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

[michael769]

Forgot it's in Scotland for a minute, Justice of the Peace court or District court then. Same basic function, different name and still doesn't have a jury.

Assault cases are usually heard by a Sheriff rather than a JP. (Except in Glasgow where the greater sentencing powers of the Stipendiary magistrates mean that more serious offences can be heard in the District court)

 

[Greeny]

michael769 wrote
Quote:
"Originally Posted by Greeny View Post
Personally, I’d call it an assault and I hope the CPS think so.
As the CPS have no involvement in the Law of Scotland what they think of the matter (if anything) is entirely irrelevant."

Scot's law and especially our legal procedures are very different from anything you may have experienced or seen on TV South of the Border.
michael769 is online now Report Post

Granted - the equivalent to the CPS then - Procurator fiscal ?. Either way it doesn't matter. What matters is that aside from different procedures, assault is still assault and should be dealt with as such no matter how it is dressed up.

Personally (as far as not having the correct ticket is concerned) I have little or no sympathy with the none-paying passenger. However (and as I have already said) where is the line drawn?. Had it been me, the 'good guy' would be minus his teeth.

Sorry.

G

 

[michael769]

Had it been me, the 'good guy' would be minus his teeth.

In that case they would have been far too busy doing you for GBH to worry about the big man's supposed ABH.

 

[Wolfie]

This won't be heard by a jury, it'll be a Magistrate's court hearing if it gets that far. He's only been charged with common assault.

I am no expert on Scots Law and the Scottish legal/court system. However in England and Wales a defendant can always opt for a Crown Court hearing in front of a jury. I would be somewhat surprised if the same right did not exist in Scotland. Were I the "bigman" I would be using that right......

 

[Greeny]

Hello Michael,

In my original post I said that had the ‘do-gooder’ laid a hand on me, he would be minus his teeth. My meaning was that had a stranger grabbed hold of me first – not that I’d just have smacked him for getting involved. My reasoning being that the law allows me to use reasonable force to defend myself and If I am grabbed, out of the blue, by a stranger, I don’t know their intentions so I’ll smack first then worry about it afterwards.

Sorry if I wasn’t very clear.

G

 

[90019]

So, if someone put a hand on your shoulder, for whatever reason, you'd just punch them straight away?

 

[Chew Chew]

So, if someone put a hand on your shoulder, for whatever reason, you'd just punch them straight away?

The phrase 'internet hardman' is springing to mind. No idea why though........ :roll:

 

[Greeny]

So, if someone put a hand on your shoulder, for whatever reason, you'd just punch them straight away?

Who said that ????.

I said if a stranger grabbed me out of the blue. There is a great deal of difference between that and putting a hand on my shoulder. But to be clear, if anybody put their hand on my shoulder NO - I WOULD NOT JUST PUNCH THEM. However, if somebody grabbed me aggressively in the fashion depicted in the video, then yes I would. I don't know their intentions, or what they are going to pull out of their pocket. I just KNOW that a stranger has grabbed hold of me in an agressive way.

If I am placed in fear for my safety I regard is as reasonable to prevent that.

G

 

[Cliveblackpool]

Hello Michael,

In my original post I said that had the ‘do-gooder’ laid a hand on me, he would be minus his teeth. My meaning was that had a stranger grabbed hold of me first – not that I’d just have smacked him for getting involved. My reasoning being that the law allows me to use reasonable force to defend myself and If I am grabbed, out of the blue, by a stranger, I don’t know their intentions so I’ll smack first then worry about it afterwards.

Sorry if I wasn’t very clear.

G

That's exactly what Main would have done if the big man had given him half a chance!

 

[90019]

Who said that ????.

In my original post I said that had the ‘do-gooder’ laid a hand on me, he would be minus his teeth.

I said if a stranger grabbed me out of the blue. There is a great deal of difference between that and putting a hand on my shoulder.

So, a firm hand on your shoulder and you'd do nothing?
At what point does it go from doing nothing to attacking the other person?

 

[sonorguy]

That's exactly what Main would have done if the big man had given him half a chance!

Is it telepathy that's telling you this, as there's absolutely no evidence to support your assertion?

Even if he had it's possible/likely he would have been able to argue self-defence as the criteria are that a person has to believe at that time that they are in danger and that would appear to be a reasonable belief as Mr. Pollock came from behind him. That said the response has to be 'reasonable' and 'proportionate'.

 

[ANorthernGuard]

Methinks this will just keep going around in circles until the conclusion at Court :roll:

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Greeny is quite correct. If someone came up behind you and grabbed you in the way that Sam Main was then he is entitled to use reasonable force to defend himself, claiming self defence.

 

[sonorguy]

I think you're probably right. In honesty the charge is probably appropriate (as would Main's be if it happens) but I'm not convinced it's really in the public interest to go through proceedings in either case, as both will have learnt some hard lessons from it.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Methinks this will just keep going around in circles until the conclusion at Court :roll:

.......

