• The forums will be unavailable for a few hours on Saturday 6th June, when they do return they will initially be in a degraded state with some features missing, but normal posting/reading will be possible. The main website will not be affected by these updates.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.
    Some other features of the forum are also currently disabled.

Adam Johnson Trial Verdict

Status
Not open for further replies.

redandwhiterob said:
If that was the case why wasn't it put into the statement?
Click to expand...

I read it as 'We knew what he done but we weren't allowed to make a decision as it would prejudice the courts'

It's not like he played a big part in keeping us up either when he came back. Was on the bench for a lot of games however I'm sure the media will be all over us saying he was instrumental and the club weren't bothered.
 
HarrogateMackem said:
Why haven't the club denied it then?

If its not true its a massive oversight on there part as the media and other fans have picked up on it and we are going to get a hammering.

If it is true...
Click to expand...
Maybe it is, I don't think I've said it's not an oversight, but tbf to me that's not the point I've been arguing. I just wouldn't trust a barrister or a defendant as far as I could chuck either of them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gaz
redandwhiterob said:
So why the fuck have the club not denied it in the one and only statement they are making on the subject??
Click to expand...
Because in essence they'd be constantly having to answer more and more detail.
For instance, is they address Johnson's assertion that they knew about the kissing, and say 'we were not aware that kissing took place' (just as an example) - then the next question will be 'were you aware that he arranged to meet a fan privately?'... the questions would not stop.

Addressing the current 'big question' would only lead to a new big question that needed addressing. Legal advice will be to avoid directly getting into a 'Johnson said, SAFC said' statement - just a simple rebuttal is enough, and that's what they've issued.

Let the media start investigating in more detail if they wish, and if it comes to light that the club DID know a lot more, then fine, they deserve castigation, but until then, the club hasn't done anything wrong.
 
Sweeper said:
He should at the very least have been suspended immediately, pending the outcome. That suspension should not have been lifted. Heads will probably roll over this.
Click to expand...

Isn't there a maximum day suspension though? I seem to remember Bramble received the maximum suspension. (40 days maybe)
 
Johnsafc said:
Surely the club couldn't sack him as he pled not guilty and anything else would mean they were prejudicing the jury
Click to expand...

Regardless of the trial and the PFA and his not guilty stance, and regardless of whether they could sack or even suspend him, the club cannot be compelled to select him for the match day squad and then play him.
 
haway said:
That isn't what it says. The statement literally says 'During the time that she was present there was no suggestion whatsoever that Mr. Johnson would be changing his plea. Some documents were received relating to the case, which were immediately sent to Mr. Pownall for his attention. However, the club was not in a position to make any judgment on the outcome of the case nor on Mr. Johnson’s decision to defend all the allegations'

What it's saying is the club had 'some documents', which given they haven't suggested otherwise, are presumably the ones Johnson said (I would have thought if he said they had info they didn't the club would have refuted it). But because he was pleading not guilty, the club decided that what was contained in the documents didn't matter. So they presumably, based on that statement, did know, but decided that they didn't want to sack him 'because he was pleading not guilty'.

The club haven't refuting a thing Johnson said, all they're saying is 'that doesn't matter, what matters is he was pleading not guilty'.
Click to expand...

Why do you think Aj has tried to sully the club mate? A man takes his punishment without having to bring anyone else down with him.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top