• 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.
CARLOS CLASS said:
There is overwhelming evidence that the club, and specifically the CEO, knew that he had kissed the child and had seen the messages they had swapped.
The decision to allow him to play on in those circumstances is deeply flawed and makes the position of Margaret Byrne untenable.

It is another example of the lack of quality, experience and wisdom in the club's executive leadership team.

She has to go, and go now
Click to expand...
That's not really a fact though.
 

treetop91 said:
If the club had sacked him when the police spoke to them he could still have sued the club for negligence if the trial found in his favour. Recent cases have happened when the complaint has not been found true. The club have done exactly what they should have done, AJ will have hoped initially that his defence might win but it appears his counsel has informed him at the beginning of the case that he had no choice but plead guilty on at least one count and the club acted then,quite correctly.
Click to expand...
Exactly, the club waited until the pleas were entered, as soon as it was official he was pleading guilty then he was sacked, imagine the shit storm the club would have faced if they sacked him last year and he was not guilty of all charges now
 
CARLOS CLASS said:
There is overwhelming evidence that the club, and specifically the CEO, knew that he had kissed the child and had seen the messages they had swapped.
The decision to allow him to play on in those circumstances is deeply flawed and makes the position of Margaret Byrne untenable.

It is another example of the lack of quality, experience and wisdom in the club's executive leadership team.

She has to go, and go now
Click to expand...

All of the 'overwhelming evidence' has come from one exchange in court for which the transcripts haven't even been released. It's obviously given the papers the license they needed to print all of these stories but how much wrongdoing by the club it actually proves is difficult to determine when we can't see what was actually said.

What we do know is the club statement says the documents they had were passed straight to his QC.

People have different opinions about what that means the club knew but that just shows how poor the 'evidence' is.
 
janey said:
I knew it wouldn't take long before it became the fans fault
Click to expand...

Sadly, that was always on the cards if he was found guilty. And that's down to the club's decision to allow him to continue to play. If they'd upheld his suspension, it wouldn't have happened
 
Headingley Slog Fest said:
Exactly, the club waited until the pleas were entered, as soon as it was official he was pleading guilty then he was sacked, imagine the shit storm the club would have faced if they sacked him last year and he was not guilty of all charges now
Click to expand...

He should have been suspended pending the outcome of the trial, he should not have played and its a disgrace that he did.

prehab26 said:
Yep. The fact we known about the allegation and choose to ignore it and allow him to play is a huge error in judgement.

That surely is not up for debate. It's clear as day.
Click to expand...

Apparently not clear to some.
 
Although I'm not sure the situation is clear cut I can't see anyway back for Maggie. The flesh want a fall guy and she'll be the one who suffers (rightly or wrongly? I don't know )
 
Sweeper said:
A statement of fact from a QC in Crown Court is as close to a certainty of evidence as you will find in most places. Particularly when that statement is entirely unchallenged.
Click to expand...
Well done for missing the whole point of my post. It's not about what's true or not true for me, it's about the fact that the person responsible for this was able to be innocent until proven guilty, he was able to have a trial, the club are guilty until proven innocent by association to him. That boils my piss, because even if they have royally messed up they have not broken the law.
 
Headingley Slog Fest said:
Exactly, the club waited until the pleas were entered, as soon as it was official he was pleading guilty then he was sacked, imagine the shit storm the club would have faced if they sacked him last year and he was not guilty of all charges now
Click to expand...
I can't see anyone saying that they should have sacked him last year, suspend with pay seems to be what most are saying
 
He's a dickhead , obviously too arrogant and stupid to get a grip, but can't help thinking this could have all been stopped by a simple press of the 'block' button by the lass or a 'stop sending me messages bellend' message, why it carried on for so long is beyond me.
 
Rober33 said:
All of the 'overwhelming evidence' has come from one exchange in court for which the transcripts haven't even been released. It's obviously given the papers the license they needed to print all of these stories but how much wrongdoing by the club it actually proves is difficult to determine when we can't see what was actually said.

What we do know is the club statement says the documents they had were passed straight to his QC.

People have different opinions about what that means the club knew but that just shows how poor the 'evidence' is.
Click to expand...

If the club had not been provided with the transcript and whatsapp messages, they would surely have explicitly said so.
 
Headingley Slog Fest said:
Christ, never knew there were so many legal experts on this board like, I'm sure the highly qualified legal team the club have know the ins and outs and will shoot any allegations out of the sky
Click to expand...

am still waiting for advise on how to get out of a speeding fine from these expects you talk of.
 
zebediah said:
Talking about last year, not the trial.
Click to expand...

His first interview with the police was last year though and in that interview he admitted kissing and sending texts to a 15 year old schoolgirl.
He then, after admitting what he had to police in his initial interview pleaded not guilty to all 4 charges in June 2015.
Sorry if I'm getting crossed wires about what you are asking.
 
SAFCOldie said:
He's a dickhead , obviously too arrogant and stupid to get a grip, but can't help thinking this could have all been stopped by a simple press of the 'block' button by the lass or a 'stop sending me messages bellend' message, why it carried on for so long is beyond me.
Click to expand...

Another victim blamer. Newsflash, the prerogative is on the ADULT not to groom the CHILD... not the child to stop the adult.

She clearly said in court she enjoyed the attention at the time (although found it weird) and only afterwards realised how strange it was and she felt uncomfortable.
 
Sweeper said:
He should have been suspended pending the outcome of the trial, he should not have played and its a disgrace that he did.



Apparently not clear to some.
Click to expand...

If people are saying The head of the investigation and Durham police force are lying, then they can not be taken seriously. This coupled with the QC comments added to the statement that didn't address the issues, is far to much to ignore.
 
janey said:
Well done for missing the whole point of my post. It's not about what's true or not true for me, it's about the fact that the person responsible for this was able to be innocent until proven guilty, he was able to have a trial, the club are guilty until proven innocent by association to him. That boils my piss, because even if they have royally messed up they have not broken the law.
Click to expand...

The club have said that they will not make a further statement, having initially skirted around the issues that were raised about their conduct. That's telling. Why are the club not denying what the QC and lead investigator have said, if they can?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top