Brewster and McBurnie Charged

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?


H
CPB said:
I wouldn't be so certain this is going to go the way of McBurnies from the posts so far as absurd as it is.

But you have to ask what on earth is Mr Brinkley's solicitor thinking? Have they advised him to say these things because it does not paint him in a good light.
Click to expand...
I doubt he has a solicitor just the prosecuting lawyer. Once he is called as a witness he is there to give his evidence and then be cross examined.
The phrase “ opening up a can of mad frogs” springs to my confused brain !!
 
CPB said:
I wouldn't be so certain this is going to go the way of McBurnies from the posts so far as absurd as it is.

But you have to ask what on earth is Mr Brinkley's solicitor thinking? Have they advised him to say these things because it does not paint him in a good light.
Click to expand...
Remember it is only the prosecution arguments at the moment. I have not seen any mention of any new video evidence so far. So at the moment we appear to have a 'victim' who didn't know who had stamped on him until 2 days later( he had a slightly bruised leg), a 'victim' who appears to be concerned about punishing OM as he has momeny, abusing and threatening OM on Social Media, a 14 year old who says he saw OM stamp on the victim

I assume the defence tomorrow will focus on what actually evidence has been produced
 
CPB said:
I wouldn't be so certain this is going to go the way of McBurnies from the posts so far as absurd as it is.

But you have to ask what on earth is Mr Brinkley's solicitor thinking? Have they advised him to say these things because it does not paint him in a good light.
Click to expand...
A barrister can try and train a witness to answer only the questions put and only those in the right way but unfortunately some witnesses are as thick as mince. Answering "no comment" in a court of law is not generally a recommended course of action either.

McBurnie's barrister only needs to introduce reasonable doubt. From the reporting it seems that the only video evidence is that which we've already seen so it would appear that the decision will come down to the strength (and corroboration) of the relevant witness evidence.

It has to be said that the alleged victim has done himself no favours on the basis of the reported evidence but that doesn't necessarily mean that McBurnie won't get convicted.
 
So Mr Watson didn't see anything then other than OM put his hood up

Forest fan Mr Watson saw McBurnie in a grey trainer jacket, and McBurnie's hood going up.

McBurnie sort of darts out towards the pitch. It would be fast, it wasn't a walk," he told the court.
McBurnie's face was concentrated but "slightly angry"," he added. He did not know what McBurnie did next, saying "it was very crowded. He went towards the dugout area and after that I went back to work mode".
Click to expand...
 
bartman said:
So Mr Watson didn't see anything then other than OM put his hood up

Forest fan Mr Watson saw McBurnie in a grey trainer jacket, and McBurnie's hood going up.
Click to expand...
I guess the prosecution are trying to suggest that McBurnie purposely tried to hide his identity
 
Dougie said:
He is in open court, isn't he? He's taking questions from McBurnie's legal team
Click to expand...
Thought he hadn’t attended court and was rather giving testimony via a prerecorded deposition. You can still be cross examined in a deposition it’s just done in advance normally at your solicitors office and recorded to be played later in court.
 
bartman said:
So Mr Watson didn't see anything then other than OM put his hood up

Forest fan Mr Watson saw McBurnie in a grey trainer jacket, and McBurnie's hood going up.
Click to expand...
He's there as the prosecution case is built on the assertion that McBurnie targeted the Dog Nonce. This witness's view that McBurnie looked angry is part of that.
 
Westran said:
I guess the prosecution are trying to suggest that McBurnie purposely tried to hide his identity
Click to expand...
Even if that was the case(which can easily be argued against), it doesn't mean he has committed any crime
 

bartman said:
Even if that was the case(which can easily be argued against), it doesn't mean he has committed any crime
Click to expand...
No but its part of building a broader case, he was angry, seeking revenge for what the alleged victim had said, he tried to hide his identity and moved rapidly towards him, stamping on him then running off down the tunnel
 
Balham Blade said:
He's there as the prosecution case is built on the assertion that McBurnie targeted the Dog Nonce. This witness's view that McBurnie looked angry is part of that.
Click to expand...
I am sure the defence will argue that he would be angry that his captain had just been assaulted. and that OM went back because he know RB and other players were out there
 
Westran said:
No but its part of building a broader case, he was angry, seeking revenge for what the alleged victim had said, he tried to hide his identity and moved rapidly towards him, stamping on him then running off down the tunnel
Click to expand...
He said he put his hood up. A United striker with a moon boot, beard and with CCTV everywhere wouldn't be too hard to recognise even for a dog nonce( who didn't know McBurnie had stamped on him until 2 days later)
 
Westran said:
No but its part of building a broader case, he was angry, seeking revenge for what the alleged victim had said, he tried to hide his identity and moved rapidly towards him, stamping on him then running off down the tunnel
Click to expand...
His defence can note that he's wearing sheffield united training gear same as all the staff and players, how rapid is rapid with one foot in a moon boot?
 
Whether the evidence is credible is up to the jury to decide unfortunately. I think it's a load of bollocks, but a jury made of of people who don't see things in the way a football fan on a forum might see things may think differently
 
16:20REBECCA SHERDLEY

Today's last witness​

David England, a security manager, has been called to give evidence. He was working in the stewarding team.
He was on the touch-line, facing the Peter Taylor stand, when the game finished.
16:10REBECCA SHERDLEY

What happened next?​

Forest fan Mr Watson saw McBurnie in a grey trainer jacket, and McBurnie's hood going up.
McBurnie sort of darts out towards the pitch. It would be fast, it wasn't a walk," he told the court.
McBurnie's face was concentrated but "slightly angry"," he added. He did not know what McBurnie did next, saying "it was very crowded. He went towards the dugout area and after that I went back to work mode".
Click to expand...
16:04REBECCA SHERDLEY

Mr Watson is describing what he saw​

Mr Watson is part of the Nottingham Forest response team and was positioned on the tunnel at the City Ground. He said fans had invaded the pitch from the second the game was decided on penalties.
All players are advised to go straight down the tunnel on the final whistle, the court heard. He said it started to get a bit heated.
He noticed Bill Sharp, who was injured, coming down the tunnel holding his nose. McBurnie was inside the tunnel and came back out.
 
McBurnie "looked angry". Can anyone say with certainty what "angry" looks like? My uncle for example has a look to him that makes him look ready to knock anyone out at any point for any reason. Unless I've seen an individual look happy, sad, angry or otherwise, how do I know what their angry face is?
 
Ainsley Harriott said:
McBurnie "looked angry". Can anyone say with certainty what "angry" looks like? My uncle for example has a look to him that makes him look ready to knock anyone out at any point for any reason. Unless I've seen an individual look happy, sad, angry or otherwise, how do I know what their angry face is?
Click to expand...
My wife always says I look fuming when we score 🤷‍♂️
 
16:26REBECCA SHERDLEY

What he saw​

He described events leading up to the incident and how Brewster, a Sheffield United player, had got hold of somebody he did not know and threw him to the floor. He described it as a "chokehold from behind".
16:20REBECCA SHERDLEY

Today's last witness​

David England, a security manager, has been called to give evidence. He was working in the stewarding team.
He was on the touch-line, facing the Peter Taylor stand, when the game finished.
 
Ainsley Harriott said:
McBurnie "looked angry". Can anyone say with certainty what "angry" looks like? My uncle for example has a look to him that makes him look ready to knock anyone out at any point for any reason. Unless I've seen an individual look happy, sad, angry or otherwise, how do I know what their angry face is?
Click to expand...
You don't unless ,you're a paid employee with a vested interest in a society where some scrote who may or not have been stamped on should have if there is any justice.
 
Westran said:
No but its part of building a broader case, he was angry, seeking revenge for what the alleged victim had said, he tried to hide his identity and moved rapidly towards him, stamping on him then running off down the tunnel
Click to expand...
More like he saw Billy’s face covered in blood and went back out to see if everyone else was ok!
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

knowsnowt
53 million.
Replies
2
Views
626
Edgar Allan Poo
Edgar Allan Poo
COME BACK CHED
Kyle Bartley
2
Replies
37
Views
4K
Karaoke Blade
Karaoke Blade
Fjortoft's Aeroplane
  • Poll Poll
Brewster v O'hare
Replies
27
Views
2K
Agreasychipbutty
A
NAnstonblade
Brewster
2
Replies
59
Views
4K
Blademan89
Blademan89
R
Shackelele charged with Drink Driving
2 3 4
Replies
110
Views
8K
HarryHaslam
HarryHaslam

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom