Denying the actual allegations far supersedes the fact of it's him in the audio or not.
Not really, as if the question is about morals, perhaps people do not wish to have an individual at the club who is like that (inflamed further by images).
He's denied the claims made against him, which means the audio has a different context to the one that we're assuming.
Were Greenwood to have been convicted there would be no qualms. With charges dropped, the victim proactively supporting him since restarting his career and Greenwood focusing purely on rehabilitation I believe he has every right to play wherever he can including United.
Trial by social media is no reason to rip up a contract. Trial by the courts is. I think that's a fairly established line in the sand that should be stuck to or we open up Pandora's box on who should and who shouldn't be playing whenever there's an accusation of anything, regardless of the veracity of evidence that is posted in the public domain.
- If there is a different context it would be quite easy to come out and say that. There hasn't been, which is very odd. If it were me in that situation I'd make sure damn well that the correct context of the situation was being told.
Many victims of DV go back to their partners.
There is no such thing as trial by social media.