Adam Johnson Trial Verdict

[The Master]

From the clubs point of view the main point is whether they knew he was guilty or not, that will certainly be what their sponsors will be wanting to know. It's also the key regarding whether they could/should sack him or not so it's easy to see that it's the most important point in their eyes.

From your point of view you want to know how much information the club has so that seems to be the most important thing.

It should've still been included which is obvious now as the media are ripping into the club, this could have been avoided if we just made it clear that we didn't know the details, avoiding the question makes it look as if we knew most of it.

 

[Chizno1]

If they didn't play him it would've sent a message that implied guilt and prejudiced the outcome of the trial b4 the fooka pleaded guilty on day one....

This...

If, and it is still an if, the club knew what it is being alleged they knew, they could have refused to select him for any match day squad. They could have done this without prejudicing the trial by simply saying that because of the charges against him, Johnson was not in a mentally fit state to be playing, and the club were allowing Johnson time to deal with his personal issues without the added pressure of football.

If what you are both saying was in any way true, that means that we have been forced to select a player for games. It would mean that any club who had a player who was up on charges could tell the club anything they wanted, but as long as they were officially pleading not guilty, they would not only continue employment, but would also have to be automatically selected for match days. I'm sorry, but that is ludicrous.

Now I am in no way saying that I believe Johnson, when he says that Margaret Byrne knew he had kissed an underage girl and sent her texts, but I would definitely have preferred that the club had refuted that specific allegation as opposed to refuting that the club knew how he was going to plead.

 

[Reiver]

So, you admit we don't know all the facts, and see that as reasoning to not ask for clarity?

Strange logic.

What I'm saying is that you're not asking for clarity, you're waffling on a message board.

If you want attention this is the right place for you.

If you want to ask the club for clarity it's not.

 

[haway]

People make all kinds of allegations in courts of law that are absolute bollocks.

Usually by defendants who'll say anything to get off with the offence.

It seems Johnson lied to everyone about everything but we have to believe him on this one particular point do we?

The issue is his QC supported the claim.

The further issue is if SAFC denied what he said I think we'd all believe SAFC over him. They haven't denied it. They have had specific allegations put to them and they've managed to answer allegations that were never actually suggested.

 

[Ilios]

The problem is the club didn't deny all the accusations made by Johnson.

The stated in the strongest terms, they did know he was guilty, nor that he would eventually do a u-turn on his plea. What do you want, an exhaustive list of offences that they aren't guilty of? If the club is incriminated, then his legal team are. Why were the club completely absent from the trial proceedings?
I'm not saying the club are completely innocent, I'm saying there is extremely speculative evidence by a convicted liar, accusing them of guilt.

 

[JonMc]

Full pay is not the only issue, think of the damage to his career that not playing for an extended period could have had.

Bollocks...sorry. Happens all of the time. AJ, on being found innocent of all charges would have resumed his career with no problem whatsoever.

 

[BS1000]

So what?

That's how things are and everyone knows it ........ the same for Rooney, Giggs, etc.

Oh Dear, so its fine doesn't matter what anybody is accused of innocent until proving guilty, just carry on as normal / when it suits you. You might think that is fine a lot of people don't, I also bet you would have a different opinion if it was another teams player.

At the end of the day its done, the club were never going to come out of this looking anything else but shallow (and thats being very kind) if he wasn't found innocent. They also failed to replace him, given this was a possibility or probably more likely stuck their heads in the sand and prayed it would go past the season.

 

[Rober33]

So, you admit we don't know all the facts, and see that as reasoning to not ask for clarity?

Strange logic.

There's asking for clarity and then there's assuming the club is guilty because they didn't answer every specific claim made.

They made a statement which included the key issues in them deciding how to continue with his employment. Did they know he was guilty. They didn't.

If you want further clarification, write to the club but don't assume they're guilty because they haven't categorically denied every point.

 

[walesie]

TBH that's not how I see it.

The girl is not high on my list of concerns, she was old enough to know what she was doing, and got what she thought she wanted. If that was my daughter I'd have kept it all as quiet as possible as I'd feel utterly humiliated and let down by her. It's not at all the same thing as a predator hanging around a playground grooming preteens IMO. I despise Johnson because I put my faith in him when the incidents first came to light, and it turns out he's a bare faced liar, a creep and a cheat. You can't engage in sexual activity with an under 16, no matter how mature he or she may look, I don't believe for a second that he had to research that.

He's destroyed his career, destroyed his girlfriend's life and put her and his family through hell and back, and his little girl will have to grow up tarnished with these events. All for a grope with a 15 year old. A man who had the world at his feet and was in possibly the most privileged position imaginable with a great career and family, and thousands of devoted fans, has pissed it away and rubbed all our faces in the shit because having everything wasn't enough for him.

People need to get some perspective FFS. So the club looks a bit bad right now, so what? Lives are ruined forever, but the club will recover and the dust will settle. Yes, it's annoying and disappointing, but it won't keep me awake at night.

As an aside - Stacey Flounders has come out of all this looking like a real gem of a human being, bless her. I hope she finds happiness with a real man, she deserves it.

Stopped reading at that point.

 

[Cockney Mackem]

Ok but surely it would strengthen the case to have the ceo of the club on the stand admitting what they knew and when? If that's what they are arguing, it would have removed any doubt.

The court wasn't interested in whether SAFC made the right decision about what to do with Johnson after his arrest. They were only there to determine whether Johnson was guilty of the crimes he's accused of. The defence bringing this into their evidence wasn't really that relevant to the case and smacks of Johnson trying to take people down with him.

