Bohs fan fails to get 'hooligan associates' ban lifted

As far as I'm aware, He was banned by Bohs for "associating" with troublemakers. Is that correct? And according to BohsPartisan, Bohs have been careful not to say or imply that he himself is a troublemaker. Is this also correct? (I'm only going on what I've read on this thread)

A number of people have mentioned that Bohs, as a private business/club/enterprise etc. have the right to refuse entry to people the don't want on the premises. I would imagine though that any such rule could not contravene the law of the country. Does anybody know if Irish law would supercede Bohs policy?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by osarusan

A number of people have mentioned that Bohs, as a private business/club/enterprise etc. have the right to refuse entry to people the don't want on the premises. I would imagine though that any such rule could not contravene the law of the country. Does anybody know if Irish law would supercede Bohs policy?

---

As far as I understand, unless they're discriminating on the grounds of gender, age, race, disability, being a traveller or a couple of other grounds that I can't think of offhand, they're OK. I may well be wrong though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by osarusan

As far as I'm aware, He was banned by Bohs for "associating" with troublemakers. Is that correct? And according to BohsPartisan, Bohs have been careful not to say or imply that he himself is a troublemaker. Is this also correct? (I'm only going on what I've read on this thread)

A number of people have mentioned that Bohs, as a private business/club/enterprise etc. have the right to refuse entry to people the don't want on the premises. I would imagine though that any such rule could not contravene the law of the country. Does anybody know if Irish law would supercede Bohs policy?

---

Of course Irish law super-cedes any rules in Dalymount..... :o

Excluding someone on grounds that fall foul of existing equality legislation would be deemed illegal. Any other grounds wouldn't. How else do you think it's legal to exclude people from bars or night-clubs for wearing football shirts, jeans, the wrong shoes etc, or simply because you don't like the look of them.... ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dcfcsteve

Of course Irish law super-cedes any rules in Dalymount..... :o

Excluding someone on grounds that fall foul of existing equality legislation would be deemed illegal. Any other grounds wouldn't. How else do you think it's legal to exclude people from bars or night-clubs for wearing football shirts, jeans, the wrong shoes etc, or simply because you don't like the look of them.... ?

---

I didn't phrase my question well I suppose.

I didn't mean "Does Irish law supercede Bohs policy?". Of course national law supercedes any private policy.

I meant "Is there a specific law in this case which supercedes Bohs policy?"

And according to you and Schumi, Bohs could well be in the clear, as this wouldn't fall under the usual discrimination laws.

I still think the whole thing is pretty unfair though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greenforever

Do you really think the directors of Bohs would go to that much trouble if he was really that innocent?

---

Actually yes I would

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Block G Raptor

It turns out the guy in question is a former bar man in Dalymount and judging by the comments on thebohs.com is an upstanding supporter who's never caused trouble

This is incredibly worrying as I've heard of a few other dubious bannings (not least young Conor, a lad who's a few cans short of a sixpack and about as dangerous as a rubber knife) whilst at least 2 of the Derry 4 have been seen at games recently

---

We have banned a guy who we used to employ to serve the very people he is banned for associating with.

Only at Bohs.

Isn't Bohs a members club though? If all the members feel terrible about this, then surely it could be brought up at a meeting....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bohs til i die

We have banned a guy who we used to employ to serve the very people he is banned for associating with.

Only at Bohs.

---

And this is the same club that banned a member of 30+ years for having an argument with a steward who was throwing his weight around.

Pay back for years of vocal but reasoned criticism at AGMs perhaps? Democracy, Bohs style.......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by passerrby

let jebus get on with cutting of his brains p.s dont make a balls of it.

---

:rolleyes:

Anyway Bohs have the right to kick anyone out, but they're *******s if they do. My family run a pub and we could bar anyone we want and make it stick, say we didn't want Africans in the bar, we could make up some excuse about the way they dress and get away with it, doesn't mean we'd be right to do so does it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by passerrby

I cant believe the tripe on this thread why cant we all assume (in light of the fact that we dont know anything about this case )that bohs took this dicision for good reasons and not just because a guy happened to be on the same flight as a bunch of idiots.

---

Because if you read the very first post you'll see that Bohs said in court that they are not accusing him of anything criminal or illegal, just for associating with these lads.

Quote:

---

Alistair Rutherdale, counsel for Bohemian FC, told the court the club had never made,nor were they making, any allegations of criminality or hooliganism against Kelehan -- but it was its security policy to ban anyone who associated with known members or groups responsible for hooliganism.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superfrank

Because if you read the very first post you'll see that Bohs said in court that they are not accusing him of anything criminal or illegal, just for associating with these lads.

---

maybe because if they accused him they would then have to prove it and that is not always easy .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by passerrby

maybe because if they accused him they would then have to prove it and that is not always easy .

