Mason Greenwood | Please be respectful and stay on topic | Factual updates only

[Rhyme Animal]

4. We did not hear recordings of Ronaldo threatening to rape.

5. We did not see pictures with blood.

We did read Ronaldo’s own, detailed description and it did sound worse than what we heard with Greenwood.

It’s not a competition, but the question of why it’s very much one rule for Ronaldo and a very different one for someone else is valid.

Though it doesn’t vindicate Greenwood, in the slightest, it’s still on topic.

If those who claim they care for moral reasons really truly do - they should care about why that discrepancy occurred, it should bother them.

And some people do care.

But many others now are more locked into a binary - ‘win or lose’ contest with strangers on the internet and don’t really seem to care about the moral issues or the victims of these crimes that they’re supposedly so concerned about and are convinced of.

I’ve seen very little energy or discussion for Greenwood’s partner or little baby daughter now that he’s being literally rushed out of OT on the back of a traumatic media meltdown for them all.

I’ve not heard a single person in the media offer any actual support to them. Literally not one person.

Rachel Riley, who shouts and makes public ultimatums because she cares so much about vulnerable women, and then, after getting what she wants rather than reaching out to offer support or even acknowledge the existence of Greenwood’s partner, instead starts another public attack at Utd.

The Athletic who, almost single handedly, have made it so that the family are now being rushed into a move have never even acknowledged the existence of a vulnerable family while launching an unprecedented media campaign in the name of standing up for vulnerable women.

Again, these people / organisations are fine to want Greenwood out of Utd, I’m not saying they shouldn’t think that, but they don’t appear to really care about the issues they’re claiming to care about.

If the Greenwood case has made people realise how much they care about these issues, then the discrepancy in the treatment of, and acceptance of other players in the recent past should bother them and should be addressed.

 

[Denis79]

A reminder. The case was not dropped because the witness withdrew. This is incorrect. It continued for 10 months.

Don't make things up to fit your narrative. Violent cases aren't instantly dismissed when witnesses recant, even if it's the victim that does it.

 

[Tarrou]

None of us know what actually happened but, hes still innocent until proven guilty. Vilifying him as if he was a criminal is grossly unjust. In today's society and Utd being such a huge commercial club there was no chance for him. But the fact they did this BS 'internal investigation' which took so long and in the end decided to release Greenwood anyways means two thing for Mason: 1. He lost valuable time of his life and career in which he could've been playing for another club now and could've got his life back on track. 2. Because its been going on for so long it became such a big deal that the poor boy has no chance of ever playing for a PL team or another top European club. No team will take the risk now the matter has become too big. And this is all while he was never found guilty its just a matter of people making up their own stories... United should be consistent and release him for free ASAP. Surely we have to know profiting from sinners is immoral if we are in this sainthood business.

I agree, but is that legally possibly?

on what grounds could they terminate his contract? they just released a statement basically absolving him of anything illegal

it's a tricky situation now, unless Greenwood himself agrees to the termination, but I doubt he wants to walk away from that money in his current predicament

 

[Sky1981]

Innocent until proven guilty is when there is insufficient evidence and we're waiting for full court investigation.

When a person caught on tape hitting a storekeeper for example in recent NY video of assault. Even when he has not been formally indicted and charged officially we can safely assume he's guilty of the alleged charged.

The innocent until proven guilty is not about the knock of the judge gavel but untill sufficient evidence beyond reasonable doubt materialised.

People are so quick to dismiss actual physically existing evidence in favour of a trust me bro he's innocent but we cant show it.

If this is Liverpool Player, or some dodgy looking scruffy tattooed nobody looking like a thug would you offer the same benefit of doubt? Or if it's your daughter or loved one that's in H's position?

Ask yourself. What is you moral compass. Just because someone good at football and happened to play for your football team?

 

[JagUTD]

We did read Ronaldo’s own, detailed description and it did sound worse than what we heard with Greenwood.

It’s not a competition, but the question of why it’s very much one rule for Ronaldo and a very different one for someone else is valid.

Though it doesn’t vindicate Greenwood, in the slightest, it’s still on topic.

If those who claim they care for moral reasons really truly do - they should care about why that discrepancy occurred, it should bother them.

And some people do care.

But many others now are more locked into a binary - ‘win or lose’ contest with strangers on the internet and don’t really seem to care about the moral issues or the victims of these crimes that they’re supposedly so concerned about and are convinced of.

I’ve seen very little energy or discussion for Greenwood’s partner or little baby daughter now that he’s being literally rushed out of OT on the back of a traumatic media meltdown for them all.

I’ve not heard a single person in the media offer any actual support to them. Literally not one person.

