UKH

Today, Mrs Goucho and I were involved in an incident which turned rather nasty.

Minding our own business at a roundabout this lunchtime, and an old Astra pulled up in the righthand lane, and one of the two male passengers opened his window and grinning, threw the contents of his Big Mac and fries out of the window.

Mrs Goucho (who was driving) looked at him, and he looked straight at her and shouted "You got a f*ckin problem with that you slag?"

She looked across a me, then back at him and responded with

"If you think that makes you look like a hard man, who am I to disagree. But the reality is, it just makes you look like what you are, an ignorant peasant".

He then shouted back

"You f*ckin pull over their (jabs finger in direction of lay bye on othe side of roundabout) and I'll show you what f*ckin hard is you slag c**t".

Now you maybe thinking, that at that point, we should have ignored him, and gone on our way to avoid escalating the situation, but Mrs Goucho isn't very good at ignoring this kind of behavior from men, and takes a very dim view of any threat of violence towards women - as do I.

So she in fact did exactly what he requested, and then waited for him to pull in behind us. Now I am in possession of a certain amount of inside knowledge regarding Mrs Goucho, which the knuckledragger was not, so bear with me?

He got out, and walked over to us doing his best Liam Gallagher strut, swearing and shouting with his fists clenched (yes he had a shaven head, tattoos etc) and as he got near the car, Mrs Goucho got out. Now she is quite small and petite, which obviously made the knuckledragger feel even more of a hard man.

I got out of the car, and advised him to back off, but the red mist and testosterone were obviously now in control. I told him he'd regret it, but he just laughes and told me he was going to "f*ckin do both of us"

The next 20 seconds went roughly as follows:-

Him: You f*ckin slag c**t, I'll f*ckin show you to mess with me bitch,"
Mrs Goucho: Call me that once more, go on, call it me once more,"
Him: You f*ckin slag c**t,"

Ten seconds later, he was lying on the floor, one hand holding where his bollocks used to be, and the other holding what was left of his nose, whimpering and sobbing like a child.

You see, the crucial bit of information he didn't know, but which I did, is that Mrs Goucho is not only a fiery Italian, she is also a 4th dan black belt in Karate!

Anyway, the outcome is, that we called the police ourselves to report the incident, and when they arrived - accompanied by an ambulance - the knuckledraggers mate (probably worried about his own safety, and the fact he was wearing a tag!) confirmed our statements, and even though we're probably going to have to go to the police station at some point to give further evidence (I've already briefed our Lawyers) we're not really worried.

But what is it about some men, that are plainly so inadequate, that they feel they can behave like this.

Throwing litter isn't cool or tough, spitting isn't cool or tough, being abusive and threatening isn't cool or tough - it just makes you look like a pathetic peasant.

Hopefully, he might think twice the next time he has the inclination to chuck litter out of his car window?

And in case you're wondering, yes, I always try to avoid getting on the wrong side of Mrs Goucho

In reply to Goucho:

I love stories like this. It would be better if it had never happened, obviously, but when someone acts in such a thoroughly unacceptable fashion, it's great to hear when they get their comeuppance.

In reply to Goucho:

I would have paid to watch!

In reply to Goucho:

Violence is not the answer. You both should have tried to de-escalate things. I cannot condone your handling of this situation.......

</steps off soapbox>

Great story that has really cheered me up. Well done!

In reply to Goucho:

Mrs Goucho I salute you!

In reply to ACollins:


I wouldn't do it too fast. Definitely no fast hand-movements when Mrs G is around.

In reply to Goucho:

Great story!

Wish I was a 4th Dan black belt too.

In reply to Shani:

Good point. Maybe I'll back away slowly without making eye contact

In reply to Goucho: What a magnificent woman. Absolutely first class.

In reply to Frank the Husky:


She certainly is, in so many ways - I think putting up with me is her greatest virtue though

In reply to Goucho:

This puts my "taking the drunk driver from his stolen car after he crashed in my street and sitting on him in my pyjamas until the police arrived" story to shame, doesn't it...

In reply to Goucho:

Full marks to Mrs G but I dread to think what would have happened to him if Mrs. Num Num had been there as well.

In reply to Goucho:

I hate people littering.well done mrs goucho. Glad you didn't get hurt or stabbed or car jacked.

In reply to Wsdconst:


It's a good job we didn't have the dogs with us?

We have two Great Danes - well they're Mrs Goucho's - which completely ignore anything I say, but my wife controls just by clicking her fingers. They're like something the baddie in James Bond would have, and very disconcerting at times

In reply to Goucho:

I love stories like this.

In reply to Goucho:

A few more men could do with meeting Mrs Goucho! :-D

I hope the police is are impressed as we all are!

In reply to Goucho:
Fun story.

However, if a woman shouts names at a man (and/or threatens him), should he hit her in the face?

In reply to Goucho:

I'd like to say reading that story brightened up my day, but it's not really true ...


It brightened up my entire week!

In reply to Goucho:

Throwing litter is shit. Being an aggressive and abusive hard man is shit.

But let me get this straight:

Mrs Goucho started an argument, which escalated. She had the opportunity to drive away and get on with her life, yet chose to accept the bloke's invitation to fight, and went out of her way to do so? And threw the first punch (possibly in self-defence, possibly so that the little girl could teach the big man a lesson)?

And she/ you are proud of this?

In reply to Richard Alderton:

any right thinking person should feel proud

In reply to Goucho:


Or he will feel angry and embarrassed about being shown up by a girl in front of his mate that he'll go home and take it out on his wife, just to make himself feel manly again.

In reply to Richard Alderton:

Yes, no sympathy whatever for wannabe hard man.

But, as told, nice story that it is, I hope Mrs G has a good lawyer. Sounds very like assault to me. Turn it round - sweary litter-throwing woman beaten up by stronger man - and I doubt there would be much sympathy for the man. Yet in terms of power there is no difference.

In reply to Richard Alderton:
I do get where you're coming from,but it was the guy dropping the litter who 'started it', Mrs Goucho just looked at him rather directly.

Basically, the guy dropped litter, called a lady who was looking at him a slag, asked her to pull over, and got beaten up for his actions.

If he hadn't been so unpleasant in the first place nothing would have happened...I am a peacenik but it serves him right.

In reply to Goucho:

Stupid bully got his comeuppance. Hurrah!

In reply to Timmd:

But it was her who started the fisticuffs. The correct response to seeing a crime in progress is to report it to the Police with any evidence you may have.

I must admit to finding it slightly amusing, but it *is* assault and it would not surprise me to see her prosecuted for it, even if he also gets a fixed penalty for littering. Two wrongs and all that...

Neil

In reply to Richard Alderton:

What a stupid comment

The start of an argument isn't always when a word is spoken. Regardless of this it seems from the account given that he started speaking using offensive and threatening language and behaviour, not Mrs Goucho.

At a guess the police might have a word with Mrs G about the fact it could* be construed that as a martial arts expert she may be in danger of "using her body as a deadly weapon", but they'll laugh about it in the canteen for weeks

*this is probably an urban legend or an American thing

In reply to Richard Alderton:


Right so women shouldn't stand up for themselves against a man because he might go home at beat up his wife?

