1 hour ago, London Wanderer said:

Wasn’t what I asked 😄

 Do you not agree with the guilty charge? Or is something else about the case bothering you?

The victims pressed charges. He’s been served his justice & will have to rein it in from now on or face a sentence. 

Police aren’t going to suddenly start looking through countless other random posts if nobody has pressed charges or reported them. 

I think this absolutely obvious point is what he's struggling with. Plus the fact that Barton has millions of followers on Twitter, so anything he says on there is massively amplified compared to some anonymous random that harrasses and abuses people and can be easily ignored.

33 minutes ago, royal white said:

There’s lots worse than this on Twitter but you said the police shouldn’t take action. Is it just because it’s Joey Barton? As the MP said, policing streets not tweets should be the priority. 

Ahh okay - so because others have done worse that makes it harsh he's been found guilty?

Not just because it is Barton no. There are many other prosecutions under the same communications act where the perpetrator wasn't 'famous'.  I said it is unrealistic to expect the police to spend their time scrolling twitter looking for abuse and ensuring nothing is missed. Just like it is unrealistic to expect them to playback endless cctv to catch folk who've committed other petty crimes. 

Are you suggesting we should stop prosecuting people for clear crimes because others are doing the same and getting away with it? Because that would be bonkers. 

We can talk all day about issues around policing - lack of resources - rises in certain crimes - weak sentencing etc. But suggesting they're not prioritising policing the streets because some people have been arrested for online abuse is just nonsense. You sound like Kurt Caz mate 😄

The 12,000 arrests you were in meltdown about yesterday include cases of grooming, death threats and online child abuse. These include real cases where serious harm has been caused. It's just as serious as if it were to happen on 'the streets;. 

14 minutes ago, Cheese said:

I think this absolutely obvious point is what he's struggling with. Plus the fact that Barton has millions of followers on Twitter, so anything he says on there is massively amplified compared to some anonymous random that harrasses and abuses people and can be easily ignored.

No it’s not the point you simpleton. Though there are many police who are paid to monitor social media. And harrasses isn’t a word👍

16 minutes ago, Cheese said:

I think this absolutely obvious point is what he's struggling with. Plus the fact that Barton has millions of followers on Twitter, so anything he says on there is massively amplified compared to some anonymous random that harrasses and abuses people and can be easily ignored.

Aye

How long before you get called a raging nonce again? 

7 minutes ago, London Wanderer said:

Ahh okay - so because others have done worse that makes it harsh he's been found guilty?

Not just because it is Barton no. There are many other prosecutions under the same communications act where the perpetrator wasn't 'famous'.  I said it is unrealistic to expect the police to spend their time scrolling twitter looking for abuse and ensuring nothing is missed. Just like it is unrealistic to expect them to playback endless cctv to catch folk who've committed other petty crimes. 

Are you suggesting we should stop prosecuting people for clear crimes because others are doing the same and getting away with it? Because that would be bonkers. 

We can talk all day about issues around policing - lack of resources - rises in certain crimes - weak sentencing etc. But suggesting they're not prioritising policing the streets because some people have been arrested for online abuse is just nonsense. You sound like Kurt Caz mate 😄

The 12,000 arrests you were in meltdown about yesterday include cases of grooming, death threats and online child abuse. These include real cases where serious harm has been caused. It's just as serious as if it were to happen on 'the streets;. 

this is what you said 

“If you're argument is that police should stop arresting and investigating comments that some people might find offensive, then l'd be in complete agreement with you” 

Now that’s how I view JB tweets. You’ve gone full circle and I’m not sure you quite know what you want.

 

I bet the 10000 or so that were dropped didn’t include death threats or online child abuse. 

Edited December 9, 2025Dec 9 by royal white

5 minutes ago, London Wanderer said:

Aye

How long before you get called a raging nonce again? 

He clearly has an admiration for racist grifters and conmen, so he can't help but jump to their defence, even if he has to makes things up and pretend he doesn't understand how the legal system works.

10 minutes ago, Cheese said:

He clearly has an admiration for racist grifters and conmen, so he can't help but jump to their defence, even if he has to makes things up and pretend he doesn't understand how the legal system works.

15 hours ago, Bertie said:

There’s a definite pattern, how some folks always try and defend or deflect any criticism from some of society’s less salubrious characters. JB, our Tommeh, Nasty Nige, Dopey Don. What a list of fine plain-speaking, anti-woke, populist patriots who can do no wrong eh 🙄? What a mast to nail your colours to. What a hill to die on.

Don't be a dick (a difficult task for you I know).

You and the cabal defend and deflect in support of anything left of centre and, of course, the illegal interlopers (oops, asylum seekers).

7 hours ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

 

He's a total cock, and always has been.

 

Oh aye. I don't think you'll get anyone disagreeing with this.

1 hour ago, royal white said:

No they didn’t. Cheshire police did. 

 

You’ve gone full spacca again 

Was there a moment he wasn't? I must have missed it.

Just now, bolty58 said:

Was there a moment he wasn't? I must have missed it.

Another one who is drawn to blatantly obvious conmen who also happen to be racist misogynists. I wonder why? 🤔

35 minutes ago, royal white said:

“If you're argument is that police should stop arresting and investigating comments that some people might find offensive, then l'd be in complete agreement with you” 

Now that’s how I view JB tweets. You’ve gone full circle and I’m not sure you quite know what you want.

 

I don't want anything - what are you on about?😂 A muppet has been found guilty of abusing and harassing two individuals and I'm saying it is the right decision. You seem to think otherwise, which I find very odd. 

At least you're finally being honest though - so you've looked at the Barton case & you've decided it falls into the category of "some people might find it offensive". 😂

Surely you've learnt by now that abuse and harassment are illegal. I'm not sure what kind of society you'd like to live in, but can't just go around calling people paedophiles and posting their address. 

