|
Post by turtlefox on Feb 10, 2016 19:34:05 GMT
If he's stupid enough to think that nothing would come of this then maybe 15yr olds are where his head is at. We all at some point have fancied in some way someone younger than ourselves but that's not the point. As a man in his thirties, I would find it difficult to text someone who was 19, let alone 15, in a sexual way, unless I had had the come on and even then I would be pretty unsure about what I was doing was right. He knew how old she was and even if the age of consent in this country was 14, you wouldn't pursue it because kids still think like children and his fame would have been manipulitive for a young girl of that age. Give him 5yrs but don't send him to prison. He's not a danger to the public in that way. Send him back to school (boys school of course)for an education on adulthood. That's where he needs to go.
|
|
|
Post by PotterLog on Feb 10, 2016 19:44:18 GMT
Yeah RAF's line about being all restrained and not judging "until we know the facts" was rather amusing, given his initial rush to introduce imaginary mitigating factors partially absolving Johnson - without knowing the facts. They weren't imaginary though, they are facts from other such cases that could be taken into account, and I wasn't trying to absolve anything of the sort. That is just your halfwitted misunderstanding and given your fuckwitted track record its not fucking surprising. H Just to recap what happened here.. Your very first post in relation to Adam Johnson admitting he had groomed a 15-year-old girl (i.e. built an emotional connection with a child to gain their trust for the purposes of sexual abuse or exploitation), was to talk about unrelated potential mitigating factors (apparently from "other cases") relating to girls pretending to be older than they are, and "crying rape", and to state that you "don't think Johnson is a peado or a nonce". You then admitted that you made that comment without knowing the "ins and outs" of the grooming charge. You then said that you wouldn't condemn Johnson until you'd "seen the facts" - but you didn't hesitate to seemingly "defend" Johnson as "not a peado or a nonce" without having seen those facts. That's what happened - just to avoid any misunderstanding, halfwitted or otherwise. I stick by my assertion that it was amusing.
|
|
|
Post by Scrotnig on Feb 10, 2016 19:49:42 GMT
View AttachmentView AttachmentJust been in the Sunderland fanzine to just see what they are all saying like, to see if they are in the same mindset as the majority of us and this is what I found, I'm quite shocked to be honest, seems like a proper kop out to me and makes me feel very uneasy, are some of them actually thinking of defending him??? They are trying to avoid sub-judice since the trial is still to start. I'm surprised it's being allowed here, site owners can get in a right row.
|
|
|
Post by Kilo on Feb 10, 2016 19:51:31 GMT
Now he has admitted his guilt and that he's been guilty of the offence since December 2014, it's only fair and right that any goals that Sunderland have scored since that date by him or any of his assists, should be struck from the records from that date and points therefore adjusted.
My views are in no way affected by the fact I'd quite like Sunderland to be one of the clubs relegated this season. ;-)
|
|
|
Post by Jamo on the wing on Feb 10, 2016 19:54:50 GMT
You are right there mate ,What surprised me most was that there fans sticking with him. i don't think they did anything wrong in playing him. we have a system over there that gives us all the freedom of being innocent until proven guilty...simply being arrested for something shouldn't mean someone has to have their career destroyed. now he's plead guilty it's 100% the right time to do it (and if i was Sunderland i'd be seeking legal advice if they kept him on based on his word that he was innocent) however, to get rid of him months back before anything had been proven would have been totally unjust. Don't agree, Mick. They suspended him at first and that's how it should have stayed in my opinion. Let's not kid ourselves, they played him because they were desperate to stay in the league.
|
|
|
Post by Pretty Little Boother on Feb 10, 2016 19:55:35 GMT
Adam Johnson's having a party, bring your playdoh and your barbie!
|
|
|
Post by turtlefox on Feb 10, 2016 19:58:54 GMT
Now he has admitted his guilt and that he's been guilty of the offence since December 2014, it's only fair and right that any goals that Sunderland have scored since that date by him or any of his assists, should be struck from the records from that date and points therefore adjusted. My views are in no way affected by the fact I'd quite like Sunderland to be one of the clubs relegated this season. ;-) Good job because that would be nonce-sense
|
|
|
Post by dhes2113 on Feb 10, 2016 20:09:08 GMT
I have to deal with safeguarding regularly as part of my job. In my experience if the police have charged a person with grooming then they have a water tight case, and are confident of gaining a conviction.