Rachel Riley, who shouts and makes public ultimatums because she cares so much about vulnerable women, and then, after getting what she wants rather than reaching out to offer support or even acknowledge the existence of Greenwood’s partner, instead starts another public attack at Utd.

The Athletic who, almost single handedly, have made it so that the family are now being rushed into a move have never even acknowledged the existence of a vulnerable family while launching an unprecedented media campaign in the name of standing up for vulnerable women.

Again, these people / organisations are fine to want Greenwood out of Utd, I’m not saying they shouldn’t think that, but they don’t appear to really care about the issues they’re claiming to care about.

If the Greenwood case has made people realise how much they care about these issues, then the discrepancy in the treatment of, and acceptance of other players in the recent past should bother them and should be addressed.

Good post.

I think we have to be careful discussing her though as we can't name her. Same with the media.

 

[Kinsella]

I am genuinely worried this is why some people are supporting him. Because they think this is a common type of thing to say.

No, he’s just really realllyyyy reaching there…and making himself look very silly in process.

 

[Rhyme Animal]

Good post.

I think we have to be careful discussing her though as we can't name her. Same with the media.

Right, but people could subtly reach out if they wanted to - they wouldn’t need to name names.

 

[The Boy]

Don't make things up to fit your narrative. Violent cases aren't instantly dismissed when witnesses recant, even if it's the victim that does it.

Goodness me, not all violent cases are the same.

But if you have a case where the evidence comes predominently from one person and that person decides to withdraw their statement, then the CPS has to take a decision on whether it is worth prosecuting without that witness, as they have limited resources.

Nothing is being made up here as this is exactly what happened in this case. It doesn't prove guilt, but at the same time it certainly does not prove innocence either. It just means the CPS decided that they would not be able to prove the charges without reasonable doubt.

 

[Mourinhonista]

I do wonder what the heck is going on between the two of them.

Greenwood's footballing career seems to be totally in the mud and so is his reputation. No one seems to be interested in taking him on. His story has become huge and i don't think he can move quitely outside the house.

There's no smoke without fire and Greenwood comes across as a very bad person. However, he worked his whole life for his career and before it really took off, it's been snatched from the person who he's living with. He must be holding a grudge.

His girlfriend looked clearly upset when she put the pictures out. But she decided to stay. I wonder what their daily life is about. He's sitting there, can't go to work, surely he's unhappy and his girlfriend was probably mistreated. Must be hell in that house. Child protected services are hopefully watching closely.

 

[AFC NimbleThumb]

4. We did not hear recordings of Ronaldo threatening to rape.

5. We did not see pictures with blood.

So it isn’t what people do, it’s what the public see?

 

[GiveItToGi...nowait]

We did read Ronaldo’s own, detailed description and it did sound worse than what we heard with Greenwood.

It’s not a competition, but the question of why it’s very much one rule for Ronaldo and a very different one for someone else is valid.

Though it doesn’t vindicate Greenwood, in the slightest, it’s still on topic.

If those who claim they care for moral reasons really truly do - they should care about why that discrepancy occurred, it should bother them.

And some people do care.

But many others now are more locked into a binary - ‘win or lose’ contest with strangers on the internet and don’t really seem to care about the moral issues or the victims of these crimes that they’re supposedly so concerned about and are convinced of.

I’ve seen very little energy or discussion for Greenwood’s partner or little baby daughter now that he’s being literally rushed out of OT on the back of a traumatic media meltdown for them all.

I’ve not heard a single person in the media offer any actual support to them. Literally not one person.

Rachel Riley, who shouts and makes public ultimatums because she cares so much about vulnerable women, and then, after getting what she wants rather than reaching out to offer support or even acknowledge the existence of Greenwood’s partner, instead starts another public attack at Utd.

The Athletic who, almost single handedly, have made it so that the family are now being rushed into a move have never even acknowledged the existence of a vulnerable family while launching an unprecedented media campaign in the name of standing up for vulnerable women.

Again, these people / organisations are fine to want Greenwood out of Utd, I’m not saying they shouldn’t think that, but they don’t appear to really care about the issues they’re claiming to care about.

If the Greenwood case has made people realise how much they care about these issues, then the discrepancy in the treatment of, and acceptance of other players in the recent past should bother them and should be addressed.

Great post.

 

[Pickle85]

We did read Ronaldo’s own, detailed description and it did sound worse than what we heard with Greenwood.

It’s not a competition, but the question of why it’s very much one rule for Ronaldo and a very different one for someone else is valid.

Though it doesn’t vindicate Greenwood, in the slightest, it’s still on topic.

If those who claim they care for moral reasons really truly do - they should care about why that discrepancy occurred, it should bother them.

And some people do care.

But many others now are more locked into a binary - ‘win or lose’ contest with strangers on the internet and don’t really seem to care about the moral issues or the victims of these crimes that they’re supposedly so concerned about and are convinced of.

I’ve seen very little energy or discussion for Greenwood’s partner or little baby daughter now that he’s being literally rushed out of OT on the back of a traumatic media meltdown for them all.

I’ve not heard a single person in the media offer any actual support to them. Literally not one person.

Rachel Riley, who shouts and makes public ultimatums because she cares so much about vulnerable women, and then, after getting what she wants rather than reaching out to offer support or even acknowledge the existence of Greenwood’s partner, instead starts another public attack at Utd.

The Athletic who, almost single handedly, have made it so that the family are now being rushed into a move have never even acknowledged the existence of a vulnerable family while launching an unprecedented media campaign in the name of standing up for vulnerable women.

Again, these people / organisations are fine to want Greenwood out of Utd, I’m not saying they shouldn’t think that, but they don’t appear to really care about the issues they’re claiming to care about.

If the Greenwood case has made people realise how much they care about these issues, then the discrepancy in the treatment of, and acceptance of other players in the recent past should bother them and should be addressed.

The Ronaldo comparison is so disingenuous. Yes, he may have done what he's accused of but the facts are that the public evidence against Greenwood is far more damning (again, not at all discounting the fact that Ronaldo could well have done it). Correct me if I'm wrong but the only evidence against Ronaldo is her word against his and the transcript which he claims is fake. Evidence against Greenwood is a recorded tape of him threatening to rape her, alongside a number of rather disturbing pictures that she claimed show injuries he inflicted. He hasn't publicly claimed that any of this evidence was contrived, incidentally.

Quite apart from this, why are you so insistent on bringing Ronaldo in to this? Because it sure seems like you're doing it to make greenwood seem better by comparison.

I'll honestly never understand anyone who argues for someone at the centre of this, given everything that we know. Despite everything we've heard, seen and everything that he's yet to deny it MAY be fake (I think it's absolutely, categorically not) but if the key argument is 'we just don't know enough' then why not stay silent instead of arguing like you're a part of his defense team?

 

[Duafc]

So no one can actually give a rational or plausible explanation beyond BDSM or going on to flick water at her and give up on demanding sex with threats.

Which of course explains why she was recording in the first place, clearly not an isolated incident.

Instead we want to draw parallels to children saying they hate or want to kill their parents or siblings? I said that when I was maybe 9 I'll admit. Never when I was 19. Even so such a flippant remark is clearly not what is in that recording.

He wants to have sex with her and thinks he can demand it any anytime whether she wants to or not, he then appears to threatens her when she physically resists him.

Not being able to offer any alternative is one thing, to minimize the audio and act as if you are simply being fair to facts you don't know is something else.

I think the thread would work better if instead of people saying 'im happy he's gone but the club, Riley, Crafton, woke mob are a joke etc etc. They said, I know he very likely sexually and violently abused her but the club, Riley, Crafton, woke mob are a joke etc etc.

And this isn't about forgiveness or empathy, we absolutely should show empathy toward Greenwood and his partner, allow them to move on and collectively hope lessons have been learned and the family doesn't suffer more, especially with a child now involved. You can feel those things whilst still acknowledging the obvious reality of the situation and not trying to give an obscene benefit of the doubt that you can't even hypothetically explain in any convincing way.

 

[The Boy]

I’ve not heard a single person in the media offer any actual support to them. Literally not one person.

Rachel Riley, who shouts and makes public ultimatums because she cares so much about vulnerable women, and then, after getting what she wants rather than reaching out to offer support or even acknowledge the existence of Greenwood’s partner, instead starts another public attack at Utd.

This is actually very hard to do given the victim is entitled to anonymity for life and to break that publicly without her consent is illegal.

 

[Redlambs]

I’ve seen very little energy or discussion for Greenwood’s partner or little baby daughter now that he’s being literally rushed out of OT on the back of a traumatic media meltdown for them all.

You must have seen me talk about her and the child both in here and the former thread. Others have too. The media and celebrities won't because of the anonymity, no one knows if they have "reached out privately", though I do agree and have also said that the MPs and celebs going on about it is cynical.


But if you also think the CPS case was dropped rightfully and accept Greenwood and the club saying he is innocent of those charges, then you must also accept his own words when he says it's best to leave to start new. You must also accept then that whatever "mistakes" he made doesn't make him any threat to her or the child. Which is fair enough as an opinion, but it has to be consistent.

Though that then begs the question of what people think should happen to women who make false accusations of course, but I get that people don't want to broach that subject as they simply can't answer that in a way that makes doesn't raise issues with the "think of the woman" aspect.

All in all, it's the true innocent we know about I care most about. That child. And if being raised in a happy home by a young mother and father who have made huge mistakes but are going to learn from them, regardless of where they are and what they do, then that's the only outcome anyone should want.

So it isn’t what people do, it’s what the public see?

Careful now, you are doing exactly what you've been running around asking others not to.

And before you feign innocence, you know exactly what I mean.

 

[frostbite]

The Ronaldo comparison is so disingenuous. Yes, he may have done what he's accused of but the facts are that the public evidence against Greenwood is far more damning (again, not at all discounting the fact that Ronaldo could well have done it). Correct me if I'm wrong but the only evidence against Ronaldo is her word against his and the transcript which he claims is fake. Evidence against Greenwood is a recorded tape of him threatening to rape her, alongside a number of rather disturbing pictures that she claimed show injuries he inflicted. He hasn't publicly claimed that any of this evidence was contrived, incidentally.

Quite apart from this, why are you so insistent on bringing Ronaldo in to this? Because it sure seems like you're doing it to make greenwood seem better by comparison.

I'll honestly never understand anyone who argues for someone at the centre of this, given everything that we know. Despite everything we've heard, seen and everything that he's yet to deny it MAY be fake (I think it's absolutely, categorically not) but if the key argument is 'we just don't know enough' then why not stay silent instead of arguing like you're a part of his defense team?

It is standard whataboutism. And I bet that the people who are asking "what about Ronaldo" never asked to drop Ronaldo because of the rape accusations.

 

[shoom]

What Greenwood was saying CAN’T JUST BE EXPLAINED AWAY because it ISN’T NORMAL, but knowing that it’s a small snippet of a much longer clip coupled with knowing that those who’ve heard the longer clip have then dropped charges (CPS) or declared him innocent (Utd) does mean that the context is very likely quite different to what it appears from the snippet.

Small point, but Utd haven't heard the longer clip, they've received 'alternative explanations' for it and for the photos. As the victim didn't participate in the process it's a fair assumption that these explanations came from MG.

 

[AFC NimbleThumb]

Careful now, you are doing exactly what you've been running around asking others not to.

What would that be exactly?

And before you feign innocence, you know exactly what I mean.

What am I feigning innocence over & what do I know exactly? It’s almost as if you’re filling gaps that don’t exist.

Feel free to provide an example of your accusation so we can discuss further.

Andy Mitten sums this fanbase up perfectly every time.

 

[JediSith]

So no one can actually give a rational or plausible explanation beyond BDSM or going on to flick water at her and give up on demanding sex with threats.

Which of course explains why she was recording in the first place, clearly not an isolated incident.

Instead we want to draw parallels to children saying they hate or want to kill their parents or siblings? I said that when I was maybe 9 I'll admit. Never when I was 19. Even so such a flippant remark is clearly not what is in that recording.

He wants to have sex with her and thinks he can demand it any anytime whether she wants to or not, he then appears to threatens her when she physically resists him.

Not being able to offer any alternative is one thing, to minimize the audio and act as if you are simply being fair to facts you don't know is something else.

I think the thread would work better if instead of people saying 'im happy he's gone but the club, Riley, Crafton, woke mob are a joke etc etc. They said, I know he very likely sexually and violently abused her but the club, Riley, Crafton, woke mob are a joke etc etc.

And this isn't about forgiveness or empathy, we absolutely should show empathy toward Greenwood and his partner, allow them to move on and collectively hope lessons have been learned and the family doesn't suffer more, especially with a child now involved. You can feel those things whilst still acknowledging the obvious reality of the situation and not trying to give an obscene benefit of the doubt that you can't even hypothetically explain in any convincing way.

Thinking about it. The CPS have dropped charges, the club have said the recording was not as it appeared, the GF is back with him and they have a baby together, her family don’t have a problem with him.

Also I remember her dad’s comment at the time. Some thought it was strange, some thought he loved the money, not realising the dad is wealthy himself. But maybe he knew something we didn’t and don’t.

Then you have us the public. Know 5% of the situation but decide to be judge, jury and executioner.


Truth be told. Maybe that audio is real domestic abuse and possibly rape or threat of rape. She recorded it and posted to get justice. But she ended up protecting him because she loves him.

Maybe it’s the way they talk to each other and never leads to anything serious. But for whatever reason she recorded it that time and posted it. Anyone who says “people don’t talk like” how can you possible say?

It’s a whole lot of maybes.

 

[mitchmouse]

Innocent until proven guilty is when there is insufficient evidence and we're waiting for full court investigation.

When a person caught on tape hitting a storekeeper for example in recent NY video of assault. Even when he has not been formally indicted and charged officially we can safely assume he's guilty of the alleged charged.

