Boycott Braehead
#46
Posted 11 October 2011 - 11:56 AM
Come to think of it, we were asked if we had any cameras by the stewards on the way in to the venue, which I thought was rather pointless given that everyone has camera phones these days.
#47
Posted 13 October 2011 - 06:24 PM
“It is absolutely right and proper that when a complaint about the police is made that it is fully investigated. The public need to know that their complaints are taken seriously and are acted upon promptly and professionally. This is exactly what has happened in this incident.
“Mr White complained to the police about the incident in Braehead. In his statement he set out a set of circumstances that has caused widespread debate, comment and criticism for those who he alleged were involved. Mr White chose to make his complaint public, to give interviews to the media and to seek debate on social networks.
“We are well aware that, as a result of this social media conversation, demonstrations are being planned this weekend at Braehead. We have also seen global media coverage of the incident – all of which has painted the shopping centre, this police force and, arguably, our country in a very negative light.
“It is because Mr White chose to seek publicity for his account of events and because of the planned demonstration that we feel compelled to take the unusual step of making our findings public.
“In reaching our conclusions, officers took statements from a number of independent witnesses and viewed the substantial amount of CCTV that was available in the centre.
“On reviewing all of this objective evidence, I have to tell you that we can find no basis to support the complaint which Mr.White has elected to make.
“The members of the public who asked for the security staff to become involved have told us that they did so for reasons which had absolutely nothing to do with him taking photographs of his daughter. They had a very specific concern, which I am not in a position to discuss publicly, that they felt the need to report. It was because of this very specific concern that security staff became involved. They were right to raise their concern and we are glad that they did so.
“The security staff were the ones who asked for police involvement. Again, this was not because Mr White said he had been photographing his daughter, but was due to the concerns that they themselves had regarding this particular incident.
“When our officers became involved they did not confiscate any items, nor was Mr White questioned under counter terrorist legislation. It is wrong to suggest that the police spoke to Mr White because he claimed he had been photographing his daughter, or that officers made any reference to counter terror legislation. Mr.White knows, or ought to know, why our officers spoke with him.
“Since Mr White chose to publish his version of events on Facebook, we have seen substantial traditional media and social media activity around the story. People have been very quick to offer their opinions on this issue and were very keen to accept Mr White’s story as the only evidence that was available. Clearly this was not the case.
“Social media allowed this story to spread quickly around the world. I hope that the same media allows this part of the tale to move just as quickly.
“For the avoidance of any doubt, we have fully investigated this incident and we can say that none of the independent and objective evidence presented to us by either the members of the public or the CCTV backs up the claims made by Mr White.”
www.skyeluxurycottage.com - 7.5% TA discount
#48
Posted 13 October 2011 - 06:32 PM
So they are defaming the guy without actually telling us why, despite the fact that they open up the press release by telling us that they are, but go on to say they aren't going to disclose anything?
I'm surprised he left the SFA as he seems to talk some amount of shyte
YES!
#49
Posted 13 October 2011 - 06:41 PM
Rob Shorthouse, khunt gets about eh?
So they are defaming the guy without actually telling us why, despite the fact that they open up the press release by telling us that they are, but go on to say they aren't going to disclose anything?
I'm surprised he left the SFA as he seems to talk some amount of shyte
Rob Shorthouse was at the Tamb Christmas night out you were at (i think it was the same day as your birthday)
#50
Posted 13 October 2011 - 06:52 PM
Rob Shorthouse was at the Tamb Christmas night out you were at (i think it was the same day as your birthday)
I only remember sexpest, Balloch thistle and some khunt that looked like his dad was in the Wurzels
YES!
#51
Posted 13 October 2011 - 06:57 PM
If of course his version of events is still the true story which it could well be then it's still a shocking story but it's amazing that just cause he said it's true how so many people believed it including myself and were happy to hate Braehead
#52
Posted 13 October 2011 - 07:07 PM
A similar incident happened in Edinburgh last year where a security guard oversteped the mark. Makes an arse of the shopping centers for having the rule in the first place.
