The Big Man has been charged!

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Still, it'll stop people thinking they can take the law into their own hands at least. He may have been morally correct, however it was never his place to remove the kid from the train, nor did he have the right.
 
Sitting there after (a few drinks but not drunk) and mouthing off to the conductor while holding up a trainload of passengers, he deserved to be thrown off the train inmy opinion.
 
It will be interesting to see what happens now under Scottish Law. The eyes of the rest of the country and indeed the world will be watching this one.

It cant be "Not Proven" but it could be conditional discharge (as was the oik from the train)
 
All I can say is 'pity...'
 
MercFanUk said:
Still, it'll stop people thinking they can take the law into their own hands at least. He may have been morally correct, however it was never his place to remove the kid from the train, nor did he have the right.
Click to expand...

Why didn't he?

This lad that he's thrown off is 'diabetic' yet admits to having hardly any food all day and had been drinking, just for good measure. He hasn't got a ticket and was being abusive to the ticket collector. If I'd have been on the train, I'd have been slinging the little idiot off.

The big 'un deserves a medal, not being arrested.
 
The kid has been wrongly advised, as soon as this goes to court he'll become a target, he was in the wrong, he should have left it as it stood.
 
MercFanUk said:
Still, it'll stop people thinking they can take the law into their own hands at least. He may have been morally correct, however it was never his place to remove the kid from the train, nor did he have the right.
Click to expand...

The elderly conductor asked him time and again to get off the train. He refused and was abusive. The train was halted at a station and everybodys' journey was being delayed by one foul-mouthed youth with no ticket.

So I think that right was on his side.
 
Guy's - I agree on the moral grounds, but we have to remember it wasn't his right to do anything. It wasn't his train, it wasn't a relation/friend etc of his, and he didn't work for the train company either. So what if he was suffering a delay, that's the train companies business to sort, not his. They should have better trained staff (no pun intended!), or they should have more capable staff.

Either that, of the conductor should have arranged to have a copper at a station and have him removed that way.
 
Last edited:
MercFanUk said:
Guy's - I agree on the moral grounds, but we have to remember it wasn't his right to do anything. It wasn't his train, it wasn't a relation/friend etc of his, and he didn't work for the train company either. So what if he was suffering a delay, that's the train companies business to sort, not his. They should have better trained staff (no pun intended!), or they should have more capable staff.
Click to expand...


And the youth should buy a ticket and clear off when he's caught without one.

Sometimes prompt and decisive action is the most expedient solution and negates any need for hand-wringing or debate.
 
Lets not forget both have been charged.

The youth - Main, 19, has been reported to the Procurator Fiscal for a breach of the peace and trespass.

The Big Man is charged with assualt.

British Transport Police said today: 'British Transport Police can now confirm that a 35-year-old man from Stirling and a 19-year-old man from Falkirk are the subject of a report to the local Procurator Fiscal in connection with an incident on-board the 21:33 Edinburgh Waverley to Perth service, at Linlithgow on Friday 9 December 2011.'
 
Scott_F said:
And the youth should buy a ticket and clear off when he's caught without one.

Sometimes prompt and decisive action is the most expedient solution and negates any need for hand-wringing or debate.
Click to expand...

Perhaps, but by appropriate people - not a random unconnected stranger. He left himself wide open for this charge, and he's lucky that the kid didn't really have the ability to fight back too. If that had been a kid with a knife on him or worse, it could have ended quite badly for him.
 
Last edited:
Its probably some no win no fee firm pushing the kid on, I think he will regret the publicity as Swannymere says.
 
MercFanUk said:
Perhaps, but by appropriate people - not a random unconnected stranger. He left himself wide open for this charge, and he's lucky that the kid didn't really have the ability to fight back too.
Click to expand...

So you sit and you wait, and you wait and you wait. As the situation between the ticket inspector and the guy without the ticket gets worse. (Never a Transport Copper around when you want one)

Given the situation I would probably be on a charge for assault right now. So the man of 19 had a medical condition and how did he treat that medical condition that day? Starved himself of food and perhaps became tired and emotional by drinking. How about the inspector? Anybody enquire as to his health.
 
These people have always got a 'medical condition' or some other bull**** mitigating circumstance.

They never just say so and so is a class A scumbag , that is why he did it.

He should have chinned him as he pushed him out of the door for good measure.
 
In my opinion, this is what I think would be a normal situtaiton:

Kid (For the sake of labelling one as a man the other as a kid - I know he's not a young kid).

Kid refuses to pay
Inspector suggests he does
Kid still refuses
Inspector tells kid of risks
Kid gets mouthy
Inspector arranges to have coppers at next station (They're not generally going to ignore that kind of call I'd assume - mouthy kid on train full of people)
Kid get's nicked.

No delays, everyone's happy, kid gets what he deserves.

Like I say, I know everyone would love to be able to just kick the mouthy git off the train and be done with it, but there are reasons we can't just go doing this.

First of all, the kid was just being mouthy - not physically violent, therefore laying his hands on the kid was a stupid thing to do (Legally speaking). Then throwing him off the train was another stupid thing to do (He doesn't work for the train company, nor is he a copper, nor did he know the kid).

Aside from the legal ramifications, whose to say the kid hadn't got a knife on him (like in my above post), or texted/bbm'd (whatever they do these days) his mates to be at the platform.

I'm all for showing a gobby little **** whats right and wrong, but there are reasons for why we have certain laws. I'd rather be late than arrested over something so monumentally stupid.
 
MercFanUk said:
In my opinion, this is what I think would be a normal situtaiton:

Kid (For the sake of labelling one as a man the other as a kid - I know he's not a young kid).

Kid refuses to pay
Inspector suggests he does
Kid still refuses
Inspector tells kid of risks
Kid gets mouthy
Inspector arranges to have coppers at next station (They're not generally going to ignore that kind of call I'd assume - mouthy kid on train full of people)
Kid get's nicked.

No delays, everyone's happy, kid gets what he deserves.

Like I say, I know everyone would love to be able to just kick the mouthy git off the train and be done with it, but there are reasons we can't just go doing this.

First of all, the kid was just being mouthy - not physically violent, therefore laying his hands on the kid was a stupid thing to do (Legally speaking). Then throwing him off the train was another stupid thing to do (He doesn't work for the train company, nor is he a copper, nor did he know the kid).

Aside from the legal ramifications, whose to say the kid hadn't got a knife on him (like in my above post), or texted/bbm'd (whatever they do these days) his mates to be at the platform.

I'm all for showing a gobby little **** whats right and wrong, but there are reasons for why we have certain laws. I'd rather be late than arrested over something so monumentally stupid.
Click to expand...


You are totally correct every step of the way - with hindsight.

My Dad once said a wonderful thing to me.

Son let the Lord walk with you and keep his arm around your shoulder... and let him keep his hand over your mouth.

Guess I forgot the last bit.
 
True, but this must be regular occurrence on trains (The fare dodging practice) - surely they should have a pre set routine procedure to follow?

As for the man himself, he should have known better. I don't say the above post with hindsight, that's how I felt the first time I saw the video - I'd just never do that in that situation. Now if the kid was being physically violent, all bets are off, but if not, then I have better things to be doing.
 
I'm with MercFanUK on this one. While I in no way approve of the youngster's behaviour, and I can understand the so-called big man's urge to intervene (whatever his true motives may have been), I think the person at fault here is the ticket inspector, who effectively turned a blind eye and gave the 'big man' licence to do what he did.

Train staff have well-developed procedures for dealing with fare dodgers, and they do not encompass requisitioning members of the public to throw their weight around.

Much as I abhor the youngster's behaviour, I understand there was some dispute as to whether or not he was actually dodging his fare, and that he was frustrated/aggravated by the fact that ticket inspector was not listening to his side of the story. Also, bear in mind we haven't seen what happened during the five minutes or so prior to the point at which the passenger that recorded it started filming.

Overall, I think the whole incident was handled very poorly by all concerned, and a decent fine for the two protagonists may make them think about how they acted that day. And the ticket inspector could also benefit from some re-training... or early retirement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top Bottom