A significant legal development has unfolded in Perth, where a local football supporter has been acquitted of breaching the peace following an alleged altercation involving rival fans. This decision subsequently led to the discontinuation of proceedings against seven other individuals who were facing similar accusations stemming from a high-profile incident earlier this year. The case has drawn considerable local attention, highlighting community safety and the role of law enforcement during sporting events in the area.
The charges originated from a confrontation on January 2, a day marked by the Scottish Premiership fixture between St Johnstone and Edinburgh’s Hibernian. The incident, which purportedly took place on Long Causeway and Strathtay Road – thoroughfares in close proximity to McDiarmid Park, a prominent local landmark and home to the Saints – involved allegations of disorderly conduct. According to the original accusations, the group engaged in shouting, offensive language, threats of violence, and openly challenged opposing supporters to physical altercations. Each of the accused steadfastly denied these charges, leading to a trial that would shape the outcome for all involved. The Trial at Perth Sheriff Court
Ciaran Sinclair, a 23-year-old mechanic from the Perth area, was the first among the eight to stand trial at Perth Sheriff Court. The proceedings focused on a single charge of breach of the peace. Testimony from two police officers formed the core of the prosecution’s case. These officers recounted following a contingent of St Johnstone fans from the Welcome Inn public house on Rannoch Road as they made their way towards the stadium for the afternoon match. It was on Strathtay Road that this group reportedly encountered a substantially larger gathering of Hibernian supporters.
One police witness described how several of the local fans “stopped and put face coverings on,” proceeding to loudly “shout, swear and challenge the others to a fight.” This officer specifically identified Mr. Sinclair as being among this group, alongside the other seven individuals who were present in the public gallery awaiting their own hearings. A second police witness offered a crucial perspective, characterising the Hibernian supporters as the “main aggressors” in the unfolding situation, noting they actively advanced towards the St Johnstone contingent.
In his defense, Mr. Sinclair provided an account of the day, stating that his group was in a buoyant mood and “high spirits” prior to the encounter. He mentioned having consumed only a soft drink at the Welcome Inn before setting off. Upon reaching Strathtay Road, he explained, they heard aggressive shouting emanating from the direction of a nearby B&Q store, followed by the sight of the rival supporters, who were “shouting and threatening us.” He clarified that his decision to wear a balaclava was purely practical, made because “it was cold outside,” rather than for any malicious intent. Mr. Sinclair maintained that he was not involved in any shouting or threatening behaviour, despite being part of the larger group. He also noted that police officers drew their batons and instructed both groups to retreat, an order which his group complied with. Sheriff’s Verdict and Wider Implications
Sheriff Alison McKay, presiding over the trial at the venerable Perth Sheriff Court, delivered a nuanced assessment of the situation. She explicitly acknowledged the challenging nature of policing football matches in a busy urban setting, particularly when “tensions are high” between rival fan bases. Her remarks underscored the delicate balance that law enforcement must strike between maintaining public order and respecting individual freedoms. Addressing Mr. Sinclair, the Sheriff noted that while the act of donning a balaclava was considered, she firmly stated that “it is not an offence to wear a balaclava.” This clarification was pivotal, as it removed an element that might otherwise have been misinterpreted as inherently criminal. Crucially, Sheriff McKay found Mr. Sinclair’s testimony – that he was merely in good spirits, not seeking confrontation, and did not engage in aggressive behaviour – to be credible. Consequently, she pronounced him not guilty of the breach of the peace charge.
The ripple effect of this verdict was immediately felt by the remaining seven individuals awaiting trial. In a series of swift proceedings, their cases were individually called, and the prosecutor announced the desertion of charges *pro loco et tempore*. This means that while the current legal action is paused, the possibility of these charges being resurrected in the future remains a distinct, albeit uncertain, threat. Despite impassioned pleas from their legal representatives for a *simpliciter* desertion – which would have permanently closed the chapter on these accusations – Sheriff McKay upheld the Crown’s right to potentially pursue the matters again. This decision leaves Connor Reilly (32), Ryan Brown (26), Cameron Lorimer (23), Felix Neil (18), Euan Borland (24), Ross Laughlin (23), and Nathan Bartlett (31) in a state of indefinite legal limbo.
This significant legal turn of events highlights the intricate challenges faced by authorities in balancing fervent fan culture with the need for public safety during large-scale sporting fixtures in urban centres like Perth. While the immediate outcome offers a measure of relief to the acquitted individuals, the Crown’s decision to leave open the possibility of future prosecution for the remaining seven underscores the ongoing complexities inherent in such incidents. The community of Perth and Kinross, with its deep-seated passion for football and a strong sense of local identity, will no doubt continue to observe how such matters are managed, particularly as future events draw large crowds to popular venues like McDiarmid Park. This case reaffirms the diligent efforts of the local justice system to ensure fairness while addressing concerns over public order, a dynamic often amplified in the context of sporting rivalries.
The charges originated from a confrontation on January 2, a day marked by the Scottish Premiership fixture between St Johnstone and Edinburgh’s Hibernian. The incident, which purportedly took place on Long Causeway and Strathtay Road – thoroughfares in close proximity to McDiarmid Park, a prominent local landmark and home to the Saints – involved allegations of disorderly conduct. According to the original accusations, the group engaged in shouting, offensive language, threats of violence, and openly challenged opposing supporters to physical altercations. Each of the accused steadfastly denied these charges, leading to a trial that would shape the outcome for all involved. The Trial at Perth Sheriff Court
Ciaran Sinclair, a 23-year-old mechanic from the Perth area, was the first among the eight to stand trial at Perth Sheriff Court. The proceedings focused on a single charge of breach of the peace. Testimony from two police officers formed the core of the prosecution’s case. These officers recounted following a contingent of St Johnstone fans from the Welcome Inn public house on Rannoch Road as they made their way towards the stadium for the afternoon match. It was on Strathtay Road that this group reportedly encountered a substantially larger gathering of Hibernian supporters.
One police witness described how several of the local fans “stopped and put face coverings on,” proceeding to loudly “shout, swear and challenge the others to a fight.” This officer specifically identified Mr. Sinclair as being among this group, alongside the other seven individuals who were present in the public gallery awaiting their own hearings. A second police witness offered a crucial perspective, characterising the Hibernian supporters as the “main aggressors” in the unfolding situation, noting they actively advanced towards the St Johnstone contingent.
In his defense, Mr. Sinclair provided an account of the day, stating that his group was in a buoyant mood and “high spirits” prior to the encounter. He mentioned having consumed only a soft drink at the Welcome Inn before setting off. Upon reaching Strathtay Road, he explained, they heard aggressive shouting emanating from the direction of a nearby B&Q store, followed by the sight of the rival supporters, who were “shouting and threatening us.” He clarified that his decision to wear a balaclava was purely practical, made because “it was cold outside,” rather than for any malicious intent. Mr. Sinclair maintained that he was not involved in any shouting or threatening behaviour, despite being part of the larger group. He also noted that police officers drew their batons and instructed both groups to retreat, an order which his group complied with. Sheriff’s Verdict and Wider Implications
Sheriff Alison McKay, presiding over the trial at the venerable Perth Sheriff Court, delivered a nuanced assessment of the situation. She explicitly acknowledged the challenging nature of policing football matches in a busy urban setting, particularly when “tensions are high” between rival fan bases. Her remarks underscored the delicate balance that law enforcement must strike between maintaining public order and respecting individual freedoms. Addressing Mr. Sinclair, the Sheriff noted that while the act of donning a balaclava was considered, she firmly stated that “it is not an offence to wear a balaclava.” This clarification was pivotal, as it removed an element that might otherwise have been misinterpreted as inherently criminal. Crucially, Sheriff McKay found Mr. Sinclair’s testimony – that he was merely in good spirits, not seeking confrontation, and did not engage in aggressive behaviour – to be credible. Consequently, she pronounced him not guilty of the breach of the peace charge.
The ripple effect of this verdict was immediately felt by the remaining seven individuals awaiting trial. In a series of swift proceedings, their cases were individually called, and the prosecutor announced the desertion of charges *pro loco et tempore*. This means that while the current legal action is paused, the possibility of these charges being resurrected in the future remains a distinct, albeit uncertain, threat. Despite impassioned pleas from their legal representatives for a *simpliciter* desertion – which would have permanently closed the chapter on these accusations – Sheriff McKay upheld the Crown’s right to potentially pursue the matters again. This decision leaves Connor Reilly (32), Ryan Brown (26), Cameron Lorimer (23), Felix Neil (18), Euan Borland (24), Ross Laughlin (23), and Nathan Bartlett (31) in a state of indefinite legal limbo.
This significant legal turn of events highlights the intricate challenges faced by authorities in balancing fervent fan culture with the need for public safety during large-scale sporting fixtures in urban centres like Perth. While the immediate outcome offers a measure of relief to the acquitted individuals, the Crown’s decision to leave open the possibility of future prosecution for the remaining seven underscores the ongoing complexities inherent in such incidents. The community of Perth and Kinross, with its deep-seated passion for football and a strong sense of local identity, will no doubt continue to observe how such matters are managed, particularly as future events draw large crowds to popular venues like McDiarmid Park. This case reaffirms the diligent efforts of the local justice system to ensure fairness while addressing concerns over public order, a dynamic often amplified in the context of sporting rivalries.