• 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 Trial Verdict

Status
Not open for further replies.

East Riding Mackem said:
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.
Click to expand...

I have to disagree.
This is Johnson's doing, and his alone. None of his colleagues, or his employer are to blame for this. Yes, they are often spoilt arrogant rich young men, but plenty manage to stay the right side of the law despite being dislikable people.

This is NOT the fault of SAFC or any of his former teammates and it really ought not to reflect badly on them at all.
 
Chip said:
The thing I struggle to get my head around is the fact in this case he was accused of two separate counts. Two distinct crimes against a child. He denied both. He has been convicted of one. He has been cleared of the other (more serious crime). Given the nature of the allegations that means he was telling the truth and the complainant was lying. Whats it called when you lie in court? will perjury charges be brought?

In my mind there are no grey areas here it either happened or it didnt in which case someone is lying there is no get out clause for anyone. If it happened its a crime if it didnt happen someone has lied to get someone else into trouble.
Click to expand...
So you propose where someone is found not guilty the complainant be charged with perjury?
Away and shite man
 
rocky said:
Fletcher and Wickham mentioned in what way? What are they guilty of?
Click to expand...
I don't know mate guilty of being part of the bullshit culture that is a footballer's life? Fletcher was going to be a defence witness, something to do with Johnson's pubes FFS. Wickham - sensibly dodged the jail bait probably cos he was shacked up with his pole dancing bird - they don't have to be saints in my book just not stupid f***ing idiots. We've seen it before with the gang-banging trio Lawrence etc. Johnson himself said he was arrogant and with no honour. Seems to sum it up.
 
Stevos said:
That's what he claimed in court but he has also been shown up repeatedly to be a liar. Remember the context in which he claims to have told the club back in May:

It was put to him he pleaded not guilty on all counts, duping everybody in the process, only in order to prolong his playing career and carry on drawing his 60k a week wage. He denied this, saying he carried on playing because the club wanted him to, despite him telling them from the start what he had done.

So it wasn't just a throw away comment from him which he would have no cause to lie about. It was part of him was rebuffing an accusation from the prosecution, as to his motives for carrying on playing. In a nutshell, he is a proven and self-confessed liar who also had a motive to lie about whether or not the club was aware of what he had done. Given that he was denying all charges in June, it seems odd he would have admitted his guilt to anybody a month before that.

It's also important to remember where this fits into his defence's case. In an attempt to portray him as an honest man, his QC argued in court (unsuccessfully, ultimately) that he only lied initially to the police because he panicked. He subsequently then went home and confessed all to his partner, not only about this but about the other women too. This was part of the defence's argument that, despite having lied repeatedly to the police on his arrest, this was essentially out of character and that everything he had done or said since, including his denial of the 2 further counts, was truthful and honest. Admitting he had kept the truth a secret from the club all along would not have tied in with that argument.
Click to expand...
This for me. Lost in amongst all the kicking and screaming.
 
janey said:
Exactly, he's been found guilty, the club have made a statement some aren't happy with the statement.
Click to expand...

If they're not happy they can write to the club.

In reality they just want to stamp their feet and have others see them do it.
 
haway said:
Of course they could suspend him with pay, how the hell couldn't they? That's totally the club's discretion to pay someone but tell them to stay at home.
Click to expand...
no it could be seen as harmful to his case which is why he got his union in. the clubs only 2 options in reality would be to pay his contract off or lift the suspension with a safeguarding review
 
I for one just wish everyone would move on and forget Adam Johnson ever existed. The club aren't commenting further and I for one simply could not care less about it any more. How this football club do on the pitch is my biggest and only concern.
 
"Doing the right thing, would have meant axing Johnson the moment he and his barrister presented the club with his admission of kissing and grooming his 15-year old victim, and their 800 messages.

That, Bradford Crown Court heard, happened on May 4 last year, a couple of months after he was arrested.

It should have been clear to the club from that day that Johnson was guilty of preying on an under-age fan, even if it would take the legal process another nine months to confirm."

pretty much nail on head
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top