Shocking and disgusting behaviour

[Nameless]

Based on previous examples I suspect there is every chance some of those responsible have commented on the thread. Was certainly the case after al Habsi/ Arsenal.

I can accept to some extent the 'lads just being lads' argument for some behaviour. Marching in a gang through a strange town making a racket is what fans have done for years and while it might scare old ladies and make the lads look a bit silly it's kind of harmless.
Setting off a smoke bomb inside a ground may be unpleasant for asthmatics but again, I don't see it as a huge crime.
But the insensitivity of filling a tube carriage with smoke just days after people have been hurt in a real bomb attack is crazy. Just why would you do it ?
If they are identified a ban is inevitable. Whether what they did is a criminal offence is irrelevant as the club can ban people from the ground for any reason they like in the same way they can refuse entry and eject someone.

[Theroyalbox]

the thing that p!sses me off the most is the little gimp who posted it on twitter trying to sell the video for 50£ that's more punishable than what these lads did.

Harmless fun? if you can call it that but its certainly harmless if anything quite stupid. I'd imagine they will face punishment otherwise it'll happen again and again as people will think it can go unpunished. If the carriage was filled with football fans perhaps it would be more forgivable but people calling for life bans need to relax and lighten up a bit.

Personally I think its nice to see the youngsters come to the games enjoying themselves, but all you lot seem to think about is how chavvy they are.

Well that was a Rollercoaster. Are you condemning them or supporting them?

I obviously think it is a stupid thing to do, but I don't think they need life bans if any at all. So a bit of both really

[John Smith]

It's a bit like being punished by your school for something you did down the park after school hours. Should really be a police matter only - could still have happened on a non-matchday.

[Norfolk Royal]

Perhaps you could explain what charges would result in my scenario from the accidental discharge of a smoke bomb. That would be a bit more accurate than your ludicrous conflation. Neither did I say that no charges would result, merely that a deliberate act would be difficult to prove were the suspect to say it were accidental.

It's illegal to set off a smoke bomb in a public place, usually punished by a £70 on-the-spot fine.

It's also illegal to attempt to take a smoke bomb into a football ground. Saying "it was an accident, I meant to take it to the ground" could be incriminating. This offence is often punished with a prison sentence and banning order.

As always, the sensible legal advice for non-lawyers to give is "contact a lawyer".

Presumably the offence you quote for the £70 on the spot fine includes an element of deliberation having to be proved and would certainly mean the person handing out the on the spot fine would have to see the person actually letting off the smoke bomb, deliberate or not. The person who let off the smoke bomb was not attempting to enter a football ground and would merely have to say that they were not intending to go to the match and were going to stay in a pub for the duration, or say they were going to let it off in public before the match. It would be difficult to prove otherwise.

Surely the easiest way to avoid any confusion would be to make it illegal to be in possession of a smoke bomb such as this in a public place.

[muirinho]

It's a bit like being punished by your school for something you did down the park after school hours. Should really be a police matter only - could still have happened on a non-matchday.

Except, if you were wearing school uniform, it wouldn't just be a police matter, it would be a school matter also. If you think kids don't get suspended/expelled from school for matters outside the school ground, you're very wrong.

From .gov.uk guidance

"Heads have the power to discipline pupils who misbehave outside the schools premises and outside schools hours"


Those idiots were in Reading colours going to a Reading game. The club can do what it likes to them.

[John Smith]

It's a bit like being punished by your school for something you did down the park after school hours. Should really be a police matter only - could still have happened on a non-matchday.

Except, if you were wearing school uniform, it wouldn't just be a police matter, it would be a school matter also. If you think kids don't get suspended/expelled from school for matters outside the school ground, you're very wrong.

From .gov.uk guidance

"Heads have the power to discipline pupils who misbehave outside the schools premises and outside schools hours"


Those idiots were in Reading colours going to a Reading game. The club can do what it likes to them.

Can you help me get back in my box please muirinho

[muirinho]

It's a bit like being punished by your school for something you did down the park after school hours. Should really be a police matter only - could still have happened on a non-matchday.

Except, if you were wearing school uniform, it wouldn't just be a police matter, it would be a school matter also. If you think kids don't get suspended/expelled from school for matters outside the school ground, you're very wrong.

From .gov.uk guidance

"Heads have the power to discipline pupils who misbehave outside the schools premises and outside schools hours"


Those idiots were in Reading colours going to a Reading game. The club can do what it likes to them.

Can you help me get back in my box please muirinho

Hang on a sec, I just need to go fetch some nails

[John Smith]

Hang on a sec, I just need to go fetch some nails

Alright, don't milk it.

[Snowflake Royal]

Perhaps you could explain what charges would result in my scenario from the accidental discharge of a smoke bomb. That would be a bit more accurate than your ludicrous conflation. Neither did I say that no charges would result, merely that a deliberate act would be difficult to prove were the suspect to say it were accidental.

It's illegal to set off a smoke bomb in a public place, usually punished by a £70 on-the-spot fine.

It's also illegal to attempt to take a smoke bomb into a football ground. Saying "it was an accident, I meant to take it to the ground" could be incriminating. This offence is often punished with a prison sentence and banning order.

As always, the sensible legal advice for non-lawyers to give is "contact a lawyer".

Presumably the offence you quote for the £70 on the spot fine includes an element of deliberation having to be proved and would certainly mean the person handing out the on the spot fine would have to see the person actually letting off the smoke bomb, deliberate or not. The person who let off the smoke bomb was not attempting to enter a football ground and would merely have to say that they were not intending to go to the match and were going to stay in a pub for the duration, or say they were going to let it off in public before the match. It would be difficult to prove otherwise.

Surely the easiest way to avoid any confusion would be to make it illegal to be in possession of a smoke bomb such as this in a public place.

Good luck trying that argument with a steward, police officer or a magistrate

[SCIAG]

Perhaps you could explain what charges would result in my scenario from the accidental discharge of a smoke bomb. That would be a bit more accurate than your ludicrous conflation. Neither did I say that no charges would result, merely that a deliberate act would be difficult to prove were the suspect to say it were accidental.

It's illegal to set off a smoke bomb in a public place, usually punished by a £70 on-the-spot fine.

It's also illegal to attempt to take a smoke bomb into a football ground. Saying "it was an accident, I meant to take it to the ground" could be incriminating. This offence is often punished with a prison sentence and banning order.

As always, the sensible legal advice for non-lawyers to give is "contact a lawyer".

Presumably the offence you quote for the £70 on the spot fine includes an element of deliberation having to be proved and would certainly mean the person handing out the on the spot fine would have to see the person actually letting off the smoke bomb, deliberate or not. The person who let off the smoke bomb was not attempting to enter a football ground and would merely have to say that they were not intending to go to the match and were going to stay in a pub for the duration, or say they were going to let it off in public before the match. It would be difficult to prove otherwise.

Surely the easiest way to avoid any confusion would be to make it illegal to be in possession of a smoke bomb such as this in a public place.

1) Couldn't say if deliberation is necessary. In any case I think you're massively overestimating how hard it is to prove that. Wouldn't need to be witnessed directly by a police officer.
2) It's not clear whether the person was attempting to enter a football ground but I think there's every chance they could be convicted in this situation. People have been convicted at the nearest train or tube station so I would imagine it's possible to get done in the train on the way to said station. Supposedly you can't be convicted at a service station even in colours. Obviously one has legal rights but just saying "I wasn't planning on going" isn't going to rub if you're in a crowd on the way to the ground.
3) Admitting that you were planning to let it off later anyway is a terrible defence.
4) If anything the law needs to be relaxed - people shouldn't be spending months in prison just for owning something.
5) Stop giving terrible advice. If you don't know the law (as you clearly don't and I've already admitted that I don't) then saying "this is a good defence" could get someone sent down and could even be illegal.

[Norfolk Royal]

On your point number 3 my response was in response to you saying that letting it off in a football ground was viewed as more serious and could attract a jail term. If the person said they were not going to a football ground and it couldn't be proved otherwise, then clearly it is a good defence.

[Snowflake Royal]

On your point number 3 my response was in response to you saying that letting it off in a football ground was viewed as more serious and could attract a jail term. If the person said they were not going to a football ground and it couldn't be proved otherwise, then clearly it is a good defence.

I'm looking forward to Seb's take on this.