Ben Stokes Charged

Good point, not sure. If the footage that did the rounds was brought to the attention of my employers, then possibly. I work for a university.

 

This is fine in theory, but in practice if he's later found guilty of a serious offence then the employer gets hammered for it.

"What sort of example is the ECB setting to young children wanting to play cricket when you're allowing a man who has battered someone on the street to represent their country?"

 

I dare say he continued to be paid under the terms of his contract with the ECB so I wouldn't say his livelihood was taken away. I think they took a very sensible approach and looked at it objectively. Yes he is one of our better players but no one is bigger than the team. I was disappointed he wasn't avaible for selection but I fully understand the reasons he wasn't. Of course he is innocent until proven otherwise but as long as the ECB honour the contract I.e continue to pay him they have done no wrong. Even if he were to be found not guilty, the ECB could still bring it's own disciplinary action as I doubt they advocate players going out to night clubs and getting into brawls in the street.

 

Fair point but my main gripe is with the CPS for dragging its feet with pretty damning evidence in front of them , and not the ECB , it could all have been sorted out much quicker . .

 

Yes it's not something I know a lot about but it does seem a ridiculous amount of time to sort out a fight outside a club.

 

I think the video is the issue.
If there wasn't a video then it could have been a whole lot different. Stokes himself has not denied anything in his public statements and has apologised for his actions.

 

He's also played 20/20 cricket in new zealand recently so still getting some coin in regardless. Don't forget his IPL franchise paid him 1 million pounds too last year: lad's not short of a bob or two.
Further the ashes tour was blighted by off the field player indescretion: there does appear to be an unsavoury element within the current england set-up.

 

Once he is convicted or cleared, he should be allowed to continue his career either way.

It is clear that he displayed overly aggressive behaviour but it is just as apparent that this wasn’t unprovoked and without reason. The provocation/mitigation is probably why the cps took so long to make a charging decision.

I’m not condoning violence but let’s not pretend that the bloke that ended up with a broken eye socket was an innocent victim.

Stokes needs to be more controlled, more mature and probably drink less. But to suggest this incident is a career ender is ridiculous. I just hope this episode hasn’t dampened his demeanour to the point of reducing his on-field aggression and competitiveness.

 

No one's intimated the other two involved appear not be culpable of untoward behaviours, inclusive of homophobia and i'm sure they will be duly dealt with. Stokes did what any right minded person should do: he intervened. But instead of saying 'eff off or i'll smash your scummy faces in' he carried out a violent assault on said persons.
Unfortunately for him this was captured on camera.

 

Don’t dispute most of that, it appears he overstepped the mark by a good way, but it doesn’t mean he shouldn’t be allowed to work.

However just to pick up one thing, he’s been charged with affray. I’m sure the other charges of assault and abh were also considered, but dismissed. Assault (and assault occasioning abh) has to have a victim in the eyes of the law and so it seems they have deemed that the odious little homophobe is not a victim.

Charging affray means they don’t think he would have a reasonable chance of conviction for the ‘violent assault’ you mention. He hit somebody - but he is not being charged with, and so is not guilty of, an assault.

He may or may not be criminally culpable for affray, but he definitely smashed someone in the face.

Not great, not at all, but he shouldn’t lose his whole future career in cricket IMO.

 

It's certainly a life lesson for Stokes , as England vice captain he needs to show more responsibility and maturity . We've all been there to a lesser extent I suppose , crossroads of life n'all that . Hopefully the justice system will be lenient .

 

I'm sure if i walked up to a nun and smacked her in the eye then i'd be charged with assault: he's lucky to be charged with affray.
I agree completely that he should continue with his cricket career. He doesn't look after vulnerable people so i don't see any issue there. I would like to see the ECB putting a further suspension in place however, after conviction. He will continue playing regardless somewhere in the world.

 

The whole thing has been handled badly.

Preposterous in my view to suspend him pre-charge. He’s innocent right now and at worst was only ever going to be convicted of an assault/public order offence on the basis of self defence/defence of others gone too far.

Typically ECB to panic and over react. Why not let him play and in the event of conviction make a positive of the situation - have him accept he went too far, use him as an example of what happens if you do, deter others doing the same.

Don’t lose sight of what he’s alleged to have done. It’s not the worst offence in the world whatever you call it and will inevitably attract a community penalty given his lack of form and the circumstances.

It took so long to charge he could have played entire Ashes Test Series. Only explanation for delay is police and CPS fretting owing to celebrity and running scared of criticism. They had no real option to charge in light of the CCTV.

They’ll also have wrestled with whether the other two, the initial aggressors, were motivated by hatred of homosexuals such as would aggravate their culpability and potential sentence.

Evidentially Stokes has problems with the CCTV but I would still fancy my chances in a jury trial given who he is and the Good Samaritan element.

If the jury think he might have thrown the punch believing, in the heat of the moment, that it was reasonable and necessary to defend himself/others he’s not guilty. And even if they don’t he’s still Ben Stokes and the other 2 are homophobic scrotes. Juries usually find a way to acquit if they have sympathy with a defendant.

I’m having a tenner on NG if he has a trial.

 

I hear what your saying and agree with much of it but he didn't only throw one punch and it doesn't appear he was in that much danger in the video. He's a big strong fit man and the others are rather pathetic in comparison.
Do you really think he'd take it to trial and hope for full acquittal?

 

It’s affray not assault; claiming reasonable force and self defence wouldn’t cut much and given its clear he carried on when the other guy had relented it would be a crap defence anyway.

I suspect he’ll be convicted, given it progresses to crown from magistrates if he pleads not guilty I suspect he might plead guilty to the magistrates.

 

He will have to defend his assaultative behaviours at his appearance in court for affray.

 

It would be a gamble and if I was advising I’d give him the hard word but stop short of getting his arm up his back!

Equally, I have fought worse cases and won. The crucial issue is what he believed was necessary at the time, however mistaken he may have been. I wouldn’t be too concerned about the earlier blows, it’s that last one that looks bad.

You’ll be aware though that juries are directed that it’s difficult to weigh to a nicety the precise amount of force required in the heat of the moment and I do think there is a chance, in all the circumstances, that they might find a way to give him the benefit of the doubt.

 

Affray requires the threat or use of unlawful violence. Violence is not unlawful if in self defence.
I think he’ll either plead in the mags or elect trial by jury.

 

So now he has been charged he is available for selection? It feels like the ECB have gone about this backwards.