In reply to Neil Williams:
Perhaps I've been worn down a little bit lately by people who do shit things, having had radiators I was going to scrap taken from my back garden and that kind of thing, but I struggle to feel sorry for unpleasant people who have bad things happen to them.

Vaguely surprised at myself too. Bah humbug. :-/

In reply to Richard Alderton:

As my old man used to say "There's always f*cking one!"

Boggy

In reply to balmybaldwin:


More like "If you're going to be a vigilante, consider the likely consequences". There's a good reason why we have police and courts to deal with this sort of thing, and not ladies who know karate.

In reply to Bogwalloper:

One what, exactly?

In reply to Neil Williams:
I'm not convinced "the public intrest" would be served by prosecuting MrsG and I hope that is how the authorities see it. I'd be interested to hear from our Police corespondents on how this might go for MrsG. Police caution on the cards? Too much violence for that? Or just brushed under the carpet because the injured party is too embarised to make a formal complaint?

Regardless, it's a good story well told, hope it turns out fine...

In reply to Neil Williams:

The assault came from the bully - the actions of the bully asdescribed would easily be enough for someone to apprehend imminent physical harm and thus she was already a victim of assault.

In reply to Neil Williams:



You are right of course, it just would have been really unfair if he had beaten up Mr & Mrs Goucho, so of the three possible outcomes, it's not the worst one is where I'm coming from, and if he now changes his approach to the world that's a plus.

In reply to wercat:

I too think what he said might count as assault - would be interested to hear legal opinions, either on here or when it gets to court (although hopefully the former).

In reply to Neil Williams:




You're certainly developing form with these kinds of posts.

As I was there, and you weren't, Mrs Goucho actually waited for him to make the first move, which he attempted to, before quite rightly getting the shit kicked out of him!

And if she hadn't, I certainly would.

In reply to Richard Alderton:


Did you read this back to yourself before posting?

Sometimes it's a good idea.

In reply to humptydumpty:

I would imagine that if a small, gobby woman gave a big bloke an aggressive mouthful of abuse and got a pasting in return, the big bloke might be facing some formal legal action.

I guess if Mrs G doesn't face such action, she should consider her woman's privilege...

Not that I think she should; I don't think arseholes like the littering bully get enough immediate justice in this day and age.

In reply to Richard Alderton:





There's always one, but it doesn't always have to be you?

Another way of looking at it is that the litter-droppers behaviour could be construed as threatening behaviour/verbal assault and that Mrs G. was responding appropriately rather than risk becoming the victim of a physical(rather than verbal assault)

In reply to Richard Alderton:


And, back in the real world, absolutely no action would be taken against this cock, and he'd continue to act like he has. I suspect he's had a bloody good kicking coming for many years. I guess he didn't expect to get it from a small Italian woman.

In reply to Goucho:
As serious point, I an not sure posting Mrs Gs fisticuffs expertise in public forums is that wise. I doubt it would help her case if any legal action is taken.

In reply to Richard Alderton:


Do you have some issues requiring professional help?

My wife was the one who was threatened and attacked you dumb f*ck!

In reply to Goucho:

As you initially posted events, she wasn't attacked.

In reply to Goucho:



This is the point at which I will be leaving this thread.

In reply to Richard Alderton:

This is clearly a case of self defence against a very unpleasant unprovoked confrontation by an odious man towards a small woman who had a reasonable belief that he was about to assault her given his verbal threats and actions.

You do realise the police won't always be there to protect you?

In reply to MG:


The police have already indicated, that there will be little chance of prosecution, because this idiot has got form and is known to the police.

However, our lawyers have been briefed, and they are rather good ones

In reply to Neil Williams:



You are right of course, it just would have been really unfair if he had beaten up Mr & Mrs Goucho, I guess I'm just pleased that didn't happen, & if the unpleasant man changes his approach to the world too, that would be a plus.

As somebody who's learnt to try and cultivate a peaceful air as a way of avoiding trouble, I'm half thinking of learning self defence for any times it isn't enough...

In reply to MG:


Well it's pretty obvious she was verbally, and would have been physically, if she hadn't taken control.

In reply to MG:


Some would say that she was verbally attacked/assaulted. My understanding is that assault does not necessarily have to involve "physical" violence

In reply to Goucho:
Really, the guy who dropped the litter could do with some therapy or similar to explore why he acts (acted) like that.

Whether he'd seek it or if that will happen is something else, but ideally......

In reply to Goucho:

Think your wife maybe a superhero/ night time vigilante,do you ever wake up in the middle of the night only to find she's not there ?

In reply to Goucho:

Reminds me of a story that made the papers a few years ago about a mugging of a shuffling old fellow as he made his way home after bingo at the Legion. Turns out he was ex Para unarmed combat and PTI and put 3 well known scrotes down in the dog sh!t. Never mind the legal niceties, its always hearwarming to hear about natural justice being served. 3 Cheers and a raised glass to Mrs G.

In reply to Goucho:
Fiery Italian and a Black Belt.

Do you ever complain about her cooking?

In reply to Richard Alderton:





I don't want to live in a country where citizens take the law in to their own hands. Nor do I want to live in a country where the police arrest for EVERY offence (if you disagree, think it through). This leaves a grey area rather than a thin blue line.

From this, the only thing to add is that the world needs MORE Mrs G and fewer littering, aggressive cock-wombles, like the one described above. Sure he has issues and may have had a troubled past, but this may help break the destructive cycle he finds himself in. Certainly once his mate spreads this story, there may well be one more beating in the offing, but then as a consequence one or other of them will encounter a further learning point about friendship - whomsoever wins.

In reply to DerwentDiluted:


This is one reason I like Paddy Ashdown.

In reply to Goucho:



Despite amusing and totally agreeable response to aggressor in OP, moral high ground was spectacularly lost right here.

In reply to Goucho:

An update.

Mrs Goucho has just had a long phone call with the police. The upshot is, they will not be pressing charges.

Apparently this individual has 3 outstanding court cases for threatening behavior and aggravated assault, and when he was searched they found a knife and some drugs. He has been charged with threatening behavior, and possession of an illegal weapon and drugs.

As far as his injury's are concerned, he has very swollen testicles and a broken nose. He is also claiming he has no recollection of exactly what happened?

However, the police were more concerned with the situation my wife (and I) put ourselves in, and said it was both irresponsible and dangerous, and strongly advised if a situation like this occurs again, to just drive away and not to get involved, or report the incident to the police.

Can't disagree with this advice on hindsight.

In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:


You are entirely correct. But sometimes....you know.....

In reply to andymac:



Only if I'm in a different country on the phone, and not due back for at least a week

In reply to Wsdconst:


Funny you should say that.....

In reply to mypyrex:


As far as I am aware for the self defence, ermm, defence to work it does. Although preemptive attack is permitted.
However in this case it does seem like deliberate escalation so would be on somewhat dubious ground. Hope the OP has a good lawyer since if the cretin decides revenge is best served via the law it could be a tad awkward.

