Pilko Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 Conor Wigwam apparently called the police after becoming aware of mentions of it on social media. How? Picked up the phone, dialled the number for the police and said "Hi I'd like the Emercengy Nonce Division please." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Interpolic Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 "I suspect my teammate is suffering from a bad case of nonsilitis". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fugazi Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 "I suspect my teammate is suffering from a bad case of nonsilitis". "With no awareness of the noncequences" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hanshithispantz Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 "If I've telt him nonce I've telt him 1000 times." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superior Acuña Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 As bad as the Lee Hughes incident was I think it's right he should be allowed back into football like, I'd say the same for most criminals. If you're grooming a 15 year old girl then you're obviously completely f***ed in the head though. The thing that's extra fucked about Johnson and that should stop him being in football moreso, is he very actively used his position as a sunderland player to drive the whole thing, it all comes from a thank you for the shirt. That's where I thought sunderland as his employer could get in bother too. I'd say it's also significantly worse than the Rix case because he knows her age. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
U2 Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 "I suspect my teammate is suffering from a bad case of nonsilitis". "With no awareness of the noncequences" http://usvsth3m.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/collins-nonce-sense.jpg Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoppaz Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 I thought 2 or 3 friends were interviewed today? Who said what just to be clear? Edit here is what I followed on mobile.... http://m.sunderlandecho.com/live/event?1834584 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueStar Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 http://i.imgur.com/1NiMbXr.png Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueStar Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 He needs a lawyer to advise him on the basics, like when you're appearing in court for sex offences try and keep your hands out of your fucking keks. http://i.imgur.com/3oovgWU.jpg Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeyt Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 He needs a lawyer to advise him on the basics, like when you're appearing in court for sex offences try and keep your hands out of your f***ing keks. http://i.imgur.com/3oovgWU.jpg Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 http://i.imgur.com/1NiMbXr.png Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mighty__mag Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 McCormick and Hughes were accidents - stupid, irresponsible ones - but not intentional. Johnson has been accused of consciously grooming a school girl, which is far more heinous. Unintentional? Fucking hell. If your pissed and think it's ok to drive, the risk is there. You make a choice. If you kill someone the choice to get behind the wheel is intended if you already know your pissed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paully Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Adam Johnson will NOT be sued by Sunderland after sacking him for breach of contract following guilty plea Under FIFA laws club had the option of seeking compensation Johnson was sacked by Sunderland after pleading guilty to grooming PA:Press Association EXCLUSIVE by DAVID COVERDALE 00:01, 18 Feb 2016 SHAMED Adam Johnson is set to escape a seven-figure legal suit from Sunderland. The Black Cats sacked the winger last week for breach of contract after he pleaded guilty to one count of sexual activity with a child and one charge of grooming. Under FIFA laws, the club had the option of seeking compensation from Johnson by claiming for losses suffered as a result of his dismissal. But Sunderland have decided against suing their ex-player as they want to move on from the scandal. ________________________________________ ________________________________________ Johnson, 28, cost the Black Cats £10million when he signed from Manchester City in August 2012. The ex-England international had less than five months of his four-year deal left to run. But Sunderland could still have claimed for the “unamortised portion” of the transfer fee, signing on fee and agent fee, which would likely have been around £1m. The Premier League’s second-bottom club may also have had a case to claim for losses suffered if they were relegated, as well as compensation for reputational damage. But it is unlikely they would have been able to recover any of the wages Johnson banked from when he was first arrested last March, as the Black Cats benefited from playing him. Back in 2004, Chelsea terminated Adrian Mutu’s contract after he tested positive for cocaine and then sought compo from the Romanian, who cost £15.8m from Parma. After a hard-fought legal battle, Mutu was ordered to pay the Blues a whopping £14.5m. But he had almost three and a half years of his five-year deal to run when he was sacked. And legal experts believe it would not have been worth Sunderland’s while to sue Johnson given his contract was soon to expire. Nick Hawkins, employment solicitor at Stewarts Law LLP, said: “Sunderland may have grounds to sue Adam Johnson for breach of contract, claiming the losses suffered as a result of his dismissal. “However, any damages are likely to be minimal. “Johnson is out of contract in the summer, and so the club have had almost full value for his services.” Zee Hussain, employment partner at Simpson Millar Solicitors LLP, added: “Sunderland may consider that any potential damages are outweighed by the legal costs and adverse publicity. “If the club were relegated, any damages for subsequent loss of revenue would likely be seen as too remote by the courts. “In order to succeed, the club would have to show that there was a direct, foreseeable link between Johnson’s conduct and the loss incurred.” Johnson was initially suspended by the club following his arrest in March 2015. ________________________________________ ________________________________________ But that ban was lifted when his bail was extended by five weeks a fortnight later - and he continued to play even after he was charged in April. Hawkins told SunSport: “If Sunderland had dismissed Johnson at the time of his charges, their losses for breach of contract would be greater. “He would have had more time left on his contract and the club might have been able to replace him. “However, the club have not incurred any obvious losses by not dismissing Johnson earlier, because he continued to play during the period between then and his recent guilty plea. “Sunderland would not likely be able to recover the Johnson’s wages for that period, as they had the benefit of his services in return.” Johnson has denied two further charges of sexual activity with a girl under 16 and his trial continues at Bradford Crown Court. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianovthetoon Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Bearing in mind they gained millions from the games he played last year which helped keep them up I suppose it would have been a bit of a cheek. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sempuki Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 http://i.imgur.com/1NiMbXr.png Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
1964 Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 And of course if they did sue something might emerge about how much they actually knew Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Roger Kint Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Bearing in mind they gained millions from the games he played last year which helped keep them up I suppose it would have been a bit of a cheek. Hundreds of billions in TV money. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattoon Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 And of course if they did sue something might emerge about how much they actually knew This is it for me, surely you would sue as matter of principal, the money might be pennies but it would send out a strong signal. Letting it fly says they knew more than they admitted. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hanshithispantz Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 It does seem pretty sketchy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Bailey Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Smells fishy this to me. You would have thought they would be wanting to use any chance to clear the 'guilt' of the club by playing him and appearing to stick by him, sueing him would have been a chance to say to the world they were lied too. Methinks they knew more or just didn't ask. Johnson was sacked by Sunderland after pleading guilty to grooming PA:Press Association EXCLUSIVE by DAVID COVERDALE 00:01, 18 Feb 2016 Maybe he will report next that Johnson was just 'gulity of love', and he only wanted to 'slide it in'..... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magpie Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 They had to have known man, had to!!! And if they didn't they did their utmost to avoid finding out. After what came out last week about how he said at the time of his arrest he thought she was 16 they must have known that something had actually happened and as she was under age they would surely have put two and two together. But ignored it and played him anyway. I'm adamant they knew what had happened. There should be an FA investigation. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbnufc Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 And of course if they did sue something might emerge about how much they actually knew This is it for me, surely you would sue as matter of principal, the money might be pennies but it would send out a strong signal. Letting it fly says they knew more than they admitted. What signal? "Don't be a nonce while playing for us"? They probably just don't want anything to do with it anymore and distance themselves from it as much as possible. Move on and all that Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbnufc Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Stacey Flounders is not in the public gallery at Adam Johnson’s child sexual offences trial for the second day running. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
loki679 Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Best not think of the children. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
healthyaddiction Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 It does put an odd twist on the saying "staying together for the kids". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts