Rival watch

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
BrunelGunner said:
I’d suggest you listen to the recordings between Greenwood and the victim, as well as the images posted, whilst also looking at your club’s history of dealing with such incidents historically.

Don’t be naive.
Click to expand...
I don't know if he's guilty or innocent - or what he might have done.
My point is that there should be a due process. You have decided he is guilty - and that the club is covering up for him too!
Posting things on social media and allowing a trial in the court of (ill-infomed) public opinion is not the way to do things, for the very reason I'm rebuking you for. People assume knowledge, without actually having knowledge of the evidence or having undertaken any proper scrutiny of it.
And it could prejudice a fair trial because by the time it gets to court (if it does), it's hard for Magistrates or jurors to ignore the thousands of comments they might have seen on social media and elsewhere.
It's the modern day equivalent of alleging witchcraft; by the time the accusations are heard, the accused has been condemned already.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Diego
littleDinosaurLuke said:
I don't know if he's guilty or innocent - or what he might have done.
My point is that there should be a due process. You have decided he is guilty - and that the club is covering up for him too!
Posting things on social media and allowing a trial in the court of (ill-infomed) public opinion is not the way to do things, for the very reason I'm rebuking you for. People assume knowledge, without actually having knowledge of the evidence or having undertaken any proper scrutiny of it.
And it could prejudice a fair trial because by the time it gets to court (if it does), it's hard for Magistrates or jurors to ignore the thousands of comments they might have seen on social media and elsewhere.
It's the modern day equivalent of alleging witchcraft; by the time the accusations are heard, the accused has been condemned already.
Click to expand...
Have you heard the audio yet?


Its plain as fuking day like.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dier Hard
littleDinosaurLuke said:
I don't know if he's guilty or innocent - or what he might have done.
My point is that there should be a due process. You have decided he is guilty - and that the club is covering up for him too!
Posting things on social media and allowing a trial in the court of (ill-infomed) public opinion is not the way to do things, for the very reason I'm rebuking you for. People assume knowledge, without actually having knowledge of the evidence or having undertaken any proper scrutiny of it.
And it could prejudice a fair trial because by the time it gets to court (if it does), it's hard for Magistrates or jurors to ignore the thousands of comments they might have seen on social media and elsewhere.
It's the modern day equivalent of alleging witchcraft; by the time the accusations are heard, the accused has been condemned already.
Click to expand...

I’m sorry but this is just a bunch of mumbo-jumbo. As I said before, you can’t seriously be that naive. Especially when a situation like this has overwhelmingly clear evidence.

If there were no images, recordings or audio, then fine. I would accept your argument.

But when there is the bulk of proof that has been provided, including voice recordings that have been identified as being him, when some of your senior players have unfollowed him from social media, and your own club have felt it was appropriate to ban him from playing or training pending investigation, well, that wouldn’t have been done for no reason. There is definitely substance to this.

Whether you like to accept this fact or not, the reality is your club have a history of trying to sweep these types of incidents under the carpet. They (reportedly) tried to do the same in 2020 when Ole was in charge, but clearly they didn’t do a good enough job.

I also want to point out that even if, in a court of law, he is found not guilty, that doesn’t mean he did not do it - it means they couldn’t find sufficient evidence to prove that he did. They are not one and the same.

As you should be well aware, and as recent statistics show, matters of abuse, rape and domestic violence can be extremely difficult to prove. Which is why many perpetrators get away with their heinous crimes.
 
BrunelGunner said:
I’m sorry but this is just a bunch of mumbo-jumbo. As I said before, you can’t seriously be that naive. Especially when a situation like this has overwhelmingly clear evidence.

If there were no images, recordings or audio, then fine. I would accept your argument.

But when there is the bulk of proof that has been provided, including voice recordings that have been identified as being him, when some of your senior players have unfollowed him from social media, and your own club have felt it was appropriate to ban him from playing or training pending investigation, well, that wouldn’t have been done for no reason. There is definitely substance to this.

Whether you like to accept this fact or not, the reality is your club have a history of trying to sweep these types of incidents under the carpet. They (reportedly) tried to do the same in 2020 when Ole was in charge, but clearly they didn’t do a good enough job.

I also want to point out that even if, in a court of law, he is found not guilty, that doesn’t mean he did not do it - it means they couldn’t find sufficient evidence to prove that he did. They are not one and the same.

As you should be well aware, and as recent statistics show, matters of abuse, rape and domestic violence can be extremely difficult to prove. Which is why many perpetrators get away with their heinous crimes.
Click to expand...
I'll say it again - don't know. But I believe there should be due process first.
You've obviously spoken to Sue Gray.
 
I'm with LDL on this. There has to be due process. The trouble with "obvious evidence" is that you can't draw the line between that and stuff that isn't quite as damming, and then where do you stop? Moreover just because something "seems" obvious doesn't mean it is, and until something passes the test of proper "evidence" then it doesn't actually count. Regardless how this looks, you can't convict people in the court of social media. As LDL suggests this ends up with people accusing each other of witchcraft. And there can't be exceptions for those *seeming* more obvious. I know what this looks like, and all you have to do is be patient and it will be investigated. This isn't a matter of getting away with anything, just delaying the result until due process is observed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpursDisciple and Diego
I really don’t get this.

Yes, there has to be due process - but there are quite literal quotes and recordings of her repeatedly telling him he doesn’t want to have sex with her and him repeatedly saying “I don’t care, I’m gonna **** you” and also saying “I don’t give a **** what you want”.

How much more obvious can a lack of consent be?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sucky
BrunelGunner said:
I really don’t get this.

Yes, there has to be due process - but there are quite literal quotes and recordings of her repeatedly telling him he doesn’t want to have sex with her and him repeatedly saying “I don’t care, I’m gonna **** you” and also saying “I don’t give a **** what you want”.

How much more obvious can a lack of consent be?
Click to expand...
I obviously don't think that this is true, but it could be fake or someone that sounds like him.
Is that likely? No. Is it possible? I guess so.
 
BrunelGunner said:
I really don’t get this.

Yes, there has to be due process - but there are quite literal quotes and recordings of her repeatedly telling him he doesn’t want to have sex with her and him repeatedly saying “I don’t care, I’m gonna **** you” and also saying “I don’t give a **** what you want”.

How much more obvious can a lack of consent be?
Click to expand...

Audio recordings can easily be faked. I’m not saying that’s the case here but you have to investigate thoroughly.

That said, it looks pretty damning and I think it’s genuine and that Mason Greenwood’s career is pretty much over.
 
BrunelGunner said:
I really don’t get this.

Yes, there has to be due process - but there are quite literal quotes and recordings of her repeatedly telling him he doesn’t want to have sex with her and him repeatedly saying “I don’t care, I’m gonna **** you” and also saying “I don’t give a **** what you want”.

How much more obvious can a lack of consent be?
Click to expand...
Anyone listening to that audio and not utterly condemning him are a fuking danger to any woman around em imo.

Due process my arse listen to the audio.
 
KingHotspur said:
Audio recordings can easily be faked. I’m not saying that’s the case here but you have to investigate thoroughly.

That said, it looks pretty damning and I think it’s genuine and that Mason Greenwood’s career is pretty much over.
Click to expand...
PleaseNotPoll said:
I obviously don't think that this is true, but it could be fake or someone that sounds like him.
Is that likely? No. Is it possible? I guess so.
Click to expand...

And this is why I’m saying that domestic violence cases/rape can be extremely difficult to prove, even if there is evidence. A court may not find it admissible. I don’t know. But that doesn’t mean he didn’t do it.

Unless he admits to it, how can anyone else with 100% certainty say the recording is him in that situation?
 
PleaseNotPoll said:
There should be due process. For the court case.
The rest of us are allowed to see the pictures, hear the audio and think he's a massive ****er.
Click to expand...
As it's highly likely he's now been arrested and an investigation is underway, I don't agree.
And why would anyone is a victim of a crime risk prejudicing the case by posting the alleged evidence on social media?
 
BrunelGunner said:
And this is why I’m saying that domestic violence cases/rape can be extremely difficult to prove, even if there is evidence. A court may not find it admissible. I don’t know. But that doesn’t mean he didn’t do it.

Unless he admits to it, how can anyone else with 100% certainty say the recording is him in that situation?
Click to expand...
They can test for it. Speaker recognition technology.
I think Apple have something for Siri that allows it to distinguish your voice from others.
 
littleDinosaurLuke said:
As it's highly likely he's now been arrested and an investigation is underway, I don't agree.
And why would anyone is a victim of a crime risk prejudicing the case by posting the alleged evidence on social media?
Click to expand...
Perhaps such a person may have become frustrated at previous police inaction?
Alternatively, it could be because they're quite young and don't understand the legal system.

Edit: Or this:
You must log in or register to see images


Sounds like she may be bullshitting her dad here, to me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back