• 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.
Front page of The Times ffs :(

Headline 'Club allowed paedophile footballer to keep playing'

Jesus..the Mirror or Chronicle I might have expected, but The Times!!
 

Rober33 said:
The meeting was an introductory meeting between Johnson and his new Barrister, that's the scope of it.
Click to expand...

One in which she was told he kissed her and she had a copy of all 834 whatsapp's and what he admitted at police station interview... hmm....
 
pedro_1879 said:
I have a feeling it will, especially in the post Savile/yewtree world we live in now
Click to expand...
Sunderland haven't broken the law though. It may be morally wrong if the allegations of SAFC knowing are true, but Adam Johnson committed the crime and has been served justice.

People can stamp their feet all they want but I feel it's likely that this will be off the agenda in the national press within a week or two and not much of interest will come out.
 
Reiver said:
The offender is no longer a Sunderland player and therefore no longer on their list of targets.

The club, and Byrne in particular, are now firmly in the line of fire for the internet warriors.

Simple as that.
Click to expand...

Its not as black and white as that though is it.

When this kicked off there were 3 camps, can do no wrong, wait and see and shouldn't be playing.

Given the nature but more importantly the age thing, I was in he shouldn't play brigade. Like many others I thought the club took the right decision initially to suspend him, then the wrong one to let him play. I still think that as do many others, I suspect if it was a player we didn't need he would of stayed suspended.

The Byrne thing is a different issue, no one in their right mind can think that some of the decisions that have been made over the past few years have been good, more like bordering on the farcical this is just another poor one in a long list. But its carry on regardless. There is a vast difference between supporting the club and blindly following and for me I hate watching the club lurch from one crisis to another year after year especially when a 3 year old could see how some of the decisions were going to play out.
 
Some people really going to town on facebook and Twitter with pictures and allegations against the lass, wouldn't be surprised if they get a knock at the door soon
 
The Cabbage said:
I can well believe that they didn't look at them. Hi Mags I'm gonna plead not guilty. Btw here's a load of transcripts that police process wouldn't allow you to see. I'm not sure I'd peek inside in those circumstances. However on the flip side I struggle to see how anyone could read those transcripts and not resolve to move the lad on. Big wage, summer window and he's been little more than a super sub since the arrest. It's not like moving on Johnson in the light of this evidence was a disaster from a playing perspective. Given all that, plus the evidence in court and the club statement, the logical conclusion is that the club didn't look at the file. Perhaps that's incompetence enough. However I'm not sure what I'd do in such an unusual situation.
Click to expand...

To be fair there were 834 messages, a cursory glance at that lot probably wouldn't have told anyone anything, there were a few key messages highlighted at court out of all 834.

I would imagine somebody would have to spend a good amount of time going through the messages to find the evidence of wrongdoing and I doubt the club did this.
 
Now the trial is over you think they could be a few kiss and yells from Johnsons other conquests in the next few days? Must be a few journo's trying to hunt them down you would have thought
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top