Sho Time Posted February 19, 2016 Share Posted February 19, 2016 Not looking good for him judging from the transcripts of his police interviews where he appears to admit that he kissed her, which confuses me as to why he pleaded not guilty to all 4 charges initially - if only for the agenda of making as much money as possible from Sunderland before he went down. Anyway - when does this trial finish ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeyt Posted February 19, 2016 Share Posted February 19, 2016 He denied any sexual activity in the police interview, just kissing with tongues Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sho Time Posted February 19, 2016 Share Posted February 19, 2016 Aye, but he pleaded not guilty to kissing and grooming initially - despite the interviews and the evidence - which are the 2 charges he pleaded guilty to at the start of the trial. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeyt Posted February 19, 2016 Share Posted February 19, 2016 Aye, sorry, it wasn't in response to your post was just posting it for those that haven't followed the updates today Think the trial is meant to finish the end of next week fwiw Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sho Time Posted February 19, 2016 Share Posted February 19, 2016 Ah fair enough, got a bit confused there. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heake Posted February 19, 2016 Share Posted February 19, 2016 From the transcript, its seems he genuinely thought it was "ok" to snog a 15 year old girl ffs Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marmoset Posted February 19, 2016 Share Posted February 19, 2016 Poor lass, such an important time of your life and she's got all this to deal with, hope it doesn't send her off the rails too much. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattoon Posted February 19, 2016 Share Posted February 19, 2016 From the transcript, its seems he genuinely thought it was "ok" to snog a 15 year old girl ffs Aye, ignorance is no excuse though, hope they throw the book at the dirty nonce. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
54 Posted February 19, 2016 Share Posted February 19, 2016 Whens the decision on this? Out of interest. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heron Posted February 19, 2016 Share Posted February 19, 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. They almost certainly knew he was guilty, this is from a legal fella I know......"SAFC would have had copies of the advice from Counsel (Orlando Pownall QC is a big, big cheese in crime) and copies of the prosecution evidence once he was charged. They will have known the content of the whatsapp messages straightaway." They knew and played him to save themselves, which is utterly despicable in my opinion, and you're right, the FA should investigate it. The classy c***s. Would they have all that though? Strictly speaking they're nothing to do with this case, it's a matter between the crown and Johnson. Basically if an employee is charged with a child sexual offence, then there is procedure to follow for the employers. As a football club would have children of all ages on it's premises, they have a duty to consider there being any further risk of him reoffending while on bail. That is why in most cases like this, the employee would be suspended pending the outcome, simply to be on the safe side. Most SAFC fans seem to think that the club would simply ask him if he was guilty, he denies it, and they carry on, innocent until proven guilty and all that. However there's more to it than that. The club need to investigate further to see if they aren't putting children at risk, their legal people must have spoken to him, social services and the police. They would also have had to look into the CPS case itself and as my legal friend has said, they would have known the details of the case and the evidence against him. If they didn't do this, they were negligent themselves. I think at the very least they have turned a blind eye to this. If the CPS are pushing for prosecution you can bet they have good grounds for doing so. Sunderland have stuck their fingers in their ears and shouted 'la la la la can't hear anything' over the entire duration until he admitted to it. My view is that they did know and played him anyway, I cannot believe otherwise, it seems incomprehensible that they would not have had doubts at least. They kept playing him for one reason, he is one of their best players. Not sure if I am completely missing the point but it seems to me that it's more a case of the PFA being at fault than the SMB's...from what I can gather... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heron Posted February 19, 2016 Share Posted February 19, 2016 Whens the decision on this? Out of interest. Next Friday I think... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted February 19, 2016 Share Posted February 19, 2016 Whens the decision on this? Out of interest. When both sides have finished presenting their case and the jury have then decided on a verdict. There's no deadline. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geordie Ahmed Posted February 19, 2016 Share Posted February 19, 2016 Regardless of whether Sunderland actually knew, the logical and sensible thing to do would have been to suspend him due the seriousness of the arrest/charge BUT they were struggling in the league, beating relegation was their priority and they put everything else secondary. If they were safe and in mid-table there is no way they would have played him Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Howaythetoon Posted February 19, 2016 Share Posted February 19, 2016 What makes this all the more worrying is that at 15, this girl will be 'sexually' aware if you like, aware of her body, aware of sex etc. and because of this, along with her hormones etc. her mind emotionally will be all over the place and an easy target for a predator like AJ to manipulate, especially when you factor in his status as a footballer for a club this girl supports. No blame whatsoever should be leveled at this girl, even if she consented to 'acts' and even if she say fancied him. She is a child and he an adult, one in a considerable position of power and responsibility. I have nieces and sisters, I know how fucked up girls can be when they become teenagers. AJ has abused more than this girl. He should be made an example of. I'm a father and uncle and it makes me sick reading about this case. He is wrong in the head, simple as. She could look much older for all I know and therefore finding her attractive or pretty could be normal, but to know her age and want to engage in sexual acts with her and to use your power and influence to manipulate a mind that is all over the place due to hormones etc. is very very wrong. This isn't a rich footballer shagging a lass he thought was older, or someone who genuinely cared for or lusted after a person as you would with someone you wanted to be with, this is someone who wanted to fuck a kid basically for his own pleasure. He is scum. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Howaythetoon Posted February 19, 2016 Share Posted February 19, 2016 Regardless of whether Sunderland actually knew, the logical and sensible thing to do would have been to suspend him due the seriousness of the arrest/charge BUT they were struggling in the league, beating relegation was their priority and they put everything else secondary. If they were safe and in mid-table there is no way they would have played him Aye and its sickening. He should have been suspended period. SAFC and their fans to me look like right fucking wrong-uns over this, just like their hero AJ. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackie Broon Posted February 19, 2016 Share Posted February 19, 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. They almost certainly knew he was guilty, this is from a legal fella I know......"SAFC would have had copies of the advice from Counsel (Orlando Pownall QC is a big, big cheese in crime) and copies of the prosecution evidence once he was charged. They will have known the content of the whatsapp messages straightaway." They knew and played him to save themselves, which is utterly despicable in my opinion, and you're right, the FA should investigate it. The classy c***s. Would they have all that though? Strictly speaking they're nothing to do with this case, it's a matter between the crown and Johnson. Basically if an employee is charged with a child sexual offence, then there is procedure to follow for the employers. As a football club would have children of all ages on it's premises, they have a duty to consider there being any further risk of him reoffending while on bail. That is why in most cases like this, the employee would be suspended pending the outcome, simply to be on the safe side. Most SAFC fans seem to think that the club would simply ask him if he was guilty, he denies it, and they carry on, innocent until proven guilty and all that. However there's more to it than that. The club need to investigate further to see if they aren't putting children at risk, their legal people must have spoken to him, social services and the police. They would also have had to look into the CPS case itself and as my legal friend has said, they would have known the details of the case and the evidence against him. If they didn't do this, they were negligent themselves. I think at the very least they have turned a blind eye to this. If the CPS are pushing for prosecution you can bet they have good grounds for doing so. Sunderland have stuck their fingers in their ears and shouted 'la la la la can't hear anything' over the entire duration until he admitted to it. My view is that they did know and played him anyway, I cannot believe otherwise, it seems incomprehensible that they would not have had doubts at least. They kept playing him for one reason, he is one of their best players. Not sure if I am completely missing the point but it seems to me that it's more a case of the PFA being at fault than the SMB's...from what I can gather... The PFA's duty is to represent the interests of players, like any union should their members. The club has a duty to safeguard children. Whatever the PFA's position, it was the club's choice what to do, in similar circumstances almost any other employee would have been suspended. The club allowed Johnson to stay, for a year, in a position that we now know he exploited to have sexual contact with a child. Whatever they knew about the evidence, whatever pressure they had from the PFA, he should have been suspended. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marmoset Posted February 19, 2016 Share Posted February 19, 2016 Hope it doesn't prompt any tasteless chants from our side tbh, will make me cringe a bit if at the Derby people are trying to rub it in their faces. I'm sure the girl probably just wants to forget the whole thing as soon as possible. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted February 19, 2016 Share Posted February 19, 2016 Hope it doesn't prompt any tasteless chants from our side tbh, will make me cringe a bit if at the Derby people are trying to rub it in their faces. I'm sure the girl probably just wants to forget the whole thing as soon as possible. Best of luck with that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJ_NUFC Posted February 19, 2016 Share Posted February 19, 2016 Hope it doesn't prompt any tasteless chants from our side tbh, will make me cringe a bit if at the Derby people are trying to rub it in their faces. I'm sure the girl probably just wants to forget the whole thing as soon as possible. Did she tell you she's going to be at the derby? Telly doesn't pick these things up usually. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarrenBartonCentrePartin Posted February 19, 2016 Share Posted February 19, 2016 Hope it doesn't prompt any tasteless chants from our side tbh, will make me cringe a bit if at the Derby people are trying to rub it in their faces. I'm sure the girl probably just wants to forget the whole thing as soon as possible. Best of luck with that. Took all of about 15 seconds for them to start singing it against Chelsea. It'll be out of their systems by the time we play sunderland, though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest firetotheworks Posted February 19, 2016 Share Posted February 19, 2016 Is it not enough that one of their players is a paedophile man?[emoji38]Why is there any need to insinuate that his club knew about it when it's based on nothing more than total guesswork? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Figures 1-0 Football Posted February 19, 2016 Share Posted February 19, 2016 From the evidence today, AJ has no leg to stand on When it was suggested she had police that he had, Johnson told officers: “I feel like I can’t believe she would, I feel like someone is telling her to say these things. “When she was with me, we were like friends and she came to all the games, she was a fan. “I feel like someone’s told her to do this for beneficial purposes. “She is saying that I made her touch me isn’t she? “Obviously when we were kissing I knew it was wrong.” Adam Johnson, hang your head in shame lad how would he know, at the point of this interview that the sexual contact accused was her touching him and also that she was accusing him that he was slightly creepy/forceful? He's absolutely walked into that one and if the jury miss it then I'll be amazed. He'll be guilty on all four counts, absolutely - the prosecution will cross examine him next week and hang him out to try on all of this. The best bet for him was the victim messing up, which she did not do at all. Regarding Sunderland... they would 100% not be given any access to any of the evidence, legally the CPS and Police have no position to make the evidence known to his employers whether it is child sex offences or murder. The fact that Johnson admitted most of the offences in his police interview, then lied to Sunderland for 11 months is quite amusing though bet Sunderland feel awesome now like. Fact is he should have been suspended from the day he was charged until the day his trial concludes, there is no argument that he should have been allowed to play. Morally it was very wrong by Sunderland, but the FA can take no action as it doesn't actually break any rules (such is that Ched Evans, Lee Hughes and the Plymouth keeper can continue to play football). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bhoywhonder Posted February 19, 2016 Share Posted February 19, 2016 Meanwhile, in non-nonce news, Rihanna has cancelled the summer gig at the stade de merde, quoting 'logistical reasons', but I imagine she just remembered the last time her tour manager inadvertently booked chickentown... People literally couldn’t stand. Slaloming between wobbly youths I nipped to the mens only to be greeted by a gaggle of women using the facilities in their own way. I hadn’t seen that many fannies since, well, the last time I was here to watch our hapless football team. she warned the crowd not to “throw your s*** onstage or else I’ll f*ck off early" Exiting the stadium there was just enough time to see a girl forego the bother of squatting over a trough and just pissing on the floor before almost getting in the middle of a couple having a very vocal confrontation http://www.gigslutz.co.uk/rihanna-live-sunderland-stadium-of-light-20-6-13/ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ujpest doza Posted February 19, 2016 Share Posted February 19, 2016 From the evidence today, AJ has no leg to stand on When it was suggested she had police that he had, Johnson told officers: “I feel like I can’t believe she would, I feel like someone is telling her to say these things. “When she was with me, we were like friends and she came to all the games, she was a fan. “I feel like someone’s told her to do this for beneficial purposes. “She is saying that I made her touch me isn’t she? “Obviously when we were kissing I knew it was wrong.” Adam Johnson, hang your head in shame lad how would he know, at the point of this interview that the sexual contact accused was her touching him and also that she was accusing him that he was slightly creepy/forceful? He's absolutely walked into that one and if the jury miss it then I'll be amazed. Yip, that's as good as a signed confession right there. Also admitting that he'd been caught by there lass texting other girls in the past, wonder how old they were? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
shintonsghost Posted February 19, 2016 Share Posted February 19, 2016 i see the obsessed Reiver is at it again, utter bellend http://www.readytogo.net/smb/threads/newcastle-v-sunderland-live-at-the-sol.1202401/ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts