14 Comments

• Jennie 24th Sep '13 - 10:07am

  It’s the dog’s behaviour that interests me. It doesn’t attack Dale, it attacks it’s own owner. That does not speak to me of a happy doggie.

• Stephen Glenn 24th Sep '13 - 10:10am

  I’m guessing Iain was only attacking because of the incorrect apostrophe, he is an editor after all, I’m guessing it was the poor grammar what led him to such rage.

• Graham Martin-Royle 24th Sep '13 - 10:48am

  The video doesn’t show the beginning of the assault but I would be interested to know what went on before this happened. Was the protester doing something illegal? If not, then surely this counts as assault and Mr Dale has committed an illegal act.

• Steve 24th Sep '13 - 11:31am

  It is a clear-cut case of assault against a peaceful man going about his lawful business. I fully expect the police to do nothing.

• g 24th Sep '13 - 11:57am

  Jolly japes, isn’t it?

  Not an unprovoked assault at all.

  At the very least if you’re going to run videos of people being assaulted you could make clear you do not condone illegal acts of violence and condemn the parties involved.

• Martin Lowe 24th Sep '13 - 1:17pm

  That incorrect apostrophe on “No Nuke’s” would make me a bit scrappy too.

  And it is strange why the dog went for its owner – unless of course the demonstrator had also appropriated a random dog for his own message in the same way he appropriates the background of TV interviews.

• Steve 24th Sep '13 - 1:25pm

  “he appropriates the background of TV interview”

  He was in a public place. There is no such thing as the background of a TV interview. Are you really a liberal?

  “would make me a bit scrappy too.”

  So, you commit unprovoked acts of violence against old men as well then?

  “And it is strange why the dog went for its owner ”

  It’s not strange at all. The dog was attached to the owner whilst he was being assaulted, but it had no cognition of the fact that he was being assaulted (a bit like you) but only felt his owner pull violently at its lead as a result of Dale’s assault.

• Liberal Neil 24th Sep '13 - 1:35pm

  Graham is spot on. On the face of it this is an assault. Iain Dale’s own description of what happens back that up. Stuart is entitled to stand on Brighton seafront holding a sign just as much as Daybreak are to film an interview there. Iain Dale does not have the right to assault him for doing so. Iain Dale does have the right to book a private room if he wants interviews to be conducted without such distractions.

• Liberal Neil 24th Sep '13 - 1:41pm

  @Martin Lowe – how can someone ‘appropriate’ the background to a TV interview being conducted in a public place? TV companies don’t take ownership of the space behind an interview when they decide to turn their cameras on.

• Peter Watson 24th Sep '13 - 2:26pm

  To be fair to the dog, I don’t think it is attacking anyone – it is attached to its owner’s waist by a lead. Perhaps animal cruelty is another criminal charge Dale should face?

• snagglepus 24th Sep '13 - 10:58pm

  Iain Dale is the new Godfrey Bloom. Innit? 😉

• Chris 25th Sep '13 - 12:32am

  Oh come off it! Of course an Important Person like Iain Dale has the right to manhandle a working-class nobody out of shot.

• nuclear cockroach 25th Sep '13 - 2:24am

  Assault, that’s the beginning and end of it. If the Sussex Police and the DPP’s office don’t prosecute, then it says something bad about our legal system.

  Mind you, I can’t imagine it will do Dale’s business much good, anyway, when 38 Degrees (or whoever) decides to pursue him with a million emails a week and a thousand placarded protestors outside his office for months on end.

  Clearly a nasty piece of work, who will thoroughly deserve everything unpleasant coming his way.

• Martin Caffrey 25th Sep '13 - 2:38pm

  Stuart Holmes is a harmless man. Why is Mr Dale boasting about this? He should be charged with assault.