#53
Posted 13 October 2011 - 07:18 PM
I only remember sexpest, Balloch thistle and some khunt that looked like his dad was in the Wurzels
Only been at one and Rob was there along with Pistonbroke.
Tartan Army Sunshine Appeal Steering Group Member
#54
Posted 13 October 2011 - 07:25 PM
YES!
#55
Posted 13 October 2011 - 07:26 PM
Facebook campaigns generally = Rooneys spouting pish
Regan, Ogilve, Doncaster, Longmuir and Ballantyne, a quintet of tossers - who are somehow all still in a job
#56
Posted 13 October 2011 - 07:43 PM
I only remember sexpest, Balloch thistle and some khunt that looked like his dad was in the Wurzels
Only been at one and Rob was there along with Pistonbroke.
That's right Ed was there too, back in the day eh? Before all these young rugrats got involved
Pistonbroke has been to most
Last year we had me,Jen,Pistonbroke,Glasgowmancity and Frew ...........all the young rugrats
I'll get you back for that Wurzels comment
#57
Posted 13 October 2011 - 08:01 PM
fu¢king pathetic response. Are we really at the stage where we assume that any adult male with a small child is a paedophile?Braehead have issued a statement.
Following various postings on social media websites and stories in the traditional media, Braehead would like to set the record straight on an incident involving a man taking photographs of a child in the centre, on Friday October 7.
Retail staff at an ice cream stall in Braehead became suspicious after they saw a male shopper taking photographs of a child sitting at their counter. The staff thought the man had also been taking photographs of them and they alerted one of the centre’s security staff.
The member of security staff approached the man and politely asked if he had been taking photographs. At no time in the initial conversation was the member of our security staff informed by the man that the child in question was his daughter.
Because of the nature of the incident, police became involved and also spoke to the man.
Our priority is always to maintain a safe and enjoyable environment for all our shoppers and retailers. The member of our security staff acted in good faith.
Like most shopping centres, we have a ‘no photography’ policy in the mall for two reasons. First, to protect the privacy of staff and shoppers. as we are sure shoppers would not want strangers taking photographs of them or their children while they were in the mall.
Secondly and sadly, we live in a world of potential threats from terrorists and everyone is being urged by the police to be vigilant at all times. It is not uncommon for those intending to make some kind of attack to take photographs of their intended target as part of their planning before the event.
However, it is not our intention to - and we do not - stop innocent family members taking pictures. Discretion is used at all times.
Although Friday’s incident had nothing to do with a potential terrorist attack, the two retail assistants and the member of our security staff were faced with a situation they genuinely thought was suspicious. They witnessed a man taking photographs of a child, unaware that the man and the child were related.
I’m sure people will agree it is better safe than sorry.
remember people, everyone is a potential terrorist or paedophile, if you see anything suspicious or a neighbour acting weird contact the Stasi, and children remember to report anything strange your parents do
London Scottish AFC - More history than the MK Dons!
www.londonscottishfc.com also add us on Facebook!!!
I want to go for a swim!
#58
Posted 13 October 2011 - 08:01 PM
Rob Shorthouse, Director of Communications for Strathclyde Police said:
Mmmm, a strange turn for this to take.
So the Police are implying that he was up to something dodgy but it wasn't photographing his daughter? but the Police are not saying, and he wasn't charged with anything.
Will be interesting to see what turn this takes now.
#59
Posted 13 October 2011 - 08:07 PM
Last year we had me,Jen,Pistonbroke,Glasgowmancity and Frew ...........all the young rugrats
I took that as a complement
A post (number 2156887) from 'antidote' on 11th June 2012 at 8:57pm "If Scotland votes no then I will never help a unionist supporter agian."
#60
Posted 13 October 2011 - 08:19 PM
I took that as a complement
I was calling you an auld git (if Jen is watching i wasn't calling you that)










