|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Feb 7, 2022 9:10:45 GMT
Having read the transcript I cannot see any reason to exonerate Goodwillie. It seems to boil down to how drunk the victim was and the evidence of everybody but the defenders was that she was extremely drunk, one even suggesting she needed an ambulance not a taxi. Most of the expert witnesses suggest that she was too drunk be considered to have given consent. I have no sympathy for Goodwillie and see no reason for wanting to see him with a contract at a football club. I can assure you that there are several professions where his behaviour would preclude him from continuing a career in them not just football. I read the transcript as well. I had a failed career in criminal defence law, but at one point I was really enthusiastic about it, got through all the entrance exams and interviews to be a trainee crown prosecutor. I read the transcript and thought about the exams I'd taken which I passed with flying colors, all about assessing the chances of getting a guilty verdict. I can see why they didn't prosecute. There is no chance you'd get a jury to convict them on that evidence. I've no doubt that a lot of what has happened in this case is wrong, but it's a difficult case, based on that evidence. I don't feel comfortable with any aspects of it. I can see why the cps didn't get involved. As Prestwich says, the balance of probabilities in a civil case is very different. In all though on a moral level, this behavior is wrong, the two men deserve punishment, consequences, but then what? What do we do with men like that after? Stop them from working? Good points well made. I too can see why they didn't prosecute in a criminal court. As you say, whether rape occurred or not, it was pretty lousy behaviour by the men concerned. I'm on the side of those who are concerned by any lack of remorse. Whether or not Goodwillie is correct that actual rape did not take place, I'd be much more sympathetic towards him if he admitted that his actions that night were morally wrong and showed some remorse. As it is, he paid his fine and felt that was enough to expect his career to be resumed without problems. Footballers and anyone in the public eye have always been at the mercy of public opinion. If you behave like Goodwillie did - and fail to show any remorse - you ought to expect that the sponsors and fans of some football clubs will say that a line has been crossed and that they don't want you representing their club and their community.
|
|
|
Post by GoBoks on Feb 7, 2022 21:34:14 GMT
I read the transcript as well. I had a failed career in criminal defence law, but at one point I was really enthusiastic about it, got through all the entrance exams and interviews to be a trainee crown prosecutor. I read the transcript and thought about the exams I'd taken which I passed with flying colors, all about assessing the chances of getting a guilty verdict. I can see why they didn't prosecute. There is no chance you'd get a jury to convict them on that evidence. I've no doubt that a lot of what has happened in this case is wrong, but it's a difficult case, based on that evidence. I don't feel comfortable with any aspects of it. I can see why the cps didn't get involved. As Prestwich says, the balance of probabilities in a civil case is very different. In all though on a moral level, this behavior is wrong, the two men deserve punishment, consequences, but then what? What do we do with men like that after? Stop them from working? Good points well made. I too can see why they didn't prosecute in a criminal court. As you say, whether rape occurred or not, it was pretty lousy behaviour by the men concerned. I'm on the side of those who are concerned by any lack of remorse. Whether or not Goodwillie is correct that actual rape did not take place, I'd be much more sympathetic towards him if he admitted that his actions that night were morally wrong and showed some remorse. As it is, he paid his fine and felt that was enough to expect his career to be resumed without problems. Footballers and anyone in the public eye have always been at the mercy of public opinion. If you behave like Goodwillie did - and fail to show any remorse - you ought to expect that the sponsors and fans of some football clubs will say that a line has been crossed and that they don't want you representing their club and their community. On the other hand ...... My background is negotiation. Clearly the minute this goes to civil court rather than criminal court, it is about how much money can I gain/lose out of the situation (on both sides) i.e. negotiation. I cannot see why a defendant would lay on thick how wrong it was and how sorry they are, when the only result of that course of action is for your opponent to add a zero or two onto the end of the amount that you will get stuck with. This is especially true if there was consent and this is now simply a way to maximise the financial benefit that can be gained.... and those stories are also fairly common. Again, to prevent someone from working in their chosen career simply based on hearsay and conjecture is not right in my opinion. We are unlikely to know the truth of the matter. I hope both of them can move on with their lives and make better choices in the future.
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Feb 7, 2022 21:59:06 GMT
Good points well made. I too can see why they didn't prosecute in a criminal court. As you say, whether rape occurred or not, it was pretty lousy behaviour by the men concerned. I'm on the side of those who are concerned by any lack of remorse. Whether or not Goodwillie is correct that actual rape did not take place, I'd be much more sympathetic towards him if he admitted that his actions that night were morally wrong and showed some remorse. As it is, he paid his fine and felt that was enough to expect his career to be resumed without problems. Footballers and anyone in the public eye have always been at the mercy of public opinion. If you behave like Goodwillie did - and fail to show any remorse - you ought to expect that the sponsors and fans of some football clubs will say that a line has been crossed and that they don't want you representing their club and their community. On the other hand ...... My background is negotiation. Clearly the minute this goes to civil court rather than criminal court, it is about how much money can I gain/lose out of the situation (on both sides) i.e. negotiation. I cannot see why a defendant would lay on thick how wrong it was and how sorry they are, when the only result of that course of action is for your opponent to add a zero or two onto the end of the amount that you will get stuck with. This is especially true if there was consent and this is now simply a way to maximise the financial benefit that can be gained.... and those stories are also fairly common. Again, to prevent someone from working in their chosen career simply based on hearsay and conjecture is not right in my opinion. We are unlikely to know the truth of the matter. I hope both of them can move on with their lives and make better choices in the future. I see your point about the way he needed to conduct himself during the hearing. But once the case was over, a little humility and remorse would have done no harm to his reputation and would not have harmed his case as that was already decided in the civil court. He could easily have voiced public regret over his behaviour after the case without admitting rape. Had he done so it might not have harmed his career as much as his silence did.
|
|
|
Post by nottsover60 on Feb 8, 2022 0:10:32 GMT
Woah! If the woman can't remember what happened, how can anyone say "she was forced to have sex"? But, let's just disagree, but your comments do open a whole different train of thought. What are the consequences of cheating; telling a lie; watching films that portray unacceptable behaviours; etc, etc.? Perhaps the real problem is we live in a world where eternal consequences are simply ignored in the vast majority of our decisions? I see the links you are making, and agree. A driving instructors attitude to road safety is important because his integrity as an instructor is at stake if he or she doesn’t observe the rules themselves. Where I’m struggling is the link between football and this assault (not a criminal offence mind you). What other indiscretions should footballers have their careers ended for? Should everyone in the public eye be judged this way? If the offence isn’t directly linked to the profession then surely this is effectively trial by media? Lots of questions marks! Rape is not an indescretion it is abuse of women. I would argue that having sex with a woman you've not met before and who is obviously extremely drunk is also abuse whether or not the man concerned thought she wanted it.
|
|
|
Post by nottsover60 on Feb 8, 2022 0:20:31 GMT
www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/60292455From some of the comments on this thread I think education of young males whatever their profession is needed. Until men understand what abuse of women is then this sort of incident will continue and the perpetrator will be defended with the argument that she gave consent through her behaviour. I fail to see why some on here think it was OK for two men to take a very drunk woman to a house where they took it in turns to have sex with her. If you really think that is what any woman would give consent to then it might be a good idea to get yourself some relationship education. And I don't care if technically they didn't break the law, it's a matter of respect. It's interesting that on the Kurt Zouma thread there is understandably total condemnation but on here equally shocking abuse of a woman is being condoned by some.
|
|
|
Post by biddulphchav on Feb 8, 2022 2:23:35 GMT
www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/60292455From some of the comments on this thread I think education of young males whatever their profession is needed. Until men understand what abuse of women is then this sort of incident will continue and the perpetrator will be defended with the argument that she gave consent through her behaviour. I fail to see why some on here think it was OK for two men to take a very drunk woman to a house where they took it in turns to have sex with her. If you really think that is what any woman would give consent to then it might be a good idea to get yourself some relationship education. And I don't care if technically they didn't break the law, it's a matter of respect. It's interesting that on the Kurt Zouma thread there is understandably total condemnation but on here equally shocking abuse of a woman is being condoned by some. I think a bit of education on your part is needed too. I don’t know how old you are but threesomes and other things of a similar nature are probably a lot more common nowadays than they used to be. You’re argument about consent presupposes that the woman was not consenting - but it’s not clear in this case one way or another, which is basically why the CPS didn’t proceed. You have the right to have a moral objection to the behaviour but that’s your take on it and it’s far more common and normal than you think.
|
|
|
Post by nottsover60 on Feb 8, 2022 9:04:55 GMT
www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/60292455From some of the comments on this thread I think education of young males whatever their profession is needed. Until men understand what abuse of women is then this sort of incident will continue and the perpetrator will be defended with the argument that she gave consent through her behaviour. I fail to see why some on here think it was OK for two men to take a very drunk woman to a house where they took it in turns to have sex with her. If you really think that is what any woman would give consent to then it might be a good idea to get yourself some relationship education. And I don't care if technically they didn't break the law, it's a matter of respect. It's interesting that on the Kurt Zouma thread there is understandably total condemnation but on here equally shocking abuse of a woman is being condoned by some. I think a bit of education on your part is needed too. I don’t know how old you are but threesomes and other things of a similar nature are probably a lot more common nowadays than they used to be. You’re argument about consent presupposes that the woman was not consenting - but it’s not clear in this case one way or another, which is basically why the CPS didn’t proceed. You have the right to have a moral objection to the behaviour but that’s your take on it and it’s far more common and normal than you think. My problem is that yes I have admitted I am of a different generation but I just don't understand what morals some people have if any. Where do they draw the line? Last night's post was written following reading a chapter in a book called Queenie when the protagonist agrees to go for sex with a man who then proceeds to have very violent sex with her causing her severe internal injury and yet despite being in pain she doesn't try to stop him and even covers for him when examined by a nurse. To then see on here the Raith thread near the top again I just wondered where caring for someone came into relationships these days. I do not need education I am quite aware of what goes on but like Queenie does I wonder how many women just put up with what they think is expected of them. I thought sex was supposed to be enjoyable for both parties (or all three if that's your preference) The CPS didn't proceed because the evidence though compelling was circumstantial which is not likely to succeed in a court of law. In my eyes and I may be old fashioned but 1. Goodwilliie and friend were attracted to this woman because she was extremely drunk not because they fancied her 2. They took her to a friend's house so that they wouldn't be recognised 3. Clearly she wasn't expecting three in a bed as she went with one into the bedroom 4. Despite assuring the barmaid he would look after her the men, as soon as they'd had their fun didn't feel any duty of care towards her and abandoned her penniless and phoneless. When in that did they show any care, understanding or empathy or even any morals? If you don't understand what morals are which I suspect many don't they are the way you know you should behave beyond what the law expects so it doesn't matter that they weren't prosecuted.
|
|
|
Post by nottsover60 on Feb 8, 2022 9:12:37 GMT
www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/60292455From some of the comments on this thread I think education of young males whatever their profession is needed. Until men understand what abuse of women is then this sort of incident will continue and the perpetrator will be defended with the argument that she gave consent through her behaviour. I fail to see why some on here think it was OK for two men to take a very drunk woman to a house where they took it in turns to have sex with her. If you really think that is what any woman would give consent to then it might be a good idea to get yourself some relationship education. And I don't care if technically they didn't break the law, it's a matter of respect. It's interesting that on the Kurt Zouma thread there is understandably total condemnation but on here equally shocking abuse of a woman is being condoned by some. I think a bit of education on your part is needed too. I don’t know how old you are but threesomes and other things of a similar nature are probably a lot more common nowadays than they used to be. You’re argument about consent presupposes that the woman was not consenting - but it’s not clear in this case one way or another, which is basically why the CPS didn’t proceed. You have the right to have a moral objection to the behaviour but that’s your take on it and it’s far more common and normal than you think. How many times? She was too drunk to consent or refuse. Does that give men the right to rape her?
