Gaylord du Bois
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 16 Aug 2010
- Messages
- 29,262
- Location
- Great Umbrage.
- Team supported
- Glory Hunting Blue. Was Chelsea.
You probably left him no option.Didsbury Dave said:
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Adam Johnson Arrested
- Thread starter Hamann Pineapple
- Start date
Steviesleftpeg
Well-Known Member
Genuinely quite surprised he's been named in the press. Would have thought his legal team would have had a injunction on it straight away, or at least until he had been charged with an offence.
For quite obvious and legitimate reasons the victim's name will be kept secret, not disagreeing with that in the slightest. I do however, think that there should be some decency of keeping his name out of it too until he is formally charged. If is turns out to be innocent, although the police have had reasonable suspicion to arrest him and have his house searched, then his naming will have serious consequences.
If (by what definition of the law the previous 17 pages have decided is applicable here) he is guilty then obviously he is deservedly in a whole lot of trouble, in which the end of his career is one of variables he'll have to deal with.
No doubt that there has been an incident here. However, 99.9% of the information regarding the case still isn't known to any of us. Until that time I for one won't be coming to any conclusions about the veracity of the claim or AJ's character. I know plenty of lads who like a drink and footballers or not none of them are sexual offenders. Over the last 7 years there has only been an 60% conviction rate for rape in the courts [source BBC]. Maybe he is one of the 60%, but equally according to the publicly available knowledge at the moment there is still a good chance he is in the 40%.
Titus Bramble was charged with sexual assault last year and was found not guilty in court. He was also arrested on suspicion of rape in 2010 and was again found not guilty.
Innocent until proven guilty. If guilty then he'll pay the price, undoubtedly.
For quite obvious and legitimate reasons the victim's name will be kept secret, not disagreeing with that in the slightest. I do however, think that there should be some decency of keeping his name out of it too until he is formally charged. If is turns out to be innocent, although the police have had reasonable suspicion to arrest him and have his house searched, then his naming will have serious consequences.
If (by what definition of the law the previous 17 pages have decided is applicable here) he is guilty then obviously he is deservedly in a whole lot of trouble, in which the end of his career is one of variables he'll have to deal with.
No doubt that there has been an incident here. However, 99.9% of the information regarding the case still isn't known to any of us. Until that time I for one won't be coming to any conclusions about the veracity of the claim or AJ's character. I know plenty of lads who like a drink and footballers or not none of them are sexual offenders. Over the last 7 years there has only been an 60% conviction rate for rape in the courts [source BBC]. Maybe he is one of the 60%, but equally according to the publicly available knowledge at the moment there is still a good chance he is in the 40%.
Titus Bramble was charged with sexual assault last year and was found not guilty in court. He was also arrested on suspicion of rape in 2010 and was again found not guilty.
Innocent until proven guilty. If guilty then he'll pay the price, undoubtedly.
chestervegasblue
Well-Known Member
Steviesleftpeg said:Genuinely quite surprised he's been named in the press. Would have thought his legal team would have had a injunction on it straight away, or at least until he had been charged with an offence.
For quite obvious and legitimate reasons the victim's name will be kept secret, not disagreeing with that in the slightest. I do however, think that there should be some decency of keeping his name out of it too until he is formally charged. If is turns out to be innocent, although the police have had reasonable suspicion to arrest him and have his house searched, then his naming will have serious consequences.
If (by what definition of the law the previous 17 pages have decided is applicable here) he is guilty then obviously he is deservedly in a whole lot of trouble, in which the end of his career is one of variables he'll have to deal with.
No doubt that there has been an incident here. However, 99.9% of the information regarding the case still isn't known to any of us. Until that time I for one won't be coming to any conclusions about the veracity of the claim or AJ's character. I know plenty of lads who like a drink and footballers or not none of them are sexual offenders. Over the last 7 years there has only been an 60% conviction rate for rape in the courts [source BBC]. Maybe he is one of the 60%, but equally according to the publicly available knowledge at the moment there is still a good chance he is in the 40%.
Titus Bramble was charged with sexual assault last year and was found not guilty in court. He was also arrested on suspicion of rape in 2010 and was again found not guilty.
Innocent until proven guilty. If guilty then he'll pay the price, undoubtedly.
Spot on. Lock thread until further official information released.
zandvoort blue
Well-Known Member
Franck Ribery`s career didn`t suffer.
aguero93:20
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 21 Oct 2013
- Messages
- 90,256
- Location
- Hunting Cats.
- Team supported
- Some gobshites in day-glo green and black.
Eccles Blue said:blue b4 the moon said:If the club were happy to admit her then she must have looked old enough, if she's used false ID and lied about her age then although he was maybe sniffing around girls in his mind 10 years younger than him its not all his fault.
The only people to mention clubs are on here, I haven't seen anything that states he met her in a club.
It's AJ he spends all his time in Nightclubs.
chestervegasblue said:Steviesleftpeg said:Genuinely quite surprised he's been named in the press. Would have thought his legal team would have had a injunction on it straight away, or at least until he had been charged with an offence.
For quite obvious and legitimate reasons the victim's name will be kept secret, not disagreeing with that in the slightest. I do however, think that there should be some decency of keeping his name out of it too until he is formally charged. If is turns out to be innocent, although the police have had reasonable suspicion to arrest him and have his house searched, then his naming will have serious consequences.
If (by what definition of the law the previous 17 pages have decided is applicable here) he is guilty then obviously he is deservedly in a whole lot of trouble, in which the end of his career is one of variables he'll have to deal with.
No doubt that there has been an incident here. However, 99.9% of the information regarding the case still isn't known to any of us. Until that time I for one won't be coming to any conclusions about the veracity of the claim or AJ's character. I know plenty of lads who like a drink and footballers or not none of them are sexual offenders. Over the last 7 years there has only been an 60% conviction rate for rape in the courts [source BBC]. Maybe he is one of the 60%, but equally according to the publicly available knowledge at the moment there is still a good chance he is in the 40%.
Titus Bramble was charged with sexual assault last year and was found not guilty in court. He was also arrested on suspicion of rape in 2010 and was again found not guilty.
Innocent until proven guilty. If guilty then he'll pay the price, undoubtedly.
Spot on. Lock thread until further official information released.
We're not big on censoring discussion
kas_tippler
Well-Known Member
And bingo clubsaguero93:20 said:Eccles Blue said:blue b4 the moon said:If the club were happy to admit her then she must have looked old enough, if she's used false ID and lied about her age then although he was maybe sniffing around girls in his mind 10 years younger than him its not all his fault.
The only people to mention clubs are on here, I haven't seen anything that states he met her in a club.
It's AJ he spends all his time in Nightclubs.
bluwes
Well-Known Member
Didsbury Dave said:I went to a City players house on the first day of the 2001 season and he was showing off his gun. Seriously
Is that a typo, he would have been 14 and playing for Boro youth teams in 2001
chestervegasblue
Well-Known Member
Damocles said:chestervegasblue said:Steviesleftpeg said:Genuinely quite surprised he's been named in the press. Would have thought his legal team would have had a injunction on it straight away, or at least until he had been charged with an offence.
For quite obvious and legitimate reasons the victim's name will be kept secret, not disagreeing with that in the slightest. I do however, think that there should be some decency of keeping his name out of it too until he is formally charged. If is turns out to be innocent, although the police have had reasonable suspicion to arrest him and have his house searched, then his naming will have serious consequences.
If (by what definition of the law the previous 17 pages have decided is applicable here) he is guilty then obviously he is deservedly in a whole lot of trouble, in which the end of his career is one of variables he'll have to deal with.
No doubt that there has been an incident here. However, 99.9% of the information regarding the case still isn't known to any of us. Until that time I for one won't be coming to any conclusions about the veracity of the claim or AJ's character. I know plenty of lads who like a drink and footballers or not none of them are sexual offenders. Over the last 7 years there has only been an 60% conviction rate for rape in the courts [source BBC]. Maybe he is one of the 60%, but equally according to the publicly available knowledge at the moment there is still a good chance he is in the 40%.
Titus Bramble was charged with sexual assault last year and was found not guilty in court. He was also arrested on suspicion of rape in 2010 and was again found not guilty.
Innocent until proven guilty. If guilty then he'll pay the price, undoubtedly.
Spot on. Lock thread until further official information released.
We're not big on censoring discussion
I wasn't being particularly serious. More applauding SLP's summation of where the situation is and his remarks toward those already playing judge and jury.
Damocles said:Tanzeylee said:johnny on the spot said:But the law states that nobody under the age of sixteen is able to give legal consent to sexual activity.
I'm not saying it doesn't, but it's still not rape, unlawful sex yes, rape no, anyway without knowing the details it's all just up in the air, what's for sure is he will get jail time wether she consented or not...
If this even happened, she didn't consent. 15 year olds cannot consent. It's rather infuriating that people cannot understand this and I mentioned in the Cellar recently how these sorts of cases get given bullshit names and excuses towards them instead of what they are.
She may not have been raped as there's a legal distinction on the 14-16 bracket that means that implied consent comes into play. That's why some people get labelled with raping a child and others get labelled with unlawful sex depending on circumstance according to the Sexual Offences Act 2003. You can rape a child over 13 but not all sex with children over 13 is legally classified as rape. The system has protection for common sense built into it at various places
-- My sister (social worker with specialism in child sexual abuse)
How come your going round in circles with yourself, I've already said a couple of times that legally under 16s can't give consent, but unless we know the facts people are assuming she gave consent as an 18yo(or at least 16+)all I've said is it's not rape, I read the same part from the gov site to gen up a bit on it, and it's good that you cut and pasted the bit that confirms what I was saying about it (possibly)not being rape, think the protection for common sense part is used with situations like this...