If any person would wish to continue to support a person guilty of this type of offence then they should spend some time in the company of the victims, for it is truly heartbreaking.
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Feb 10, 2016 20:13:54 GMT
Why would they ?, it appears that this info. is already out in the public domain, plenty of reports of the on goings on the internet. I mean names of people involved etc. (which haven't been released). Fair comment if they have been posting names that is way out of order.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 10, 2016 20:25:04 GMT
CAREER OVER BY THE SOUNDS OF IT
|
|
|
Post by boothenboy75 on Feb 10, 2016 20:26:48 GMT
in which case you need to look at the charges read out in court then mate. this is NOT, i repeat NOT a case of bumping into a girl who looked older. he has plead guilty to charge that SPECIFIED that he KNEW she was under the age of 16. in my opinion that one line RAF has used "have to ask for ID...give them an alcohol breath test to make sure they don't cry rape" is 1 where i see what he's saying in the grand scheme of things but in this particular matter it's fucking disgusting. Johnson has ADMITTED HIMSELF that he KNEW she was under 16 and did it anyway. i also don't see why RAF is happy to not castigate Johnson until he knows all the fact yet is happy to try to defend him in that way without knowing all the facts. for anyone to try to even slightly defend him (when he himself had admitted he knew what he did was against the law) is absolutely fucking abhorrent!!!!! I wasn't defending anyone Mick and I take absolute fucking exception to you even suggesting as much. Unlike some of the knee jerk kangaroo court cunters on here I was more than happy to wait for absolute fact before calling him a peado or nonce and condemning him to a baseball batting. This kind of case is so prevelant in this day an age it's never fucking cut and dry. If what you have quoted is actually fact from the court I hope the cunt gets his bollocks cut off. Please don't ever accuse me of something like that again. H Someone pleading guilty to grooming a child seems pretty cut and dry to me, and I have no problem in calling him a nonce. Theres no need for any kangaroo court either because he's actually admitted it in a crown court. Finally, I've no idea if 27 year olds grooming minors is prevelant in this day and age, but it must be pretty much cut and dry, hence the guilty plea?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 10, 2016 20:36:32 GMT
Put a bullet in the cunts head. Fucking nonce
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 10, 2016 20:42:22 GMT
This is probably worse than Ched Evans given the way Johnson groomed the 15 year old (and I'm not condoning rape).
If Evans can't play then neither should Johnson.
|
|
|
Post by daviddunn on Feb 10, 2016 21:28:20 GMT
He couldn't get out of the grooming charge the evidence was on her phone I live up near her so you here bits and bobs and he knew from quite early on her age and was still sending her messages I won't say any more leaving it to the courts option up here seems to be divided and heard lots of accounts and rumours so I'm staying clear except that he was at the very least guilty of grooming a minor . don't discount this the girl has stuck to her guns throughout this in the same area and Johnson will have the best legal team money can buy and one last thing Blunder land will be able to terminate his contract soon as court delivers its verdict
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Feb 10, 2016 21:40:03 GMT
How the fuck can a minor consent !, they can not legally buy a packet of fags but they can consent to sexual relations with a grown man I wrote a reply but somehow it got deleted. The age of consent is a legal construct. We set it at 16. In France it is 15 and in Germany it is 14. Are the teenagers in the UK substantially different to those in Germany? A 15yr old girl is perfectly capable of consent. Some are mature enough to understand,others are not. That is why we have an arbitrary age cut off. Thus, in the UK the person below the age of 16 is the victim and the person over 16 is the offender. I think this is why the grooming issue is important. Johnson knew she was 15 and continued to text her and he was too immature to stop. Do I think he is a paedophile who preys on innocent under age girls? No. Do I think he is an immature,pathetic adult. Yes. Both of these opinions are based on what little I have read about his case. My opinion may change if all the facts become available. DO the Germans have a far better sex education system than in the UK?
