• 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.
Wood Green Mackem said:
She knows nowt about football so the only solace was we were well run legally ... Fingers crossed
Click to expand...

She has a degree in law or a law conversion. Worked as a solicitor in North London with a qualification which enabled her to visit and represent those in police custody. She'e no legal heavy weight and barely scratched the surface professionally speaking.
I wouldn't hold your breath.
 

The mods need to lock and remove this thread before thse f***ing bellends make your club look even worse. Im out. Im no longer talking to these people whos morale compass is so corrupt.
 
Cockney Mackem said:
Your suggestion that people are looking for a problem where there isn't one doesn't really stack up to the fact that the club was accused of knowing he was guilty and playing him anyway, and has not denied that.
Click to expand...

I'll ask again as you ignored the question he first time .........


"Didn't that only become ''a fact' when he changed his plea and was subsequently found guilty?"
 
Morse said:
Did the girl have learning difficulties that prevented her from making a choice? She encouraged the situation from the start, it was with her consent. When she turns/turned 16, does she suddenly become competent enough to make an informed decision about sex? Legally yes, in reality, no. In Denmark and premably many other countries, she'd be legal. Are they culturally backwards there regarding sex? 16 is a fairly arbitrary choice of age of consent, it's hardly a science given people mature at very different rates. For what it's worth, I think the age of consent should be raised to 18, for various reasons. All this 'nonce' and child molester talk is a massive overreaction and is insulting to those who have genuinely been molested IMO.

I was molested several times as a kid, I've openly mentioned it on here before, on a couple of occasions it involved violence. I felt threatened and cornered, and I couldn't tell anyone as I didn't think anyone would believe me. I did absolutely nothing to encourage the events. NOTHING.
If you think that is in any way the same thing as the Johnson case, you're f***ing nuts. You and all the idiots who agree with you. The girl has to shoulder some responsibility in this, and where the hell were her parents?
Click to expand...

While it's fair to say that there's a difference between Johnson and a child molester (and you have my empathy for what happened to you) it's problematic to try and say how much responsibility the girl should take for her actions.

Yes the age of consent is somewhat arbitrary and you're absolutely right that a girl doesn't suddenly become ready for things on her 16th birthday that were despicable crimes the day before. But teenagers have limited life experience, a bunch of hormones and poor impulse control. Below a certain age (and the law has to draw a line somewhere to have any chance of regulating this) it's determined that a young person is not equipped to decide to have sex. The flip side I'd they're not equipped to decide not to have sex. There is an onus on the older person not to exploit this. In Denmark for example you're right that the age of consent is 15, but it's also a criminal offence to induce anyone under 18 to have sex by exploiting an age difference and greater experience. The law states a difference between a fifteen year old girl sleeping with her 17 year old boyfriend, which may be problematic in other ways but is not for them a criminal matter, and a much older person exploiting an impressionable young person.

This latter is exactly what Johnson did. The girl was starry eyed at meeting her hero and getting a signed shirt and was bowled over by him showing an interest in her. At which point you've got a man not far off thirty, who might be a f***ing cretin but he's also aware that he's a millionaire and has over a decade more life experience than her, calling the shots and lining her up for sex.

It is clearly not as serious a crime as the grooming and rape of a younger child, but it is still sinister and exploitative. Frankly if the girl had been 16 it would still be creepy as fuck in my eyes, and the sort of thing that should in my view still be illegal because of the age difference and something approaching a position of trust and privilege.

So while paedophile and nonce might not be exactly the right words, he still deserves a description of what a despicable little fuckwit he is.
 
safctommie said:
So because she looked older than the age she told him she was it was ok then??
Click to expand...
No let me explain, the other poster was trying to make the point that he was attracted to someone who looked 14, Ive said she looks older than what she is, but again because ive posted a different opinion certain posters a having a go.
 
Cockney Mackem said:
While it's fair to say that there's a difference between Johnson and a child molester (and you have my empathy for what happened to you) it's problematic to try and say how much responsibility the girl should take for her actions.

Yes the age of consent is somewhat arbitrary and you're absolutely right that a girl doesn't suddenly become ready for things on her 16th birthday that were despicable crimes the day before. But teenagers have limited life experience, a bunch of hormones and poor impulse control. Below a certain age (and the law has to draw a line somewhere to have any chance of regulating this) it's determined that a young person is not equipped to decide to have sex. The flip side I'd they're not equipped to decide not to have sex. There is an onus on the older person not to exploit this. In Denmark for example you're right that the age of consent is 15, but it's also a criminal offence to induce anyone under 18 to have sex by exploiting an age difference and greater experience. The law states a difference between a fifteen year old girl sleeping with her 17 year old boyfriend, which may be problematic in other ways but is not for them a criminal matter, and a much older person exploiting an impressionable young person.

This latter is exactly what Johnson did. The girl was starry eyed at meeting her hero and getting a signed shirt and was bowled over by him showing an interest in her. At which point you've got a man not far off thirty, who might be a f***ing cretin but he's also aware that he's a millionaire and has over a decade more life experience than her, calling the shots and lining her up for sex.

It is clearly not as serious a crime as the grooming and rape of a younger child, but it is still sinister and exploitative. Frankly if the girl had been 16 it would still be creepy as fuck in my eyes, and the sort of thing that should in my view still be illegal because of the age difference and something approaching a position of trust and privilege.

So while paedophile and nonce might not be exactly the right words, he still deserves a description of what a despicable little fuckwit he is.
Click to expand...
Good post.
 
The BBC of all people, you couldn't make it up. I wonder how she managed to correspond with such a corrupt institution with a history of child sex abuse cases without calling for the reporter to explain themselves. Or did her holier than thou halo slip just then so she can get some publicity
 
Nobody has much of a problem with a man fancying someone who looks much older (but actually isn't). It can happen. The man is fancying the image of a woman, not a girl.
As soon as that man learns the true age behind the image, most would be put off and probably say 'bloody hell, just goes to show you can't be too careful' - and that's that.

If Johnson had been in that situation, most would have sympathy.

But the moment he learned her true age, and continued, he stepped into the abyss.
 
FanchesterCity said:
Nobody has much of a problem with a man fancying someone who looks much older (but actually isn't). It can happen. The man is fancying the image of a woman, not a girl.
As soon as that man learns the true age behind the image, most would be put off and probably say 'bloody hell, just goes to show you can't be too careful' - and that's that.

If Johnson had been in that situation, most would have sympathy.

But the moment he learned her true age, and continued, he stepped into the abyss.
Click to expand...
100% agreed.
 
theinediblebulk said:
How many meetings did Durham police have with the club like? I thought they only went to the club on the day he was arrested and told the club what he had been arrested for, which was what was reported in the Echo.

You must be logged on to see external links


Det Insp Sampson told jurors that on the day of Johnson's arrest she met with SAFC chief exec Margaret Byrne to inform her of the allegations facing the player.

"I disclosed the offences which Mr Johnson had been arrested for, and considered safeguarding for any other young people who may come into contact with him in his role as a professional footballer."

The senior officer said particulars of the offences were not discussed, as Johnson had not been interviewed. What he said in interview was still not disclosed to the club.

Spoke about the arrest, but no details of the offences, and certainly not what Johnson had said because he hadn't even been interviewed by then. I'm presuming there was another meeting that you are referring to when, as you say, the allegations were discussed in detail. Got a link to that please as I've missed that one.
Click to expand...


On the BBC interview the police officer said, "On that day we gave the club a little more information."

Which means little or nothing ....... although I've still no idea why they had to give an exclusive to the BBC tbh.
 
Reiver said:
'Riv' hasn't reported anyone, I can play this bunch like a sack of fiddles.

I haven't been warned either so it's obvious my views aren't an offensive as the little ninnies keep saying.
Click to expand...
You haven't done a good job of showing it tbf.

I don't really know why you would be warned or reported though tbh, some posters should rightly be warned but can't say I've noticed you being one of them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top