Mason Greenwood | Officially a Marseille player

Status
Not open for further replies.
No the case falls apart because of the key witness. Not this mythical recording which exonerates him.

Pray tell, why don't they release this "longer version" so we can all understand the context and then judge him more fairly?

Because it doesn't exonerate him nor does it add ANY context.

Or it may exonerate him of the very specific things he was charged for but still make clear he's the sort of horrible, violent bully nobody should want at their football club.
 
I don't want to get into the debate of whether he's actually guilty or innocent (because I don't know), but there's a million reasons one could speculate on regarding the wider context of this voice recording snippet, which was specifically cut from a much longer recording with the express purpose of making Greenwood look like a rapist. These have already been widely covered in this thread, e.g. role-playing, Greenwood being pestered whilst sleepy and unaware of what he/she were actually saying etc..

What the actual feck

Of course, the civil court is an official instrument of our legal system, so we have to respect its rulings. If the day comes when Greenwood is found guilty in such a court of law, then I will change my opinion.

This is about whether he should play for Man United again though. It's about our opinion. We aren't making a legal ruling. I was drawing a parallel as on the balance of probabilities I've made a decision on what I believe happened. My opinion is never going be legally binding so the burden of proof required in a court of law doesn't come into it.
 
So I have been thinking about this and my best guess is that this is the situation:

The internal investigation established that his girlfriend, the alleged victim, has since withdrawn her allegations and together they are clear in their version of events - Greenwood did nothing wrong.

As far as the club is concerned, from an HR perspective they can do nothing more than take that at face value. To disagree with that version of events would be calling their employee a liar with no evidence otherwise and would be calling the alleged victim a liar with no evidence to support it.

In any normal situation that would result in Greenwood returning to work. This isn’t a normal situation though and unfortunately for Greenwood, the advice and opinions of other parties matter as it’s about setting the right example.

Charities that support domestic abuse victims and public figures who are knowledgeable on the subject have already made it clear that Greenwood getting back with his girlfriend is not evidence enough and can in fact be a continuation of his controlling and coercive behaviour. The evidence we have seen and heard is much stronger than Greenwood persuading his partner that everything will be better this time.

So the bar is set much much higher. If there was irrefutable evidence which cleared Greenwood then the club would have been quick to release it but they haven’t. So it’s likely it’s just verbal testimony which while United themselves know they cannot contest, they also know that it will not pass public scrutiny. So here we are.
 
I don't want to get into the debate of whether he's actually guilty or innocent (because I don't know), but there's a million reasons one could speculate on regarding the wider context of this voice recording snippet, which was specifically cut from a much longer recording with the express purpose of making Greenwood look like a rapist. These have already been widely covered in this thread, e.g. role-playing, Greenwood being pestered whilst sleepy and unaware of what he/she were actually saying etc..

What the actual feck is this?
 
I was just pointing out that it doesn’t work like that in U.K.

Also, as has been stated many times - the audio is being taken as hard evidence for many in here - it’s been stated repeatedly that THAT is what makes this case different to Antony / Ronaldo etc.

Most DV charges won’t have evidence like that - yet the CPS, after hearing more of that recording than you or I have, doesn’t consider it as worth pursuing.

Likewise, Utd categorically stated that after hearing the entire recording, they too believe him to be innocent of every charge levelled at him.

My point is that two very different bodies - one of which exists to make prosecutions - has heard / seen MORE than the general public and have both concluded that there isn’t a case here. And this was a very high profile case that the CPS will not have wanted to walk away from.

I just think the club should let him go cleanly and draw a line under the whole thing. It’s been awfully handled and I feel they’ve strung the family along and then essentially caved into the opinions of people who they’re essentially claiming know very little about it.

Pointing that out without the full context of how rare it is in domestic abuse and intimate partner violence cases to proceed without the victims support feels disingenuous to me.

The recording is morally wrong yet without further evidence it is not a crime. As such it's absolutely irrelevant that the CPS didn't decide that alone was enough to prosocute. The only way they could without the alleged victim providing their witness statement and supporting the investigation would be if a crime was taking place in that recording which is not the case.

Do you not believe that Richard Arnold who has had huge negative press for the rumours of reinstating MG wouldn't benifit for stating things that made that decision appear more moral?

Whilst Greenwood and Utd's reputation was torn down for 18 months and so much was leaked do you not find it strange that nothing compelling was leaked that remotely indicated what the public had being untrue or there being context that made it palatable?
 
Well yeah but I mean that's the scenario I'm talking about. The evidence is what it looks like and she's forgiven him. Could purely be down to love. I think it naive to believe his money hasn't played a role. Which as I say I wouldn't judge her on. It's a life changing decision to leave or stay with him.

I wouldn't call it love.
 
Of course we need to review the system, but do you really think it's right for us to take it upon ourselves and ruin the life of Greenwood on the basis of mere suspicion?

The thing is that this case is not 'mere suspicion.'

Greenwood is on tape saying incredibly terrible things. The tape is damning in itself. Neither United nor Greenwood have denied that he said those things, and they have not offered an alternative explanation of the tape. They have merely asserted that the alternative explanation exists, and is good.

Imagine if the tape wasn't of Greenwood saying those things. Instead, it was a tape of Mason Mount saying that all foreigners should be kicked out of England. That England should be white. Down with [insert racial expletive here].

Would you accept the club saying "Mount has offered us an alternative explanation of the contents of the tape and we are satisfied with it. But it's all very complicated"? Would you start thinking "well maybe Mason Mount is a big Eric Clapton fan and he was just doing an impression of a little known mid-concert rant from a 1976 bootleg?"


"Ah, but one is a crime and the other isn't." Well no one's prosecuting Greenwood were, this is a thread about him transferring out of Manchester United, his life isn't "ruined."
 
Last edited:
So am i to understand that when someone makes a mistake in life he cannot have a second chance ?
When people go to jail they get a chance afterwards to rebuild their life.

This was mishandled so badly by United!
A mistake? It's not like he ran a red light or forgot to show up on time....
And he's getting another chance - second chances does not mean no consequences though.
 
Apologies if I misunderstood you. I also think she is the victim and my initial comment was a flippant response to someone who seems to think that everything can be handwaved away because she has forgiven him.

Tis grand. I can see how you could have misinterpreted me as backing up the other person.
 
I think we are talking about different things. You are talking more general. I am talking more specific.

I do not think that a case involving domestic violence getting dropped because the alleged victim does not want to move forward is not "as close you can get to being exonerated." Domestic violence cases get dropped because of this all the time.

Greenwood being 'innocent in the eyes of the law' is largely irrelevant here, United did not restore him in February when the case was dropped.
I was responding to an opinion which was given as “lawyer opinion”. He tried to give his legal opinion on this. His exoneration also was meant to be in front of law. Calling him innocent is not misleading in legal terms.

Personal opinion might be different on this but legal opinion is that he is innocent. That “lawyer” made it sound like his innocence in front of law is also debatable
 
So I have been thinking about this and my best guess is that this is the situation:

The internal investigation established that his girlfriend, the alleged victim, has since withdrawn her allegations and together they are clear in their version of events - Greenwood did nothing wrong.

As far as the club is concerned, from an HR perspective they can do nothing more than take that at face value. To disagree with that version of events would be calling their employee a liar with no evidence otherwise and would be calling the alleged victim a liar with no evidence to support it.

In any normal situation that would result in Greenwood returning to work. This isn’t a normal situation though and unfortunately for Greenwood, the advice and opinions of other parties matter as it’s about setting the right example.

Charities that support domestic abuse victims and public figures who are knowledgeable on the subject have already made it clear that Greenwood getting back with his girlfriend is not evidence enough and can in fact be a continuation of his controlling and coercive behaviour. The evidence we have seen and heard is much stronger than Greenwood persuading his partner that everything will be better this time.