The innocent until proven guilty is not about the knock of the judge gavel but untill sufficient evidence beyond reasonable doubt materialised.

People are so quick to dismiss actual physically existing evidence in favour of a trust me bro he's innocent but we cant show it.

If this is Liverpool Player, or some dodgy looking scruffy tattooed nobody looking like a thug would you offer the same benefit of doubt? Or if it's your daughter or loved one that's in H's position?

Ask yourself. What is you moral compass. Just because someone good at football and happened to play for your football team?

You couldn't be more wrong... innocent until proven guilty is until the very moment a jury (or in same cases a judge/magistrate finds someone guilty

 

[Redlambs]

What would that be exactly?

There's the feigning, predictable but very disappointing nonetheless.

Andy Mitten sums this fanbase up perfectly every time.

Feel free to drop levels, I don't have to follow. I had hoped you'd be better than that, as your words pretend you are, but ultimately you are no different.

In any case, reply however you want I simply don't care to comment any further on what you are doing in these threads.

 

[Dan_F]

This is actually very hard to do given the victim is entitled to anonymity for life and to break that publicly without her consent is illegal.

Not to mention the poster has no idea what has gone on behind the scenes. Moaning about other posters jumping to conclusions when he is doing the same thing about how the victim has been treated by Rachel Riley or the club.

 

[Iker Quesadillas]

I’ve seen very little energy or discussion for Greenwood’s partner or little baby daughter now that he’s being literally rushed out of OT on the back of a traumatic media meltdown for them all. I’ve not heard a single person in the media offer any actual support to them. Literally not one person.

What support do you expect people in the media to give? There's not a whole lot random people can do to support a potential domestic abuse victim who is still with their abuser. In fact, most recommendations of 'how to help people' in this situation are very passive.

If you mean 'support because your husband is out of a job', that is a standard that has never applied to anyone in football so everyone is just being consistent.

 

[astracrazy]

Innocent until proven guilty is when there is insufficient evidence and we're waiting for full court investigation.

When a person caught on tape hitting a storekeeper for example in recent NY video of assault. Even when he has not been formally indicted and charged officially we can safely assume he's guilty of the alleged charged.

The innocent until proven guilty is not about the knock of the judge gavel but untill sufficient evidence beyond reasonable doubt materialised.

I don't think you quiet understand how the justice system works or what innocent until proven guilty is.

Innocent until proven guilty is when there is insufficient evidence and we're waiting for full court investigation.
Innocent until proven guilty has zero to do with evidence. If there is insufficient evidence it's unlikely it would even go to trial, the court doesn't do the investigation.

When a person caught on tape hitting a storekeeper for example in recent NY video of assault. Even when he has not been formally indicted and charged officially we can safely assume he's guilty of the alleged charged.
Again, wrong. They could be charged for attempted murder (I don't know not seen the video) but only be found guilty of GBH due to evidence that comes to light during the trial, meaning the charge was downgraded. (I'm using extreme ends of the scale to make a point)

 

[AFC NimbleThumb]

There's the feigning, predictable but very disappointing nonetheless.

The fact you see a poster asking you to substantiate your claim as anything other than that says a lot about your approach to this discussion.

I had hoped you'd be better than that, as your words pretend you are, but ultimately you are no different.

In any case, reply however you want I simply don't care to comment any further on what you are doing in these threads.

Classic forum behaviour. Make statements & when asked to substantiate claim you’re above doing so.

I don’t know exactly what I have written to draw your ire but should you calm down & provide an example I will happily dial it back. I posed a question, in the exact manner countless posters have done in this thread, you selectively targeting that post above those you’ve ignored isn’t coincidence now is it? I’m not claiming innocence for asking a question, so the feigning is coming from you.

Perhaps you’ve got me mixed up with the countless posters you’ve been arguing with, it’s an emotive subject & things move fast in here so can understand if you’re struggling to keep up but let’s not make baseless accusations, it doesn’t help further the conversation as don’t comments like ‘what you’re doing’ when you actually don’t then tell me what you think that is.

 

[Redlambs]

The fact you see a poster asking you to substantiate your claim as anything other than that says a lot about your approach to this discussion.

Classic forum behaviour. Make statements & when asked to substantiate claim you’re above doing so.

I don’t know exactly what I have written to draw your ire but should you calm down & provide an example I will happily dial it back. I posed a question, in the exact manner countless posters have done in this thread, you selectively targeting that post above those you’ve ignored isn’t coincidence now is it? I’m not claiming innocence for asking a question, so the feigning is coming from you.

