Oh for fucks sake another inbred wanker has appeared.doubt you'll be anywhere near retirement age when your heart explodes.
not that anybody will give a fuck mind.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Oh for fucks sake another inbred wanker has appeared.doubt you'll be anywhere near retirement age when your heart explodes.
not that anybody will give a fuck mind.
But I do think his sentence was too harsh
Why is this a shit argument?
At the time after his trial, when people were saying "ah well he didnt do anything wrong really" I was one of the main posters saying what he did was wrong, that it was an abuse of power/ trust and it was completely inappropriate behaviour.
But I still think the sentence was too long. I often read cases and think "that sentence was too long" or "that sentence was too short". Do you not? Do you think every sentence is right?
I don't see what the issue is with disagreeing with the length of his sentence. It has fuck all to do with him playing for us. I thought it was shameful he was still allowed to play once he was charged. I do think he deserved to be punished. But 6 years? Nah.
Or perhaps in the full knowledge of what he'd told them had happened ..... tbf I don't think some of the facts came out until the trial was fixed.
1 minute before someone turns 16 they are A CHILDOn here...
Day before 16th birthday, burn the paedo.
Day of their 16th birthday, all is good.
*the above only applies if the person under age is female. If its a male he's a jammy bastard regardless.
Looks to me like you were stoking up a game of 'what's the best kind of nonce'
On here...
Day before 16th birthday, burn the paedo.
Day of their 16th birthday, all is good.
*the above only applies if the person under age is female. If its a male he's a jammy bastard regardless.
The poster who said they'd have him back playing for us when he is released is the best I've seen on here.. something along the lines of he will have served his time as justification for re-employing a sex offender.
He's already appealed his sentence and lost that. Luckily the judges aren't so easy to give him a slap on the wrist as some people on here seem to be.
So given that he pleaded guilty, the court heard the evidence (including his defence), the judge followed the sentencing guidelines, and the Appeal Court dismissed his appeal, on what basis do you think the sentence was too harsh?
Just the fact that you don't think it was a bad enough crime?
Check.Looks to me like you were stoking up a game of 'what's the best kind of nonce'
I'm only going off the evidence of things I've seen myself, and he doesn't show any remorse in it.
I'd left caps lock on at first without realising and that reply looked f***ing mental![]()
And 'evidence' from other trials to 'prove' Johnson isn't bad really
She faces 250 hours of unpaid community work - and was ordered to pay a £100 victim surcharge.
Regardless of how the headline makes him look, I hate Adam Johnson.
One of the most talented players we've had for years and throws it away by getting with a lass under the age of 16 when you look at his Mrs new born baby and his glorious lifestyle ..f***ing idiot.
1 minute before someone turns 16 they are A CHILD
And 'evidence' from other trials to 'prove' Johnson isn't bad really
Check.
That was on the last thread on here too.
As well as a quick round of victim blaming and a bonus prize of 'its the parents fault'.