Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Ms Blackwell QC has asked why Johnson only revealed in the witness box that he had to arrive at the Stadium of Light by 6pm after the alleged sexual encounter or that he would be fined if he was late.

 

“I didn’t say everything I should have in the interview,” Johnson said.

 

“It was only after you were convinced that there was no evidence with the prosecution to confirm a time you were driving that you decided to say this,” Ms Blackwell QC said.

 

Johnson claims the meeting between the pair must have ended at 5.35pm in order for him to make it to the Stadium of Light in time for the player’s bus.

 

However messages from the teenager to her friends show that Johnson drove away at 6.08pm.

 

At that same moment Johnson responded to pleading messages from his girlfriend.

 

The prosecution say this shows the player’s encounter with the girl didn’t end until after 6pm.

 

The court heard the teenager Johnson texted the girl to say: “Wasn’t bad was it?” at 6.12pm.

 

The teenager responded “texting and driving eesh,” which the prosecution says proves that he didn’t leave until after 6pm.

 

Oh dear oh dear :lol: his lies slowly starting to unravel...

 

Tripping over his own tall tales.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like a tough day for him, having his todger shown in court. No sympathy for him of course. He sounds like a despicable arsehole even without his apparent tendencies for underage girls.

 

Surely it gets to the point where when it's going so badly, there's a big screen showing text messages saying you wanted to get a Year 10 lass's jeans off, a text message saying you can't last more than ten seconds without going off and a picture of your cock you're just gonna go "OK, let's just end the trial here, I change my plea to guilty".

 

I'd be mortified if a full courtroom of people were looking at a photo of my penis like, cos I don't really like my penis.

 

I think mine's mint, but I still don't want a room full of people checking it out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Just wondering, since RTG have banned mention of it, do you think their posters are reading this instead? Has there been an influx of new members requests that are suspiciously mackemesque?

 

Yes I am

 

I agree with what's being said.

 

Throw the book at him. He's quite clearly not reet in the head.

 

As for Sunderland. If we knew this was coming out and played him anyway, deduct us points. Send us down.

 

Wouldn't put it past Byrne etc. to act this way. Wouldn't be the first time our board have been ridiculous.

 

Fair play :thup:

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Just wondering, since RTG have banned mention of it, do you think their posters are reading this instead? Has there been an influx of new members requests that are suspiciously mackemesque?

 

Yes I am

 

I agree with what's being said.

 

Throw the book at him. He's quite clearly not reet in the head.

 

As for Sunderland. If we knew this was coming out and played him anyway, deduct us points. Send us down.

 

Wouldn't put it past Byrne etc. to act this way. Wouldn't be the first time our board have been ridiculous.

 

:thup:

 

The two resident mackems on here are great.

 

I work with another Mackem and he's of the same opinion. He can't believe the lack of stick Sunderland have taken for their handling of the situation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest palnese

Reads like he's being as honest as possible with the already admitted charges so to seem more credible with his denial of the other charges. It's a clear tactic but it could easily backfire. Especially if the jury just think "nonce".

:lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Just wondering, since RTG have banned mention of it, do you think their posters are reading this instead? Has there been an influx of new members requests that are suspiciously mackemesque?

 

Yes I am

 

I agree with what's being said.

 

Throw the book at him. He's quite clearly not reet in the head.

 

As for Sunderland. If we knew this was coming out and played him anyway, deduct us points. Send us down.

 

Wouldn't put it past Byrne etc. to act this way. Wouldn't be the first time our board have been ridiculous.

 

:thup:

 

The two resident mackems on here are great.

 

I work with another Mackem and he's of the same opinion. He can't believe the lack of stick Sunderland have taken for their handling of the situation.

 

I can only assume the papers are waiting 'til the trial is done just in case. It's been oddly quiet from all and sundry.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest neesy111

Byrne is in trouble. The club has been completely exposed here, they should count themselves very lucky if they escape punishment.

 

I don't see what rules Sunderland have broken, morally they are very wrong but it's stupid to suggest they escape punishment when they've broken zero rules or laws.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Byrne is in trouble. The club has been completely exposed here, they should count themselves very lucky if they escape punishment.

 

I don't see what rules Sunderland have broken, morally they are very wrong but it's stupid to suggest they escape punishment when they've broken zero rules or laws.

 

This. It all depends on the backlash in the media in which case Byrne will probably be forced to resign and that'll probably be that. Can't even see that happening though tbh - they're a totally irrelevant football club so it may yet just go by without blowing up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Who even cares about them like? :lol:

 

If Big Marge stays or goes, does it really matter? Will it effect the team?

They've broken no rules to get a deduction or anything, so really - nobody should care less.

 

All they've done is highlight what we already knew before, they're just a sad little club that nobody is bothered about.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Byrne is in trouble. The club has been completely exposed here, they should count themselves very lucky if they escape punishment.

 

Only if what Johnson is saying is true. We only have his word for it so far. We really need a statement from the club, and hopefully the PFA who were also involved in his suspension being lifted. We'll see what happens at the end of the trial.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Only if what Johnson is saying is true. We only have his word for it so far. We really need a statement from the club, and hopefully the PFA who were also involved in his suspension being lifted. We'll see what happens at the end of the trial.

 

The PFA were instrumental in allowing him to return to training. The PFA didnt shove him into the first team for over a year. Its clear the SAFC board were complicit..... He's got plenty of reasons to lie under oath - this isnt one of them.

 

He denies this and said: “Once I went for the kiss, and I hold my hands up for that, I realised this can’t go any further and stopped.”

 

I'm going to take this at face value i.e. he was giving both her nascent bee-stings a sly rub whilst licking the haribo taste off her tongue.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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