Griffiths denies endangering crowd with flare

He’s a horrible little individual, he acted billy big baws against Keirnan and the likes of Russel Martin. Rats like him loved lording it over us now he is a fat nobody, but remember everyone we need to feel sorry for poor Leigh. Karma indeed. Typical one of them who causes it then plays the victim I take great joy in watching his rapid decline couldn’t happen to a nicer guy
 
I wouldn't admit to %^*& all in Scotland either as the police and courts are hopeless. Plead not guilty and take your chances.

It will be interesting to see what happens here though
 
Pyro being a burning issue with helmetheed at the moment i think its unlikely that the crown will be seeking to reduce the charge against this scumbag.
Despite wanting more imformation about the level of danger that this poses I have a feeling that who carried out the act will carry more weight.
He'll get a slap on the wrist.If you or I kicked a flare at a group of opposition fans outside Ibrox we would get hammered and would be vilified in the press.
I very much hope that I'm wrong though.
 
The trial was set for September after the court was told that Griffiths was likely to be "away" during July when it would normally have been set for.

Fiscal depute Dev Kapaldia said: "Having had a look at the case, the court might benefit from further inquiry into the flare.

"I know what they do, but I don't know how they operate. The significance is what the effect of it might be. It came from the crowd onto the pitch.

"I want to inquire further into what effect it might have within a crowded area if it comes back in. The Crown is intending to make this inquiry."

Sheriff George Way said: "Looking at it, it is kicking a smoke bomb or similar item. One would readily infer from that that the flare came from somewhere.

"How does it matter how it works? It is a description of a thing giving off flames, smoke or whatever, and the defence will be along the lines of 'this nasty thing came at me and I kicked it. The scary thing came flying at me and I kicked it.'

"Does it matter if it is a flare, or a smoke bomb, or a pot plant? I just wonder if you are wasting your own time and money?" he asked the prosecutor.
The judge seems to be offering a suggestion for the defense here. And quite a ludicrous one at that. It doesn’t give me much confidence that the wee nonce will be held to account.
 
I actually can't get his logic but he'll probably get away with it anyway. I mean, there physically isn't any way to kick a flare into a crowd and not endanger them so he really can't use that defence and should be told to shut the %^*& up.

Putrid wee scumbag.
 
The judge is right in what he says. It is within the ken of judicial knowledge that such an object has the potential to cause danger to spectators.

What worries me is that the depute is seeking a report to say that the ‘object’ did not have the capacity to cause injury which could potentially see the case marked for no proceedings due to there being no chance it could cause injury.

The difficulty the rat has to overcome is he did not know whether or not the object could cause injury so no matter what the report says it was still reckless behaviour by the cretinous poltroon.
 
The judge is right in what he says. It is within the ken of judicial knowledge that such an object has the potential to cause danger to spectators.

What worries me is that the depute is seeking a report to say that the ‘object’ did not have the capacity to cause injury which could potentially see the case marked for no proceedings due to there being no chance it could cause injury.

The difficulty the rat has to overcome is he did not know whether or not the object could cause injury so no matter what the report says it was still reckless behaviour by the cretinous poltroon.
I'm thinking the defence would be that it was a smoke bomb and not actually a flare. Not that I'm defending the idiot. If they want to call it a flare and has a more serious charge, then great.
 
Just do a runner like stokes to ROI.. Get arrested over there and no problem, you want be extradited, same as Stokes
I don't think Griffiths, is capable of working that out, he would need help from a friend. Remember he's not the sharpest tool in the box. If he had to count past 10 , he would have to take his socks, and shoes off.
 
If the Crown decides there was no danger posed by the flare then the policy of holding fans to account for the dangerous act of bringing them into the stadium goes out the window.
Exactly and it will be a free for all. His defence is actually saying Flares are not dangerous, what a joke.
 
Leigh Griffiths has denied endangering fans by booting a flare into the crowd and will go on trial later this year. He appeared in the dock at Dundee Sheriff Court and pled not guilty to culpable and reckless conduct. The court was told that the police evidence was agreed in the case, but the Crown are seeking further information about the potential danger posed by the flare.
Let's just discard the evidence of our own eyes.

6 months in the Bar-L, but the children, the children!
 
If the Crown decides there was no danger posed by the flare then the policy of holding fans to account for the dangerous act of bringing them into the stadium goes out the window.

Precisely.

This one is going to be very interesting to see how Sheriff McTaguey gets himself out of this one to let poor wee abused Griffiths off with it.
 
Precisely.

This one is going to be very interesting to see how Sheriff McTaguey gets himself out of this one to let poor wee abused Griffiths off with it.
If and at this stage it is a big IF the crown proceed then the wee tramp could not possibly use the defence that he knew when he kicked it that it was harmless.

If it gets to trial he quite simply does not have a defense to a charge of reckless conduct.
 
Fire safety officer Griffiths did a full risk assessment prior to carefully removing the object from the pitch \
Nothing to see
Move along
 
Looks like the laws that be have manipulated this case and let it run without a court hearing long enough to ensure police and witnesses memories become a bit addled. Deliberate act to ensure a criminal walks free. A very SNP affair
 
He’s guilty. Done. But if people in crowds want to throw objects, then cry when objects are thrown back? saying oh but there are kids here. Well then ban the muppets who throw stuff. Some fans are thick, drunk and there to cause bother. All that sensible sht said I hate thumb with a passion, wish nothing but a slow death on that massive C
 
The legal eagles will be here I’m sure to advise - I assume the defence will be intended to kick it clear of ground, selflessly placing oneself in danger, to avoid anyone coming to harm.

The actual trajectory being pure bad fortune, and wholly unintended by the accused whose intent was only positively minded.

And off he trots.

Load of total shite - he binned it exactly where he meant to, the little pissflap
 
It is not even up for debate.


“The report concludes that there are significant health and safety risks arising from their use in close proximity to other people and in contravention of the safety distances which are specified on the pyrotechnic articles themselves. All pyrotechnic devices have a “safety” distance for good reason and which will exceed the available space within a crowded stand or stadium. It is not safe, therefore, for any pyrotechnic device to be used in spectator areas within football stadia.”
Seems pretty clear.
 
Precisely.

This one is going to be very interesting to see how Sheriff McTaguey gets himself out of this one to let poor wee abused Griffiths off with it.
It will be interesting to see how this pans out.

Even the pf ain't that stupid.

Cough
 
PTIYWL4.gif
 
So are they going to argue the technicality of whether a smoke bomb is dangerous?

Launching one into a crowd would be dangerous, placing one on the floor or holding it up wouldn’t be
Kinda seems obvious doesn’t it it’s not dangerous until discharged and i would assume it is covered in law as a dangerous item once It is .

6 years will do
 
This all seems to be getting pointlessly complicated. Whether it's a flare, a smoke-bomb, a coin or a plastic bottle of juice, the only question should be, "Did the wee baldy, junkie paedo endanger people by his actions?"

Where the item came from is immaterial. Is it a fire hazard is immaterial.

Can open, worms everywhere if they let him off. It's precedent set for anyone anywhere to kick or throw any solid object into any group of people.
 
So they accept he did it but they seem to be contesting the fact that it was a 'danger' seems to be the gist of that.
Who in their right mind could contest that kicking a lit flare into a crowd of people is dangerous?

Any idea what the consequence of being found guilt would be?
 
It is not even up for debate.


“The report concludes that there are significant health and safety risks arising from their use in close proximity to other people and in contravention of the safety distances which are specified on the pyrotechnic articles themselves. All pyrotechnic devices have a “safety” distance for good reason and which will exceed the available space within a crowded stand or stadium. It is not safe, therefore, for any pyrotechnic device to be used in spectator areas within football stadia.”
So there we have it, I do wonder it will stand up under Scots law though :rolleyes:
 
Back
Top