So the bar is set much much higher. If there was irrefutable evidence which cleared Greenwood then the club would have been quick to release it but they haven’t. So it’s likely it’s just verbal testimony which while United themselves know they cannot contest, they also know that it will not pass public scrutiny. So here we are.

So basically you think she lied and he is protecting her.

I mean, it's the only other option than him being guilty. But then he does speak to have done things wrong in this relationship, and that means she did it out of anger.
 
Awful decision

Greenwood should be playing for United again, INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY - the BS court of public opinion is not how to make a decision.

Bring Back Greenwood.

If Manchester United are going to convict someone who’s no longer even being charged, perhaps it’s time for me to move away from them as a supporter.

I categorically DO NOT support the decision to kick out Greenwood.

GreenwoodIn.
#Jazmodoout
 
As much as I was leaning towards not wanting him to leave, after the charges were dropped etc.. And the difference in narrative between him and Ronaldo, I'm actually glad he has been forced out because of all his feckwit top G style cultists losing their minds.
 
Anyone trying to say Greenwood is innocent needs to go listen to those recordings, would you let him date your daughter? If the answer is no, then stop defending him.
 
Talk about not being a morning person.
:lol:

You just knew there'd be some absolutely mental takes from newbies once this topic was put back on the United forum and they're not disappointing.
 
So the detailed claims of a woman claiming he did xyz abroad isn’t evidence?

No it is not until it is corroborated.
You can't just not play someone because someone said they did xzy, anyone can come and said you did xyz.

In the case of Greenwood there was actual evidence in the form of a recording, that's the difference here.
Now its unlear whats actually happened in this case because of what both the CPS and United have said, but its in no way comparable to the situation with the Arsenal player as far I can see
 
Awful decision

Greenwood should be playing for United again, INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY - the BS court of public opinion is not how to make a decision.

Bring Back Greenwood.

If Manchester United are going to convict someone who’s no longer even being charged, perhaps it’s time for me to move away from them as a supporter.

I categorically DO NOT support the decision to kick out Greenwood.

GreenwoodIn.

Off you pop then.
 
A mistake? It's not like he ran a red light or forgot to show up on time....
And he's getting another chance - second chances does not mean no consequences though.
Still, the whole situation was mishandled by the top echelon at United.
First they said one thing and when some people came out protesting they bowed their head -weaklings!
 
Yeah if we really believed he was innocent and on the path of redemption then we shouldn’t have let him go. Send him out on loan, follow his progress and ensure that he’s a new and reformed man before taking him back. On the other hand if he’s committed those heinous acts and is the scumbag we all thought he was, then make it clear and send him packing.

The way it comes across, it’s hard to know what our investigation entailed but on face value it appears as though the decision is purely based on the backlash which is typical of us - ameteurish.
Wording of the statement makes it sound like we will be sending him out on loan and doors are not completely closed on this.
 
Pointing that out without the full context of how rare it is in domestic abuse and intimate partner violence cases to proceed without the victims support feels disingenuous to me.

The recording is morally wrong yet without further evidence it is not a crime. As such it's absolutely irrelevant that the CPS didn't decide that alone was enough to prosocute. The only way they could without the alleged victim providing their witness statement and supporting the investigation would be if a crime was taking place in that recording which is not the case.

Do you not believe that Richard Arnold who has had huge negative press for the rumours of reinstating MG wouldn't benifit for stating things that made that decision appear more moral?

Whilst Greenwood and Utd's reputation was torn down for 18 months and so much was leaked do you not find it strange that nothing compelling was leaked that remotely indicated what the public had being untrue or there being context that made it palatable?

Totally agree. It would be almost impossible to proceed without the victims input into the case. The tape and images are not enough to convict.

Richard Arnold is playing both sides. He is trying to justify that the fact he was a rizla paper away from reinstating Greenwood last week.

The club is so leaky, especially on things they want out there. Had there been "extenuating circumstances" they would be out there by now.
 
Same as plenty of other careers. You can't be banned from the profession and you can earn back your career but your company doesn't have to keep you and suffer the flak for your actions. Shame that he turned out to be such a scumbag but lets be honest at this point, the whole club is rotten at its core. Theres something deeply wrong at every level right now.
 
That's your opinion but why not?
He's trying to build a new life with his partner and baby and she forgave him too.

The fact that domestic abuse victims frequently struggle to completely leave and often rekindle relationships with their abusers does not make abuse morally acceptable.

I am not sure how many more times this needs to be said.
 
Yeah if we really believed he was innocent and on the path of redemption then we shouldn’t have let him go. Send him out on loan, follow his progress and ensure that he’s a new and reformed man before taking him back. On the other hand if he’s committed those heinous acts and is the scumbag we all thought he was, then make it clear and send him packing.

The way it comes across, it’s hard to know what our investigation entailed but on face value it appears as though the decision is purely based on the backlash which is typical of us - ameteurish.
Going by the statement, we clearly wanted to bring him back and I remember there was talk of him doing a live interview on opening week.
 
Wording of the statement makes it sound like we will be sending him out on loan and doors are not completely closed on this.

Knowing our club and the love for keeping the "value of our assets", a loan seems likely.

Even if they wanted to sell, our incompetency probably wouldn't allow us to do so in less than two weeks.

Entire club is filled with dithering cnuts for decision makers.
 
Unfortunately there is a huge proportion of men who hate and despise women.

To see a young man physically abuse and sexually assault his GF, stay with her, father a child with her, marry her, all the while likely continuing to abuse her while he still gets to collect a large paycheck every week while playing for one of the largest football clubs in the world, then he becomes their ultimate hero, a top G so to speak.

To them he's getting one over on women and getting to give them joy by playing for their team. He's taking what's his, or whatever he wants and he faces no consequences for his actions because he's an alpha.

It's sad and bleak.

As others have stated, if he was a shit player in the reserves, it would be simple for the club to fire him and the supporters to turn their backs on him. When it comes to online arguments between people, the truth is that football doesn't really mirror normal day to day standards. At the end of the day, you're talking about people for whom supporting United means weekends ruined when we lose 2-0 to Spurs and want United to sign Mbappe etc, get bought by Qatar. Ultimately, it bears as much semblance to Football Manager as real life, so it becomes difficult to accept the fact that a player who many believed would be United's greatest of his generation has had his career ended because he is a total scumbag.

It's less to do with hating women per se and more to do with being unable to look beyond a football team that people have invested hours upon hours in arguing over, no matter the charges.

I think people who look at the pictures, understand the history of Greenwood prior to this offence - e.g. that weird video he did in his car and then being sent home early from the England camp in Iceland - know full well that he could never play football in UK again, yet alone for Manchester United. But that doesn't mean that an unbelievable talent hasn't been extinguished and that has clearly resulted in quite a lot of people lashing out with hyperbolic statements.
 
I think you may have misunderstood the CPS’s statement. They didn’t say they was no case, they said there was ‘no longer a realistic prospect of conviction’ - that’s very different from saying there was no case, given the standard of proof for a criminal conviction is ‘beyond reasonable doubt’. It’s almost impossible to reach that standard in a case like this without the complainant’s cooperation, which she withdrew. Hence the CPS discontinuing the case.

I’m not misunderstanding the CPS’ statement at all.

I’m just not going to pretend that the fact the CPS dropped the entire matter, on such a high profile case, counts for nothing when they are a professional body that exists to make prosecutions.

And I’m not going to deny to myself that they know more about the case they dropped than anyone else.

DV / SA (he was charged with BOTH) cases do get to court with the main witness pulled out of them - it does happen. And this was a very high profile case that the CPS wouldn’t want to be seen to be dropping.

It doesn’t mean ‘he’s innocent’, but it certainly shouldn’t just be tossed aside because it goes against current public feeling.
 
The club is just so badly run. To release such a statement is a real indictment. Not a lot to like about the club at the moment.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.