• The first stage of the forum upgrades has now been completed but they remain in a degraded state and are still being worked on.
    Please read this thread for more details.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.

Adam Johnson appeal

Status
Not open for further replies.
chunkylover53 said:
It's a good post

I agree with most of it

I do however think the sentence is excessive relative to some other crimes. I have zero sympathy mind

That doesn't make me an apologist mind

Edit: I'm one of the few that thought he was shite for us in general anyway
Click to expand...

I'm guessing you'd be fine with the length of the sentence if the other crimes were longer? So it's not the 6 years you object to, it's that perpetrators of other crimes have received less?

Fwiw, I think 6yrs for using your elevated position to pursue, groom and have sexual contact with a child isn't too long at all. I couldn't give a toss what Father O'Reilly got, it should probably be longer too.

OLDROKERENDER said:
I took a peak at Sheff Utd's forum while the Ched Evans case was ongoing & many were trying to defend him, so you're correct to say it happens within all fanbases. I'd wager if I'd visited a Sheff Wed forum to get their viewpoint, it would be 99.9% condemnation of his actions.
Click to expand...

Oh there'll definitely be bias on the other side of the coin too.

Newton John said:
Not any way excusing the terrible thing Johnson did but this guy walking free doesn't sit comfortably with the six year sentence.

You must be logged on to see external links
Click to expand...

Eh? totally different set of circumstances. That 21yr old lad thought he was having consensual sex with a 16yr old lass he met in a bus queue at 4am. Adam Johnson knew the lass was under the legal age of consent, he used his fame to groom a child and it wasn't a random night, he pursued her over a period of time.
 
Last edited:

The Fish said:
I'm guessing you'd be fine with the length of the sentence if the other crimes were longer? So it's not the 6 years you object to, it's that perpetrators of other crimes have received less?

Fwiw, I think 6yrs for using your elevated position to pursue, groom and have sexual contact with a child isn't too long at all. I couldn't give a toss what Father O'Reilly got, it should probably be longer too.



Oh there'll definitely be bias on the other side of the coin too.



Eh? totally different set of circumstances. That 21yr old lad thought he was having consensual sex with a 16yr old lass he met in a bus queue at 4am. Adam Johnson knew the lass was under the legal age of consent, he used his fame to groom a child and it wasn't a random night, he pursued her over a period of time.
Click to expand...
Correct. I'm talking the relative sentence
 
chunkylover53 said:
Correct. I'm talking the relative sentence
Click to expand...

So, when you say "6yrs is too harsh", you mean "I wish other crimes were punished similarly".

The former sounds like you'd support a shortening of his sentence, the second means you want other sentences to be just as strict.
 
chunkylover53 said:
This thread won't go well

But in summary

1) he was an idiot
2) it most certainly was illegal
3) the sentence feels harsh
Click to expand...
He was punished more because of who he was. I remember a couple of weeks after he was sentenced there was a small in section a paper saying some female teacher got far less for actually having sex with a student.
 
A high profile brings greater responsibility. Every premier league player goes through some sort of awareness training, how to speak to the press, do's and don'ts etc etc. Footballers can't just go around doing what they want, this case and the ched evans case will have brought a few home truths to many players out there. IMO
 
OLDROKERENDER said:
I took a peak at Sheff Utd's forum while the Ched Evans case was ongoing & many were trying to defend him, so you're correct to say it happens within all fanbases. I'd wager if I'd visited a Sheff Wed forum to get their viewpoint, it would be 99.9% condemnation of his actions.
Click to expand...

Ched Evans has been proved innocent in a court of law though he never admitted guilt unlike Johnson

Stupid comparison
 
The Fish said:
There's an element that seems unable to put their partisan allegiance to Sunderland AFC aside. Most Sunderland fans seem to want nothing more to do with Johnson, think he's a wrong'un and don't think the sentence is harsh at all. However there appears to be a minority who speak up for/defend/whatabout for a convicted sex offender because of his old connection to the club. Were he a kids tv presenter, or a popstar with similar access, appeal to and influence of kids, but no allegiance to SAFC, I'm sure they'd be in line to throw him under a bus.

This element exists in all fanbases mind you. There'll definitely be an element of Leicester fans who'll defend Vardy's racist incident and not because they think he's innocent, but because they won't countenance any criticism of their club or those associated with it. There's an element of Newcastle fans who leapt to the defence of Barton or Shelvey when they've done something wrong, even after the guilt was confirmed.
Click to expand...
Good post and sums this thread up perfectly.

Though on a scale of 1 to horrible. Grooming and interfering with a child is, by most people's moral compass, likely 'worse' than racist comments.

It really does make one wonder of the wiring in people who would revel in the antics of a sex offender and still hail him as a "hero".

I suspect one of the more vocal supporters of the "nonce" on here is actually doing it for attention. But to claim support for the "nonce" because he scored some goals against Newcastle is even more indicitive of something gone awry in someone's code of behaviour.
 
geordiedean said:
Ched Evans has been proved innocent in a court of law though he never admitted guilt unlike Johnson

Stupid comparison
Click to expand...

This. Although Johnsons never admitted guilt to sexual activity iirc. He did wrong, he's not getting out so he should just get on with it. Only thing I find laughable is people saying goes he is a paedo and comparing him to Savile. Bit silly tbh.
 
It was on the BBC news the other night that the limit is two pints. I was very surprised. I've always thought it was one, and I shall be sticking to one. Cos I'm a good lad me.
 
kick in the quinn said:
In the law, that outcome is forseeable, which is why the perpetrator has to take the consequences. If they think "it won't happen to me", or are too stupid or selfish not to think of what might happen, the law doesn't have to give them more lenient treatment.
Click to expand...
Ok. So why then doesn't the law treat it more seriously when someone punches someone and they DONT die. Or when someone drink drives and no one is injured? I agree the consequences are likely - they're likely for anyone who does it. The discrepancy in punishment between 6 points for using a phone if no one dies and 10 years if someone does is stupid. It should be community service/ suspended sentence if you're caught with a phone and no one hurt, a couple of years if you kill someone, maybe suspended.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top