It's quite clear he crossed a line. Hardly like he made a slightly offensive joke is it ffs.

Only you could attempt to disagree with this verdict 😂👏 After a shit load of tangents and whataboutery we saw your real views in the end x 

Edited December 9, 2025Dec 9 by London Wanderer

1 hour ago, royal white said:

No one is saying Nolan was average. 
 

Point is average footballers don’t play for over a decade in the best league in the world. 

Richard Dunne would like a word 

4 minutes ago, London Wanderer said:

I don't want anything - what are you on about?😂 A muppet has been found guilty of abusing and harassing two individuals and I'm saying it is the right decision. You seem to think otherwise, which I find very odd. 

At least you're finally being honest though - so you've looked at the Barton case & you've decided it falls into the category of "some people might find it offensive". 😂

Surely you've learnt by now that abuse and harassment are illegal. I'm not sure what kind of society you'd like to live in, but can't just go around calling people paedophiles and posting their address. 

It's quite clear he crossed a line. Hardly like he made a slightly offensive joke is it ffs.

Only you could attempt to disagree with this verdict 😂👏 After a shit load of tangents and whataboutery we saw your real views in the end x 

And here you go again, around in circles. You said you were in complete agreement that the police should stop Arresting folk for comments that some people might find offensive. Your words cocker. 
 

What line did he cross? What makes it worse than any other of the online abuse posted daily? Why is it worse than the abuse footballers get at a match? 

19 minutes ago, bolty58 said:

Don't be a dick (a difficult task for you I know).

You and the cabal defend and deflect in support of anything left of centre and, of course, the illegal interlopers (oops, asylum seekers).

Making stuff up again. Show me where I said this. You can’t.

Oh, and for the god-knows-how-many-time, I’m not left of centre. Not all folk on the right share your views you know.

3 minutes ago, royal white said:

And here you go again, around in circles. You said you were in complete agreement that the police should stop Arresting folk for comments that some people might find offensive.

What line did he cross? What makes it worse than any other of the online abuse posted daily? Why is it worse than the abuse footballers get at a match? 

Only one person going in circles here fella 

He's been found guilty of sending grossly offensive messages. This included repeatedly harassing and abusing individuals. Accusing one of being a paedophile and posting their address. It's not about what I think, it's about what the  law says you can and can't fucking do 😄 There is a difference between saying something that others might find offensive and targeting people with grossly offensive abuse. If he had come out and said 'Aluko is shit - female pundits are a joke' it would never have gone to court.

This is the act he was charged under - https://www.cps.gov.uk/prosecution-guidance/communications-offences#a01Read away fella - because you clearly don't have a clue what the law says. 

And yes - folk at football matches are sometimes charged for similar.  https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cp8zj7jdl51o

And yes - sometimes people get away with worse, doesn't mean Barton deserves to get off though does it. You can't go to court and mount a defence saying well what about everyone else that does it 😂😂

5 minutes ago, London Wanderer said:

Only one person going in circles here fella 

He's been found guilty of sending grossly offensive messages. This included repeatedly harassing and abusing individuals. Accusing one of being a paedophile and posting their address. It's not about what I think, it's about what the  law says you can and can't fucking do 😄 There is a difference between saying something that others might find offensive and targeting people with grossly offensive abuse. If he had come out and said 'Aluko is shit - female pundits are a joke' it would never have gone to court.

This is the act he was charged under - https://www.cps.gov.uk/prosecution-guidance/communications-offences#a01Read away fella - because you clearly don't have a clue what the law says. 

And yes - folk at football matches are sometimes charged for similar.  https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cp8zj7jdl51o

And yes - sometimes people get away with worse, doesn't mean Barton deserves to get off though does it. You can't go to court and mount a defence saying well what about everyone else that does it 😂😂

I’m not sure if you’re just pretending to be thick or you really are, surely staying  up late arguing the toss with strangers then teaching kids in the morning isn’t good for you? 
 

It’s name calling on twitter, some people will find it offensive others will just laugh it off, the police are clearly wasting a lot of time on these cases. Well done on the BBC  link for a guy being arrested, now ask yourself why aren’t dozens arrested every week at the majority of grounds up and down the country?

 

12000 arrests 90% of them dropped. 10s of Thousands of hours of police time wasted. Silly isn’t it.

11 hours ago, London Wanderer said:

I don't want anything - what are you on about?😂A muppet has been found guilty of abusing and harassing two individuals 

Three

Happens all the time though so best to leave them to it then waste time going after them

Not reading through all the backwards and forwards here.

Barton is a prick who uses his platform to try and show how edgy he is. He is terrible at it and on regular basis crosses a line. 
 

He deserves to be taken down a peg or two and that is what the case has done. I think a non custodial sentence is right and hope he has learnt a lesson, but expect he will be back before long. 

13 minutes ago, Ani said:

Not reading through all the backwards and forwards here.

Barton is a prick who uses his platform to try and show how edgy he is. He is terrible at it and on regular basis crosses a line. 
 

He deserves to be taken down a peg or two and that is what the case has done. I think a non custodial sentence is right and hope he has learnt a lesson, but expect he will be back before long. 

His track record suggests he'll find himself in bother again soon enough

On the upside, his wife is safe from a twatting for the next six months. 

9 minutes ago, mickbrown said:

On the upside, his wife is safe from a twatting for the next six months. 

It's an 18 month suspended sentence.

Jeremy Vine sticking the boot in.  I bet Barton's fuming!  🤣 

 

1 hour ago, Cheese said:

It's an 18 month suspended sentence.

I know

3 minutes ago, mickbrown said:

I know

So how is his wife safe for the next 6 months?