Skip to content

BBC reports yobbo harassment of TVG applicant

May 25, 2012

Those in gross denial of the seedier side of the football club’s new stadium application need look no further than this BBC report.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-18193878

Bricks through windows of homes, tyres slashed, threatening phone calls, names painted on walls.
What had these people done to deserve this cowardly treatment?

Spoke up for their rights as citizens in a democracy that’s what.

It’s a sad day when a minority of cowardly thugs turn violent on local residents in a sick attempt to get their own way in a supermarket and stadium planning dispute.
But then this has been a feature of the new stadium application and a poor reflection on the club and it’s genuine fans. Why were the directors not condemning this from day one?

Advertisements
11 Comments
  1. Bernard Knight permalink
    May 25, 2012 7:49 pm

    We wait with bated breath to see this reported in the TOAST which has been so impartial in this whole matter..

  2. Bobs permalink
    May 26, 2012 8:58 am

    Don’t understand why people complain about BBC covering this. Ben Prater made a big deal about the TVGers having to “put up or shut up” about the evidence of violence and threats. They did that in March in spades in the evidence to the Court. The Judge accepted the evidence as true. Only surprise is why is took the BBC so long to cover the very evidence they had asked to be “put up”

    It seems that for many what they want the TVGers to do is “shut up or shut up”. As pointed out above, this is not yet a fascist state.

  3. harry permalink
    May 26, 2012 11:00 am

    Whilst it is obvious that only a tiny minority of BCFC fans have been involved in threats and violence, the effect has been corrosive.

    During the mediation, on 5 succesive nights 5 different TVG organisers suffered either bricks through windows or vandalised cars. The methodical nature of the violence had a chilling effect as did the apparent existance of a list of names and addresses of “targets”. It became very difficult to convince people of the merits of compromise with such actions taking place.

    When after 4 months of mediation, the club eventually came up with an offer, a meeting was organised to which all 182 TVG witnesses were invited. The meeting was then publicised on OTIB and various “jokers” thought it funny to threaten to come along and disrupt the meeting. Most of them may well have been “only joking” but in the context of the recent bricks through windows and vandalism, the meeting was cancelled and no further meetings took place. The mediation ended shortly after. How can you discuss the situation when you cannot even meet ?

    I have heard similar stories from the BERATE and BASICS campaigners – some truly horrible in the nature of the threats made, with written threats against people’s children identifying the schools they attended. Those who identified these people by name and address on OTIB, with pins on google maps to identify them further, seek to defend themselves upon the basis that such information was “in the public domain”. Whether that is true or valid or not, they have certainly not helped their cause.

    Those involved in the Judicial Review have now obtained 4 anonymity orders from 4 different judges. Anonymity orders are very rare in this country. The final one obtained in the context of signficant opposition from BCC and BCFC, determined to publically identify the replacement applicant. Again, the fact of the need for an anonymity order has not helped matters at all. Neither has the identifcation of SDRs real name and address on Twitter (where it still remains) and on the walls of garages in Ashton Vale.

    Whilst the vast majority of BCFC fans have had no involvement at all in any of this, the language on OTIB and from BCFC (Sextone’s quote for the fans to direct their anger at the Inspector and the TVGers in particular) has not been helpful. A few speak out against this on OTIB and elsewhere but they are very few and are generally attacked by others. The failure of a compromise has been, in my view, largely because of this.

  4. May 27, 2012 8:54 am

    That is a very succinct and much needed factual summary of the events from Harry.
    There has been a noticeable failure of the club to recognise that the tribal thuggery they passively condone has been the wrecking ball for a negotiated settlement.
    Stirring up the fan base as a private army was never a good idea in this complicated planning dispute.

  5. Anthony B permalink
    May 27, 2012 5:19 pm

    harry, will you condemn the Bristol Blogger for his actions?

  6. Harry permalink
    May 28, 2012 11:22 am

    Anthony

    You have your time line all wrong and your facts all wrong.

    What the Bristol Blogger did was reveal that the letters which indicated SDR was withdrawing from the JR were (a) written by his stepson and (b) that the stepson was also his legal guardian. This was in the context of BCC press
    releases which withheld these facts. In fact Peter Holt of BCC told the BBC that the letters were witnessed by a woman so it could not be by his stepson. So the Bristol Blogger did us all a service by identifying the deceit of BCC.

    All this post dated the threats to SDR by months. What identified SDR was the person on Twitter who posted his name and address last November.

    Anyone claiming that SDR was or could be identified by the less redacted version of the letter is simply misleading themselves and others. Further, SDR had already withdrawn from the case by then.

  7. Anthony B permalink
    May 28, 2012 1:03 pm

    Harry, you have your time line all wrong and your facts all wrong. I’m talking of different events to you.

  8. thebristolblogger permalink
    May 29, 2012 7:14 am

    Who’ve I threatened/intimidated then?

  9. Anthony B permalink
    May 29, 2012 9:44 am

    Who said anything about threats or intimidation?

  10. harry permalink
    May 29, 2012 10:36 am

    Anthony

    If you want me to condemn him, you are going to have to give me a clue concerning what you are on about !

  11. May 30, 2012 7:14 pm

    Looks like the BBC and the programme editor are the new targets for the hate campaigners.
    As if that’s going to help their cause. Quite a good demonstration of how the hate campaign kicks off against anyone/anything that dares mention the truth or indulge in free speech.
    Anthony B trying to ferment a hate campaign against the BB is another dysfunctional example.

Comments are closed.