• 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.
haway said:
I think we have a clue. Johnson says (in court, so he's guilty of perjury if he's lying) they had copies of all the whatsapp messages... SAFC release a statement saying we received 'some documents'... surely if they didn't receive what Johnson suggested they did SAFC would have refuted it? It seems reasonable if he accuses them of receiving documents, and in their statement they don't deny it, that we have a 'clue' about what was in the documents...
Click to expand...
Johnson said he never had sexual contact with her as well.
 

before that thread mine was even higher. I'm making a point that the mods pulling it was pointless
 
The Exile said:
It didn't matter what they knew. He told them he was intending to plead not guilty. Even if he'd walked in and said he was bang to rights, sacking him would have prejudiced any trial. It's a difficult situation, and can only be resolved imho if the club pursue him for the money he was paid while lying to them regarding his pleas. If not, the question will always hang there.
Click to expand...

Sacking him would not have prejudiced the trial, the only downside is they would have opened themselves up to an unfair dismissal if he was found not guilty. But as I said, I wouldn't have sacked, I would have suspended with pay.

They can't claim the money because he will say 'I changed my mind at the last minute' and how will they ever prove he was always planning to plead? Seems impossible task imo.
 
Lord Alfred said:
BBC News confidently stating that he admitted to the club on the 4th May the charges he later pleaded guilty to.
Click to expand...
They've changed their report as this is what I'm currently reading:
You must be logged on to see external links

During the trial,
You must be logged on to see external links
to the lesser offences until the start of his trial so he could still play for Sunderland, from whom he earned £60,000 a week.

Johnson told the court the club knew he had kissed the girl, but in a statement issued after the verdict Sunderland denied the claim.

The club
You must be logged on to see external links
and only became aware he had kissed the girl when he admitted it in court, at which point they sacked him.
 
Fletcher and Wickham mentioned in the trial in addition to Johnson (surely one of the most spectacular falls from grace/ ie utter f***ing stupidity in the history of football), lends credence to the rotten core position often put about on here - throw in Bardsley rolling about in £50 notes, part-time managers, absent owners, it's a miracle we're still in the league.

Overpaid, thick prima donnas, running riot with minimal oversight- I suppose something like this was inevitable.

Sad f***ing day for the club. Di Canio was right.
 
rocky said:
Johnson said he never had sexual contact with her as well.
Click to expand...

Which he was found guilty of... the point isn't that Johnson said it (we can obviously take what he says with a pinch of salt)... the issue is that Johnson has said it and the club hasn't refuted it...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top