In reply to Goucho:

I'm happy to see UKC applauding this as usual I've seen arrogant pacifism and judgement on here in relation to violence. " you punched him back? You should bowed before h, blessed him and walked away, you're a disxrace".
Anyway, while its nice to say we should all walk away in the threat of violence or verbal abuse, fact is that people like that guy see that as them winning because you're scared of them. Getting arrested is a badge of honour. However being shown up in from of a mate by a petite woman will stick with him. Sometimes bullies need to be shown.

Bravors Goucho.

In reply to Goucho:

And messing about with not one, but four Dans. Sexually dubious too.

In reply to Goucho:

Sounds good. BTW "Dorset and Courmayeur" Bastard.

In reply to Scarab9:

There's a great video of a young bellend getting his just reward on tinterweb after giving some fella some abuse. Do a search for bully gets what he deserves and YouTube will reveal all.

In reply to Scarab9:

It might be worth a bit of extra background here too.

Mrs G has a brother 5 years older, and a sister 1 year younger. When she was 14, her brother was travelling round the States when he was violently attacked and robbed. The attack was so violent it left him paralysed from the waist down and in a wheelchair. Her father made both her and her sister enroll in a martial arts class to learn self defence, and Mrs G - a natural sportswoman - progressed very well.

She has always had a problem with what she calls 'macho inadequacy violence' especially when directed towards women.

Right or wrong, she just won't stand for it.

In reply to dissonance:


See my other post re no charges.

I suppose he could try his arm at a civil law suit, but I'll deal with that possibility as and when.

In reply to Goucho:

>> However, the police were more concerned with the situation my wife (and I) put ourselves in, and said it was both irresponsible and dangerous, and strongly advised if a situation like this occurs again, to just drive away and not to get involved, or report the incident to the police.


Do you think the police possibly sense your probably quite aggressive people that would find yourselves in that position more than once?

In reply to MG:

Well the way Goucho tells it on here, which is also I assume the way he told it to the Police, Mrs G defended herself during an attempted assault. Nobody went and gave the bully a pasting once he was on the ground. Sounds like a reasonable use of force to me.

In reply to Goucho:





No need to defend the incident Groucho. Even the naysayers on this thread know that the world needs MORE Mrs Gs and fewer littering, aggressive cock-wombles.

In reply to Goucho:

Does Mrs G offer her services on a contract basis? I've enough work to keep her in business for a good while... Regardless, hearty congratulations to the lady. She deserves some reward in the New Years Honours

In reply to The New NickB:

It all worked out well but I could imagine a lawyer: "my client was stressed at work and regrettably threw litter and swore at Mrs G when she challenged him. However he asked her to stop to talk calmly about the matter. At this point she goaded him and launched a vicious attack. She, as her husband States publiclly, is highly trained in martial arts. She clearly has anger issues and left my client severely injured..."

In reply to Clauso:

I've just run her a nice hot bath filled with her favorite bubbles, and put a chilled glass of fizz on the side, and afterwards, I'll give her an Indian head massage

In reply to Clauso:


Are you calling her a hussie?

In reply to Goucho:

Congratulations to Mrs G. Very public spirited.

In reply to JJL:


Given the OP, what do you think?

In reply to MG:


I've got a feeling if this scenario did occur, my lawyer would eat this one for breakfast, as a) it's complete fabrication, and b) £600 an hour, buys you a merciless courtroom assassin

In reply to Goucho:

Stressed at work?

Who would employ such a delightful character?

In reply to Goucho:

I love hearing stories about gutsy women in the face of agression. Reminds me of the woman on the bus who witnessed the murder of Fusilier Lee Rigby and calmly went up to the murderer, disarmed him, and talked to him until the police arrived.

Did she ever get a bravery award for her actions?

In reply to Trangia:

Don't think so

Lisa Potts GM is the one I remember.

In reply to Richard Alderton:


Oh you know - if you need it explaining I'm not the type of of person who can be arsed to do the explaining. Sorry.

Boggy.

In reply to Trangia:

I'm not sure but she was amazing.

In reply to Trangia:

Sadly it seems she was sectioned last summer. I hope she is OK now

In reply to marsbar:

That is so sad, but no matter what has transpired since I think her actions on that day were amazing.

In reply to Trangia:

Totally agree. It must have an effect seeing that happen.

In reply to Goucho:








I'm so pleased you and your lady wife have been exonerated of blame, by the police for your public spirited act. You must go now the national press to denigrate the yobs in full view of all others, who toss rubbish out as they travel around these isles.
Do post a link so as we can see how the tabloids spin it.
Any video, for the Y tube?

In reply to Goucho:

Any photos?
( I mean you knew how this was going to end, you should have been prepared with your phone camera

In reply to ThunderCat:



Given looking at this weeks (Gouch0) last postings it does give the idea that this was the origin of this one. There are a few issue threads that are leading up to this. Troll?

In reply to fmck:


I did wonder. Seems too well thought out a story to be true. The whole "lets meet in a car park and fight" sounded a bit too school yard to me.

In reply to fmck:

I just want to know what this drunk driver was doing in your street and in your pyjamas
( were they Spider-Man pyjamas by any chance?)

In reply to Jim C:



Mwahahha.

They were Peter Griffin / "Bird is the word" pyjama pants

I may have a link to a picture of said pyjamas...

In reply to google:




Your sarcasm is lost on me, and do you have a (truthful) public profile.
Well done Mrs G, he was the aggressor !

In reply to fmck:


You think Groucho's thread is a bit made up, or mine? (Or Groucho's thread is made up as a response to mine)?

Eeek, I don't know - I took Groucho's as being an honest account?

Just want to assure everyone my story about the drunk driver (and me sitting on the guy until the police arrived) was absolutely true. Me posting it wasn't in any way me trying to brag about it - quite the opposite...after the commotion died down I spend bloody HOURS fretting about it, wondering if I'd done the right thing...whether I could have been less violent with the guy (I honestly used the minimum amount of force necessary to contain him - getting him on the floor and lying on him seemed the safest bet), whether him trying to run off could have been down to confusion after an impact and a severe amount of alcohol...etc etc tec

In the few minutes it took the police to arrive I could have quite easily knoacked seven pounds of shit out of the guy with absolute impunity, but I didn't. I just wanted to contain him there until plod arrived.

I got a letter from the courts yesterday telling me that the guy had pleaded guilty, and that I won't be needed as a witness in court. I was fully prepared to go, but I'm kinda glad I'm not needed.

Anyway Groucho - sorry to hijack the thread.

In reply to Goucho:

I am very anti violence, if that is what you mean. If he threw the first punch (your original post to me suggests otherwise, but fair enough for clarifying) I would say it would clearly be self defence.

OTOH I would have just thought "what a muppet", ignored him and continued driving.

Neil

In reply to Ade in Sheffield:

(truthful) public profile?

Nothing untruthful in the profile.

In reply to Goucho:



Yes it's the best thing to do but the police will do nothing at all about it and the next person he corners might not fare so well.
Top marks to Mrs G in my book.
I love the part about the bloke having no recollection of the events. Just goes to prove his brains are in his now swollen balls.

In reply to Goucho:

While camping in the Blackpool last weekend, we took the kids to the beach where we witnessed some extreme violence. In front of all the kids on the beach there was this man beating the hell out of the women he was with. Eventually a Policeman turned up who had to use his baton on the man. Somehow this man managed to wrestle the baton off of the Policeman and started battering both the women and the Policeman with it. Then along came a crocodile and stole all the sausages!

