• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Adam Johnson Case - Post Sensibly

thfcsteff said:
Mate...and I say this knowing he has not been proven guilty yet...I would say that if the rozzers are prepared to announce the charges he has been arrested of, and the CPS in charge of the case are prepared to say they feel there will be a conviction based on the evidence they have, then we do (indeed) have a situation here...yes. He is innocent until proven guilty. BUT if he is NOT guilty, he would (and probably should) sue the crud out of all concerned because the crimes being suggested here are a fudgeing disgrace.

I will be interested to see the comments here if he is proven guilty BTW.

p.s. taking your text theory, IF he has said certain things then YES that would absolutely be MORE than enough. Put it this way, if I saw a 26/27 year old man sending texts to my not-yet 16 year old daughter, I would be sure to find out their address and pay them a visit.
Click to expand...

What happens if you are faced by the fact the man says but she said she was 20. If he was her teacher I would 100% agree with you, but we are talking about a self absorbed Premier League footballer that doesn't think about birth certificates when he sees a nice piece of skirt at a nightclub.

Anyway, I am sure all will come out eventually, I prefer to air on the not guilty until actually proven before making my mind up.
 
Last edited:
Craig_J said:
I'm interested to know whether some of the people on this forum who said that Ched Evans (a convicted rapist) should be allowed to resume his career playing football after serving his sentence would say the same of a convicted peadophile?

Although I do think it's borderline impossible that any club would ever go as far as to employ a player convicted of peadophilia anyway.
Click to expand...

I did, and yes I do, as long as it's possible with all required legal procedures being followed

the fact he is a footballer is irrelevant, the law is the same for everyone
 
Superhudd said:
What happens if you are faced by the fact the man says but she said she was 20. If he was her teacher I would 100% agree with you, but we are talking about a self absorbed Premier League footballer that doesn't think about birth certificates when he sees a nice piece of skirt at a nightclub.

Anyway, I am sure all will come out eventually, I prefer to air on the not guilty until actually proven before making my mind up.
Click to expand...

I think you need to rephrase your question. I suspect you are trying to say something else, but the bit of my comment you bold-faced suggests you are asking the wrong question?
Let me say what I said again, one more time.
If I saw a 26/27 year old man sending texts to my not-yet 16 year old daughter, I would be sure to find their address and pay them a visit.

If we are 'lucky' your assertion will be the one that plays out However, did you not see the charge for 'grooming'? I don't think they meant excessive use of hair product and razors...
 
galeforce said:
I did, and yes I do, as long as it's possible with all required legal procedures being followed

the fact he is a footballer is irrelevant, the law is the same for everyone
Click to expand...

100% agree

The fact it is even a question is something I hate about the false "holier than thou" attitude in Britain. We have a legal system, let's stick to it - no one is immune from it.

Yes some people will have a moral objection - again, that should be addressed by the fact he will serve time if convicted. But there will also be an element of consumer choice.

I'm sure some will raise the role model for kids issue - use him as an example. " Look kids, this is something not to do as you don't want to go to prison. But kids, we also understand we live in a society where recompense for illegality is also important "
 
Is it for sure that he KNEW she was underage? or was he just being completely stupid in assuming?

Also 'Grooming', does that mean they chatted on FB and he invited her out etc. or was it something more seedy?
 
Surely he's going to prison?
The summary conviction (if the extent of the crimes are the tamest - which, based on what has been reported in the media, it seems unlikely that it'd be seen in that manner) of each is 6months each. As he's said to have had sex with the underage person, the range for sentencing is around 2-7 years but, as she was not under 13 at the time, there's a bit more scope for a lesser sentence
 
So he has admitted two charges and will stand trial for two others. Presumably he has admitted lesser charges and hopes that helps the decision on the more severe charges.

The Guardian gives a bit more detail:

The Sunderland and England footballer Adam Johnson has pleaded guilty to kissing a 15-year-old schoolgirl after grooming her over the internet.

The 28-year-old midfielder admitted one count of sexual activity with a child and one of grooming at Bradford crown court. He denies two other counts of sexual activity with a child and is due to go on trial on Friday.

...

Johnson entered two guilty pleas when the charges were read out to him by the court clerk.

Johnson is accused of grooming the teenager between 30 December 2014 and 26 February 2015 and having met with her to carry out sexual activity knowing that she was under 16, the age of consent. Standing in the dock, Johnson answered “guilty”.

In a second count, Johnson is charged with intentionally touching the complainant in a sexual way knowing that she was under 16. He briefly consulted his legal team before answering “guilty, yeah”.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...ilty-to-sexual-activity-with-15-year-old-girl
Click to expand...
 
Superhudd said:
What happens if you are faced by the fact the man says but she said she was 20. If he was her teacher I would 100% agree with you, but we are talking about a self absorbed Premier League footballer that doesn't think about birth certificates when he sees a nice piece of skirt at a nightclub.

Anyway, I am sure all will come out eventually, I prefer to air on the not guilty until actually proven before making my mind up.
Click to expand...

What are your thoughts now mate? Not goading, genuinely interested.
 
Okay now that he pleaded guilty what is he still doing at Sunderland?
Sunderland I'm sure knew the whole story for months. The have no reason to be backing him up.

Also why when a player fails an A sample drug test are they immediately suspended even though the B sample hasn't proved their guilt.
Yet Johnson wasn't suspended at any point.
 
Modric THFC said:
Okay now that he pleaded guilty what is he still doing at Sunderland?
Sunderland I'm sure knew the whole story for months. The have no reason to be backing him up.

Also why when a player fails an A sample drug test are they immediately suspended even though the B sample hasn't proved their guilt.
Yet Johnson wasn't suspended at any point.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't want to speculate or cross any line but, it is entirely possible that the club wasn't aware that he would plead guilty. He could have said he was innocent until he realised he wouldn't be able to get away with it. Obviously this is completely speculative so I've negated my stance on this a bit.

If I recall correctly, he was suspended initially after the allegations came to light but, obviously that didn't stick. I think it's a little different from the drug test stuff as the drugs can be seen to have an affect on sporting integrity of the game and I'm fairly certain its a FA (or even FIFA) policy to suspend players in the event of a initial failed test.
 
I don't care if she looked and acted 30, he should do porridge for 5 years and be on a sex offender list for the rest of his life, if this was my daughter It wouldn't be safe for me to be in the same room as him.
 
Mr_B said:
I don't care if she looked and acted 30, he should do porridge for 5 years and be on a sex offender list for the rest of his life, if this was my daughter It wouldn't be safe for me to be in the same room as him.
Click to expand...

Well said Mr B, well said mate.
 
Papercut said:
@dingdongo

Yeah, I don't think these cases are always black and white.

What is definite is that he will be chastised from the stands.
Click to expand...

Let me be clear.
If Sunderland let him set foot on a football pitch again, both he and the club will deserve every bit of abuse they get. Every last bit.
I think this is black and white. There is not one thing you can say here that does not end with him being a fudging nonce who needs to be locked up.
 
If he'd have shagged this girl a few months later, it would have 'only' been morally wrong and not much of a news story. It's a weird world in a lot of ways, I doubt the girl would be any more 'grown-up' in the few months from whenever they met to her 16th birthday, but everything changes on the letter of the law.

I'm not defending his actions, just pointing out that a very small amount of time changes everything.
 
Recurring theme - Young people are attracted to celebrities! Celebrities take advantage of that attraction.

Footballer - Young girl - Media - post Savile.

Not defending him - He is a fool.
 
So now we know he admits to grooming and meeting up with a girl knowingly under 16, it wouldn't be much of a stretch to think the other charges could have some substance.

This clearly isn't a case of him being tricked or deceived into thinking she was older, so throw the book at him and make an example to show it doesn't matter what status and money you have in life this type of offence will not be tolerated.

And from a footballing perspective Sunderland should be considering terminating his contract.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back