Adam Johnson Trial Verdict

[Mowgli]

I quoted the wrong lad mate it was for @ollie c
But ta any way.

 

[Reiver]

She is the chief executive of a company that's name is being dragged through the mud with these allegations.

She needs to deny it if it isn't true...

Not at the whim of message boards and the Sun.

The club's name would be dragged through the mud without these allegations, just summat we have to live with 'til the next Giggs or Ched Evans.

 

[haway]

Lots of things are said in trials that aren't always true.

Why would Byrne be obliged to answer to a proven liar when she wasn't in the witness box?

As we said before it depends what you mean by 'obligated'. She's not legally obligated to say or do shit. But as is apparent by the current backlash, if she didn't know/ have what has been alleged, she could put water on this fire in 2 minutes by confirming that.

The fact his QC was there should give her further incentive to speak up, because he seemed to confirm, at the very least, some of what AJ alleged.

If AJ said one thing and Byrne said another I would believe Byrne. The issue is he's said one thing, parts of it have been supported by his QC, and she's not responded at all. In fact the club have responded, but they've proceeded to miss this one issue which is the fundamental worry people have - that the club had hard evidence 8 months ago he's acted inappropriately and kept playing him.

 

[Market Where?]

She is the chief executive of a company that's name is being dragged through the mud with these allegations.

She needs to deny it if it isn't true...

The fact that a several hundred million dollar business operating in a very high profile media environment has not responded to the slating in the media today smacks of absolute amateurism.

 

[ollie c]

We the supporters will be here long after owners, players and managers. Don't dessert the badge to spite those you have a grievance with marra its you that'll be losing out. Whichever side you're on at the minute it's a pervert that caused the stink and arguments amongst us, he can get fucked.

Know what you're saying...of course!

 

[Mowgli]

Not at the whim of message boards and the Sun.

The club's name would be dragged through the mud without these allegations, just summat we have to live with 'til the next Giggs or Ched Evans.

Fair enough. We just disagree.

The fact that a several hundred million dollar business operating in a very high profile media environment has not responded to the slating in the media today smacks of absolute amateurism.

It's pathetic. Another in a long line of reasons why the boardroom needs to be gutted out

 

[Purrfect South]

Sounds like the club never told him about the content of the WhatsApp messages

After reading those it was obvious to anyone at the club that he was going to plead guilty

There a few perfectly innocent messages at the start of those exchanges. If the club were only shown those, they would be shocked when he pleaded guilty.

 

[ftm1974]

Why would Byrne be obliged to answer to a proven liar when she wasn't in the witness box?

Well, she felt obliged to refute at great length any implication that she knew he would plead guilty....

The fact that she didn't take that opportunity to also refute that she had any knowledge of his guilt (since he'd admitted it to her - and she had the documentation to prove it) is very telling.

 

[Reiver]

Fuck off.

You all spent the whole afternoon debating this and came to the conclusion,

"If the answer is no, then we move on and the club remain as blameless as the rest of us."

"If the answer is yes, then a full enquiry must be launched and heads need to roll, because risking the reputation of the football club in choosing to ignore that fact is enough to turn me off from Sunderland altogether."

Decisive indeed.

And what if you never get an answer to your 'yes or no' question ........ will you have a weekly vote

 

[theinediblebulk]

While i see that point. Every major media outlet in the country is asking the same questions and the NSPCC is piping up. They can nip all this on bud right now...

It was always going to be a media shit storm, no matter what the club did imo. It's already been pointed out that the club acted as best they could in the opinion of a QC called Joshua Rozenberg but that's getting ignored under all the other shit that's coming out about it. Only fucker to blame and get the knives out for are for Johnson imo, everyone else has just been caught up in the wake of his shit behavior and seeing as he's a convicted sex offender and known liar, I really couldn't give a fuck what he's claimed. If it was coming from a different reputable source, then I would give it a lot more credence.

 

[Deleted User 18963]

Not at the whim of message boards and the Sun.

The club's name would be dragged through the mud without these allegations, just summat we have to live with 'til the next Giggs or Ched Evans.

The message boards and the sun?

