There are definitely situations in which it could have been taken out of context. I have first hand experience of this and it 100% could happen. The idea shouldn’t be mocked just because what you heard sounds horrible. Although personally I’m not exactly convinced that’s what’s happening here.
Mason Greenwood | Officially a Marseille player
- Thread starter keithsingleton
- Start date
- Status
The thing is, if it was role-play or some kind of sexual fantasy or whatever, which are really the only fairly harmless possibilities, how the feck have they let it get to the point where we are now after all this time? I mean, they chose the current shitshow over a few weeks of mild embarrassment over their sexual kinks? Nah, I'm not buying that.
And that's if we only had the audio, but we also have the pictures. How likely is that all that shite was consensual?
I wouldn’t bother mate. It takes a minimal amount of common sense to work out what’s happening in the recording. Many just don’t want to see it, and would prefer to accuse others of ‘wanting things to be black and white’ etc.
Exactly. Like it's more awkward to be branded a rapist than to come clean about their kinks.
Thank you for actually explaining yourself and engaging.
I don't really want to go into detail on why I disagree with your definition there - but it does make me understand your reasoning. I think we should leave that there on such a sensitive topic.
I agree, and my point is it shouldn't be such guess work if he's clean enough to warrant returning. I think we're in agreement there's a lot of unknowns and for you that means you can't say he's guilty, but for me that means he is in no position to be seen as innocent until it's explained properly. I'm not condemning him to prison.
I just don't think you can use that as a challenge, if you say "you can't be certain of what you've heard" as a rebuttal. Someone can say they can't be certain back for any of your points?
I'll refer to my first point.
I do get what you're exploring, I'd just be wary of trying to over analyse on this. Unless you're planning to refer to specific examples, you're in danger of talking very generically and also reaching conclusions without a lot to base them on.
Again, I get your opinion and It's a fair point on the longer excerpt if that is the new evidence the CPS is talking about. The longer excerpt doesn't necessarily mean the whole recording either. I don't know who the original witnesses are, could the extra one could have been a family member? Again if they were witnesses they were originally being used to prosecute Mason, so two people originally were going on record against him and now they're not? What's changed? This is why the lack of detail is damaging for everyone. It could absolve him as much as it could incriminate him or her.
I think I understand your point of view, I personally need far more explanation of what's gone on, before I can ever be confident supporting someone like Mason.
Probably just shouting into the void here but I find this thread baffling. So much animosity being generated over a settled question.
The argument over whether he did it and the essay long posts of people justifying why they feel one way or another seems like the ultimate exercise in pointlessness. There seems to be a core delusion within these arguments that somehow if they can just persuade other posters to their point of view, which clearly is never going to happen, then this may impact the decision over Mason's future. The reality is that Mason will never play for this club again and is going to be sold in the summer and all of the rest is just noise.
The argument over whether he did it and the essay long posts of people justifying why they feel one way or another seems like the ultimate exercise in pointlessness. There seems to be a core delusion within these arguments that somehow if they can just persuade other posters to their point of view, which clearly is never going to happen, then this may impact the decision over Mason's future. The reality is that Mason will never play for this club again and is going to be sold in the summer and all of the rest is just noise.
We actually don't know what's going to happen in the summer, which is one of the many reasons people are continuing to debate. He could be sold, he could be brought back. The club have already tried to bring him back once and its not outside the real of possibility they may do it again, especially if they can't get the fee they want and the new regime assess that the likes of Antony, Pellistri, Rashford and Sancho need to be shown the door.
Yes exactly
And I agree that it won't be easy and that's surely part of the reason it hasn't happened already.
At the moment we dont even know if they actually want to come back anyway.
The club made a mess of the statements and timings last year, hopefully things will be better managed by the new regime.
Well I am not going to contribute to what I just railed against so I will just say that I would be utterly astonished at any other outcome than a full sale in the summer and you can all feel free to quote me on this when the time comes. Frankly there is more chance of SAF coming out of retirement to be our next manager and the class of 92 lacing them up again next season than there is of INEOS starting their first ever transfer window with the biggest media shitstorm in the clubs history by bringing back Mason.
That may be the prevailing logic - INEOS wouldn't dare begin their tenure by bringing Greenwood back, but we won't have any evidence of what their position is until they actually take one. There was also a prevailing sentiment 9 months ago that the club would sell the player last summer, but they instead attempted to bring him back before loaning him to Getafe. Given what transpired late last summer, its fair to say United have an exponentially higher chance of bringing him back than the class of 92 lacing it up again.
As someone who has reasonable experience in this realm (not wanting to delve too much in to it here), it doesn’t sound like CNC. It gave me bad vibes. Not trying to condemn based on something that could be misconstrued, however. I’m open to the idea it’s a misunderstanding, but if the club ever wants to bring him back they need to be fully transparent with the fans, the women’s team, everyone in fact, as to why this isn’t as it seems. Seems to me there’s an awful lot to this story that we don’t know.
It's a huge leap from a verbal threat to committing the physical act. Whether in this example or just in general. Here the threat was deemed credible enough to warrant an extensive investigation but ultimately the case collapsed.
Even in fits of rage most people come to their senses before crossing lines you can't come back from. That's why physical acts of extreme violence are relatively rare.
Even if this was the case and it was role play, at this point there's nothing to be gained by either of them coming out and saying that was the case.
If Greenwood claimed this was the case publicly nobody is going to change their view.
If Haley claimed it was the case she opens herself up to the very worst the internet has to offer, whether it's trolls claiming they always knew she was lying or people claiming she is being coerced into making such statements.
Whether individually or together, at this stage claiming it was role play or anything similar serves no purpose publicly.
Out of a sense of protecting her, she will very likely have been advised not to speak about it in any capacity.
Or protecting him. I think it's probably more likely that protection of HIM is higher on everyone's agenda, his included.
Maybe but given a section of the public view him quite negatively, it's not working particularly well.
Given the images, audio and his behaviour (breaking bail conditions etc) out in the public domain I would say he's doing just fine.
I mean I don’t think it really is.
But even accepting that - within the recording is the statement ‘stop putting your dick there’ in distressed tones, followed ultimately by ‘push me again one more time and watch what happens’
The idea that this wasn’t a physical encounter is pretty hard to stand over. Clearly he was forcing himself on her to the point she was pushing him away, with him threatening violence.
Painting it as some sort of throwaway threat to rape, only, if such a thing exists is not aligned with the actual content.
Again, people should listen to the tones of their voices and the words they are using, it is, clearly, what it is.
That’s because there’s an incredible amount of daft people pretending they can’t even imagine how a longer clip could change the tone/event, when clearly there’s a tonne of ways a longer clip could change everything.
Seriously? There is no way any longer clip could somehow change what we'd already heard. He was clearly violent towards her in the bit that we did hear, the pictures released proved what he's capable of, so nothing that comes after is going to change that.
You're forgetting the "lol, jk" defence
Yeh exactly, are people seriously saying that in the longer clip that MG is turning around to her and going "Aha I'm only joking, I really had you going there didn't I?!" and her responding "Oh mason, you got me again with your silliness!" , or something equally ridiculous? C'mon ffs, have a bit of common sense people.
And I would have gotten away with it too if not for you meddling kids!
It could be attempt to rape. Its not damning evidence which convinces me without reasonable doubt.
When I'm stating my opinions, I'm basing them on all the evidence and information we have rather than looking at each piece individually. I don't necessarily think that's a bad way to analyse things when there's such serious accusations. It would be like me suggesting he's innocent because of Man Utds investigation while ignoring the audio. You have to look at everything as a whole and when I do, I don't find it damning that he attempted to rape but I also don't rule out the possibility either.
Thanks! Its been an enjoyable discussion and it's always good to hear different perspectives on things.
