Should Top Gears' Jeremy Clarkson be saved or sacked?

[Chippiewill]

BBC is run on a political basis anyway, its been long established that it has a left wing slant.

It's also been long established that it has a right wing slant.

[GommeInc]

They wouldn't do anything without the producer pressing charges anyway would they?

Like if I punch you, it's not an issue regarding police until you press charges for assault.

The police can get involved even if you don't press charges. If they know a crime was committed they can get involved, especially if it is true that the presenter had to go to hospital - it's a battery (or ABH/GBH, depending on the severity). The way to think about it is this:

Victims cannot dictate when a law has or has not been broken if they do or do not press charges.

The media coverage and the BBC report makes it kind of clear a crime may have been committed, so it's worth investigating.

To be honest he had it coming assaulting someone. It's inexcusable and deserved.

[scottish]

The police can get involved even if you don't press charges. If they know a crime was committed they can get involved, especially if it is true that the presenter had to go to hospital - it's a battery (or ABH/GBH, depending on the severity). The way to think about it is this:

Victims cannot dictate when a law has or has not been broken if they do or do not press charges.

The media coverage and the BBC report makes it kind of clear a crime may have been committed, so it's worth investigating.

To be honest he had it coming assaulting someone. It's inexcusable and deserved.

Maybe I'm paying too much attention to the American way, but if the police knows it happened it's still down to the victim to state that they wish to press charges against them?

Like in so many domestic abuse situations the woman will not press charges against the man and the police can't do anything, similarly in non domestic abuse situations even if they have CCTV etc it's still down to the victim to state they wish to press charges for the police to be able to hold them or investigate it as a crime.

Like usually if they go to the police, they'd be asked if they wanted to press charges against the attacker do they not?

Obviously this is isolated to the assault charge (as you can't say you don't want to press charges against someone who's reckless driving, drunk driving, etc )


That's the way I've always thought it was.

[GommeInc]

Maybe I'm paying too much attention to the American way, but if the police knows it happened it's still down to the victim to state that they wish to press charges against them?

Like in so many domestic abuse situations the woman will not press charges against the man and the police can't do anything, similarly in non domestic abuse situations even if they have CCTV etc it's still down to the victim to state they wish to press charges for the police to be able to hold them or investigate it as a crime.

Like usually if they go to the police, they'd be asked if they wanted to press charges against the attacker do they not?

Obviously this is isolated to the assault charge (as you can't say you don't want to press charges against someone who's reckless driving, drunk driving, etc )


That's the way I've always thought it was.

If they witness the crime or they have evidence a crime has been committed they usually act. Your example is pretty good that women who are abused by their partners do not press charges and police do not act. If a police officer is told of abuse but the main victim says it is not true (or refuses to press charges) they do not have any real evidence to go by. Domestic abuse cases tend to go on behind closed doors so it is the word of a "rumour" measured up against the denial of a victim. If an officer witnesses domestic abuse they can act - it's how child abuse cases go about although in recent years there has been a lot of denial by all forms of authorities (child/social services and the police). It's a broken area.

As this happened in public and there has been an investigation, they have two sources of evidence. If anything, the producer has made himself exempt from gaining compensation as compensation cases require the claimant to make a claim, while in criminal cases the CPS and the police can make a case with or without your consent.

[scottish]

I doubt the producer wanted to gain compensation or even cared in the slightest (if he did he would have reported the incident, instead of it being Jeremy reporting the incident).

Also the incident was in a hotel wasn't it? not in public. The only reason it went public was due to the BBC releasing the information to the public, for something that should have strictly been an internal investigation and had no reason to notify the public (until they cancelled the live shows obviously)

But fair enough, seems a bit silly if the person doesn't want to take action then that should be the final decision, not for others to make on their behalf (probably a bad example but say two brothers were fighting in an alley, would both be charged for assault if a police officer randomly strolled in and seen it?)

[-:Undertaker:-]

It's also been long established that it has a right wing slant.

If you are Leon Trotsky then maybe...

[scottish]

Oisin Tymon, the Top Gear producer punched by Jeremy Clarkson during a row over food, has told police he does not want to press charges.

Mr Tymon had to drive himself to hospital when he was left with swelling and a split lip after the Top Gear presenter launched an "unprovoked" attack on him at a hotel in North Yorkshire on 4 March.

Mr Tymon's lawyer, Paul Daniels, issued a statement in which he said: "Mr Tymon has informed the police that he doesn't want to press charges.

[Reality]

To be honest, I can envisage Clarkson and the others will all go to another channel or they will ask Clarkson back in the next 6 - 7 months.

[GommeInc]

I doubt the producer wanted to gain compensation or even cared in the slightest (if he did he would have reported the incident, instead of it being Jeremy reporting the incident).

Also the incident was in a hotel wasn't it? not in public. The only reason it went public was due to the BBC releasing the information to the public, for something that should have strictly been an internal investigation and had no reason to notify the public (until they cancelled the live shows obviously)

But fair enough, seems a bit silly if the person doesn't want to take action then that should be the final decision, not for others to make on their behalf (probably a bad example but say two brothers were fighting in an alley, would both be charged for assault if a police officer randomly strolled in and seen it?)

Depends how serious it was really. From what has been said since it seems the police are not that interested and Clarkson is showing some amount of remorse so they might just let it go.

The police would probably break up the fight, give a few verbal warnings and if they kept going for each other they would probably considering arresting one or both of them. It all depends on how severe it is. I think I remember reading he had to go to hospital as he was pretty beaten up but not so much that it makes Clarkson a risk to society, so you could look at it that way. He was remorseful, didn't cause that much pain and to his advantage reported the incident to his bosses and being sacked is punishment enough.

The police tend to focus on really serious crimes like rape, domestic abuse, torture and child abuse (I say it separately to domestic abuse as it has different meanings). If you say it was fine or have survivors/victims remorse, it's no excuse for what that person did to you.

[scottish]

From everything I've read, he punched him once which burst his lip (hence him going to hospital).

There wasn't some massive fight with 30 punches going back and forward or anything.