Perhaps you’ve got me mixed up with the countless posters you’ve been arguing with, it’s an emotive subject & things move fast in here so can understand if you’re struggling to keep up but let’s not make baseless accusations, it doesn’t help further the conversation as don’t comments like ‘what you’re doing’ when you actually don’t then tell me what you think that is.

I lied, one more comment:

Nice try. Bog standard technique, but I appreciate it. I look forward to reading and then ignoring your future attempts

 

[Sky1981]

I don't think you quiet understand how the justice system works or what innocent until proven guilty is.

Innocent until proven guilty is when there is insufficient evidence and we're waiting for full court investigation.
Innocent until proven guilty has zero to do with evidence. If there is insufficient evidence it's unlikely it would even go to trial.

When a person caught on tape hitting a storekeeper for example in recent NY video of assault. Even when he has not been formally indicted and charged officially we can safely assume he's guilty of the alleged charged.
Again, wrong. They could be charged for attempted murder (I don't know not seen the video) but only be found guilty of GBH in a court of law and by their peers due to evidence that comes to light.

…My mate, let’s call him Phil because that is his actual name, got accused of shoplifting in 1988. He was however, not prosecuted for this crime. The local shop suspected a few school children of shoplifting, they spoke to the school, the school spoke to the children and asked them to confess. Some did, Phil didn’t. He was not prosecuted.

Thing is, he definitely did do a load of shoplifting. Masses of it. I had at least 8 illegally obtained Mars Bars off him. He was, absolutely, unquestionably guilty of the thing he was accused of. And he’d done it a lot…absolute tons of shoplifting – it was not a one-off but a pattern of behaviour. And free Mars bars for me.

Interesting to note that there some people in the mailbox who would cheerfully describe Phil, who definitely did an absolute shedload of shoplifting, as ‘innocent’.

Innocent until proven guilty only applies in court of law where there are legal proceedings, as in the jury, the judge, the prosecutor must give a reasonable benefit of doubt case per case basis. That means that even if John Doe shoot a man dead in broad daylight, for the sake of legal proceeding he's still given a trial. But he's never assumed Innocence in the eyes of law, because he is detained and charged.

And the court can never claim "Innocence" they can only just come out with guilty or not guilty.

The burden of guilty is heavier and usually must be beyond reasonable doubt, so if you're deemed "Not Guilty" it still doesn't mean you're innocence.

A mob boss who killed the key witness could have been declared not guilty, but never innocence.

In the UK legal system people are either found Guilty or Not Guilty, it’s a binary verdict and the standard of proof is a certainty of guilt. Our legal system is built on a foundational principle that it is better to let some of the guilty walk free rather than convict an individual innocent.

If a jury is not certain the accused is guilty, they are instructed to find in favour of the defendant and return a not guilty verdict, even if they think there’s a 98% chance they committed the acts they are accused of.

And for the record, Hitler never go to trial. Innocent until proven Guilty?

 

[astracrazy]

And for the record, Hitler never go to trial. Innocent until proven Guilty?

I've got no time for you what so ever and not even going to read through your post properly to respond. All you have done is highlight your stupidity even more to me.

 

[AFC NimbleThumb]

We did read Ronaldo’s own, detailed description and it did sound worse than what we heard with Greenwood.

It’s not a competition, but the question of why it’s very much one rule for Ronaldo and a very different one for someone else is valid.

Though it doesn’t vindicate Greenwood, in the slightest, it’s still on topic.

If those who claim they care for moral reasons really truly do - they should care about why that discrepancy occurred, it should bother them.

And some people do care.

But many others now are more locked into a binary - ‘win or lose’ contest with strangers on the internet and don’t really seem to care about the moral issues or the victims of these crimes that they’re supposedly so concerned about and are convinced of.

I’ve seen very little energy or discussion for Greenwood’s partner or little baby daughter now that he’s being literally rushed out of OT on the back of a traumatic media meltdown for them all.

I’ve not heard a single person in the media offer any actual support to them. Literally not one person.

Rachel Riley, who shouts and makes public ultimatums because she cares so much about vulnerable women, and then, after getting what she wants rather than reaching out to offer support or even acknowledge the existence of Greenwood’s partner, instead starts another public attack at Utd.

The Athletic who, almost single handedly, have made it so that the family are now being rushed into a move have never even acknowledged the existence of a vulnerable family while launching an unprecedented media campaign in the name of standing up for vulnerable women.

Again, these people / organisations are fine to want Greenwood out of Utd, I’m not saying they shouldn’t think that, but they don’t appear to really care about the issues they’re claiming to care about.

If the Greenwood case has made people realise how much they care about these issues, then the discrepancy in the treatment of, and acceptance of other players in the recent past should bother them and should be addressed.

Hits many nails on many heads.

