• 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.

The Beautiful Game said:
They've given a badly worded statement, but I believe they were trying to deny just that. They've said they weren't involved in any tactical discussions about him playing. They also said "his intention was to defend the charges in their entirety and he was confident of success". This suggests to me he didn't tell them he did it. But we're both just guessing. A new statement to clarify would be nice but we aren't going to get one.
Click to expand...
They have had plenty of time to come up with a statement, no chance in a case as serious as this they would cock it up this badly if they didn't know about anything, it's clear to see that they've come up with a cleverly worded statement to try and dodge the accusation.
 
theinediblebulk said:
If the club had seen proof of his guilt, I think they would have sacked him there and then, never mind suspend him. But I'm highly dubious of what was claimed regarding this evidence due to the fact it came from his defence team, the same lot that 'advised' him to plead not guilty. I still don't see how Johnson's QC would give the club any evidence that pointed to him being guilty. Just doesn't make sense to me. Again, all my opinion, not stating it as a fact.
Click to expand...

This. I don't get why anyone thinks if Johnson's legal team had the damning evidence to hand and knew he was likely to go down they would not do everything to hide it from SAFC and prolong his career, which is maybe why it's been dragged out so long. They're hardly likely to present it to SAFC, then see him suspended or sacked and lose earnings, goodwill and maybe prejudice opinion of him.

Also SAFC suspended him immediately initially and sacked him when he pleaded guilty to the grooming and the sexual kiss. That suggests they've acted accordingly when needed, so it's unlikey they'd have sat on knowledge of wrong doing given the type of case it is and protected him, whilst knowing they'd suffer for it later.
 
haway said:
The f***ing irony, yet again.

I might be boring the forum to death in this thread but at least day in, day out, I don't troll every single thread on here with my mundane patter.
Click to expand...

Nor do I ....... you're really struggling with the concept of irony aren't you?

I'm not 'trolling' this thread either, I'm giving my opinion.

That it doesn't suit your agenda doesn't make it trolling no matter how you stamp your feet.

Posting multiple smilies doesn't make you look un-troll like btw.
 
Sima said:
That's fair enough but you've got to respect others who don't feel the same, yes?
Click to expand...

Have said that consistently. It's not like I'm calling anyone who disagrees with me a f***ing idiot or owt, because they're not. They just have a different opinion to me. No way was everyone going to be happy with what has gone on, regardless of the outcome.

The bit it keeps coming back to is what did the club actually know? For me, I just can't see why Johnson's defence team would hand over evidence that incriminated him then 'advise' him to plead not guilty. That doesn't make any sense to me at all. Other people don't think the same and that's fair enough.
 
Perryqhill said:
This. I don't get why anyone thinks if Johnson's legal team had the damning evidence to hand and knew he was likely to go down they would not do everything to hide it from SAFC and prolong his career, which is maybe why it's been dragged out so long. They're hardly likely to present it to SAFC, then see him suspended or sacked and lose earnings, goodwill and maybe prejudice opinion of him.

Also SAFC suspended him immediately initially and sacked him when he pleaded guilty to the grooming and the sexual kiss. That suggests they've acted accordingly when needed, so it's unlikey they'd have sat on knowledge of wrong doing given the type of case it is and protected him, whilst knowing they'd suffer for it later.
Click to expand...

I can see every bit of the logic and sense of what you're saying. I can completely believe that this is what happened in May 2015. If it was, then it begs the question why the statement released yesterday made such a massive pig's arse of stating that and left the club wide open to get kicked all over the gaff by every news and media organisation on the planet today.
 
Perryqhill said:
This. I don't get why anyone thinks if Johnson's legal team had the damning evidence to hand and knew he was likely to go down they would not do everything to hide it from SAFC and prolong his career, which is maybe why it's been dragged out so long. They're hardly likely to present it to SAFC, then see him suspended or sacked and lose earnings, goodwill and maybe prejudice opinion of him.

Also SAFC suspended him immediately initially and sacked him when he pleaded guilty to the grooming and the sexual kiss. That suggests they've acted accordingly when needed, so it's unlikey they'd have sat on knowledge of wrong doing given the type of case it is and protected him, whilst knowing they'd suffer for it later.
Click to expand...
I thought that too. Unfortunately the God awful statement made me realise I was likely wrong on that front.

look out piano said:
What are you going to do if they don't tell you what you want to hear - boycott the club ? withdraw your support ?
Click to expand...
I'm not going to renew. Simple as. A statement clarifying their position or a new CEO would make me bin the renewal letter.
 
look out piano said:
What are you going to do if they don't tell you what you want to hear - boycott the club ? withdraw your support ?
Click to expand...

Haven't mentioned any of this, just makes the club look like shit and more importantly the board loses the trust of some of the fans.

theinediblebulk said:
Based on what a lying twat has said in court.
Click to expand...

Which the club refuse to even respond to despite it being a sue-able offence to tell such a lie in court.
 
theinediblebulk said:
Have said that consistently. It's not like I'm calling anyone who disagrees with me a f***ing idiot or owt, because they're not. They just have a different opinion to me. No way was everyone going to be happy with what has gone on, regardless of the outcome.

The bit it keeps coming back to is what did the club actually know? For me, I just can't see why Johnson's defence team would hand over evidence that incriminated him then 'advise' him to plead not guilty. That doesn't make any sense to me at all. Other people don't think the same and that's fair enough.
Click to expand...

Then they should have had no issue denying the knowledge they were accused of having during the trial.

That they've done no such thing just leaves the door open to the questions that are currently being asked.
 
Reiver said:
Nor do I ....... you're really struggling with the concept of irony aren't you?

I'm not 'trolling' this thread either, I'm giving my opinion.

That it doesn't suit your agenda doesn't make it trolling no matter how you stamp your feet.
Click to expand...

Irony = Calling me the PF spokesperson and an attention seeker while simultaneously taking every opportunity on every thread in the history of the SMB, ever, to speak over everyone and get in the most trivial arguments about nothing and turn it into a 'oh look, Reiver is doing his argue with an individual poster until 3am' borefest again. Hazard a guess in 5,000 odd posts how many times I've had an on-going argument with a poster like I have with you today. Not once. You do it almost daily on here. The running war you wage against dangermows is a case in point of that. Now, behave.
 
Kenna said:
Haven't mentioned any of this, just makes the club look like shit and more importantly the board loses the trust of some of the fans.



Which the club refuse to even respond to despite it being a sue-able offence to tell such a lie in court.
Click to expand...

If everyone who lied in court got sued there'd be no end to the litigation following on from it. People lie all the time in court and in police interviews to either get off with the charge or make themselves look better so the sentence is lessened. That's a daily occurrence.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top