 

[PaulLothian]

I am no expert on Scots Law and the Scottish legal/court system. However in England and Wales a defendant can always opt for a Crown Court hearing in front of a jury. I would be somewhat surprised if the same right did not exist in Scotland.

Prepare to be surprised! There never has been any such option in Scotland, in common with most legal jurisdictions in the world that are not based on the English system. The significant difference is that we entrust such decisions to legally-trained and experienced Sheriffs, rather than to a random selection of individuals. I think it actually works very well.

 

[Tin Rocket]

Could Mr Main be a pursuer and open civil proceedings against scotrail/big man if the case is not taken up by the procurator fiscal?

 

[Chew Chew]

Could Mr Main be a pursuer and open civil proceedings against scotrail/big man if the case is not taken up by the procurator fiscal?

Would it be worth his while after the negative publicity that has already surrounded him?

 

[Greeny]

Hello 90019,

I would say that it becomes an 'attack' when a stranger tries to drag me from my seat. However, I cannot see the situation where I would be involved in something like that.

Look, no matter how it is represented what this ‘good guy’ did was to become involved in something which was, up to that point, a row between a Conductor and a passenger. As far as I could see, whilst the passenger was swearing, up to the point that this character got stuck in there was no physical contact – he immediately escalated it. Had the fare dodger smacked the other passenger first or assaulted the Conductor then it would be a different matter. But that was not the case, and like it or not that passenger was entitled not to be grabbed and thrown off a train by a stranger. I don’t like dragging ‘if’s’ or ‘butt’s’ into it, but what if this ‘good-guy’ had broken the fare evaders arm, or leg, or neck?. Again, where do you draw the line?. We employ Police to enforce the law, Courts and Lawyers to administer it, and Prison and Probation Services to carry out the Courts decisions. This was something approaching vigilantism and we’ve all seen where that leads.

At no point have I ever said that I’d smack somebody for “just putting their hand on my shoulder” and frankly I would deserve whatever punishment was coming my way if I did do that. But (again, sorry) if a stranger grabs me in an aggressive way and, as in this case, tried to pull me from my seat I do not know their intentions and ‘if’ I had reason to fear for my safety I will take action to defend myself.

At best, this do-gooder ‘retaliated’ first, at no time on the video was he threatened prior to him grabbing the fare dodger, and as far as I could see, nor was the conductor. And no matter how grateful the Conductor and other passengers were to be on their way, it did not justify one passenger throwing another passenger off a train.

Sorry if that offends anyone – it’s just my opinion

G

 

[Tin Rocket]

Would it be worth his while after the negative publicity that has already surrounded him?

If he is driven by financial compo,then maybe yes.

 

[michael769]

Methinks this will just keep going around in circles until the conclusion at Court :roll:

Afraid so, positions on the issue are deeply entrenched by now.

 

[Chew Chew]

If he is driven by financial compo,then maybe yes.

Taking things to a civil court thus re-publicising the initial events, where he was drunk and swore at an old man in front a a woman and young children, would make him even more unemployable so I can't see that happening.

 

[ANorthernGuard]

Afraid so, positions on the issue are deeply entrenched by now.

They certainly are, Myself is on the side of Mr Pollock, even just from a Moral point of view, others from a legal point of view and a minority who think Mr Main was a poor victim (I'm still trying to get my head around that one). IMHO I hope the book gets thrown at Mr Main even if its just for the way he treated someone in the same profession as myself, It was disgusting behaviour and I hope he is heavily fined and Mr Pollock is cleared, hopefully that will happen but regardless of what country we are in this British Isles the law still goes against people willing to stand up for what they believe in and let people like Mr Main off scot free (parden the pun)

 

[GB]

Hello 90019,

I would say that it becomes an 'attack' when a stranger tries to drag me from my seat. However, I cannot see the situation where I would be involved in something like that.

Look, no matter how it is represented what this ‘good guy’ did was to become involved in something which was, up to that point, a row between a Conductor and a passenger. As far as I could see, whilst the passenger was swearing, up to the point that this character got stuck in there was no physical contact – he immediately escalated it. Had the fare dodger smacked the other passenger first or assaulted the Conductor then it would be a different matter. But that was not the case, and like it or not that passenger was entitled not to be grabbed and thrown off a train by a stranger. I don’t like dragging ‘if’s’ or ‘butt’s’ into it, but what if this ‘good-guy’ had broken the fare evaders arm, or leg, or neck?. Again, where do you draw the line?. We employ Police to enforce the law, Courts and Lawyers to administer it, and Prison and Probation Services to carry out the Courts decisions. This was something approaching vigilantism and we’ve all seen where that leads.

