Adam Johnson Trial Verdict

[soapster]

"Seems to be people defending the club and absolving them of any blame that seems to be shouting the loudest now."

That isn't an opinion, it's a claim that people are absolving the club of any blame.

You can't give one example so you're wrong .......... sorry, I don't make the rules, that's just how it is.

Good

here is an extract from the club statement

The club did not give evidence either for the prosecution or the defence in this case. It was therefore not present in court when it is understood that a suggestion was made that the club knew all along that Mr. Johnson was intending to change his plea just before trial to enable him to continue to play football for the club and that the club may also have been involved in tactical discussions about the plea. This is utterly without foundation and is refuted in the strongest possible terms.

It does seem to highlight that the club did not know anything about guilty pleas and therefore about the guilty actions.
If it was such an issue the prosecution had a right to seek advice from the club about this and could have called them in rebuttal but they chose not to.
IIRC the prosecution did dirty SAFC for its own ends by use of clever words like it could and really in was not in the defence interest to challenge those. So we got a bad name.
The same as when Johnson came out and said the club knew all about it. The club knew what they were told by the defence team which was not guilty when all the evidence came out. They did not know all the facts ie prosecution and defence.
The club are on a hammering to nothing and it does not matter what they say or do somebody will think of another agenda and have a go again.

Lots of underlying issues, footballers being bored and too much time on their hands. Pay. famous. Johnson was wrong in what he did and what he wanted to do. He is also a liar and has lied to us all and to the court. We have all been let down by him and we hurt. I understand there is anger but we also need to consider the legal side has its system, the pfa has its system and civil liability has its system. You cant throw those ingredients into the pan and make a lovely pie. Throw that lot together and you get a mess

 

[Reiver]

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.

No, of course not, that was a bit of a flippant answer in a sea of pontificating amateur barristers.

If she denies it you know, as I do, that the next word out of some mouths would be 'COVER UP!!!'

And it would carry on just as it is now .........

 

[Pacific]

the club will say nowt more and wait for the issue to blow over. Byrne is untouchable

 

[Deleted User 18963]

the club will say nowt more and wait for the issue to blow over. Byrne is untouchable

If she rides this storm, I tent to agree.

 

[Reiver]

Good

here is an extract from the club statement

The club did not give evidence either for the prosecution or the defence in this case. It was therefore not present in court when it is understood that a suggestion was made that the club knew all along that Mr. Johnson was intending to change his plea just before trial to enable him to continue to play football for the club and that the club may also have been involved in tactical discussions about the plea. This is utterly without foundation and is refuted in the strongest possible terms.

It does seem to highlight that the club did not know anything about guilty pleas and therefore about the guilty actions.
If it was such an issue the prosecution had a right to seek advice from the club about this and could have called them in rebuttal but they chose not to.
IIRC the prosecution did dirty SAFC for its own ends by use of clever words like it could and really in was not in the defence interest to challenge those. So we got a bad name.
The same as when Johnson came out and said the club knew all about it. The club knew what they were told by the defence team which was not guilty when all the evidence came out. They did not know all the facts ie prosecution and defence.
The club are on a hammering to nothing and it does not matter what they say or do somebody will think of another agenda and have a go again.

Lots of underlying issues, footballers being bored and too much time on their hands. Pay. famous. Johnson was wrong in what he did and what he wanted to do. He is also a liar and has lied to us all and to the court. We have all been let down by him and we hurt. I understand there is anger but we also need to consider the legal side has its system, the pfa has its system and civil liability has its system. You cant throw those ingredients into the pan and make a lovely pie. Throw that lot together and you get a mess

Good?

Why are you quoting me?

I was quoting someone else and your comments are totally irrelevant to what I was saying.

""Seems to be people defending the club and absolving them of any blame that seems to be shouting the loudest now."

"That isn't an opinion, it's a claim that people are absolving the club of any blame.

You can't give one example so you're wrong .......... sorry, I don't make the rules, that's just how it is."

 

[HutchSafc]

No, of course not, that was a bit of a flippant answer in a sea of pontificating amateur barristers.

If she denies it you know, as I do, that the next word out of some mouths would be 'COVER UP!!!'

And it would carry on just as it is now .........

Well I agree its a no win situation but the club could at least acknowledge and respond to the one allegation made against them.

 

[Wayne The Punk]

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

it is getting tedious, so, if they did hear he snogged a 15 year old, sack him? They had top legal advice, its shocking how many people are jumping onto the blame the club bandwagon now. There is only one person to blame for this

 

[Deleted member 26022]

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.

yes, its not going away soon like, and as for the rest of the uk, from what i can see online aka twitter, there are a lot of people also talking about whats been going on this is massive news.

 

[haway]

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.

One of the funniest suggestions in this thread is that its 'a few people on a message board' or 'a few people on Twitter'.

To be clear we have: The BBC, ITV, Sky, The Guardian, The Times, the Daily Mail, the Sun and the Mirror all asking questions of SAFC in either editorials or opinion pieces.

We have: the NSPCC, prominent child sex abuse campaigner Peter Saunders, Wearside women in need, Dr Melanie Lang - expert in child safeguarding, Jim Gilling from SAFCSA etc. all again, raising worries about SAFC behaving inappropriately.

And yet this is all just 'the Sun and a message board'.

 

[Market Where?]

the club will say nowt more and wait for the issue to blow over. Byrne is untouchable

I don't think so on this one as it has the very likely potential to scare off sponsors.

 

[Cack Stottie]

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

At what point did I have to start answering to you, like? I have no idea who you are.

 

[Dilligaf60]

made my feelings known about her last night.

Didn't she give up on the burning idea and have them made into toilet paper or something? Sunderland central mp also in on the act. She says questions should be asked. Notably she doesn't mention which questions or by whom. I wish people like this would be more specific instead of coming out with sound bites. Makes you wonder why they do it.

 

[Reiver]

One of the funniest suggestions in this thread is that its 'a few people on a message board' or 'a few people on Twitter'.

To be clear we have: The BBC, ITV, Sky, The Guardian, The Times, the Daily Mail, the Sun and the Mirror all asking questions of SAFC in either editorials or opinion pieces.

We have: the NSPCC, prominent child sex abuse campaigner Peter Saunders, Wearside women in need, Dr Melanie Lang - expert in child safeguarding, Jim Gilling from SAFCSA etc. all again, raising worries about SAFC behaving inappropriately.

And yet this is all just 'the Sun and a message board'.

I was being flippant as I said ...... but don't let that interrupt your agenda.

Do you quote The BBC, ITV, Sky, The Guardian, The Times, the Daily Mail, the Sun and the Mirror in every relevant post

 

[luvulongtime]

One of the funniest suggestions in this thread is that its 'a few people on a message board' or 'a few people on Twitter'.

To be clear we have: The BBC, ITV, Sky, The Guardian, The Times, the Daily Mail, the Sun and the Mirror all asking questions of SAFC in either editorials or opinion pieces.

We have: the NSPCC, prominent child sex abuse campaigner Peter Saunders, Wearside women in need, Dr Melanie Lang - expert in child safeguarding, Jim Gilling from SAFCSA etc. all again, raising worries about SAFC behaving inappropriately.

And yet this is all just 'the Sun and a message board'.

could you let them know i'll be in the Blandford from 7 pm tomorrow.

 

[janey]

Didn't she give up on the burning idea and have them made into toilet paper or something? Sunderland central mp also in on the act. She says questions should be asked. Notably she doesn't mention which questions or by whom. I wish people like this would be more specific instead of coming out with sound bites. Makes you wonder why they do it.

As I said last night CP is dangerous, not specifically linked to this but generally I know her really well. She hates men she would hate every bloke on this board and see abuse, sexism and control in every post. While women can't do any of that. A hidden agenda, never, oh and she's a Mag.

 

[Deleted member 26022]

One of the funniest suggestions in this thread is that its 'a few people on a message board' or 'a few people on Twitter'.

To be clear we have: The BBC, ITV, Sky, The Guardian, The Times, the Daily Mail, the Sun and the Mirror all asking questions of SAFC in either editorials or opinion pieces.

We have: the NSPCC, prominent child sex abuse campaigner Peter Saunders, Wearside women in need, Dr Melanie Lang - expert in child safeguarding, Jim Gilling from SAFCSA etc. all again, raising worries about SAFC behaving inappropriately.

And yet this is all just 'the Sun and a message board'.

like i said before to prehab, massive and for me, its just begun, the media won't be happy until she comes out with a statement, or resigns, or some other such action taking place, the whole county is watching right now, and at the moment, our reputation is in the bin, god knows what is gonna be like come summer trying to sign players because no doubt there will be a few of them very interested in the next few days and weeks.

 

[Must be bored]

This!

In the article; it says:



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???

The investigating officer said in court that the police did not discuss the evidence with the club, their discussions were only around the nature of the allegations as part of the club's safeguarding/risk assessment. Presumably anything given to the club was via Johnson/his legal team, alongside his ongoing claims of not guilty and his/his legal team's belief that he would be found not guilty once the full evidence was presented.

 

[ollie c]

the club will say nowt more and wait for the issue to blow over. Byrne is untouchable

If the club have done what is alleged here, merely sacking Byrne won't make the issue go away, anyway.

 

[haway]

I was being flippant as I said ...... but don't let that interrupt your agenda.

Do you quote The BBC, ITV, Sky, The Guardian, The Times, the Daily Mail, the Sun and the Mirror in every relevant post

Do you or do you not accept that there are a wide range of media sources and groups asking for more information from SAFC?

You've said several times in this thread, flippant or not, words to the effect of 'why would safc respond when it's only a few people asking for a response'.

You might fine well think that the media hoo-har and people speaking out doesn't deserve a response, but it's silly to pretend that this isn't a big issue. It's headlined several papers man.

 

[Mainze]

Has closing our eyes and pretending this was all a bad dream worked then?

Or have the club been dismantled in the national media today....I daren't pick up a paper