Merseyrail "Draconian"

finnis

Can't believe some of the comments on here. People putting feet on seats really winds me up, but to get a criminal record for it? Get real. A criminal record would affect her in all sorts of ways, from job applications to working with children in her spare time (if she wished) to travel to foreign countries etc.

She should have got a fine of £50 or so. Doubt she would have done it again and would have learned her lesson. She was wrong to do it, but, in my opinion, the courts were absolutely right to give her a discharge. Common sense at last.

Steve_xx

validata wrote: »

As a now infrequent user of the Merseyrail service I can tell all of you that, as is now commonplace in the UK, law enforcement is centred on the soft underbelly of "crime" i.e. motorists. This has plainly extended to foot-resters.

There is a much larger problem on Merseyrail - drug and alcohol abuse, physical threats to passengers, and vandalism.

These acts are ignored as they are carried out by large gangs of anti-social youths.

I have not been put off by a foot-rester!

The other problems mentioned in your post are every bit as bad as feet on seats. These too need to be severely dealt with. One step at a time I guess.

People putting their feet on train seats is part of a larger problem, called antisocial behaviour and if taking people to court is the start of a clampdown on all such activities, then I for one am in favour of it.

I appreciate that not everyone will agree with my point of view. But nevertheless, it is my point of view. I'm not in favour of the softly, softly approach when things are clearly reaching an intolerable level.

Dylanwing

I appreciate that not everyone will agree with my point of view. But nevertheless, it is my point of view. I'm not in favour of the softly, softly approach when things are clearly reaching an intolerable level.

I actually agree with you, we do need a move towards zero tolerance. The point is that it needs to be targetted in the right area, and whilst feet on the seat is anti-social, it is not top priority in my book. And I think Validata sums up the whole scenario perfectly. Now, how about zero tolerance of shop assistants who chew gum? :mad:

From what I heard the reason it got in to the papers is that she was a reasonably attractive young lady and was prepared to be photographed showing rather a lot of bare leg and thigh.

Seems pretty reasonable to me! A bit of cleavage and she might even have been awarded costs!!!:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: