• 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.
genericus said:
That's what I don't get, Johnson has lied to police, his lass, in court and multiple times in police interviews.
He doesn't suddenly become a paragon of virtue based on one statement.

The police statement yesterday was odd to say the least but I don't see why people are so willing to take the word of someone who has lied and manipulated his way through the entire case.
Well I do and that basically because the buck stops at one woman.
Click to expand...

He does if your entire agenda hangs on it ;)
 

Littlerobbieh said:
They haven't admitted it either. They have released a statement saying no wrong doing, spoke to legal team, took advice from professionals, done everything above board, sacked him when he pleaded guilty. If they released a statement today saying what you want to hear you'll just say they're lying and should have said that 2 days ago. Then you'll find something else they missed out and start again. It's boring man. The club, manager and players are all shocked and disappointed in the player yet some of our fans are siding with the media and Johnson. It's baffling to me.
Click to expand...

It's not a matter of interpretation, it's a matter of what words mean in the English language. The club's been accused of something which is terrible for its reputation and has failed to deny it. In a statement which went to a lot of trouble to deny some other things. To suggest this is siding with Adam Johnson is completely ludicrous.
 
Littlerobbieh said:
They haven't admitted it either. They have released a statement saying no wrong doing, spoke to legal team, took advice from professionals, done everything above board, sacked him when he pleaded guilty. If they released a statement today saying what you want to hear you'll just say they're lying and should have said that 2 days ago. Then you'll find something else they missed out and start again. It's boring man. The club, manager and players are all shocked and disappointed in the player yet some of our fans are siding with the media and Johnson. It's baffling to me.
Click to expand...
Who is siding with Johnson like?
 
Cockney Mackem said:
It's not a matter of interpretation, it's a matter of what words mean in the English language. The club's been accused of something which is terrible for its reputation and has failed to deny it. In a statement which went to a lot of trouble to deny some other things. To suggest this is siding with Adam Johnson is completely ludicrous.
Click to expand...

Agreed.
 
Cockney Mackem said:
It's not a matter of interpretation, it's a matter of what words mean in the English language. The club's been accused of something which is terrible for its reputation and has failed to deny it. In a statement which went to a lot of trouble to deny some other things. To suggest this is siding with Adam Johnson is completely ludicrous.
Click to expand...
Stop siding with Johnson, man. You anarl @shepherd88
 
genericus said:
That's what I don't get, Johnson has lied to police, his lass, in court and multiple times in police interviews.
He doesn't suddenly become a paragon of virtue based on one statement.

The police statement yesterday was odd to say the least but I don't see why people are so willing to take the word of someone who has lied and manipulated his way through the entire case.
Well I do and that basically because the buck stops at one woman.
Click to expand...
I think some people think he sat down with Margaret Byrne last May and said 'I groomed her, necked on with her, I'll be pleading guilty to 2 charges but please keep it hush hush and I'll do my best for the club until then. It just doesn't make any sense, there's no way the club were told anything near the truth last May, it's mental to think they were.
 
Windypants said:
I'm pretty sure a defendant's statement isn't his to do anything with. It's the property of the Police.


I think you're making some fairly fundamental leaps here that are constructed on shaky ground. As far as I'm aware nobody has said Johnson admitted guilt to anyone at the club. What is your source for this? Nobody has said that Byrne saw any documents that proved anything. What is your source for this? Accusation, evidence and proof are three very different things. The first documented instance of Johnson admitting guilt is, as far as I'm aware, when he plead guilty.
Click to expand...

Johnson's testimony, his lawyer's statements to the court and the judge's summing up of the court all said exactly that. They said Johnson admitted being guilty of at least one offence in what he personally said to the CEO of the club, and that the CEO of the club saw transcripts of texts that incriminated Johnson. What part of that is a leap?

frot said:
Did he actually say that he was guilty though? For all we know, he could have said "yes, I kissed her, but I have reason to believe I can fight this because of..". No one has any idea of the context of the conversation, how it took place and what was actually said. It's right to ask but I don't understand this outrage when we don't know the details.
Click to expand...

He told the court he did admit it and the club released a statement which denied a bunch of other things but did not deny that, or the other allegation that the club saw documents and as a result of seeing those documents knew he was guilty of at least one of the offences.

f***ing hell.
 
Cockney Mackem said:
Yep, definitely getting weird. Multiple news outlets that were live blogging the court have consistently reported identical quotes attributed to Johnson and his QC, and the judge. Not one of the news outlets, despite this being a big story, has contradicted that this is what's been said in court or that there is any error. Johnson's going to be keeping his head down but the QC at least could be reasonably expected to clarify if he hasn't openly accused the club of knowing Johnson was guilty. For you to suggest that we don't have a very good indication of what was said in court is bizarre and very damaging to the credibility of anything else you argue.

