David Aspden missing.

MrHodgeheg123

First Team
St Maria Gorettis, Ribbleton.

Cadley always had a good set up...
I use to play for a team in Garstang in the same league as Gorrettis when I was about 13/14.
We were good but Gorrettis won the league every time. I remember one season we were the only team to take points off them when we got a 3-3 draw on a quagmire pitch.
They were always bigger and stronger and some of them had beards. I'm sure half of them were old enough to vote.
 

Ando60

First Team
I use to play for a team in Garstang in the same league as Gorrettis when I was about 13/14.
We were good but Gorrettis won the league every time. I remember one season we were the only team to take points off them when we got a 3-3 draw on a quagmire pitch.
They were always bigger and stronger and some of them had beards. I'm sure half of them were old enough to vote.
Yeah, we used to fiddle the birth certs Hodgey
 

Regardless

Forum Patron
Patron
There's a lot of (understandable) talk about how important it is for accused people not to be named. But I just don't think that it is practical.
 

chorleythehord

Forum Patron
Patron
There's a lot of (understandable) talk about how important it is for accused people not to be named. But I just don't think that it is practical.
They do manage not to name the victims/alleged victims in these cases though and their names are kept out of the public domain regardless of the outcome of the case.
 

Nobber

Forum Patron
Patron
They do manage not to name the victims/alleged victims in these cases though and their names are kept out of the public domain regardless of the outcome of the case.
Do you not think it is hard enough to go to the police if you had been assaulted, knowing that you may need examinations, inform your family details of what happened, grilling, court cases etc without the thought that it could be all over the papers/social media?

As I said above I can see both sides, but true victims need protection. What I would say is that anyone proven to make up stuff should serve a minimum of five years, no parole. Maybe that would make people think twice.
 

chorleythehord

Forum Patron
Patron
Do you not think it is hard enough to go to the police if you had been assaulted, knowing that you may need examinations, inform your family details of what happened, grilling, court cases etc without the thought that it could be all over the papers/social media?

As I said above I can see both sides, but true victims need protection. What I would say is that anyone proven to make up stuff should serve a minimum of five years, no parole. Maybe that would make people think twice.
I completely agree. I was replying to the comment that it is not practical to keep people’s names out of the public domain, when in fact they can, at least with the victims. And it is right that they do so.
 

Regardless

Forum Patron
Patron
Do you not think it is hard enough to go to the police if you had been assaulted, knowing that you may need examinations, inform your family details of what happened, grilling, court cases etc without the thought that it could be all over the papers/social media?

As I said above I can see both sides, but true victims need protection. What I would say is that anyone proven to make up stuff should serve a minimum of five years, no parole. Maybe that would make people think twice.
I think chorley would fully agree with that. He was arguing that both sides should get anonymity.
 

Regardless

Forum Patron
Patron
They do manage not to name the victims/alleged victims in these cases though and their names are kept out of the public domain regardless of the outcome of the case.
Of course, and that's a great thing... but it is a lot less complicated to keep a victim's identities safe.

Talking about crimes generally... I cannot see how you can balance the reasonable rights to anonymity of the accused with the rights of the public to be protected from harm.

You simply have to take an accused person away from working with vulnerable people, and you can't do that effectively, in a practical way, without making the public aware. You cannot RELY on an accused person promising to stay away from all the youth groups he or she is involved with, all the vulnerable people he or she has contact with.

It's true of other crimes too. If the church warden has been accused of stealing all the money collected to buy a new church organ, you don't know what other organisation he's treasurer for... but it's fair to let them know.

Either the right to anonymity of the accused, or the right of the public to protect itself has got to be given up and it's clear to me which it has to be (certainly for sex crimes)

Maybe, as a society, we should be more clear about the fact that we do take away the inherent right to anonymity of people accused of crimes. Be clear that we are being 'unfair' by naming people before any guilt has been established. So by recognising the unfairness, it makes it easier for us all to truly accept the adage of innocent until proven otherwise.
 

KeithLard

Youth Team
The fact the club is no longer going (Springfields) is clearly connected. Such a shame as a great youth football club which had been running for years.

Let's hope that the guy resurfaces and faces his crimes in court fairly. If he is innocent, then he shouldn't have anything to worry about.
 

bluekipper

First Team
The fact the club is no longer going (Springfields) is clearly connected. Such a shame as a great youth football club which had been running for years.

Let's hope that the guy resurfaces and faces his crimes in court fairly. If he is innocent, then he shouldn't have anything to worry about.
Springfields FC is going strong with teams at Open Age, Youth and Junior levels.
 

Libertine

First Team
The fact the club is no longer going (Springfields) is clearly connected. Such a shame as a great youth football club which had been running for years.

Let's hope that the guy resurfaces and faces his crimes in court fairly. If he is innocent, then he shouldn't have anything to worry about.
I did hear that the club wrapped up because of this case.
 

jakehake

Preachs PA
Staff member
Patron
As an FYI it's likely this thread has already encouraged a new user to sign up with a username that suggests he thinks the bloke has already been convicted and is guilty of whatever crimes he's accused of and that he should be killed. No such thing as innocence it seems. Careful what we post people please.
 
Top