David Icke - Son of God Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 You'd think this would deter them from trying to take the imaginary high ground with the weird 'at least we have class' shite they made up, but it won't. They're like Liverpool, only they achieve cringeworthy solidarity in their faux hatred of nonses instead of stadium tragedies. Their desire to be liked is fucking odd. One of the top threads on the SMB at the minute is about Colin Murray being nice about them. Fucking stark raving ronsons the lot of them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tsunami Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 I also think that reasonable doubt is distinctly possible however, a 27 year old who has a history of cheating with other women is unlikely to text that someone felt turned on if there was only kissing. I also find it unlikely that you'd say that something wasn't too bad if it was only kissing. Most 15 year old have been kissing so the likelihood is that this was something more. If it was just kissing and he's texted those things then he's admitting that he knew that kissing was fundamentally wrong yet still went ahead with it and wanted more. I'd love to know what directions the judge gave/ will give in summing up and whether a majority verdict will be accepted as that could be telling in what happens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ketsbaia Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 "You felt turned on" says a lot for 4 words, like. I'd lose all faith in our justice system if he's acquitted. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 I can easily see the jury deciding there's enough doubt to acquit him. I haven't followed that closely but I haven't seen anything that proves he sexed her up. because there isnt anything Wouldn't be so sure. It seems like the reporting on certain aspects of the incidents that Johnson pleaded to not guilty on were rather scant, as if more was said in the courtroom than was released in the media. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ally Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 Has there been any indication of what the 2 charges are that he is contesting? I've heard the ones he's pleaded guilty to but then just keeps saying "two other charges" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ash Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 Has there been any indication of what the 2 charges are that he is contesting? I've heard the ones he's pleaded guilty to but then just keeps saying "two other charges" Two counts of sexual activity with a child. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackie Broon Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 I can easily see the jury deciding there's enough doubt to acquit him. I haven't followed that closely but I haven't seen anything that proves he sexed her up. because there isnt anything There's the girl's evidence that he did. Texts before: 'Depends what you’re up for - a little bit more than kissing. A bit of feeling.' and after: 'it wasn't so bad', 'you felt turned on'. His admission in giving evidence he intended to have sexual contact with her. The only evidence against is his story that he had some sort of epiphany while his tongue was down her throat. You don't need to have all the pieces to see the picture on the jigsaw puzzle. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 Has there been any indication of what the 2 charges are that he is contesting? I've heard the ones he's pleaded guilty to but then just keeps saying "two other charges" Poking and blowie. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Altamullan Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 OP saying he is going to talk about the characters of both the girl and Johnson, as well as the girl's untruths which he said have been "ignored" by the prosecution. OP on the girl's small lies underoath: "This exhibits her swift ability, without blinking, to mislead you." "She, underoath before you, has continued to tell you untruths." OP reminding jurors that the girl tried to persuade her friends to lie. One has already admitted that she did lie, but others refused. She asked her friends not to tell officers about alleged sex act she performed on Johnson and asked them to delete messages from their phones. OP: "That is an illusion the girl was trying to achieve. Distortion. 'Hide what I said'." Prosecution called Johnson a liar, now defence are calling her a liar. Whose lies to believe Yep, "Whees lees are thees liese?" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbnufc Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 I can easily see the jury deciding there's enough doubt to acquit him. I haven't followed that closely but I haven't seen anything that proves he sexed her up. because there isnt anything There's the girl's evidence that he did. Texts before: 'Depends what you’re up for - a little bit more than kissing. A bit of feeling.' and after: 'it wasn't so bad', 'you felt turned on'. His admission in giving evidence he intended to have sexual contact with her. The only evidence against is his story that he had some sort of epiphany while his tongue was down her throat. You don't need to have all the pieces to see the picture on the jigsaw puzzle. There's no proof though. To be sure "beyond reasonable doubt" you really need some proof. Him saying he wanted more than kissing doesnt mean it happened. I've said it before, I do think he is guilty of a feel of her but I wouldnt be 100%. How high up a percentage would it need to be to qualify as beyond reasonable doubt? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 I can easily see the jury deciding there's enough doubt to acquit him. I haven't followed that closely but I haven't seen anything that proves he sexed her up. because there isnt anything There's the girl's evidence that he did. Texts before: 'Depends what you’re up for - a little bit more than kissing. A bit of feeling.' and after: 'it wasn't so bad', 'you felt turned on'. His admission in giving evidence he intended to have sexual contact with her. The only evidence against is his story that he had some sort of epiphany while his tongue was down her throat. You don't need to have all the pieces to see the picture on the jigsaw puzzle. There's no proof though. To be sure "beyond reasonable doubt" you really need some proof. Him saying he wanted more than kissing doesnt mean it happened. I've said it before, I do think he is guilty of a feel of her but I wouldnt be 100%. How high up a percentage would it need to be to qualify as beyond reasonable doubt? Steven Avery thinks Adam Johnson should walk as there's reasonable doubt he did it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 Unfortunately that's the way a democracy should work. I think the dirty bastard's guilty as sin but if reasonable double exists you can't support a conviction. The burden has to be on the prosecution. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 Of course, but there has to be more evidentiary support than one person's word to justify a conviction anyway. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alijmitchell Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 Bollocks basically. Absolute proof is nigh on impossible in cases like these. It should be reasonable doubt both ways Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbnufc Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 Of course, but there has to be more evidentiary support than one person's word to justify a conviction anyway. So essentially, in any sex case unless there are what third party witnesses/evidence the person can never be convicted? That cannot be right. But then is it not down to basically who can lie better in court anyway? Only Johnson and the girl will ever know what truly happened in the car that evening. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackie Broon Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 I can easily see the jury deciding there's enough doubt to acquit him. I haven't followed that closely but I haven't seen anything that proves he sexed her up. because there isnt anything There's the girl's evidence that he did. Texts before: 'Depends what you’re up for - a little bit more than kissing. A bit of feeling.' and after: 'it wasn't so bad', 'you felt turned on'. His admission in giving evidence he intended to have sexual contact with her. The only evidence against is his story that he had some sort of epiphany while his tongue was down her throat. You don't need to have all the pieces to see the picture on the jigsaw puzzle. There's no proof though. To be sure "beyond reasonable doubt" you really need some proof. Him saying he wanted more than kissing doesnt mean it happened. I've said it before, I do think he is guilty of a feel of her but I wouldnt be 100%. How high up a percentage would it need to be to qualify as beyond reasonable doubt? It's about 90%. 'Proof' doesn't need to be DNA samples and fingerprints, it can be a combination of factors which back up someone's side of the story. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 Of course, but there has to be more evidentiary support than one person's word to justify a conviction anyway. So essentially, in any sex case unless there are what third party witnesses/evidence the person can never be convicted? That cannot be right. No evidence with the exception of the alleged victim's word resulting in a conviction if contested by the defendant(s)? I'd be genuinely interested to read one case in the UK where it has, but I doubt it exists. Sex cases will generally always have a fair degree of supporting evidence anyway, thankfully. One quick scratch will get DNA under the fingernails etc. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alijmitchell Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 Mental that people even use the word proof, since there is no such thing Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GideonShandy Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 Mental that people even use the word proof, since there is no such thing Really? Even if it says so in Savvywoman.com? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 No evidence with the exception of the alleged victim's word resulting in a conviction if contested by the defendant(s)? I'd be genuinely interested to read one case in the UK where it has, but I doubt it exists. Sex cases will generally always have a fair degree of supporting evidence anyway, thankfully. One quick scratch will get DNA under the fingernails etc. I'm not trying to be a dick here it's genuinely interesting to talk about. So we're talking generally about sex cases, typically people (including rapists) will run consent. So how can DNA take the case any further in such a scenario? Court of appeal says medical evidence is corroborative but not diagnostic of rape so what sort of supporting evidence are you envisaging? Like I say genuinely curious. Unfortunately, within a relationship the consent defence can succeed, it's a major flaw in the system but I don't see a way around it. But if a woman fights back, sustains injuries etc, as does the accused there's obviously effective support for the allegation. Admmissable use of previous bad character pertaining to sexual assaults etc. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackie Broon Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 Of course, but there has to be more evidentiary support than one person's word to justify a conviction anyway. So essentially, in any sex case unless there are what third party witnesses/evidence the person can never be convicted? That cannot be right. No evidence with the exception of the alleged victim's word resulting in a conviction if contested by the defendant(s)? I'd be genuinely interested to read one case in the UK where it has, but I doubt it exists. Ched Evans? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hithere Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 I think he's guilty of it. Just my opinion. He's cast enough 'reasonable doubt' on the charges he's not pleading guilty to. Not guilty on both counts. Sign the register. Suspended sentence. Is what will happen. We'll squirm a bit. Make Byrne a scapegoat. It'll be forgotten about within the month. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klaus Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 Probably not a god example but it does exist. The attrition rate in rape cases is around 6/10 i.e. 6 cases in 10 result in not guilty verdicts. I am not saying you are wrong. But where did you get this number? It is a shockingly high statistic. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbnufc Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 I think he's guilty of it. Just my opinion. He's cast enough 'reasonable doubt' on the charges he's not pleading guilty to. Not guilty on both counts. Sign the register. Suspended sentence. Is what will happen. We'll squirm a bit. Make Byrne a scapegoat. It'll be forgotten about within the month. Doubt it, football fans will be singing about it for ages man Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackie Broon Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 Is there some part of his defense I missed? From what I can tell his defense consists of 'I wanted to but changed my mind when I was kissing her, honest' backed up by 'I've always been an honor-less slime-ball but I'm actually being really honest now' and his girlfriend's supporting evidence that 'he's been really honest and open and told me everything... apart from all the stuff I've just found out about'. Where's all this doubt he's supposedly cast? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts