- This topic has 6 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated March 17, 2010 at 9:57 am by starlaugh.
-
AuthorPosts
-
January 11, 2007 at 12:24 pm #1040266
shame as it actually is a good venue inside…
but if management keep allowing violence to happen (and people insist on using entertainment venues as battlegrounds) thats what will happen to the venue – and many others besides
wonder what will become of the building? probably get turned into some yuppie restaurant, or converted into flats (I think its listed)
A SUFFOLK nightclub known in London for its violent reputation was permanently closed down last night in a groundbreaking move by councillors.
Zest nightclub in Princes Street, Ipswich – the scene of a murder, triple shooting and stabbing only last month – lost its licence yesterday after police said its management had failed to take steps to promote the prevention of crime.
A damning report, which followed a hearing of Ipswich Borough Council’s licensing and regulatory sub-committee, found the nightspot had:
nDeveloped such a reputation for violence that “criminal elements” would continue to be attracted to the premises – even if it changed its name and banned external promoters,
nBeen linked to a very large number of offences and incidents between April and December 2006, many involving varying degrees of violence,
nContributed or caused some of the offences through management failings,
nDeveloped such a reputation in the London area that it was now impossible to stop people from the city attending.
Police made an application to permanently close the nightclub during a meeting at Grafton House in Ipswich yesterday.
It came after a string of incidents in or around the popular nightspot, the latest being the murder of Jimoh Plunkett on December 9.
The 24-year-old, of South London, had been one of 800 partygoers who had visited Zest for a special garage music event when violence flared.
Six shots were fired, one of which struck Mr Plunkett, who was found lying outside the club with gunshot wounds at around 2.20am. He died hours later at Ipswich Hospital.
Three other men were also shot and one stabbed.
Following yesterday’s hearing, the licensing committee published a notice of determination, containing the reasons for its decision to close the nightclub.
It said during the evening of December 8 and 9, not everyone entering the premises was searched on entry with a metal detector. The discovery was made after police viewed CCTV footage and the committee concluded this had been a “breach” of assurances given to police.
It said only seven door supervisors had been on duty that evening, which was in breach of earlier agreement with police that there would be at least nine, and also found there was no accurate log kept of the numbers of door supervisors on the premises.
The club’s emergency exits were not given the security they needed because there were not enough supervisors to watch them, it added.
The club put forward a list of additional conditions it pledged to undertake in order to maintain its licence.
But the committee said it was not satisfied prevention of crime and disorder and public safety would be promoted.
Zest was contacted last night but nobody was available to comment.
Superintendent Alan Caton, of Suffolk police, said: “The murder within the Zest nightclub was a tragic and terrible incident. Police have had concerns regarding the club and feel it’s right and proper that an application for closure was made.
“We support the licensing sub-committee’s decision to revoke the licence and will await the outcome of any future appeal.
“We have had an ongoing operation into the events of the 8-9th December and would continue to ask anyone that was there to contact Suffolk police.”
The sub-committee said it was irresponsible at the current time to allow the premises to reopen when the full facts of what happened on this night were unknown, and revoked the licence.
However, it leaves open the possibility it could reapply again if circumstances change.
It is thought to be the first time in Suffolk that a council has permanently closed down a nightclub using the new licensing laws, which came into force in 2005.
January 11, 2007 at 4:58 pm #1097788Thats a bit of the shame for the local nightlife but I can undertand the point of view taken by the authorities – it is common up and down the country.
Once someone has been killed violently in a premises it is hard to forget that and to a certain extent the building may ‘have a bit of an atmosphere’ for a long time if nothing is done to dispel it:hopeless: :hopeless: :hopeless:
Wonder where the violent clubbers will go next? And nil points to the doorstaff for not being able to tell who the trouble makers were :you_crazy :you_crazy :you_crazy
January 11, 2007 at 5:45 pm #1097790There seems to be a trend of violence starting in this country. i only live in a small town but i have noticed a large increase of violence in the last few years. we now have cameras right through the town centre something people would have never dreamed of here. My brother even comented on it (he has moved away to uni and hasnt lived with us for a few years) he said every time he come back there seems to be 5x more scallys hanging around.
I know this is just one town and many places may just be as calm and violence free as they always have, but i have spoken to other people who live simalar towns who have also noticed and increase in these shify characters.
Its a shame really.January 11, 2007 at 8:35 pm #1097789This comes as no suprise to be honest, something was bound to happen like this after the shootings. I’ve never been in that place since it was Hollywoods :lol:… heard it had to much of a bad rep.
January 12, 2007 at 10:12 am #1097791Ruff Beat Provider wrote:There seems to be a trend of violence starting in this country. i only live in a small town but i have noticed a large increase of violence in the last few years. we now have cameras right through the town centre something people would have never dreamed of here. My brother even comented on it (he has moved away to uni and hasnt lived with us for a few years) he said every time he come back there seems to be 5x more scallys hanging around.
I know this is just one town and many places may just be as calm and violence free as they always have, but i have spoken to other people who live simalar towns who have also noticed and increase in these shify characters.
Its a shame really.Was it because that bloke got kicked to death the other month there?:hopeless: Or have i got me towns muddled up?
Its a shame as some of the music styles seem to promote violence and its a shame that a few people actually become violent! :you_crazy Even in the little village i live in there has been an increase in violence and it a small village! how does that happen :crazy:
Isn’t a night out about dancing meeting new people and generally having a good time?
Ah well i will never understand and hope i am never on the recieving end of this violence.
January 12, 2007 at 12:05 pm #1097787starlaugh wrote:Was it because that bloke got kicked to death the other month there?:hopeless: Or have i got me towns muddled up?nah, that was in Henley on Thames…
I used to live in Reading and me and my mates noticed how rough some of the surrounding villages were getting.
There’s a lot of anger and tension and a lack of positive things to get involved in (unless you have lots of money to spend) in many areas – and people are angry and insecure because of wider world problems such as the effects of globalisation (migration, outsourcing etc) making jobs harder to get and increasing competition worldwide.
I think social progress has gone backwards, although we weren’t all “hippies” in the 1990s there was less casual acceptance of violence, racism and sexism then than there is now, something which IMO needs to change….
the acceptance (albeit grudging) of licensed late night music venues is a very recent thing which only happened in the last 16 years and Middle England has never really been that tolerant of any form of “late night entertainment” which involves loud music and hedonistic behaviour.
If people can’t play nicely, the nanny state (which has lot of power, however much we don’t like it) will take away the playgrounds and toys; whilst the rest of society supports the states’ actions as its “making the streets safer”.
March 17, 2010 at 9:57 am #1097786Anonymous
very informative post
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.