You know better than that, dont ignore it.

Front page of The Times! One of the most respected papers in the country, The Guardian too.

 

[HutchSafc]

Not at the whim of message boards and the Sun.

The club's name would be dragged through the mud without these allegations, just summat we have to live with 'til the next Giggs or Ched Evans.

Its not just the message board and the sun though is it? Also we wouldn't have to live with them if they would just deny the allegation.

 

[safcforever]

They knew he was pleading not guilty and that he and his legal team expected a not guilty result - that is until the day of the trial. It is truly bizarre for his QC to say the club knew the situation, get his client to plead not guilty at the magistrates court and then on the day of the Crown Court trial to change the plea and then somehow blame the club having pocketed £3M worth of wages.

His sentence should reflect that too. If he's lied for profit (which he very well could have) he then should be punished to the maximum sentence. The bottom end of the sentences (minimum) should be withheld for the people who admit it and don't withhold any evidence and don't waste people's time and state money.

 

[Reiver]

Well, she felt obliged to refute at great length any implication that she knew he would plead guilty....

The fact that she didn't take that opportunity to also refute that she had any knowledge of his guilt (since he'd admitted it to her - and she had the documentation to prove it) is very telling.

TBH, there are various people asking various questions ...... none of which she's obliged to answer.

For every answer there would be another question until someone came out with 'methinks the lady does protest too much'.

Which is what the tabloids are after imo.

 

[Madmartigan]

I'm sick of all this talk about guilty pleas and wotnot. There is only one burning question which needs to be answered clearly by the club and that is, did they know he had done it?

This!

In the article; it says:

"However, the trial at Bradford Crown Court heard evidence that the club's chief executive, Margaret Byrne, met with Johnson and his barrister in May 2015 when he accepted he had kissed the girl and exchanged messages with her.

The jury was told that, before the case came to court, club bosses had seen all the 834 WhatsApp messages the pair sent to each other, along with transcripts of police interviews."

so, 2 more questions:
1) Were the police allowed to the show the club the Whatsapp stuff and police interviews (as posed by @Wayne The Punk)
2) If they DID know, what happens now???

 

[Market Where?]

The two statements that come out of the trial that needed to be addressed in the statement are that in about May last year:

• Johnson admitted to a senior official of the club that he had committed an offence by kissing an underage girl in a sexual manner
• Senior official(s) of the club saw a transcript of WhatsApp messages that indicated Johnson was guilty of a sex offence against an underage girl

Neither of those statements are denied in the statement.

^^^^^This. And the senior official is a f***ing lawyer.

The quickest reading of the club statement yesterday would tell anyone bar the terminally stupid that it was absolutely piss poor and would attract a slating in the media - rightly so.

 

[Reiver]

The message boards and the sun?

You know better than that, dont ignore it.

Front page of The Times! One of the most respected papers in the country, The Guardian too.

I was being facetious ....... I'm allowed to do that just like you and everyone else on here.

I didn't see the 'Paedo in his Speedos' quote on the front of the Times to be fair like .........

 

[Peaknutt]

You are a genius. Do you think that those messages were shared with "anyone" at the club? And I still dont believe the police can show evidence prior to a trial, someone with a legal background may be able to enlighten us

Well, it was heard in court that Byrne had full copies of the WhatsApp messages

You must be logged on to see external links

You must be logged on to see external links

You must be logged on to see external links

Sunderland AFC chief Margaret Byrne also had full copies of Johnson's Whatsapp exchanges with schoolgirl on 4 May 2015, court hears

 

[Deleted User 18963]

TBH, there are various people asking various questions ...... none of which she's obliged to answer.

For every answer there would be another question until someone came out with 'methinks the lady does protest too much'.

Which is what the tabloids are after imo.

Disagree. Those who have issues with the statement, would you continually want more information if the statement clearly denied that the club seen the messages and evidence and that AJ told them about kiss?

I wouldn't. I bet those who have an issue wouldn't either. Those were the 2 serious allegations that were made and put to the club. We have not denied them. It really is that simple.

 

[janey]

The same.

made my feelings known about her last night.