joe jordans teeth Posted April 24, 2015 Report Share Posted April 24, 2015 Aussie is right,everyone is entitled to a fair and honest trial,no doubt it won't go to court,he wil pay the youngster off and it won't get that far Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joe jordans teeth Posted April 24, 2015 Report Share Posted April 24, 2015 Should feel sorry for his kid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 24, 2015 Report Share Posted April 24, 2015 Aussie is right,everyone is entitled to a fair and honest trial,no doubt it won't go to court,he wil pay the youngster off and it won't get that far Just to show you are certainly way off the mark it is the crown prosecuting, not the victim. If he commits a crime of towards the victim he will be in deeper pending trial trouble. If he does and gets away with it the grooming charge is likely to carry enough evidence of itself that this will go to court without any witness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esmond Million's Bung Posted April 24, 2015 Report Share Posted April 24, 2015 The CPS are under intense pressure to prosecute however flimsy the evidence. A friend of mine was forced to leave Bristol after being the victim of false accusations of attempted rape. It turned out that this was the third time the woman had made such false accusations and withdrawn them at the last minute. She got off scot-free, my friend had to build a new life elsewhere. Despite what the Feminists might tell you, accusation is not proof, prosecution is not guilt. Just out of interest what do you suggest?, ignore all unsubstantiated allegations?, only prosecute if the woman is beaten to a pulp?, ignore all allegations where under aged girls are willing participants?. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joe jordans teeth Posted April 24, 2015 Report Share Posted April 24, 2015 And you as well as I know they haven't got a leg to stand on if she says nowt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joe jordans teeth Posted April 24, 2015 Report Share Posted April 24, 2015 Grooming doesn't and won't stand up in court without her,they can take what they won't from computers but that's not hard evidence Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numero Uno Posted April 24, 2015 Report Share Posted April 24, 2015 Just out of interest what do you suggest?, ignore all unsubstantiated allegations?, only prosecute if the woman is beaten to a pulp?, ignore all allegations where under aged girls are willing participants?. I am guessing this will be the crux of the matter in the Johnson case. Did he know or could/should he have reasonably known that the girl was 15? Not comparing anything to the Johnson case for one second as I don't know enough about the circumstances but if you met a girl in a nightclub who you were unaware was 15 years old does the law say you could reasonably assume she was 18 before you took her back to your place on the basis she gained entry to the nightclub? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joe jordans teeth Posted April 24, 2015 Report Share Posted April 24, 2015 i defended a person in court with exactly the case you just mentioned uno,thrown out straight away pretty much,which is why there's a lot more to this case than we know Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PHILINFRANCE Posted April 24, 2015 Report Share Posted April 24, 2015 Just out of interest what do you suggest?, ignore all unsubstantiated allegations?, only prosecute if the woman is beaten to a pulp?, ignore all allegations where under aged girls are willing participants?. ES, you are better than this. Aizoon is saying simply that his friend suffered because some girl, not for the first time, accused him falsely of attempted rape. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esmond Million's Bung Posted April 24, 2015 Report Share Posted April 24, 2015 ES, you are better than this. Aizoon is saying simply that his friend suffered because some girl, not for the first time, accused him falsely of attempted rape. I don't know what you thought you read, this is a genuine question, castigating the system is all well and good, but what is the alternative?, there has to be an alternative, what we have is imperfect, everybody knows that, the nature of rape usually means 1 word against another, that is how most rapes occur, no witnesses, so I am asking for suggestions to improve things, as I said it's easy to criticise but at least offer an alternative and I for one cannot think of how things can be changed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WolfOfWestStreet Posted April 24, 2015 Report Share Posted April 24, 2015 This guy won't get a fair trial Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joe jordans teeth Posted April 24, 2015 Report Share Posted April 24, 2015 :laugh: it won't but if it did go to trial it wouldn't be fair ur right,he would walk off scot free Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leveller Posted April 25, 2015 Report Share Posted April 25, 2015 No I don't hear a story and make a judgement. The facts are the CPS have sufficient evidence to charge him with grooming and having sexual intercourse with a minor. It has been stated he had conversed with the 15yo for months on a social network site. Even if the girl did try it on with him, that is no excuse she is still a minor, and having sex with a minor still makes you a pedophile. Grooming is when you have conversation with someone under the legal age of consent in a manner which tries to convince them into having sexual activity. Regardless of whether he contacted her first or she did, of even if she did fancy him , those are all facts no one knows, but the CPS who have all the evidence, had enough to bring charges against him. Now given this grey area, let me ask you a question , would you if you had a teenage daughter feel comfortable of her maybe being a mascot for the day, being in his presence, regardless of whether the guy is guilty or not, the fact is, he has to be considered as a danger to society. He also will be vulnerable playing and at the club. There are some weird people in the world and it wouldn't surprise me to see someone take a pop at him. Given he has been charged, he should have been put on gardening leave for his own safety and so he doesn't interact with any children. Sunderland do community projects, visit hospitals and schools and so on, I hope Sunderland at least have the common sense to not involve him in these activities. No I don't hear a story and make a judgement. The facts are the CPS have sufficient evidence to charge him with grooming and having sexual intercourse with a minor. It has been stated he had conversed with the 15yo for months on a social network site. Even if the girl did try it on with him, that is no excuse she is still a minor, and having sex with a minor still makes you a pedophile. Grooming is when you have conversation with someone under the legal age of consent in a manner which tries to convince them into having sexual activity. Regardless of whether he contacted her first or she did, of even if she did fancy him , those are all facts no one knows, but the CPS who have all the evidence, had enough to bring charges against him. Now given this grey area, let me ask you a question , would you if you had a teenage daughter feel comfortable of her maybe being a mascot for the day, being in his presence, regardless of whether the guy is guilty or not, the fact is, he has to be considered as a danger to society. He also will be vulnerable playing and at the club. There are some weird people in the world and it wouldn't surprise me to see someone take a pop at him. Given he has been charged, he should have been put on gardening leave for his own safety and so he doesn't interact with any children. Sunderland do community projects, visit hospitals and schools and so on, I hope Sunderland at least have the common sense to not involve him in these activities. Just a technicality, but having sex with a 15 year old girl doesn't make you a paedophile. Paedophiles are attracted to children - ie pre puberty. Being attracted to a physically mature girl of 15 isn't unnatural and doesn't make you a paedophile. It's just that you have legal & moral duty not to be tempted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Negan Posted April 25, 2015 Report Share Posted April 25, 2015 Well I think he still has more respect than Kyle Walkers girlfriend... and that's saying something! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dollymarie Posted April 25, 2015 Report Share Posted April 25, 2015 Well I think he still has more respect than Kyle Walkers girlfriend... and that's saying something! Nobody go and search for this. I'm now traumatised for the rest of the day Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ten minutes of rough Posted April 25, 2015 Report Share Posted April 25, 2015 Not like OTIB to jump to conclusions, but if the claims are true then he does deserve whatever comes his way. However there are far worse cases that have come to light, or even some that have been swept under the carpet en masse. When you look at the scale of grooming , rape, and even murder that has come to light such as Bradford forgive me if I don't join Monkeh in jumping to any conclusions about a Premiership footballer and a 15 year old girl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numero Uno Posted April 25, 2015 Report Share Posted April 25, 2015 Nobody go and search for this. I'm now traumatised for the rest of the day I wish I hadn't now. Pond life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numero Uno Posted April 25, 2015 Report Share Posted April 25, 2015 Not like OTIB to jump to conclusions, but if the claims are true then he does deserve whatever comes his way. However there are far worse cases that have come to light, or even some that have been swept under the carpet en masse. When you look at the scale of grooming , rape, and even murder that has come to light such as Bradford forgive me if I don't join Monkeh in jumping to any conclusions about a Premier League footballer and a 15 year old girl. Didn't you mean Rotherham? At least get your facts right before becoming all high and mighty!