Nevertheless, the ejector was a bully, guilty of assault, is clearly identifiable and should be prosecuted.
Wrong! He's NOT guilty of an assault, he's not been tried and convicted. To say othewise is libellous
I may be liable to a pedant.
I clearly stated he should be prosecuted. His guilt is clearly apparent from the footage. (Although no doubt our wonderfull legal system would preclude that evidence as prejudicial).:rolleyes:
I clearly stated he should be prosecuted. His guilt is clearly apparent from the footage. (Although no doubt our wonderfull legal system would preclude that evidence as prejudicial).:rolleyes:
You cannot rely totally upon a video taken by a bystander. We do not know what went on before the video begins. We do not know what other witnesses are saying.
Clearly the PF does know the full story and as such decided not to prosecute.
However it seems that viewing a wee Youtube clip seems to qualify some folks to know better than the PF. :rolleyes:
I heard the occasional incoherent mutter from the lad but no bad language.
Not sure what version you've seen, obviously there's been some editing going on to paint Saint Sam in a good light. When I watched the footage just after it was first posted up on YouTube you can clearly hear Sam Main repeatedly swearing aggressively at the conductor.
As I posted already his behaviour was the reason he deserved to be ejected from that train. He attempted to bully the conductor, who stood his ground, and he was hoping that his aggressive toddler style behaviour would never be confronted by all those he was inconveniencing with his tantrum. Then someone else interjected and that was the end of that. I'm only sorry it wasn't pissing it down with rain that night. He needed to learn a lesson on how to behave in public, but all his noise about compensation etc. shows he's still not learned it.
What did he expect, a cuddle? Welcome to the adult world, Mr Main, where behaviour such as yours has consequences.
Must confess that when I have the misfortune to have to use the railways in this Kingdom I pays me money and put the tickets in my pocket until required. I have a reasonable assumption that I have been sold the correct items.
I suppose on reflection I should know better than trust railway staff to get it right.
Again we only have his word that the tickets he was holding were:
A. Bought by him.
B. Not the tickets he asked for at the ticket desk.
Given his general attitude I'd have a hard time believing either points A or B.
Again we only have his word that the tickets he was holding were:
A. Bought by him.
B. Not the tickets he asked for at the ticket desk.
Given his general attitude I'd have a hard time believing either points A or B.
The ticket machines are programmed to ask for the money for the tickets so there is little chance that he would have paid the full price for the wrong ticket. He might have been mixed up by similar fares for off and on peak travel but he may also have been traveling beyond his stop in the expectation that any ticket inspector would have finished at that point.
The ticket machines are programmed to ask for the money for the tickets so there is little chance that he would have paid the full price for the wrong ticket. He might have been mixed up by similar fares for off and on peak travel but he may also have been traveling beyond his stop in the expectation that any ticket inspector would have finished at that point.
I think the issue was the youth claimed he'd asked for a return. As often the difference in cost between a single and a day return is 10p, even on fares of a tenner or more he would neither have noticed the difference or bought a single hoping to bunk off the return fare.
He may have not known he needed to come back on the train when he bought the ticket and have been trying it on, however.
I think the issue was the youth claimed he'd asked for a return. As often the difference in cost between a single and a day return is 10p, even on fares of a tenner or more he would neither have noticed the difference or bought a single hoping to bunk off the return fare.
He may have not known he needed to come back on the train when he bought the ticket and have been trying it on, however.
If you buy a return you are usually issued with three parts, the Out, the Return and the receipt if you paid by card.
The only times a return journey is issued on a single ticket is if you are buying an all day travelcard.
Again we only have his word that the tickets he was holding were:
A. Bought by him.
B. Not the tickets he asked for at the ticket desk.
Given his general attitude I'd have a hard time believing either points A or B.
But given the minimal difference between the price of a single and the price of a return it's a credible story, if you knew you were coming back no one would deliberately save 10p by just buying a single.
