People keep saying the club had more evidence. They didn’t, they spoke to the parents. That’s it. Not exactly magic evidence. The parents aren’t exactly gonna say he treats her badly. We specially when hes broken his bail condition, and got her pregnant. Complete botch job
The clubs statement said,
"Based on the evidence available to us, we have concluded that the material posted online did not provide a full picture and that Mason did not commit the offences in respect of which he was originally charged."
"Based on the evidence available to us" suggests they have evidence available different to that in the public domain.
Saying "did not provide a full picture" further suggests the club has had access to additional evidence. Or why else would they suggest the material online doesn't provide a full picture if that's the only picture they've had access to.
@BigDerek I can't seem to quote your post to reply.
First, I wasnt implying you dont condemn rape or domestic violence. I was just saying it's nonsense to suggest there's people here condemning it just to feel better about themselves or look good.
I don't think the audio indicates someone actively raping someone. Personally I wouldn't think Greenwood ever raped her as that wasn't something he was ever charged for. But threatening to do it and beating her up is surely deplorable enough.
You say Greenwood might have not released any material that might have exonerated him because it looks bad on the mother of his child. But she wasn't the mother of his child at the time, she was just a who he was in a toxic relationship with. So would he really protect her in that situation to the extent that he is known as a rapist and he can't play football for close to 2 years? Possible but very unlikely in my eyes.
Another thing is that the guards thought there was enough evidence there to actively charge him with multiple different charges and didn't drop the charges until over a year later when it was revealed they were back together and having a baby. Again, it's very unlikely that the case would have went on for so long if he was innocent.
The point I was making more is the language used and directed towards those who aren't deciding someone is guilty based of one small side of a story. Why would someone dare question the social media judge and jury when you get accused of all sorts for simply having an open mind and asking questions which you'd expect to be asked in a court.
Of course beating someone up isn't right but if I post a picture of myself with a broken nose and say you did it, that doesn't make it true. Wasn't there a story about a girl in England who accused multiple men of beating and raping her and they got put out of their area from a mob? And it came out that she was lying. Three sides to a story - his, hers and the truth. I'm not prepared to draw conclusions based on one side.
In an ongoing open case, any decent respected lawyer would be advising their client not to be releasing stuff into the public domain. So anything which may exonerate him at that time wouldn't have been released.
How could the CPS not charge him after that info was released by the accuser? So many people made up their minds on the case from that snippet. Imagine the reputational risk and trust had they not. But charging someone is significantly different from convicting and a charge doesn't mean one is guilty.
We actually have no idea exactly what evidence the club has. We know for sure they have spoken to Mason, his family, her family (and even that alone is more information than anyone here might have) but the rest is just speculation.
Have the club heard the full recording? We don't know either way.
All we know for sure is that there was around 15minutes of audio recorded in October 2021 and 1 minute of that was released on Instagram in January 2022.
Some claim that if the club had the full recording that they would release/leak it - this is possible but again it's just speculation.
Good post.
I don't think the club would breach GDPR by releasing a private audio or any additional evidence.
I’ve read the last couple of pages and it was quite illuminating. There’s some posters against him who demand an explanation 100% absolving him. Then I read
@BigDerek post and I realized there’s no possible winners in this, particularly the girl.
Going public is not an option for either of them. People have posted her private messages theorizing her a scornful ex. Let’s say she publicly said it was roleplaying. She’s going to go through life with people making snide remarks about her preferences in the bedroom. Theyre parents now and now there’s potential that any statement made will be used to taunt them and their kid. Her parents are being called gold diggers.
For those that demand an explanation, them staying silent is their only option. It’s better for them to let you believe what you like because the truth will destroy either one of them individually or both of them.
I agree. Which is why the language used in the clubs statement is quite important in my opinion.
I expand on the language used in my reply to golden. The phrases they use give the impression that they have seen more than the public and that posted on social media doesn't provide a full picture.
Like you said there are no winners no matter what they do. And I'm sure what happened with Caroline Fleck is very much in their mind too. Releasing more information in the public domain is not in either parties best interests.
That's a great post
@BigDerek I understand your flow of logic there. In time I could see this case and maybe Sancho's appearing as case studies in training or textbooks for lawyers, police, victim advocates. It has so many variables. I hope the new family finds peace and wellbeing away from the UK. That, at least, seems to be a good decision for all.
Thank you Kelly for taking the time to read my post. I, like everyone else, don't have any additional information available to know exactly what went on. And I'd like to emphasis my first post where I said I can't be certain he is guilty. I'm simply highlighting some unanswered questions which make it difficult me to be certain what has gone on. I don't think that makes me a horrible or disgusting person. Surely in the era of misinformation and fake news, trying to challenge and question the unknowns is what we should all be doing rather than just taking one account of an incident and basing our views solely on that. For me that is a much more dangerous way to think.
This post is disgusting, and I've quoted only the worst of it. What the feck does any of that have to do with the veracity of an accusation of violence and threats of rape. And it offers no mitigation for the violent behaviour depicted in the audio and visuals. Why have you mentioned this at all.
That others are quoting, liking and egging you on is a fecking sorry state.
Dumbo, I disagree and I don't appreciate the language you're using here either.
If you disagree with my post then I welcome you to challenge points made and debate it in a respectful manner. But name calling is not productive and I don't appreciate you labelling people as disgusting or cynical because you hold a different opinion.
I respect your right to disagree with my post and challenge it but labelling people as cynical or disgusting is getting personal in my opinion and I'd much prefer if we could conduct any debate in a more mature fashion.
: