|
Post by metalhead on Mar 2, 2016 18:28:22 GMT
Oh god i'm making a bet with myself as to how many posts into that thread it will be until you mention Jean Hatchett's name I've been reading her Twitter today. Same misandrist bollocks.
|
|
|
Post by Staffsoatcake on Mar 2, 2016 18:38:20 GMT
Woy says he will wait for him.
|
|
|
Post by Ayupshag on Mar 2, 2016 18:53:55 GMT
Apparently his sentence will be between 4-10 years. Hopefully 10 is closer to the mark. Shit thing is he will be kept in relative luxury away from people who want to dish out the punishment he really deserves Not sure what you are basing that on. My understanding would be that he will be treated in the same way as any other convicted inmate who either requests or the MOJ decide that for good order and discipline and or their own protection are segregated with others in similar circumstances. That does not mean extra luxury solitary confinement or anything of the like. So he'll be seg'd then cos he won't be safe in general population. Can you really see him spending 5 years in Armley seg? Not a chance. He will be in a cat c/d nick within a few months. Guaranteed
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Mar 2, 2016 21:54:41 GMT
Sunderland basically claiming they knew nothing They appear to be liars and should face sanctions from the FA, where is Haway now Sunderland a club with no morals, they should be docked the points they earned whilst this scum bag was playing last season this season whilst under suspicion of the charges he was facing, scummy club played the nonce to save their sorry arses apparently knowing the truth about his guilt.
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Mar 2, 2016 22:00:20 GMT
Sunderland basically claiming they knew nothing They appear to be liars and should face sanctions from the FA, where is Haway now Sunderland a club with no morals, they should be docked the points they earned whilst this scum bag was playing last season this season whilst under suspicion of the charges he was facing, scummy club played the nonce to save their sorry arses apparently knowing the truth about his guilt. The majority will have morals, its not his fault a few dodgy people at the club are involved.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 2, 2016 22:03:36 GMT
Innocent until proven guilty, so a sensible decision by Sunderland to wait for the verdict before releasing a statement.
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Mar 2, 2016 22:08:30 GMT
They appear to be liars and should face sanctions from the FA, where is Haway now Sunderland a club with no morals, they should be docked the points they earned whilst this scum bag was playing last season this season whilst under suspicion of the charges he was facing, scummy club played the nonce to save their sorry arses apparently knowing the truth about his guilt. The majority will have morals, its not his fault a few dodgy people at the club are involved. He defended the club at the outset of this thread saying they knew nothing, that AJ was lying about telling the club or it's representatives what he had done, it appears that was bullshit the FA should intervene in light of this evidence, Sunderland have handled this in a way that suited them and their PL survival last season, they have been found out now they need to take the consequences if the FA have the bollocks this judge has shown.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 3, 2016 6:02:09 GMT
Sentencing in 2 to 3 weeks. Judge says custodial sentence is 'Almost Inevitable'. Why bail him? Perhaps the Judge is hoping Johnson may save the taxpayer some money My thoughts exactly. Wonder how much dough this whole thing as cost him, as lets face it, he will never play again, and is facing financial ruin, prob not been playing long enough to have squillions stashed away, and his ex will be wanting a share of anything that is left...Suicide watch for sure...
|
|
|
Post by haway on Mar 3, 2016 7:06:09 GMT
Sunderland basically claiming they knew nothing They appear to be liars and should face sanctions from the FA, where is Haway now Sunderland a club with no morals, they should be docked the points they earned whilst this scum bag was playing last season this season whilst under suspicion of the charges he was facing, scummy club played the nonce to save their sorry arses apparently knowing the truth about his guilt. I'm right here.
|
|
|
Post by haway on Mar 3, 2016 7:09:00 GMT
It's his word against ours and AJ has been lying throughout this case (he refutes that no sexual contact took place but has been found guilty of it). We still need answers from one way or another - maybe his dad who was apparently there can shed some light as so far it's just his word against ours and no one can be 100% certain either way.
|
|
|
Post by haway on Mar 3, 2016 7:11:11 GMT
The majority will have morals, its not his fault a few dodgy people at the club are involved. He defended the club at the outset of this thread saying they knew nothing, that AJ was lying about telling the club or it's representatives what he had done, it appears that was bullshit the FA should intervene in light of this evidence, Sunderland have handled this in a way that suited them and their PL survival last season, they have been found out now they need to take the consequences if the FA have the bollocks this judge has shown. What evidence? Him making a comment in court where a jury has effectively found him to be lying previously? But it's impossible to suspect he's lying when he's trying to drag the club's name down? You're like a fucking parrot you repeating the same shit over and over again, just drop it man
|
|
|
Post by crownmeking on Mar 3, 2016 7:17:54 GMT
He defended the club at the outset of this thread saying they knew nothing, that AJ was lying about telling the club or it's representatives what he had done, it appears that was bullshit the FA should intervene in light of this evidence, Sunderland have handled this in a way that suited them and their PL survival last season, they have been found out now they need to take the consequences if the FA have the bollocks this judge has shown. What evidence? Him making a comment in court where a jury has effectively found him to be lying previously? But it's impossible to suspect he's lying when he's trying to drag the club's name down? You're like a fucking parrot you repeating the same shit over and over again, just drop it man Why can't you just accept the reality? Your club has behaved very badly. they knew what was going on with Johnson and chose to look the other way... Vile!! How you can try and defend that is beyond me.
|
|
|
Post by thebet365 on Mar 3, 2016 7:39:56 GMT
What evidence? Him making a comment in court where a jury has effectively found him to be lying previously? But it's impossible to suspect he's lying when he's trying to drag the club's name down? You're like a fucking parrot you repeating the same shit over and over again, just drop it man Why can't you just accept the reality? Your club has behaved very badly. they knew what was going on with Johnson and chose to look the other way... Vile!! How you can try and defend that is beyond me. Have you read the statement they released yesterday? They say he said all along that he was innocent. Now all of a sudden because of 1 comment made by someone desperately trying to save his own skin you believe him over the club?
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Mar 3, 2016 8:13:39 GMT
Why can't you just accept the reality? Your club has behaved very badly. they knew what was going on with Johnson and chose to look the other way... Vile!! How you can try and defend that is beyond me. Have you read the statement they released yesterday? They say he said all along that he was innocent. Now all of a sudden because of 1 comment made by someone desperately trying to save his own skin you believe him over the club? Possibly because they played him desperately trying to save their own skin, do you really believe either AJ or the club are innocent of lying ?
|
|
|
Post by crownmeking on Mar 3, 2016 8:21:19 GMT
Why can't you just accept the reality? Your club has behaved very badly. they knew what was going on with Johnson and chose to look the other way... Vile!! How you can try and defend that is beyond me. Have you read the statement they released yesterday? They say he said all along that he was innocent. Now all of a sudden because of 1 comment made by someone desperately trying to save his own skin you believe him over the club? So at best they are fucking negligent!! Because he 'said' he was innocent, they believed him? Bull shit! He should of been suspended until the outcome of the court case - The club chose to allow him to carry on, because it suited them, which is disgusting. Do you really believe Sunderland football club didn't do any investigation or due diligence after one of their players was accused of a child sex crime?
|
|
|
Post by haway on Mar 3, 2016 8:43:28 GMT
What evidence? Him making a comment in court where a jury has effectively found him to be lying previously? But it's impossible to suspect he's lying when he's trying to drag the club's name down? You're like a fucking parrot you repeating the same shit over and over again, just drop it man Why can't you just accept the reality? Â Your club has behaved very badly. they knew what was going on with Johnson and chose to look the other way... Vile!! How you can try and defend that is beyond me. Chose to look the other way? You're just ignoring the club statement completely. Either one of two things have happened; 1) AJ (a man who was found by the jury to be lying regarding this trial) has told another lie in a desperate attempt to lower his sentencing. 2) The club knew what was going on and have lied in their statement (which makes me feel sorry for the Sunderland fans if anything). If the 2nd scenario is true, then key members of the board need removing (Byrne in particular). However I know for a fact he told key members of the squad he's innocent - it says a lot that not one of our players came to give evidence despite being asked to - it says to me that he's a liar. Maybe he told the squad players & the board a different thing, I'm not sure. To claim it's 100% the club's fault or not is premature. I'd say I'm 80-20 in favour of the club, some will think differently but that can't be helped. Another point - sanctions won't be brought against the club, so just drop it.
|
|
|
Post by mumf on Mar 3, 2016 9:21:20 GMT
I suppose when you look at the situation in hindsight it's a sad sorry state of affairs that Sunderland have staggered through . The clubs misguided and naive stance whether intentional or not has led to even more allegations and bad publicity . The fact that any allegations at all were made against Johnson in the first place should have rung alarm bells , but no ....his side of the story was believed .
Some of the comments in relation to the sad sorry affair equally expose the idiotic naive nature of Joe Public that doesn't surprise me in the slightest .
As one barrister once told me , " 95 percent of people I represent are as guilty as hell ...... I just get very well paid to massage the facts ".
