Yeah, that's a bit concerning mate.
I don't believe I'm alone in that mindset. We'd tackle the court backlogs in this country in a day with some of you.
Going to break this out as I think the long format is a bit confusing.
It's not offended me, I am just surprised that you went back and listened and didn't think it was damning. What are you defining as rape or attempted rape? I can see what you mean that the transcript looks harsher, but in the cold light of day, that is what he said.
I'm just not sure how we can process additional information when the original information hasn't been processed. The fact we still have lots of questions and additional information hasn't done anything to resolve those, make the additional information a bit moot.
There's a lot of "presume" and "believe" here, which if you are doing, how can you come to a conclusion of their motives?
I don't think you understood my point here, I meant hiding behind the fact you can't 100% say what it is. You can't say you don't see the audio as damning as you don't know the full context (I assume that's why you don't think it's damning), but when you present your understanding of the parents statements as fact. They could have drunk the kool aid of a remorseful Mason, their child may have asked them to do it, they may believe it's better they stay together but know what happened. We can't answer it, because again, it doesn't address the original questions about the audio and pictures.
I can only assume she was, if not, the MUFC investigation would have been a farce. I believe she asked not to - why is also unknown. No, if you want it to be objective and find the truth. If you want to absolve Mason of wrong doing, then sure. Again we don't know any of that and her not taking part is curious - yet again more unanswered questions.
I agree why he didn't at that point. Post the investigation internally and case being dropped, the statement was mealy. I can understand the reasons why they haven't, I just don't buy that he's not had a right to reply, he's just chosen to be vague and then stay silent on the matter.
I think this will probably be where we part ways in the conversation. Unless you can explain why, coherently.
Nope, that's my mistake and misread what you said. Apologies.
That is what Myers Briggs does though, I just think it's not a good thing to use, because it certainly looks like you're implying someone with strong feelings (emotional, or whatever you want to say) isn't able to be as logical as someone without. If you're not, I don't really understand who you're saying is thinking logically vs emotionally. Or are you just broadly speaking? If you are, I don't really understand what point you're trying to make.
I am confident he threatened to rape her and I'm not confident he didn't abuse her, based on what I know. That's more than enough to not support him to be back at the club.
To a degree, but I'd also ask why this information wasn't brought forward earlier? Of course if it all comes out that is a deep fake, a big plot by his partner, the GMP, the CPS to send him down, it would very much rock my world view and I'd change the way I look at things. I don't really understand how your hypothetical comes to pass.
Damning for me means it strongly suggests they're guilty. I don't think listening to it makes me confident they're guilty of attempted rape. Doesn't mean it may not be happening in that audio, just means I'm not convinced or that I have strong feelings it's happening from what I listened to.
Attempted rape is if someone clearly intended to sexually penetrate the victim without consent. As an athlete I imagine Mason is quite strong compared to the accuser too. Listening to that was I convinced I'm listening to someone forcefully attempt to penetrate without consent? I'm not.
There is alot of presuming and believing because its very much alot of guess work. I could use similar language to others and say "he did this/that" but that implies I know - I don't. You've presented other possible explanations yourself with "may have", "could have", "may believe", "may have asked them to". I think we're aligned in terms of the language we used as neither of us know.
I don't think I have presented the parents statement as fact though as you've literally just spoken about the language I've used when giving possible explanations. I was challenging this for people who have decided a verdict because they've obviously processed this when coming to a decision and either dismissed it as not being instrumental or came to a conclusion thst collaborates with their verdict.
In terms of the investigation I did do a bit more research into it last night and came across some interesting points I didn't notice before. I'll raise this at the end of the post.
I would agree that he's chosen to be vague and stay silent on the matter.
I think I've expanded on why I don't think I'm listening to rape earlier in this post. I think if the audio alone was enough evidence then the case could have proceeded? I'm not convinced that the case dropping was solely down to a statement being withdrawn either. Which I'll expand on at the end. And a statement provided by the CPS or Man Utd (I'll find it and provide it) did say the audio was part of a longer recording. I presume the content in this longer recording may also offer reasoning and an explanation for the decisions made from the investigation.
The Myers Briggs us probably a poor example. Honestly I find that stuff interesting and I remember it discussing thr different thinking methods in the past. I googled it and found the first result discussing the difference in the way people think. I then quickly jotted down the shortest explanation I could as it wasn't meant to be a big part of the post. It may be a shit point. But an autistic person compared to someone with alot of emotional intelligence will process this differently. Whether that makes a big difference in terms of wider population and how they process it I'm not sure. I'm quite mathematical and logical myself and I prefer black and white over subjective topics. So I presume due to how my mind works thst my thinking is likely a factor. I don't think my method of thinking is better or makes me better equipped than anyone else in analysing this. But it may explain a difference in how we reach our conclusions.
See that's interesting because I'd be the other way round and think there's more chance of domestic abuse over rape. But that's just from how I've read it.
In terms of the investigations. There are things surrounding it which add further questions for me.
Richard Arnold said, "The alleged victim requested the police to drop their investigation in April 2022"
Mason Greenwood was charged in October 2022. I can't find anything online which says when the witness withdrew their statement. Could there statement have been withdrawn in April 2022 before charged or does anyone have a source which says when it was?
When the case was dropped we were told by the CPS:
"“In this case a combination of the withdrawal of key witnesses and new material that came to light meant there was no longer a realistic prospect of conviction. In these circumstances, we are under a duty to stop the case."
Key witnesses is plural. So someone aside from the accuser also withdrew a statement. I think that's a key bit of info. In addition it says "and new material came to light".
Unless the new material was instrumental in changing the decision it wouldn't have been mentioned. So this is a key piece of evidence in the case.
Going back to the key witnesses comment. Again I can see the accuser tried to stop the investigation in April 2022 - is that when their statement was also withdrawn or is there anything else which gives an indication when it was withdrawn?
Then between October and February new material and removal of a secondary witness (and potentially the accusers witness statement if it wasn't revoked when they tried to cancel the investigation in April 2022) found the case dropped? Either way the case was never dropped solely due to the accuser removing their statement like many try to imply. It was dropped due to multiple witnesses removing their statement and new evidence.
As for the new evidence, Richard Arnold did say:
"We were provided with alternative explanations for the audio recording, which was a short excerpt from a much longer recording, and for the images posted online."
So that's confirmation that the audio was cropped in black and white there. So no I cannot be confident that a short exert I listened to was an attempted rape. Especially upon learning that additional evidence, possibly this longer recording, came to light which stopped the case alongside witness(es) removing their statements.
Now unless of course the CPS is lying about additional evidence influencing their decision. And if Richard Arnold is also lying about the recording being an exert from a larger recording. Then I can't help but think what is on this longer recording is critical in whether or not attempted rape is happening. That alongside my doubts from listening to the recording is enough for the evidence to not be damning in my eyes.