Yes they have, and seeing as none of us were actually present, none of us should even be discussing this.
So why did you assert that poster had no right to say that racist language MAY have been used as he wasn't there, whilst at the same deeming it completely acceptable to contend that Cheryl's actions were down to self-defence when you weren't there either?
I like the way once you were backed into a corner you decide it's not suitable to discuss. :rolleyes:
Yes they have, and seeing as none of us were actually present, none of us should even be discussing this.
I can think of no fairer subject for discussion on a forum than someone's criminal convictions. You could argue that this particular example has been discussed enough, but surely not that it shouldn't be discussed at all.
As a matter of detail, the offence she was cleared of was racially aggravated assault (not racist abuse) and the offence she was convicted of was assault causing actual bodily harm.
I can think of no fairer subject for discussion on a forum than someone's criminal convictions. You could argue that this particular example has been discussed enough, but surely not that it shouldn't be discussed at all.
As a matter of detail, the offence she was cleared of was racially aggravated assault (not racist abuse) and the offence she was convicted of was assault causing actual bodily harm.
Was she actually cleared of "racially aggravated assault" or was the charge merely dropped?
Was she actually cleared of "racially aggravated assault" or was the charge merely dropped?
She was tried and cleared. I don't think anyone suggested that she had gone out with the intention of committing a racist assault; the charge hinged on the allegation that she had used racist language at the same time as the assault. The jury either thought she didn't or thought the language was just ad hoc drunken cursing and not racist in intent. Since they are not allowed to discuss it we will never know.
She's no better, nor any worse, than any of the other trashy girls that go out wearing sod all on a Saturday night, get completely pi$$ed up and then start slapping people when they "disrespect" them.
She may have a top-of-the-range PR man now, but she's still only half a brain cell away from the other tough nuts from Walker and Heaton. Suspended twice at school, once for violence.
She's not "the Nation's Sweetheart", she's a hard case done well is all.
She was tried and cleared. I don't think anyone suggested that she had gone out with the intention of committing a racist assault; the charge hinged on the allegation that she had used racist language at the same time as the assault. The jury either thought she didn't or thought the language was just ad hoc drunken cursing and not racist in intent. Since they are not allowed to discuss it we will never know.
the fact that Cole probably used a derogatory racial term and married Ashley Cole at least proves that you can say certain words and not be a genuine racist - It's called temper !!!
According to the BBC, she was found not guilty of "racially aggravated assault." However, she was guilty of assault occasioning actual harm.
[ I don't think the jury believed the self-defense theory because they still convicted. ]
The Guardian said that the racial motivation charge came after the police had intervened and could have been made up by the club. Thee was no proof that she used any racial slurs.
The incident at the Drink club in Guildford, Surrey, occurred in January when she was at the height of her pop fame. Less than 24 hours after Tweedy had punched Mrs Amogbokpa a detailed, albeit one-sided, account of the story appeared in the Sunday Mirror
Of all the witnesses in the case, it was only those at the debriefing who claimed that Tweedy had used racist abuse.
The victim of the assault did not make any mention of racism in her first statement to police while she was being treated in hospital. It was only after she had returned to the club and met the PR agent and then spoken to the Sunday Mirror later in the day that the allegations emerged.
i contend the jury were unduly influenced by the press reports
The incident at the Drink club in Guildford, Surrey, occurred in January when she was at the height of her pop fame. Less than 24 hours after Tweedy had punched Mrs Amogbokpa a detailed, albeit one-sided, account of the story appeared in the Sunday Mirror
Of all the witnesses in the case, it was only those at the debriefing who claimed that Tweedy had used racist abuse.
The victim of the assault did not make any mention of racism in her first statement to police while she was being treated in hospital. It was only after she had returned to the club and met the PR agent and then spoken to the Sunday Mirror later in the day that the allegations emerged.
i contend the jury were unduly influenced by the press reports
How were they influenced, if Cheryl wasn't found guilty of racially aggravated assault?
How were they influenced, if Cheryl wasn't found guilty of racially aggravated assault?
Indeed. I think guffybear is suggesting that the jury were influenced by press reports when they found her guilty of ABH, not when they found her not guilty of racially aggravated ABH.
In which case I would suggest that Amogbokpa's horrifically battered looking eye was what influenced the jury. The defence must have known that self-defence was a weak case since Tweedy could not muster the tiniest bruise or scratch. But they did the best they could. Tweedy would have done better to have bitten the bullet, expressed sorrow and regret, and showed some signs of addressing 'her drinking problem', which is what celebs normally do in these cases when they want a light sentence. She would probably have got a conditional discharge.
And if Cheryl IS a racist, as so many people insist, how comes she married a footballer of colour?
"a footballer of colour" - That has to be one of the strangest phrases I'll ever encounter. Congratulations on telling everyone else to shut up and listen to you.
"a footballer of colour" - That has to be one of the strangest phrases I'll ever encounter. Congratulations on telling everyone else to shut up and listen to you.
I'm not racist.... So I wouldn't really want to use the term "black fella" or "black bloke" as it's rude in my eyes.
Even when I speak to the female comedienne Ava Vidal, who's performed at a venue where I used to work, she even says it's OK to say "black bird" or "black woman", but she knows I am not racist so I use terms like "woman of colour" or "man of colour".
So before judging me to be able to come out with "weird phrases", think that I might actually be trying to assert myself as non-racist.
I'm not racist.... So I wouldn't really want to use the term "black fella" or "black bloke" as it's rude in my eyes.
Even when I speak to the female comedienne Ava Vidal, who's performed at a venue where I used to work, she even says it's OK to say "black bird" or "black woman", but she knows I am not racist so I use terms like "woman of colour" or "man of colour".
So before judging me to be able to come out with "weird phrases", think that I might actually be trying to assert myself as non-racist.
Are you aware that "person of colour", or using the world "coloured" is usually completely unacceptable to the black community??
Exactly. Who's to say that the toilet attendant didn't attack Cheryl on purpose to get some money from her.
A jury . Cheryl was found guilty of attacking and racially abusing the toilet attendent over not wanting to pay for some lollipops. Not a nice person at all.
Girls Aloud singer Cheryl Tweedy gave a female nightclub toilet attendant a black eye and called her a "black bitch" in a row over a handful of lollipops, a court heard.
The 20-year-old pop star screamed racist abuse before punching Sophie Amogbokpa, leaving her face with severe swelling and bruising that lasted for three months, the court was told.
A "completely paralytic" Tweedy told the 39-year-old part-time law student: "I'm going to deal with you" and had to be restrained by security staff as she struggled, Kingston Crown Court heard.
The singer allegedly attacked Mrs Amogbokpa during a night out with fellow band member Nicola Roberts at The Drink nightclub in Guildford, Surrey, where Miss Amogbokpa worked, on January 11 this year.
The row began when Tweedy, who had been drinking wine and champagne, took sweets and lollies from a display in the club's ladies' lavatory without leaving the customary tip. When Mrs Amogbokpa asked her for money a heated argument broke out and Miss Roberts, who had been with her friend in the toilet, ran out to alert security, the court was told.
Comments
Yes they have, and seeing as none of us were actually present, none of us should even be discussing this.
So why did you assert that poster had no right to say that racist language MAY have been used as he wasn't there, whilst at the same deeming it completely acceptable to contend that Cheryl's actions were down to self-defence when you weren't there either?
I like the way once you were backed into a corner you decide it's not suitable to discuss. :rolleyes:
It's more of a case of "I'm up at 6am so I'll continue this at lunchtime tomorrow" kind of thing..... :yawn:
Nah, you were owned and you know it.
I'll be back.... at around 11.30am - 12.30pm to pick up where I left off.
:yawn: :yawn: :yawn: :yawn: :yawn: :yawn: :yawn: :yawn: :yawn:
And if it was, we will of course not know whether that was becuase it never happened, or there was insufficient evidence, or just plee bargaining.
Can anyone shed any light on this? And be careful, just in case you get called to court for lible - facts only please.
I can think of no fairer subject for discussion on a forum than someone's criminal convictions. You could argue that this particular example has been discussed enough, but surely not that it shouldn't be discussed at all.
As a matter of detail, the offence she was cleared of was racially aggravated assault (not racist abuse) and the offence she was convicted of was assault causing actual bodily harm.
Was she actually cleared of "racially aggravated assault" or was the charge merely dropped?
She was tried and cleared. I don't think anyone suggested that she had gone out with the intention of committing a racist assault; the charge hinged on the allegation that she had used racist language at the same time as the assault. The jury either thought she didn't or thought the language was just ad hoc drunken cursing and not racist in intent. Since they are not allowed to discuss it we will never know.
She's no better, nor any worse, than any of the other trashy girls that go out wearing sod all on a Saturday night, get completely pi$$ed up and then start slapping people when they "disrespect" them.
She may have a top-of-the-range PR man now, but she's still only half a brain cell away from the other tough nuts from Walker and Heaton. Suspended twice at school, once for violence.
She's not "the Nation's Sweetheart", she's a hard case done well is all.
But people are saying they don't like Tulisa because of her past?
What? People, so fickle it is untrue!
the fact that Cole probably used a derogatory racial term and married Ashley Cole at least proves that you can say certain words and not be a genuine racist - It's called temper !!!
I think these two articles sum up the assault and conviction case.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/3207822.stm
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2003/oct/21/helencarter
According to the BBC, she was found not guilty of "racially aggravated assault." However, she was guilty of assault occasioning actual harm.
[ I don't think the jury believed the self-defense theory because they still convicted. ]
The Guardian said that the racial motivation charge came after the police had intervened and could have been made up by the club. Thee was no proof that she used any racial slurs.
Of all the witnesses in the case, it was only those at the debriefing who claimed that Tweedy had used racist abuse.
The victim of the assault did not make any mention of racism in her first statement to police while she was being treated in hospital. It was only after she had returned to the club and met the PR agent and then spoken to the Sunday Mirror later in the day that the allegations emerged.
i contend the jury were unduly influenced by the press reports
If they were, the jury should've found her guilty of racially aggravated assault, which they did not.
How were they influenced, if Cheryl wasn't found guilty of racially aggravated assault?
Indeed. I think guffybear is suggesting that the jury were influenced by press reports when they found her guilty of ABH, not when they found her not guilty of racially aggravated ABH.
In which case I would suggest that Amogbokpa's horrifically battered looking eye was what influenced the jury. The defence must have known that self-defence was a weak case since Tweedy could not muster the tiniest bruise or scratch. But they did the best they could. Tweedy would have done better to have bitten the bullet, expressed sorrow and regret, and showed some signs of addressing 'her drinking problem', which is what celebs normally do in these cases when they want a light sentence. She would probably have got a conditional discharge.
"a footballer of colour" - That has to be one of the strangest phrases I'll ever encounter. Congratulations on telling everyone else to shut up and listen to you.
I'm not racist.... So I wouldn't really want to use the term "black fella" or "black bloke" as it's rude in my eyes.
Even when I speak to the female comedienne Ava Vidal, who's performed at a venue where I used to work, she even says it's OK to say "black bird" or "black woman", but she knows I am not racist so I use terms like "woman of colour" or "man of colour".
So before judging me to be able to come out with "weird phrases", think that I might actually be trying to assert myself as non-racist.
Are you aware that "person of colour", or using the world "coloured" is usually completely unacceptable to the black community??
That's the press's label. Say something often enough and people will start to believe it. Fact.
Stupid people, granted.
Correct. Person of colour is such a ridiculous term, why not call them black, we call white people white :cool:
A jury . Cheryl was found guilty of attacking and racially abusing the toilet attendent over not wanting to pay for some lollipops. Not a nice person at all.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-199155/Pop-star-punched-toilet-attendant.html