Mason Greenwood | Officially a Marseille player

[Pogue Mahone]

I‘m very confused by the people talking about a duty of care for Greenwood. The man is 21 years old. He’s an adult. He’s allowed to drink, drive, own property, have a family, earn a living and so on. I just don’t get how a football club has any responsibility there. He’s just an employee. A rather wealthy one, too. So it’s much easier for him to start anew and build a new life than for an average person.
I get that he came from your academy. But at that point of his life, even his parents aren’t responsible for him anymore. He’s responsible for himself. And he needs to care for himself.
In addition to this, I also dislike this argument because it suggests a shared guilt. But nobody here is responsible for Greenwood‘s actions other than himself. And it’s not like rape or sexualised violence or domestic violence are a byproduct of bad care. They are the consequence of a series of conscious decisions undertaken by Greenwood himself. He didn’t act out due to bad care. Or economic issues. He acted from a position of great privilege and power. And as he was comfortable in using or abusing that power, he should also have to face the consequences himself.

I honestly believe the idea that United have any responsibility towards Greenwood to be absurd.

It makes no sense at all. Especially with the club being more than happy to cut adrift less talented players without any anguish about a duty of care. Or does the club have a greater duty of care to players who misbehave than those behave? Because that’s surely the opposite of the way it should work?

 

[11101]

Indeed, except I’d add, it’s not actually Mason Greenwood I’m giving the benefit of the doubt to - it’s the CPS and the professionals who have seen far more of this case than any of the shrieking voices of either side.



They claimed that charges were dropped due to withdrawal of witness - which formally took place as early as April 2022 - and new material coming to light.

Now you’ve decided that the ‘new material’ was just the withdrawal of witness, but there is absolutely nothing at all to base that on.

People are repeating it because it suits their online argument, but they have no idea at all what the ‘new material coming to light’ is, and no one should be claiming they know what it is.

The witness withdrawal took place in April 2022 and yet all charges were dropped in February 2023, so it seems very unlikely that this is all that took place in the investigation.

Utd have effectively stated that they’ve seen more than the public but less than the Police and are happy to go on record that they think he is actually ‘innocent’ of what he was charged with.

What it really comes down to is nobody is prepared to say 'I dont know'. Everybody thinks their view must be the final and most authoritative. Either I think he did it and he must be punished, or I don't think he did and should be let off. Nobody will admit they don't know all the evidence and could be wrong, or accept that people who have seen all/more of the evidence think he's innocent.

 

[Witchking]

Did not think there would be 93 odd pages for this. Mason can go feck himself. Do not care that we do not have a striker. Whoever wants him can have him. Let him win the ballon dor or whatever. Just not at United. Happy that the club even though completely stupid in taking so long to come up with the decision, have stumbled to the right decision due to public pressure.

 

[united_99]

Never saw the duty of care noble thought process applied to Lingard, Tuanzebe or the hundreds of other academy kids United release regularly. Or does duty of care only apply to those who have insane talent?

 

[red.knight]

Say you have a kid. You hire a 20 year old babysitter, who you witness molesting your child. You go to the cops, but the case isn't strong enough.

If you don't hire this babysitter again, are you being unjust? Rule of law, second chances, all that.

I will die fighting with perseverance to get justice for my kid even when the system fails. But what has Greenwood case got to do with this scenario?

 

[Iker Quesadillas]

Whatever you feel about Greenwood, him not playing for United does not mean he is less likely to assault his girlfriend or worse. There is no benefit other than "this makes some of our fans and Ms Riley feel good".

I don't think this is the socially accepted "standard of action." Most of society is not 100% consequentialist / utilitarian.

