FortunaUtd
Full Member
We know enough.What it really comes down to is nobody is prepared to say 'I dont know'. Everybody thinks their view must be the final and most authoritative. Either I think he did it and he must be punished, or I don't think he did and should be let off. Nobody will admit they don't know all the evidence and could be wrong, or accept that people who have seen all/more of the evidence think he's innocent.
I was not asking youYep. In fact, this "court" doesn't even actually exist. It's about people putting there opinions out there and pressuring things like clubs and businesses into doing what they perceive as the right thing.
The case was dropped because the alleged victim withdrew her statement and some new material came to light, after Greenwood broke bail to meet up with her. So he wasn't summoned to court as the case was no longer strong enough and never had to stand trial. However there has been no explanation of the evidence in the public domain, so people are rightly opinionated on that. And others (like the poster you are responding to) who doesn't want those opinions shared.
But I can drop the faux-naive Socratic dialogue act, since the poster I actually quoted will never get there even with the most well-intentioned discoursive ste-by-step assistance..