[Josy]

The guy that interfered was far too rough, yeah the one that never had a ticket was in the wrong but that was between him and the conductor, no one else, just because he never had a ticket doesnt mean the other guy had a right to assault him, the conductor should have done his job properly and kept him on the train then radio through for the police to be waiting at the next station.

[Shasown]

Originally Posted by ~HO~HO~HO~

The guy that interfered was far too rough, yeah the one that never had a ticket was in the wrong but that was between him and the conductor, no one else, just because he never had a ticket doesnt mean the other guy had a right to assault him, the conductor should have done his job properly and kept him on the train then radio through for the police to be waiting at the next station.

Very true and the conductor should also have offered to allow the man to purchase a valid ticket or provide some acceptable form of ID in order for the company to send an invoice for the fare for the youth to pay at a convenient time (Thats part of the provisions Rail compainies must follow imposed when the network was sold off).

The passenger had no right to interfere or to manhandle the youth off the train, thats called vigilantism. Would have been funny if the youth had knocked him on his ass after fat man grabbed him, fat man would have had no comeback.

Even though the act was carried out apparently as a public spirited action, in order to help out the conductor and make sure people werent overly delayed because of the action of one numpty its still illegal.

[Pyramid*]

Originally Posted by Shasown

Very true and the conductor should also have offered to allow the man to purchase a valid ticket or provide some acceptable form of ID in order for the company to send an invoice for the fare for the youth to pay at a convenient time (Thats part of the provisions Rail compainies must follow imposed when the network was sold off).

The passenger had no right to interfere or to manhandle the youth off the train, thats called vigilantism. Would have been funny if the youth had knocked him on his ass after fat man grabbed him, fat man would have had no comeback.

Even though the act was carried out apparently as a public spirited action, in order to help out the conductor and make sure people werent overly delayed because of the action of one numpty its still illegal.

We don't know if the conductor perhaps did offer the youth this option and that's where it began to kick off. The start of the clip seems to be whereby the 'discussion' has become a heated one.

For all we know, the conductor may have offered the guy the option and he told him to eff off that he had a ticket.....

[Shasown]

Originally Posted by Snowball

We don't know if the conductor perhaps did offer the youth this option and that's where it began to kick off. The start of the clip seems to be whereby the 'discussion' has become a heated one.

For all we know, the conductor may have offered the guy the option and he told him to eff off that he had a ticket.....

Ah at last some common sense. Thats very true, nor do we know what excuses the youth gave, nor the conversation or tones of the conductor prior to whats shown on the clip.

There is lots we dont know.

But as admirable as you think the passenger who threw the youth off is, we do know he committed an assault on the youth. The only people allowed to "lay hands" on another person and physically remove them from a train are the police, transport police and duly authorised personnel in the execution of their duty.

This isnt a case of citizen's arrest. It is assault, pure and simple and as soon as some other numpty whispers the word compensation claim in the youths ear he will no doubt make a complaint. Such is life.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by ~HO~HO~HO~

The guy that interfered was far too rough, yeah the one that never had a ticket was in the wrong but that was between him and the conductor, no one else, just because he never had a ticket doesnt mean the other guy had a right to assault him, the conductor should have done his job properly and kept him on the train then radio through for the police to be waiting at the next station.

Originally Posted by Shasown

Very true and the conductor should also have offered to allow the man to purchase a valid ticket or provide some acceptable form of ID in order for the company to send an invoice for the fare for the youth to pay at a convenient time (Thats part of the provisions Rail compainies must follow imposed when the network was sold off).

The passenger had no right to interfere or to manhandle the youth off the train, thats called vigilantism. Would have been funny if the youth had knocked him on his ass after fat man grabbed him, fat man would have had no comeback.

Even though the act was carried out apparently as a public spirited action, in order to help out the conductor and make sure people werent overly delayed because of the action of one numpty its still illegal.

Yup, exactly...to both.

I fail to see how people can think this idiot (the big bloke) was in the right by throwing his weight around...

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by ~HO~HO~HO~

The guy that interfered was far too rough, yeah the one that never had a ticket was in the wrong but that was between him and the conductor, no one else, just because he never had a ticket doesnt mean the other guy had a right to assault him, the conductor should have done his job properly and kept him on the train then radio through for the police to be waiting at the next station.

Yeah, this would have been the best option really. It was quite uncomfortable viewing tbh. Yeah, he was verbally rude to the conductor but the conductor should have acted more professionally and called the proper authorities instead of giving a passenger the go ahead to basically assault him. That kid/man (whatever), would be within his rights to sue the rail company too I reckon.