 

[TrustInJanuzaj]

I have to admit the discourse on this topic is actually really painful, so I'm not sure why I waded back in. What I will say as a final point is my initial opinion at the time, was that with evidence that damming, the only reasonable assumption from then onwards was that he would be convicted. To my mind, if you have the "smoke and gun", then that will lead to a conviction. So I was quite happy to leave this in the hands of the police investigation and respect the outcome. I did maintain from the start that this would have been better played out directly in court so that a jury could weigh up a body of evidence, but alas that wasn't the case. However, what we do know is that based on the wide variety of evidence seen by the CPS (including in my opinion what looks to be a "smoke and gun"), they still didn't press charges. To me that makes me think they have seen something that makes him appear less guilty than what we all saw and heard. Utd's recent investigation has only added to my feeling that there's context we are not seeing currently in the public. I think where I take issue is those people coming down so strongly and definitively as if they have all the answers already, and vilifying him as if he was fully convicted of all those crimes. Even if you truly believe he's guilty, surely that slight twinge of doubt exists?

Which would then bring about it's own consequences for them both and still likely lead to him playing for United again as a bad move.

Hence why I'm not sure why people are so hell bent on thinking the best place for them to be is at United now. It's not the first time he's been in trouble whilst under our watch, other clubs have practices in place to help and support them, and going somewhere they are going to be able to move on with life is surely ideal if people think he isn't abusing her? And if they think he is, then why would staying in the same environment change that, especially now he's gotten away with it in their eyes?

I think a fresh start, under a very watchful eye is the best thing all round personally. But that's just my opinion.

Yes and to be honest, I've changed my mind on this. The club made the right decision getting rid, because the circus alone would have been a massive distraction. However, I still can't shake the feeling that public pressure has played the biggest part in this decision, which I do find hugely frustrating.

 

[theyneverlearn]

Did not think there would be 93 odd pages for this. Mason can go feck himself. Do not care that we do not have a striker. Whoever wants him can have him. Let him win the ballon dor or whatever. Just not at United. Happy that the club even though completely stupid in taking so long to come up with the decision, have stumbled to the right decision due to public pressure.

The club did everything correct up until they made the decision to keep him (according to reports).

They instantly suspended him and allowed the Police to complete their investigation, before then completing a very in-depth investigation as well.

Legally the club couldn’t have done much more, except perhaps pay off his huge contract, which would have been silly seeing as if he was charged and convicted, the club would have sacked him without payment.

 

[NotThatSoph]

I will die fighting with perseverance to get justice for my kid even when the system fails. But what has Greenwood case got to do with this scenario?

I didn't ask about your kid, I asked about the babysitter. The babysitter isn't charged with anything criminal, and is innocent in the eyes of the law. Rule of law, second chances, making mistakes as a young adult, what does that mean to you here?

 

[Ainu]

What it really comes down to is nobody is prepared to say 'I dont know'. Everybody thinks their view must be the final and most authoritative. Either I think he did it and he must be punished, or I don't think he did and should be let off. Nobody will admit they don't know all the evidence and could be wrong, or accept that people who have seen all/more of the evidence think he's innocent.

Surely a lot of people in here have not claimed that they know all of the facts? Not necessarily in those words, but the way you are presenting it comes across as dishonest. There's also a bit of a contradiction in your post, as you seem to expect that acknowledging you don't have all the facts means you should automatically accept that he's innocent.

The simple truth is that a lot of people have heard the recording and, even while recognizing they don't have all the facts, feel uncomfortable supporting Greenwood after that. That is not the same thing as thinking you know everything, proclaiming him guilty and wanting him to be punished.

 

[mu4c_20le]

Surely a lot of people in here have not claimed that they know all of the facts? Not necessarily in those words, but the way you are presenting it comes across as dishonest. There's also a bit of a contradiction in your post, as you seem to expect that acknowledging you don't have all the facts means you should automatically accept that he's innocent.

The simple truth is that a lot of people have heard the recording and, even while recognizing they don't have all the facts, feel uncomfortable supporting Greenwood after that. That is not the same thing as thinking you know everything, proclaiming him guilty and wanting him to be punished.

People making conclusions based on a minute clip are, imo, not too different than someone ignorantly claiming they know all the facts. They may not say those specific words, but their actions suggest that they know all they need to know.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

What it really comes down to is nobody is prepared to say 'I dont know'. Everybody thinks their view must be the final and most authoritative. Either I think he did it and he must be punished, or I don't think he did and should be let off. Nobody will admit they don't know all the evidence and could be wrong, or accept that people who have seen all/more of the evidence think he's innocent.

The main issue with the notion that the club/CPS have seen evidence which clearly exonerates him is the fact that nobody, not the club, not Greenwood, has made any effort to share this additional evidence with the rest of the world. And they’re happy to let his United career go up in flames despite convincing evidence that he’s an innocent man. Which makes no sense at all.

So we can only conclude that there’s a big difference between evidence that might be enough to scupper a court case against him and evidence that would explain away the despicable behaviour recorded and shared when the story first broke.

 

[Acquire Me]

I think the main issue for people who wanted him back are based on his talent as a footballer. We had something really exciting in him and now we don’t. That is a hard truth to swallow.

I still see a lot of fans hoping it somehow will be fixed here and on other platforms. It’s time to let this go, the chance of that is about nonexistent. Best we can hope for now is that we get a sale or loan and in that way can reinvest the money in new talent/players.

 

[Redlambs]

What it really comes down to is nobody is prepared to say 'I dont know'. Everybody thinks their view must be the final and most authoritative. Either I think he did it and he must be punished, or I don't think he did and should be let off. Nobody will admit they don't know all the evidence and could be wrong, or accept that people who have seen all/more of the evidence think he's innocent.

Plenty of people said that, especially in the original thread.

And my opinion hasn't changed, I've made myself clear numerous times:

No matter what, as soon as this came out he would not be playing for United again. As soon as she made a statement to the police which led them to take this to the CPS, it was done. No matter the truth (and you place way too much faith in thinking many, including the CPS actually know the full truth btw), someone was guilty of something or possibly both. There are a lot of really shady things to say the least, the pictures/audio, the bail breaking and making her pregnant, the father's weirdness, but we do have to accept that the CPS had to drop the case. They didn't find him "innocent", they didn't find him "guilty" they found that when a key witness dropped out and new material came to light it wasn't in the interest of taking it to court.

However that is not going to satisfy sponsors, fans and support groups whether you or I or anyone thinks rightly or wrongly about that. The fact is the audio IS out there, the fact is Greenwood has admitted he did make mistakes to spark this off, and ultimately Arnold has accepted responsibility for the decision. Any further statement about why they reached this decision is only going to make it worse for them, there is no flat out good answer as to why this happened, there isn't a fairy tale "misunderstanding let's all be happy" moment, and we have to accept that.

Unless Greenwood or the woman make an announcement down the line, we will never know. And I hope we don't as that would mean they've split and it's a whole new thing. I hope, regardless of the situation, they can move on be happy and learn/change their ways for the sake of their child.

 

[TrustInJanuzaj]

I didn't ask about your kid, I asked about the babysitter. The babysitter isn't charged with anything criminal, and is innocent in the eyes of the law. Rule of law, second chances, making mistakes as a young adult, what does that mean to you here?

But your analogy makes no sense. It would be more apt to say you suspect she may have molested your child. You didn't see it yourself, you just heard a snippet of a conversation from the room next door and made a judgement call. On investigation, new evidence is revealed, which clears her name. In that scenario, yes, she probably should go back to work. Let's be honest, though, it's just a stupid analogy all around. For what it's worth, I think that whole 'duty of care' to Greenwood is absolute b*llocks. Once you deem him innocent in the eyes of the law and the club, the only consideration remaining is a footballing one, for which most people will agree he should have stayed. Where this gets complicated is the public reaction.

 

[lex talionis]

Man United has is a profit-seeking enterprise but is so much more than that. It must be aware of the wishes of supporters and stakeholders and respond responsibly them. In this case, the rights of subject of this discussion are not in question as he has been cleared of any potential criminal or civil liability.

We're here to have a full throated debate about what the club should have done so by all means let's continue to have at it, but at the end of the day the club has a much broader responsibility not only to present day supporters and stakeholders but also to generations and supporters and stakeholders who haven't even been born yet than attending to the desires of one man. What that might mean is for each of us to decide.

