1964

Does this mean they've reached a verdict? If so he is knackered I reckon

Room meets Spotlight GRoom meets StadiumofLight

I see, cheers

So if the verdict has to be unanimous if he is found not guilty will that have to be the unanimous view of the jury? Or is that a stupid question? If so I can't see all 12 thinking he is not guilty, albeit based on the anecdotal sketchy stuff we've had so far Or if they cannot agree on a verdict is he therefore found not guilty?

Spot on

But didn't transgress the laws of football

Nope I don't think so. One is an infringement of the laws of the game and the other an infringement of the laws of the land. For example had Cantona drop kicked someone in the chippy queue he would not have been banned from playing football. Or if Suarez had bitten his next door neighbour he wouldn't be banned from playing football but as they did it on the pitch they were charged with transgressing the laws of football. I doubt there is much that can be done other than worldwide condemnation of the club for persisting with a child molester to save them from relegation

What city walls? Its nothing more than a shitty town man. Aye fair point, figure of speech. Hung from the chicken wire fence might be more apt

Their statement will be an absolute rebuttal of the defence accusations, it can't really be anything else. Be interesting to see how they squirm out of it though. Margaret Byrne will be hung from the city walls and it will all be her fault, nicely brushed under the mackem carpet. The fans and Ready to Groom will agree with the club's position and all will be well with the classy club.

MAGistrate. :lol: Only a matter of time till this is a genuine reaction

Worrying though that all those around us seem to be having a go. Our policy of lie down and die will see us down

Given we are fully rested, had a good bonding session in la manga and two of our rivals lost yesterday I fully anticipate us keeping them down to a 2 goal victory.

Janmaat is targeted by premier league teams every week

That's just bollocks by the way, he has already pleaded guilty to grooming, it's the hottest football topic, this is a football forum and it's highly relevant to the area.

I actually have some sympathies with her. She probably believed that she was living the dream, footballers WAG money no object and she now faces being a single mother on child benefit with the stigma of this following her and her daughter for the rest of their lives. From her perspective her (and her daughters) world has fallen apart so for that I feel sorry for her. She has done nothing wrong other than try to keep her dream alive, she may be misguided in that but to crucify her is unnecessary.

The club needs to make a statement when the trial ends. If it turns out they did know, then someone should be sacked. I can't believe some of the head burying going on, from quite a lot of seemingly decent, level headed mackems and all. The chief inspector has already said the club knew about the case and the details. It has been mentioned under oath a few times that Byrne knew and had the whatsapp exchanges, police interviews etc. I think by Johnson and by DCI whateverhernameis. It would be pretty easy to disprove this and why would Johnson lie about this bit under oath? Wouldn't sunderland then have grounds to sue him? The fact they didn't in the first place, after he was sacked, is pretty damning Plus, the whole lying in court thing isn't a great idea........ Byrne may end up being used as a scapegoat. But even if the club release a statement, saying they were unaware and Byrne had kept it to herself, so she has been sacked because of it. Would you honestly believe that? Do you not think other people at the club, in positions of power, would be interested in what was going on, in such a high profile case? Do they not have board meetings or does nobody talk to each other at SAFC? Would Short not be asking what the situation is, with one of the club's star players, who is on bail for a very serious allegation? Our club is run by a pack of c***s and I have no problem in pointing this out, when they've acted badly. I just don't understand why sunderland fans are still trying to act like the club have done nothing wrong? I mean it's bad enough that he was never suspended, pending the outcome of the trial. Instead, they trotted him out every week, for your fans to applaud and cheer for. Now, it sounds as if they have been complicit in the whole thing, for 8-9 months. Yet they decided to do nothing and let him play, knowing full well he was guilty of at least the grooming and the kiss. yep, that's it for me as well. I think its because for years they have built this myth about Sunderland being a classy outfgit who always try to do the right thing. That of course has been blown out of the water if you'll pardon the expression. Totally agree about the corridors of power in the SOS, 'Has anyone bothered asking Ann about Adam and the kiddy stuff?' 'No, its not really relevant to the football side of it is it' They will have known right to the top, fortunately for them they are media irrelevant

The club needs to make a statement when the trial ends. If it turns out they did know, then someone should be sacked. Not sure what you mean by 'if it turns out the club did know'. They did it's been mentioned under oath several times, I know he is a liar but it's not in his benefit to lie about that

That is the disgraceful thing though, he was sacked based upon what he has already admitted to which, they knew last May. They only decided to sack him when he made (what they already knew) public

Is it not even anything along the lines of acting recklessly/irresponsibly? It seems more like the type of thing that would be deemed that way in hindsight, had he gone on to do it again. As it is it just looks dodgy that they allowed a player of their's to remain in a position that they knew he had used in order to groom a child. As Hans says, it's up to the police/court to decide what he can and can't do whilst on bail. They knew what his job was, they could have imposed conditions saying he couldn't play football if they wished, but they didn't. Ah okay, so the onus is on the police/court and all they did was recommend safeguards. I'm not sure if this is right. As the post above says, if SAFC assumed he was pleading not guilty then I'd totally agree. Having a full confession from him about what he'd done is a totally different matter. I'm trying to think what would happen in any other line of work - say this was a teacher. Imagine a School knowing a teacher was a pedophile but keeping it hush hush and keeping the teacher in employment until the trial. In the teaching profession that is absolutely clear, you are working directly with impressionable kids and a suspension till the verdict is a given, it's not the same in this case although morally disgusting behaviour from the club

Lee Ryder ‏@lee_ryder 12h hours ago Hearing rumours that a girl might be in trouble with her parent. A footballer tell me there's nothing in it.

Got grief for this yesterday. But are we sure the club haven't broken any laws? It's getting worse by the day. I can't think how they will have broken any law because they will not be legally bound to disclose evidence such as this but from a morality perspective it's bottom of the swamp

Lee Ryder is just preparing to tweet that there's nothing in it any time now. "According to my club sources at the club who have told me, there's nothing concrete in the Johnson case about Johnson right now" lol outstanding! Another quick question, are any of our forum legally qualified? Been reading some of the explanations given to questions on here and it's been rather enlightening, with some really good answers. Not sure any of this board are legally qualified but they could have done a better job than Johnson's legal team

It's clear that Sunderland were desperately hoping this would 'go away' so credit to the girl and her family cos I would bet she has received incentives to drop the case

As in she solicits? Not surprised

Hang on, nobody actually believes that Margaret Byrne kept this all to herself do they?