Hoppa smashed some drunk

this report again from the telegraph though says they
chased him 150 metres up the road.
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...n-duque-castillo/story-e6freuy9-1225981231254
some footage of onlookers gawking.

 

:rofl:rofl

Yep.... some Coco-nuts should be left on the tree.

 

just because they were chased doesn't mean the guys that got hurt r innocent.
it was reported that they threatend the security.

everyone is innocent until proven guilty. lucky some of u r not on the jury, hoppa would be guilty before the trial had begun.

 

Who here has said Hoppa is guilty, go and get fresh tampon.

Hoppa charged with asault the other thug most likely either a murder or manslaughter charge. Hoppa can kiss his license good bye. He would want tohope his charge is heard first.

 

The kid who died.. was he armed? The knife?

David Hookes was unarmed. Micevic got away with his death.

 

I'd say the difference here Bobby is significant. Hookes was felled and hit his head on the kerb. It's been reported that the bouncer responsible for for Duques death handed him a savage beating.

 

whats the tampon for?

u r carrying on as if there is little doubt. calling them thugs and saying hoppa can kiss his licence goodbye, lol.

u have them guilty.

they r asking for witnesses to find out what happened but u already know?

do u know what was done to make the bouncers chase them in the first place?
i don't, i have no idea.

so pipe down!!!!!!!

 

So far you've made several references inferring Hoppa's guilt.

The articles a very thin on facts. Rather than make assumptions I prefer to wait and hear all of the facts. How anyone's guilt or innocence can be determined from a couple of news articles is beyond me.

 

Hoppa will most probably kiss his licence goodbye.

Unless the people being chased posed a threat in some way, then they had no business leaving the premises to chase them. A security officers job is to deter and prevent crime. It isnt to be a vigilante of any sorts.

 

i think bouncers are employed to diffuse trouble within a nightclub/pub and refuse entry to drunks/troublemakers.
which they apparently did with these guys.outside of that its a police matter you dont go chasing them 150 metres
down the street just because they got lippy.anyway as
you said it will all be sorted out at the trial.

 

Yes I have made inferences....as one does.

Again, where has it been determined that Hoppa is guilty?

There is little doubt an assualt on 2 people has taken place, one brother is now dead.
There is little doubt that this occured about 100 meters from the Trademark on darlinghurst road where the crowd controllers are employed.
There is little doubt that licensed crowd controllers are not allowed to agressively pursue people from thier place of employment to carry out remedial action.

Inferences can be made.

 

You've determined their guilt by referring to them as thugs.

Yes, there is doubt that assault on 2 people has taken place.

A video of the incident has been released, although it doesn't show the deceased going down. After viewing the footage let me know who you think is to blame for the incident taking place.

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/8192481/video-released-of-kings-cross-brawl-victim

 

A bunch of bouncers walking down the street following the guys. Bad move.

One man is dead. Another belted by Hoppa. Ummmm... JB.. looks like there's very little doubt of any assault. Lack of witnesses might save their arses for now.

The fat slob in the t-shirt with the writing all over it... looks like a nice guy.

 

Bobby, the bouncers had every right to follow the group if they intended to detain them for the police due to their threatening behaviour and use of weapons.

There's plenty of doubt regarding assaults, especially given the conduct of the group. Yeah, Hoppa's been charged but he may have had a valid reason for striking a patron. And was he charged over this incident or another? The reporter mentioned that Hoppa was charged over a separate incident that night.

The painters were acting like morons before the incident and had no qualms pulling a weapon after being refused entry. It's unfortunate that one of them lost his life but it could've been easily avoided. They just had to turn around and go elsewhere and their night may not have ended in the manner that it did.

I worked in the security industry for over a decade and couldn't count the amount of times we'd end up in a blue with ****s at the door because they couldn't handle being knocked back after acting like ****wits or being dressed like bums.

 

Assaulting the deceased's brother... seperate incident to the death of a bloke.

I dont know how much right the security have in detaining patrons/refused patrons. Err.. the effort to detain anyone seems quite laxed, considering the wise move to shove one to the footapath....

Yes, the painters were acting like morons that night. The deceased was almost sexually assaulting that chick walking by.... almost looking up her skirt. FFS!! Being a cockhead beforehand by brandishing a weapon and racing across the street for some reason.

The fact the painters were still in the work garb suggests they'd bee boozing since work. Personally, I dont give a rats arse about the bloke being dead.

If they wanted the painters quizzed by the cops about pulling a knife/paint scraper, then they'd only need one bloke to tail them and keep the cops informed of their location..... It doesn't look good for the security when ten of them start a possie.