The Scottish Cup Final: Rangers v Hibs

[alexscottislegend 2,068]

One thing is incontrovertible: Lee Wallace and Foderingham were physically attacked. Aside from who started what, that is assault. Evidence should be sent to the Fiscal. It is a criminal matter, same as if it happened on the street.

[der Berliner 3,249]

Disabled Fans At Hampden Blast Police

 

Disabled fans at Hampden blast police after fears they would be trampled during pitch riot

 

THE chairman of the Rangers Disabled Supporters Club has branded policing of the Scottish Cup final “pathetic.”

 

Wheelchair-bound Billy Paterson said his members feared for their safety after Hibs fans ran across the pitch to goad them in the South Stand at Hampden.

 

Paterson, 51, told how up to 40 disabled fans and their carers finally made their way to safety, only to fear they would be trampled by mounted police sent in to quell the chaos.

 

Read more: Every Rangers player on pitch was attacked or spat on by Hibs fans during Hampden riot

 

Paterson, from Fraserburgh , said: “The reaction of police and stewards – what little there was – was pathetic and far too slow.

 

“We attempted to move towards the exit at the end of the game, only to be confronted by hundreds of Hibs fans who ran to goad us and other Rangers fans.

 

“Police and stewards stood and did nothing. Police continued to video-record Rangers fans in our end of the ground when all of this was going on behind them.

 

“We were shouting at them to react, but they blanked us and continued to film. The police made no attempts to help.

 

“Other Rangers fans came down to the front, in support of us. Our members were pretty scared.”

 

Disabled fans eventually had a path cleared towards the tunnel between the south and west stands where they traditionally exit, only to be confronted by mounted police.

 

Read more: Hampden riot: Rangers launch scatter-gun attack on Hibs, the SFA, football pundits and Nicola Sturgeon

Paterson added: “The mounted police took forever to arrive, at least a good 10 minutes after the pitch had been invaded.

 

“Police horses charged through the tunnel as we were making our exit at either side and it was dangerous and uncomfortable.

 

“When you’re in a wheelchair and they are coming through at a fair canter, it’s not unusual for horses to slip on concrete.

 

“To cap it all, when we did eventually get to the car park, they refused us permission to leave. The delay only increased the risk of us leaving the stadium at the same time as Hibs fans.

 

Read more: Do you know these thugs? Task force set up to hunt down hooligans who marred Rangers v Hibs Cup Final

 

“There should be a full investigation. What’s the point of police and stewards if they do nothing when required? Whoever was in control of planning got it badly wrong.”

 

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/disabled-fans-hampden-blast-police-8029606#zRrG58z48hGXmSjf.99

[cooponthewing 1,139]

It was disgraceful!! I was in row c which is one behind where the carers sit with the disabled. The police only wanted to film and prosecute Rangers fans, nobody assisted those who were in front of me. I was half way up the stair and was looking back watching. I saw police and stewards doing nothing as Hibs fans ran amok down there.

[cooponthewing 1,139]

I also saw the disgraceful way which fans were brushed aside and ignored 15mins after the final whistle when they decided to turn up in their vans. I take it they were not informed of the thousands of fans breaking the law and couldn't manage to appear any faster?. I know there are some who will not hear a bad word against plod, I wholeheartedly disagree with that stance.

[aweebluesoandso 290]

I also saw the disgraceful way which fans were brushed aside and ignored 15mins after the final whistle when they decided to turn up in their vans. I take it they were not informed of the thousands of fans breaking the law and couldn't manage to appear any faster?. I know there are some who will not hear a bad word against plod, I wholeheartedly disagree with that stance.

 

Agree here coop, If the police would have dealt with the Hivs thugs as robustly as they dealt with the small number of Rangers fans, that had got on the pitch. They would have brought the riot under control a lot lot faster than they did. Their batons were out quicker than a flashers cock, with the Rangers fans, but i never saw one policeman or police woman draw their baton against the Hivs thugs even when they were assaulting our players.

[ian1964 10,416]

Self Defence- Why Rangers fans had a legal right to defend themselves and others

 

10 Hours Ago by jamiebrysonadmin

 

Following my tweet last night, which came shortly after a statement from Rangers Football Club that praised the restraint shown by fans, there was much feigned outrage by social media trolls.

 

The predictable diatribe of illiterate rantings by internet obsessives was, surprisingly, littered with some sensible points of debate which were raised- naturally- by more normal and sensible persons.

 

I tweeted the following;

 

“Rangers fans are legally protected if they entered the field of play to use reasonable force to protect a player who was under attack.”

 

It is, of course, beyond the pot noodle eating bedroom trolls to dissect such a paragraph and understand its meaning, so understandably many of the intellectually challenged internet warriors flew into a frenzy.

 

Responses also came from a number of lawyers- some agreeing with what I had highlighted, others disagreeing. One particular law firm- McGovern Court Lawyers- managed to miss the point entirely and point out that the criteria for self defence (or defence of another) excludes rioting.

 

They are entirely correct and but this would only have been relevant had I said “legal protections are there for fans who entered the pitch to riot”. This is vastly different than “…to use reasonable force to protect a player who was under attack.”

 

Rangers fans who entered the field of play in order to protect a player who was coming under attack, by a violent mob, would not have been entering to riot, but rather to intervene to protect the life or safety of another.

 

One must be mindful of the fact that the policing and stewards had lost control, Rangers players were surrounded and under attack, therefore- I believe- an intervention to disrupt an ongoing assault would be reasonable and proportionate in the circumstances.

 

It is, of course, ludicrous to suggest that in normal circumstances it would be reasonable and proportionate to run onto the pitch to intervene in a fight between opposing players or even if a fan- or small number of fans- had encroached on the playing area. In such a circumstance it would be a matter for the police and stadium security to fulfil their duties.

 

However, in law context is everything and in the context of the events on Saturday the stadium authorities had lost control of a rapidly evolving and ugly situation.

 

It is also important to note that many thousands of Hibs fans surged onto the pitch and charged violently whilst provocatively waving Irish tri-colours, which are understandably seen by many Unionists as representative of the terrorist IRA and the Irish Government that assisted in arming and assisting that murderous organisation.

 

Such provocation- whilst not in itself reason to enter the playing area- can also, in the circumstances, not be discounted in mitigating the reasons why Rangers fans would have felt fearful and defensive.

 

In those circumstances it is entirely reasonable that families with children would be fearful for their safety as a baying mob- who had completely overrun the policing and security staff- marauded across the pitch towards them. The most obvious reaction for those with children would have been to head for the exit, however in the panic and confusion there was obviously a likelihood that an urgent surge in panic towards the exit could have caused children, or others, to be crushed or seriously injured.

 

Therefore, in order to prevent such a tragic event, it would be entirely reasonable to conclude that adults, especially single men, would move away from the exits in order to leave them clear for fleeing women and children. The only option in this circumstance was clearly to move towards the pitch.

 

It is clear from all footage that Rangers players and supporters were vastly outnumbered. One media outlet reported in the region of 5,000 Hibernian supporters and a few hundred Rangers fans. If ever there was a need for self defence, then surely such a circumstance justifies a reasonable and proportionate use of force to protect yourself and/or others.

 

In determining the test for self defence it is always prudent to read the worlds of Lord Parker CJ in Chisam (1963) 47 Cr App Rep 130 :

 

“…. where a forcible and violent felony is attempted upon the person of another, the party assaulted, or his servant, or any other person present, is entitled to repel force by force, and, if necessary, to kill the aggressor ….”.

 

It is clear from the words of Lord Parker that a reasonable and proportionate intervention was lawful under the circumstances. Instigating an attack and/or acting provocatively or using excessive force would not be lawful.

 

For example; chasing a Hibernian supporter who was running away towards his own end and attacking him would not be self defence. In contrast, intervening as a mob of Hibernian fans attacked a Rangers player, coach or supporter would be entirely justified.

 

Therefore, if a Rangers supporter entered the playing area- in a genuine attempt to intervene to prevent violence upon another or themselves, or acted in self defence having moved towards the pitch for safety reasons- then I believe such actions would be justified.

 

In such a circumstance, it appears that one of the obvious methods to challenge any prosecution that followed would be for the defence to lodge notices, to the Court and the Crown, in advance of any trial under Section 78 of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 for self defence and/or provocation.

 

It should also be noted that “excitement” or “joy” is not defence for causing criminal damage or engaging in acts of violence or provocation.

 

Therefore, the attempts by some commentators to excuse or laugh off the actions of Hibs fans are little short of disgraceful and comes very close to condoning the vile behaviour of those Hibs fans that invaded the pitch to cause damage and/or violence.

 

https://jamiebrysonblog.wordpress.com/2016/05/23/self-defence-why-rangers-fans-had-a-legal-right-to-defend-themselves-and-others/

[ian1964 10,416]

Taking some time for this investigation!,wonder how much this is costing?,

[cooponthewing 1,139]

I wouldn't hold my breath. It is already widely acknowledged that this will be another whitewash, of sorts. Petrie still being in a job is laughable as is the response from those in power.

