Probably explains why he wasn't on the bench at the weekend, and I would guess rules him out of the Peterborough game About bloody time the court get on with it though! 18 Frigging months http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/9650494.Saints_striker_due_in_court_today/
Saints gave him a new contract, but may have had a proviso that he is available to play and not banged up.
His lawyer kept delaying and changing courts. Tbh it should take 4mins, Judge: Mr Barnard were you being a big head mug and try to chat up other guys girlfriends. Barnard: Ye lord. Judge: Did a guy tell you to pack it in chatting his gf up. Barnard: Ye me lor Judge: Did you then go ****ing mental and bottle the same guy, hurting your hand in doing so?. Barnard: Yes me lord. Judge: Did your cage fighter mate then join in. When the guys mates ried to help him. Barnard: Ye me lord Lord: Are you a complete twat for your actions. Barnard: Yes me lord Lord: I charge you with being a complete mug, you will spend one week in stock and chains. The public will then throw rotten veg at you. Do you understand? Barnard: Ye me lord. Court close
I don't like speculating but I think it is fair to assume that the new contract would have taken account of this. I can't imagine Nicola sitting there and pretending it did not exist. Anyway unlike others I have no idea what happened or what the judge will hear, so don't know what the outcome is likely to be.
well, I asked the man about the Barnard case. He said that he was the last person they would have expected this of and stand by him. He is a very nice man... I then asked if the club would stand by him if found giulty, and as father of a 11 year old, would the club take a moral approach. I go "a look".
Personally, I think we should stand by Barnard, but make it clear the club does not condone his behaviour
If he gets found guilty, he will be gone simply as. All I do hope is the truth is found out, what ever that may be. If he bottled a guy for no reason then he deserves to go down. I just dont want him getting of because he's a 'footballer'. I want him to get off if he was some how provoked/ protecting himself.
I think the refusal to answer your second question is telling. I just think he's unlikely to be in our plans in future and the club is a business like any other, they will look at what's in the best interests of the club, and although it might seem disloyal, I think he will be shown the door if found guilty. I don't feel too sorry for him though, he's earned more than enough in his career so far to look after a kid, and he could probably get another club on a free transfer without too much difficulty.
http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/9652737.Saints_star__glassed_boxer_in_nightclub_/r/?ref=rss Update, although not too much info regarding the outcome just yet
Not quite sure why so many posters above are quick to judge him, without knowing all the facts. That's what the courts are for, and I'm sure they'll do their job. Til then, let's just wish him a fair hearing. And let's not forget, he's a Saint, whatever he has or hasn't done.
Surely you should be adding 'allegedly' into each of Mr Barnard's responses? You can always change it back later, should he be found guilty (which I hope he won't)
Just looked at the article, not saying Lee's innocent but that guy is the doorman from Junk or at least was and he's a arsehole, I've witnessed some shocking stuff from him when he's supposed to be working and used to remember him and his mates walking round white house acting all macho and intimidating people.
