|
Post by RAF on Feb 11, 2016 10:59:41 GMT
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? 1. How many times on here have we had excerpts from the press on here that turn out to be absolute horseshit? I'll save you answering it's fucking countless 2. I was aware what he had been accused of , but at the time of my posting I wasn't aware 'Officially' he had admitted he was guilty to grooming a girl under the age of 15. To even infer that because it was posted by the OP that it should be beyond reproach, is quite frankly fucking ridiculous. I also wasn't trying defend him but airing on caution for called him a peado/nonce as there have been many cases surrounding footballers that have been a lot more complex than first thought. 3.Forgive me , but not every media outlet has made it abundantly clear exactly what he has admitted and not admitted, thus until it was clarified I was wary of labelling him as the above. Even late yesterday the BBC were reporting he had pleaded not guilty of sexual activity with a girl aged under 16 with no mention of grooming. I wanted some clarification that he had indeed knowingly groomed someone under the age of 16. Not that it would have been much better had she been 16, but at least legal in the eyes of the law. H
|
|
|
Post by draytonstokie on Feb 11, 2016 11:29:21 GMT
" Metal head is this accurate " 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." I believed that the girl was already known to him as he knew the family. I may be wrong and I am not suggesting it makes it any less reprehensible in fact the complete opposite if he abused the trust of people he knew.
|
|
|
Post by PotterLog on Feb 11, 2016 12:03:11 GMT
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? 1. How many times on here have we had excerpts from the press on here that turn out to be absolute horseshit? I'll save you answering it's fucking countless 2. I was aware what he had been accused of , but at the time of my posting I wasn't aware 'Officially' he had admitted he was guilty to grooming a girl under the age of 15. To even infer that because it was posted by the OP that it should be beyond reproach, is quite frankly fucking ridiculous. I also wasn't trying defend him but airing on caution for called him a peado/nonce as there have been many cases surrounding footballers that have been a lot more complex than first thought. 3.Forgive me , but not every media outlet has made it abundantly clear exactly what he has admitted and not admitted, thus until it was clarified I was wary of labelling him as the above. Even late yesterday the BBC were reporting he had pleaded not guilty of sexual activity with a girl aged under 16 with no mention of grooming. I wanted some clarification that he had indeed knowingly groomed someone under the age of 16. Not that it would have been much better had she been 16, but at least legal in the eyes of the law. H Well, thanks for taking the time to answer the questions. And in a civil manner (for a change )
|
|
|
Post by RAF on Feb 11, 2016 16:02:46 GMT
1. How many times on here have we had excerpts from the press on here that turn out to be absolute horseshit? I'll save you answering it's fucking countless 2. I was aware what he had been accused of , but at the time of my posting I wasn't aware 'Officially' he had admitted he was guilty to grooming a girl under the age of 15. To even infer that because it was posted by the OP that it should be beyond reproach, is quite frankly fucking ridiculous. I also wasn't trying defend him but airing on caution for called him a peado/nonce as there have been many cases surrounding footballers that have been a lot more complex than first thought. 3.Forgive me , but not every media outlet has made it abundantly clear exactly what he has admitted and not admitted, thus until it was clarified I was wary of labelling him as the above. Even late yesterday the BBC were reporting he had pleaded not guilty of sexual activity with a girl aged under 16 with no mention of grooming. I wanted some clarification that he had indeed knowingly groomed someone under the age of 16. Not that it would have been much better had she been 16, but at least legal in the eyes of the law. H Well, thanks for taking the time to answer the questions. And in a civil manner (for a change ;) ) Bollocks cunt! H
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2016 16:50:20 GMT
Blunderland just confirmed Johnson will not be involved on Saturday.
They should have announced he'd been sacked.