I lied, one more comment:

Nice try. Bog standard technique, but I appreciate it. I look forward to reading and then ignoring your future attempts

You’ve bolded parts of a post & dropped an emoji. This is not the mic drop you intended it to be.

 

[reelworld]

As for United being treated differently due to size & exposure, that’s the problem. United are the only part of this whole thing that stand to lose anything. MG has the pick of the rest of the football world bar 1 club, the football world who seem not to care half as much as people on here do because they never have done have a run at one of football’s premier talents at a cut price & United get what exactly? To say we did the ‘right’ thing whilst football has never been about doing so before & will not be again in the future. We’re continually told by rival fans & journalists how not special we are, how we’re just another club, so ask yourself what’s changed here.

You really think MG could pick and join any club the world?? I don't know about that.
If United can't improve without MG, that said alot more about United than about MG talent

 

[Redlambs]

You really think MG could pick and join any club the world?? I don't know about that.
If United can't improve without MG, that said alot more about United than about MG talent

Some people have greatly inflated his talent, as per the norm when players are missing and a club struggles whether as a result of that one absence or not.

It helps justify their view that this should only be about football and that since no one else does the right thing, and we certainly always haven't in the past, then we shouldn't even try now. All whilst moaning that we did the right thing (according to Greenwood himself) because "people" and yet those people are somehow the bad guys and not the one guy who told us he started all this nor the one who has told us he made the decision.

Make it make sense.

 

[AFC NimbleThumb]

You really think MG could pick and join any club the world?? I don't know about that.
If United can't improve without MG, that said alot more about United than about MG talent

No but he still has the the option to talk to & negotiate with the rest of world football as they do him, in what is a free market where as we have self imposed a restriction upon ourselves in an industry that does not punish moral misconduct.

I don’t look towards footballers to parent my child or set an example, I simply want them to play football & I think Manchester United Football Club should be making decisions that are in the best interest of the football, which in fairness after 18 months out this may finally end up being.

I agree wholeheartedly with the bolded part.

 

[DavelinaJolie]

One thing that I wonder about is the long term impact of this on Utd.

I remember how the aftermath of Ray Rice basically hung around the Baltimore Ravens for years, partly because of how they handled it. This is probably going to be a millstone around the neck of Utd for years, because they dithered and screwed around in the process.

 

[Roboc7]

So no one can actually give a rational or plausible explanation beyond BDSM or going on to flick water at her and give up on demanding sex with threats.

Which of course explains why she was recording in the first place, clearly not an isolated incident.

Instead we want to draw parallels to children saying they hate or want to kill their parents or siblings? I said that when I was maybe 9 I'll admit. Never when I was 19. Even so such a flippant remark is clearly not what is in that recording.

He wants to have sex with her and thinks he can demand it any anytime whether she wants to or not, he then appears to threatens her when she physically resists him.

Not being able to offer any alternative is one thing, to minimize the audio and act as if you are simply being fair to facts you don't know is something else.

I think the thread would work better if instead of people saying 'im happy he's gone but the club, Riley, Crafton, woke mob are a joke etc etc. They said, I know he very likely sexually and violently abused her but the club, Riley, Crafton, woke mob are a joke etc etc.

And this isn't about forgiveness or empathy, we absolutely should show empathy toward Greenwood and his partner, allow them to move on and collectively hope lessons have been learned and the family doesn't suffer more, especially with a child now involved. You can feel those things whilst still acknowledging the obvious reality of the situation and not trying to give an obscene benefit of the doubt that you can't even hypothetically explain in any convincing way.

My suspicion about the recording is that Greenwood gives up and the rest of the audio clearly shows he the walks away. That combined with testimony club received about what was happening during the section that was leaked meant they deemed he didn’t commit an offence. If the recording clearly exonerated him it would not have got to this stage.

It may well not have an isolated incident and fact club said they are said they don’t think he committed ‘what he is charged with’ was covering themselves.

He is never going to be conclusively innocent or guilty. I didn’t want him back and don’t trust him to stay out of trouble.

 

[Redlambs]

My suspicion about the recording is that Greenwood gives up and the rest of the audio clearly shows he the walks away. That combined with testimony club received about what was happening during the section that was leaked meant they deemed he didn’t commit an offence. If the recording clearly exonerated him it would not have got to this stage.

It may well not have an isolated incident and fact club said they are said they don’t think he committed ‘what he is charged with’ was covering themselves.

He is never going to be conclusively innocent or guilty. I didn’t want him back and don’t trust him to stay out of trouble.

This has been talked about before, and does indeed fit with much of the case. Which, as you allude to, begs the question of why she was recording him and documenting evidence.

We don't know he can't stay out of trouble though. I want to believe the best outcome will happen, despite his past including this, but that might just be because of my experiences and what I've seen and been counselled on about DV cases and coming out the other side still believing people can change.

We can but hope.

 

[FromTheBench]

The only person to blame is MG himself for getting into the mess.
there’s a learning here for young players, you’re in the spotlight, behave yourselves or risk facing the consequences
So you can blame the women, Riley, Crafton, your cat, the bin man, the mods, the Tories, the man on the moon, brexit, god, Satan, Mickey Mouse or whoever. The person who needs to look in the mirror and reflect is MG

Even if we assume he did all of that he was accused off.(which is not clear considering new evidence and not full picture being there.)

What do we want him from now? He's been out of football for 2 years almost or whatever, been in jail and admitted to some mistakes in his statement. Also his alleged accused has forgiven him enough to have a child with him no less. And it was a alleged crime in between those 2 only.

So now considering all evidence wont come out as it isn't going to trial and both accused living together don't want mud slinging,what do we want of him now?

I am asking this because I've personally seen a case like this (not to same level) where the alleged accused attempted suicide and that had many people introspect their actions wrt to satisfying the concious of the mob.

 

[Redlambs]

Even if we assume he did all of that he was accused off.(which is not clear considering new evidence and not full picture being there.)

What do we want him from now? He's been out of football for 2 years almost or whatever, been in jail and admitted to some mistakes in his statement. Also his alleged accused has forgiven him enough to have a child with him no less. And it was a alleged crime in between those 2 only.

So now considering all evidence wont come out as it isn't going to trial and both accused living together don't want mud slinging,what do we want of him now?

I am asking this because I've personally seen a case like this (not to same level) where the alleged accused attempted suicide and that had many people introspect their actions wrt to satisfying the concious of the mob.

And I've been involved in a case extremely similar to this with similar allegations.

And at no point was there any finger wagging at a "mob" from anybody, despite outside influences certainly getting involved. It ended with people taking responsibilities for their actions and being taught to look inward and improve. None of this scattergun blaming everyone else for a situation two people started and could be helped to learn lessons from and grow into mature people who understand more about partnerships and responsibilities to others.


As for what "we" want from him now? I've personally made my position very clear on this. We shouldn't "want" anything, we can but hope they learn from their mistakes and raise that child right as a happy family, regardless of his career or outside viewpoints or anything else. That's best case scenario and I hope upon hope it happens, I really do.

 

[FromTheBench]

It was not the media picking favorites, Ronaldo simply did a much better job at 'handling' his case.

Ronaldo paid in settlement. Are u saying he should have done same.

Also he had bigger media management team. But if media has created same furore I am sure the same people would be after him too.

And as for role model argument we had a convicted person for assault and bribery as our captain till last season.

 

[flameinthesun]

We did read Ronaldo’s own, detailed description and it did sound worse than what we heard with Greenwood.

It’s not a competition, but the question of why it’s very much one rule for Ronaldo and a very different one for someone else is valid.

Though it doesn’t vindicate Greenwood, in the slightest, it’s still on topic.

If those who claim they care for moral reasons really truly do - they should care about why that discrepancy occurred, it should bother them.

And some people do care.

But many others now are more locked into a binary - ‘win or lose’ contest with strangers on the internet and don’t really seem to care about the moral issues or the victims of these crimes that they’re supposedly so concerned about and are convinced of.

I’ve seen very little energy or discussion for Greenwood’s partner or little baby daughter now that he’s being literally rushed out of OT on the back of a traumatic media meltdown for them all.

I’ve not heard a single person in the media offer any actual support to them. Literally not one person.

Rachel Riley, who shouts and makes public ultimatums because she cares so much about vulnerable women, and then, after getting what she wants rather than reaching out to offer support or even acknowledge the existence of Greenwood’s partner, instead starts another public attack at Utd.

The Athletic who, almost single handedly, have made it so that the family are now being rushed into a move have never even acknowledged the existence of a vulnerable family while launching an unprecedented media campaign in the name of standing up for vulnerable women.

Again, these people / organisations are fine to want Greenwood out of Utd, I’m not saying they shouldn’t think that, but they don’t appear to really care about the issues they’re claiming to care about.

If the Greenwood case has made people realise how much they care about these issues, then the discrepancy in the treatment of, and acceptance of other players in the recent past should bother them and should be addressed.

Really good post mate, I agree entirely.

 

[JediSith]

Ronaldo paid in settlement. Are u saying he should have done same.

Also he had bigger media management team. But if media has created same furore I am sure the same people would be after him too.

And as for role model argument we had a convicted person for assault and bribery as our captain till last season.

But that’s the Greek courts it doesn’t count …. so it seems