E.G.Red Posted January 5, 2022 Report Share Posted January 5, 2022 On 23/12/2021 at 10:09, Akira said: If found guilty I'd love to see Man City sueing him for breach of contract, and him having to repay the millions they've given him, and some of this money given to the victims. He signed a 5 year contract in 2017, so presumably OOC in the Summer. The trial is now scheduled for Jul/Aug so highly unlikely to be a Man City player then. Any thoughts of Man City suing him though would presumably have to wait until the result of the trial. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leveller Posted January 5, 2022 Report Share Posted January 5, 2022 6 hours ago, E.G.Red said: He signed a 5 year contract in 2017, so presumably OOC in the Summer. The trial is now scheduled for Jul/Aug so highly unlikely to be a Man City player then. Any thoughts of Man City suing him though would presumably have to wait until the result of the trial. But if convicted, perhaps they could sue for return of his pay from the time he was unavailable to play ( or even the date of the first offence)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bristol Rob Posted January 5, 2022 Report Share Posted January 5, 2022 2 hours ago, Leveller said: But if convicted, perhaps they could sue for return of his pay from the time he was unavailable to play ( or even the date of the first offence)? Be surprised if they are paying him when he is on remand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Batman Posted January 5, 2022 Report Share Posted January 5, 2022 15 minutes ago, Bristol Rob said: Be surprised if they are paying him when he is on remand. They were aware of the accusations in November 2020 and continued to play him rather than suspend him pending further investigations. Granted at the time the player could not be named for legal reasons in the media and people would have wondered why he wasn't playing.... Then again, match of the day, sky sports, bt sports etc have not questioned rafa benitez as to why a certain Everton player hasn't been selected all season and isn't even registered to play in the squad and even confirm who the suspended player is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numero Uno Posted January 5, 2022 Report Share Posted January 5, 2022 8 minutes ago, The Batman said: They were aware of the accusations in November 2020 and continued to play him rather than suspend him pending further investigations. Granted at the time the player could not be named for legal reasons in the media and people would have wondered why he wasn't playing.... Then again, match of the day, sky sports, bt sports etc have not questioned rafa benitez as to why a certain Everton player hasn't been selected all season and isn't even registered to play in the squad and even confirm who the suspended player is. Yeah, that's a joke and as I've said before meant that a fellow player (Delph) was also named and shamed on social media of the issue in question at the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Batman Posted January 5, 2022 Report Share Posted January 5, 2022 11 minutes ago, Numero Uno said: Yeah, that's a joke and as I've said before meant that a fellow player (Delph) was also named and shamed on social media of the issue in question at the time. I'm going super injunction because there's more to it than meets the eye. Maybe they've uncovered some large scale crimes and it was more than just one footballer and one child. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Akira Posted January 5, 2022 Report Share Posted January 5, 2022 1 hour ago, The Batman said: I'm going super injunction because there's more to it than meets the eye. Maybe they've uncovered some large scale crimes and it was more than just one footballer and one child. Genuine question, are super injunctions still a thing? I remember when they were all the rage with celebrities and ex footballers using them, Ryan Giggs being one of them, but since then, don't really hear about them much anymore, so presumed there was a change in the law or something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admin phantom Posted January 5, 2022 Admin Report Share Posted January 5, 2022 2 hours ago, Numero Uno said: Yeah, that's a joke and as I've said before meant that a fellow player (Delph) was also named and shamed on social media of the issue in question at the time. It wasn't him though, it was another player at the same club, Delph was incorrectly assumed to be the person. May sound daft with the amount of evidence but I would assume Man City could be on a sticky wicket until he is actually found guilty and charged. As improbable as it seems but if he was cleared of all charges then he could go after the club Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hxj Posted January 6, 2022 Report Share Posted January 6, 2022 10 hours ago, Akira said: don't really hear about them much anymore That was the whole reason behind a 'super-injunction' - it was a Court Order which no one could mention or be in potential contempt of court. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Batman Posted January 6, 2022 Report Share Posted January 6, 2022 11 hours ago, phantom said: It wasn't him though, it was another player at the same club, Delph was incorrectly assumed to be the person. May sound daft with the amount of evidence but I would assume Man City could be on a sticky wicket until he is actually found guilty and charged. As improbable as it seems but if he was cleared of all charges then he could go after the club That's what @Numero Unois saying though. The club made an announcement that a 31 year old first team player was suspended and there were only two 31 year olds at the club at the time. One of them Delph. Course it wasn't him because he's played this season but it meant that he was being targeted as a possible player at the time. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admin phantom Posted January 7, 2022 Admin Report Share Posted January 7, 2022 Mendy just been released on bail Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Batman Posted January 7, 2022 Report Share Posted January 7, 2022 17 minutes ago, phantom said: Mendy just been released on bail Hhhhmmm, well, each case is taken on its own merits. End of the day, innocent until proven guilty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonyTonyTony Posted August 10, 2022 Report Share Posted August 10, 2022 Is he still getting paid from ManC? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonyTonyTony Posted August 10, 2022 Report Share Posted August 10, 2022 Just now, TomF said: Probably because they can’t sack him unless he’s actually convicted of something. What they might do after that is sue him for his wages if he is. I seem to remember a Chelsea player facing similar? That’s a lot of wages. He hasn’t played for a long time. Trial over in a month or so, so won’t be long Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon bristol Posted August 10, 2022 Report Share Posted August 10, 2022 2 minutes ago, TomF said: Probably because they can’t sack him unless he’s actually convicted of something. What they might do after that is sue him for his wages if he is. I seem to remember a Chelsea player facing similar? Only time ive heard of that was mutu the romanian player, is that who you were thinking of? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonyTonyTony Posted August 10, 2022 Report Share Posted August 10, 2022 1 hour ago, Simon bristol said: Only time ive heard of that was mutu the romanian player, is that who you were thinking of? Ordered to pay Chelsea 17M. Wonder if he ever paid it ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexukhc Posted August 10, 2022 Report Share Posted August 10, 2022 1 hour ago, TomF said: Probably because they can’t sack him unless he’s actually convicted of something. What they might do after that is sue him for his wages if he is. I seem to remember a Chelsea player facing similar? Edit: was Mutu https://amp.theguardian.com/sport/2010/jun/14/adrian-mutu-chelsea Sacked at so many clubs he’s been too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northern Red Posted September 13, 2022 Report Share Posted September 13, 2022 Not guilty on one count at the direction of the judge: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-62894037 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northern Red Posted January 13, 2023 Report Share Posted January 13, 2023 Not guilty on all remaining charges. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selred Posted January 13, 2023 Report Share Posted January 13, 2023 4 minutes ago, Northern Red said: Not guilty on all remaining charges. Retrial on two outstanding charges. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numero Uno Posted January 13, 2023 Report Share Posted January 13, 2023 21 minutes ago, Percy Pig said: Without getting drawn into this case or any specific ones, the conviction rate for rape is an absolutely grotesque injustice and I thank God every day that I don't have a daughter who could be subjected to what many victims of this awful crime face in the search for justice. The burden of proof would have to be lowered imo but obviously that opens up scan of worms in terms of people being wrongly convicted. Clearly the balance ain’t right but it’s not a straightforward one to solve. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CyderHead92 Posted January 13, 2023 Report Share Posted January 13, 2023 It says a lot though that he hasn't actually been convicted for one count of anything, if he was genuinely guilty I believe he would of been convicted. Obviously he wasn't living the right kind of lifestyle and all of this has absolutely ruined him as a professional footballer! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
And Its Smith Posted January 13, 2023 Report Share Posted January 13, 2023 6 hours ago, CyderHead92 said: if he was genuinely guilty I believe he would have been convicted. Why? There are over 60,000 rape offences recorded every year which produce around 2,000 convictions. Do you believe that 58,000 people that are found not guilty are all innocent? I am assuming so from what you are written but I am hoping not as it’s pretty clear that many rapists go unpunished Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Notgetinya Posted January 14, 2023 Report Share Posted January 14, 2023 8 hours ago, Percy Pig said: Knowing the conviction rate I'm not sure it does say a lot. But again, I'm not in a position to offer any great insight into the trial or evidence or incidents listed so won't cast aspersions either way. 2 hours ago, And Its Smith said: Why? There are over 60,000 rape offences recorded every year which produce around 2,000 convictions. Do you believe that 58,000 people that are found not guilty are all innocent? I am assuming so from what you are written but I am hoping not as it’s pretty clear that many rapists go unpunished I’ve followed this pretty closely. The defence team have certainly earned their money. A not guilty verdict was almost a certainty from a lot of things that have come to light during the trail and what you need to keep in mind is that a jury of random people have come to the conclusion that there is not enough evidence to prove him guilty beyond reasonable doubt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
And Its Smith Posted January 14, 2023 Report Share Posted January 14, 2023 6 hours ago, Eddie Notgetinya said: I’ve followed this pretty closely. The defence team have certainly earned their money. A not guilty verdict was almost a certainty from a lot of things that have come to light during the trail and what you need to keep in mind is that a jury of random people have come to the conclusion that there is not enough evidence to prove him guilty beyond reasonable doubt Yes that has happened but my point is that I absolutely disagree with the statement “if he was guilty he would have been convicted”. That is clearly not true 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Notgetinya Posted January 14, 2023 Report Share Posted January 14, 2023 1 hour ago, And Its Smith said: Yes that has happened but my point is that I absolutely disagree with the statement “if he was guilty he would have been convicted”. That is clearly not true Yeah, fair point Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archie andrews Posted January 14, 2023 Report Share Posted January 14, 2023 17 hours ago, Percy Pig said: Knowing the conviction rate I'm not sure it does say a lot. But again, I'm not in a position to offer any great insight into the trial or evidence or incidents listed so won't cast aspersions either way. So what are you saying? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admin phantom Posted July 19, 2023 Admin Report Share Posted July 19, 2023 Just signed for French signed L'Orient Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy082005 Posted July 19, 2023 Report Share Posted July 19, 2023 1 minute ago, phantom said: Just signed for French signed L'Orient Everything that is wrong with modern day football Hopefully gets snapped in his first game 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Monaghan Posted July 19, 2023 Report Share Posted July 19, 2023 Wasnt he just found not guilty? Or have I missed something? 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.