---

What?

Of course they'd have to prove it. If they have no proof that he's done anything else, then he can't accuse him of anything else.

Bohs have said they banned him because

Quote:

---

it was its security policy to ban anyone who associated with known members or groups responsible for hooliganism

---

They're accusing him of associating with hooligans because that's what he did and they must have evidence of it.

They are not accusing him of anything else because they don't have any evidence to suggest he has done anything else. And yet you seem to be certain that

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by passerby

bohs took this dicision for good reasons and not just because a guy happened to be on the same flight as a bunch of idiots

---

How are you so certain? Where's your evidence? Bohs have none but you must if you're making accusations like that.

Evidence that would stand up in court is fairly difficult to come by. You would need serious video evidence to prove that someone was involved in something criminal or illegal. It may be that they are banning him for something they believe he did, but are using the association with hooligans policy as their legal defence.

This Decision Would Be Laughed Out Of Court!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jebus

My family run a pub and we could bar anyone we want and make it stick, say we didn't want Africans in the bar, we could make up some excuse about the way they dress and get away with it, doesn't mean we'd be right to do so does it?

---

There's seems to be a lack of understanding of equality law throughout this thread.

If you tried to ban an entire ethnic or racial group (e.g. Africans) on grounds of the way they dress, for example, then you would fall foul of the law.

You would get away with refusing the odd person individually, but if it became a noticeable trend - and more importantly, if you linked refusal directly to ethnic clothing - then you should and hopefully would be challenged. And you would lose.

Devout Muslims tend not to go to places were alcohol is served - but if a lady in a veil tried to enter your pub and you refused her on clothing grounds, then you'd rightly be in a world of bother.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pateen

This Decision Would Be Laughed Out Of Court!

---

Read the original post :rolleyes:

meh, he associates with scum, ban away

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dcfcsteve

You would get away with refusing the odd person individually, but if it became a noticeable trend - and more importantly, if you linked refusal directly to ethnic clothing - then you should and hopefully would be challenged. And you would lose.

---

I know exactly what the law is, my example was in reference to people who seem to feel that the rights of private ownership usurp all rational thought and national laws. Surely saying we're not letting you in because we've seeing you talk to scumbags is just another form of discrimination that will be thrown out of court? Yet some on here are advocating it as the way Eircom League clubs should go to deal with a largely non-existant problem

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jebus

I know exactly what the law is, my example was in reference to people who seem to feel that the rights of private ownership usurp all rational thought and national laws. Surely saying we're not letting you in because we've seeing you talk to scumbags is just another form of discrimination that will be thrown out of court? Yet some on here are advocating it as the way Eircom League clubs should go to deal with a largely non-existant problem

---

As DCFCsteve said your example is irrelevant. You stated an example which would be a breach of the discrimination laws. Nowhere above has anyone stated that this Bohs fan being LEGALLY discriminated against, based on Irish legislation. Of course the morals of Bohs actions are a completely different question & this is what merits discussion.

[QUOTE=MyTown;941674][QUOTE=Da Real Rover;941404]
Class.This man is innocent, dont forget that, so please dont drag James Connolly into it. [QUOTE]

Wasn't it yourself who brought JC into it originally?

Ah yes DRR, I keep forgetting you're posting from the last bastion of true socialism in Europe where the road leading into town from Galway is called the Ray McSharry road :eek: and where the locals get to choose between Declan Bree, Sean McManus and Jimmy Devins. Out of that lot, I'd definitely be giving the innocent Bohs supporter my No. 1 if he was on the ticket.

[QUOTE=Da Real Rover;941404]He has committed as much thuggery as yourself.

Quote:

---

:rolleyes:That's what I love about you guys - you're so on top of the facts all the time.

---

What is your problem?
I never mentioned James Connolly or anything to do with James Connolly in this thread, so cut the bull****.

As for the comment on Sligo:rolleyes:
Dont make me laugh.
I never said Sligo was a bastian of Socialism, even though I fail to se what this has got to do with your idiotic and deeply flawed post on the Bohs fan.
Its really quite pathetic that on a thread on a Bohs fan you have to revert to attacks on Sligo, can you deal with the topic at hand or will you just embaress yourself more?

As for Declan Bree, great Socialist and great man, wrong man to single out, you could have easily picked out alot more of the right wing politicans in sligo than him. God knows theres a few to pick from. Declan Bree has done alot of good work, so please dont drag him into this debate, try to discredit him. I can give you links to such men from sligo such as John Lynch, Partridge etc, all great socialists from sligo, fought with the ICA, founders of the ITGWU here and friends of Connolly. Its not exactly a bastion, I am not delluding myself, but there is a good tradition.

Ok cause your so on top of your facts,
Now you better answer this
Where has this Bohs fan committed thuggery?