|
|
|
Post by nottsover60 on Feb 8, 2022 9:20:46 GMT
www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/60292455From some of the comments on this thread I think education of young males whatever their profession is needed. Until men understand what abuse of women is then this sort of incident will continue and the perpetrator will be defended with the argument that she gave consent through her behaviour. I fail to see why some on here think it was OK for two men to take a very drunk woman to a house where they took it in turns to have sex with her. If you really think that is what any woman would give consent to then it might be a good idea to get yourself some relationship education. And I don't care if technically they didn't break the law, it's a matter of respect. It's interesting that on the Kurt Zouma thread there is understandably total condemnation but on here equally shocking abuse of a woman is being condoned by some. I think a bit of education on your part is needed too. I don’t know how old you are but threesomes and other things of a similar nature are probably a lot more common nowadays than they used to be. You’re argument about consent presupposes that the woman was not consenting - but it’s not clear in this case one way or another, which is basically why the CPS didn’t proceed. You have the right to have a moral objection to the behaviour but that’s your take on it and it’s far more common and normal than you think. I would agree by the way that women are in need of relationship education to understand that they don't have to do things they don't want to do because it is 'common and normal' these days. I wonder where it goes wrong because I know relationship education in schools is based very much on caring for and liking someone you have sex with, acceptable touching and that you can always so no if things go beyond what you were expecting. When does it become the first and only way some people interact? Is it all about self servicing. Another indication of a selfish society? I worry about what it is like for my single daughter and what it will be like for my young granddaughter if things progress this way.
|
|
|
Post by leicspotter on Feb 8, 2022 9:31:05 GMT
It's a sad fact that there are many people out there who are just not very nice. Something I warned my daughter about when she was a teenager...drink spiking is still a 'thing' 20 years on.
The two stories you have referenced could both have been different if others, who were there, had also made better choices:
"“Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.”
If the woman "needed to go to hospital" then call an ambulance. If Zouma is kicking his cat, don't film it, stop him.
|
|
|
Post by nottsover60 on Feb 8, 2022 9:56:46 GMT
I notice Kurt Zouma will not be prosecuted. Does that mean he didn't really do it and it was all trial by social media and he's a really nice animal lover just doing what anyone would do faced with a naughty cat?
|
|
|
Post by biddulphchav on Feb 8, 2022 12:17:03 GMT
I notice Kurt Zouma will not be prosecuted. Does that mean he didn't really do it and it was all trial by social media and he's a really nice animal lover just doing what anyone would do faced with a naughty cat? Not sure why you are resorting to sarcasm. He won’t be prosecuted probably because what he did isn’t seen to be serious enough to be a criminal offence. Right or wrong I would say that is the most likely reason. You say you don’t need to be educated but I think you do. Loads and loads of men and women indulge in drunken threesomes. Dating apps like tinder mean sex is at your fingertips 24/7. So things have changed, and whilst I agree with you on the morals of society at large to be at odds with what I was brought up to believe was right, that particular issue doesn’t discriminate by gender. There are many many men and women that would have done very similar things to the events that occurred that night - are they all criminals? Should they all have their careers ended? Do we tackle the moral decay in society by making examples of celebrities / people with a public profile while we completely ignore the fact that this type of thing happens in every town every single weekend. I think there are better ways to address the issue, and I don’t think this is the answer, although I don’t know what is!
|
|
|
Post by biddulphchav on Feb 8, 2022 12:22:55 GMT
I think a bit of education on your part is needed too. I don’t know how old you are but threesomes and other things of a similar nature are probably a lot more common nowadays than they used to be. You’re argument about consent presupposes that the woman was not consenting - but it’s not clear in this case one way or another, which is basically why the CPS didn’t proceed. You have the right to have a moral objection to the behaviour but that’s your take on it and it’s far more common and normal than you think. How many times? She was too drunk to consent or refuse. Does that give men the right to rape her? When did i say that it did? What I said was her version was that she cannot remember and doesn’t believe she would have consented because it would have been very much out of character. His version was the she did consent. I haven’t and wouldn’t condone rape - so where you are getting that idea from I do not know. What makes you so sure her version is the truth?
|
|
|
Post by nottsover60 on Feb 8, 2022 12:51:58 GMT
How many times? She was too drunk to consent or refuse. Does that give men the right to rape her? When did i say that it did? What I said was her version was that she cannot remember and doesn’t believe she would have consented because it would have been very much out of character. His version was the she did consent. I haven’t and wouldn’t condone rape - so where you are getting that idea from I do not know. What makes you so sure her version is the truth? The evidence of other witnesses and the fact that Goodwillie has selective memory of the evening. She admits her wrong choices, he never once admits to having done anything wrong,. Purely intuition on my part I will admit. If you can get hold of the book I referred to, Queenie by Candice Carty - Williams and read chapter 6 I think it is, it might give you a bit more insight into how what a woman thinks she is giving consent to quickly turns into something she doesn't want but can't stop.
|
|
|
Post by nottsover60 on Feb 8, 2022 12:54:52 GMT
I notice Kurt Zouma will not be prosecuted. Does that mean he didn't really do it and it was all trial by social media and he's a really nice animal lover just doing what anyone would do faced with a naughty cat? Not sure why you are resorting to sarcasm. He won’t be prosecuted probably because what he did isn’t seen to be serious enough to be a criminal offence. Right or wrong I would say that is the most likely reason. You say you don’t need to be educated but I think you do. Loads and loads of men and women indulge in drunken threesomes. Dating apps like tinder mean sex is at your fingertips 24/7. So things have changed, and whilst I agree with you on the morals of society at large to be at odds with what I was brought up to believe was right, that particular issue doesn’t discriminate by gender. There are many many men and women that would have done very similar things to the events that occurred that night - are they all criminals? Should they all have their careers ended? Do we tackle the moral decay in society by making examples of celebrities / people with a public profile while we completely ignore the fact that this type of thing happens in every town every single weekend. I think there are better ways to address the issue, and I don’t think this is the answer, although I don’t know what is! I am pointing out that people on here are saying Goodwillie can't have raped her because he wasn't prosecuted. Not true, not prosecuting isn't proof of innocence. Drunken orgies are nothing new but if innocent I would argue take place between consenting adults who all remember them, not just the male participants. If a woman is too drunk to remember anything a morally decent man would refuse to have sex with her.
|
|
|
Post by biddulphchav on Feb 8, 2022 14:25:26 GMT
Not sure why you are resorting to sarcasm. He won’t be prosecuted probably because what he did isn’t seen to be serious enough to be a criminal offence. Right or wrong I would say that is the most likely reason. You say you don’t need to be educated but I think you do. Loads and loads of men and women indulge in drunken threesomes. Dating apps like tinder mean sex is at your fingertips 24/7. So things have changed, and whilst I agree with you on the morals of society at large to be at odds with what I was brought up to believe was right, that particular issue doesn’t discriminate by gender. There are many many men and women that would have done very similar things to the events that occurred that night - are they all criminals? Should they all have their careers ended? Do we tackle the moral decay in society by making examples of celebrities / people with a public profile while we completely ignore the fact that this type of thing happens in every town every single weekend. I think there are better ways to address the issue, and I don’t think this is the answer, although I don’t know what is! I am pointing out that people on here are saying Goodwillie can't have raped her because he wasn't prosecuted. Not true, not prosecuting isn't proof of innocence. Drunken orgies are nothing new but if innocent I would argue take place between consenting adults who all remember them, not just the male participants. If a woman is too drunk to remember anything a morally decent man would refuse to have sex with her. The burden of proof is not on Goodwillie, it’s on the woman. You cannot have a society where it is the other way around. That is exactly what I have been saying the whole time, I object to the fact that people on social media have decided the outcome of this situation. So although the burden of proof (which is set by an institution that is there to uphold the law via punishment aka the judicial system) cannot be met, we have a similar outcome. The law is fundamental to the functioning of society. Does the law need to be updated? Maybe it does. Disregarding it and deciding the outcome based on the court of public opinion is a dangerous path to go down. Not to mention the fact that other laws may have been broken in the termination of this contract, and I’m taking about Goodwillie’s rights here. We cannot say ‘well we think he’s a rapist so his rights do not matter’ - what sort of messed up society acts in that way. And one last point, I do agree if someone believed that another person was too drunk to give consent then absolutely, the right and moral thing to do would not to have sex with them. But it is a subjective issue - especially when both people are drunk. And there is no way that he would know that should wouldn’t remember what happened unless he can see into the future so I don’t really understand what you are trying to say - you are advocating for one moral standard to be upheld and at the same time seem to be advocating for the rights of those who have been accused to not be a factor.