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Feb 10, 2016 21:42:26 GMT
We need the boards resident lawyer to give us daily updates I'll just put my black cap on
|
|
|
Post by bassmaster on Feb 10, 2016 22:02:33 GMT
They weren't imaginary though, they are facts from other such cases that could be taken into account, and I wasn't trying to absolve anything of the sort. That is just your halfwitted misunderstanding and given your fuckwitted track record its not fucking surprising. H Just to recap what happened here.. Your very first post in relation to Adam Johnson admitting he had groomed a 15-year-old girl (i.e. built an emotional connection with a child to gain their trust for the purposes of sexual abuse or exploitation), was to talk about unrelated potential mitigating factors (apparently from "other cases") relating to girls pretending to be older than they are, and "crying rape", and to state that you "don't think Johnson is a peado or a nonce". You then admitted that you made that comment without knowing the "ins and outs" of the grooming charge. You then said that you wouldn't condemn Johnson until you'd "seen the facts" - but you didn't hesitate to seemingly "defend" Johnson as "not a peado or a nonce" without having seen those facts. That's what happened - just to avoid any misunderstanding, halfwitted or otherwise. I stick by my assertion that it was amusing. It's typical RAF and well summarised. An aggressive gobshite with an opinion on everything, knowledge of very little and absolutely no insight whatsoever into his personality disordered traits of entitlement, grandiosity, hostility and narcissistic egregiousness. That is obviously not an extensive list.
|
|
|
Post by RAF on Feb 10, 2016 22:26:07 GMT
I wasn't defending anyone Mick and I take absolute fucking exception to you even suggesting as much. Unlike some of the knee jerk kangaroo court cunters on here I was more than happy to wait for absolute fact before calling him a peado or nonce and condemning him to a baseball batting. This kind of case is so prevelant in this day an age it's never fucking cut and dry. If what you have quoted is actually fact from the court I hope the cunt gets his bollocks cut off. Please don't ever accuse me of something like that again. H Someone pleading guilty to grooming a child seems pretty cut and dry to me, and I have no problem in calling him a nonce. Theres no need for any kangaroo court either because he's actually admitted it in a crown court. Finally, I've no idea if 27 year olds grooming minors is prevelant in this day and age, but it must be pretty much cut and dry, hence the guilty plea? Thats the point, at the time I hadn't seen he had put a guilty plea in. Does that make it easier for you? H
|
|
|
Post by RAF on Feb 10, 2016 22:29:08 GMT
They weren't imaginary though, they are facts from other such cases that could be taken into account, and I wasn't trying to absolve anything of the sort. That is just your halfwitted misunderstanding and given your fuckwitted track record its not fucking surprising. H Just to recap what happened here.. Your very first post in relation to Adam Johnson admitting he had groomed a 15-year-old girl (i.e. built an emotional connection with a child to gain their trust for the purposes of sexual abuse or exploitation), was to talk about unrelated potential mitigating factors (apparently from "other cases") relating to girls pretending to be older than they are, and "crying rape", and to state that you "don't think Johnson is a peado or a nonce". You then admitted that you made that comment without knowing the "ins and outs" of the grooming charge. You then said that you wouldn't condemn Johnson until you'd "seen the facts" - but you didn't hesitate to seemingly "defend" Johnson as "not a peado or a nonce" without having seen those facts. That's what happened - just to avoid any misunderstanding, halfwitted or otherwise. I stick by my assertion that it was amusing. No dickhead, at the time of my posting I wasnt aware of him admitting any such thing. Just to catch up I hope the cunt has his bollox cut off if true. H
|
|
|
Post by haway on Feb 10, 2016 22:30:56 GMT
hawayHave the club said owt about releasing him? Nothing as of yet, my gut feeling is they're waiting till sentencing although I'd get it over with now - no point in waiting
|
|
|
Post by RAF on Feb 10, 2016 22:34:52 GMT
Just to recap what happened here.. Your very first post in relation to Adam Johnson admitting he had groomed a 15-year-old girl (i.e. built an emotional connection with a child to gain their trust for the purposes of sexual abuse or exploitation), was to talk about unrelated potential mitigating factors (apparently from "other cases") relating to girls pretending to be older than they are, and "crying rape", and to state that you "don't think Johnson is a peado or a nonce". You then admitted that you made that comment without knowing the "ins and outs" of the grooming charge. You then said that you wouldn't condemn Johnson until you'd "seen the facts" - but you didn't hesitate to seemingly "defend" Johnson as "not a peado or a nonce" without having seen those facts. That's what happened - just to avoid any misunderstanding, halfwitted or otherwise. I stick by my assertion that it was amusing. It's typical RAF and well summarised. An aggressive gobshite with an opinion on everything, knowledge of very little and absolutely no insight whatsoever into his personality disordered traits of entitlement, grandiosity, hostility and narcissistic egregiousness. That is obviously not an extensive list. Are you still out for a pint tomorrow sweetheart? H
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Feb 10, 2016 22:59:52 GMT
I wrote a reply but somehow it got deleted. The age of consent is a legal construct. We set it at 16. In France it is 15 and in Germany it is 14. Are the teenagers in the UK substantially different to those in Germany? A 15yr old girl is perfectly capable of consent. Some are mature enough to understand,others are not. That is why we have an arbitrary age cut off. Thus, in the UK the person below the age of 16 is the victim and the person over 16 is the offender. I think this is why the grooming issue is important. Johnson knew she was 15 and continued to text her and he was too immature to stop. Do I think he is a paedophile who preys on innocent under age girls? No. Do I think he is an immature,pathetic adult. Yes. Both of these opinions are based on what little I have read about his case. My opinion may change if all the facts become available. DO the Germans have a far better sex education system than in the UK? They do have a lot more potential rapists/sex offenders now thanks to Merkel, hope they carry out their judicial responsibilities better than we do.
|
|
|
Post by jimigoodwinsbeard on Feb 11, 2016 0:42:21 GMT
Someone pleading guilty to grooming a child seems pretty cut and dry to me, and I have no problem in calling him a nonce. Theres no need for any kangaroo court either because he's actually admitted it in a crown court. Finally, I've no idea if 27 year olds grooming minors is prevelant in this day and age, but it must be pretty much cut and dry, hence the guilty plea? Thats the point, at the time I hadn't seen he had put a guilty plea in. Does that make it easier for you? H It was in the very first post that he had pleaded guilty to 2 offences - one of those being grooming.
|
|
|
Post by hanibal7 on Feb 11, 2016 3:04:28 GMT
Dirty Nonce, 20 years in jail
|
|
|
Post by PotterLog on Feb 11, 2016 4:59:28 GMT
Just to recap what happened here.. Your very first post in relation to Adam Johnson admitting he had groomed a 15-year-old girl (i.e. built an emotional connection with a child to gain their trust for the purposes of sexual abuse or exploitation), was to talk about unrelated potential mitigating factors (apparently from "other cases") relating to girls pretending to be older than they are, and "crying rape", and to state that you "don't think Johnson is a peado or a nonce". You then admitted that you made that comment without knowing the "ins and outs" of the grooming charge. You then said that you wouldn't condemn Johnson until you'd "seen the facts" - but you didn't hesitate to seemingly "defend" Johnson as "not a peado or a nonce" without having seen those facts. That's what happened - just to avoid any misunderstanding, halfwitted or otherwise. I stick by my assertion that it was amusing. No dickhead, at the time of my posting I wasnt aware of him admitting any such thing. Just to catch up I hope the cunt has his bollox cut off if true. H Okay RAF, allow me to press on with this if you will. Given that you apparently missed the detail that Adam Johnson had pleaded guilty in a thread entitled "Adam Johnson pleads guilty", I hope you don't mind me asking you a couple of questions. 1) What news or information did you think you were responding to when you posted that you "don't think Johnson is a peado or a nonce", and that certain other posters were "knee jerk kangaroo court cunters" for condemning him? 2) Given that you were unaware of the facts of the case, is there any reason why you are seemingly so comfortable making comments *in defence* of an alleged sex offender as "not a peado or a nonce", invoking potential mitigating factors such as girls lying about their age in a club or getting drunk and "crying rape", yet you advise and exercise extreme caution in *condemning* an alleged sex offender (actually a confirmed sex offender, but we'll go with your story that you still hadn't noticed this, several hours and multiple posts after the news came through and was reported in the first post of this thread)? 3) Why are you *still* using caveats like "if true", after the news has been in the main pages of every UK media outlet for the last 12 hours and the OP made it abundantly clear that Adam Johnson has confessed to the crime?