 

[Redlambs]

Yes and to be honest, I've changed my mind on this. The club made the right decision getting rid, because the circus alone would have been a massive distraction. However, I still can't shake the feeling that public pressure has played the biggest part in this decision, which I do find hugely frustrating.

If the public played any part, it would be the sponsors who then made the weight come down. After all, how much do we bitch and moan as a fanbase about not being listened to and ignored on huge decisions? Why, suddenly, are we the be all and end all? Obviously it played a part mate, it would be madness to deny that. But ultimately, as always, this came down to money more than anything else. And despite what people think he's worth, the sponsors and investors are worth a hell of a lot more.

Also, I think we all underestimate the pressure of dickhead politicians getting involved. Once they start running their mouths, the likes of the FA and PL definitely start taking notice and potentially put pressure behind closed doors. Let's not forget all the elements involved that carry much more weight than tweets and emails from fans.

But your analogy makes no sense. It would be more apt to say you suspect she may have molested your child. You didn't see it yourself, you just heard a snippet of a conversation from the room next door and made a judgement call. On investigation, new evidence is revealed, which clears her name. In that scenario, yes, she probably should go back to work. Let's be honest, though, it's just a stupid analogy all around. For what it's worth, I think that whole 'duty of care' to Greenwood is absolute b*llocks. Once you deem him innocent in the eyes of the law and the club, the only consideration remaining is a footballing one, for which most people will agree he should have stayed. Where this gets complicated is the public reaction.

Again though, this is forgetting just how difficult it is to get convictions/find the truth in matters like this. And you and I both know there's no realistic answers to those pictures and audio where everyone walks away completely innocent.

So no, I don't agree most people will say he should stay. You can't be accused of that level of crime, that has such a low level or reporting/conviction rate with that evidence out there and simply expect everyone to believe the club's own statement which actually says he DID so something wrong at least. It's just too much to ask considering what's at stake if we are wrong.

And besides, as I've said above, let's not forget this happened on our watch. Just like all his other issues he's had. It's wrong to assume this is the best place, and he is in the best environment to move forward.

 

[JPRouve]

Surely a lot of people in here have not claimed that they know all of the facts? Not necessarily in those words, but the way you are presenting it comes across as dishonest. There's also a bit of a contradiction in your post, as you seem to expect that acknowledging you don't have all the facts means you should automatically accept that he's innocent.

The simple truth is that a lot of people have heard the recording and, even while recognizing they don't have all the facts, feel uncomfortable supporting Greenwood after that. That is not the same thing as thinking you know everything, proclaiming him guilty and wanting him to be punished.

Pretty much.

Do I know what happened before or after the recording? No. Do I have a negative opinion on the recording? Yes. Do I understand why reasonable doubt is enough for the CPS to drop a case? Absolutely. Does it change my opinion on the audio? No.

 

[Ainu]

People making conclusions based on a minute clip are, imo, not too different than someone ignorantly claiming they know all the facts. They may not say those specific words, but their actions suggest that they know all they need to know.

Sigh, what is with people reducing everything to its most simplistic form in this thread? It is not just the one minute clip. It is also the fact that it was part of a case that led to a player being charged with attempted rape, assault and coercive and controlling behaviour, a case the alleged victim supported by her statement to the police. That led to a player being suspended for 18 months (give or take). It's also the fact that our society has a history of brushing domestic violence cases under the rug.

And again, it is not about making conclusions. I literally used the words "feel uncomfortable supporting Greenwood". That is not a conclusion. It's basically saying you don't know everything you need to know, but there are elements you find hard to ignore.

You have a different opinion about that, you choose to accept that the case being dropped and United's investigation points to his innocence. And that's fine, I'm not going to claim you shouldn't do that or think less of you for making that choice. But I would expect the same courtesy for those who find it hard to accept that.

(Just to be clear, I'm not talking about those who have decided they're certain he's guilty and say feck him or whatever. That's not a view I support.)

 

[NotThatSoph]

But your analogy makes no sense. It would be more apt to say you suspect she may have molested your child. You didn't see it yourself, you just heard a snippet of a conversation from the room next door and made a judgement call. On investigation, new evidence is revealed, which clears her name. In that scenario, yes, she probably should go back to work. Let's be honest, though, it's just a stupid analogy all around. For what it's worth, I think that whole 'duty of care' to Greenwood is absolute b*llocks. Once you deem him innocent in the eyes of the law and the club, the only consideration remaining is a footballing one, for which most people will agree he should have stayed. Where this gets complicated is the public reaction.

No, that would be a horrible analogy.

We're talking about rule of law, people not convicted of crimes, second chances. That goes for people you know are guilty as well. If the babysitter's name is cleared, what would they need a second chance for? They didn't squander their first one.

 

[Kinsella]

What is the erroneous fact, that the courts/prosecution services do not pronounce someone as “innocent”, but rather “not guilty” and means that the evidence was not strong enough for a guilty verdict?

That he was found or deemed innocent by any legal body.

 

[Dr Foo]

I have to admit the discourse on this topic is actually really painful, so I'm not sure why I waded back in. What I will say as a final point is my initial opinion at the time, was that with evidence that damming, the only reasonable assumption from then onwards was that he would be convicted. To my mind, if you have the "smoke and gun", then that will lead to a conviction. So I was quite happy to leave this in the hands of the police investigation and respect the outcome. I did maintain from the start that this would have been better played out directly in court so that a jury could weigh up a body of evidence, but alas that wasn't the case. However, what we do know is that based on the wide variety of evidence seen by the CPS (including in my opinion what looks to be a "smoke and gun"), they still didn't press charges. To me that makes me think they have seen something that makes him appear less guilty than what we all saw and heard. Utd's recent investigation has only added to my feeling that there's context we are not seeing currently in the public. I think where I take issue is those people coming down so strongly and definitively as if they have all the answers already, and vilifying him as if he was fully convicted of all those crimes. Even if you truly believe he's guilty, surely that slight twinge of doubt exists?


Yes and to be honest, I've changed my mind on this. The club made the right decision getting rid, because the circus alone would have been a massive distraction. However, I still can't shake the feeling that public pressure has played the biggest part in this decision, which I do find hugely frustrating.

This. You have loads of people going "how can you hear the audio recording and not be xxxxx, where's our morals xxxx, what other possible scenarios could there be xxxx". Court of public opinion wins, they know better than investigators.

 

[Michael T]

Care to elaborate?

I'm a sucker for a smart blonde. It's a character flaw, what can I say.

 

[Beachryan]

The main issue with the notion that the club/CPS have seen evidence which clearly exonerates him is the fact that nobody, not the club, not Greenwood, has made any effort to share this additional evidence with the rest of the world. And they’re happy to let his United career go up in flames despite convincing evidence that he’s an innocent man. Which makes no sense at all.

So we can only conclude that there’s a big difference between evidence that might be enough to scupper a court case against him and evidence that would explain away the despicable behaviour recorded and shared when the story first broke.

Seriously, this. If Mason Greenwood, his PR and legal team coupled with the Glazers love of a 100m asset had something that could make this all go away, we would have heard about it over a year ago.

I mean realistically the only thing that would do that for me is for the two involved to come out with some pretty serious evidence that this was in fact an experimentation into filmmaking, involved make-up artists and was scripted to look as real as possible. I mean, sure, maybe that's what happened, but...erm...

People saying he wasn't convicted so it's all good exist in some weird parallel universe where domestic violence isn't a thing imo. These crimes almost never result in a guilty verdict, but are happening everyday. If as public a figure as a Manchester United number 11 gets away with it, that does a huge disservice to efforts to make such violence a thing of the past.

 

[Devil You Know]

I have to admit the discourse on this topic is actually really painful, so I'm not sure why I waded back in. What I will say as a final point is my initial opinion at the time, was that with evidence that damming, the only reasonable assumption from then onwards was that he would be convicted. To my mind, if you have the "smoke and gun", then that will lead to a conviction. So I was quite happy to leave this in the hands of the police investigation and respect the outcome. I did maintain from the start that this would have been better played out directly in court so that a jury could weigh up a body of evidence, but alas that wasn't the case. However, what we do know is that based on the wide variety of evidence seen by the CPS (including in my opinion what looks to be a "smoke and gun"), they still didn't press charges. To me that makes me think they have seen something that makes him appear less guilty than what we all saw and heard. Utd's recent investigation has only added to my feeling that there's context we are not seeing currently in the public. I think where I take issue is those people coming down so strongly and definitively as if they have all the answers already, and vilifying him as if he was fully convicted of all those crimes. Even if you truly believe he's guilty, surely that slight twinge of doubt exists?


Yes and to be honest, I've changed my mind on this. The club made the right decision getting rid, because the circus alone would have been a massive distraction. However, I still can't shake the feeling that public pressure has played the biggest part in this decision, which I do find hugely frustrating.

Good post.

I'm in exactly the same situation as you. My first reaction to the audio and images was disgust, and my first instinct was to throw the book at him. Now I'm not so sure.

I still feel as though cutting ties with Greenwood was the right move for all involved. But I'm less certain about his guilt as further leaks have come out. I also feel as though I've been dragged along with the general consensus, and the broader British cultural values around "believe women" and "abusers are evil people who never change". In quieter moments, those sentiments sit uneasily with me.

Not to mention the fact that I believe in second chances for people who have been through the justice system. Posters saying he can "continue his life elsewhere, just not here" sound like NIMBYs to me.

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

The main issue with the notion that the club/CPS have seen evidence which clearly exonerates him is the fact that nobody, not the club, not Greenwood, has made any effort to share this additional evidence with the rest of the world. And they’re happy to let his United career go up in flames despite convincing evidence that he’s an innocent man. Which makes no sense at all.

So we can only conclude that there’s a big difference between evidence that might be enough to scupper a court case against him and evidence that would explain away the despicable behaviour recorded and shared when the story first broke.

To be fair that evidence involves another party whose reputation could be damaged if it was shared. Speculative, of course, but it's something we should consider.

 

[Rood]

To enhance her profile present herself as a leading light on women's right. In other words self indulgence.

It’s weird. The people who were adamant that Greenwood needs to go regardless of any club investigation that seemingly is unimportant, got the outcome they wanted but are still whining that it isn’t enough. Because apparently United is a random twitter account that makes it’s mind up based on whims and fancies.

I do agree that it’s a bizarre statement - but not because it empowers abusers or some bullshit like that. The decision is strong enough a signal against that, as is the rest of the statements. It’s bizarre because going purely by it, it seems Greenwood should not have been let go but was due to media pressure. If anything her still criticising them despite the decision shows exactly why they came to this incoherent conclusion.

She wants her time in the sun. Its downright disgusting how she (and to some extent the Athletic journalist) are making this all about themselves. The statement was bad yes, but Greenwood is leaving so surely we can all move on now.

I have no problem with her or anyone having their opinion, but I'm not sure when she became a spokesperson for everyone or why everything she says makes the BBC Sport front page. They're just making her a target for abuse for having an opinion.

I also have no issue with Riley having an opinion and, as a celebrity United fan, it's normal that her opinion will get more of a spotlight.

But for me she is pushing too far now, Greenwood is going but clearly that's not enough for her as she now wants Arnold out too!

While it's clear that the club could have handled this better, it is an unprecedented situation (due to the online release of photos and audio) for the club so it's always going to be difficult to handle such things perfectly.
I don't really see what Arnold has done so wrong to be asked to leave or what it even achieves anyway. it's only going to have a negative impact in the club and the team to have that level of disruption with no real benefit for anyone.

 

[pratyush_utd]

Adam just wont let this golden duck go. Milking it as much as he can.

People choose not to disclose details to avoid further scrutiny all the time. Not sure why this is so hard for English media and talkshow presents to understand.

 

[Iker Quesadillas]

To be fair that evidence involves another party whose reputation could be damaged if it was shared. Speculative, of course, but it's something we should consider.

I don't think anyone is expecting the evidence itself to be shared. We just expect more than the claim that 'an alternative explanation exists.'

People choose not to disclose details to avoid further scrutiny all the time. Not sure why this is so hard for English media and talkshow presents to understand.

