Rival watch

Also messes with my fantasy team...

 

They're taking it well...

 

I guess we need to issue an apology to City for spoiling what would have been entirely organic growth. Frankly I don't know who we think we are.

 

We should also apologise to them for allowing them to play a known rapist against us twice last season...

 

hmmm - known? I'd go with suspected on a public forum.

 

If what BrunelGunner says about them issuing a super injunction last November is true, it certainly looks like an attempted cover-up on their part

And people don't cover up things they merely suspect

 

Thank you SD.
This is me, not a s a moderator, but just expressing my personal view. Mendy may or may not have committed the crimes but I am not comfortable with all this trial by internet. Innocent or guilty he is entitled to a trial before everyone rushes to judgement. Remember not everyone who is charged by the CPS is guilty.

 

I agree in principle, but a rich, famous man being charged on multiple counts of rape?
You'd have thought that the evidence would have to be pretty good to charge him.

 

If it were a single account I'd absolutely agree with you and wouldn't judge until a verdict was given but multiple accounts of rape and a sexual harassment? It's very, very hard to imagine he's innocent in all of those.

 

I expect it is PNP but it's still not a trial and it's still people putting forward opinions based on media reports. It's more serious than a transfer in football which we speculate all the time so we should be careful IMO. Even the rich and famous are entitled to a fair trial, it's the basis of our civilisation and why things like the Taliban appall us.

 

Quantity means nothing. People are persecuted by mobs. Multiple opinions based on what? Only the people involved know what happened, hopefully the trail will establish those facts.

 

That's what happens when you usually shop at Aldi or Lidl.

 

Not necessarily, as evidenced by the kangaroo court which Johnny Depp got dragged into last year

 

What not neccessarily? You need to explain more I think.

 

In that case, the judge ruling that it was okay for Dan Woottoonn to call Johnny Depp a "wife beater" in The Sun in spite the evidence pointing to Amber Heard being the abusive partner in the relationship

The fact that the judge has a personal relationship with the Murdoch family, and the judge's son working for the Murdoch-owned talkRADIO before, during (with a swift edit to their Twitter and Linkedin profiles) and after the trial, not only means the judge was hardly impartial yet allowed to preside over the case, but also that it established a version of the facts instead of the facts

 

Civil cases are different though. You basically have 2 versions of the truth and pick the one that seems more likely, based on evidence. For criminal trials the threshold is very different. This could end up being a co-ordinated sting by 3 women to extort money from him. Obviously not suggesting it is. Until there is a trial there HAS to be care taken on guilt assumptions.

 

Thanks hbic for expalining. Sure there have been many instances of miscarriages of justice, remember the Birmingham 6 for example, but we have to persevere with the court procedures. It's like democracy it's far from perfect but it's a lot better than most of the alternatives.
Anyway I have made my point. I don't want to be in a position of supporting Mendy against what I know are well motivated people championing the rights of young women. I just think we should be careful when prejudging legal cases.

 

There's actually an element of that in the media, going hand in hand with Citeh (and others) being "entitled" to the best players.

 

There does seem to be an element of forgetting the 'innocent until proven guilty' principle when it comes to certain charges it seems. Some of it more like the justice of 'she's a witch, burn her'. Obviously if Mendy weighs the same as a duck he should be drowned, but until then isn't is better to wait for the evidence?

 

As you may expect, it's hard to find information on this rumoured super injunction (even if it would make sense based on the information which has come out since), but this was the original article from November: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/s...rested-suspicion-rape-false-imprisonment.html