The FA should investigate this case and formulate guide lines and instructions in relation to new cases which Will inevitably occur in the future .
|
|
|
Post by thebet365 on Mar 3, 2016 9:30:29 GMT
Have you read the statement they released yesterday? They say he said all along that he was innocent. Now all of a sudden because of 1 comment made by someone desperately trying to save his own skin you believe him over the club? Possibly because they played him desperately trying to save their own skin, do you really believe either AJ or the club are innocent of lying ? AJ has been proven in a court of law to be lying. Whilst I wouldn't be surprised that Sunderland would have been desperate to play AJ because of the threat of relegation, I don't understand why the PFA would have put their neck on the line by backing AJ's innocence unless he was telling everyone he was.
|
|
|
Post by thebet365 on Mar 3, 2016 9:37:25 GMT
Have you read the statement they released yesterday? They say he said all along that he was innocent. Now all of a sudden because of 1 comment made by someone desperately trying to save his own skin you believe him over the club? So at best they are fucking negligent!! Because he 'said' he was innocent, they believed him? Bull shit! He should of been suspended until the outcome of the court case - The club chose to allow him to carry on, because it suited them, which is disgusting. Do you really believe Sunderland football club didn't do any investigation or due diligence after one of their players was accused of a child sex crime? And what if he hadn't of done this, but the club had got relegated after suspending 1 of there best players for nothing ? They did suspend him, then after doing whatever checks and meetings with the PFA, legal teams etc it was lifted, probably because he was pleading innocence.
|
|
|
Post by crownmeking on Mar 3, 2016 11:24:38 GMT
So at best they are fucking negligent!! Because he 'said' he was innocent, they believed him? Bull shit! He should of been suspended until the outcome of the court case - The club chose to allow him to carry on, because it suited them, which is disgusting. Do you really believe Sunderland football club didn't do any investigation or due diligence after one of their players was accused of a child sex crime? And what if he hadn't of done this, but the club had got relegated after suspending 1 of there best players for nothing ? They did suspend him, then after doing whatever checks and meetings with the PFA, legal teams etc it was lifted, probably because he was pleading innocence. Okay, let me explain this to you one more time... As soon as Johnson was arrested and charged, Sunderland should of suspended him on full pay until the outcome of the case. Allowing him to continue working in a position of trust is negligent and wrong on every level. Regardless of what he told the club about his innocence or guilt, they should of suspended him on full pay. You simply don't take chances with those kinds of allegations. If a teacher was charged with a sex offense, guess what, suspended until the outcome of the court case, same as any other job that brings you into contact with children or puts you in a position of responsibility. Sunderland allowed Johnson to carry on playing to suit their own situation, which they clearly put before anything else. The club could never have know if he was innocent or guilty, so they should of suspended him until the situation was resolved one way or the other.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 3, 2016 12:20:37 GMT
If sunderland did know anything about this and lied, then they should be dissolved as a club. If i were a sunderland fan, i would turn my back on the club if sunderland football club had lied. Some things a clubs reputation can't shake off and this would be one.
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Mar 3, 2016 13:31:14 GMT
The pfa who released a statement last April and provided updated on their website are now surprisingly quiet
|
|
|
Post by mickmillslovechild on Mar 3, 2016 14:57:24 GMT
I suppose when you look at the situation in hindsight it's a sad sorry state of affairs that Sunderland have staggered through . The clubs misguided and naive stance whether intentional or not has led to even more allegations and bad publicity . The fact that any allegations at all were made against Johnson in the first place should have rung alarm bells , but no ....his side of the story was believed . Some of the comments in relation to the sad sorry affair equally expose the idiotic naive nature of Joe Public that doesn't surprise me in the slightest . As one barrister once told me , " 95 percent of people I represent are as guilty as hell ...... I just get very well paid to massage the facts ". The FA should investigate this case and formulate guide lines and instructions in relation to new cases which Will inevitably occur in the future . spot on! whether Sunderland ARE telling the truth in their statement or not, a full investigation simply has to take place to establish the facts and (as riccochet says) to ensure there are things put in place to ensure nothing like this happens again. there is no way anyone can take any association seriously if they are more than willing to lay down ground rules regarding the finances of the club but aren't willing to impose rules surrounding the safeguarding of their fans. Sunderland's statement said they were given some documents but obviously dispute the idea they were given all of them...now, considering the fact that they WERE aware of what the charges were (and those charges involving a 15 year old girl) even if they weren't party to all the docs and Johnson promised then he was innocent it is disgraceful they just chose to basically ignore the matter on that premise. if nothing else they should have a duty of care towards the fans that visit their ground and offer their support and a moral obligation to ensure that people, even if only under suspicion, do not receive 60k a week while they stand around doing nothing.
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Mar 3, 2016 20:33:45 GMT
The PFA are "extremely disappointed" to see the damage that had been caused by one of its members.
Bless
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Mar 3, 2016 21:22:40 GMT
The PFA are "extremely disappointed" to see the damage that had been caused by one of its members. Bless I bet they are.
|
|
|
Post by stokefc on Mar 3, 2016 22:20:21 GMT
they should of sacked him when they got the report off the police last year and ignored the PFA then took a chance in the unfair dismissal claims court if he was found not guilty,they knew he was guilty tho.
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Mar 3, 2016 23:08:42 GMT
they should of sacked him when they got the report off the police last year and ignored the PFA then took a chance in the unfair dismissal claims court if he was found not guilty,they knew he was guilty tho. It is looking as if they knew his guilt from the news tonight, looking like more investigations into the conduct of the club on the cards, it is also looking that they played this nonce to save their sorry arses hopefully they will be punished retrospectively, scummy club time to face the music ! we will see.
|
|
|
Post by draytonstokie on Mar 4, 2016 9:27:27 GMT
Not sure what you are basing that on. My understanding would be that he will be treated in the same way as any other convicted inmate who either requests or the MOJ decide that for good order and discipline and or their own protection are segregated with others in similar circumstances. That does not mean extra luxury solitary confinement or anything of the like. So he'll be seg'd then cos he won't be safe in general population. Can you really see him spending 5 years in Armley seg? Not a chance. He will be in a cat c/d nick within a few months. Guaranteed No of course he won't spend 5 years in Armley or any other local Prison because thats not the way it works. He will when sentenced go to a local prison, where he will go through all the same procedures that every other convicted prisoner goes through. this will eventually lead to him being given a ' classification' with other considerations other than the offence being taken into consideration. and based on that classification he will be allocated to a Prison within that category Take Rolf Harris as an example according to the press currently residing at her Majesty's dwelling in Stafford requesting to be transferred to a Prison more local to his family. Will Johnson go to a cat D prison almost certainly at some point in his sentence. The point I am making is that he will not be treated any differently by the MOJ systems than you or I would be.
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on Mar 4, 2016 10:06:41 GMT
I think it's important to clear up the black, white, and grey areas on this, because a lot of people are saying Sunderland should have sacked him immediately. There are only so many permutations, but really, when looked at, these are the situations and how Sunderland should have dealt with them.
If Johnson told Sunderland he was innocent and was going to deny all charges, they were right not to sack him.
However If Sunderland knew about the messages (which some people are claiming they did) then they should have sacked him immediately on the spot. If Sunderland knew about the kiss (which some people are claiming they did) then they should have sacked him immediately on the spot. If Sunderland knew about the meeting in the car (which some people are claiming they did) then they should have sacked him immediately on the spot.
The reality is, someone is telling porkies here. The police are saying that the case was outlined to Sunderland FC, but the case against Johnson is not necessarily the evidence. Evidence is evidence, and if Sunderland were not provided any, you can understand them sticking with their man. The CPS are notorious for fucking up high profile cases, especially those involving crimes of a sexual nature.
Now, if Sunderland were shown those text messages, which there's certainly a rumour going around that they were, then they've fucked this right up. Those messages were explicit and demonstrated Johnson's intent to groom and sexually assault this young girl.
I think Sunderland are in for a very rough ride over the next few months and even years. If it eventually comes out that officials at the club were aware of the text messages etc, then you can see boycotts from fans and sponsors alike.
Right now, I am clinging on to the hope that Sunderland did the right thing. The evidence was not presented, therefore they rightly believed their man. You cannot just suspend someone on the accusation alone. Innocent until proven guilty is paramount to our justice system (which is already falling apart from outside influence). Johnson was innocent until the day he pleaded guilty. The real issue is, how aware were Sunderland FC of Johnson's actions?
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Mar 4, 2016 10:10:48 GMT
So he'll be seg'd then cos he won't be safe in general population. Can you really see him spending 5 years in Armley seg? Not a chance. He will be in a cat c/d nick within a few months. Guaranteed No of course he won't spend 5 years in Armley or any other local Prison because thats not the way it works. He will when sentenced go to a local prison, where he will go through all the same procedures that every other convicted prisoner goes through. this will eventually lead to him being given a ' classification' with other considerations other than the offence being taken into consideration. and based on that classification he will be allocated to a Prison within that category Take Rolf Harris as an example according to the press currently residing at her Majesty's dwelling in Stafford requesting to be transferred to a Prison more local to his family. Will Johnson go to a cat D prison almost certainly at some point in his sentence. The point I am making is that he will not be treated any differently by the MOJ systems than you or I would be. thats very true and if you want documented proof read Jeffrey Archers prison diaries. Harrowing at times but a useful insight to life inside
|
|