Why oh why Tuilagi!....... BREAKING NEWS!

First topic message reminder :

Well that makes the midfield pairing debate easier...............................

http://www.espn.co.uk/rugby/story/_/id/12891571/manu-tuilagi-world-cup-assault-charge

Laurie

In the UK a defendant is charged in the Police station

They are bailed from there to a magistrate unless indictable only to Crown court

At Mag court they can plead guilty at the first opportunity to accrue benefit on sentence or opt to plead not guilty and go for summary trail by bench of 3 or to go to Crwon for triable either way

A plea is a plea, there is no mitigation at plea time. Guilty or not.

So in the Uk you could have the situation where you punch some once in the face, are arrested, charged, plead Guilty, then when the prosecution is reading the statement of facts to the court they say that you punched the victim five times, you cant do anything about it because youve pleaded guilty to the charge of Assault.

In New Zealand what would happen is the matter would be further remanded for a hearing so that the prosecution witnesses can give evidence, be crossexamined, then in turn the  defendant can call witnesses,  give evidence and be crossexamined, the result being the Judge can then determine as whether the Defendant punched the victim once or five times. But at all times being guilty of the charge  by way of the plea he entered earlier.

I've never had a very high opinion of Tuilagi (he's yet to confirm his opinion of me), and this event does little to improve that.
What I would say though, is if someone accused me of assaulting two female police officers, and I felt I hadn't done it, there is NO WAY I would cop for it just to make my life a bit easier.
Seems like he has taken some incredibly bad advice there.
It's also worth noting that the police officers were trying to detain him for a reason, so assaulting them wasn't his first offence that evening.
Disclaimer: I wasn't there, and he's not here now to defend himself.

aucklandlaurie wrote:So in the Uk you could have the situation where you punch some once in the face, are arrested, charged, plead Guilty, then when the prosecution is reading the statement of facts to the court they say that you punched the victim five times, you cant do anything about it because youve pleaded guilty to the charge of Assault.

In New Zealand what would happen is the matter would be further remanded for a hearing so that the prosecution witnesses can give evidence, be crossexamined, then in turn the  defendant can call witnesses,  give evidence and be crossexamined, the result being the Judge can then determine as whether the Defendant punched the victim once or five times. But at all times being guilty of the charge  by way of the plea he entered earlier.

No - you can still dispute the facts - but you would know the outline of the prosecutions case before you plead anyway. What you describe is more like an inquisitorial justice system, ours is advesorial

We already know that Tuilagi's offence was at the low end by the nature of the punishment it drew. If he had actually beaten up any police officers, he'd more than likely be behind bars.

It's understandable, then, why Tuilagi is frustrated that people might be under the impression he went at the WPCs with flying fists but I don't think he's doing himself any favours with his comments.

From a personal PR point of view, if Tuilagi wanted to put his version of events, it would have been better if one of the relatives, who was there that night, had spoken instead.

absolutely right Rugby fan. If he had beaten up a cop he would be looking at serious jail time

Since when did we have 'cops' in this country? People have been watching far too much Sky television

"cops" is an english slang term for police adopted by the americans although searching round the web there seems to be no consensus on why but its not an americanism I am sure

~from Wiki
Cop or Copper
The term Copper was the original, unshortened word, originally used in Britain to mean "someone who captures". (In British English the term Cop is recorded (Shorter Oxford Dictionary) in the sense of 'To Capture' from 1704, derived from the Latin 'Capere' via the Old French 'Caper').

I know that, TJ  It might not originally be an American term, but it's certainly what they use.

The only people I see use it in this country are the tabloid press (the shorter word the better) and kids brought up on a steady diet of American telly.

Anyway, let's hope Tuilagi gets back to playing rugby soon and keeps out of trouble with the 'cops'.

Cyril. Lots of my family are cops and they use the term. now all retired but they called themselves cops way back in the 70s

Higher_Ground wrote:I've never had a very high opinion of Tuilagi (he's yet to confirm his opinion of me), and this event does little to improve that.
What I would say though, is if someone accused me of assaulting two female police officers, and I felt I hadn't done it, there is NO WAY I would cop for it just to make my life a bit easier.
Seems like he has taken some incredibly bad advice there.
It's also worth noting that the police officers were trying to detain him for a reason, so assaulting them wasn't his first offence that evening.  
Disclaimer: I wasn't there, and he's not here now to defend himself.

I agree. It is no good pleading guilty but saying you are innocent.

Apart from anything else he might well find himself having difficulties in the future as he now has a criminal record. For instance he might find it difficult to go to quite a few countries with a record for assaulting police officers.

