• 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.
Lanchesterredandwhite said:
Why do you think the club, in their very detailed statement of events, are not refuting that they knew all along what he had done?
Click to expand...

That is the million dollar question. The club statement is clearly drafted to use a lot of words without actually saying much or addressing the allegations. Like I said in an earlier post, it's worrying that the club did not actually address/refute the allegations as to what information they were given at the meeting last year.
 

geordiedean said:
Who says she lied?....it could of happened for all we know there just wasn't enough evidence to convince 12 jurors it happened
Click to expand...
Exactly what more evidence was there of digital penetration by him than oral sex by her. The jury clearly believed her that he penetrated her but were not convinced that she was telling the truth in respect of the oral sex! The evidence of both relied upon her testimony. If the jury had any doubts that she was telling lies in respect of some of her evidence then it should have tainted all of her evidence. Watch for the appeal!
 
Mr Redknapp said:
This

Should just leave it at that really.

he has nothing to do with Sunderland now,

Wad
Click to expand...

But it is to do with SAFC that it has been alleged in court our CEO had copies of whatsapp messages in which Johnson groomed a 15 year old girl and the club kept playing him. It is to do with SAFC that it has been alleged in court that SAFC knew he was admitting to kissing a 15 year old girl and kept playing him.

If neither of those statements are true, then SAFC should come out and vehemently deny them. If they do that, this matter will pass. As things stand, their failure to address those two matters mean it is very much still an issue for the club because we have allegations that our CEO did ^ which haven't yet been responded to. If they deny them, or say exactly what papers they had etc. then we can move on.
 
Sweeper said:
Why?
Click to expand...
Suspending someone with pay means paying them a lot of money to do nothing. Private firms generally will try to avoid doing this, especially when it's a footballer's wage. I'm making the assumption that they didn't have a valid reason to suspend him without pay/sack him, otherwise they surely would have done so. If they did have reason to do so and chose not to, then they would be in the wrong, but there's no evidence (other than his testimony) that this was the case, as far as I'm aware.
 
Rickybilly said:
In fairness to the club if he had acknowledged his guilt to them they could have sacked him saving some 3 million in wages for a player that would often sit on the bench.
Click to expand...
We've been trying to get players off the wage bill for years. We were presented with an opportunity to do that while also protecting ourselves from a virtually guaranteed shitstorm and instead we chose to knowingly play a lad we could be fairly certain was mere months away from being found guilty on numerous serious charges? It's not a convincing story.
 
Rickybilly said:
Exactly what more evidence was there of digital penetration by him than oral sex by her. The jury clearly believed her that he penetrated her but were not convinced that she was telling the truth in respect of the oral sex! The evidence of both relied upon her testimony. If the jury had any doubts that she was telling lies in respect of some of her evidence then it should have tainted all of her evidence. Watch for the appeal!
Click to expand...
You have got to be on a wind up :lol:
 
CissesUnderpants19 said:
we are all great at ignoring the papers after we have been beat i agree :lol: however this is a little different, this time i don't feel i can with this, it goes above and beyond what is expected, of even the most passionate fan this is down to what you personally see as right and wrong, and for me the club need to start coughing up more than just statement, because i don't feel in today's society its enough
Click to expand...

Ive been ignoring the media for years mate. It can be done easily. Its the kernts on your footy thread on whatsapp that post shite from the Daily mail. They're already having a go at the fans for singing about him, in a airport.
 
haway said:
But it is to do with SAFC that it has been alleged in court our CEO had copies of whatsapp messages in which Johnson groomed a 15 year old girl and the club kept playing him. It is to do with SAFC that it has been alleged in court that SAFC knew he was admitting to kissing a 15 year old girl and kept playing him.

If neither of those statements are true, then SAFC should come out and vehemently deny them. If they do that, this matter will pass. As things stand, their failure to address those two matters mean it is very much still an issue for the club because we have allegations that our CEO did ^ which haven't yet been responded to. If they deny them, or say exactly what papers they had etc. then we can move on.
Click to expand...
This is spot on. If Johnson is lying and there is no proof at all that the club had anything then they should deny it and it will be put to bed.
 
Redcar said:
The CEO was present in the interview and saw the documents relating to the case ie the WhatsApp messages (according to what was revealed in court, which the club haven't denied in the statement) .

From what was revealed in those messages it was pretty clear he'd be guilty. If I was a SAFC fan I'd be sickened if she didn't sack him after seeing those.
Click to expand...
she said yesterday that she was at the meeting but never read the documents. he said at that meeting he was not guilty. i think she is useless but not a liar. unlike aj
 
theinediblebulk said:
Aye, I'll accept the handing over of transcripts being instigated by his own lawyer like. However, what do the transcripts contain? I f it was a full and frank admission of the allegations, he's getting a P45 straight away. So my money is on him denying that any criminal activity took place when he was interviewed by the police and this was then used by him as evidence that he was innocent.

'Look, here's a copy of my interview, I'm denying it and pleading not guilty."

So we end up back at the club knowing about the allegations but having the accused making a full denial.

This is just my take on it, based on a bit of personal experience of being inside the whole justice game. Other points of view are available.
Click to expand...

Isn't it well documented that he admitted to meeting and kissing the girl in his interview? On that basis, you have to assume that the transcript reflects that. If that is the case, and the club were indeed provided with the transcript a year ago, he should not have played again.
 
TAFKAHM said:
I've got one more comment, that we discussed at work today, Johnson high profile status got him arrested, I know a couple that are happily married with kids, when they first got together, she was 15 and he was 25, its a very fine line.....
Click to expand...
It's not that "fine a line". That was wrong.
 
janey said:
He's systematically lied for a year, he admitted two counts, the lesser counts hoping he'd get away with the more serious counts, of course he will lie to save his sad backside
Click to expand...


He's only ever admitted to anything when he had absolutely no choice.

Self preservation was uppermost in his mind- he has shown no consideration for the defendant his wife or the club.

No doubt he was hoping that the case might be dropped in the intervening year when he was pleading not guilty and of course he would have wanted to earn as much as possible regardless.

As much as the club could perhaps of handled this better the real focus should be on him.
 
Sweeper said:
That is the million dollar question. The club statement is clearly drafted to use a lot of words without actually saying much or addressing the allegations. Like I said in an earlier post, it's worrying that the club did not actually address/refute the allegations as to what information they were given at the meeting last year.
Click to expand...

I agree completely.

What came out in trial was the allegation the club had the whatsapps and knew he admitted kissing her. They simply said he had always said he was pleading not guilty. I'm not disputing that the club's statement is 100% true, it's just completely beside the point.
 
The Cabbage said:
We've been trying to get players off the wage bill for years. We were presented with an opportunity to do that while also protecting ourselves from a virtually guaranteed shitstorm and instead we chose to knowingly play a lad we could be fairly certain was mere months away from being found guilty on numerous serious charges? It's not a convincing story.
Click to expand...
he insisted that on legal advice to the contrary
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top