|
|
|
Post by keasie1863 on Feb 11, 2016 9:16:05 GMT
As a father,i find this little weasels actions despicable,and thats being polite.could you imagine seeing that twat playing football on the box,knowing what he did to your daughter.i dont know how parents restrain themselves, i for one would be at one of these matches,amd over the fence i would go.
|
|
|
Post by mrred on Feb 11, 2016 9:31:00 GMT
As a father,i find this little weasels actions despicable,and thats being polite.could you imagine seeing that twat playing football on the box,knowing what he did to your daughter.i dont know how parents restrain themselves, i for one would be at one of these matches,amd over the fence i would go. Yeah, I'm sure your kids would love to see their Dad getting banged up for a nonce. Great example to set.
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on Feb 11, 2016 10:16:00 GMT
Wow this thread got salty pretty quickly didn't it..... and I haven't even taken part yet The simple reality is, there's absolutely no comparison with the Ched Evans case. Evans was found guilty, when there is plenty of evidence to suggest his conviction was/is unsafe. In my opinion, the Evans case was influenced by the media, both print, broadcast and social. Also the current political climate and the rise of 'radical feminism' was a determining factor. The prosecutions case appeared to built on the back of underlying prejudices (hence the 'Titus Bramble?' line in police notes) and a desire to get a guilty verdict, regardless of how safe such a conviction actually was. Evans has maintained his innocence throughout and is arguably jeopardizing his future chances of a career. The only similarities between the two cases are that they're both footballers and they're both accused of crimes involving sex. In reality, they couldn't be further away from each other. Johnson has admitted to a charge of child grooming. Now I'm no expert in law, but if you take the Wikipedia brief it says: Furthermore in the Guardian, their article specifically states: So it's quite evident that Adam Johnson was fully aware that his victim (let's not beat around the bush here) was under the age of 16. Grooming requires pre-meditation; it requires a conscious effort to build a relationship with a child, to effectively lower their inhibitions. In plain English, Adam Johnson met a girl online, was aware she was under the age of consent, yet still felt it was acceptable to groom her for some kind of sexual relationship. He had many opportunities to pull out, consider his conscience, yet decided not to. Now I am aware that Johnson has decided to plead not guilty to the charges of a more sexually driven nature, but the fact is he's admitted to grooming this girl and meeting her absolutely outlines his intentions. The fact he is saying it didn't get that far is irrelevant as far as I am concerned. Johnson knew she was younger than the legal age of consent, yet continued to build a relationship online, one which eventually involved meeting and ' touching' (supposedly only kissing) in a sexual nature. I reiterate that Johnson had opportunities to pull away, yet chose not too. I am a very strong believer in innocent until proven guilty, therefore I'm not going to suggest he's a full blown paedophile considering he has denied those charges, but he's quite evidently a sexual predator, and he's admitted as such. He chose (or 'hunted') a victim to abuse and meet up with, from the internet. That is not up for discussion, he's admitted it. Those saying that "men need to ask for ID because some young girls are out looking to cry rape" are absolutely abhorrent and should be ashamed of themselves. The girl in this case is quite evidently not some young girl looking out to cry rape. Johnson knew her age and as the responsible adult, should have backed the fuck off once he became aware of that. He did not. Whether she led him on or not is also irrelevant, because he is the adult and she is not legally able to consent. Even if she did give him the 'come on' she was not in any position to legally consent because that's the fucking law and we should be glad about it. Johnson abused his position as an adult, and quite evidently abused her. Simple. Those looking to victim shame are utterly reprehensible.
|
|
|
Post by Mr_DaftBurger on Feb 11, 2016 10:20:14 GMT
|
|
|
Post by RAF on Feb 11, 2016 10:44:18 GMT
Thats the point, at the time I hadn't seen he had put a guilty plea in. Does that make it easier for you? H It was in the very first post that he had pleaded guilty to 2 offences - one of those being grooming. And I quite clearly didn't see it, and even if I did it's not like this place doesn't have shit that the press has issued which turns out to be bollocks. All I wanted was a bit of official clarity. As soon as the crown prosecution service post their official verdict I shall be happy to call for his cock to be cut off. H
|
|