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Feb 11, 2016 16:54:57 GMT
Blunderland just confirmed Johnson will not be involved on Saturday. They should have announced he'd been sacked. It's almost as if he avoids jail they will keep him
|
|
|
Post by mickmillslovechild on Feb 11, 2016 17:02:19 GMT
Blunderland just confirmed Johnson will not be involved on Saturday. They should have announced he'd been sacked. i'm sure they would have announced that if they had a few more points on the board! the longer they leave it as a club (after he's now admitted 2 criminal offences) the far worse they will end up looking as well....poor show by them tbh we saw a thread yesterday about that young lad who won the Everton goal of the month award..that was the great, heart warming side of football which we, as fans, all love being a part of Sunderland not having sacked him as yet...that just shows the greedy, scummy, sordid, pure business and noting else matters side of football we, as fans, all abhor and want no association with
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Feb 11, 2016 17:03:13 GMT
Blunderland just confirmed Johnson will not be involved on Saturday. They should have announced he'd been sacked. i'm sure they would have announced that if they had a few more points on the board! the longer they leave it as a club (after he's now admitted 2 criminal offences) the far worse they will end up looking as well....poor show by them tbh we saw a thread yesterday about that young lad who won the Everton goal of the month award..that was the great, heart warming side of football which we, as fans, all love being a part of Sunderland not having sacked him as yet...that just shows the greedy, scummy, sordid, pure business and noting else matters side of football we, as fans, all abhor and want no association with i feel the same. Maybe legally it's easier for the club once sentenced
|
|
|
Post by bathstoke on Feb 11, 2016 17:42:54 GMT
If he waited another 6 months he could of legally married her. Until 3yrs ago, the age of consent in Spain was 13
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Feb 11, 2016 18:26:54 GMT
Adidas have sacked him
|
|
|
Post by turtlefox on Feb 11, 2016 18:46:41 GMT
Three stripes and your out
|
|
|
Post by haway on Feb 11, 2016 19:13:33 GMT
Blunderland just confirmed Johnson will not be involved on Saturday. They should have announced he'd been sacked. It's almost as if he avoids jail they will keep him That's fucking bollocks.
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Feb 11, 2016 19:16:50 GMT
It's almost as if he avoids jail they will keep him That's fucking bollocks. i know but that's the impression Nothing from the club. Why have they not sacked him. Regardless of the outcome of the other two charges. Johnson will be doing time/community service and signing the sex register
|
|
|
Post by haway on Feb 11, 2016 19:18:38 GMT
We have been told not to comment or act whilst the case is ongoing (continues tomorrow) - I've heard the club can't really sack him until the trial is over. We'll wait to see what happens after the trial before being angry at the club.
I'm still shocked he's told fellow players and the club he isn't guilty and then pleads guilty first thing. Utter prick.
|
|
|
Post by haway on Feb 11, 2016 19:19:05 GMT
i know but that's the impression Nothing from the club. Why have they not sacked him. Regardless of the outcome of the other two charges. Johnson will be doing time/community service and signing the sex register Read above mate.
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Feb 11, 2016 19:25:45 GMT
i know but that's the impression Nothing from the club. Why have they not sacked him. Regardless of the outcome of the other two charges. Johnson will be doing time/community service and signing the sex register Read above mate. And? He's guilty. The club could sack him. Why are they waiting?
|
|
|
Post by FullerMagic on Feb 11, 2016 19:36:18 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2016 19:39:01 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. Bang on MH. This board needs more posters like you.
|
|
|
Post by stantheman on Feb 11, 2016 19:47:26 GMT
He'll be fine, its half term next week!
|
|
|
Post by haway on Feb 11, 2016 19:47:28 GMT
And? He's guilty. The club could sack him. Why are they waiting? Sacked him now. Would have been sorting out things behind the scenes probably. I'll get some details tomorrow.
