Jailed LFC fan Michael Shields might be pardoned

[sleaterkinney]

And the fact that the victim identified him is irrelevant I suppose? Well that card has been played by Shields family time and time again, so fairs fair... Unless it's only allowed for them to make such sweeping statements.
Sankey also contradicted himself and Shields and his other mates.

Well considering the victim was out cold by the time the paving slab was dropped on his head, how did he know who did it?

 

[Fedayn]

Well considering the victim was out cold by the time the paving slab was dropped on his head, how did he know who did it?

He couldn't possibly have seen him before of course, not course not.

Straw is making it clear there is new 'evidence', so what is it? Will arrests be made? If not why not?

 

[sleaterkinney]

He couldn't possibly have seen him before of course, not course not.

He might or he might not, but either way he wouldn't have been able to identify him as the attacker, would he?

 

[Fedayn]

He might or he might not, but either way he wouldn't have been able to identify him as the attacker, would he?

Why couldn't he?

 

[London_Calling]

Anyone know how much he's made from selling his story to the News of the World?

Or how much he'll be giving to the kids of the victim?

 

[sleaterkinney]

Why couldn't he?

I thought he had been knocked out before that happened.

What do you make of the statements of the other two who were involved and convicted in the assault, Wilson and Thompson that they did not know Shields, and that he was not involved in the incident?.

 

[Fedayn]

I thought he had been knocked out before that happened.

What do you make of the statements of the other two who were involved and convicted in the assault, Wilson and Thompson that they did not know Shields, and that he was not involved in the incident?.

The two of them who were in the next room to him at the hotel and had been talking to him? I don't know, what do you make of them?

The next morning a number of English fans, including those staying at the hotel, were rounded up by the police. Shields was among them, as were his friends Kieron Dunne, 20, and John Unsworth, 21. All three had been sharing room 419. Room 421 next door had been occupied by Wilson and Thompson, who were friends of Mr Sankey, until both had been evicted by the hotel management earlier for disturbing other guests. The two groups had become friendly and had spent previous mornings on their neighbouring balconies comparing notes from the night's revelries.

Significantly, Thompson, who had also been charged with hooliganism, had already made a confession, for which he had received a six-month suspended sentence, after confirming that he had attacked Mr Georgiev together with Wilson and Shields. However, when the trial began and Thompson was called to give evidence, he gave a highly contradictory and muddled account of event

 

[sleaterkinney]

Facts such as Bulgarian witnesses identifying Shields? Those nasty Bulgarians.....

Another thing, He was not segregated from the victim and witnesses before the parade - he was chained to a radiator in full view of them, he was also ordered to put on a white t-shirt - he was the only one wearing one in the parade.

 

[sleaterkinney]

The two of them who were in the next room to him at the hotel and had been talking to him? I don't know, what do you make of them?

Maybe they were trying to get their mate off who the police had turned up at the hotel to arrest but couldn't find?. The mate who since then confessed and has a record of violence?

 

[futha]

Why go forensic though? The man had a paving slab thrown on his head. He got a fractured skull and brain damage - however, he was not murdered. Given that there were several witness accounts to the incident, and probably very little that forensic examination could conclude, did it really need to go forensic?

The issue here is the fact that vital evidence was not considered, or rejected, and that there the conviction has become increasingly unstable due to this all coming to light and an evidently stronger case against Graham Sankey being built. So, should Shields be pardoned? No. Because that suggests while the British courts accept the guilt, they don't accept the sentence. Should there be a retrial? Yes. The evidence supports it and casts enough doubt in my opinion. Not to mention that seeing as Martin Georgiev will be brain damaged for life by these hooligans, he deserves justice as much as Michael Shields does.

Well I guess it's too late now but considering all these dodgy eyewitness testimonies it would be handy to see who's DNA was on the stone. I don't know what to think about all this really, it isn't good if Shields has been wrongly convicted but it doesn't seem right to release him and not make attempts to try and find who did do it.
The saddest part is some guy who wasn't doing anything gets lamped in the head and brain damaged for life. Scumbag whoever did it.

 

[Fedayn]

Another thing, He was not segregated from the victim and witnesses before the parade - he was chained to a radiator in full view of them, he was also ordered to put on a white t-shirt - he was the only one wearing one in the parade.

Maybe they were trying to get their mate off who the police had turned up at the hotel to arrest but couldn't find?. The mate who since then confessed and has a record of violence?

He was wearing a very light shirt the night of the attack it seems, at night it could be mistaken for a white shirt.

There's lots of stuff that's totally contradictory. That includes the two men you mentioned who admitted it and dropped Shields in it. How's that helping him?

