• 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.

East Riding Mackem said:
Did Johnson and the QC say they were pleading not guilty on May 4th? If so why would Byrne contradict the judgement of one on the best defence QC's in the country? It would be like a GP querying the judgement of a brain surgeon. If on the other hand they knew how he was going to plead then her position is untenable.

As an aside - bearing in mind the calamitous nature of the last few years - it's amazing that she's managed to hold onto that position.
Click to expand...

Agree, if she somehow rides this storm (I dont think she will mind) she will literally be untouchable, job for life if she wants it.
 
John J Rambo said:
Couple things here and I'm far from an expert. What does employment law state in these cases? I'm sure that will be the legal advice the club has looked at. If he is adamant he's pleading not guilty and fighting the allegations all the way, then where does the club stand on sacking or suspending him and influencing the case in any way? Also like someone mentioned, the PFA have been contacted and they have given advice to the club on this and had their say no doubt. If they have put pressure on the club to support Johnson in this and made the implications clear to them if they don't, then why is there no questions being aimed at them?

Apologise if this has been covered, but it's a long thread.
Click to expand...

Couldn't sack him. Suspension on pay or carry on regardless were the alternatives.
 
Gaz said:
Didnt the police contradict part of it under oath too though?

Like i said, most of them will be bending the truth to some degree. I agree it doesnt look good until the club say something to clear it up though one way or another
Click to expand...
No, this for some reason was brought up by someone who didn't have a clue what they were talking about earlier in the thread
 
Maximus said:
speaking of the truth, Abe Lincoln actually said;

"You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time."

;)
Click to expand...

I stand corrected :)
 
Reiver said:
I've sat back and ignored this thread for a while and, instead of just firing off posts, thought about the behaviour of the police.

There's something absolutely wrong.

Why would they feel it necessary to send a senior officer to give the BBC an exclusive interview? Why are the rest of the media excluded if it's simply standard police procedure? Why is it so urgent to attack SAFC when the convicted man hasn't even been sentenced yet ....... this looks like panic to me.

Why are the police now bleating on about why "there's a 15 year old girl wondering why blah blah blah"

The officer, in the BBC interview, also said that 'the club were given a little more information'. What the hell does that mean ......... absolutely nothing tbh.

There's an agenda here and the police have their PR team working full blast on this, mark my words. Are they expecting a shit-storm when the sentence is passed down and the judge makes his closing comments? Should they have, if the case against Johnson was so secure, objected to his bail application.

After all the police appear to be branding the man a sexual predator who deliberately targeted a 15 year old for sex but would be walking around free. I've no doubt that Johnson was terrified of being remanded in custody until the trial was concluded but why wasn't he? This, in my mind, is why he was pleading not guilty even though he knew 100% that he'd change his plea on the first day of the trial. He's lied through his teeth to stay out of remand.

I believe the police have made mistakes that will soon come out, most likely on sentencing, and they're getting their retaliation in first.

There's something wrong here with the police behaviour which I haven't figured out yet,but I will.
Click to expand...



Without the facts of what, if anything, was passed to the club, and by whom, and what the club did with those items, it's incredibly difficult to come to any conclusion.

My guess is that the smoke will clear if and when Johnson appeals and what the grounds for that appeal are.Would passing evidence, in the form of Johnson's statement, to the club constitute grounds for a mistrial? Are the police allowed to release a defendants statement to a third party prior to a case going to trial?
 
The Master said:
It's insane the lengths some are going to to avoid putting any sort of blame on the club.
Click to expand...
No one is going to any lengths at all. They're stating an opinion.

If Johnson was innocent until proven guilty then so are the club. There's an accusation levied at them that's all. There's no proof of any wrongdoing as yet. If that proof comes out then everyone will have the same reaction. Heads should roll.

Say Margaret Byrne comes out today and denies she was ever told or that she's seen the documents. What will you say then?

I suspect a lot of the people on this thread jumping in with two feet based on a couple of quotes from johnsons defence are the same ones who have been blaming everything on Byrne and the board.

Demand answers by all means but people on here are desperate for her to be guilty. They've already made their minds up and they've all misplaced their anger towards Johnson on her.
 
prehab26 said:
Agree, if she somehow rides this storm (I dont think she will mind) she will literally be untouchable, job for life if she wants it.
Click to expand...

it must be some sort of record really, being rewarded so well for never-ending chaos. That said, if AJ and the QC said they were pleading not guilty I'm not sure she will have to resign.
 
BS1000 said:
If that is referring to then Mystic Meg bit then given the nature of the charges, lifting the suspension followed by a guilty verdict was always going to give the club very bad PR, because thats the way the press / things work. Nobody could seriously believe anything else. Given the information coming out it makes the club look 10 times worse and the pressure much greater. The club obviously thought the risk was worth it, no way they could of believed there was no risk of this happening.
Click to expand...

Didn't they follow the same line with Bramble? IIRC he was suspended and then reinstated. I wonder where we would have been left had Johnson's trial collapsed, or turned up a not guilty verdict. Had we sacked him we'd have been pilloried, suspended him he'd have been out of the game for a year. What a mess.
 
Windypants said:
Without the facts of what, if anything, was passed to the club, and by whom, and what the club did with those items, it's incredibly difficult to come to any conclusion.

My guess is that the smoke will clear if and when Johnson appeals and what the grounds for that appeal are.Would passing evidence, in the form of Johnson's statement, to the club constitute grounds for a mistrial? Are the police allowed to release a defendants statement to a third party prior to a case going to trial?
Click to expand...

This is why I'm not making any claims about the club or the police, not that it stops some people.

But anyone, with any grasp of public relations, would've seen the police actions as acting with undue haste.

If the senior investigating officer was doing nothing more than addressing the press why weren't they all invited to her station, as is normal?

Why was it necessary to send her to London for an exclusive interview with the BBC?

Why is it so urgent and what was it designed to achieve?
 
The Beautiful Game said:
No one is going to any lengths at all. They're stating an opinion.

If Johnson was innocent until proven guilty then so are the club. There's an accusation levied at them that's all. There's no proof of any wrongdoing as yet. If that proof comes out then everyone will have the same reaction. Heads should roll.

Say Margaret Byrne comes out today and denies she was ever told or that she's seen the documents. What will you say then?

I suspect a lot of the people on this thread jumping in with two feet based on a couple of quotes from johnsons defence are the same ones who have been blaming everything on Byrne and the board.

Demand answers by all means but people on here are desperate for her to be guilty. They've already made their minds up and they've all misplaced their anger towards Johnson on her.
Click to expand...

I agree, even if she has seen the documents that's irrelevant - the key issue is what Pownall said their defence would be to the charges - if he said they were pleading not guilty and had a good defence why would a Mickey Mouse lawyer like her query the logic of a top man in the field? If on the other hand they said at the meeting they were pleading guilty to two charges then she'd have to go. Unless I'm missing something, the club seemed genuinely shocked at the change of plea.
 
Windypants said:
Without the facts of what, if anything, was passed to the club, and by whom, and what the club did with those items, it's incredibly difficult to come to any conclusion.

My guess is that the smoke will clear if and when Johnson appeals and what the grounds for that appeal are.Would passing evidence, in the form of Johnson's statement, to the club constitute grounds for a mistrial? Are the police allowed to release a defendants statement to a third party prior to a case going to trial?
Click to expand...

As far as I could discover last night they require a court order.

East Riding Mackem said:
I agree, even if she has seen the documents that's irrelevant - the key issue is what Pownall said their defence would be to the charges - if he said they were pleading not guilty and had a good defence why would a Mickey Mouse lawyer like her query the logic of a top man in the field? If on the other hand they said at the meeting they were pleading guilty to two charges then she'd have to go. Unless I'm missing something, the club seemed genuinely shocked at the change of plea.
Click to expand...

Which could explain the content of their statement.
 
Wayne The Punk said:
Are you referring to me?

If you want to have a conversation about it pm me your email address, if not shut the fuck up. Its amazing, because I suggest a 15 year old girl knew what was going on, I suddenly support Johnson. I would hang the dirty bastard by the balls for what he did
And by the way, dont bring my dad into this you kangaroo shagging wanker
Click to expand...
:lol: You brought him in to it by mentioning what he'd said. Daft lad.
 
---Nemo--- said:
Didn't they follow the same line with Bramble? IIRC he was suspended and then reinstated. I wonder where we would have been left had Johnson's trial collapsed, or turned up a not guilty verdict. Had we sacked him we'd have been pilloried, suspended him he'd have been out of the game for a year. What a mess.
Click to expand...

The only way we could of sacked him was pay up his contract then it would of inferred guilt so it would of been a no no.

It differs from Bramble because of age and circumstances, yes it meant losing him but imho he should of stayed suspended, if not guilty then the club have suffered through his stupidity but none of this.

The Beautiful Game said:
No one is going to any lengths at all. They're stating an opinion.

If Johnson was innocent until proven guilty then so are the club. There's an accusation levied at them that's all. There's no proof of any wrongdoing as yet. If that proof comes out then everyone will have the same reaction. Heads should roll.

Say Margaret Byrne comes out today and denies she was ever told or that she's seen the documents. What will you say then?

I suspect a lot of the people on this thread jumping in with two feet based on a couple of quotes from johnsons defence are the same ones who have been blaming everything on Byrne and the board.

Demand answers by all means but people on here are desperate for her to be guilty. They've already made their minds up and they've all misplaced their anger towards Johnson on her.
Click to expand...

Well thats not going to happen unless the club is sued and have their day in court, I suspect if it goes that route it will be settled very quickly out of court to save anymore mess, so still won't happen.

The statement would of been crafted by legal and Byrne / Short wouldn't/ shouldn't of made the decision without legal advice and not his.
 
Last edited:
---Nemo--- said:
As far as I could discover last night they require a court order.
Click to expand...

The police, from the outset, seemed quite keen to involve the club.

I'm not sure why they would feel it necessary to share this amount of information with the club pre-trial.

Almost as if they wanted the club to do the dirty work for them, sack the player and hang him out to dry.

They now appear aggrieved that the club did whatever they could for, what was at that point, an innocent man as far as they knew.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top