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Feb 11, 2016 19:52:48 GMT
Adidas forced their hand
Sacked
|
|
|
Post by nicholasjalcock on Feb 11, 2016 20:57:04 GMT
And? He's guilty. The club could sack him. Why are they waiting? Sacked him now. Would have been sorting out things behind the scenes probably. I'll get some details tomorrow. I said on a thread last year Sunderland were making a mistake bringing him back into the fold! This covers your famous club in mud or something much worse?!
|
|
|
Post by Jamo on the wing on Feb 11, 2016 21:09:52 GMT
And? He's guilty. The club could sack him. Why are they waiting? Sacked him now. Would have been sorting out things behind the scenes probably. I'll get some details tomorrow. I personally don't think Sunderland have handled it particularly well. I reckon most employers would put you on a fully paid suspension in the circumstances until it was cleared up either way. To suspend him and then say "oh go on then you can play" smacks of "as long as we stay up" which is pretty cynical. It worked for them though.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2016 21:35:18 GMT
Sacked him now. Would have been sorting out things behind the scenes probably. I'll get some details tomorrow. I personally don't think Sunderland have handled it particularly well. I reckon most employers would put you on a fully paid suspension in the circumstances until it was cleared up either way. To suspend him and then say "oh go on then you can play" smacks of "as long as we stay up" which is pretty cynical. It worked for them though. I think plenty, possibly the majority of clubs in Sunderland's position would have done the same thing. He was innocent until proven guilty. If they'd suspended him for months and he'd then been found innocent, and Sunderland went on to be relegated by a narrow margin, I doubt their fans would have looked kindly on the decision not to play one of their few assets. From the club's point of view, they may also have felt they were backing a man who again, was innocent until found guilty. I don't really think they did much wrong, and potentially could have looked pretty stupid if they'd acted differently. One of those 'damned if you do, damned if you don't' situations.
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Feb 11, 2016 22:05:53 GMT
From what I've read the girl is from his own town. I'd be surprised if he first met her on the net
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2016 22:14:33 GMT
He's a fucking moron, even if he does have an interest in pubescent girls he could bang as many 16 year olds as he wants without breaking the law. It would be creepy but the law says it would be legal. There's effectively no difference physically between a 15 and a 16 year old, the fact that he knowingly hounded a 15 year old means he deserves all that is coming his way, and knowing our justice system he'll surely get off lightly.
|
|
|
Post by owdestokie on Feb 11, 2016 22:19:55 GMT
I personally don't think Sunderland have handled it particularly well. I reckon most employers would put you on a fully paid suspension in the circumstances until it was cleared up either way. To suspend him and then say "oh go on then you can play" smacks of "as long as we stay up" which is pretty cynical. It worked for them though. I think plenty, possibly the majority of clubs in Sunderland's position would have done the same thing. He was innocent until proven guilty. If they'd suspended him for months and he'd then been found innocent, and Sunderland went on to be relegated by a narrow margin, I doubt their fans would have looked kindly on the decision not to play one of their few assets. From the club's point of view, they may also have felt they were backing a man who again, was innocent until found guilty. I don't really think they did much wrong, and potentially could have looked pretty stupid if they'd acted differently. One of those 'damned if you do, damned if you don't' situations. Talking earlier to a good friend in the NE who associates with a few informed people told me that SFC are absolutely in shock as to his admittance of guilt as they had supported him throughout due to his continual denial. Behind the scenes there is a lot of anger by his admission!!!
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Feb 11, 2016 22:24:47 GMT
I think plenty, possibly the majority of clubs in Sunderland's position would have done the same thing. He was innocent until proven guilty. If they'd suspended him for months and he'd then been found innocent, and Sunderland went on to be relegated by a narrow margin, I doubt their fans would have looked kindly on the decision not to play one of their few assets. From the club's point of view, they may also have felt they were backing a man who again, was innocent until found guilty. I don't really think they did much wrong, and potentially could have looked pretty stupid if they'd acted differently. One of those 'damned if you do, damned if you don't' situations. Talking earlier to a good friend in the NE who associates with a few informed people told me that SFC are absolutely in shock as to his admittance of guilt as they had supported him throughout due to his continual denial. Behind the scenes there is a lot of anger by his admission!!! which says the CPS produced. Substantial evidence in the run up
|
|
|
Post by Trouserdog on Feb 11, 2016 22:37:42 GMT
Dogs' home.
|
|
|
Post by Kewstokie on Feb 11, 2016 22:42:54 GMT
So Sunderland have terminated his contract. Have they kept his registration or let that go too?
|
|