• 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.

Must be bored said:
The amount of times this thread ends up misquoting, misrepresenting, correcting, arguing about the same issues of agreed fact is ridiculous. If any of the below is incorrect then please say but from what I've seen this is the agreed timeline and disclosures that prosecution/defence/SAFC all agree on unless otherwise stated.

2nd March 15
- Johnson arrested
- Police visit club, discuss nature of allegations, that he'd messaged and had sexual contact with the girl and safeguarding issues for the club. Police had not yet interviewed Johnson. This was confirmed by the leading office both in court and in the BBC interview
- SAFC suspend Johnson

18th March 15
- Johnson suspension lifted following meetings with him, legal team, PFA.

23rd April 15
- Johnson charged with 4 offences.
- SAFC did not take any action re: suspension. We had two games between this date and the meeting on 4th May, Johnson was not in the squad in the game following being charged and made a late sub appeared in the second game

4th May 15
- Meeting between club, Johnson and legal team/QC. Not the police.
- In court, AJ/QC say that Johnson admitted kissing girl in this meeting (this is not the same as admitting guilt to any of the charges against him) and provided police interview and What's App messages to MB (this is not the same as saying she read them)
- Club statement says MB attended part of this meeting. Club received documents which were "Immediately" handed to QC (not clear this was during meeting or at a different time) and club were not in position to determine guilt. They don't address issues of AJ admitting to kissing or refer to whether they reviewed any of the messages they are meant to have been provided with.

Throughout this whole time Johnson maintained that he was pleading not guilty.


Sorry for repeating what should already be known but the amount of circular arguments about "police confirmed SAFC knew he was guilty", "police told SAFC he was guilty", "SAFC should never have unsuspended him" or "Johnson admitted he was guilty" is stupid.


For the little it's worth, my opinion is that the club acted correctly 2nd March.

On 18th March, the were obliged to relax his suspension given he wasn't charged and has a right to train/retain fitness so they acted correctly again. They could have left him out of 1st team but until charged I think they again acted correctly.

On 23rd April they took no action. There's an argument that at this point they could have suspended/removed him from 1st team action as this meant the CPS believe they have sufficient evidence for a conviction so the club should be looking to protect itself from any fallout. With hindsight it's easy to say but even at the time many people were uneasy about him not being suspended following the charges.

The meeting on 4th May is where the questions lie and whilst not necessarily conflicting with each other, the implied nature of what happened from the statements of Johnson/QC and SAFC did not sit well together. I'm inclined to give SAFC the benefit of the doubt about how much they knew. I'd prefer to believe they were were naïve/poorly advised/lacking in judgement rather than anything more sinister but it's not a great reflection on them either way.

I'm leaving it at that
Click to expand...

Thanks for this. If this is taken to be the true nature of events, then this timeline should be stickied at the top of each page to stop some of the circular arguments.

From this though, there is clearly a big issue from 4th May. If Johnson has admitted kissing the girl, and we had access to the WhatsApp messages, a) why the hell didn't we just sack him on the spot, and b) if we haven't read the transcript of messgaes, why the hell not?

Who gives a fuck if we thought he was going to plead not guilty if he has ADMITTED TO KISSING A 15 YEAR OLD GIRL and we had access to all these incriminating messages? If you're inclined to give MB the benefit of the doubt in that she may have been badly advised then that's your prerogative, but this looks f***ing terrible to me. If our club's name is tainted because of something like this then whoever is responsible needs to get out of our club ASAP.
 
Laeotaekhun said:
I can't understand why more hasn't been made of it!

In the witness box she revealed she had asked how old his then accuser was as soon as police arrived at their £1.5m mansion. She had been the one to answer the door to the officers.

He told her she “said she was 16”. In reality, he knew the girl had only recently turned 15.

You must be logged on to see external links


Given, it now transpires, that she knew he was involved with other women it just seemed a very strange question to ask, unless she knew more about what was going on in his life than has been revealed so far.

Thoughts?

Mods, please merge with the main AJ thread if you don't think this deserves a thread of its own.
Click to expand...
He's being nicked for a sex offence against a child, I don't see it being a strange question.
 
janey said:
And I'm pretty sure she will have a canny decent legal team advising her too. it's as if only Johnson has had legal advice and the club haven't bothered seeking any.
Click to expand...
Exactly. It's not as if she's nipped down to haddaway and shite solicitors and said "giz a hand with this" Given Ellis Short is who he is, And does what he does, I'm pretty sure he has access to some pretty high powered lawyers.
 
Tadger said:
She was barely 15 when this whole thing started. The onus was on him and him alone to prevent this from happening.
Click to expand...

I've ripped into AJ in my OP. He's a creep who should have stopped it. No argument there. It doesn't alter the fact that for every AJ in prison, there's 10s of thousands of similar types online looking for underage girls. If we don't teach young people to look out for themselves, this will continue to happen. You can't rely on morally bankrupt arseholes like AJ to do the right thing, that's why they get put in prison, and why young people need to be educated about such things.

Who the onus is on is of little help in the real world. AJ wasn't legally allowed to have sexual contact with a 15 year old, yet it still happened. If the girl had been able to exercise better judgement, this needn't have happened. In the same way that many women carry rape alarms of sprays, we should be arming young people with the skills to make sensible choices and walk away from AJs. Women shouldn't have to carry rape alarms or take other precautions against rapists, but it's not a bad idea, is it? There's bad people out there, and I'd rather young people were taught a bit of personal responsibility if it stops this happening.
 
Look. We've been here before. We've had players on camera gang-banging a lass and that went global. Di Canio which hit HIGNFY. Now this. SAFC will weather this storm as well and in two years time we'll be having a go at some other club and their supporters but this time the spotlight is on Sunderland. This is how the world works now. Internet and media storms are the order of the day.
 
Laeotaekhun said:
I can't understand why more hasn't been made of it!

In the witness box she revealed she had asked how old his then accuser was as soon as police arrived at their £1.5m mansion. She had been the one to answer the door to the officers.

He told her she “said she was 16”. In reality, he knew the girl had only recently turned 15.

You must be logged on to see external links


Given, it now transpires, that she knew he was involved with other women it just seemed a very strange question to ask, unless she knew more about what was going on in his life than has been revealed so far.

Thoughts?

Mods, please merge with the main AJ thread if you don't think this deserves a thread of its own.
Click to expand...
I could be wrong but I think she met her before after a match.
 
geordiedean said:
His initial is an A really?

That is his actual name a username on a forum is created and can be changed at any point

Your comparisons there are daft really
Click to expand...
What difference between username and surname can't you grasp?
 
janey said:
Very few are saying he doesn't deserve to be punished man, are you saying most people are defending what he's done because he's a footballer
Click to expand...
I'm saying that people are finding it hard to come to terms with the fact that a person who they cheered actually is a class of person that they regularly say should be strung up branded and left to walk the streets for society to deal with.

They cannot come to terms with the fact including me, that they were conned by an organisation that plays a massive part in my life.

Quite a lot of pride has gone and I think people are embarrassed, quite rightly.

The semi excuses made and the grey areas put forward are understandable due to the bereavement some people will be feeling.

SAFC must act in plain sight and honestly. If that means resignations or selling the club, and relegations then so be it.

On the cold light of day. The victim is a child! End of!
 
LeicesterMackem said:
In Denmark they take into account the age of the man and his position and influence. It's not simply a case of any man can have sex with a 15 yrs old.
Click to expand...

Indeed, I stand corrected. All the more reason to raise the age to 18 across the EU, yes? This legal standpoint of 'you're sort of able to make an informed decision about sex at 16, but not entirely' is dangerous IMO.
 
Morse said:
I've ripped into AJ in my OP. He's a creep who should have stopped it. No argument there. It doesn't alter the fact that for every AJ in prison, there's 10s of thousands of similar types online looking for underage girls. If we don't teach young people to look out for themselves, this will continue to happen. You can't rely on morally bankrupt arseholes like AJ to do the right thing, that's why they get put in prison, and why young people need to be educated about such things.

Who the onus is on is of little help in the real world. AJ wasn't legally allowed to have sexual contact with a 15 year old, yet it still happened. If the girl had been able to exercise better judgement, this needn't have happened. In the same way that many women carry rape alarms of sprays, we should be arming young people with the skills to make sensible choices and walk away from AJs. Women shouldn't have to carry rape alarms or take other precautions against rapists, but it's not a bad idea, is it? There's bad people out there, and I'd rather young people were taught a bit of personal responsibility if it stops this happening.
Click to expand...
The judgement of a besotted child you fool!

He is what he is and that's why we have laws!
 
Useless at Roker said:
The situation is that he wasn't drunk or confused on a nightclub!

He sought her out continually and when she requested him he realises it was the girl he, Johnson, had fancied since she was 14. His own confession.

If that happened to anyone else then they would deserve the same!
Click to expand...
Did you quote my post by mistake mate?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top