Adam Johnson Trial Verdict

[Cockney Mackem]

The accusations being tossed around about the club are pure speculation based on a few statements made in court which were designed to suggest to the jury that Johnson was not continuing to plead not guilty so that he could collect his £60,000 a week wages.

We have no idea what was actually even stated in court because we haven't seen the transcripts, all we know is a few quotes and the sensationalist headlines the media has ran with.

Yep, definitely getting weird. Multiple news outlets that were live blogging the court have consistently reported identical quotes attributed to Johnson and his QC, and the judge. Not one of the news outlets, despite this being a big story, has contradicted that this is what's been said in court or that there is any error. Johnson's going to be keeping his head down but the QC at least could be reasonably expected to clarify if he hasn't openly accused the club of knowing Johnson was guilty. For you to suggest that we don't have a very good indication of what was said in court is bizarre and very damaging to the credibility of anything else you argue.

And again and again you duck the fact that after being accused of something very serious, the club released a statement designed to refute allegations made in court that it objects to, it very conspicuously did not refute the very serious allegation of hearing an admission and seeing a document that meant the club knew he was guilty and played him anyway. The statement was very big in refuting very strongly one allegation, but did not refute two other more serious allegations.

How you can continue to disagree with the statement, universally acknowledged, that the club has been accused of knowing he was guilty and playing him anyway, and has failed to deny that accusation, is really quite strange.

 

[Littlerobbieh]

In which case, it begs the question, and not for the first time, why the club did not deny that this is exactly what they did when it was alleged in court and the club released a statement designed to address what was alleged in court?

This is just weird now.

I really don't know but they've issued a statement saying they've spoke to lawyers and legals and done everything they feel correct. If they knew he was going to plead guilty he'd have been sacked sooner, they sacked him the day after he pleaded guilty. Sam said he was deeply shocked and him and the players feel really let down by him. I don't get why safc fans can't take this on board, back the club, manager, players and look to survival. People taking the side of the media and Johnson over them man, it's not right to me. Like I said I fully back the club in what they're saying, if it's proven in time there's been a cover up I'll review my stance then.

 

[The Cabbage]

Until we hear from the club, and I don't think we will, then you don't know the full story. You can have your reasons but you'll never know.


Really?

The May 4th meeting at which full disclosure is implied was between the club, Johnson, his legal team and his newly appointed qc. The confusion is the statement yesterday. However the meeting with the police could only have been to discuss allegations since they had not interviewed Johnson nor had any phone data at that point.

 

[deleted user 785]

The May 4th meeting at which full disclosure is implied was between the club, Johnson, his legal team and his newly appointed qc. The confusion is the statement yesterday. However the meeting with the police could only have been to discuss allegations since they had not interviewed Johnson nor had any phone data at that point.

Fair enough.

I hate that bastard for putting the club in this position. My anger is towards him more than the club.

 

[Littlerobbieh]

In any other job that would be more than enough for suspension until the case was heard though, at the very least. I used to work for the police in Children and Families-there's no grey areas when it comes to the legislation on these things in circumstances like that. It's not like you can entrap an adult as a 15 year old without the adult being really f***ing stupid. If you said to your boss at work that you had given a random 15 year old a peck on the cheek and they were thinking about pressing charges, then things would (quite rightly) change for you very quickly.

I really don't think it is. I took my kids to the sci-con at the arena last November and a female wwe wrestler gave them both a signed pic and peck on the cheek. It depends how Johnson's told them, he might have said after the game he gave her a signed shirt, she asked for a kiss so he gave her a peck. None of us know anything about the transcript. Like I said I back the club over the scoundrel media and that scumbag who's facing jail.

 

[Deleted User 18963]

Just for clarity the police have never said the above

Oh sorry was it March the 2nd and was AJ's father and QC on May 4th?

 

[genericus]

That's very narrow sighted.

Any organisation has legal, civic and moral obligations and commitments when it comes to the protection of children. The gaps in the current situation, including the club's seeming inability to refute accusations which, if it was innocent, would be very easy to deny and clear up, suggest that it has failed to follow these obligations and failed to take the protection of young people into account. At worse, it has actively tried to brush them under the carpet for a year rather than enact them. This concerns me both in respect to the wellbeing of the community of supporters as well as what it says about the current state of a a club which has been an emotional and financial fixture and commitment in my life for 30 years. I never supported Sunderland because it was a winning team, but because it was my team, my town, my people. I don't like the idea that the club now does not care for the welfare of the young people who support my team, my town, my people.

I know it might be an amazing/unbelievable to thing hear, but some people are as bothered about the wider community and other people as they are themselves. Not everything boils down to "If you're not at risk then it's not a problem, butt out".

The police have already said Sunderland followed the necessary protocol for safeguarding, in fact the police were more than happy for him to resume playing so long as the safeguards were in place.

As for the 'wider community' thats bullshit, you know as well as I do some of the people calling for answers don't care beyond their own need for an answer let alone the impact the answer will have on other people who support Safc.

I can understand people being upset by what has happened but you are making a dangerous assumption that because of what Johnson did the club are unfit in its protection of children, the issue i take however is that the club have not been proved to have flouted any safeguarding or protection of children, one person has done that, he actively sought out the girl and manipulated her.
No amount of safeguarding will ever be enough when someone manipulates a position of trust.
You can't pin any blame in the club for failing to protect a child when the reality is she was willing to meet him and message him over a prolonged period of time just as he was willing to, Johnson himself committed the acts, the first the club had heard was on his arrest and like I say by police admission they took the requisite steps to safeguard by removing him from those situations.

Bar a statement that skirted around the issue I dont see where the club have failed here, they followed legal procedures, enacted safeguarding on police advice, sought independent legal advice, however if indeed it has been known from the interviews that he admitted to the charges then yes there needs to be action taken, I don't think we'll find that out though.

I'm am however very uncomfortable that this now seems less about the actions of Johnson but instead on the actions of the club, it seems crass and has no bearing on tee outcome of the case and seems instead to be based on agenda and assumptions.


I will agree though, if it is found that the club knew than Byrne's position is untenable, I don't see someone with a legal background being that ignorant to the implications.

 

[Cockney Mackem]

I really don't know but they've issued a statement saying they've spoke to lawyers and legals and done everything they feel correct. If they knew he was going to plead guilty he'd have been sacked sooner, they sacked him the day after he pleaded guilty. Sam said he was deeply shocked and him and the players feel really let down by him. I don't get why safc fans can't take this on board, back the club, manager, players and look to survival. People taking the side of the media and Johnson over them man, it's not right to me. Like I said I fully back the club in what they're saying, if it's proven in time there's been a cover up I'll review my stance then.

Wow. Would you like to point to the exact words in the statement where they say they deny hearing Johnson say he was guilty and deny seeing documents that incriminated Johnson, or are you just going to admit to wilful blindness?

 

[The Sandance Kid]

Until we hear from the club, and I don't think we will, then you don't know the full story. You can have your reasons but you'll never know.

The Club surely have to put the record straight?

They can't let people continue to say that they knew all along he was guilty of two charges (it's not relevant how he intended to plead, that's not in question) and they decided to play him anyway to help the Club avoid relegation.

They have to refute this. Unless of course they cannot refute it because it is true.

 

[sonson]

I really don't think it is. I took my kids to the sci-con at the arena last November and a female wwe wrestler gave them both a signed pic and peck on the cheek. It depends how Johnson's told them, he might have said after the game he gave her a signed shirt, she asked for a kiss so he gave her a peck. None of us know anything about the transcript. Like I said I back the club over the scoundrel media and that scumbag who's facing jail.

You think that if some lass in those circumstances asked for a peck it would have got this far? Come on man, use your brains. Did the the former WWE Wrestler give them her number and WhatsApp them 800 odd times as well?

For it to have got this far means that it was obviously no innocent gesture like that. People don't go to prison for three years for a dainty, consented to (in your example she asks him for it, in a safe and innocent context) publicly acceptable form of affection.

 

[Dogbark]

The Club surely have to put the record straight?

They can't let people continue to say that they knew all along he was guilty of two charges (it's not relevant how he intended to plead, that's not in question) and they decided to play him anyway to help the Club avoid relegation.

They have to refute this. Unless of course they cannot refute it because it is true.

No they don't.

 

[deleted user 785]

The Club surely have to put the record straight?

They can't let people continue to say that they knew all along he was guilty of two charges (it's not relevant how he intended to plead, that's not in question) and they decided to play him anyway to help the Club avoid relegation.

They have to refute this. Unless of course they cannot refute it because it is true.

I don't think they will.

 

[Sgt Pepper]

Who'll remember her name after she's gone? In the eyes of the wider public it is an SAFC issue. I don't like it, but that's the way it is.

Couldn't care less, everyone knows deep down the whole club cannot be held responsible for the actions of any individual regardless of how high up that individual is. If people want to use it against SAFC then fuck them. It's also all the more reason for them, and I say again, any other boardroom member who knew, to come out and face what they're being accused of and then deal with it accordingly (e.g. resign or be sacked if possible - if they're guilty of what they're being accused of).

Probably true.

The brand that will get tarnished in the public eye isn't Byrne or Short as the public isn't really aware of them, it's SAFC.

That said, it is only the individuals involved who can be blamed, imo.

Exactly. If it's true the individuals have wronged the club itself, and the club's good name, as much as they have us fans and the others associated with the club I've mentioned in previous posts.

 

[Littlerobbieh]

Wow. Would you like to point to the exact words in the statement where they say they deny hearing Johnson say he was guilty and deny seeing documents that incriminated Johnson, or are you just going to admit to wilful blindness?

No I'm just going to carry on with life, loving and backing my club and despising what that fuckin wanker has done to it. He's the issue here not safc. Can't you see how tragic it is that this threads turned into a safc are ran by scumbags thread..... Fuck Johnson he's gone..... Adam who?....... Na, we need answers off the wankers at the club. It's wrong on so many levels to me.

 

[anotherfinemessi]

The accusations being tossed around about the club are pure speculation based on a few statements made in court which were designed to suggest to the jury that Johnson was not continuing to plead not guilty so that he could collect his £60,000 a week wages.

We have no idea what was actually even stated in court because we haven't seen the transcripts, all we know is a few quotes and the sensationalist headlines the media has ran with.

There were "live" feeds everyday.

 

[The Cabbage]

Oh sorry was it March the 2nd and was AJ's father and QC on May 4th?

That's right. The police statement yesterday was a little naughty and the press have run with it. They simply weren't in a position to say what Johnson had done at that point and most certainly didn't do so at the time. Otherwise they would have opened themselves up to legal action on the back of a not guilty verdict. May is the only meeting that matters in this case.

 

[Littlerobbieh]

You think that if some lass in those circumstances asked for a peck it would have got this far? Come on man, use your brains. Did the the former WWE Wrestler give them her number and WhatsApp them 800 odd times as well?

For it to have got this far means that it was obviously no innocent gesture like that. People don't go to prison for three years for a dainty, consented to, publicly acceptable form of affection.

I'm not saying that am I. What I'm saying is when Johnson told the club about it in May he may have hidden some details. For example he may have said 'look this is bad shit but I've done nowt wrong. She asked for a signed shirt so after the game I gave her one and I gave her a kiss. I'll be pleading guilty and I'll be getting off with it. That's just one theory, literally none of us know what he told the club. They're happy with how they've dealt with it, Johnson's the arsehole here.

 

[The Sandance Kid]

No they don't.

I think they do.

If they don't then everyone will think the Club have played him despite knowing he was guilty. That doesn't sit comfortably with many fans

 

[Reiver]

He wasn't bang to rights legally - there was a long way to go trial and there would still have been a hope that the case might ultimately have been withdrawn, that they would be able to work out a good defence strategy etc.

At the end of the day it's quite simple - if the QC has not lied in court, SAFC knew very early and continued to allow him to play. If he has lied, I am at a loss to explain why he would risk his career in such a high profile case, or why the club would "forget" to mention it in the statement.

Well I can see your point.

However, whether he actually played or not he'd have still been coming into work, signing autographs, training with the other players, etc.
He'd have been collecting wages, playing in practice matches and wearing the shirt ....... how much worse it is that he actually played is up for debate.

If the case had been dropped, thrown out of court or he'd been found not guilty his playing wouldn't now be an issue.

Is it for the club to act as judge & jury, go against advice from the PFA and tell him not to show his face at the club?

 

[Safc88]

You must be logged on to see external links