At no point have I ever said that I’d smack somebody for “just putting their hand on my shoulder” and frankly I would deserve whatever punishment was coming my way if I did do that. But (again, sorry) if a stranger grabs me in an aggressive way and, as in this case, tried to pull me from my seat I do not know their intentions and ‘if’ I had reason to fear for my safety I will take action to defend myself.

At best, this do-gooder ‘retaliated’ first, at no time on the video was he threatened prior to him grabbing the fare dodger, and as far as I could see, nor was the conductor. And no matter how grateful the Conductor and other passengers were to be on their way, it did not justify one passenger throwing another passenger off a train.

Sorry if that offends anyone – it’s just my opinion

G

Summed it up quite nicely there me thinks!

 

[Bungle73]

2. Back to the swearing there were other people in the carriage, there were the children sat with the mother, who looked worried and when he was pulled along the carriage he went out of his way to pull into the mother would he have done that if one of the young children were sat there? I imagine he has commited a public order offence (I am no Legal expert so cannot which!)

Sorry, but that's wrong as well. The reason he fell onto her was because he was being dragged along the carriage by Big Man.

This a quite clear case of assault to me. Big Man intervened in a situation he had no business being involved in, and in doing this he caused unnecessary injury to someone.

It's a sad day when people think it's ok for some random to attack another person on a train over a ticketing dispute. The fact that he was swearing is neither here nor there.

 

[ANorthernGuard]

Sorry, but that's wrong as well. The reason he fell onto her was because he was being dragged along the carriage by Big Man.

This a quite clear case of assault to me. Big Man intervened in a situation he had no business being involved in, and in doing this he caused unnecessary injury to someone.

It's a sad day when people think it's ok for some random to attack another person on a train over a ticketing dispute. The fact that he was swearing is neither here nor there.

But its perfectly ok to be verbally abusive and acting in a threatening manner to a conductor and having no regard for the passengers on board the train?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I think you're probably right. In honesty the charge is probably appropriate (as would Main's be if it happens) but I'm not convinced it's really in the public interest to go through proceedings in either case, as both will have learnt some hard lessons from it.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


.......

and I still cannot help sticking up for the Conductor and Mr Pollock....Damn Morals

 

[asylumxl]

I don’t like dragging ‘if’s’ or ‘butt’s’ into it, but what if this ‘good-guy’ had broken the fare evaders arm, or leg, or neck?

The world would be one ned better off.

 

[Bungle73]

But its perfectly ok to be verbally abusive and acting in a threatening manner to a conductor and having no regard for the passengers on board the train?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---



and I still cannot help sticking up for the Conductor and Mr Pollock....Damn Morals

Show where he was "threatening"? All I hear is him saying stuff like "I've shown you my F'ing ticket", "I've f'ing paid". That is threatening to you? Tell me this what would happen if a railway employee had assaulted someone like that? I can you this, it wouldn't be nothing. Also what would have happened if a full scale fight had broken out; all on the say so of this ticket inspector.

 

[ANorthernGuard]

Show where he was "threatening"? All I hear is him saying stuff like "I've shown you my F'ing ticket", "I've f'ing paid". That is threatening to you? Tell me this what would happen is a railway employee had assaulted someone like that? I can you this, it wouldn't be nothing. Also what would have happened if a full scale fight had broken out; all on the say so of this ticket inspector.

No offence but have you actually worked a train??? have you had to deal with persons like Mr Main on a reasonably Regular basis when you and the Driver are the only 2 railway employees? how do you think the Conductor felt, I know I would have felt threatened by his behaviour and so would most, We cannot rely on the police due to lack of numbers, we are in a metal tube and the majority of the time we are by ourselves dealing with persons like Mr Main, The conductor involved would not have stood a chance if Mr Main was physically aggressive, good on Mr Pollock for what he did.

 

[WelshBluebird]

To those having a go at the guard, put yourself in his shoes for a second.
You are presented with a passenger, who does not have a valid ticket, who is being abusive and disruptive, who has had a drink and who clearly is not going to cooperate with you. Yes, you could phone the BTP, but there you are basically just hoping that they turn up. As someone who does not work within the industry, even I do it to some extent, we are all guilty of being too harsh on railway staff IMO. In some of the circumstances staff have to put up with, I have no idea what on earth I would do!

 

[ANorthernGuard]

To those having a go at the guard, put yourself in his shoes for a second.
You are presented with a passenger, who does not have a valid ticket, who is being abusive and disruptive, who has had a drink and who clearly is not going to cooperate with you. Yes, you could phone the BTP, but there you are basically just hoping that they turn up. As someone who does not work within the industry, even I do it to some extent, we are all guilty of being too harsh on railway staff IMO. In some of the circumstances staff have to put up with, I have no idea what on earth I would do!

Thankyou WBB one of the few who at least tries and sees it from the guards point of view