And again and again you duck the fact that after being accused of something very serious, the club released a statement designed to refute allegations made in court that it objects to, it very conspicuously did not refute the very serious allegation of hearing an admission and seeing a document that meant the club knew he was guilty and played him anyway. The statement was very big in refuting very strongly one allegation, but did not refute two other more serious allegations.

How you can continue to disagree with the statement, universally acknowledged, that the club has been accused of knowing he was guilty and playing him anyway, and has failed to deny that accusation, is really quite strange.
Click to expand...

Multiple news outlets have taken a few quotes and wrote the most sensationalist headline they could to sell newspapers. To understand exactly what it is claimed the club knew, you would need to see the full transcript from court. The fact that you are willing to accept this as some sort of evidence against the club without even seeing the entire transcript tells me more about your credibility than it does mine.

I have responded to this point multiple times. Firstly these were not allegations against the club they were statements made in court for the purpose of painting a picture to the jury that Adam Johnson did not consider the money he would lose when he decided to plead not guilty to a charge he knew he was guilty of. The statement from the club states that they had documents relating to Johnsons defence but these were passed straight on to his QC. They also stated they were not in a position to make any judgement on the outcome of the case. They also say they did not know he was going to plead guilty. They do not state specifically that they did not know whether he was guilty or not but that does not mean that they were aware of his guilt.

The club have been accused in the press of knowing he was guilty and playing him anyway, based on one exchange in court and some very sceptical misreporting of a police statement claiming the club knew all about what Johnson had done. I'm not denying the accusation I'm simply saying that it is not based on evidence.

The club have stated they passed the documents straight to the QC which pretty much rules out them analysing 834 messages and being able to ascertain guilt. They have also said they had no idea that Johnson was going to plead guilty to any of the charges which strongly suggest that he had not made any admissions to the club that would suggest his guilt.

You can continue to believe the club have done wrong without seeing any actual evidence, I'm just offering you an alternative which you seem unhappy to accept.

My views on this are all over this thread and I've spent far more time trying to explain to people how the wildly sensationalist headlines have offered no reasonable proof of guilt on the clubs part than I ever wanted or intended to.

My personal view is that Johnson is the person who was in the wrong and he is solely responsible for any damage caused by his initial offence and his continued lying about that offence. I will continue to hold this belief until I see some sort of evidence that the club is in some way to blame.
 
Republican Mackem said:
Johnson pleaded not guilty to the charges, even though he admitted to certain acts, that is his right under the law, and as long as he maintained this stance Sunderland could not sack him, even suspending him would have left the club open to legal proceedings (innocent till proven guilty etc.) Why is nobody criticising the CPSand the plod for taking so long to firstly press charges, and secondly bringing the case to trial.
Click to expand...
:eek: You what?
 
Littlerobbieh said:
I think some people think he sat down with Margaret Byrne last May and said 'I groomed her, necked on with her, I'll be pleading guilty to 2 charges but please keep it hush hush and I'll do my best for the club until then. It just doesn't make any sense, there's no way the club were told anything near the truth last May, it's mental to think they were.
Click to expand...

The court record includes specific allegations that they knew he was guilty, and the club's statement did not deny that.
 
Republican Mackem said:
Why is nobody criticising the CPSand the plod for taking so long to firstly press charges, and secondly bringing the case to trial.
Click to expand...
I've been wondering this all along, unlike some on this thread I'm not a legal expert but don't understand why it takes a year to get to court, anyone help?
 
Cockney Mackem said:
The court record includes specific allegations that they knew he was guilty, and the club's statement did not deny that.
Click to expand...
Like I've said until I see concrete proof the club have been involved in a sickening cover up then I'm happy with my stance and I'm happy to back them. I'm backing out the thread now but I hope you get the answers you seek.
 
ollie c said:
Respect your opinion, absolutely. For me, though, it was the clubs collective decision. Get rid of the officers at the helm....definitely, but it was, ultimately, a Sunderland AFC issue.
Click to expand...

Respect yours as well the same as I respect anyone else's but for me personally I just won't accept that and will argue against it forever more if I have to, because like I said, the good name of the club has (allegedly) been wronged just as much as the fans have, for example. IF any individuals employed by the club chose to ignore any knowledge they had, of course.
 
Cockney Mackem said:
Johnson's testimony, his lawyer's statements to the court and the judge's summing up of the court all said exactly that. They said Johnson admitted being guilty of at least one offence in what he personally said to the CEO of the club, and that the CEO of the club saw transcripts of texts that incriminated Johnson. What part of that is a leap?



He told the court he did admit it and the club released a statement which denied a bunch of other things but did not deny that, or the other allegation that the club saw documents and as a result of seeing those documents knew he was guilty of at least one of the offences.

f***ing hell.
Click to expand...


So why didn't he tell them he was going to plead guilty? We just don't know the details of what actually happened.
 
viccarlton said:
I've been wondering this all along, unlike some on this thread I'm not a legal expert but don't understand why it takes a year to get to court, anyone help?
Click to expand...

It kept getting delayed at court didn't it?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top