Rugby Fan wrote:It's understandable, then, why Tuilagi is frustrated that people might be under the impression he went at the WPCs with flying fists but I don't think he's doing himself any favours with his comments.

Manu should not be talking, but I understand why he is.

1) He is injured and bored. He is reading social media and rugby boards where he is being described as someone who beat up women (including on here).
2) This is the start of his campaign to leave Tigers, and the bad advice received from the clubs lawyers will be one reason cited.

Cyril wrote:Since when did we have 'cops' in this country? People have been watching far too much Sky television

COP

Constable of Police.

Well, I'm still not calling them 'cops' even if the rest of Britain has gone bonkers 

Cyril wrote:Well, I'm still not calling them 'cops' even if the rest of Britain has gone bonkers 

Thats right Cyril theyve been watching far too much of "The Bill"...

Constable is too long and overly formal in a Victorian oil lamp and smog way.....

'Con' for short?

Perhaps too confusing albeit not always inaccurate.....

LondonTiger wrote:

Rugby Fan wrote:It's understandable, then, why Tuilagi is frustrated that people might be under the impression he went at the WPCs with flying fists but I don't think he's doing himself any favours with his comments.

Manu should not be talking, but I understand why he is.

1) He is injured and bored. He is reading social media and rugby boards where he is being described as someone who beat up women (including on here).
2) This is the start of his campaign to leave Tigers, and the bad advice received from the clubs lawyers will be one reason cited.

You really think he wants to leave?? I was under the impression that Tigers had been very good to him through all his injuries.

As to his comments he's got himself into a corner, either he puts his side across and looks silly for lying, or he stays silent and is thought to have assaulted female police officers with most assuming that means the very worst. Moral if the story, don't trust lawyers!

I'm not sure genuinely how many people felt he bludgeoned the women with a string of heavy right uppercuts to their chins and brutal rib punches to down them. I don't really think anyone would be out walking on the street after something like that and I don't think too many observers had that impression of the altercation.

Interesting to hear LT's take. Tuilagi was asked whether he would consider a move to France and he sidestepped the question by saying his only priority is getting fit.

When you have the kind of injury record he has lately, it must start to prey on your mind about how long your career might be in the game.

We can't know whether he took the right course of action with his plea, but the penalty was low, and the case dealt with quickly. He has a criminal record now, so the only question is whether he could have escaped prosecution entirely or fessed up to a lesser charge. Even going by his version of events, I don't think either avenue was open to him.

Still, Manu's pectoral injury was initially misdiagnosed by a specialist, and he wasted eight weeks waiting for it to heal, before discovering it needed an operation. He might be sceptical of all professional advice these days.

What's missing from his interview is a sense of contrition to go along with his feeling he has been portrayed unfairly. That's why he would have been wiser to have a relative give the events of that evening more context if he wants to change the narrative.

SecretFly wrote:Constable is too long and overly formal in a Victorian oil lamp and smog way.....

'Con' for short?

Perhaps too confusing albeit not always inaccurate.....

what an idiot you are.

We've been through this before and it was scientifically proven then that the title belonged to you.

The medal is probably in your attic. Go look, I'm sure it's there where you hid it.

SecretFly wrote:We've been through this before and it was scientifically proven then that the title belonged to you.

The medal is probably in your attic.  Go look, I'm sure it's there where you hid it.

SecretFly wrote:We've been through this before and it was scientifically proven then that the title belonged to you.

The medal is probably in your attic.  Go look, I'm sure it's there where you hid it.

No but i found your brain, let me know if you want it back…somehow i think you need it idiot.

SecretFly wrote:I'm not sure genuinely how many people felt he bludgeoned the women with a string of heavy right uppercuts to their chins and brutal rib punches to down them.  I don't really think anyone would be out walking on the street after something like that and I don't think too many observers had that impression of the altercation.

another example of how your brain operates, so …laying a hand on a woman is ok, PC or not, if you don't make a mark. You always find new ways to plumb the depths of ignorance, its really quite staggering.

Gwlad wrote:

SecretFly wrote:We've been through this before and it was scientifically proven then that the title belonged to you.

The medal is probably in your attic.  Go look, I'm sure it's there where you hid it.

No but i found your brain, let me know if you want it back…somehow i think you need it idiot.

Yeah, I could spare it - I upgraded.  But you obviously forget to steal the Instruction book that went with it.  

The 'On' switch is the green one on the left.  But careful though - the surge might give a guy like you some peripheral vision anomalies to begin with.  Brains take some getting used to when unfamiliar with them.

Gwlad wrote:

SecretFly wrote:I'm not sure genuinely how many people felt he bludgeoned the women with a string of heavy right uppercuts to their chins and brutal rib punches to down them.  I don't really think anyone would be out walking on the street after something like that and I don't think too many observers had that impression of the altercation.

another example of how your brain operates, so …laying a hand on a woman is ok, PC or not, if you don't make a mark. You always find new ways to plumb the depths of ignorance, its really quite staggering.

Brain still in 'Off' mode there. That few lines of mine in English doesn't remotely say or imply what you've come up with. You short-circuited yourself. Take a drink and wait ten seconds

SecretFly wrote:

Gwlad wrote:

SecretFly wrote:I'm not sure genuinely how many people felt he bludgeoned the women with a string of heavy right uppercuts to their chins and brutal rib punches to down them.  I don't really think anyone would be out walking on the street after something like that and I don't think too many observers had that impression of the altercation.

another example of how your brain operates, so …laying a hand on a woman is ok, PC or not, if you don't make a mark. You always find new ways to plumb the depths of ignorance, its really quite staggering.

Brain still in 'Off' mode there.  That few lines of mine in English doesn't remotely say or imply what you've come up with.  You short-circuited yourself.  Take a drink and wait ten seconds

I could take  year and many many drinks and you'd still sound like an ignorant  bigot

'not sure how many people felt he bludgeoned the women etc etc' It was juts a light tap right? inference is clear please reply on the issue not try and deflect it with inane attempts at humor.

Thought so, you can't.

Gwlad wrote:

SecretFly wrote:I'm not sure genuinely how many people felt he bludgeoned the women with a string of heavy right uppercuts to their chins and brutal rib punches to down them.  I don't really think anyone would be out walking on the street after something like that and I don't think too many observers had that impression of the altercation.

another example of how your brain operates, so …laying a hand on a woman is ok, PC or not, if you don't make a mark. You always find new ways to plumb the depths of ignorance, its really quite staggering.

I cant help but think GWLad that you have to look at the whole incident in its entirety,if this was only a case of pushing the the female officer, then I think MT would have been taken back to the station, put in a holding cell till dawn, given a "you dont know what an opportunity your being given here" lecture and let go.

However we all know that the incident started with the the Taxi driver and the damage to the taxi, and I dare say the cops didnt have the room to move with any discretion.

aucklandlaurie wrote:

Gwlad wrote:

SecretFly wrote:I'm not sure genuinely how many people felt he bludgeoned the women with a string of heavy right uppercuts to their chins and brutal rib punches to down them.  I don't really think anyone would be out walking on the street after something like that and I don't think too many observers had that impression of the altercation.

another example of how your brain operates, so …laying a hand on a woman is ok, PC or not, if you don't make a mark. You always find new ways to plumb the depths of ignorance, its really quite staggering.

I cant help but think GWLad that you have to look at the whole incident in its entirety,if this was only a case of pushing the the female  officer, then I think MT would have been taken back to the station, put in a holding cell till dawn, given a "you dont know what an opportunity your being given here" lecture and let go.

However we all know that the incident started with the the Taxi driver and the damage to the taxi, and I dare say the cops didnt have the room to move with any discretion.

No auckland that doesn't happen except on 'the bill', you clearly have no idea about policing in the UK.

You dont assault police and walk away next day with a slap on the wrist. Assaulting an officer in lawful execution of duty is serious, despite the ignoramus fly trying to negate it by saying he didnt cause serious harm.

True, I am not familiar with Police practise in the UK. saying I have "No idea" might be going a little far.

I dont even know why he (MT) was charged with assault on police in the first place.as opposed to a charge of resisting. As the push appears to have occured while they were putting the bangles on.

Aucklandlaurie - because that is the offence. Laying hands on a police officer is assault. Resisting arrest is different. Thats wriggling while the cuffs are being put on, running away, that sort of thing.

In the UK you are charged when arrested. Remanded either on bail or in custody while the case is prepared. Your lawyer gets to see all the evidence from the prosecution then you decide how to plead. With two police officers swearing that he had assaulted one of them ( and unwanted touch ie a push is assault) then he has no chance of winning on a not guilty plea so he pleads guilty. Case over.

Gwlad wrote:
I could take  year and many many drinks and you'd still sound like an ignorant  bigot

'not sure how many people felt he bludgeoned the women etc etc' It was juts a light tap right? inference is clear please reply on the issue not try and deflect it with inane attempts at humor.

Thought so, you can't.

When you get around to being proficient at the English language have another stab at it and read what I was responding to. You display yet again that you haven't a clue.

You're simply a guy who likes to attack people from behind and then gets all emotional and fraught when they turn around and beat the schit out of you Quelle surprise!

Look at the consistent factors and deal with the posters concerned?

Oooh, who called the 'cops'?