I agree that in terms of a defence "I can't be certain" isn't going to hold up. I'm not trying to say he's innocent from the recording or defend it. But I can't be certain that I'm listening to attempted rape either.
The 2nd, or more, witnesses do add another twist to the case. I think knowing so little on them makes it impossible to speculate about but it does again highlight how little we know compared to those involved in investigations.
Thanks for the insight into your opinions and for taking the time to answer my questions. If I was to try to summarise. You've not seen enough to convince you he's innocent while I've not seen enough to convince me he's guilty.
I think with time more people will soften on Greenwood if he stays out of trouble. If Ravel Morisson can play in England with his history and still.be relatively well received then with time so can Greenwood.
Why do people insist on applying criminal court level evidentiary standards to forming personal opinions in this case? It's baffling.
Probably because we’ve many times previously (and one case very recently) seen really damning evidence completely unravel when put under cross examination. Let’s be honest here, the majority were absolutely convinced of Depp’s wife beating, yet once in a courtroom the story was turned completely around.
Probably because the CPS cited not just the withdrawal of the key witness but also “new evidence” and because his employer also made claim to evidence (longer tape) that hasn’t been made ccessible to the public.
Some people in that situation don’t feel comfortable with pretending they know the full story.
Not sure how many hundreds of times this needs explaining to you.
I'm not sure how many times you need explaining to you that the vast majority of people make most of their decisions without imposing these sorts of evidentiary requirements.
Also, the Depp case is a terrible comparison as he was the plaintiff, suing her for defamation. Greenwood has shown absolutely no desire to do the same.
If the extended version of the audio would indicate that it's all a role play or that it's all taken out of context then why wasn't it released to the public. Why the silence from Greenwood and the victim side?
There aren't many things you could be acused of that are worse than (attempted) rape. Surely you would do anything you could to clear your name!
I think it actually happend, she uploaded the evidence and later regretted doing so for whatever reasons I don't want to speculate about.
United sent him on loan to get him out of the firing line and are hoping that after the loan the public opinion has calmed down enough to bring him back.
From Uniteds point of view it's probably more important to not lose out on a 70M(or whatever his value is) talent than whether or not he's actually innocent.
It is nothing to do with criminal conviction. I don't want an utter scumbag like him anywhere near the club. It is that simple.
And I want neither Heard nor Depp anywhere near the club either.
It is complete bollocks. Very few DV or sexual assault (or similar) cases progress when the complainant withdraws cooperation with the prosecution.
I don't want Ryan Giggs near the club
Or Ronaldo. Or George Best. Or some other player that has nothing to do with United and did bad stuff.
Exactly. But it is a bit easier with Best.
Yup. Cos he was old. Almost like he was from a different time...In that we would have to dig him up to re-sign him?
Yep,
Absolutely, yet another dishonest line of argument that needs exposing. Like the irrelevant comparisons to other players (or actors) in some way implicated in DV cases in the past.
Yeah I don’t necessarily think it’s that, I’m not saying it is, but there’s just something about the overly confident mocking of any explanation that exonerates him that rubs me the wrong way. Anyone making such a statement definitely doesn’t have all the details. Given what we’ve heard I don’t assume it’s been misinterpreted or taken out of context, but I will be open minded to the idea it could have been. It’s not impossible. I’d agree that if there was more to the recording we’d probably have heard it by now, but it’s all uncomfortable (and private) stuff to put out there. Probably a whole lot about this we don’t know. He’d have to be innocent for me to want him back at United though.
I understand. I would also agree that there is a lot we don't know about. But to me, altough not impossible, an alternative explanation is just very unlikely. Of course its uncomfortable talking about your private (sex) life and you don't want people to know everything about it, however it's surely even more uncomfortable being accused of being a rapist and have people talking and speculating about you years later. Makes no sense to me to be so ashamed of what actually happend that you not try to clear things up and to prefer the second scenario.
We can imagine it, but we can also immediately dismiss explanations like the below as completely unrealistic:
I mean, come on.
Laughable if it wasn’t so bleak.
- Status