|
|
|
Post by nottsover60 on Feb 8, 2022 14:29:42 GMT
I am pointing out that people on here are saying Goodwillie can't have raped her because he wasn't prosecuted. Not true, not prosecuting isn't proof of innocence. Drunken orgies are nothing new but if innocent I would argue take place between consenting adults who all remember them, not just the male participants. If a woman is too drunk to remember anything a morally decent man would refuse to have sex with her. The burden of proof is not on Goodwillie, it’s on the woman. You cannot have a society where it is the other way around. That is exactly what I have been saying the whole time, I object to the fact that people on social media have decided the outcome of this situation. So although the burden of proof (which is set by an institution that is there to uphold the law via punishment aka the judicial system) cannot be met, we have a similar outcome. The law is fundamental to the functioning of society. Does the law need to be updated? Maybe it does. Disregarding it and deciding the outcome based on the court of public opinion is a dangerous path to go down. Not to mention the fact that other laws may have been broken in the termination of this contract, and I’m taking about Goodwillie’s rights here. We cannot say ‘well we think he’s a rapist so his rights do not matter’ - what sort of messed up society acts in that way. And one last point, I do agree if someone believed that another person was too drunk to give consent then absolutely, the right and moral thing to do would not to have sex with them. But it is a subjective issue - especially when both people are drunk. And there is no way that he would know that should wouldn’t remember what happened unless he can see into the future so I don’t really understand what you are trying to say - you are advocating for one moral standard to be upheld and at the same time seem to be advocating for the rights of those who have been accused to not be a factor. The problem here is that there is no doubt that to some extent the woman consented. The dilemma is that once she did that can the man therefore be argued to be innocent whatever later transpired? If she consented to what she imagined was going to be tender and enjoyable sex but turned into basically violent rape does that mean it was her fault for consenting to go to his bed?
|
|
|
Post by biddulphchav on Feb 9, 2022 2:38:41 GMT
The burden of proof is not on Goodwillie, it’s on the woman. You cannot have a society where it is the other way around. That is exactly what I have been saying the whole time, I object to the fact that people on social media have decided the outcome of this situation. So although the burden of proof (which is set by an institution that is there to uphold the law via punishment aka the judicial system) cannot be met, we have a similar outcome. The law is fundamental to the functioning of society. Does the law need to be updated? Maybe it does. Disregarding it and deciding the outcome based on the court of public opinion is a dangerous path to go down. Not to mention the fact that other laws may have been broken in the termination of this contract, and I’m taking about Goodwillie’s rights here. We cannot say ‘well we think he’s a rapist so his rights do not matter’ - what sort of messed up society acts in that way. And one last point, I do agree if someone believed that another person was too drunk to give consent then absolutely, the right and moral thing to do would not to have sex with them. But it is a subjective issue - especially when both people are drunk. And there is no way that he would know that should wouldn’t remember what happened unless he can see into the future so I don’t really understand what you are trying to say - you are advocating for one moral standard to be upheld and at the same time seem to be advocating for the rights of those who have been accused to not be a factor. The problem here is that there is no doubt that to some extent the woman consented. The dilemma is that once she did that can the man therefore be argued to be innocent whatever later transpired? If she consented to what she imagined was going to be tender and enjoyable sex but turned into basically violent rape does that mean it was her fault for consenting to go to his bed? Well I hope it doesn’t mean that. But I didn’t see anything that stated this was a violent episode? However I do agree in principle - when you consent to something you have certain expectations of what it will entail. If the experience is then different (and it could be misunderstanding), you need to withdraw consent. At the same time, there is a ‘normal’ expectation for most activities so the other person in that situation has some obligation to act within the bounds of good morals and standards. Cleary, if consent is withdrawn and things continue we get into the legal realm, but how do we navigate through the grey area where expectations are different but consent isn’t withdrawn whether that be to alcohol or just a lack of self confidence etc etc?
|
|
|
Post by nottsover60 on Feb 10, 2022 14:23:53 GMT
www.thesun.co.uk/news/17606037/mum-defends-teacher-sex-pupil-west-lothian/So is it right that a gifted teacher should lose his job because of a legal relationship? Just to point out that in my opinion yes it is because he betrayed a position of trust because although 18 and obviously consented she was still his pupil. I posted to prove that footballers are not the only victims.