In reply to Baron Weasel:

Just when it was getting a bit boring u cheer me up with that gem. &#128514;

In reply to Baron Weasel:

I saw it too, I likes it when the crowd put a rope around to make a ring and put a blue flag in the policeman corner

In reply to Neil Williams:

She didn't start anything she pulled over to see if he would follow through with a very specific threat (he could have backed off realising how disgusting/ludicrous his intended behaviour would be). Quite frankly anyone wishing to do what he intended to a smaller, outwardly vulnerable looking target, he must have been licking his lips at the prospect, deserves all he gets. He got off lightly.

In reply to Goucho:

Men? or People?

In reply to Goucho:




I think it's a kind of 'Devil's Advocate Disease'. Well I hope so anyway.

In reply to DubyaJamesDubya:

With the full intention of escalating to violent conflict, which could have been avoided by simply driving on, making a note of the registration number and reporting it. That, not getting in a fight that could easily have been avoided, makes one the bigger man/woman in the situation, in my view. Would something have been done about this specific incident? Perhaps not, but it seems the Police were amassing evidence against this individual and one more bit (for menacing and threatening behaviour) wouldn't have gone amiss I'm sure.

I'm aware I'm out of kilter with many here, but (call me a pacifist if you like, as I probably am by many definitions) in my view violence is to be avoided full stop. Always better to use non-violent means to solve problems in my book. I'm not trolling, it is genuinely how I feel.

Neil

In reply to DubyaJamesDubya:

No, it's a strong and genuine opposition to violence in any form and for (almost) any reason. The only use of violence I support is pure self defence, and ONLY where the entire situation could not have been avoided. In this situation it could easily have been avoided by simply thinking "what an idiot" and driving on.

Last time I hit someone I was aged about 8, FWIW. And even back then I can't think of many cases.

Neil

In reply to Goucho:

brilliant,glad i clicked on this thread now

In reply to Goucho:

ive just read some of the comments and people are saying mrs goucho started this.....B.S

she was attacked,she she got in there first.

good on her, the thug brought the trouble to her.she has done nothing wrong

In reply to mark s:

Jeez, another knuckle dragger joins the baying mob.......

This thread needs a bit more balance......oh no hang on it's UKC, no chance of that then.

In reply to mark s:

She was attacked[1] in a situation she willingly put herself in.

I can't blame her for using self defence once the situation had started, but she should not have started it. She should have driven on, and reported the incident to the Police, as they themselves confirmed.

[1] The original post omits the rather important information of who threw the first punch, though, and implies she did. With Goucho having corrected this, I can't criticise her for acting in self defence once she had got herself in the situation (and that would likely have been a strong defence against any assault charge), but I agree with the Police that she should and could easily have avoided the situation by ignoring the idiot (or reporting him) and driving on rather than acting as some kind of vigilante.

Neil

In reply to Father Noel Furlong:

knuckle dragger? how do you work that out?

just because you are happy to roll over and let this type of scum take the piss?
she is well with in her rights to stop and question why he is behaving like that,he chose to attack.
she has the capability to challenge this sort of behavior that seems to be everywhere these days,dont knock her because you choose to run away from any confrontation

rather than run,id defend myself...that does not make some one a knuckle dragger

In reply to Neil Williams:




But you always seem to end up on the side of the would be oppressors/aggressors.
What would your position on Hitler in the 30s have been?

In reply to Neil Williams:



I think the fact that you think it is implied says more about you than anything else. I assumed the opposite.

In reply to mypyrex:


No you can be done for "threatening words and behaviour" which will cost you £25 in 1979 if you tell a copper to "f*ck off", allegedly

This has now been updated to "using threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour causing fear of or provoking violence - section 4 of the Act; "

In reply to DubyaJamesDubya:



I claim a Godwin's

In reply to Neil Williams:



Let's look at the case for reporting this behavior (prior to the physical violence). Would reporting it have been effective? Would the police have pursued it? Is it a good use of police resources especially in these lean times? If the man HAD actually got a knock on the door, he could simply deny it.

Now let's look at the case for avoiding physical conflict. The man may well have reaffirmed his feelings of superiority and with them his attendant lack of compassion and empathy for others, his willingness to bully not only strangers but those who APPEAR weaker and vulnerable than himself. He may well continue to litter and intimidate as he deems appropriate, and be increasingly willing to use violence against those that choose to challenge his behavior. Anyone this willing to instigate violence and threaten strangers may well go so far as to kill someone some day - and it is likely that the person who dies is weaker and more vulnerable than this thug himself.

I see that this guy has several charges against him already for this kind of behavior. Anyone want to wager that Mrs G's actions have done MORE to change his behavior than police convictions and an electronic tag?

In reply to Neil Williams:





In an ideal world, your comments are sensible. However, we don't live in an ideal world, and aggressive morons like the idiot in question are around most corners, and unfortunately getting away with this kind of behavior on a regular basis.

Neither myself nor Mrs G are aggressive or vigilante's - our surname is not Statham - but sometimes turning a blind eye just encourages these cretins to continue being arseholes.

Mrs G did not react because of the litter, it was being called a 'slag' that pressed the red button - why should any woman have to be subjected to this kind of verbal abuse?

The upshot is, a deluded wannabe hard man yob got a kicking unquestionably deserved, and may now think twice the next time he wants to emulate a gangster from Grand Theft Auto. The incident has also provided the police with further evidence of his character and more charges against him, which means the judicial system might also lock the tw*t away this time, instead of handing out 50 hours of community service and a bag of doughnuts.

He should also consider himself very lucky that Mrs G showed restraint, and only used her hands to hit him twice to simply immobilise him and eliminate any further threat. Swollen bollocks and a broken nose are nothing compared to the damage she could have done if she'd used her feet too, and really gone to town on him - I've seen her in full action in a competition fight, and trust me, she is lethal.

In reply to Neil Williams:



I find it fascinating that you effectively blame Mrs Goucho for the events because she had the temerity to call someone on their anti-social behaviour (actually not even that since all she did to initiate events was give the guy 'a look') then all that follows; him willingly going to a lay-by with the intention beating up a woman who he imagined would be easy meat.
Because you know what happened it is easy to say that the violence in the situation was inevitable and should've been avoided by one of the parties leaving. Actually the inevitability of the violence has come from the male aggressor pursuing an agenda so unreasonable any sensible person might have expected him to back off once he realised he wasn't going to silence his accuser by non-physical intimidation.
I suppose when we see street crime we should all quietly retreat and call the police (if we have our phone with us) or pretend it isn't happening.

In reply to DubyaJamesDubya:

I quote:-





I took that precisely as stated. At no point in that does it state that he threw a punch at all, only that he used abusive and threatening language.

It turns out that was an omission, which certainly does affect my view - I would say an assault charge would fail as it was self defence *as he did throw the first punch*. If he had not, it was merely a verbal argument with no justification to escalate it to fisticuffs. Or indeed to have had it at all.

Neil

In reply to Neil Williams:

It doesn't matter what you would say though, we're talking about the law.

This has now been updated to "using threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour causing fear of or provoking violence - section 4 of the Act; "

It was quite clear he was provoking violence, to most people.

It doesn't have to have a punch thrown by anyone and it matter's not who threw the first one, who was provoking the violence?

In reply to mark s:


Nothing personal mate, just hilarious how these types of threads always attract the "yeah let's all fight back against the onslaught of violence in our society" responses. If you're ( and I mean all who agree with you ) serious about being able to defend yourself maybe we should all have guns, i mean that works well in other countries doesn't it?


Oh, where to start......a truly complete person would have walked away, you're choice of language says more about you than either of the parties involved in the original story. The OP's story can be easily shortened to "two people with low self esteem issues met and had a fight. Both lost"


What rights? Please refer me to the relevant legislation?


Everywhere? My god you mean i'm not safe to leave my house without fear of seeing someone......oh hang on a minute it all started with a bloke dropping litter!!!


Good for you. Mob rule is just what this country needs

In reply to DubyaJamesDubya:

If we witness violent crime in progress, we should call the Police, yes. It may be worth getting involved in order to cause the crime to cease (i.e. in defence of someone who cannot for whatever reason defend themselves). However, if the crime does not involve violence, such involvement should only be verbal (or at most the kind of "removal from the situation" used by more professional door staff) until such time as the offender throws a punch, at which point the situation escalates, but the objective is to restrain, not to injure.

I would not intervene in any form in a verbal argument, though I might well continue watching it from a distance in case it did develop further, and may consider a call to the Police depending on what form it was in.

However, if there is an opportunity to avoid escalation, this should always be taken and the appropriate channels followed. Vigilante justice is not acceptable in this country, nor in my view should it be. The Police quite clearly stated what should have happened, and I agree fully with them.

Neil

In reply to Neil Williams:



He didn't throw a punch, but undoubtedly was going to as his fists were clenched, and he was extremely aggressive and leaning in towards her. Mrs G simply ended the confrontation in a manner she saw as the most effective - right or wrong - and wasn't going to let him make the first physical move.

In reply to Goucho:

Less clear-cut then but understandable. It doesn't, however, alter my view that the altercation was unnecessary and would have been avoided entirely by driving on and not stopping as requested. For avoidance of doubt, that decision could, and should, have been taken by both parties, so I don't blame one more than the other. Actually, in retrospect, because the other party started the issue by dropping litter, he is a fair amount more to blame - but both parties still had the opportunity to avoid it right up to the point they each chose to press their brake pedal.

Neil

In reply to Father Noel Furlong:

The OP's story can be easily shortened to "two people with low self esteem issues met and had a fight. Both lost"

Are you naturally presumptive, or do you go to night school?

Do not make comments about 'low self esteem' regarding someone whom you have never met. It just makes you look an arrogant fool.

In reply to Father Noel Furlong:


And where's the line where you would act?

What if they were throwing litter in your garden?
Posting it through your letterbox?
Shitting in you garden or letterbox.
Doing this every day?
Dropping litter in your garden that your pet then ate an died from?

Calling you wife, kids mother a cnut?

When would you do something about it?

No body asked him to drop the litter, nobody asked him to then get aggressive and abusive, these were all his actions, they were causing offence and provoking violence, so who is in the wrong?

In reply to krikoman:

Where act involves physically beating someone up?

As I haven't done this since I was 8 (and even then it was just throwing someone up against the wall and one punch, and I can't remember it having happened at all before or since that), I think it would have to get as far as that being the only way out of the situation. Which to be fair it may well have been here, but entering the situation was clearly optional.


I'd do something about it at a quite low level of provocation, but that something would be to call the Police each time there was an issue. I'm more calculating than to want to go and just whack someone, knowing full well that that is unlikely to stop them doing what they were doing, indeed more likely to cause them to dislike me even more and cause more of a problem, perhaps later retaliation.


You think littering is validly "provoking violence"? We fundamentally differ, then.

Neil

In reply to DubyaJamesDubya:

I find war a very difficult one to justify. My general line is towards the Swiss one of the Army being used only for humanitarian work and defence of a direct threat to the UK's territory. I do however find WW2 difficult to reconcile - as there *was* a direct threat to UK territory it was probably justified. However, I fail to find any justification for recent conquests in the Middle East, none of which seem to have provided any long-term benefit nor dealt effectively with any threat to UK territory.

Edit: To add to that, if we had spent all the money we spent on Iraq on building nuclear power stations and electrifying transport networks to reduce heavily our dependence on oil, how much better would things have been?

Neil

In reply to krikoman:


But my use was valid. No it really was!

In reply to Neil Williams:


But it didn't provoke the violence did it?
His violently abusive response to 'a look of disapproval' was responsible if anything.

In reply to Goucho:


"Night school" - interesting phrase, perhaps betraying some of your background? And yes i have done. It's called getting an education.


Why not, you started the discussion? Did you presume we would all agree with your wife's actions and say hurrah? I'd be ashamed if my wife acted like yours. As for sounding arrogant.......jeez, on this thread, really?

Thanks for starting this thread by the way, pure entertainment.

In reply to Goucho:
I do wonder about those objecting to Mrs G's actions. She has stood up to a bully. Do these people not realise how damaging bullying is on an individual? How crushing it can be on personal development? Should we really behave meekly in the face of intimidation? On paper littering and 'verbals' would look like such a worthless event to pursue (largely due to its non-violence), but intimidating antisocial behavior carries a real overhead.

If it was their son/daughter or mother/father being faced with verbal abuse and intimidation, I wonder how many of these people would welcome the arrival of Mrs G?

I think many of the people objecting to Mrs G's actions are hiding a degree of spinelessness. (Don't get me wrong, I am not sure I would have had the cajones to face up to this guy although I have addressed littering in the past).

In reply to krikoman:



I'd call the Police


I'd call the Police


I'd call the Police



I'd call the Police


I'd call the Police


Wouldn't be bothered but if it helps you then......

I'd call the Police



About what, litter? Somebody shouting abuse?


They all are.

In reply to Father Noel Furlong:
>> Shitting in your garden or letterbox.


And what do you do knowing that by the time the police arrive, he'd have finished shitting through your letterbox, wiped his arse with your pet rabbit and be back home beating his wife up for not having his dinner on the table?

In reply to Goucho:
In your opinion, what attributes are required to classed as a peasant?

In reply to Father Noel Furlong:


And there you go again. God it must be wonderful to be you?


Not at all, this is UKC after all. You could start a thread about the earth being round, and sooner or later a representative from the flat earth society would show up.


Thanks, shame you weren't able to contribute some yourself.

In reply to n-stacey:


Dont, just dont.

In reply to Goucho:

Wow. You can rely on UKC for some varied viewpoints.

For what (little) it's worth - I read the OP yesterday and started typing a reply on my phone, which then crashed. Following a fairly long shift which, as usual, featured the feral behaviour of violent people I thought I would repeat my response to the initial post.

The circs as I see them were :-
Hardman litters and then is verbally aggressive and abusive to Mrs. G.
Mrs. G responds - perhaps inappropriately, however hardman did invite a response by asking a question.
Hardman continues to be verbally aggressive and abusive.
Mrs. G. agress to his request to stop and pull over.
Hardman is invited by Mr G not to get involved.
Hardman chooses to ignore that advice and continues to be verbally aggressive and abusive.
Hardman repeatedly makes threats of violence to both Mr and Mrs. G.
Mrs. G responds to the perceived threat of a large violent and aggressive male who is repeatedly threatening to cause physical harm to both herself and Mr G, and indeed has apparently alighted from his vehicle in order to do so, by striking - either pre-emptively or in response to an attempt by the hardman. Self defence - no offences.

1)Arrest Hardman for public order.
2)Look to charge with littering, public order, and if possible any breaches to the terms of conditions of any release on a tag (it's not clear if that was being worn by the hardman or his mate)
3)Strong words of advice to Mrs. G

There is no legal obligation to back down to aggressive and abusive bullies. However life is not a movie and aggressive and abusive bullies can also be extremely violent fighters who are not averse to using weapons, so challenging them isn't advisable.

In reply to krikoman:

Be honest though, if he was shitting through your letter box you could easily get a photo for evidence so that's not going to happen. Is it?

In reply to off-duty:

Excellent post.

In reply to Goucho:


Wasn't going to get involved in this thread but I'm getting hooked now. You asked if i went to night school and I replied yes. I further explained what going to night school meant for me. Not sure why that needs a sarcastic reply.


I think your comment below shows quite the contrary. You posted on here expecting people to agree with you which the majority have. There are others though who do not agree. Your post below shows you are unable to take criticism of you and your wife's actions and now you're becoming sarcastic and defensive.

In reply to DubyaJamesDubya:


And therein lies the problem. There was no need to escalate a gobful of foul language to violence (by either party).

Neil

In reply to Shani:


You can stand up to a bully without the use of violence. Indeed, that in many ways makes you the bigger person.

Neil

In reply to krikoman:


If he is that bad a person, chances are a thump would not even come close to changing his ways. OTOH, being in prison may well do (or if it doesn't, it will at least prevent him doing it again while he is there).

Neil

In reply to Father Noel Furlong:


Selective paraphrasing of your own post - omitting the presumptive sarcasm regarding my education.


No, I just posted it, and anyone is free to criticise - trust me, it won't cause us sleepless nights.

I took objection to your 'sarcastic' presumptions - which tend to typify your posts.

In reply to off-duty:




Agreed. And said advice was given by the Police, and I agree with it as quoted.

Neil

In reply to Neil Williams:



She did contemplate delivering some withering Nietzsche, or a brutal Hunter S Thompson one liner, but ascertained it might have possibly gone over his head?

In reply to Neil Williams:


You can, and yours is a neat, textbook position. Applying this approach, we can see that in this instance Mrs G stood up to this gentleman without violence by pulling over to engage with discourse. She was 'the bigger person'. However, this man then behaved violently such that she deemed it necessary to fight back.

As an aside, I don't believe you have EVER stood up physically against a bully. Ever.

In reply to Goucho:


On the contrary....but you're no stranger to sarcasm yourself.


Why? I reread your OP. You basically tell a story, why did you feel the need to share? I would suggest you wanted approval from your fellow man who would delight in the revenge element with the feminine twist.


Given i don't post very often i'm not sure where you get that from.

In reply to Father Noel Furlong:


True, but I try not to add presumption in the same sentence.


Damn, you've seen right through me and spotted my John Wayne fixation - god you're good.


Just this thread.

In reply to Goucho:

Thank you. See how easy it is to achieve gratification without resorting to violence

In reply to Shani:


Or she could have not stopped and telephoned the Police at the first opportunity, which is exactly what I would have done.


No, I haven't, and why do you see that as a bad thing? Why would I need to when there are better options? (I certainly have dealt with bullying).

Neil

Whilst abhoring violence, a reasoned argument with caveman driver seems unlikely (I would have driven off but then again probably wouldn't fancy my chances)

Makes me think of 'Demolition Man'
Squad Leader:
Simon Phoenix! Lie down with your hands behind your back.

Simon Phoenix:
What's this? Six of you. Such nice, tidy uniforms. Oh I'm so scared!

Simon Phoenix:
What you guys don't have sarcasm anymore?

Squad Leader:
Maniac is responding with a scornful remark.

In reply to Father Noel Furlong:


What if he's wearing one of these?

https://www.pinterest.com/pin/555420566514074198/

In reply to krikoman:

Damn, foiled by a master criminal!

In reply to Neil Williams:


>> And what do you do knowing that by the time the police arrive, he'd have finished shitting through your letterbox, wiped his arse with your pet rabbit and be back home beating his wife up for not having his dinner on the table?

If he is that bad a person, chances are a thump would not even come close to changing his ways. OTOH, being in prison may well do (or if it doesn't, it will at least prevent him doing it again while he is there).

The question was how do you stop him from leaving before the police arrive? If he's wearing a mask or you can't photograph / see his face then how do you identify him to the police?

what do you do then? ask him to turd himself in?

In reply to krikoman:

It *might* be justified to try to restrain him/execute a citizen's arrest (as the other poster did with regard to a drunk driver). However that is quite distinct from beating someone up. One is keeping them there until the Police come along and the due legal process can determine punishment, the other is inflicting bodily injury intentionally as a punishment or deterrent.


I think the argument was that he did just "turd" in something

Neil

In reply to krikoman:



Or take a leaf out of Sean Connery's book (and our other illustrious UKC poster) and sh1t on him until the police arrive....

In reply to Neil Williams:



Good luck with that in a real world situation like Mrs G was in. Of course you can (and should) try but I suspect that in a case like this the dialogue would be rather one-sided and short. You need to be confident that you can defend yourself before you can rely on witty banter.

In reply to Dave Garnett:


I love this repeated belief that this poor woman was in danger. She was in a car and could have driven away, she didn't have to defend herself, she chose to escalate the situation to deal with her issues as described by Goucho in a previous post. This was not a simple case of self defense.

Sheesh......

In reply to Father Noel Furlong:



Or perhaps the pratt could have decided to follow her right on her bumper driving aggressively and dangerously ,escalating the potential for harm to those involved or to third parties significantly. When faced with someone like that person as described, I'd rather it was not a confrontation with two people at the wheels of their cars on the public highway.

Sheesh...

In reply to wintertree:

And maybe he had a machine gun and would have popped a cap in her ass, or maybe he had a gang of mates all nearby who would have jumped in and we would have had a full scale riot, or maybe......or maybe.....

Really??

In reply to Neil Williams:


Very good points, there's nothing inherently noble or honourable about being physical with people, or bad about not having been.

It's a negative that being physical is sometimes the only method some people understand. I've never (needed to have) been physical with anybody either.

In reply to Neil Williams:



Much safer to stop & duff him up. If you'd driven on, it sound like there was a good chance he'd have driven after you & tried to run you off the road - a much more dangerous situation.

Chapeau to Mrs G.

In reply to Neil Williams:


I think the term 'beating someone up' is a tad over the top - he got his bollocks punched once, and his nose punched once - which successfully detained him until the police arrived (who we called).

In reply to Dave Garnett:


She could have avoided the situation by not pulling over. She probably could even have got back into her car and driven off.

"Flight" can often be a better option than "fight". We're evolved for both!

Neil

In reply to Chris Harris:


As most road rage stuff doesn't end that way, that would seem a very low risk.

Neil

In reply to Goucho:

I was speaking a little more generically in that posting rather than direct reference to your situation.

Neil

In reply to Neil Williams:


Some certainly do, though. I've had drivers consciously moving their cars aggressively near me while cycling, and it's pretty frightening.

The laws and 'rules of civility' do only stretch so far, unfortunately.

In reply to Goucho:


If only you had this on video......you'd have a gazillion hits on You Tube by now!

In reply to Goucho:

It may or may not have been the right thing to have done........but it makes for a good story. I laughed when I read the post. Until I got to the punchline though, I did think, 'what kind of a world do we live in?'

In reply to Timmd:

True. Of course a cyclist is much more vulnerable (to injury) than a driver. But equally, a punch-up is not how I would look to solve such an incident, I'd look to get away and let the idiot zoom off into the distance (then if I had a helmet cam I would have good quality evidence to provide when later informing the Police).

Neil

In reply to Phil1919:

I agree it was amusing

In reply to Neil Williams:




Having not stood up to a bully means you likely lack experience of how bullies may react in such a situation. It is noble an brave to stand up to a bully - especially when the police are several hours away.

I am not advocating violence, I am advocating standing up to a bully. But lets not get away from the fact that such action may precipitate violence.

If you think that the bully in the instance above was open to reasoned discussion then you are naive. If you think that he was unlikely to ever repeat this behavior had Mrs G not stood up for herself (perhaps with a more tragic outcome for the victim), then you are naive. Luckily the VICTIM in this instance, Mrs G, stood up to the bully and I think that he will now think twice about repeating this kind of thing.

I recognise and applaud civic-minded people and their actions.

In reply to Shani:

Where, exactly, do you have to be in the UK where someone is being threatened with violence and the police are "several hours away"?

In reply to Oceanrower:


Either St Kilda, or anywhere in Council Tax Band A?

In reply to Shani:


How can you possibly know this?? Did he doff his cap and say "sorry guvnor". Seriously what planet are some of people on???


If she was civic minded she would have made him go back and pick up the litter, she didn't. I fail to see how this could possibly be viewed as a civically minded action. She did it to deal with her own demons. Nothing to do with me or you. Or the litter for that matter!

In reply to Oceanrower:

For a start, 'in your own house': http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/mar/27/police-failures-domestic-vio...

But response times are going to also be affected by your ability to access a phone/get a signal/having a charge, knowing your exact location/coordinates, how busy the police are that particular moment (Friday nights and Saturdays are likely to be busy for police), remoteness of your current location, how the call is graded etc....

But if police cannot respond to promptly and consistently to a domestic - where a precise address is given (and in plenty of time), what chances of a one-off road rage incident being resolved in a similar manner?

In reply to Shani:


In your opinion. I don't believe it is necessarily noble and brave to stand up to a bully by way of physical violence. Sometimes getting away and being more calculating as to how to deal with the situation is better. On this I clearly differ from many other people on here (and I was bullied as a kid, FWIW).

>Luckily the VICTIM in this instance, Mrs G, stood up to the bully and I think that he will now think twice about repeating this kind of thing.

I doubt it.


It is not "civic minded" to engage in pointless violence in my view. It would be civic minded to pick up the litter and report the matter to the Police with as much evidence as you could provide.

Neil

In reply to Shani:


The Police did not need to respond on the spot. What would have been useful would be more evidence to add to their existing body of evidence against that individual.

Neil

In reply to Neil Williams:


There is no indication that Mrs G stood up to this bully with the intention of physical violence, only with the knowledge that should it come to physical violence, she could handle it.

The only person in this scenario who wanted to precipitate a violent exchange was the aggressor. I am sure if they had pulled their cars over and the man had approached Mrs G with the intention to discuss matters verbally, she'd have obliged. Looks like she wasn't given that option.

The guy that bullied you, do you think he would have bullied you if he thought you could floor him? Bullies prey on those they believe are weak and vulnerable. I have seen TWO bullies stopped dead in their tracks on separate occasions having met a short, sharp and violent response. Both these bullies became much nicer once their 'hard man' aura was shattered.

In reply to Shani:



And if one of the two *hadn't* pulled their cars over, there would most likely have been no confrontation at all.


Possibly not. But the "easy" outcome isn't always the right outcome.

Neil

In reply to Father Noel Furlong:

She did it to deal with her own demons. Nothing to do with me or you. Or the litter for that matter!

You sent off for that 'Become a Psychiatrist in a Day' book, advertised on the back of a cereal box didn't you.

Wasn't Father Noel Furlong idiot number 2 in Father Ted?

In reply to Neil Williams:

Didn't Chamberlain try this approach a few years back?

And I'm claiming Godwins Law before anyone else does

In reply to Neil Williams:



We don't know what would have happened if they hadn't pulled their cars over. Their next victim may have had a more nervous disposition and crashed. Drunk on the power, this bully night have pushed the next altercation further. Lots of possibilities.

Violence is not the 'easy' answer. Driving away is 'easy'....although there is not guarantee of getting away.

I see where you are coming from and I know we will not convince each other to change our opinions. I have little more to add to this thread - unless provoked to return

In reply to Goucho:

What kind of cereal do you eat? I'll assume yours is a genuine question and not sarcasm.


Yes, the one played by Graham Norton.

In reply to Goucho:


I'd do it for free!

In reply to Goucho:

Excellent

In reply to DubyaJamesDubya:


I've been in a similar position and it was actually the safest option. I was on a motorbike so more vulnerable in some senses (also heavy traffic, I had no where to go without endangering others) but after no immediately stopping I was tailgated in a very aggressive manner for a while before I dismounted and yanked open the person's passenger door and invited him to step out so we could talk about it. He soon pissed off.

I always say I'm jealous of the people on here who refuse to accept that occasionally physical action is required, they've obviously not been put in a position where it was required which unfortunately a lot of people are.

They then normally go on about how their superior nature means they'd never end up in that position, but then I feel sorry for them because they're obviously delusional to think every moment in life is under their control.

In reply to Scarab9:

You're situation was very different from the OP but don't let that get in the way of a good generalisation.

In reply to Scarab9:

That's almost the reverse situation in fact.

You've had a dispute about the other person's driving. In my experience these are never quite as straightforward as they appear to each person involved - but taking it on face value - he's driven badly, aggressively even.

You have then taken the initiative in escalating the incident to a physical confrontation. He has been intimidated by you - potentially a threatening/aggressive male in biker gear- and made off.

In reply to Neil Williams:

I normally agree with your posts but this time whilst in theory I agree, the reality is that calling the police in that situation would have solved nothing. Without the incident escalating further, the police would be unable to do anything much, if at all.

Some people sadly don't learn the easy way and have to learn life's lessons the hard way. Sooner or later if you act like a tw*t you will get a beating. For the hard of thinking the sooner this happens the less damage they will cause.

In reply to marsbar:


I wonder if it ever occurs to the masses that maybe that's how this guy was raised. Maybe he was beaten long before he could even walk? And before anyone says it I'm not a bleeding heart liberal, i have already qualified in an earlier post nobody comes out of this scenario looking good. Regardless of what the thuggish masses might think.

In reply to Father Noel Furlong:

Can you clarify what you think this guy has learned by how he was raised? Can you then resolve this with his initiating of antisocial behaviour?.

In reply to Shani:


Yes and yes. I could refer you to the endless research into the subject, but i'm sure you're more than capable of doing this for yourself.

In reply to Father Noel Furlong:

We could debate round in circles the nature/nurture issues about our "hardman's" upbringing.
We could then propose some possible treatments/punishments/rehabilitations.
Maybe we could then test them out - decide which are effective and modify our criminal justice system to address them.

In the meantime- until that research is completed and a solution found - a broken nose, busted bollocks and a charge for public order are just going to have to suffice.

In reply to Father Noel Furlong:

I used to work for social services, with teenagers that had suffered that kind of childhood. Generally in my experience the majority don't go round provoking people. They either have a similar attitude to Neil, that violence isn't the answer, or are too scared to interact with people. Some of the loveliest people I know were beaten as kids and worse.

Its easy to go for the whole must have had a bad start in life idea. Generally behaviour as described above in my experience comes from the opposite type of parent, the sort that spoil the kids and never discipline them. Kid learns to do as they like and treat women like doormats because mum used to lie down and let them behave any way they wanted. Mum runs round and picks up after them.

I would prefer kids to learn to be civilised as kids without violence, but if they don't then sooner or later someone will give up explaining to them and deal with it.

Its a concept I have tried to ensure that certain of the teenagers in school understand. One particular lad kicked off aggressively and called his teacher a "see you next Tuesday." I happened to see one of the technicians walk past while I was talking to the lad about this incident. I asked the technician the hypothetical question of what would happen if someone in a pub called someone that. He explained it to the lad. I don't know if he got the idea, but I tried.

In reply to Goucho:

Mr Groucho, I'm going to marry your Mrs!!

Personally, in my experience, violence with violence works in certain scenarios, this was one of them.
Wishywashy doesn't work, if it did, we wouldn't have things like school-bullies.

I lived for about 5 years next to a cr4p area in Salford, where the following happened.
Men on bus - knocked one out, rest forced to apologise to the lady they had poured milk over - passengers applauded.
Teenagers throwing rocks at cars -grabbed the biggest, told him, in a very loud violent voice that I would rip his head off and stick it up his mates a4se....and a few other expletives - no car ever stoned again.
Man spat on my car - stopped, asked him politely to clean it - he wouldn't - then he did but he had to use his face, then I flung him in a bush, a jaggy bush.
Xmas burgler - won't tell you what I done to him but he sat against a wall and seemed happy when the police arrived - no more burglaries in the area!

Knowing the people and the area, in any of the situations above, if I tried reasoning, I would've taken a hiding.....the free weekly rag was full of battered wishy washies. If they want to act like sh1t, treat them like sh1t.

And I'm sure one of the internet warriors on here will be along to tell me I acted like sh1t but life is different in the real world, it really is.

In reply to aultguish:


Sounds like she'll kick your ass if you try

In reply to cander:

They must go through a mattress a month!! Lol

In reply to Goucho:

Best post I've read in ages!

Your missus sounds awesome!

In reply to Goucho:

Why do you have lawyers? Does this sort of thing happen often?

(Not that the CPS would listen to them anyway, but that's another story...)

In reply to Siward:


Why wouldn't he?

In reply to Scarab9:


I think you have to consider how you got in the situation. If someone cornered you and jumped you in the street, you may have no option but to knock them out if you don't want to get knifed, say. I accept that.


No, what we (or I at least) say is that I would choose any option *before* the option of violence, which is not true of everyone (and is not what happened in this case). It is certainly not in my mindset to use violence deliberately to teach someone a lesson; I may at some point (hasn't happened yet) be forced to use it to get out of a situation where "flight" rather than "fight" is not an option.

Neil

In reply to mypyrex:

Only time I've ever used lawyers was for conveyancing, and I just picked one locally that seemed well recommended (and they indeed did it correctly). I do hear of people who speak of "my lawyer" and have wondered (without casting any aspersions) what they need them for!

I suppose if you're self employed or something you might.

Neil

In reply to Neil Williams:



I've always considered it a good idea to have a legal firm you know and trust, for business and any other matters which occur, because you never know what might be round the corner?

Given the nature of this incident, it struck me as a sensible prudent move to inform them.

In reply to Goucho:

If the OP is a precursor to the future might be worth arranging a weekly update.

In reply to Goucho:

In reply to all.

I think this thread is coming to its natural end now - as it should.

Thanks for all the comments - both supportive, and critical

Whilst Mrs G's actions might raise moral concerns among some, there are times when taking a passive approach to this kind of behavior, just re-enforces the self belief of wannabee macho/hardmen.

Am I proud of Mrs G?

Well, in this world of dickhead men, reared on a diet of gangland movie culture and misogynistic attitudes to women, I am very proud that Mrs G can more than take care of herself, should one (or even more than one) of these scroats try it on with her.

And I should also point out, that this is far from normal behavior for either of us...but sometimes...just sometimes...

I'll leave the final comment to Mrs G.

"A mans balls, are always his weakness."

In reply to Father Noel Furlong:


I'll do my best

In reply to Goucho:

I once punched holes in a stack of A4.

In reply to Clauso:


Yeah, with a hole punch!

In reply to Phil79:


Ah, but was it stationary at the time?

In reply to Goucho:




That's why I keep mine in a jar on the mantelpiece.

In reply to krikoman:


I'm not coming round yours for drinks and nibbles!

Nuts, anyone?

In reply to mypyrex:

Well, I don't 'have lawyers'. I might engage one for a specific purpose to, for example, deal with conveyancing or wills. But they wouldn't be much use in a courtroom.

In my experience folk with the number of a criminal solicitor in their phone contacts are folk who are regularly in the dock!

In reply to Goucho:

This had really cheered me up today - Mrs Groucho is FAB!!!!! WELL DONE!!!!!!

In reply to Siward:


Or they have the number of a large law firm in their contacts, who cover all areas of the law?

In reply to Siward:


Seriously, when the going gets tough you don't want a criminal lawyer you want a c r i m i n a l lawyer.

youtube.com/watch?v=JNMQqh1ovlM&

In reply to off-duty:




Indeed, and this is infinitely preferable to the very likely alternative of a number of innocent people (such as The Gouchos) getting assaulted by this scumbag.

In reply to Goucho:

I honestly don't know why some men behave like this. Pathetic bullys. Probably makes them feel big. Mrs Goucho sounds awesome. Good stuff

In reply to Goucho:
I wouldn't worry what the few lentil eaters think
The vast majority of people would love a Mrs like yours.

In reply to Richard Alderton:


In view of the fact that the gentleman in question had been repeatedly exposed to the legal system for numerous other misdemeanours without any apparent change to his behaviour, I think it's fairly safe to say that the efforts of the police & courts had totally failed to "deal with this sort of thing".

When someone is in an endless loop of Be an idiot > Get fined > Be an idiot again > Get fined > Be an idiot again> Get fined, then perhaps what is needed is for someone to break the loop. And his nose. And testicles.

It is, I'm afraid, the only language they understand.