Everyone understands it.

It just has consequences.

Adam just wont let this golden duck go. Milking it as much as he can.

The tweet is from yesterday morning. There might be more distance between the tweet and your accusation that he is "milking it" than between United's announcement and the tweet.

 

[Tender Teacher]

Say you have a kid. You hire a 20 year old babysitter, who you witness molesting your child. You go to the cops, but the case isn't strong enough.

If you don't hire this babysitter again, are you being unjust? Rule of law, second chances, all that.

If (I somehow knew that) you personally witnessed Greenwood assaulting the victim with your own two eyes, then I would understand why you, @NotThatSoph, held an opinion that was more valuable than our country's judicial system. Until then...

 

[NotThatSoph]

If (I somehow knew that) you personally witnessed Greenwood assaulting the victim with your own two eyes, then I would understand why you, @NotThatSoph, held an opinion that was more valuable than our country's judicial system. Until then...

That would imply the rule of law and second chances don't apply to guilty people. Is that what people are saying in this thread? It would make second chances a pretty incoherent concept, because usually you only need a second chance when you've messed up your first.

 

[L1nk]

Adam just wont let this golden duck go. Milking it as much as he can.

People choose not to disclose details to avoid further scrutiny all the time. Not sure why this is so hard for English media and talkshow presents to understand.

Well.. he's exactly right though? After what people have seen in the pictures and heard in the audio, how can you just say "Oh well we know more but we cannot say or show you" and expect everyone to just be on board with that? Especially when there's no impartiality whatsoever in trying to protect their valuable asset.

 

[MyUnconventionalViews]

That he was found or deemed innocent by any legal body.

My point remains, it is quite easy to extrapolate and manipulate the language employed to support both points of view, and both means are erroneous. If this is the case, it cannot be acceptable to you in one manner but not the other.

Using the statement “there was no longer a realistic prospect of conviction”, which is the standard language used by the CPS even in instances where there is sufficient evidence to prove that the alleged is not guilty (remember, the scope is to prove guilt, not innocence), to support the notion that he was not charged solely because of a technicality is just as incorrect as using the mental gymnastics to move from “charges are dropped” indicates a state of “non guilt” and, considering that our justice system dictates innocence until proven guilty, he is therefore innocent.

One cannot have it both ways.

 

[Redlambs]

To be fair that evidence involves another party whose reputation could be damaged if it was shared. Speculative, of course, but it's something we should consider.

Something that is being continually overlooked. Especially by those blaming "mob rule" for him leaving.

If (I somehow knew that) you personally witnessed Greenwood assaulting the victim with your own two eyes, then I would understand why you, @NotThatSoph, held an opinion that was more valuable than our country's judicial system. Until then...

I'm not sure the guy who tried to suggest Greenwood was provoked because he was woken from a sleep by her should be being so snipey.

This. You have loads of people going "how can you hear the audio recording and not be xxxxx, where's our morals xxxx, what other possible scenarios could there be xxxx". Court of public opinion wins, they know better than investigators.

Why don't you join all the angry voices on twitter you think have made this decision and see if you can't get it reversed then?

You know, when you are done dismissing that audio.

Well.. he's exactly right though? After what people have seen in the pictures and heard in the audio, how can you just say "Oh well we know more but we cannot say or show you" and expect everyone to just be on board with that? Especially when there's no impartiality whatsoever in trying to protect their valuable asset.

He is right.

But once again people want to look for scapegoats instead of being mad at the people who caused this mess.

 

[MancunianAngels]

Few things worth pointing out and a wider summary of the thread.

As fans, the only evidence we have is the recordings. Fans every right to want him out based on that. If there's further evidence that somehow lessens the impact of that video/image then the club and/or the player should release that. He'll clearly never play for us again but it will make the player's next move easier. The only negative from either is that it extends the stories news cycle.

The 6 month investigation, or whatever it ended up being, was ridiculous. At the latest, this should have been dealt with after the cup final. Now, the fact they didn't come to an immediate "he should stay" conclusion would mean that even the people with this other supposed evidence, weren't totally convinced about his return. What does that say? Possibly nothing but potentially interesting. They might simply have thought, is he worth the trouble?