Russia have just been threatened with expulsion from the euros due to fans of theirs, in the hundreds, rioting in the streets, it took a matter of hours for the response. While in Scotland thousands of Hibs fans invade the pitch, assault players, staff and fans, cause crininal damage and have members of their staff excuse such behaviour. Response from those in power in Scotland......??????

Yup, the saddest thing in all this, is we all know how crooked this country is, but nobody inside or out wants or has the inclination to clean it up and rid us of these leaches.

Edited June 15, 2016 by cooponthewing

[Bluedell 5,342]

Silence of McGlennan after Cup disorder is deafening

 

From todays (London) Times:

 

Michael Grant, Scottish Football Correspondent

 

It has to be said that Uefa, much-derided as it rightly is, has shown Tony McGlennan a clean pair of heels when it comes to laying down the law on crowd disorder. Within 24 hours of the horrific attacks by Russian brutes on England supporters inside the Stade Velodrome in Marseilles, European football’s governing body had initiated proceedings against the Russian FA. Crowd disturbances, racist behaviour, setting off fireworks: the offences were identified and crystallised into formal charges within hours.

 

This is day 26 since the William Hill Scottish Cup final. So far there has been silence from McGlennan, the SFA’s compliance officer on the enormous pitch invasion by Hibernian fans, the attacks by some of their supporters on Rangers fans and the equivalent violence by those Rangers supporters who came on the pitch to give as good as they got. Alleged assaults on Rangers players as they walked off at full-time, and the smashing of a goal frame and vandalism to the playing surface at the Hibs end, have all to be processed and dealt with by the SFA too.

 

The profile and sensitivities of the whole sorry episode, and its wide-ranging potential consequences for Hibs and Rangers, make it understandable that McGlennan has not rushed in. He is right to take time in order to be measured and proportionate when it comes to framing the charges which will place both clubs in the dock. But with every passing day there is growing restlessness for something to happen.

 

McGlennan doesn’t need to consider the circumstances of every single supporter who went on the pitch, just the broad brush of clear SFA rule-breaking which was obvious to thousands of eye witnesses and from television and social media footage. When it comes to sifting through the Cup final debacle his responsibilities are far less onerous than Police Scotland’s. Will it really take him much longer?

 

There are three concurrent investigations into what happened in the ten minutes after Hibs won what had been a breathtakingly good final. The police continue to work their way through the alleged culprits and have carried out a number of arrests in Edinburgh, Glasgow and elsewhere. They are dealing with the violent incidents and disorder first, before turning attention to other matters including the vandalism. The total of arrests stands at 28 — 16 in the first week after the final, 12 more last week — with more expected.

 

That’s the criminal justice element, then. A fortnight ago on June 1 the SFA announced it would look into how the final was handled in terms of security and risk-management. Sheriff principal Edward Bowen was appointed to chair an independent commission which will determine whether every reasonable step was taken to prevent what happened.

 

He will also look into the response, including reaction times, of the SFA, the police, G4S (the stewarding company) and the clubs as chaos ensued. Bowen still has six-and-a-half weeks to meet the SFA’s July 31 deadline to submit his report, which will be published in full. It is understood that McGlennan will not issue any notice of complaint which could impact on an element of the independent commission until Bowen’s findings are out; and similarly he may have to wait to act on some matters until Bowen’s investigation is complete. Neither investigation intends to prejudice the other.

 

So there has been clarity on two strands of the fallout but not the third, beyond a single sentence in the SFA statement about the Bowen commission which said: “The compliance officer has also initiated an investigation into the Cup final, from a football regulatory perspective via the judicial panel protocol.”

 

Because the game was in the Scottish Cup, rather than under the auspices of the SPFL, McGlennan is empowered under SFA Articles of Association number 28. “A club shall take all such steps as are reasonably practicable to ensure the safety, good conduct and good behaviour of its supporters at any ground”. Further: “Misbehaviour by spectators before, during or at the close of a match resulting from the failure of a club or recognised football body to take all reasonably practicable steps as aforesaid shall render that club or recognised football body liable to a fine or closure of ground or suspension or all of these penalties.”

 

That’s a bit wordy, as is the SFA’s way, but essentially whatever notices of complaint McGlennan issues will end up being considered by an independent judicial panel which has the power to impose fines or suspensions or to expel or eject clubs from the Scottish Cup if they “in any way bring the game into disrepute”.

 

Hibs and Rangers’ defence is sure to be the same: did we take all reasonably practicable steps? Yes we did.

 

In some quarters that excuse simply isn’t going to wash. Remember Justice Secretary Michael Matheson’s message to the SFA? It wasn’t quite “do something about this… or else the government will”, but it was close enough. Meanwhile, time marches on.

 

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/sport/football/article4753861.ece

[compo 6,147]

What disorder nothing happened at hampden it was all a dream