|
|
|
Post by Squeekster on Feb 10, 2022 14:42:34 GMT
www.thesun.co.uk/news/17606037/mum-defends-teacher-sex-pupil-west-lothian/So is it right that a gifted teacher should lose his job because of a legal relationship? Just to point out that in my opinion yes it is because he betrayed a position of trust because although 18 and obviously consented she was still his pupil. I posted to prove that footballers are not the only victims. Let’s Be Clear On Sexual Relations Between Teachers And Students Over 16. It’s not OK. Under the Sexual Offences Act 2003, any sexual relationship between someone who is in a position of trust, such as a teacher and a person to whom that trust extends, is criminal. So not quite the same. PS they are not my words, I looked it up.
|
|
|
Post by nottsover60 on Feb 10, 2022 15:10:09 GMT
www.thesun.co.uk/news/17606037/mum-defends-teacher-sex-pupil-west-lothian/So is it right that a gifted teacher should lose his job because of a legal relationship? Just to point out that in my opinion yes it is because he betrayed a position of trust because although 18 and obviously consented she was still his pupil. I posted to prove that footballers are not the only victims. Let’s Be Clear On Sexual Relations Between Teachers And Students Over 16. It’s not OK. Under the Sexual Offences Act 2003, any sexual relationship between someone who is in a position of trust, such as a teacher and a person to whom that trust extends, is criminal. So not quite the same. PS they are not my words, I looked it up. Or this one? www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-55567572Not condoning the teachers concerned but I do think footballers ought to be punished as I feel some take advantage of star struck teenagers.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Mar 5, 2022 9:31:52 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Laughing Gravy on Mar 5, 2022 9:48:56 GMT
Oh that’s ok then. As long as he’s only a rapist not a racist 🤷♂️
|
|
|
Post by a on Mar 5, 2022 10:42:21 GMT
Oh that’s ok then. As long as he’s only a rapist not a racist 🤷♂️ I don’t think they in any way excused his actions mate just correcting their own error.
|
|
|
Post by Laughing Gravy on Mar 5, 2022 10:46:52 GMT
Oh that’s ok then. As long as he’s only a rapist not a racist 🤷♂️ I don’t think they in any way excused his actions mate just correcting their own error. I guessed that mate but that’s what they made it sound like.
|
|
|
Post by a on Mar 5, 2022 11:02:21 GMT
I don’t think they in any way excused his actions mate just correcting their own error. I guessed that mate but that’s what they made it sound like. Oh I agree it was very matter of fact, but they have to remain to be seen as neutral, even though the crime of rape is clearly abhorrent to us all, including sky too
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Mar 5, 2022 11:06:35 GMT
I don’t think it sounds like that at all.
Saying he’s a racist is wrong and they could get sued for it. Merely just correcting their mistake.
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on Feb 7, 2023 21:38:01 GMT
I’ve been to watch Radcliffe v Belper in the Northern League Premier this evening and unbeknown to me Radcliffe have signed Goodwillie.
He’s scored a superb hat trick and is clearly a cut above this level, I didn’t even realise until they announced his name after his first goal and I Googled it.
Not sure how the locals feel about it……..
|
|
|
Post by thehartshillbadger on Feb 7, 2023 21:39:52 GMT
I’ve been to watch Radcliffe v Belper in the Northern League Premier this evening and unbeknown to me Radlcliffe have signed Goodwillie. He’s scored a superb hat trick and is clearly a cut above this level, I didn’t even realise until they announced his name after his first goal and I Googled it. Not sure how the locals feel about it…….. Sign him up!
|
|
|
Post by Laughing Gravy on Feb 8, 2023 10:11:58 GMT
I’ve been to watch Radcliffe v Belper in the Northern League Premier this evening and unbeknown to me Radlcliffe have signed Goodwillie. He’s scored a superb hat trick and is clearly a cut above this level, I didn’t even realise until they announced his name after his first goal and I Googled it. Not sure how the locals feel about it…….. Sign him up! Goodwillie and Smallbone? What a combo.
|
|