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonBristolian Posted April 25, 2015 Report Share Posted April 25, 2015 Just a technicality, but having sex with a 15 year old girl doesn't make you a paedophile. Paedophiles are attracted to children - ie pre puberty. Being attracted to a physically mature girl of 15 isn't unnatural and doesn't make you a paedophile. It's just that you have legal & moral duty not to be tempted. Acting on it makes someone a sexual abuser of a child though - and that's the key point. It's not relevant how old she looks or whether it's natural or unnatural to be be attracted to someone. A 15 year old is legally still a child and certainly most 15 year olds, regardless of physical maturity, are vulnerable in so far as that they might find it difficult to say no to someone older than them pressuring them into sex, and they may lack the experience and emotional tools to know whether it is or isn't something they want to do. I've no idea of the details of this case and Adam Johnson should be treated as innocent unless proven guilty (and hence Sunderland are quite right to let him play football) but I think people sometimes judge cases like this based on physical maturity (i.e. a 15 year old girl might look more than an adult than a child so therefore it's somehow not as bad as child sex abuse) but the defining factor of child sex abuse is the exploitation of someone vulnerable and unable to defend themselves by someone who is older and believes their power and status will allow them to get away with their actions. Someone who has sex with a 15 year old might not necessarily meet the technical definition of paedophile but they are nonetheless sexually abusing a child. Whether Adam Johnson has done this or not is up to a jury to decide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ten minutes of rough Posted April 25, 2015 Report Share Posted April 25, 2015 Didn't you mean Rotherham? At least get your facts right before becoming all high and mighty!!! Good Lord you are telling me to get my facts right and yet you somehow missed that I was right re Bradford grooming. And then you accuse me of being high and mighty because I merely indicated that we should not jump to conclusions, I would be high and mighty if I had the opposite opinion. Oh! well, perhaps some of this might make you think before you jump in again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ten minutes of rough Posted April 25, 2015 Report Share Posted April 25, 2015 Just a technicality, but having sex with a 15 year old girl doesn't make you a paedophile. Paedophiles are attracted to children - ie pre puberty. Being attracted to a physically mature girl of 15 isn't unnatural and doesn't make you a paedophile. It's just that you have legal & moral duty not to be tempted. Very good mature comment, besides a '15 year old girl would be expected to have an IQ greater than any Premiership footballer. Not condoning his or any others who groom, but consider in many cultures girls of this age marry and have children. The evidence that young teenage girls actually seek out such is played out with many offering themselves to IS men. What we perceive as unlawful in the west is perfectly normal elsewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aizoon Posted April 25, 2015 Report Share Posted April 25, 2015 Just out of interest what do you suggest?, ignore all unsubstantiated allegations?, only prosecute if the woman is beaten to a pulp?, ignore all allegations where under aged girls are willing participants?. Simple. Anonymity for the accused, as well as the victim. PS And the woman concerned in my friend's case was in her late 20's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aizoon Posted April 25, 2015 Report Share Posted April 25, 2015 Didn't you mean Rotherham? At least get your facts right before becoming all high and mighty!!! Bradford as well, I'm afraid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky Posted April 25, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 25, 2015 Nobody go and search for this. I'm now traumatised for the rest of the day Of course I did google after that statement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YorkshireSection Posted April 25, 2015 Report Share Posted April 25, 2015 The grooming charge is the big one. Shows evidence of planning and coercion, rather than a couple of 'over-excitable' slip-ups It's a shame it's not a conspiracy charge, alone that's a 5 year maximum sentence! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 25, 2015 Report Share Posted April 25, 2015 Simple. Anonymity for the accused, as well as the victim. PS And the woman concerned in my friend's case was in her late 20's.There are, as I'm sure you well know, reasons that the accused is not afforded anonymity. In the first instance given the terrible lack of reporting of offences other of the accused's victims (if there are any) may be encouraged or inspired to come forward also. It is much easier to secure conviction if there is a pattern. The effect of this cannot be downplayed: I need not present the vast evidence of this effect as the news has done that over the past 24 months plus. Secondly anonymity flies directly in the face of the principles of justice. Justice must be done and must be seen to be done. Trials must only be in secret in instances of public interest and protecting the young. You may lack confidence in the criminal system already, I accept that and I won't even begin trying to defend it, but it would be impossible to trust a 'secret' system. What you have experienced is extreme and isolated. I would urge you to respect that this is the case. Any barrier, real or perceived, to true victims reporting a crime - such as compounding an almost inherent distrust of them which already exists in the system - is an evil far, far worse than preventing an isolated incident such as your friend was cruelly subject to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aizoon Posted April 25, 2015 Report Share Posted April 25, 2015 There are, as I'm sure you well know, reasons that the accused is not afforded anonymity. In the first instance given the terrible lack of reporting of offences other of the accused's victims (if there are any) may be encouraged or inspired to come forward also. It is much easier to secure conviction if there is a pattern. The effect of this cannot be downplayed: I need not present the vast evidence of this effect as the news has done that over the past 24 months plus. Secondly anonymity flies directly in the face of the principles of justice. Justice must be done and must be seen to be done. Trials must only be in secret in instances of public interest and protecting the young. You may lack confidence in the criminal system already, I accept that and I won't even begin trying to defend it, but it would be impossible to trust a 'secret' system. What you have experienced is extreme and isolated. I would urge you to respect that this is the case. Any barrier, real or perceived, to true victims reporting a crime - such as compounding an almost inherent distrust of them which already exists in the system - is an evil far, far worse than preventing an isolated incident such as your friend was cruelly subject to. Any system where the accuser is anonymous and the accused is not is open to abuse. The system worked well for two separate oppressive regimes in Germany and was the scourge of mediaeval Venice. You may not be aware that anonymity for the accused in alleged sex crimes was the rule in this country until comparatively recently. Let's say, for the sake of argument, that Adam Johnson is found to be totally innocent of these charges (which does happen, sometimes). Do you think he would be allowed just to get on with his life? The fact is that in this area, mud sticks. Just read some of the posts here, if you doubt me. The same applies to the alleged victim, which is why I'd prefer both to be anonymous until a conviction, or at least until the trial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 25, 2015 Report Share Posted April 25, 2015 Any system where the accuser is anonymous and the accused is not is open to abuse. The system worked well for two separate oppressive regimes in Germany and was the scourge of mediaeval Venice. You may not be aware that anonymity for the accused in alleged sex crimes was the rule in this country until comparatively recently. Let's say, for the sake of argument, that Adam Johnson is found to be totally innocent of these charges (which does happen, sometimes). Do you think he would be allowed just to get on with his life? The fact is that in this area, mud sticks. Just read some of the posts here, if you doubt me. The same applies to the alleged victim, which is why I'd prefer both to be anonymous until a conviction, or at least until the trial. I take your point, on this occasion perhaps it is probably just one of those areas where we amicably agree to disagree. I certainly don't believe I am right, you are wrong; there is no right or wrong answer just perfectly justifiable morals albeit on either side of the spectrum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aizoon Posted April 25, 2015 Report Share Posted April 25, 2015 I take your point, on this occasion perhaps it is probably just one of those areas where we amicably agree to disagree. I certainly don't believe I am right, you are wrong; there is no right or wrong answer just perfectly justifiable morals albeit on either side of the spectrum Thank you, sir. Rational debate at last. Now, back to mocking the Gas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esmond Million's Bung Posted April 25, 2015 Report Share Posted April 25, 2015 Simple. Anonymity for the accused, as well as the victim. PS And the woman concerned in my friend's case was in her late 20's. I agree to a point but sometimes the police might suspect that there are other victims of the accused, yet to come forward. Perhaps a judge needs to the one making the decision on who gets anonymity?. The problem is the system as it stands is loaded not only against a prosecution but also against a conviction and of course rapists know that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.