Leroy - I think you've missed my point. As I stated at a lot of games there were only a handful of the said group present. They didn't go there to act like ''f+cking morons'' as you state, just to watch the football. You'd have to be pretty stupid to go anywhere in the UK in a small group and ''act up'' as you'd probably get your head caved in.
I have no truck for violent criminals who attack other people be they muggers, drunks or druggies or football hooligans. As far as I am concerned if convicted as guilty then they should be locked up and the key thrown away so that innocent, decent, ordinary people are not at risk of falling victim to their violent acts.
However I am very troubled reading this thread as Civil Liberties and traditional individual rights dating from the Magna Carta appear to have been completely ignored and /or obliterated.
I do not know Nathan Prior so cannot comment on the veracity or otherwise of the allegations against him but what does seem clear is that he has neither received a conviction nor faced a trial for football hooliganism so why do the police hold his name on a covert list?
This issue is not just about football but about the freedom of the individual in society as a whole. If we value individual freedoms we need to (legally) fight this sort of thing.
[cite]Posted By: Henry Irving[/cite]se9/palace hater,
A question. Are you part of this group of people you mention?
Group??? I use to have a season ticket for years but dont anymore due to the fact the way I have been treated by the Police and the club. I got served with a civil ban just befoe the 2006 world cup despite having no convictions for football violence and my mate got to the airport and was banned as well. Part of the evidance was that after we left the game at wigan away tried going round to the Wigan end of the ground. My Dad was with me at the time and read this and knew it was not true as we had to walk around past wigans supporters to get to the train station. Another time was when serving this ban myself and my mate mentioned that I mentioned earlier decided to go out and meet mates in Greenwich on a matchday as we were not allowed near the Valley. Now due to the fact that that the police had by what we thought had treated us unfairly, the group we were with in the pub didnt want to speak to the football Police when they entered the pub as we thought they were out of order. There was know abuse or anything like that we just didnt want to talk to them. So the next person who is arrested for something or they want to put banning orders on get a little file stating every time they are seen at Charlton or in surroundings area and who with. On the bit I mentioned about greenwich that person is told they where drinking in Greenwich with high risk supporters two of whom are serving football banning orders. It then goes on to read that the group was anti police!!! So as soon as a judge reads it he/she then see's the worst when it was nothing like that.
There are also women told by the police that they are classed as high risk as they are seen drinking with the youth. so there the association and that is why I know that Nathan and his mates by no fault of there own will be classed as hight risk now.
[cite]Posted By: Henry Irving[/cite]se9/palace hater,
A question. Are you part of this group of people you mention?
Group??? I use to have a season ticket for years but dont anymore due to the fact the way I have been treated by the Police and the club. I got served with a civil ban just befoe the 2006 world cup despite having no convictions for football violence and my mate got to the airport and was banned as well. Part of the evidance was that after we left the game at wigan away tried going round to the Wigan end of the ground. My Dad was with me at the time and read this and knew it was not true as we had to walk around past wigans supporters to get to the train station. Another time was when serving this ban myself and my mate mentioned that I mentioned earlier decided to go out and meet mates in Greenwich on a matchday as we were not allowed near the Valley. Now due to the fact that that the police had by what we thought had treated us unfairly, the group we were with in the pub didnt want to speak to the football Police when they entered the pub as we thought they were out of order. There was know abuse or anything like that we just didnt want to talk to them. So the next person who is arrested for something or they want to put banning orders on get a little file stating every time they are seen at Charlton or in surroundings area and who with. On the bit I mentioned about greenwich that person is told they where drinking in Greenwich with high risk supporters two of whom are serving football banning orders. It then goes on to read that the group was anti police!!! So as soon as a judge reads it he/she then see's the worst when it was nothing like that.
There are also women told by the police that they are classed as high risk as they are seen drinking with the youth. so there the association and that is why I know that Nathan and his mates by no fault of there own will be classed as hight risk now.
Some of the stuff on the Civil Ban files are ridiculous.
You could be leaving a pub at an way ground seemingly part of a known group and be included part of that. You could be chatting to a known supporter and then be classed as a risk. It's mad.
If only the police followed, harassed, filmed, restricted, searched, sectioned, etc etc the chavs and gangs of London like they do football fans then it'd be a much safer place! But no, football fans are an easy target and deserve to be picked on. If they treated gangs in Peckham, Woolwich, or Lewisham like they treated us they'd be up in court on discrimination charges.
I don't think you'd find anyone who felt there was no need for any type of policing structure. However plenty would argue that society has the right for consistency. Surely if its acceptable to use these measures on football supporters it is fair enough for them to be used on the South London ''rudeboy'' gangs? The police may well be in favour of using these measures but are in fear of being accused of discrimination etc.
Re Henry - I don't see what that has to do with anything ?! Topics like this are/have been previously discussed on here and produces a reasonable set of points of both sides of the fence.
[cite]Posted By: Henry Irving[/cite]se9/palace hater,
A question. Are you part of this group of people you mention?
Group??? I use to have a season ticket for years but dont anymore due to the fact the way I have been treated by the Police and the club. I got served with a civil ban just befoe the 2006 world cup despite having no convictions for football violence and my mate got to the airport and was banned as well. Part of the evidance was that after we left the game at wigan away tried going round to the Wigan end of the ground. My Dad was with me at the time and read this and knew it was not true as we had to walk around past wigans supporters to get to the train station. Another time was when serving this ban myself and my mate mentioned that I mentioned earlier decided to go out and meet mates in Greenwich on a matchday as we were not allowed near the Valley. Now due to the fact that that the police had by what we thought had treated us unfairly, the group we were with in the pub didnt want to speak to the football Police when they entered the pub as we thought they were out of order. There was know abuse or anything like that we just didnt want to talk to them. So the next person who is arrested for something or they want to put banning orders on get a little file stating every time they are seen at Charlton or in surroundings area and who with. On the bit I mentioned about greenwich that person is told they where drinking in Greenwich with high risk supporters two of whom are serving football banning orders. It then goes on to read that the group was anti police!!! So as soon as a judge reads it he/she then see's the worst when it was nothing like that.
There are also women told by the police that they are classed as high risk as they are seen drinking with the youth. so there the association and that is why I know that Nathan and his mates by no fault of there own will be classed as hight risk now.
Some of the stuff on the Civil Ban files are ridiculous.
You could be leaving a pub at an way ground seemingly part of a known group and be included part of that. You could be chatting to a known supporter and then be classed as a risk. It's mad.
If only the police followed, harassed, filmed, restricted, searched, sectioned, etc etc the chavs and gangs of London like they do football fans then it'd be a much safer place! But no, football fans are an easy target and deserve to be picked on. If they treated gangs in Peckham, Woolwich, or Lewisham like they treated us they'd be up in court on discrimination charges.
Well said Sparrows. Even the police would agree with this but policing football supporters is a much easier job that i bet the police all wont to do it
[cite]Posted By: Mike[/cite]so anyone think its worth us complaining about the sec 27's or without any names of police etc is it gonna be fighting a lost cause?
Stoke City fans just won a lot of compensation appealing against a S27 from Manchester the other year. The FSF were instrumental in it I think as well as Liberty (I may be wrong on that one).
It could well be worth following up, but, it was a lot of hard work and hassle for the Stoke fans and has no doubt marked them out for future "closer attention" by the plod.
[cite]Posted By: Mike[/cite]so anyone think its worth us complaining about the sec 27's or without any names of police etc is it gonna be fighting a lost cause?
Prob a lost cause. Phone Phone Plumstead police station up and ask to speak to the football intellegance and try and deal with it that way.
funny how a certain poster turned the thread to different treatment of racial groups.
When black and asian people complain about being harressed and unfairly treated they are often accused of playing the race card or having a chip on their collective shoulders.
hmmm yeah thats why Ive been thinking its too much hassle and will make them look at our names more closely. Nothing goes down on record is what the copper told me. Hopefully this is true
Where have I said that Henry (re; the group) ? This is a messageboard where people are entitled to discuss issues without having to give details out etc. From this issue being discussed before it is clear to see that plenty of members have links to this group in some form e.g friendship from years of going to games/relatives/friends from school and local areas. No one has previously been asked to explain anything about them when expressing their view so I don't see why that should change now?
Once again Henry stop trying to put spin on it. In my original post I just highlighted the fact that the age old daily mail style argument that all lads involved in the football scene are not supporters/dont care about the club is bollocks -
I used the example of handfuls of the group that are tarred as people that don't give a sh1t etc spending money on watching Charlton lose away on a regular basis (circa 06 and 07 and this was without acting in the manner leroy suggested) . I never once tried to claim that this group were angels etc at any point - just contested the notion that this debate is not as black or white as some may choose to believe after media coverage etc.
[cite]Posted By: Henry Irving[/cite]if this group is so innocent why not be open about your membership of it?
[cite]Posted By: Henry Irving[/cite]if this group is so innocent why not be open about your membership of it?
Is there a membership to it? The only memebership you get is when the Police decide your high risk!
Mike and Nathan collect your membership to Todderelers group next home game even though I think you may be to young for that group. You must take your section 27 as prove that you are eligable to join. ;-)
A piece of human excrement threw a bottle at a woman.
Bacause that piece of excrement wants to call himself a Charlton fan, the police will treat all Charlton fans as though they have some of the smell of that excrement.
That means that we cannot afford to have friendlies against Spurs and innocent fans will get section 27s by accident.
I do not understand why we have a thread with over 100 posts complaining about the police, but no one trying to find out who the coward who throws bottles at women and then hides from the police to let other real Charlton fans take the blame for his actions is.
Henry/leroy,I no some of the so called high risk supports and they are good people some have kids now,they work hard all wk and some weekends to support there familys so just because they go to watch charlton play with mates and likes a few beers and a laugh there morons,there not. Believe me I no excatly how police work and alot more police are morons than these high risk supporters. E.G Saints away last season alot of people in the pub mainly charlton supporters,at half 1 Cafc police spotters walk in and say to everyone "everyone has to leave here within 5 mins or we'll section 27 everyone",lad goes up to top OB there to ask him about it and he says to the lad that he never mentioned section 27 to Cafc spotter so he must be lying then he has words with him n tells him not to lie. That's good of the OB to lie isn't it.
Hopefully some of these good people were at the incident and will come forward to identify the Charlton 'supporter' who thinks it's OK to throw a bottle at a barmaid.
[cite]Posted By: stilladdicted[/cite]Hopefully some of these good people were at the incident and will come forward to identify the Charlton 'supporter' who thinks it's OK to throw a bottle at a barmaid.
I think I know who it is, he only said it was us cos we accidently upset him earlier in the night
Comments
A question. Are you part of this group of people you mention?
However I am very troubled reading this thread as Civil Liberties and traditional individual rights dating from the Magna Carta appear to have been completely ignored and /or obliterated.
I do not know Nathan Prior so cannot comment on the veracity or otherwise of the allegations against him but what does seem clear is that he has neither received a conviction nor faced a trial for football hooliganism so why do the police hold his name on a covert list?
This issue is not just about football but about the freedom of the individual in society as a whole. If we value individual freedoms we need to (legally) fight this sort of thing.
Group??? I use to have a season ticket for years but dont anymore due to the fact the way I have been treated by the Police and the club. I got served with a civil ban just befoe the 2006 world cup despite having no convictions for football violence and my mate got to the airport and was banned as well. Part of the evidance was that after we left the game at wigan away tried going round to the Wigan end of the ground. My Dad was with me at the time and read this and knew it was not true as we had to walk around past wigans supporters to get to the train station. Another time was when serving this ban myself and my mate mentioned that I mentioned earlier decided to go out and meet mates in Greenwich on a matchday as we were not allowed near the Valley. Now due to the fact that that the police had by what we thought had treated us unfairly, the group we were with in the pub didnt want to speak to the football Police when they entered the pub as we thought they were out of order. There was know abuse or anything like that we just didnt want to talk to them. So the next person who is arrested for something or they want to put banning orders on get a little file stating every time they are seen at Charlton or in surroundings area and who with. On the bit I mentioned about greenwich that person is told they where drinking in Greenwich with high risk supporters two of whom are serving football banning orders. It then goes on to read that the group was anti police!!! So as soon as a judge reads it he/she then see's the worst when it was nothing like that.
There are also women told by the police that they are classed as high risk as they are seen drinking with the youth. so there the association and that is why I know that Nathan and his mates by no fault of there own will be classed as hight risk now.
Some of the stuff on the Civil Ban files are ridiculous.
You could be leaving a pub at an way ground seemingly part of a known group and be included part of that. You could be chatting to a known supporter and then be classed as a risk. It's mad.
If only the police followed, harassed, filmed, restricted, searched, sectioned, etc etc the chavs and gangs of London like they do football fans then it'd be a much safer place! But no, football fans are an easy target and deserve to be picked on. If they treated gangs in Peckham, Woolwich, or Lewisham like they treated us they'd be up in court on discrimination charges.
However plenty would argue that society has the right for consistency. Surely if its acceptable to use these measures on football supporters it is fair enough for them to be used on the South London ''rudeboy'' gangs? The police may well be in favour of using these measures but are in fear of being accused of discrimination etc.
Re Henry - I don't see what that has to do with anything ?! Topics like this are/have been previously discussed on here and produces a reasonable set of points of both sides of the fence.
no one is suggesting that though, are they?
Well said Sparrows. Even the police would agree with this but policing football supporters is a much easier job that i bet the police all wont to do it
Stoke City fans just won a lot of compensation appealing against a S27 from Manchester the other year. The FSF were instrumental in it I think as well as Liberty (I may be wrong on that one).
It could well be worth following up, but, it was a lot of hard work and hassle for the Stoke fans and has no doubt marked them out for future "closer attention" by the plod.
Prob a lost cause. Phone Phone Plumstead police station up and ask to speak to the football intellegance and try and deal with it that way.
Are you asking people to bubble themselves up on a public messageboard that they may be part of or mix with an active set of lads?
When black and asian people complain about being harressed and unfairly treated they are often accused of playing the race card or having a chip on their collective shoulders.
Ring any bells?
This is a messageboard where people are entitled to discuss issues without having to give details out etc.
From this issue being discussed before it is clear to see that plenty of members have links to this group in some form e.g friendship from years of going to games/relatives/friends from school and local areas. No one has previously been asked to explain anything about them when expressing their view so I don't see why that should change now?
In my original post I just highlighted the fact that the age old daily mail style argument that all lads involved in the football scene are not supporters/dont care about the club is bollocks -
I used the example of handfuls of the group that are tarred as people that don't give a sh1t etc spending money on watching Charlton lose away on a regular basis (circa 06 and 07 and this was without acting in the manner leroy suggested) .
I never once tried to claim that this group were angels etc at any point - just contested the notion that this debate is not as black or white as some may choose to believe after media coverage etc.
Is there a membership to it? The only memebership you get is when the Police decide your high risk!
Mike and Nathan collect your membership to Todderelers group next home game even though I think you may be to young for that group. You must take your section 27 as prove that you are eligable to join. ;-)
Bacause that piece of excrement wants to call himself a Charlton fan, the police will treat all Charlton fans as though they have some of the smell of that excrement.
That means that we cannot afford to have friendlies against Spurs and innocent fans will get section 27s by accident.
I do not understand why we have a thread with over 100 posts complaining about the police, but no one trying to find out who the coward who throws bottles at women and then hides from the police to let other real Charlton fans take the blame for his actions is.
I think I know who it is, he only said it was us cos we accidently upset him earlier in the night
Dont know exactly, just managed to somehow