My take as with Ched Evans, David Goodwillie, etc has been found innocent or not even getting to a [criminal] court of law - there but for the grace of god go us.

The police & CPS are not in place to judge people's morals and no doubt these young men are not bastions of morality BUT they are not guilty of any crime and God help any one of us lest we be accused of anything especially by a woman as its seems 'she' must always be believed (and we know people, men and women, lie to the police & media - not often perhaps especially when the accused is high profile, but it happens we also know people misremember stuff or on reflection see an incident differently).

Can we please not have another of these tired arguments on the board as they are becoming tedious?
Thank you.

Free beer wrote: February 3rd, 2023, 11:15 am Can we please not have another of these tired arguments on the board as they are becoming tedious?
Thank you.

99.9% of what is on here is a rinse and repeat job - its what people, especially football fans do - I guess for Greenwood or any one of us who may have/will/could be accused of anything its more about justice than being 'tedious' isn't it?

Free beer wrote: February 3rd, 2023, 11:15 am Can we please not have another of these tired arguments on the board as they are becoming tedious?
Thank you.

Quite.

We should only talk about issues that interest you. For myself if a topic is of no interest to me I ignore it. But that is just so selfish of me.

Indeed perhaps we should all send Free Beer a private message before posting. Could I suggest the following?

Dear Free Beer,

Sorry to trouble you but I was thinking of posting my views on (insert topic). Do I have your permission to do so?

My thanks that you deem me worthy to breathe the same air as you do.

Your minion,

(Insert name.)

I know where free beer is coming from there where posters on here backing Evans saying the girl got what she deserved basically because she got that drunk

It wasn't a pleasant thread

UPTHEPORT wrote: February 3rd, 2023, 3:54 pm I know where free beer is coming from there where posters on here backing Evans saying the girl got what she deserved basically because she got that drunk

It wasn't a pleasant thread

At risk of furthering the 'tedious' debate - I didn’t see much of that but maybe that was the case* - but if so it makes my point we’re not judging morality we’re judging legality and Greenwood as was Evans is innocent - if we judged footballers, entertainers or most of us on the message board on morals we’d all be up the creek and for the noose as most of us would have done something at some point, especially in our youth (some more often than others and some to a greater degree of severity than others) which we would be less than proud of but that it would not be fair for us to be judged on it for a lifetime especially if in the eyes of the law we had done nothing wrong.

*Interestingly a number of female colleagues (all decent & sensible enough girls) in work at the time were of the view that they and other young women go on a night out to ‘pull’ and are on the lookout for local professional sportspeople and in the Evans case it was no surprise the accuser ended up in the position (no pun intended) she did – as a bloke I kept sch-tum but was very interesting that many women think that too.

UPTHEPORT wrote: February 3rd, 2023, 3:54 pm I know where free beer is coming from there where posters on here backing Evans saying the girl got what she deserved basically because she got that drunk

It wasn't a pleasant thread

Evening Jim,

I'm not quite sure I understand where you're coming from. I don't know the facts and haven't followed the story so make no comment.

However as a general rule if people argue points which are distasteful then the way to deal with that is for their views to be challenged. As you know I syrongly support the right of people to say what they think. But I am also clear that along with anyone's right to express a view nobody has the right not to be challenged kon their views.

If on the other hand it is being argued that we shouldn't talk about 'unpleasant' things then I'm afraid that's not realistic or desirable.

Another strange case involving a wealthy young footballer being acquitted following nasty allegations involving a young lady/his partner.

On the one hand “the withdrawal of a key witness” could mean either they were scared to testify, they were ‘paid off’ or simply that the lawyers from either side didn’t think they could testify maybe because they couldn’t be trusted or perhaps wouldn’t be a credible witness.

On the other hand we have another talented professional whose name is now mud and whose career has most likely been ruined by the whole affair, regardless of whether he was guilty of anything. As the law stands today, he’s an innocent man.

What do we expect Man Utd to do now following their own internal review? Pay him off or sack him, the latter only really if he has breached his contract in any way. It was the club who (rightly) suspended him when the allegations first surfaced so he has been marginalised and presumably not received his full pay for about a year now.

I’m guessing even if they stick by him he won’t be the same player again, having lost his match fitness, and probably being someone who opposition fans will target. Hard to see him ever playing in the PL again let alone represent his country as before.

It’s a very difficult situation for all concerned now - the victim (if there was one, or at least the lady who reported him), the club and the player. Unless the club are able to see the prosecution file and what was alleged, they can’t have much to dismiss him now he has been acquitted, unless for something trivial but contract-breaking such as him being out late the night before a match. As always with these sort of cases, there are no winners except for the lawyers.

DeePeeNCAFC wrote: February 6th, 2023, 11:04 pm
As always with these sort of cases, there are no winners except for the lawyers.

I both prosecuted and defended in this type of case. I came to this conclusion. In a contested case it is impossible to tell. I think a substantial majority of women are telling the truth but a small but not insignificant minority of women lie.

And here's the thing. 25 years in and I couldn't work out a way of identifying liars. I suppose defending I got some guilty people off, but equally I probably prosecuted and got convictions for the innocent. However and in defence of lawyers, I remember a few times both defending and prosecuting when the result haunted me. I'm not sure anyone really wins.

Looks like money has been the justice here