• 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.

Adam Johnson - Ahmad Khan

Status
Not open for further replies.

West_Winger said:
Yes you are.

You can’t be convicted of something at a later date that wasn’t an offence at the time it happened. Similarly you can only be sentenced depending on the sentencing guidelines in force at the time of the offence. Legislation isn’t applied retrospectively.
Click to expand...

Youre right but wasn’t some recent legislation made retrospective, can’t for the life of me remember what it was though
 
West_Winger said:
Yes you are.

You can’t be convicted of something at a later date that wasn’t an offence at the time it happened. Similarly you can only be sentenced depending on the sentencing guidelines in force at the time of the offence. Legislation isn’t applied retrospectively.
Click to expand...

That's fair enough but I'm not sure if that's what @cornish mackem was referring to tbh.
 
Stevie Freestein II said:
I’m not disagreeing but should a MP be more of a role model than a footballer?

Is there a scale of moral responsibility and appropriate punishment?

It’s a rhetorical question, I’m not putting the spotlight on you.
Click to expand...
I don't think it should make any difference if you're a prince or a pauper. We can't complain that if you're rich and famous you get away with anything, and that's unfair, then want harsher sentences for the same people.
 
ErichZann said:
He won't get anywhere close to 6 years imo, Johnson's sentence was very lengthly compared to others that are in the news on a daily basis - he was made an example of because he was a Premier League footballer.
Click to expand...
It was a tiny part of it, the bigger sentence was because of his denials and the Facebook page set up defending him.
 
cornish mackem said:
Didn’t Stuart hall get a pidley sentence because his offence was historical and the crime attracted a smaller sentence than if it was committed today?
Click to expand...

Ah right, I get you now.

That's quite possible mate, I don't know enough to say but I have heard that mentioned before.

In this case it was a criminal offence, at the time, that carried a jail term. I'm basing that on previous convictions in that year, 2008.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top