The media was out to get him....

[Workingman]

"Him" being Ben Stokes, England cricketer.

Every single minute of every day of his trial, for what was no more than a petty brawl outside a pub, has been covered in detail. Ever so much has been made of allegations of anti gay language being used hinting quite strongly that Stokes is a homophobe. He has also had his personal life laid open to scrutiny even though it had no relevance to the case.

Well today a jury found him not guilty of the charges and set him, and two others involved in the fight, free.

Unfortunately, for him, the damage has been done to his personal life and his career as a cricketer. It has taken 11 months to sort this out and in all that time there have been hints about this and about that with not a shred of evidence offered by the media.

This weekend there will be fights outside pubs and clubs up and down the land and we will hear nothing at all about them.

[TheOstrich]

An alternative view is that video phone footage depicted him as a complete thug, brawling in the street, punching another man to the ground.

I understand where you're coming from regarding celebrity coverage, especially in the aftermath of the Cliff Richard affair, but …… England representative? Role model for kids? Ambassador for the sport?

Sorry, he gets little sympathy from me for finishing up in the dock. Whilst one has to accept the jury's decision, I couldn't believe the verdict, TBH, and I do wonder what we have / have not been told.

At the end of the day, though, I think it only firms up my views about the current state of British justice .......

[Kaz]

I'm with Ossie. He's a thug, and an arrogant one at that.

[Workingman]

I probably did not make myself clear.

His actions were inexcusable and he deserved to be up in court - no argument.

But was it necessary for reporters to be at court every day reporting every detail - proved and not proved - as well as letting us know that he likes a beer, takeaways and to go clubbing (hint, hint) on his time off?

And when it comes to the role model and disrepute stuff, that has nothing whatsoever to do with his innocence or guilt regarding the case. If the ECB, his ultimate employer, wishes to take action then that is for them to decide. I believe that will happen, for the reason Ossie gives, and that will be justified.

[cromwell]

It's very strange. There were two gay men who were witnesses to the fight, but they weren't called to give evidence. One has subsequently thanked Stokes for sticking up for them.
I don't know whether Stokes is a thug or not. He certainly has a temper but he wasn't the one wielding the bottle.
Ossie and I disagree about the role model business!
I do get where WM is coming from; the media seems disappointed at the not guilty verdict.

[TheOstrich]

Yes, I agree with you, WM, that the constant media coverage and intrusion wasn't necessary, and only happened because of his celebrity status. So in that respect, it does mirror the Cliff Richard affair, although that was far more serious because that guy hadn't even been investigated / charged.

But what I find very strange, and concerns me more, was - in the light of testimony and video evidence that we know about - how Stokes was found not guilty - actually, not just Stokes, but all of them, including Hales who wasn't even charged!

Affray. n. Breach of the peace by fighting or rioting in public.

Based on the injuries sustained by one of the men, I'd argue it was an aggravated offence and potentially custodial:
https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/of ... em/affray/

I can only think things were said in the trial proceedings that the media have supressed in some way.

[Suff]

I can only think things were said in the trial proceedings that the media have supressed in some way.

The judge refused to allow the prosecution to present some charges. I've seen that before in a court. Whether, or not, he was swayed by "trial by press" or not; it is unlikely we'll ever know.

The charges that were presented could not be substantiated. Hence no conviction.

Stoke will, however, have to pay for this in his career. But not in Twenty20, where he is to be paid millions. Notably Twenty20 is not swayed by political motivations and only cares about good cricket..

[cromwell]

He's already paid a bit Suff. He missed the Ashes tour to Australia. I don't know if this equates to lost money though as they are on a contract - £700,000 pa for being on a central contract for the Test squad, I believe.