So what if he has a record of violence, does that mean he did it? There's a rush to say it was a fit up by many people who have no idea what happened. 2 people from the next hotel room deny they knew him even theough they were friensd with him and one said he and Shields were involved. Neither you nor I know, but to claim as people do that 'Michael Shields is Innocent' is bollocks because we don't know.

 

[sleaterkinney]

He was wearing a very light shirt the night of the attack it seems, at night it could be mistaken for a white shirt.

Then why did the police make him put one on and be the only one wearing one for the identity parade?.

There's lots of stuff that's totally contradictory. That includes the two men you mentioned who admitted it and dropped Shields in it. How's that helping him?

So what if he has a record of violence, does that mean he did it? There's a rush to say it was a fit up by many people who have no idea what happened. 2 people from the next hotel room deny they knew him even theough they were friensd with him and one said he and Shields were involved. Neither you nor I know, but to claim as people do that 'Michael Shields is Innocent' is bollocks because we don't know.

So you're just playing devil's advocate, right...

I don't think he has been proven guilty, do you?

 

[Fedayn]

Then why did the police make him put one on and be the only one wearing one for the identity parade?.

Who knows, not good though

So you're just playing devil's advocate, right...

No, i'm simply not convinced he's some gentle giant couldn't hurt a fly the Bulgarians are all terrible it wasn't our Michael that done it he's ionnocent all those Builgarians are liars those lads ijn the next room who admitted they did it and that Michael was with them just did it to help someone else la' cos we heard a 2nd hand confession mister....

And all the other shite spouted...

As I said, what is this new evidence Straw has claimed. Because it sure as fuck isn't this confession as that has been known by govt and others for a fucking long time.

 

[sleaterkinney]

Who knows, not good though

It's more than not good - it stinks of a fit-up.

No, i'm simply not convinced he's some gentle giant couldn't hurt a fly the Bulgarians are all terrible it wasn't our Michael that done it he's ionnocent all those Builgarians are liars those lads ijn the next room who admitted they did it and that Michael was with them just did it to help someone else la' cos we heard a 2nd hand confession mister....

Have a cup of tea and a lie-down.

 

[Fedayn]

It's more than not good - it stinks of a fit-up.

That on it's won with no witnesses from both here and Bulgaria and yes i'd agree. However that's not the case.

Have a cup of tea and a lie-down.

Yeah, that's right, ignore what's right there because it doesn't fit in with your schema.

 

[sleaterkinney]

That on it's won with no witnesses from both here and Bulgaria and yes i'd agree. However that's not the case.

You're not making sense now, go have that lie down.

 

[Fedayn]

It's more than not good - it stinks of a fit-up.

The chained to a radiator point is dodgy as. If it was simply that on it's own that they had to convict him on and if there was absence of witnesses from both here and Bulgaria then yes i'd agree. However that's not the case, there are witnesses. So are they simply lying?

 

[DexterTCN]

Telegraph wopuld never have any interest in slagging off working-class scousers would they?

A rather different account, which rather undercuts most of the Torygraphs shite - http://www.guardian.co.uk/theobserver/2007/jun/03/features.magazine37

Two things stand out in that link...

In May 2005, as his heroes flew home from Istanbul with the European Cup, 18-year-old Michael Shields was celebrating 'the greatest night of his life'. But then came a knock on his door, and the start of a nightmare.

...Peter Coles, former head of major crimes for Nottinghamshire police, shares his dismay: 'I was a policeman for 35 years and if any of my men had conducted a case like this they would have been sacked,' he says.

This is why we need new smileys.

(Didn't read the torygraph one but I'm sure it's just as bad.)

 

[sleaterkinney]

The chained to a radiator point is dodgy as. If it was simply that on it's own that they had to convict him on and if there was absence of witnesses from both here and Bulgaria then yes i'd agree. However that's not the case, there are witnesses. So are they simply lying?

What witnesses from here, the one that recanted his statement when he was on the witness stand and his mate had left the country?

 

[purplex]

Who smashed the paving slab over the waiters head then?
Wheres the justice for him?
Enjoy the celebration scousers.
Der der der der der der der deeerrr

 

[Fedayn]

What witnesses from here, the one that recanted his statement when he was on the witness stand and his mate had left the country?

Aaah, I know which one i'll believe the one that says Michael is not guilty. As for the Bulgarians, well who cares about them.

 

[sleaterkinney]

Aaah, I know which one i'll believe the one that says Michael is not guilty. As for the Bulgarians, well who cares about them.

You're not bothered that he recanted his statement on the stand then, are ya?.

 

[Fedayn]

You're not bothered that he recanted his statement on the stand then, are ya?.

Bothered? No. Wondering which one, if any, is the truth? Yes