England footballer 'arrested over underage sex allegations"
Discussion
TVR1 said:
Already plead guilty to the first 2 charges that included penetration, so yes, guilty as sin. What he's contesting is that it didnt happen again, once he discovered her age. That's what he is going to trial for.
I hope you can understand the subtle but rather important difference.?
No - my understanding is that he has admitted to the charge of 'sexual activity' and of grooming someone he knew to be under 16. The other two charges that he is denying, relate to full penetration (on two separate occasions).I hope you can understand the subtle but rather important difference.?
Presumably his plea stems from the fact that the CPS has irrefutable evidence of the first charges - the penetration charge will be far harder to prove.
Whatever the outcome of the trial, this is a shameful episode for the club - who should have refused to let him play after his initial arrest, until he was fully exonerated.
Anglade said:
Whatever the outcome of the trial, this is a shameful episode for the club - who should have refused to let him play after his initial arrest, until he was fully exonerated.
Can't agree with that. Don't fancy your club facing the on-form Carlos Fandango next week? Just accuse him of something unpleasant and his club will suspend him.
SpeckledJim said:
Anglade said:
Whatever the outcome of the trial, this is a shameful episode for the club - who should have refused to let him play after his initial arrest, until he was fully exonerated.
Can't agree with that. Don't fancy your club facing the on-form Carlos Fandango next week? Just accuse him of something unpleasant and his club will suspend him.
Anglade said:
No - my understanding is that he has admitted to the charge of 'sexual activity' and of grooming someone he knew to be under 16. The other two charges that he is denying, relate to full penetration (on two separate occasions).
Presumably his plea stems from the fact that the CPS has irrefutable evidence of the first charges - the penetration charge will be far harder to prove.
Whatever the outcome of the trial, this is a shameful episode for the club - who should have refused to let him play after his initial arrest, until he was fully exonerated.
Presumably his plea stems from the fact that the CPS has irrefutable evidence of the first charges - the penetration charge will be far harder to prove.
Whatever the outcome of the trial, this is a shameful episode for the club - who should have refused to let him play after his initial arrest, until he was fully exonerated.
SpeckledJim said:
Can't agree with that.
Don't fancy your club facing the on-form Carlos Fandango next week? Just accuse him of something unpleasant and his club will suspend him.
This case was clearly rather more than just a spurious allegation from the beginning; because a lot of the evidence came through (his) social media.Don't fancy your club facing the on-form Carlos Fandango next week? Just accuse him of something unpleasant and his club will suspend him.
There's no way that Sunderland's legal team weren't taking a very close interest in the nature of the evidence procured by the CPS - and indeed the evidence presented by the victim's father; their Chief executive has a background in criminal law. Within days of his arrest, the club would have known that there was a high probability of his guilt - regardless of what he actually told them - because of the evidence through social media.
Sadly it looks like their subsequent suspension of the player after his arrest was only overturned once their Premier League status began to be threatened - and it's that disregard of the reputation of a once-proud club for financial gain, that is so shameful.
Edited by Anglade on Thursday 11th February 10:37
Edited by Anglade on Thursday 11th February 10:39
Jasandjules said:
rover 623gsi said:
he's admitted knowing that she was under 16 - so I don't think he has any defence.
Why on earth did he have sex with someone he knew was 15? There would no doubt be countless 18-21 year olds throwing themselves at him.What a fool.
Anglade said:
SpeckledJim said:
Can't agree with that.
Don't fancy your club facing the on-form Carlos Fandango next week? Just accuse him of something unpleasant and his club will suspend him.
This case was clearly rather more than just a spurious allegation from the beginning; because a lot of the evidence came through (his) social media.Don't fancy your club facing the on-form Carlos Fandango next week? Just accuse him of something unpleasant and his club will suspend him.
There's no way that Sunderland's legal team weren't taking a very close interest in the nature of the evidence procured by the CPS - and indeed the evidence presented by the victim's father; their Chief executive has a background in criminal law. Within days of his arrest, the club would have known that there was a high probability of his guilt - regardless of what he actually told them - because of the evidence through social media.
Sadly it looks like their subsequent suspension of the player after his arrest was only overturned once their Premier League status began to be threatened - and it's that disregard of the reputation of a once-proud club for financial gain, that is so shameful.
Edited by Anglade on Thursday 11th February 10:37
Edited by Anglade on Thursday 11th February 10:39
Would you expect anyone else to be suspended from their job if facing an allegation like this? Should football clubs treat their employees in a different way to other businesses?
I'm sure he will now have his contract terminated. If he was a regular Joe with a regular job, his employer would likely not be able to take that option quite so easily (depending on some as-yet unknowns)
Jasandjules said:
Jim the Sunderer said:
His girlfriend's stuck with him.
Women love [b]rich[/] boys, you can't get much badder than a nonce.
Fixed that for you.Women love [b]rich[/] boys, you can't get much badder than a nonce.
And I suspect a baby will ensure an eighteen year income stream too...
Petrol Only said:
saaby93 said:
About the sacking.
Can they sack him for an offence that isn't to do with his work?
Where's the line - is it type of offence?
Probably a clause in his contract?Can they sack him for an offence that isn't to do with his work?
Where's the line - is it type of offence?
Challo said:
Petrol Only said:
saaby93 said:
About the sacking.
Can they sack him for an offence that isn't to do with his work?
Where's the line - is it type of offence?
Probably a clause in his contract?Can they sack him for an offence that isn't to do with his work?
Where's the line - is it type of offence?
Worse is a £10m transfer fee up the swanny with no chance of getting anything back for him.
I wonder if there is any recourse to this, Adrian Mutu style?
Soov535 said:
Jasandjules said:
rover 623gsi said:
he's admitted knowing that she was under 16 - so I don't think he has any defence.
Why on earth did he have sex with someone he knew was 15? There would no doubt be countless 18-21 year olds throwing themselves at him.What a fool.
Burwood said:
Soov535 said:
Jasandjules said:
rover 623gsi said:
he's admitted knowing that she was under 16 - so I don't think he has any defence.
Why on earth did he have sex with someone he knew was 15? There would no doubt be countless 18-21 year olds throwing themselves at him.What a fool.
He is certainly an idiot but if he'd done this in France, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Greece, Iceland, Monaco, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Albania, Austria, Bulgaria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Estonia, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Liechtenstein, Macedonia, Montenegro, Portugal, San Marino, Serbia or Sweden it wouldn't have even been a crime, never mind the end of his life.
(perhaps learn what paedophile means before throwing it around?)
Soov535 said:
Jasandjules said:
rover 623gsi said:
he's admitted knowing that she was under 16 - so I don't think he has any defence.
Why on earth did he have sex with someone he knew was 15? There would no doubt be countless 18-21 year olds throwing themselves at him.What a fool.
/keithlemon
(She's 16 now right?)
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff