• 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.
So the club have tried to treat the fans and the press the idiots with a well worded statement that didn't deny they knew Johnson had kissed her and fall flat on their face, something needs to be done whether they come out and actually deny the allegations which would be easy to do if they are untrue which looks more and more likely that they are true. Only other option is to make an example of someone on the board and send them packing.

Not saying it should be Byrne but whoever looked at the evidence and decided 'You know what? We'll let him play anyway' The club knew he was guilty and were only concerned about the fact he admitted it. What is baffling is the club were happy to stand by and watch him try play innocent despite they knowing he wasn't.

There is no excuse for him to have played, so fuck if we were in a relegation battle, it's no reason to play someone who likes fiddling with children.
 

hexhamali said:
Unfortunately the media often manipulate the way they report the news to push an agenda. More examples of this can be seen in both the migrant crisis and the benefit cuts.
Click to expand...

Andy Hughes (@SkyAndyHughes) tweeted at 11:47 am on Wed, Feb 24, 2016:
Sunderland #SAFC had all transcripts and access to messages between the #AdamJohnson and the girl from at least May 4, 2015.
(
You must be logged on to see external links
)

This was tweeted during the trial from the courtroom in a long timelime of tweets. Doesn't seem agenda based in the slightest, more a matter of factual disclosure.
 
Tadger said:
It's not about ascertaining Johnson's guilt, it's about avoiding a potential PR shitstorm for the club by distancing itself from an employee facing serious charges.

She's a bloody lawyer, you think they don't spend most of their careers scouring through paperwork?
Click to expand...

It's absolutely about ascertaining his guilt because that's the precondition they would need to sack him, unless they decided to run their own investigation which I would think would at best be extremely ill advised when a criminal case is under way.
 
Mainze said:
Andy Hughes (@SkyAndyHughes) tweeted at 11:47 am on Wed, Feb 24, 2016:
Sunderland #SAFC had all transcripts and access to messages between the #AdamJohnson and the girl from at least May 4, 2015.
(
You must be logged on to see external links
)

This was tweeted during the trial from the courtroom in a long timelime of tweets. Doesn't seem agenda based in the slightest, more a matter of factual disclosure.
Click to expand...

All of the journo's tweeted that.
 
sdurhamlad said:
This is the nub of the matter. If SAFC had the information that indicated some form of conviction was very possible then he should not have kicked another ball for them until it was resolved.
With all the legal experts available to a huge turnover company they must have known there was a chance he would be found guilty and with child abuse such a poison issue I just can't believe the club got it so wrong.
Further clarification us needed by SAFC as well as the resignation of the CEO
Click to expand...

Agreed.
 
Sima said:
He's met her through his work - similar.
He's abused his trust via their mutual connection to his employer - similar.
Click to expand...
This will be an aggravating feature when it comes to sentencing. The prosecution could also request an order banning him from working in football on the same basis. I would be surprised if they didn't.
 
Rober33 said:
It's absolutely about ascertaining his guilt because that's the precondition they would need to sack him, unless they decided to run their own investigation which I would think would at best be extremely ill advised when a criminal case is under way.
Click to expand...

Who said anything about sacking him? He could have been dropped from the squad.
 
Tadger said:
It's not about ascertaining Johnson's guilt, it's about avoiding a potential PR shitstorm for the club by distancing itself from an employee facing serious charges.

She's a bloody lawyer, you think they don't spend most of their careers scouring through paperwork?
Click to expand...

She may be getting the stick but the decision has come from above her pay grade imo. No way on earth she has made the decision to play him alone imo
 
Cockney Mackem said:
And yet, it was alleged in court and stated by the judge at the end of the trial as an Agreed Fact that the club saw evidence that he was guilty, and the club's statement supposedly in response to what was said in court was not to respond to that allegation at all.
Click to expand...

It was not agreed by SAFC as they weren't present at the trial so to try and represent it as an agreed fact is at best disingenuous.
 
Mainze said:
Andy Hughes (@SkyAndyHughes) tweeted at 11:47 am on Wed, Feb 24, 2016:
Sunderland #SAFC had all transcripts and access to messages between the #AdamJohnson and the girl from at least May 4, 2015.
(
You must be logged on to see external links
)

This was tweeted during the trial from the courtroom in a long timelime of tweets. Doesn't seem agenda based in the slightest, more a matter of factual disclosure.
Click to expand...
that's how the echo blog reported it too...
 
I guess your explanation is that the media fairy all told them to write the same thing?



Not at all the information is out there I've never denied it, I'm just not repeating different versions of the same story over and over and over and over and over again to prove a point.
 
Rober33 said:
You just being silly now, the news story that will sell is obvious, of course they've all came to the same conclusion.

As I've said a million stories written about the same quote still adds nothing to the debate especially when none of us have seen the original quotes.
Click to expand...

No, I mean the comments on the articles, and what other message boards are saying, why are they so bias?

You do realise, right, that everything that comes out the court will have to be transcribed by someone in the media. So whatever you hear will have come via a journalist. If every journalist present is saying the same thing, then quotes or no quotes, why do you dispute the sentiment of what they're ALL saying?
 
Tadger said:
Who said anything about sacking him? He could have been dropped from the squad.
Click to expand...

Could he?

Are you sure the PFA would have no problem with him being dropped from the squad purely because of these accusations, given the long term damage that not playing could have on his career?
 
walesie said:
I can understand them not suing the player, I think that would cause more hassle than its worth & rake everything up again for the victim. Completely agree with the rest of the post though.
Click to expand...

I would probably have agreed with not suing him a couple of weeks ago. I just think now that if the club was to successfully sue him for wages/damages then there would be no better way of putting the whole mess to bed and show no wrong doing on the clubs behalf meaning we all as a club can move on and concentrate on whats happening on the pitch rather than wake up to this shite every day.
 
It should be very interesting to see our crowd reaction next home day, hopefully the away fans can voice their opinions of the board.
 
haway said:
Yes because my follow up question was going to be whether you meant in criminal trials, whether you mean in Crown Court etc. and then continue to ask why being a witness would have any bearing on your understanding of what barristers can legally /can't legally do but I decided it was getting a bit invasive, asking you follow up q's about your life etc, and would invariably come across as dismissive, which I don't mean to be, but I don't understand why being a witness in cases gives you any insight on what you suggested it did...
Click to expand...
I wasn't just a witness, and I mean in all Courts. Believe me I know how the legal system works. Everything I have said is from experience.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top