Adam Johnson found guilty of one count of sexual activity with a child | Sentenced to six years

Status
Not open for further replies.
Mrs Smoker said:
I don't like that just the accusation would be enough for that. No admission of guilt, no due process,...just doesn't seem right.

Then again, it's not unheard of, right? And guess if the state believes it has enough to charge him...
Click to expand...
Because he lied to the club and she got it wrong the next executive won't take chances
 
dwd said:
Statement from Margaret Byrne:

http://www.skysports.com/football/n...atement-following-resignation-from-sunderland
Click to expand...

Taken from the above....

"This meeting took place on 4 May, 2015. After this meeting, Mr. Pownall sent me a note to forward to Mr Johnson which recorded , amongst other things ,that Mr Johnson had kissed the victim and communicated with her. I did not share this information with anybody including the board of Sunderland AFC."

This is her downfall. She knew from at least this date that there had been sexual activity with a child and did nothing about it. This is backed up by what the police said about her being told details of what happened. Something she fails to acknowledge in her carefully wordered statement. Good riddance to her.
 
Marching said:
Taken from the above....

"This meeting took place on 4 May, 2015. After this meeting, Mr. Pownall sent me a note to forward to Mr Johnson which recorded , amongst other things ,that Mr Johnson had kissed the victim and communicated with her. I did not share this information with anybody including the board of Sunderland AFC."

This is her downfall. She knew from at least this date that there had been sexual activity with a child and did nothing about it. This is backed up by what the police said about her being told details of what happened. Something she fails to acknowledge in her carefully wordered statement. Good riddance to her.
Click to expand...

I definitely do not believe that she decided not to tell anyone else on the board or at the club about this. I'm calling bullshit.
 
Boycott said:
I read recently his childhood friend Dale Roberts committed suicide after his girlfriend cheated on him with Paul Terry (John's brother). One would have thought after going through that experience Johnson would have some conscious about the implications of cheating on family.
Click to expand...

Just as one might have thought that John might have some conscience as to the same implications after his brothers actions had led to someone's suicide. Cnuts are going to be cnuts. Period.
 
It is spectacularly stupid.

"Yea I knew he'd had sexual contact with her and also sent her hundreds of text messages but he said he was going to deny it so I figured it was all good".
 
Rado_N said:
It is spectacularly stupid.

"Yea I knew he'd had sexual contact with her and also sent her hundreds of text messages but he said he was going to deny it so I figured it was all good".
Click to expand...
:lol::lol:
 
Cassidy said:
I definitely do not believe that she decided not to tell anyone else on the board or at the club about this. I'm calling bullshit.
Click to expand...

Does seem a bit unlikely doesn't it. Others at the club knew what the police knew as early as March. I agree with your bullshit call.
 
Rado_N said:
We're not talking about sacking someone on the basis of an accusation, it's suspended with pay.

Guilt can only be determined by the courts, but he should never have has his suspension lifted while it was all ongoing, and making him captain was just ridiculous.
Click to expand...
Need to be a bit careful though when you look at what happened to Paul Gambaccini. His suspension by the BBC was taken by many as a tacit statement of guilt, with numerous pitchforkers falling over themselves to apply the "no-smoke-without-fire" principle when considering his potential involvement.
The police, it could be argued, appeared to do little in the way of due diligence when preparing their investigation, as both accusers had a history of fabricating such claims, and much of the witness material was either sub-standard or downright fantasy.
They kept the DJ dangling, in a constant state of pariah-ship, for a full year, while bailing & re-bailing him in readiness for a prosecution which was almost certain to fail.
I think we need to be aware of the message that can be sent out through the organs of the wider media ( Twitter, tabloids, TV, etc. ) when such suspensions or sackings are being undertaken, beacuse it can really colour the perception of an individual's character when allegations of this nature are brought to to the table.
I struggle also with the idea that the police should be contacting the employer with such allegations in the first place, before any information has been tested in court, because at this stage it is no more than supposition and can't be qualified in any meaningful sense until their investigation has been concluded and the court-based legal process can begin.
If you look at Johnson's case then this degree of caution most certainly wouldn't apply as he admitted to his employers that he had committed a sexual offence in the first instance, and they should be able to suspend or sack him without fear of prejudicing the outcome.
 
redtilded121 said:
It's good she has gone,she got it wrong
The next player to be accused won't be given the chance to play on they will be suspended from the start till the end of the case.
Click to expand...

I think most people will agree that in most walks of life, this is what would have happened. He got exceptional treatment because of his job and because he could help them escape relegation.
 
Just got in and am catching up with everything. I don't believe she was the only one at the club to know this info and I think she's taken a fall for em. I'm sure I'll hear tales from the North East over the next few days about what really happened. Also, I might be working in Sunderland next month :D
 
I wonder if Johnson had been found innocent would people be criticizing him so much?
 