 

[HTG]

I'm a sucker for a smart blonde. It's a character flaw, what can I say.

Do you think a thread partly dealing with the topic of sexualised violence is the right place to share your taste in women?

 

[JPRouve]

Maybe it's my timeline but outside of Redcafe, I have seen more people against the club decision than for it. Which begs the question, which public opinion the club followed?

 

[Yorke to Cole]

Good post.

I'm in exactly the same situation as you. My first reaction to the audio and images was disgust, and my first instinct was to throw the book at him. Now I'm not so sure.

I still feel as though cutting ties with Greenwood was the right move for all involved. But I'm less certain about his guilt as further leaks have come out. I also feel as though I've been dragged along with the general consensus, and the broader British cultural values around "believe women" and "abusers are evil people who never change". In quieter moments, those sentiments sit uneasily with me.

Not to mention the fact that I believe in second chances for people who have been through the justice system. Posters saying he can "continue his life elsewhere, just not here" sound like NIMBYs to me.

I completely agree. I remember working the day after the incident on the Monday and a girl I work with was "winding me up, saying Mason's been a naughty boy then". I did not say much because I was disappointed. I knew the impact on the team was going to be great, during what was already a disastrous season.

I thought in terms of guilt, he is finished. Anyway, I happened to speak to another lady about this, who is much older than the first girl, I refered to. She said " well let's and wait and see what happens, we do not know the full story." I was still sceptical, but as time went by what she said did seem to stick with me.

Then when I read that the complainant wanted to withdraw charges in the April that year, I thought oh okay. Then the charges were dropped in February. Then the girl was expecting his child. That is when I felt that there is more to this incident than what was put out online.

I think United should have constructed a plan to reintroduce with the objective of rehabilitation and been more open about it during the summer months. It would have been also good to hear from Mason himself.

I actually thought the idea of him going to Atalanta on loan and then bringing him back was also a good idea.

 

[mu4c_20le]

Sigh, what is with people reducing everything to its most simplistic form in this thread? It is not just the one minute clip. It is also the fact that it was part of a case that led to a player being charged with attempted rape, assault and coercive and controlling behaviour, a case the alleged victim supported by her statement to the police. That led to a player being suspended for 18 months (give or take). It's also the fact that our society has a history of brushing domestic violence cases under the rug.

And again, it is not about making conclusions. I literally used the words "feel uncomfortable supporting Greenwood". That is not a conclusion. It's basically saying you don't know everything you need to know, but there are elements you find hard to ignore.

You have a different opinion about that, you choose to accept that the case being dropped and United's investigation points to his innocence. And that's fine, I'm not going to claim you shouldn't do that or think less of you for making that choice. But I would expect the same courtesy for those who find it hard to accept that.

(Just to be clear, I'm not talking about those who have decided they're certain he's guilty and say feck him or whatever. That's not a view I support.)

I don't disagree with that, seems like it all boils down to the leaked video and interpretation of it. This would be a lot easier if either side could either try and see from each other perspective, or just agree to disagree about the speculative parts. The extreme ends of the spectrum are the ones that believe they know all they need to know, and become emotional, and predictably start making analogies with pedophilia.

 

[redshaw]

Moving away could really help him but it could also be a big strain for both and the baby to be away from friends and family as both are local. I do worry something worse could happen if they're alone far away and things aren't going well and arguments and resentment start.

Perhaps if Greenwood and the club really wanted to work this out so they can stay, to have trained properly and be reintegrated, with the evidence being public would be to have done a lot of professional PR many months ago to show real remorse regret, extensive counseling, statements, video interviews of at least Mason, pictures of them and baby, talking about wanting to put it behind them and stay local. Humanize the situation and let it sit with the public and show someone seeking help and reform. We've just had silence hoping people would forget but all they have is the horrific audio, images and denial to go from and don't want him representing the club. Mason also has a series of incidents dating back years and shows to me he needs a lot of counselling.