If what Johnson alleged is true, the club has a case to answer on how they handled things between Johnson's arrest and his guilty plea on day one of his trial. If what Johnson is alleged is true, the club has a case to answer on how they made a complete balls of their statement yesterday.

 

[haway]

If, and it is still an if, the club knew what it is being alleged they knew, they could have refused to select him for any match day squad. They could have done this without prejudicing the trial by simply saying that because of the charges against him, Johnson was not in a mentally fit state to be playing, and the club were allowing Johnson time to deal with his personal issues without the added pressure of football.

If what you are both saying was in any way true, that means that we have been forced to select a player for games. It would mean that any club who had a player who was up on charges could tell the club anything they wanted, but as long as they were officially pleading not guilty, they would not only continue employment, but would also have to be automatically selected for match days. I'm sorry, but that is ludicrous.

Now I am in no way saying that I believe Johnson, when he says that Margaret Byrne knew he had kissed an underage girl and sent her texts, but I would definitely have preferred that the club had refuted that specific allegation as opposed to refuting that the club knew how he was going to plead.

Do you believe the QC who corroborated it?

 

[redandwhiterob]

Who else would have been aware then and made the decision to not do anything, as there's not many people higher than the CEO?

Well without mentioning names.....

 

[Reiver]

Oh Dear, so its fine doesn't matter what anybody is accused of innocent until proving guilty, just carry on as normal / when it suits you. You might think that is fine a lot of people don't, I also bet you would have a different opinion if it was another teams player.

At the end of the day its done, the club were never going to come out of this looking anything else but shallow (and thats being very kind) if he wasn't found innocent. They also failed to replace him, given this was a possibility or probably more likely stuck their heads in the sand and prayed it would go past the season.

Not when it suits me, I don't make the rules ...... it's the basis of English law, not my whim.

 

[Tadger]

From the clubs point of view the main point is whether they knew he was guilty or not, that will certainly be what their sponsors will be wanting to know. It's also the key regarding whether they could/should sack him or not so it's easy to see that it's the most important point in their eyes.

From your point of view you want to know how much information the club has so that seems to be the most important thing.

Isn't it?

 

[Cockney Mackem]

The stated in the strongest terms, they did NOT know he was guilty, nor that he would eventually do a u-turn on his plea. What do you want, an exhaustive list of offences that they aren't guilty of? If the club is incriminated, then his legal team are. Why were the club completely absent from the trial proceedings?
I'm not saying the club are completely innocent, I'm saying there is extremely speculative evidence by a convicted liar, accusing them of guilt.

Edited your post above as I think you missed a not there. Their statement says only about whether they knew he intended to plead guilty.

It doesn't need to be any list of offences that they aren't guilty of, just the ones that they were accused of. Neither of which they addressed in their statement yesterday.

 

[genericus]

The girl is not high on my list of concerns, she was old enough to know what she was doing, and got what she thought she wanted. If that was my daughter I'd have kept it all as quiet as possible as I'd feel utterly humiliated and let down by her. It's not at all the same thing as a predator hanging around a playground grooming preteens IMO. I despise Johnson because I put my faith in him when the incidents first came to light, and it turns out he's a bare faced liar, a creep and a cheat. You can't engage in sexual activity with an under 16, no matter how mature he or she may look, I don't believe for a second that he had to research that.

He's destroyed his career, destroyed his girlfriend's life and put her and his family through hell and back, and his little girl will have to grow up tarnished with these events. All for a grope with a 15 year old. A man who had the world at his feet and was in possibly the most privileged position imaginable with a great career and family, and thousands of devoted fans, has pissed it away and rubbed all our faces in the shit because having everything wasn't enough for him.

People need to get some perspective FFS. So the club looks a bit bad right now, so what? Lives are ruined forever, but the club will recover and the dust will settle. Yes, it's annoying and disappointing, but it won't keep me awake at night.

As an aside - Stacey Flounders has come out of all this looking like a real gem of a human being, bless her. I hope she finds happiness with a real man, she deserves it.

That post could have genuinely been copied and pasted from the Daily Mail comments section....i mean f***ing hell

 

[Jack Torrance]

Doubt the club are even bothered they kept Johnson in order to stay in the league and it worked. PFA deserve most criticism

 

[haway]

Ok but surely it would strengthen the case to have the ceo of the club on the stand admitting what they knew and when? If that's what they are arguing, it would have removed any doubt.

But it was a side-note in a trial about whether he sexually assaulted a child. There were 10 days of evidence, this was only 5 lines. Why would he try and call the CEO over it?

This all came up, in the trial, to refute one, minor prosecution suggestion he might have not pleaded to get paid. This had nothing to do with whether or not he actually assaulted the child. That is what the trial was about.

 

[Mackem00]

Jorno Jerry Lawton quoting the judge directly.

Judge: After his arrest

You must be logged on to see external links

told Sunderland AFC he had `passionately kissed' schoolgirl and had been `aroused'

Is the judge lying now?

No. He's repeating what Johnson told him.

 

[Reiver]

The issue is his QC supported the claim.

The further issue is if SAFC denied what he said I think we'd all believe SAFC over him. They haven't denied it. They have had specific allegations put to them and they've managed to answer allegations that were never actually suggested.

Now you're getting silly.

If his client told him that was the case then he can hardly contradict him or would want to.

I have a Sunderland supporting 'mate' who's a barrister and he'll do and say anything he can get away with to win the case.

That's what they do and, unless you're incredibly naive, you'll accept that.