One peak single ticket to destination (before 10:00)
One discounted, off peak, single ticket to his destination (after 10:00)
And the Herald reported that Scotrail's internal investigation backed up his story that the ticket office had made an error. Obviously there were certain failings in the manner in which he tried to explain his predicament to the conductor though...
Comments
I may be liable to a pedant.
I clearly stated he should be prosecuted. His guilt is clearly apparent from the footage. (Although no doubt our wonderfull legal system would preclude that evidence as prejudicial).:rolleyes:
Gawd knows?!
You know why gawd knows?
He read my previous post, where I answered this.
You cannot rely totally upon a video taken by a bystander. We do not know what went on before the video begins. We do not know what other witnesses are saying.
Clearly the PF does know the full story and as such decided not to prosecute.
However it seems that viewing a wee Youtube clip seems to qualify some folks to know better than the PF. :rolleyes:
As I posted already his behaviour was the reason he deserved to be ejected from that train. He attempted to bully the conductor, who stood his ground, and he was hoping that his aggressive toddler style behaviour would never be confronted by all those he was inconveniencing with his tantrum. Then someone else interjected and that was the end of that. I'm only sorry it wasn't pissing it down with rain that night. He needed to learn a lesson on how to behave in public, but all his noise about compensation etc. shows he's still not learned it.
What did he expect, a cuddle? Welcome to the adult world, Mr Main, where behaviour such as yours has consequences.
Actually Main should consider himself very fortunate. There are some real nutjobs out there who may have ejected him from the train between stations.
Again we only have his word that the tickets he was holding were:
A. Bought by him.
B. Not the tickets he asked for at the ticket desk.
Given his general attitude I'd have a hard time believing either points A or B.
The ticket machines are programmed to ask for the money for the tickets so there is little chance that he would have paid the full price for the wrong ticket. He might have been mixed up by similar fares for off and on peak travel but he may also have been traveling beyond his stop in the expectation that any ticket inspector would have finished at that point.
I think the issue was the youth claimed he'd asked for a return. As often the difference in cost between a single and a day return is 10p, even on fares of a tenner or more he would neither have noticed the difference or bought a single hoping to bunk off the return fare.
He may have not known he needed to come back on the train when he bought the ticket and have been trying it on, however.
If you buy a return you are usually issued with three parts, the Out, the Return and the receipt if you paid by card.
The only times a return journey is issued on a single ticket is if you are buying an all day travelcard.
Not everybody knows that.
To be honest I don't usually do "benefit of the doubt", so I must be feeling all liberal and understanding for once!
Sod it, string im up!:D
But given the minimal difference between the price of a single and the price of a return it's a credible story, if you knew you were coming back no one would deliberately save 10p by just buying a single.
What was requested (from a real person, rather than a machine) was:
One peak single ticket to destination (before 10:00)
One discounted, off peak, single ticket back to his starting station (after 10:00)
What was (apparently) issued was:
One peak single ticket to destination (before 10:00)
One discounted, off peak, single ticket to his destination (after 10:00)
I imagine the usual discount was in the region of 30%. So, for example, on a £3 single that would be a discount of £1 not 10p.
A good saving over a peak return, which is what he normally have bought. (In theory)
His general attitude seems like someone who is morally in the right, can do F*ck All about it, but is expected to just grin and bear it.
I wonder how many times this sort of mistake happens and the passengers buy another ticket but can't be arsed to claim the extra fare back?
Rail Company just gets paid twice for the same journey ... Win, WIn
That does seem to be the implication, which is fair enough, but will end up being abused.
And the Herald reported that Scotrail's internal investigation backed up his story that the ticket office had made an error. Obviously there were certain failings in the manner in which he tried to explain his predicament to the conductor though...
As the (possibly unfair) bye-law says "Failure to show a valid ticket, when required to do so, is an offence." ... or words to that effect.
No ticket. No excuse.
Sam Main was on a hiding to nothing.