Adam Johnson Trial Verdict

[haway]

The stag do was a group of mags iirc

someone claimed a month ago on here it was safc and they knew them, no idea which is true.

 

[SAFCOldie]

The lawyers will ensure she is well looked after

Not in ten year when she's searching the internet ! What an idiot he's been.

 

[haway]

Two sides to every story, I feel most sorry for his little kid to be honest.

and the wife, and the victim, and him.

No winners, just many lives ruined. IMO. Only ever losers out of this kind of offending.

 

[Icarebecauseyoudo]

After prison no money child support could be working for someone on here one day....I have not clue what he be good at....

Probably pointless doing a lifeguard qualification

 

[KarenDent]

the whole thing, from top to bottom is awful... for everyone, from the girl herself, her family, his family through to his daughter & her mother... awful...

I'm worried he might do something drastic

 

[lordy]

it won't be just him in the papers however, as you know well enough, no doubt the club will be also in among the pages of anger about him and also smashing it hard at those in power at the club, the trial maybe over just about, but the trial by public opinion and the media has only just begun.

You must be logged on to see external links

 

[SAFCOldie]

Probably pointless doing a lifeguard qualification

Off to China to play no doubt.

 

[ANonnyMoose]

This is a footballer who has picked up a girl at the training ground, offered her signed shirts etc. How the fuck is that not a position of trust? If he met her on a night out, fair. He met her at his f***ing job man.

If an employee of mine was accused of grooming girls they met via my place of work, whether it was a position of trust or not, they would be suspended without pay until the trial was over fact. Tell me a situation you wouldn't?

It was outside of his place of work, was it not? His job NEVER puts him in the position to have children under his care - therefore not a position of trust in my opinion.

 

[Icarebecauseyoudo]

Off to China to play no doubt.

Highly unlikely, they can afford to pay for prestigious players, not clownshoes

 

[haway]

You must be logged on to see external links

TBH sums up exactly how I feel

 

[RTRsBM]

I can't read 84 pages but what a disgrace the clubs statement is. Very carefully worded.

 

[WezSAFC]

You must be logged on to see external links

Anyone seen this?

Shocking journalism for me.

Ah the Daily f***ing Mail. The paper that prints the 'all grown up' articles of the female offspring of celebs, had an unhealthy interest in Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes nipper and, if I remember, published some right pervy bikini pics of one of the Kardashians who was underage.

Fuck the Daily Mail and their self-righteous indignation. Wankers.

 

[haway]

It was outside of his place of work, was it not? His job NEVER puts him in the position to have children under his care - therefore not a position of trust in my opinion.

She was coming to the training ground to meet him. He gave her a shirt at the training ground. This is all on SAFC premises.

 

[Tadger]

As events proved, a guilty plea allows them to do so. A not guilty plea is a different game altogether. They aren't going to risk being accused of prejudicing a trial, or being sued for wrongful dismissal if he walked and it could have happened, despite the evidence. If they'd sacked him that day his brief would have been talking to the jury about how the club had wronged him.

I think it's fair to say the the club have handled this the right way from a purely legal perspective.

There's still a big question mark over the club's motives and how much they actually knew.

It always annoys me when people go on about "moral outrage" and say things like "there's no morals in football" as if it doesn't matter.

 

[haway]

You must be logged on to see external links

Have a look at the one by louise taylor (guardian) on '7 questions'... better written but expressing the same worries.

 

[---Nemo---]

But why isn't it affecting the jury he was suspended for 2 weeks? Why isn't it affecting a jury he's allowed to play (bias in the other direction). If you said 'we're suspending him with no bias so he can get on with matters in his personal life'... how is that biasing anyone? Its what would happen in most jobs?

Eh? I'm OK with a suspension on full pay, I don't see that as being anything but the club waiting for an outcome before making a decision. I'm on about sacking him whilst they believe he is about to plead not guilty to all charges. Once that hits the public domain and press get hold of it anything can happen and it could easily be seen to influence a jury.

 

[ANonnyMoose]

She was coming to the training ground to meet him. He gave her a shirt at the training ground. This is all on SAFC premises.

"At the training ground" - do we know where? In the facility? In the car park?

As for position of trust, our friend Wikipedia has this:

A position of trust is any position that requires its holder to enjoy the trust of those who elected or chose the holder. It is often used in a more restricted sense defined by an organization or by legislation.

According to one common definition, it is any position that has responsibility for "cash, keys, or kids (minors)".

Footballers are not a position of trust, going by that.

 

[---Nemo---]

I think it's fair to say the the club have handled this the right way from a purely legal perspective.

There's still a big question mark over the club's motives and how much they actually knew.

It always annoys me when people go on about "moral outrage" and say things like "there's no morals in football" as if it doesn't matter.

Do you reckon we'll ever find out?

 

[Tadger]

It was outside of his place of work, was it not? His job NEVER puts him in the position to have children under his care - therefore not a position of trust in my opinion.

Him being an adult and her being 15 puts him in a position of trust, not to mention the fact she was his "fan".

Do you reckon we'll ever find out?

Probably not. Which makes it ten times worse. This is going to hang over us for a long time.

 

[haway]

Eh? I'm OK with a suspension on full pay, I don't see that as being anything but the club waiting for an outcome before making a decision. I'm on about sacking him whilst they believe he is about to plead not guilty to all charges. Once that hits the public domain and press get hold of it anything can happen and it could easily be seen to influence a jury.

But my question was, say Im alleged to have raped X, in the SAFC changing room, and my defence is 'I didn't rape her, it was consensual!'... but it's still a summary dismissal to have sex in the changing room, so they can sack me without biasing the trial. In the same way, I think the club could sack him for inappropriate behaviour without making any inclination either way as to whether or not he was guilty of the offence ... they could soundly say, guilty or not, he's been inappropriate.

That said, I wouldn't have sacked him, I'd have suspended with pay.