BoxRec

bripez wrote:

Talkischeap wrote:Jamie Cox won appeal and has been aquitted of assault

This has been established as being incorrect.

Still guilty but jail sentence suspended for 18 months - does this mean that he cannot box for 18 months (t will be interesting to see how the board apply their rules on this one - they seem to be applied quite strictly when the boxer isn't a "name" with a powerful promoter).

Either way, reading the actual facts (number of calls made and evidence from the operator who took the emergency call etc.) he is clearly not a full shilling.


Moral question of the week : if you went to meet your daughters boyfriend for the first time and saw Cox and Joshua both sat there, who would you be hoping for ?

CharlesListon wrote:I'd prefer Fury. I'd know she'd get a nice sandwich.

bripez wrote:

Moral question of the week : if you went to meet your daughters boyfriend for the first time and saw Cox and Joshua both sat there, who would you be hoping for ?

Counter-puncher wrote:

bripez wrote:

Moral question of the week : if you went to meet your daughters boyfriend for the first time and saw Cox and Joshua both sat there, who would you be hoping for ?

Joshua, hes too busy posting pictures of his chicken salad lunches and sixpack on instagram to text anyone 800 times a day

bripez wrote:

Talkischeap wrote:Jamie Cox won appeal and has been aquitted of assault

This has been established as being incorrect.

Still guilty but jail sentence suspended for 18 months - does this mean that he cannot box for 18 months (t will be interesting to see how the board apply their rules on this one - they seem to be applied quite strictly when the boxer isn't a "name" with a powerful promoter).

Either way, reading the actual facts (number of calls made and evidence from the operator who took the emergency call etc.) he is clearly not a full shilling.


Moral question of the week : if you went to meet your daughters boyfriend for the first time and saw Cox and Joshua both sat there, who would you be hoping for ?

crusader wrote:"Cox, who won gold for England at the 2006 Melbourne Olympics"

Okay.......

Talkischeap wrote:http://m.westerndailypress.co.uk/Swindo ... story.html

He did not appeal his convictions for entering with violence, for breaking down the front door, criminal damage, for breaking down her bedroom door, and harassment

freddydoesdallas wrote:So as he has still been convicted of the other offences and has had the 26 week jail sentence suspended, after serving a month, does that mean he will be allowed back in the ring in another 22 weeks?

Talkischeap wrote:

maverick23 wrote:He won his appeal against his prison sentence. The guilty verdict still stands - he just won't serve any (additional) prison time.

I'd be surprised if the BBBOC let him fight in the next 6 months.

No Jamie was aquitted of assault & the compensation order was quashed also. The other three offences were suspended. The Daily mail got that wrong I've spoken them.The 600 texts a day is what the Russian girl said in the dock just an exaggeration the press decided to print it daft really.

ste1983 wrote:

freddydoesdallas wrote:So as he has still been convicted of the other offences and has had the 26 week jail sentence suspended, after serving a month, does that mean he will be allowed back in the ring in another 22 weeks?

Board are allowing Frankie Gavin to box whilst on a suspended sentence aren't they?

Talkischeap wrote:

Boxerbeetle wrote:Ok, so as I understand it from the article linked to earlier, Cox has been acquitted of common assault and has had his prison sentence suspended, but the convictions for "entering with violence, for breaking down the front door, criminal damage, for breaking down her bedroom door, and harassment" still stand - is that correct?

Yes they suspended the other charges Jamie only appealed against the assault charge.

Talkischeap wrote:

freddydoesdallas wrote:

Talkischeap wrote: Yes they suspended the other charges Jamie only appealed against the assault charge.

They haven't suspended the other charges. They remain as they were as he didn't appeal them.

His sentence is suspended only. He still remains guilty of the other
Incorrect I was in court everyday & for the appeal also PA press for Daily mail are doing a rectified updated report Wiltshire news and BBC Wiltshire also. I'll say it again Jamie was aquitted of assault the concurrent sentences of 20 weeks on the unlawful entry & harassment have been suspended for 18 months

fighting_irish wrote:The assault is the only charge he was cleared on all the rest are suspened and pending

MarkMcBurney wrote:

Talkischeap wrote:

freddydoesdallas wrote:

They haven't suspended the other charges. They remain as they were as he didn't appeal them.

His sentence is suspended only. He still remains guilty of the other
Incorrect I was in court everyday & for the appeal also PA press for Daily mail are doing a rectified updated report Wiltshire news and BBC Wiltshire also. I'll say it again Jamie was aquitted of assault the concurrent sentences of 20 weeks on the unlawful entry & harassment have been suspended for 18 months

I think you two are sort of on the same page.

What Freddy is trying to say is that, you say the concurrent sentences for unlawful entry and harassment have been suspended; this means by default he remains 'guilty' of those charges.

Good news about the assault though, will be interesting to see what the board say about when Jamie can box again.