One return ticket to Edinburgh Park, please".
nedchester
Established Member
- Joined
- 28 May 2008
- Messages
- 2,093
A mantra that I often trot out at work. Some of the kids I teach don't have any respect for authority or each other yet. Yet they expect it from me. It's a two way street!
Flamingo
Established Member
- Joined
- 26 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 6,810
So we are now adding drunk on the railway (bylaw 7 I believe, but may be wrong) to the charge sheet?
Rule number 1 - when in a hole, stop digging!
All Line Rover
Established Member
- Joined
- 17 Feb 2011
- Messages
- 5,222
Byelaw 4.
4.1: "No person shall enter or remain on the railway where such person is unfit to enter or remain on the railway as a result of being in a state of intoxication."
4.3.i: "Where an authorised person reasonably believes that any person is unfit to enter or remain on the railway... an authorised person may: (i) require him to leave the railway."
chris89
Established Member
Byelaw 4.
4.1: "No person shall enter or remain on the railway where such person is unfit to enter or remain on the railway as a result of being in a state of intoxication."
4.3.i: "Where an authorised person reasonably believes that any person is unfit to enter or remain on the railway... an authorised person may: (i) require him to leave the railway."
Intresting to know that actually, as off from the topic the 3rd coming back from Edinburgh to Armadale, the guard had to shut of the rear coach of a 334 due to some drunk (about 7pm) had been sick during the bit from Waverly to Haymarket through the Gardens.
Chris
Flamingo
Established Member
- Joined
- 26 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 6,810
I stand corrected. Mind you, I have never seen it used, and was not even aware of it's existence until I was once asked in a questionnaire if I though it was used enough!
kyrano
Member
- Joined
- 13 Nov 2008
- Messages
- 112
so who is the big guy ??? he should have thrown the little prat in the Lithgow canal...
I'm glad that someone in the public stood up to this daft little prick.
The guy just helped the older folk out and did the exact same as what the police would have done, the guy did not pay for a ticket, he was swearing, he had no respect for anyone on that train, the bigger guy just did what any ordinary person would have done.
I would have done the exact same if I was wanting to go somewhere and you have a moron like this on the train going on like that.
Tip for the wee ned - next time pay for a ticket.
The guy just helped the older folk out and did the exact same as what the police would have done, the guy did not pay for a ticket, he was swearing, he had no respect for anyone on that train, the bigger guy just did what any ordinary person would have done.
I would have done the exact same if I was wanting to go somewhere and you have a moron like this on the train going on like that.
Tip for the wee ned - next time pay for a ticket.
DaveNewcastle
Established Member
Oh!
An exam? I thought that the four-lettered word he used on-board began with and 'f' not an 'e'.
Its so easy to confuse the two words.
Tip number two. Give up your studies and any hope for a professional career now. Get yourself a basic local job now, before your prospects get any worse.
Last edited:
ralphchadkirk
Established Member
According to his father he had an exam... :roll:
Trog
Established Member
ralphchadkirk
Established Member
- Status