This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/int/news/-/news/uk-wales-south-east-wales-13604582

The article has changed 4 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 2 Version 3
Jamie Roberts and Jonathan Davies criticised by judge Jamie Roberts and Jonathan Davies criticised by judge
(40 minutes later)
A judge has criticised two Wales rugby stars after they did not turn up at court to give evidence against a man accused of assaulting them. Wales rugby stars Jamie Roberts and Jonathan Davies have been criticised by a judge for missing a case against a man accused of assaulting them.
Jamie Roberts and Jonathan Davies were involved in "important training," Cardiff Magistrates Court heard. But after the court hearing police said the players had co-operated and were not formally told they had to be there.
But District Judge John Charles said that wrongly gave the imporession that giving evidence was optional. Earlier, District Judge John Charles told Cardiff Magistrates Court their absence gave the wrong impression that giving evidence was optional.
Daniel Richards, 20, of Cyncoed, Cardiff, was formally cleared of actual bodily harm and common assault. Daniel Richards was formally cleared of actual bodily harm and common assault.
The Welsh Rugby Union also claimed after the hearing that South Wales Police had told them that "their presence was not required".
A WRU spokesman went on: "Both players fully co-operated with the police investigation and appreciate the importance of attending court but neither was summonsed to give evidence.
"Both players supplied witness statements to South Wales Police concerning the incident which was under investigation.
"Both are extremely grateful for the efforts of South Wales Police in investigating this incident."
A spokeswoman for South Wales Police said later: "The two players have fully co-operated with the inquiry and were not formally told that their presence would be required in court."
British Lion and Cardiff Blues centre, Roberts, 24, was on a night out in Cardiff in February this year with fellow Wales player Davies when the pair were allegedly attacked.British Lion and Cardiff Blues centre, Roberts, 24, was on a night out in Cardiff in February this year with fellow Wales player Davies when the pair were allegedly attacked.
Roberts was left with a cut lip following the incident in Greyfriars Road.Roberts was left with a cut lip following the incident in Greyfriars Road.
Davies is in the Wales squad to face the Barbarians at the Millennium Stadium in Cardiff on Saturday. Roberts is being rested.Davies is in the Wales squad to face the Barbarians at the Millennium Stadium in Cardiff on Saturday. Roberts is being rested.
'Extremely unsatisfactory''Extremely unsatisfactory'
Anne Mead, prosecuting, said: "The people concerned are international rugby players and are involved in what's deemed to be important training for their World Cup participation. Anne Mead, prosecuting, told the court: "The people concerned are international rugby players and are involved in what's deemed to be important training for their World Cup participation.
"Consideration was given to the possibility of issuing summons to secure their attendance but this was not considered appropriate.""Consideration was given to the possibility of issuing summons to secure their attendance but this was not considered appropriate."
The court was told the Crown Prosecution Service case against Mr Richards could not go ahead without the two witnesses. The court was told the Crown Prosecution Service case against Mr Richards, 20, of Cyncoed, Cardiff, could not go ahead without the two witnesses.
Judge Charles asked: "What are these training requirements that take precedent over their public duty to give evidence?"Judge Charles asked: "What are these training requirements that take precedent over their public duty to give evidence?"
He said: "This is extremely unsatisfactory and it gives the wrong impression for the public at large.He said: "This is extremely unsatisfactory and it gives the wrong impression for the public at large.
"It is extremely inconvenient for the two witnesses not to attend court.""It is extremely inconvenient for the two witnesses not to attend court."
Angelo Gooden, defending, said: "Their reluctance, not inability to attend court is unacceptable.Angelo Gooden, defending, said: "Their reluctance, not inability to attend court is unacceptable.
"Their reason not to attend because they are too busy at their place of work, albeit international rugby, is not good enough.""Their reason not to attend because they are too busy at their place of work, albeit international rugby, is not good enough."