Taste Of India restaurant assaults

[Joe K]

Discussion removed from TiG 'forums':

www.thisisgloucestershire.co.uk/discussions/Taste-India-violent-staff-Boycott-business-ASAP/discussion-16530852-detail/discussion.html
--------------------------------------------

Friday, July 13 2012

“Taste Of India...violent staff!!! Boycott this business ASAP.”

By 8589brian

Report
---------------------------------------

by 8589brian

Friday, July 13 2012, 9:48AM

“From what I have heard the staff beat up some customers for not paying because the food they placed an order for hadn't turned up after an hour so they put some money down for their drinks and left and that's when the staff set upon the men.”

Report
----------------------------------------------------

by sticks_stones

Friday, July 13 2012, 10:35AM

“I cannot understand why people use those places anyway, most of them should be closed down!”

Report
------------------------------------------------

by mikehibby

Friday, July 13 2012, 11:04AM

“"From what I have heard"

From what you have HEARD being the key, why not let the trial finish and then judge them?”

Report
------------------------------------------------

by Bartonite

Friday, July 13 2012, 11:09AM

“I wonder if the assault was racially aggravated?

Nah, couldn't be...”

Report
----------------------------------------------

by Bartonite

Friday, July 13 2012, 11:27PM

They also (allegedly) 'belted' a first aider who tried to assist the unconscious man...

Report
-----------------------------------------------

Of course, this is sub judice, so it might prejudice the case against the defendants if the public were allowed to debate the evidence openly. Still, they're obviously guilty to a man jack, so where's the harm..?

[Joe K]

You can see how different a case looks, depending on which side, prosecution or defence, is depicting it.

This is the defence's take:

Taste of India restaurant staff "set upon by rugby fans"

Incidentally, this is the story I linked to in my comment at the end of the discussion. I see that comment was removed before the entire thread was deleted, though I can't see why a link to a TiG article would offend...

First aider 'belted' by Taste of India worker court hears

And here's an article from Wednesday which I didn't see at all. That could have been the day when there are so many new articles that they fill the ten available pages, and I only discovered it now because I searched for 'Taste Of India'...

Taste of India worker threatened to 'kill' rugby fans - court

Readers will note that how this works is, whatever is claimed by either side to have happened is 'alleged', or 'the court was told'. TiG, however, although they disapprove of speculation, will print headlines without any of these qualifiers. Not on this occasion. They've at least used quotes in the first headline. They have, however, printed absolute rubbish in the past, as with the 'riots' in Barton, by 'morons' who have 'shamed' their area (my quotes, not theirs), and I'm sure they will again.

The trial continues...

[Deleted]

The trial is still on, so the matter is still sub judice, isn't it? Let's wait till the (inevitable) verdict before discussing the trial, shall we? BTW, TiG is still advertising the Taste of India on the website. I overcame the urge to post a 'review'.

[Joe K]

Tempting as it might be, I'm not pre-judging the verdict, but I am noting the high-handed manner in which TiG deals with attempts at discussion. Readers would respect them more if they just explained the constraints on debating the trial, but instead they lay about with the 'delete' mace...

[Deleted]

Two of them - Rashed and Ahmed - have been found guilty of the attack, although TiG doesn't seem to say exactly what the crime was judged to be; it was probably only affray, as TiG had previously reported that the charge of violent disorder had been withdrawn. Rashid and Hoque were found not guilty of all charges, which seems a bit odd, given that it was claimed during the trial that it was Rashid (identified as the only one wearing spectacles) who was actually leading the attack and shouting "kill the customers". All in all, the attackers seem to have got off very lightly. We'll see what the judge gives the two convicts, but I can't think that there will be too much punishment for affray.

[Joe K]

Well, people claim all kinds of things during a trial (and the lawyers adopt an attitude of, 'if I don't know it's untrue, I accept it as the truth'), which is why discussion of those statements is discouraged.

I doubt anyone will face further prosecution for false allegations of being attacked by the customers. Maybe the judge will take it into consideration when sentencing...