Mason Greenwood | Officially a Marseille player

[duffer]

Offended colours of race wasn’t trying to stop JT from playing for Chelsea though were they.

I suppose minorities believing in a certain privilege makes things more acceptable and also is probably the reason why so many people feel like their matter should be heard when it comes to Greenwood. However that’s probably a social debate worth having on a different forum.

Of course they were. For Chelsea and England. People still have opinions about jobs JT should or shouldn't get more than a decade later.

 

[MackRobinson]

If we're talking hypotheticals, you can see the difference between being a 'spoiled moron' and a violent rapist though, right?!

When did Mason Greenwood become a rapist? Genuine news to me.

 

[TheReligion]

You are right, British courts are famously good at prosecuting rape…Just have a google of rape conviction statistics in the UK and stop peddling bullshit about how he would have been convicted if there was any shred of evidence. Your views are a complete fabrication of reality, and it’s genuinely sad to see people so misinformed.

Luckily not all people who voted for Brexit are fans of rapists, however right wing they may be, so im confident the club will make the right decisions.

He was never charged with rape was he?

There’s a lot of misinformation being spread by both sides of this argument within this thread. Not sure if it’s deliberate or by mistake.

 

[Dan_F]

Never once said he would be convicted. Reading comprehension is essential.
Before it can go to court the police have to present evidence to the prosecution service and they decide if it goes to court.

They didn’t have enough evidence to even press charges. Get a grip on reality and stop being judge, juror and executioner.

Also never said conservatives are fans of rapists. Mason Greenwood is not a rapist under the laws of this land. Conservatives don’t believe in cancel culture, especially via social media. Since this kid has not broken any laws, a conservative would likely want the kid to go back to his job. However there is his skin colour to take into consideration. He might want to send him to Rwanda.

Stop it.

Charges or conviction. The statistics on rape in the UK are harrowing. 68k rapes were reported in 2022, only 2% ended up in charges. Thats not convictions, charges. I’d be willing to bet there was more evidence in the Greenwood case than the vast majority of rape reports, and still no charge. The statistics match that opinion.

No idea what you’re blabbering on about with Rwanda.

 

[SecondFig]

The only thing I disagree with is that you say he raped her. We don’t know if he followed through on his disgusting threat. You should amend that

Yeah, you're right - will do

 

[Mainoldo]

Of course they were. For Chelsea and England. People still have opinions about jobs JT should or shouldn't get more than a decade later.

It holds little to no weight though doesn’t it. This club literally flipped a decision based on an article and a few people willing to leave the club. I would be shocked if JT didn’t have the same impact at the clubs he was representing even as an assistant manager.

 

[Dan_F]

He was never charged with rape was he?

There’s a lot of misinformation being spread by both sides of this argument within this thread. Not sure if it’s deliberate or by mistake.

Attempted rape. Are you suggesting that the statistics around charges for attempted rape would be more favourable? If anything, I would imagine that attempted rape is far harder to prove and lead to less charges/convictions than 2%.

I’m not even sure why I’ve opened the thread to be honest. Until he can explain the bruises and recordings, I’m not sure how he can expect anyone to support him.

 

[pauldyson1uk]

Playing professional sport on a huge salary in Spain. Not exactly any meaningful sort of punishment/penalty/revenge/retribution. He lost some sponsorships entirely through his own actions, so cry me a river.

Greenwood apologists are just upset that their shiny sporting toy has been taken away, so they are doing mental gymnastics trying to justify getting him back. It is a terrible look (to be generous).

absolutely bang on.

 

[TheReligion]

Attempted rape. Are you suggesting that the statistics around charges for attempted rape would be more favourable? If anything, I would imagine that attempted rape is far harder to prove and lead to less charges/convictions than 2%.

I’m not even sure why I’ve opened the thread to be honest. Until he can explain the bruises and recordings, I’m not sure how he can expect anyone to support him.

I simply stating he wasn’t charged with rape and there’s absolutely no suggestion he raped her, otherwise he’d of been charged with rape and not attempted rape.

I’ve also seen other posters calling him a rapist which is untrue and misleading.

 

[duffer]

It holds little to no weight though doesn’t it. This club literally flipped a decision based on an article and a few people willing to leave the club. I would be shocked if JT didn’t have the same impact at the clubs he was representing even as an assistant manager.

JT actually going to court and being found not guilty helped him for sure.

If Greenwood had gone to court and all the pics and the audio explained and he was found not guilty then he'd currently be getting ready for the Forest game.

Also let's be honest, what people think Greenwood did to his girlfriend is viewed by most people as worse than what people think JT did to Anton Ferdinand.

 

[RedDevilUnited369]

Charges or conviction. The statistics on rape in the UK are harrowing. 68k rapes were reported in 2022, only 2% ended up in charges. Thats not convictions, charges. I’d be willing to bet there was more evidence in the Greenwood case than the vast majority of rape reports, and still no charge. The statistics match that opinion.

No idea what you’re blabbering on about with Rwanda.

That maybe the case. You need evidence to present in any crime to present to the prosecution. Rape is in a lot of cases “your word against mine” with no evidence to back up the claim. This is usually because the victim doesn’t report it in time. Which is understandable. No victim blaming from me.

You think there was more evidence available in this case. This implies the police just didn’t want to do their job. I find that to be highly unlikely considering Greenwood is high profile compared to the rest of us. He can’t buy his way out of “violent rape” if there is evidence to back it up.

And as previously stated, they don’t need his girlfriend’s compliance in order to press charges. And before you say she was pregnant, she wasn't when the police concluded their investigation.

I knew the Rwanda joke would go over your head. Never mind.

 

[SonOfFergie]

He probably did it. Young, rich, stupid, probably beaten her, probably forced himself on her. Had consensual sex with her before, had consensual sex after with her so it seems they have since reconciled. They are raising a baby together. Give him a second chance. Bring him back.

 

[Dan_F]

I simply stating he wasn’t charged with rape and there’s absolutely no suggestion he raped her, otherwise he’d of been charged with rape and not attempted rape.

I’ve also seen other posters calling him a rapist which is untrue and misleading.

Reply to them if you feel that way. Had nothing to do with my post.

 

[TheReligion]

Reply to them if you feel that way. Had nothing to do with my post.

I don’t feel any way. Just wondered why people are suggesting Greenwood is a rapist, whilst discussing rape convictions and cases, when he was never accused of that.

 

[Pickle85]

When did Mason Greenwood become a rapist? Genuine news to me.

Sorry, accused attempted rapist.

 

[golden_blunder]

If you refer to my original suggestion, the quote is such staff "are welcome to go and help the overall headcount cut". The club does not need to sack them which to your point is illegal anyway. They can resign as they deem necessary. The club also reported as having bloating headcount that needs restructuring, staff resigning themselves would help reduce the number of layoff for the restructuring plan.

Again, this is all based on that we consider football as the priority . If you think that is not the case in Greenwood case, then we need to agree to disagree.

Why would they resign? Especially members of the ladies soccer team and coaching structure.
secondly why would anyone resign and miss out on possible redundancy payments

 

[RedDevilUnited369]

I’d like to state that I realise this is a very triggering subject. And my opinions may offend. I apologise if so.

It may come out later in life that the girlfriend is stuck in an abusive relationship and couldn’t escape at this time.

I find that reality to be very sad if true. If she can’t get out there is little hope for our daughters.

Even with the public support of half the Utd fanbase she can’t get out? Very sad.

I prey that is not the case.

 

[chocolate cloud]

Why are ye all discussing hypothetical stuff that doesn't concern any of ye or have anything to do with ye?

Just sell him and be done with it. Maybe put in a "can't play against us clause" if that's allowed? It's strange though. If we can't have him, why should any other team?

I bet there was tonnes of weird stuff that happened 1990 - 2012 before social media came along that would have caused uproar and made ye question whether certain players should play for us.

 

[Member 123428]

You are right, British courts are famously good at prosecuting rape…Just have a google of rape conviction statistics in the UK and stop peddling bullshit about how he would have been convicted if there was any shred of evidence. Your views are a complete fabrication of reality, and it’s genuinely sad to see people so misinformed.

Luckily not all people who voted for Brexit are fans of rapists, however right wing they may be, so im confident the club will make the right decisions.

This is such a bad and harmful argument. You can't take away the right of one man to be presumed innocent because of conviction rates of other cases out of context. Is your solution to automatically give a guilty verdict because other cases haven't ended in a prosecution?

If the audio evidence is the slam dunk some people are stating it is, the CPS could have pressed ahead knowing they'd be prosecuting a high profile target. It would be great PR. The reason they didn't was clearly because they knew the whole audio was not enough for a guilty conviction, despite what those who have less experience, intelligence and evidence say.

Here lies the problem. You don’t go back to someone who attempted to rape you, and proceed to get pregnant.

A lot of victims can’t get away from their oppressors, this girl had the backing of the police, her family, Man Utd, victim support groups…way more than most victims.

She chose to stay. It’s very hard to press forward with attempted rape charges given she clearly doesn’t feel like a victim of attempted rape.

I disagree. Between 10-33% of victims do go back to their accusers, so whilst it is uncommon it does happen. I haven't seen any stats which show what proportion go on to suffer more DV in those relationships (although any number is obviously too many), nor whether those individuals were happy or safe having done so, so wouldn’t want to speculate whether that was the right or wrong decision for them.

I'd hazard a guess that factors which lead to greater return to DV abusers would be people who are in more vulnerable situations, such as addiction, lack of economic/ housing freedoms/ possibilities or custodial challenges. But that would be entirely speculative and unless there is any evidence to the contrary, I’d be more comfortable assuming there is no specific reason that explains why up to a third of DV victims go back to someone who has abused them.

 

[RedDevilUnited369]

This is such a bad and harmful argument. You can't take away the right of one man to be presumed innocent because of conviction rates of other cases out of context. Is your solution to automatically give a guilty verdict because other cases haven't ended in a prosecution?

If the audio evidence is the slam dunk some people are stating it is, the CPS could have pressed ahead knowing they'd be prosecuting a high profile target. It would be great PR. The reason they didn't was clearly because they knew the whole audio was not enough for a guilty conviction, despite what those who have less experience, intelligence and evidence say.



I disagree. Between 10-33% of victims do go back to their accusers, so whilst it is uncommon it does happen. I haven't seen any stats which show what proportion go on to suffer more DV in those relationships (although any number is obviously too many), nor whether those individuals were happy or safe having done so, so wouldn’t want to speculate whether that was the right or wrong decision for them.

I'd hazard a guess that factors which lead to greater return to DV abusers would be people who are in more vulnerable situations, such as addiction, lack of economic/ housing freedoms/ possibilities or custodial challenges. But that would be entirely speculative and unless there is any evidence to the contrary, I’d be more comfortable assuming there is no specific reason that explains why up to a third of DV victims go back to someone who has abused them.

I agree with all you’ve said.

 

[flameinthesun]

This is such a bad and harmful argument. You can't take away the right of one man to be presumed innocent because of conviction rates of other cases out of context. Is your solution to automatically give a guilty verdict because other cases haven't ended in a prosecution?

If the audio evidence is the slam dunk some people are stating it is, the CPS could have pressed ahead knowing they'd be prosecuting a high profile target. It would be great PR. The reason they didn't was clearly because they knew the whole audio was not enough for a guilty conviction, despite what those who have less experience, intelligence and evidence say.



I disagree. Between 10-33% of victims do go back to their accusers, so whilst it is uncommon it does happen. I haven't seen any stats which show what proportion go on to suffer more DV in those relationships (although any number is obviously too many), nor whether those individuals were happy or safe having done so, so wouldn’t want to speculate whether that was the right or wrong decision for them.

I'd hazard a guess that factors which lead to greater return to DV abusers would be people who are in more vulnerable situations, such as addiction, lack of economic/ housing freedoms/ possibilities or custodial challenges. But that would be entirely speculative and unless there is any evidence to the contrary, I’d be more comfortable assuming there is no specific reason that explains why up to a third of DV victims go back to someone who has abused them.

Very good post.

 

[Valencia Shin Crosses]

This is such a bad and harmful argument. You can't take away the right of one man to be presumed innocent because of conviction rates of other cases out of context. Is your solution to automatically give a guilty verdict because other cases haven't ended in a prosecution?

If the audio evidence is the slam dunk some people are stating it is, the CPS could have pressed ahead knowing they'd be prosecuting a high profile target. It would be great PR. The reason they didn't was clearly because they knew the whole audio was not enough for a guilty conviction, despite what those who have less experience, intelligence and evidence say.



I disagree. Between 10-33% of victims do go back to their accusers, so whilst it is uncommon it does happen. I haven't seen any stats which show what proportion go on to suffer more DV in those relationships (although any number is obviously too many), nor whether those individuals were happy or safe having done so, so wouldn’t want to speculate whether that was the right or wrong decision for them.

I'd hazard a guess that factors which lead to greater return to DV abusers would be people who are in more vulnerable situations, such as addiction, lack of economic/ housing freedoms/ possibilities or custodial challenges. But that would be entirely speculative and unless there is any evidence to the contrary, I’d be more comfortable assuming there is no specific reason that explains why up to a third of DV victims go back to someone who has abused them.

Best post I’ve seen yet.

 

[Dan_F]

This is such a bad and harmful argument. You can't take away the right of one man to be presumed innocent because of conviction rates of other cases out of context. Is your solution to automatically give a guilty verdict because other cases haven't ended in a prosecution?

If the audio evidence is the slam dunk some people are stating it is, the CPS could have pressed ahead knowing they'd be prosecuting a high profile target. It would be great PR. The reason they didn't was clearly because they knew the whole audio was not enough for a guilty conviction, despite what those who have less experience, intelligence and evidence say.

I’m absolutely not saying we should give an automatic guilty verdict, especially if we are talking about this in a legal context. The bar for prosecution was not met, and that has been explained in plenty of detail by so many different sources. For example, the audio recording can easily be put down to role play by the alleged victim, which would leave the prosecution with basically nothing to go off. For all we know, she might have done this when she refused to be a witness.

The reason I wouldn’t be happy to accept him back into the club currently is the lack of explanation around this. I don’t think it’s acceptable to say simply that he wasn’t prosecuted, or that his partner has gone back to him therefore we should be okay with it, because we’ve seen that statistically these things happen a lot in types of rape cases regardless. For what it’s worth, what you’ve said in reply to the other person, is part of the reason why I don’t really hold much weight in the argument that she has forgiven him, so he’s innocent.

The bar for prosecution, and the bar for being a footballer for Manchester United in 2023 are different. I’m afraid since this situation has audio and images, they need to be explained before many will accept him back.

 

[Cloud7]

Conspiracy theory, United give Getafe money to “buy” MG. Getafe get to keep 20%. United look slightly better with that portion of fans who don’t want to lose him for free

Sums of money like that would leave a paper trail of some sort, would they not? If Getafe suddenly found that kind of money for Greenwood specifically I would certainly be suspicious of something.

I doubt he’ll be moving anywhere permanently in Jan given everything needs to be run past INEOS from now. Unless they’ve already decided to cash in early for FFP.

Id guess they’ll wait until summer though, as is being reported, so they have all the key football people in place before making a decision either way.

Again, reports suggest a return to United is also possible. No one really knows.

I wonder if a sale with buy back option could be offered.

Yeah it is difficult to really guess because no one knows what Jim and Blanc will do about this as they are total unknowns in a United sense.

 

[SilentWitness]

If the audio evidence is the slam dunk some people are stating it is, the CPS could have pressed ahead knowing they'd be prosecuting a high profile target. It would be great PR. The reason they didn't was clearly because they knew the whole audio was not enough for a guilty conviction, despite what those who have less experience, intelligence and evidence say.

This isn't necessarily true. Though they could have gone ahead with prosecution they could also have ran the risk of the witness being a hostile witness which could harm the chances of prosecution and thus despite what the extended audio may have been (even if more of the same) they may have weighed up how likely it is they would have succeeded in court and dropped it due to that.

 

[JagUTD]

This was because key witnesses pulled out, and unspecified 'new evidence came to light'. The CPS' primary remit is not establishing innocence or guilt, it's ensuring a case is prosecutable.

Besides, we are not contingent on 'court'. That is still Mason Greenwood on those recordings threatening his partner with sexual violence.

There is no mitigation for that. The player has got to go.



Quite.

The idea Greenwood is the victim of a 'witch-hunt' is absolutely pathetic and predictably ignorant.



United's finances include a 1.25 billion investment for a quarter of the club, followed by other investments to do up the stadium. Financial opportunities are lucrative and abound at United.

If the finances are precarious, why waste thousands on 'constructing PR' for abusers like Greenwood when we could just get on cultivating staff who don't threaten their partners with rape when sex isn't forthcoming.

I'd imagine the investors and advertisers (we need them for money) would be risk adverse, too, so why all this risk for one player who has never won a trophy with us, and, again, threatens people with rape.

Witness pulled out months prior to the case being dropped. It may have been the reason but the timing is off as the investigation continued for months after the witness retracted their statement.

 

[sizzling sausages]

Witness pulled out months prior to the case being dropped. It may have been the reason but the timing is off as the investigation continued for months after the witness retracted their statement.

Does the timing coincide with it being known she was pregnant and they were officially together again? I genuinely don't know.

 

[Overhaul FC]

Would be interested in a poll to see how the general feeling is today amongst supporters. I think they'll bring him back over the summer for next season.

The only way I can see the club pulling this off would be if he signs up for perceived rehabilitation and some sort of programme that can be viewed as him learning a lesson about the incident.

 

[Yorke to Cole]

Does the timing coincide with it being known she was pregnant and they were officially together again? I genuinely don't know.

There was a report that there was clothes being purchased online for her and that it was his card being used. That may have been a breach of his bail conditions. The report may not be true? It was from a tabloid and it did say they were not whether it was Greenwood himself making the purchases or he gave her his card details.

I think that was in the January last year, it was February charges were dropped and then in March they said the lady was expecting his child. I think it was July she gave birth.

 

[sizzling sausages]

There was a report that there was clothes being purchased online for her and that it was his card being used. That may have been a breach of his bail conditions. The report may not be true? It was from a tabloid and it did say they were not whether it was Greenwood himself making the purchases or he gave her his card details.

I think that was in the January last year, it was February charges were dropped and then in March they said the lady was expecting his child. I think it was July she gave birth.

So the new evidence/material could be that she told the CPS she's pregnant and they're back together and she was no longer willing to back up her previous statement? The timelines are feasible from what is known?

I know either @Redlambs or @BenitoSTARR have went into detail about bail breaches before but I can't remember the exact details.

 

[GledTheRed]

You need help

Why?

 

[Rood]

Does the timing coincide with it being known she was pregnant and they were officially together again? I genuinely don't know.

No - we dont exactly when she become pregnant but probably Nov '22, some 8 months after she asked for the investigation to be stopped.

Mason Greenwood Timeline:
30 Jan '22 - audio & pics released on Instagram, Greenwood arrested and suspended by MUFC
2 Feb '22 - Greenwood released on bail after 3 nights in prison, investigation ongoing
April '22 - Alledged victim asks CPS to stop investigation, but they continue
15 Oct '22 - Greenwood arrested on suspicion of breaking bail conditions (i.e. meeting with the alledged victim)
17 Oct '22 - Greenwood charged with attempted rape and assault, remanded in custody
19 Oct '22 - Released on bail after appeal (2 nights in prison)
21 Nov '22 - Rebailed, trial date set for November 2023
2 Feb '23 - CPS announce all charges dropped
Feb '23 - MUFC begin internal investigation
14 Jul '23 - Greenwood and his partner announce birth of child on Instagram
21 Aug '23 - MUFC internal investigation concludes Greenwood is not guilty but will continue career elsewhere
1 Sep '23 - Greenwood signs for Getafe on loan

 

[BenitoSTARR]

Guys can anyone help find any evidence of JefffromHK supporting Greenwood apart from the last two pages of him supporting Greenwood?

Sorry hun couldn’t find anything.

So the new evidence/material could be that she told the CPS she's pregnant and they're back together and she was no longer willing to back up her previous statement? The timelines are feasible from what is known?

I know either @Redlambs or @BenitoSTARR have went into detail about bail breaches before but I can't remember the exact details.

Very possible given the pregnancy was full term the dates of conception line up with the dates Greenwood was found at her address in breach of bail. They also align perfectly with times one would get a Dr confirming a pregnancy is realistically viable and her withdrawal.

He breached bail and had sex with his alleged victim of coercive controlling behaviour and sexual assault/rape. She fell pregnant, withdraws and the case is dropped as CPS don’t see a realistic prospect of conviction with her withdrawal of co-operation.

If she wasn’t a victim here why would she take so long to withdraw as a witness?

I know many will just dismiss the fact the bail breach lines up with conception dates but that is an irrefutable fact. Greenwood broke bail conditions and had sex with his alleged victim. Now you have to consider why would someone under court orders to have no contact go out of their way to maintain phone and then physical contact with their accuser?

 

[sizzling sausages]

No - we dont exactly when she become pregnant but probably Nov '22, some 8 months after she asked for the investigation to be stopped.

Mason Greenwood Timeline:
30 Jan '22 - audio & pics released on Instagram, Greenwood arrested and suspended by MUFC
2 Feb '22 - Greenwood released on bail after 3 nights in prison, investigation ongoing
April '22 - Alledged victim asks CPS to stop investigation, but they continue
15 Oct '22 - Greenwood arrested on suspicion of breaking bail conditions (i.e. meeting with the alledged victim)
17 Oct '22 - Greenwood charged with attempted rape and assault, remanded in custody
19 Oct '22 - Released on bail after appeal (2 nights in prison)
21 Nov '22 - Rebailed, trial date set for November 2023
2 Feb '23 - CPS announce all charges dropped
Feb '23 - MUFC begin internal investigation
14 Jul '23 - Greenwood and his partner announce birth of child on Instagram
21 Aug '23 - MUFC internal investigation concludes Greenwood is not guilty but will continue career elsewhere
1 Sep '23 - Greenwood signs for Getafe on loan

Sorry my post doesn't make it clear but I'm asking does the timing of the case being dropped coincide with when she would have fell pregnant, not when she pulled out of the case.

Sorry hun couldn’t find anything.

Very possible given the pregnancy was full term the dates of conception line up with the dates Greenwood was found at her address in breach of bail. They also align perfectly with times one would get a Dr confirming a pregnancy is realistically viable and her withdrawal.

He breached bail and had sex with his alleged victim of coercive controlling behaviour and sexual assault/rape. She fell pregnant, withdraws and the case is dropped as CPS don’t see a realistic prospect of conviction with her withdrawal of co-operation.

If she wasn’t a victim here why would she take so long to withdraw as a witness?

I know many will just dismiss the fact the bail breach lines up with conception dates but that is an irrefutable fact. Greenwood broke bail conditions and had sex with his alleged victim. Now you have to consider why would someone under court orders to have no contact go out of their way to maintain phone and then physical contact with their accuser?

Thank you!

 

[BenitoSTARR]

No - we dont exactly when she become pregnant but probably Nov '22, some 8 months after she asked for the investigation to be stopped.

Mason Greenwood Timeline:
30 Jan '22 - audio & pics released on Instagram, Greenwood arrested and suspended by MUFC
2 Feb '22 - Greenwood released on bail after 3 nights in prison, investigation ongoing
April '22 - Alledged victim asks CPS to stop investigation, but they continue
15 Oct '22 - Greenwood arrested on suspicion of breaking bail conditions (i.e. meeting with the alledged victim)
17 Oct '22 - Greenwood charged with attempted rape and assault, remanded in custody
19 Oct '22 - Released on bail after appeal (2 nights in prison)
21 Nov '22 - Rebailed, trial date set for November 2023
2 Feb '23 - CPS announce all charges dropped
Feb '23 - MUFC begin internal investigation
14 Jul '23 - Greenwood and his partner announce birth of child on Instagram
21 Aug '23 - MUFC internal investigation concludes Greenwood is not guilty but will continue career elsewhere
1 Sep '23 - Greenwood signs for Getafe on loan

She would have conceived during the nail breaches. Court ordered bail breaches.

3 months pregnant and case gets completely dropped… early pregnancy scans take place 10-14 weeks approximately 3 months after conception.

 

[BenitoSTARR]

But despite Greenwood breaching court ordered bail conditions to have sex with his alleged victim of coercion, attempted rape and actual bodily harm I’m sure there’s many a poster willing to ignore he broke the law to have sex with his victim that resulted in her being pregnant and the case being dropped 3 months later at the time of which they would be having an early pregnancy scan.

That’s all just co-incidence…

 

[JagUTD]

Does the timing coincide with it being known she was pregnant and they were officially together again? I genuinely don't know.

No idea. It only came out when the case was dropped that the witness, who wasn't named but almost certainly is her had retracted her statement some time earlier.

 

[Wibble]

Yes. Amazing how we hold football players to a higher standard than we hold ourselves.

Its also amazing, fans sing about 'going on the piss with George Best', worshipped and idolised yet has a long history of alcoholism and Domestic Violence against women.

Nice one....

Peak whataboutism. A player from the 70s was a drunk with form for DV, albeit not as bad as Greenwood as far as we know, so let's forget Greenwood's behaviour. Nice one.

 

[Wing Attack Plan R]

So: have the police ever said why they didn’t prosecute, or did the United investigators ever say what they found out, or did the girlfriend/wife ever say how what we all saw and heard was not what we all saw and heard?

 

[Tyrion]

So: have the police ever said why they didn’t prosecute, or did the United investigators ever say what they found out, or did the girlfriend/wife ever say how what we all saw and heard was not what we all saw and heard?

United never explained the information they claimed to have that wasn't public. I'm skeptical it exists.

As for the police, wasn't there someone who changed their testimony meaning there was a lack of evidence?