Jump to content

Sunderland


Nobody

Recommended Posts

Pretty tough ground to debate, but McCormick killed two children while drunk.  Are people honestly saying that what Johnson has done is worse than killing two children?  Honestly?  I'm not defending what Johnson has done (which I hope goes without saying)m but come on.

 

 

Quite frankly if you've killed someone or sexually abused someone, I would hope that no club would even think about offering you a contract.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty tough ground to debate, but McCormick killed two children while drunk.  Are people honestly saying that what Johnson has done is worse than killing two children?  Honestly?  I'm not defending what Johnson has done (which I hope goes without saying)m but come on.

 

 

Quite frankly if you've killed someone or sexually abused someone, I would hope that no club would even think about offering you a contract.

 

If McCormick had fingered them first it would have been worse.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A piece of shit who's served his time like, but aye, I'm not defending him. There's just a slight difference in the mindset behind speeding home pissed and sexually abusing an underage girl. One is ridiculous, arsehole behavior, the other is sexually abusing an underage girl.

 

Johnson should never be offered the chance to play football again imo, as a human being he's proven himself unoquivically to be completely ammoral. I don't think you can say the same for McCormick.

The big difference for me is the fact that Johnson's wasn't "just" a quick mistake, but something that he spent a month actively pursuing.

Aye, a lot of it might be because it's still fresh, but after reading those texts I just cannot see how he can ever be a normal citizen. It's just totally fucked up, everything about it.

 

Drink driving though isn't even considered a bad crime, it's only looked at seriously when you injure/kill someone even though both actions are the same, carried out with the same mindset. That's the long and short of it with me, I don't agree with punishment for punishment's sake although I understand it (and cannot really disagree with the sentence McCormick got). You have to move on though, treating someone like scum for the rest of their lives regardless of the consequences of their daft actions doesn't help anyone imo. Probably some hypocrisy there like, but I think the 2 charges are so far apart that it's reasonable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A piece of shit who's served his time like, but aye, I'm not defending him. There's just a slight difference in the mindset behind speeding home pissed and sexually abusing an underage girl. One is ridiculous, arsehole behavior, the other is sexually abusing an underage girl.

 

Johnson should never be offered the chance to play football again imo, as a human being he's proven himself unoquivically to be completely ammoral. I don't think you can say the same for McCormick.

 

I'm certainly not defending Johnson, I couldn't think of a more worthy arsehole for this to have happened to, I hope he ends up destitute in a ditch before he kicks another football.

 

I do have a problem with McCormick playing football again though. If you're going to get that drunk and then set out onto the motorway, it's not bad luck when you kill someone, it's a knocking bet. It's not the same category as someone risking the two hundred yards back from the pub.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty tough ground to debate, but McCormick killed two children while drunk.  Are people honestly saying that what Johnson has done is worse than killing two children?  Honestly?  I'm not defending what Johnson has done (which I hope goes without saying)m but come on.

 

 

Quite frankly if you've killed someone or sexually abused someone, I would hope that no club would even think about offering you a contract.

 

If McCormick had fingered them first it would have been worse.

 

And even worse if he had done it after.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Once a criminal has served their time, they should be allowed to work. I don't think there should be a legal route blocking him from playing, but the fans would have every right to protest about it. It would take an owner with a heart of stone and a soul of granite to take him on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's be honest. 80% of people who drive have done some type of drink driving at least once.

 

wat

 

Yeah I was wondering why this hadn't be pounced on yet.

 

It's probably true in the US like, but I'd imagine it's quite different in the UK.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A piece of shit who's served his time like, but aye, I'm not defending him. There's just a slight difference in the mindset behind speeding home pissed and sexually abusing an underage girl. One is ridiculous, arsehole behavior, the other is sexually abusing an underage girl.

 

Johnson should never be offered the chance to play football again imo, as a human being he's proven himself unoquivically to be completely ammoral. I don't think you can say the same for McCormick.

 

I'm certainly not defending Johnson, I couldn't think of a more worthy arsehole for this to have happened to, I hope he ends up destitute in a ditch before he kicks another football.

 

I do have a problem with McCormick playing football again though. If you're going to get that drunk and then set out onto the motorway, it's not bad luck when you kill someone, it's a knocking bet. It's not the same category as someone risking the two hundred yards back from the pub.

:thup: I don't disagree like, although with things like this I'm usually willing to give him the benefit of the doubt and put it down to stupidity.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not sure how people are getting away from the whole killing/ending someone's life thing.  If you get in a car and you are drunk, intent is irrelevant.  Getting in the car drunk is all the intent you need - and quite frankly, should need.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't agree that McCormick can go down as an accident. When your actions are so reckless that a fatality becomes more likely than not, that's not an accident in my view.

 

About as accidental as firing a gun down a crowded street and claiming bad luck when it kills someone.

 

Patrick Kluivert, that was an accident.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not sure how people are getting away from the whole killing/ending someone's life thing.  If you get in a car and you are drunk, intent is irrelevant.  Getting in the car drunk is all the intent you need - and quite frankly, should need.

I'm not. But when we're talking about how to deal with a criminal I'd rather look at their actions than the consequences of them. It's the whole attempted murder vs murder thing.

 

The bit in bold is fair enough, it's just that football would have no qualms accepting someone back into the game who was caught pissed going 100mph the wrong way up a 1-way street aslong as nobody is hurt. I completely get it like.

 

Edit: not saying this applies to you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

McCormick is a prick for what he did and rightly got sent down/did his time. Should he be punished for it forever? If you ask the family of the people that died no doubt they'd say yes but there has to be a point where someone is classed as rehabilitated. He did something stupid whilst under the influence, thereby of diminished capacity, not that it's an excuse, just to highlight the difference in cases here. What Johnson has done was premeditated and went on for some time, he had ample opportunity to think "you know, this is wrong I'm stopping it now.".

 

The cases are completely different and equally horrific, however mentally I see what Johnson did as worse, if McCormick has gotten drunk on purpose with the intent of smashing into someone then you'd have a case.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A couple glasses of red wine will put you over the limit. Maybe it's just the people I know and myself who have driven knowing that if they get pulled over or have an accident that licence is getting revoked.

Or maybe just run over a couple of kids. Should never risk it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A couple glasses of red wine will put you over the limit. Maybe it's just the people I know and myself who have driven knowing that if they get pulled over or have an accident that licence is getting revoked.

Or maybe just run over a couple of kids. Should never risk it.

 

Aye but lots of do. Treating everyone that has done it as murderers isn't going to work.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The schoolgirl who allegedly had sexual encounters with Adam Johnson told her friends he gave her cash for a trip to London, a court heard today.

 

The teenager bought underwear for her school friends and claimed Johnson gave her the money for it.

 

Defence barrister Orlando Pownall said: “She told you face-to-face that she received a text message from Adam Johnson saying lets meet up in a car park.

 

“She told you that Adam Johnson asked her if she needed money to go to London with and she said he gave her £50.”

 

The school friend agreed.

 

Mr Pownall went on to say: “She brought you presents from London, underwear sets and a couple of other things. She told you she had paid for the gifts with money Adam Johnson gave her.”

 

The girl agreed and Mr Pownall said: “Is this an example of what you have come to expect - that your friend is someone who can exaggerate?”

 

The school friend said: “Yea,” and added that she hadn’t believed her friend’s story about the cash.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The schoolgirl who allegedly had sexual encounters with Adam Johnson told her friends he gave her cash for a trip to London, a court heard today.

 

The teenager bought underwear for her school friends and claimed Johnson gave her the money for it.

 

Defence barrister Orlando Pownall said: “She told you face-to-face that she received a text message from Adam Johnson saying lets meet up in a car park.

 

“She told you that Adam Johnson asked her if she needed money to go to London with and she said he gave her £50.”

 

The school friend agreed.

 

Mr Pownall went on to say: “She brought you presents from London, underwear sets and a couple of other things. She told you she had paid for the gifts with money Adam Johnson gave her.”

 

The girl agreed and Mr Pownall said: “Is this an example of what you have come to expect - that your friend is someone who can exaggerate?”

 

The school friend said: “Yea,” and added that she hadn’t believed her friend’s story about the cash.

 

Its this shit that'll cast doubt in the jurors mind. Too many anomalies and they'll have to go not guilty.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Roger Kint

Cross examining a scared/nervous child is always going to come across like that. Especially when you get at her on minor details she may have slightly changed subconsciously or wasnt entirely confident on. Unlike the vile scum he is defending who deliberately pleaded not guilty for 10 months only to change when faced with a courtroom

Link to post
Share on other sites

The schoolgirl who allegedly had sexual encounters with Adam Johnson told her friends he gave her cash for a trip to London, a court heard today.

 

The teenager bought underwear for her school friends and claimed Johnson gave her the money for it.

 

Defence barrister Orlando Pownall said: “She told you face-to-face that she received a text message from Adam Johnson saying lets meet up in a car park.

 

“She told you that Adam Johnson asked her if she needed money to go to London with and she said he gave her £50.”

 

The school friend agreed.

 

Mr Pownall went on to say: “She brought you presents from London, underwear sets and a couple of other things. She told you she had paid for the gifts with money Adam Johnson gave her.”

 

The girl agreed and Mr Pownall said: “Is this an example of what you have come to expect - that your friend is someone who can exaggerate?”

 

The school friend said: “Yea,” and added that she hadn’t believed her friend’s story about the cash.

 

Its this shit that'll cast doubt in the jurors mind. Too many anomalies and they'll have to go not guilty.

 

Aye.. this is her "best friend" talking too. Says she (victim) can exaggerate and didnt even believe her about it at first. Doesnt exactly sound great for her

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...