SUFC: The Future SUFC up for sale

[sammy666]

I am not blaming Mods for their comments. In general you do good job between you but you wouldn't allow the same comments against any of you. Same with trolls from other clubs etc.

You have also banned posters from commenting on certain threads because some mods don't agree with them or one of the many dish it out but can't take it lefties on here has had a whinge up.

With power comes responsibility.

Condescending and pompous

 

[mark387]

You can always tell when there has been no new false hope given by an ITK or wannabe ITK as the first thing you see when you log on here is arguing and/or endless puns.

 

[Alexshrimper]

You can feel for her but she's a company director and has signed up to being so. She would only have the google to see what comes with that before she did so.

She owns Roots Hall.

She is involved in the death of our club as are both her children.

So o make that a full house of Martins that are responsible

 

[Thor1]

Completely off-topic, but this reminded me of when I attended a Boxing Day game a few years ago at the Farmers' in the Cloud Cuckoo Land Stadium. For some reason, they were frisking all the SUFC supporters (even 60 year old, old men like me) and they remarked on the pen knife in my pocket. Now, I carry this everywhere as it's very handy, and had never had any problems with it at any ground I had ever visited before, and remarkably, I had always managed to resist the temptation to stab anyone with it.

Anyway, I was told I would have to hand it over and collect it afterwards from the office. "Sod, that" I thought so I left the queue and went and placed it behind a fence post a little way away for easier collection after the game.

Following the game, of course, I couldn't remember which post I had put it behind and my searching garnered the interest of a lady Plod and her male companion. She asked me what I was looking for and, absent-mindedly, I said "I'm looking for my blade" (as I laughingly referred to the small item). She then went into meltdown and started quizzing me vigorously, somewhat to the embarrassment of her oppo.

Finally tiring of this silliness I asked her if she was accusing me of, "NOT being in possession of an offensive weapon?" This brought proceedings to a swift conclusion.

And my "blade" is probably still there in the long grass to this day. I've since got a new one, though.

Answer
It is an offence to carry any sharp or bladed instrument in a public place, with the exception of a folding pocket knife where the cutting edge of the blade is 7.62 cm (3 inches) or less.

A lock knife is not a folding pocket knife and therefore it is an offence to carry around such a knife regardless of the length of the blade, if you do not have good reason. A lock knife has blades that can be locked and refolded only by pressing a button. A lock knife has a mechanism which locks the blade in position when fully extended, the blade cannot be closed without that mechanism being released. A lock knife is not an offensive weapon per se, as these knives were made with a specific purpose in mind were not intended as a weapon. However, possession of a lock knife in a public place without good reason is an offence.

Possession of a multi-tool incorporating a prohibited blade or pointed article is capable of being an offence under this section even if there are other tools on the instrument, which may be of use to a person in a public place, for example a screwdriver or a can opener. It is for the person to prove on the balance of probabilities that they have a good reason for possession.

The ban is not total, it is for the person in possession of such an instrument to prove on the balance of probabilities that they had good reason for its possession. It will have to be genuine, for example, someone back packing across the Lake District may reasonably be expected to have a knife for the preparation of meals. It will be far more difficult to justify on the streets of a city or town, but there will be occasions when someone is genuinely going to a martial arts sport or scout meeting which is easily checked.

The penalty for committing this offence is a maximum prison sentence of four years.

Be aware that some bladed articles may be deemed to be offensive weapons, for example, flick knives, daggers and butterfly knives. There is also an offence of carrying an offensive weapon in public without lawful authority or reasonable excuse. Please see Q338 for further information.

FAQ

www.askthe.police.uk

 

[mark387]

She owns Roots Hall.

She is involved in the death of our club as are both her children.

So o make that a full house of Martins that are responsible

To be fair it isn't uncommon for assets and companies to be put in spouses and family members names for a variety of dodgy and grey reasons with no actual involvement in the running or decision making of the company. (I'm not saying this is the case with the Martins just that her name being on the deed doesn't actually mean she has anything to do with anything)

 

[Richard Hearn]

Answer
It is an offence to carry any sharp or bladed instrument in a public place, with the exception of a folding pocket knife where the cutting edge of the blade is 7.62 cm (3 inches) or less.

A lock knife is not a folding pocket knife and therefore it is an offence to carry around such a knife regardless of the length of the blade, if you do not have good reason. A lock knife has blades that can be locked and refolded only by pressing a button. A lock knife has a mechanism which locks the blade in position when fully extended, the blade cannot be closed without that mechanism being released. A lock knife is not an offensive weapon per se, as these knives were made with a specific purpose in mind were not intended as a weapon. However, possession of a lock knife in a public place without good reason is an offence.

Possession of a multi-tool incorporating a prohibited blade or pointed article is capable of being an offence under this section even if there are other tools on the instrument, which may be of use to a person in a public place, for example a screwdriver or a can opener. It is for the person to prove on the balance of probabilities that they have a good reason for possession.

The ban is not total, it is for the person in possession of such an instrument to prove on the balance of probabilities that they had good reason for its possession. It will have to be genuine, for example, someone back packing across the Lake District may reasonably be expected to have a knife for the preparation of meals. It will be far more difficult to justify on the streets of a city or town, but there will be occasions when someone is genuinely going to a martial arts sport or scout meeting which is easily checked.

The penalty for committing this offence is a maximum prison sentence of four years.

Be aware that some bladed articles may be deemed to be offensive weapons, for example, flick knives, daggers and butterfly knives. There is also an offence of carrying an offensive weapon in public without lawful authority or reasonable excuse. Please see Q338 for further information.

FAQ

www.askthe.police.uk

Phew, thanks for that. Most educational.

However, my "blade, was not a lock knife it was a Victorinox Swiss Army Knife (as is my current one) well within the 3" or less rule. And as I pointed out, at the time of my inquisition I was not even in possession of it, nor have I ever been since, as I couldn't find it.

 

[Thor1]

Phew, thanks for that. Most educational.

However, my "blade, was not a lock knife it was a Victorinox Swiss Army Knife (as is my current one) well within the 3" or less rule. And as I pointed out, at the time of my inquisition I was not even in possession of it, nor have I ever been since, as I couldn't find it.

You'd be surprised what you can legally buy, however carrying or being in possesion of in a public place is all a different matter.

 

[Supa Shrimpa]

To be fair it isn't uncommon for assets and companies to be put in spouses and family members names for a variety of dodgy and grey reasons with no actual involvement in the running or decision making of the company. (I'm not saying this is the case with the Martins just that her name being on the deed doesn't actually mean she has anything to do with anything)

Yep. However, by agreeing to be directors they have signed up for the responsibilites associated with the role. I'm sure they'd become very active if the companies ever made substantial profits and they were entitled to a share of the profits !

 

[rootshall rambler]

Condescending and pompous

True enough. “Lefties“ !!?? FFS !

 

[rootshall rambler]

You know, in all of this mess, Julie Martin is the person I really feel for the most. I have no proof whatsover, just a gut instinct, which is that she is trapped in a nightmare that she has no chance of getting out of either. She is likely to be a completely powerless pawn in this game too, and the poor women probably needs our help and compassion far more than most people would understand.

She has been vilified, had people camped outside her home (gilded prison), I am sure that she has no idea what has been put into her name, and how much of her independent personal assets are no longer in her control - and I suspect that it is most. or all of it. She probably could not leave the marriage if she wanted to, as knowing the sort of character he is, she will have precious little freedom and her friends and wider family have probably given up hope that she can escape a stockholm syndrome situation. As I say, zero evidence or proof of this, but there is a pattern of behaviour here, and it is not pretty!

Julie Martin does not deserve your empathy or sympathy.


She most likely to be knowingly complicit and culpable in her position within the rats web…… and is now very much a part of the problem that has all but destroyed our club.

The point is………If she had the tiniest scintilla of decency or integrity, she would have stood up to the rat, and flatly refused to have anything to do with it.

 

[Paulie Walnuts]

Julie Martin does not deserve your empathy or sympathy.


She most likely to be knowingly complicit and culpable in her position within the rats web…… and is now very much a part of the problem that has all but destroyed our club.

The point is………If she had the tiniest scintilla of decency or integrity, she would have stood up to the rat, and flatly refused to have anything to do with it.

100%.

 

[nevereatwhitesnow]

To be fair it isn't uncommon for assets and companies to be put in spouses and family members names for a variety of dodgy and grey reasons with no actual involvement in the running or decision making of the company. (I'm not saying this is the case with the Martins just that her name being on the deed doesn't actually mean she has anything to do with anything)

But for that to happen she we have had to knowingly signed and been aware, she might not have anything to do with it on a practical level but legally she is responsible and is therefore complicit. In some ways if it’s as you allude to (ie it’s a front) then she is actually probably in breach of her directorship responsibilities too!

 

[Micky]

I am not blaming Mods for their comments. In general you do good job between you but you wouldn't allow the same comments against any of you. Same with trolls from other clubs etc.

You have also banned posters from commenting on certain threads because some mods don't agree with them or one of the many dish it out but can't take it lefties on here has had a whinge up.

With power comes responsibility.

Are you saying that those who "dish it out but can't take it" are all lefties, or that all lefties dish it out but cant take it?

 

[Tampa Blue]

Are you saying that those who "dish it out but can't take it" are all lefties, or that all lefties dish it out but cant take it?

So pleased that I put him on my blocked list many months past

 

[Tommy2holes]

FFS. What a depressing read.

Are we anywhere near a takeover?????

 

[Liam AAS]

Unfortunately you and I don't know what the rental agreement is, if it's down to them then yes but if it's down to the club then it's RM.

I don't see people threatening the other directors of the club for doing nothing.

It's all there in the accounts. Why do you think he doesn't publish them?

 

[Jmayhew32]

I don't care who you are, or what your opinions are of Ron Martin - nobody should be condoning any violence towards him whatsoever.

It is immoral and wrong. You would have thought the Simon Dobbin case would have taught a few people something but clearly not.

I want him out of the club as much as anybody else on here, but resorting to violence, or even threatening it, is not good form.

 

[Liam AAS]

FFS. What a depressing read.

Are we anywhere near a takeover?????

No

 

[Roots Hall Flare]

I’m surprised no one has bricked his windows yet.

 

[Shrimper]

FFS. What a depressing read.

Are we anywhere near a takeover?????

No, don't be silly