Yes, you're right. Let's try "guilty until proven innocent". I'm sure it'll work better.
Antony under investigation by Brazilian authorities for domestic abuse | Inquiries ended | Back in the squad
- Thread starter laughtersassassin
- Start date
https://www.metropoles.com/colunas/...isa-tentou-criar-romance-com-amante-de-antony
It's in Portuguese, but you may also notice this article was from earlier this year, and suggests she was in a relationship with Antony, which is contrary to her current claims.
I usually keep out of the Greenwood talk and this thread as the waffle spouted in both threads is unbearable to read but this really takes the cake.
I believe that he should be treated by the club as they treated Greenwood. Suspend and banish him from the club, then conduct a private investigation into his conduct and finally release him.
As a club they have set the agenda by the way they dealt with Greenwood.
As a club they have set the agenda by the way they dealt with Greenwood.
Genuinely why?
Except they dealt with that poorly. For instance, the investigation should have been conducted by someone external and independent of the club.
Stick to the comedy, Ted.
Although they haven’t released Greenwood..
The audio evidence put Greenwood in that situation, all cases are not the same.
The club needs to assess the evidence in this case.
That's not the assumption at all.
Sometimes there is a precautionary barring order, but it's precautionary. Guilt would mean jail. The suspension from place of work, especially for someone like Antony can be two fold, to show the alleged victim she is being heard and to remove the accused from the glare. Imagine him playing away Elland Road in the middle of this.
If there is a trial and he is innocent the whole affair would he a massive pain in the ass and a really awful black mark on his reputation.
If he's guilty, and everybody backs him unconditionally then the effect that would have on the victim and other victims whi never saw justice is huge and often debilitating, and literally insult to injury.
These situations suck and are really lose lose, but you just have to try find the least harmful course of action.
It's not always fair. I brought my ex partner to court for hitting my kids. She denied it. Said I made it up as part of my plan is to constantly undermine and intimidate her. The judge placed a restriction order on me. I wasn't allowed knock on her door to pick up my kids. I had to text. For three years. Until I proved she was beating the kids and heR accusations towards me were lies. It fecking hurt, but I understand the court's caution when I see the figures of abuse and violence towards women.
My only gripe was it took years for the court to act on her hitting the kids, but thats a different story.
I guarantee you the amount of false accusations are nothing in comparison to the amount of women being assaulted.
Or.. everyone should stand up against anyone when we know they're doing the wrong thing. Right now we don't know what happened in this case which means it's a terrible time to stand up against any of them, even if a few of the people involved are women and you happen to be a man.
Btw, a lot of men, far, far more than the women you speak of have gotten away with DA which I presume you think isn't fair either, so that you still think it's a good idea to "stand up against" one side out of principle is just baffling, and the fact that you've presented it as a men vs women type thing just makes it that much worse.
How can you call it antiquated while conceding that there isn't a better standard that exists?
Quoting you all together because you are similarly restricting your perspective to black and white. Perhaps my phrasing made you feel that way. The challenge I'm trying to highlight is that the vast majority of you talking about innocence until proven guilty is that you're using that as a clause to condemn the victims as untruthful and manipulative. In essence you also presume their guilt in trying to inflated anothers' innocence.
https://thebluebench.org/about-us/m...ng-survivors-sexual-assault-legal-system.html
With both Antony and MG the objections have been resoundingly demonizing of the victims in question. Money and attention seeking. It's the most common criticism of women accusing men of public status. And yet as the me two movements showed, these victims tend to more often truthful than not.
So that presents a very very hard to manage and conflicting scenario where public opinion and even the legal system struggles.
This is in contrast to the issue faced by black men for generations where guilt is presumed. Ironically this innocent is guilty talk is typically reserved for white men rather than helping the historical 7:1 wrong convictions in men of color even up through today. So most of your dialogue on it is from ideology versus current status of the judicial system.
A system in which innocent til proven guilty leads to innocents being convicted.
And an innocent until proven guilty philosophy that leads to victims not being believed because they don't have a home recording of their trauma that was not mishandled in the legal discovery process in a way that it would not be admissable in court.
So in case it is still needed let me clarify that my opinion is that we have to work with shades of gray here.That's a broken process and by espousing it you are much to restricted in your thinking. THINK.
See above champ.
A masterclass: 'How to say a lot while saying absolutely nothing at all'
An interesting take, fair play for taking the time to explain as I’ve been trying to work out WTF you were on about. Can’t say I’m any the wiser now though.
So what’s your alternative solution?
Very demeaning, man. I'm sharing meaningful thought process and you're dismissing it without fair shake.
90% of domestic abuse and sexual assault victims tell the truth.
Race, social status and wealth affect conviction.
Black men are significantly wrongfully convicted more often. Historically, white women accusations lead to presumed guilt. Even TODAY - simply calling the cops on an innocent black person is a potential death sentence (in the US at least)
How do you navigate these contradictions? That's what I'm saying. Just because I have no conclusion or solution does not mean it's meaningless. Shame on you for being so close minded.
Appreciate giving it thought. It's hard, man! As you can see there's some circular logic and consistency is tough. I don't know that we can currently say there's a great fits all solution.
Perhaps the best example is from how police officers are investigated for situations they're involved in that we see in the news a lot with a supposed innocent person being shot or worse. They're put on leave until the investigation process is completed. In cases where it's not a black or white scenario, you often see the cop transferred or resigning anyway. If fully innocent they resume. If guilty to the standards required currently you see convictions.
Is it unfortunate to be wrongfully accused? Yes. Do public figures become targets more than others , probably. As a public figure, however, it is perhaps to be considered a professional hazard and to be handled in a particular way. For instance, coming out with agent and player interviews is not it. Let social media swirl and let the investigations happen in privacy.
Public opinion is fickle. Someone else quoted Mike Tyson as an example and at first I recoiled but that person was correct. He's got an idolized following and even a fecking cartoon show on Adult Swim. Not to mention the movie cameos. A convicted rapist. Is he absolved by serving time? Public opinion seems to be so. Point being that going through the process appropriately doesn't end someone's career - as was mentioned about "poor Masons career being ruined" and similarly w Antony because of the accusations and charges. Johnny Depp another good example. Guys got a new Netflix special and Disney begging for him back.
did she go to the police? that is the proper and credible course of action for a victim of a crime.
I can’t see Utd giving the ok to do this interview so I presume he did it without been advised
I may have prematurely included that subject to cover all bases of discussion.
The main thing here that is most relevant is there victims tell the truth more often than not and high profile wealthy individuals have resources they use that do not equate to fair and social media is a whole another variable. We should not be quick to brand victims/accusors as liars just because they don't have evidence like the audio in the other case.
Speculation will drive all of us bonkers. The justice system will be called on to sort out the truth, but the club has a reputational interest to protect -- which absolutely does include protecting the rights of the accused -- and it seems pretty obvious that the club should announce soon -- before ETH submits himself to the wolves -- that it will put Antony on administrative leave for the time being.
Not only is this take stupid, but it's also genuinely dangerous. Assumption of guilt has led to so many terrible things throughout history, including "witch hunts" where thousands and thousands of women were burned at the stake under any accusation.
I’m not saying or implying that he is innocent. I am saying that these public statements will look far worse if the accusations turn out to be true, so I’m thinking anyone sensible would refrain from doing such unless they’re sure of their innocence.
Your posts read like word salads. What do you actually propose instead of "innocent until proven guilty" as you think that's antiquated.
We know real abuse exists. It is also wrong to immediately blame victims for seeking attention or money. Saying this is just stating the obvious.
The current legal processes are clearly not working for sexual offences, given rape conviction rates are under 2%. But yep, obviously reducing the burden of proof is highly problematic.
Really scary to hear people essentially advocating 'guilty until proven innocent' as this does seem to be the way things are heading in society now with trial by social media and being 'cancelled' as soon as anyone is accused of anything ever.
The idea that it's too hard to prove things, so we should just assume guilt is absurd.
The idea that it's too hard to prove things, so we should just assume guilt is absurd.
Innocent until proven guilty has nothing to do with the victim and everything to do with the accused. Everything else is just speculation on what could have happened.
The race bit is random as Antony nor Greenwood are not white.
I sympathise with the many women that do suffer from this, because it is unfortunately an incredibly difficult thing to prove, but we have to be careful to not go back to an extreme where everyone accused of everything is presumed guilty by default. It's always important to consider the motives of the accusers and any evidence that is available. The system of innocent until proven guilty might not be perfect, but there's a reason that it's the system that most institutions have adopted over time. The alternative is worse.
Reading the posts on the MG and this thread. here’s predominantly 2 camps of people.. which is actually scary.
1) woman is making it up no matter what.
2) player is guilty no matter what
What’s scary is that for a lot of people the opinion appear to be set and has very little to do with the actual facts of the case.
What’s my point. Well it just occurred to me when reading some comments that jury’s are formed from randomly selected people in the population.
1) woman is making it up no matter what.
2) player is guilty no matter what
What’s scary is that for a lot of people the opinion appear to be set and has very little to do with the actual facts of the case.
What’s my point. Well it just occurred to me when reading some comments that jury’s are formed from randomly selected people in the population.
I mean, thousands of posts later by people that care, but have no access to actual evidence is pretty good evidence to me why these things should never be instigated in the media.
File police charges. Lawyer up. Present your evidence to a judge. Let the courts and law enforecement departments decide what happens next. Is it infallible, and not biased against the poorer party? No, of course it has issues.
But it's a much better solution than the court of public opinion. And that's where this is now. And regardless of what happened in the cases, for me this is the end of Antony as a footballer for Manchester United. Not because I believe x or y, or the club have done x or y. But because in England, if you play for Manchester United, you are judged by the media more harshly than anyone else. You don't get to curse after scoring, you don't get to pick up a red card in a friendly. And you certainly will never be given the benefit of the doubt.
I would wager strongly that the outcome of lawsuits or police investigations will never matter to Antony's United career at this point. And I find that really troubling, personally, but that's where we are.
File police charges. Lawyer up. Present your evidence to a judge. Let the courts and law enforecement departments decide what happens next. Is it infallible, and not biased against the poorer party? No, of course it has issues.
But it's a much better solution than the court of public opinion. And that's where this is now. And regardless of what happened in the cases, for me this is the end of Antony as a footballer for Manchester United. Not because I believe x or y, or the club have done x or y. But because in England, if you play for Manchester United, you are judged by the media more harshly than anyone else. You don't get to curse after scoring, you don't get to pick up a red card in a friendly. And you certainly will never be given the benefit of the doubt.
I would wager strongly that the outcome of lawsuits or police investigations will never matter to Antony's United career at this point. And I find that really troubling, personally, but that's where we are.
You don’t have an agenda but you’ve been affected by these issues personally and it’s hurt and scarred you.
I have also, and am also scarred by them, deeply.
I remember talking with you in the past and you said that your kids have been affected by these issues in posts that I found really upsetting and moving.
I think this, understandably, puts you into a fatherly and protective mode the moment any issue linked with this topic comes up, both noble qualities and far better than the opposite.
But I think it means that you take anyone offering nuance or a more neutral stance as a bit personal - as if they must be a bad person.
I always remember when I said that after seeing Mason and H’s baby photo, it made me hope that they’re a happy family and who cares about the football side of it - and you said you found it sinister, whereas all I meant was exactly what I said. Something that I think is realistically the best thing to hope for.
On top of this you’re having to mod the biggest Utd forum on the internet during the most divisive and troubled time the club has experienced in modern history.
i dont know. but i dont think the club cares
The problem I'm calling out is so much of the commentary of late is focused on victim blaming.
The race thing is a counter point - that black men are more quickly assumed guilty.
Point being there's not a good solution and the way the system works is not adequate
A lot of posters are having trouble interpreting my comments because they think I'm on one specific side of Antony guilty or not guilty whereas in fact I'm neither. My opinion is Antony is accused and in question. And I believe the victim(s) have suffered some sort of domestic abuse.
Its human instinct to side with women in DV case. Even more so with social network.
"Innocent until proven guilty" is never true in court of public opinion.
Last edited:
Yes you are right. Specific women made these allegations originally, and you are right to emphasize that. Nevertheless, the social mob is very quick to believe the accusations, with many calling immediately for suspension of the player or sponsorship deals. The larger point is that we (as random people not working in the courts or individually implicated in the cas), should realize that we are not in a position to pass moral judgment. The original source of the allegations doesnt change this.
It's become acceptable for women to offend against men/kids, and to blackmail to shield themselves from that offending. Or for the offending to be normalised, celebrated, and acceptable. The justice system is also tilted towards women. Wrongful convictions are higher than pre-dna USA. And the scope of what constitutes serious sexual assault has been widened too far to make it statistically rounder for better political football.
None of this resolves the structural deficiencies around 1. the crumbling state of our justice system (it's not uncommon for a defence barrister to spend 10 hours on a train, only to find the court date has been moved. Or the client has been moved etc. A case can take 3+ years. Disclosure is fecked etc) 2. The 'embarrassment' factor which simply stop women reporting sexual violence. 3. The genuine desire of women in domestic violence to often want to 'fix' and 'resolve' the relationship, rather than seeing the dad of their kids and man they love in jail. This is a tricky one, but often is a good goal. 4. Lack of funding for womens refuges and advice on how to move on 5. A push onto the judicial path. (women can be denied support if they dont want to prosecute for whatever reason) 6. Lack of education for men, lack of mental health support, lack of awareness. 7. 'embarrassment' of men to deal with anger/impulse issues 8. criminalising/demonising those issues instead of treating them early. 9. The state of our media frenzy, and how it's used. 10. Men, especially poor men feeling marginalised and hostile to women. They don't see balance in the system. 11. Rich powerful men are too able to manipulate and control the justice system, and strong legal representation poses problems.
Violence against women from men is a genuine problem, which requires long term structural change and funding.
Not comparable to the greenwood case. The leaked audio was damming enough to suspend greenwood with or without trial. Antony may turn out to have committed many of these allegations, he may not. Let’s not forget Jonny Depp was black balled from Hollywood for 5 or so years and that turned out to be a farce.
No doubt he was in a toxic relationship where both sides were angry and abusive as feck though. Amber Heard is a turd who tried to profit off it, but the demonisation and blackballing of her in the media is likely undeserved, given they were simply both terrible. Often toxic relationships are 'abusive,' in the literal sense, but it's probably something that needs resolved with a breakup and deleting each other from their phones rather than the legal system. (For example, if the woman is throwing plates at antony and slapping him round the face, and he's responding by pushing her into walls, and she's responding by abusing him further etc, that's simply a toxic relationship for me.) We don't know as we aren't privy to it. The Greenwood situation was something else though....
I don’t see it as victim blaming at all. It seems like posters are saying, if he didn’t abuse her this is what could have happened. Aren’t you essentially doing the same if you think domestic abuse occcured?