I don't understand what Sunderland did wrong. Imagine if a footballer was accused of the same but was found not guilty, is it fair that an allegation was enough to halt their career for the months or years it may take for a trial to start and conclude - take a chunk of time out of a finite career of someone who it may well turn out didn't do anything?

It's not possible to have a time machine and flash-forward to the verdicts in the trial and then wizz back to modern day and say the player who'll be found not guilty can carry on but the player found guilty must be suspended immediately. So you err on the side of innocent until proven guilty.
 
DrunkenBeaver said:
I don't understand what Sunderland did wrong. Imagine if a footballer was accused of the same but was found not guilty, is it fair that an allegation was enough to halt their career for the months or years it may take for a trial to start and conclude - take a chunk of time out of a finite career of someone who it may well turn out didn't do anything?

It's not possible to have a time machine and flash-forward to the verdicts in the trial and then wizz back to modern day and say the player who'll be found not guilty can carry on but the player found guilty must be suspended immediately. So you err on the side of innocent until proven guilty.
Click to expand...

You can't go with "innocent until proven guilty" when the bloke admits his guilt. He admitted this to the club and they still played him.
 
DrunkenBeaver said:
I don't understand what Sunderland did wrong. Imagine if a footballer was accused of the same but was found not guilty, is it fair that an allegation was enough to halt their career for the months or years it may take for a trial to start and conclude - take a chunk of time out of a finite career of someone who it may well turn out didn't do anything?

It's not possible to have a time machine and flash-forward to the verdicts in the trial and then wizz back to modern day and say the player who'll be found not guilty can carry on but the player found guilty must be suspended immediately. So you err on the side of innocent until proven guilty.
Click to expand...

They knew he was guilty though. That's the difference. They could have presumably suspended him with pay while his trial was ongoing and they wouldn't have received any criticism.
 
Guy admits to two counts and people are still running with "...but what if he WAS innocent?".
 
Once a person is formally charged they should expect to be suspended by their employer.

Anyone else would be, the fact that we're discussing a footballer is irrelevant.
 
Sunderland have made a complete arse out of the situation. Their fans must be absolutely fuming.
 
I imagine the worst that will happen to Sunderland is a hefty fine but i'd seriously consider docking them points. Mainly because they're shite.
 
unchanged_lineup said:
Just got in and am catching up with everything. I don't believe she was the only one at the club to know this info and I think she's taken a fall for em. I'm sure I'll hear tales from the North East over the next few days about what really happened. Also, I might be working in Sunderland next month :D
Click to expand...
Am I the only one who interpreted that demonic smilie at the end of unchangedlineup's post to mean that he's going to take the opportunity to do some Johnsoning while he's up there?
 
He's throwing farewell to freedom parties before sentencing. The Daily Mail's got it covered:

An onlooker, who witnessed guests leaving his house party yesterday, told The Sun: 'The woman had her shoes off and a bottle of booze in her hand. She was clearly wearing the same clothes she had on the night before.
'She and a male pal waltzed down to the gates and were pressing every button in a bid to get out. They were there for a couple of minutes trying to figure it out.
'Johnson's dad Dave then came out and opened the gates for them. The girl just walked off in her bare feet. She looked a little worse for wear.'

No, they didn't. You just made it up.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...sentenced-child-sex-crimes.html#ixzz42uWMqde8
 
duffer said:
So, out in 3-4 years?

He'll be 31/32 then. Career over or could he make some dosh overseas?
Click to expand...

Rest of his sentence on licence so I doubt he will be allowed to play football here due to his offence and the worries he's mixing with kids.
 
Now that he's been sentenced, could someone explain to me why Johnson gets 6 years but Caroline Berriman (a teaching assistant who groomed and had sex with a 15 year old over 50 times) got away without a prison sentence? I'm not defending a Johnson in any way btw, just trying of understand why there is such a difference in the sentence.
 
Judges comments are basically 'He's a perv, who's lied constantly, shown no sign of remorse and really messed the girl up'. Can see why it's a reasonably long sentence.

duffer said:
So, out in 3-4 years?

He'll be 31/32 then. Career over or could he make some dosh overseas?
Click to expand...
Career over.
ivaldo said:
Now that he's been sentenced, could someone explain to me why Johnson gets 6 years but Caroline Berriman (a teaching assistant who groomed and had sex with a 15 year old over 50 times) got away without a prison sentence? I'm not defending a Johnson in any way btw, just trying of understand why there is such a difference in the sentence.
Click to expand...
Would suggest you read up on the judges comments (can't say I know what they were in the case you cite but they generally give a clear indication).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.