you just need to use your search engine JWP. End of the day...how much i know and how little you know or how little i know and how much you know about this case is what makes us make comments on here. Judging from what i know..i reach my conclusions as do you. Im not saying its ok..im saying she deserves to be interrogated too for her role.
i get it..you seem to not get the fact that she isnt a little 3 year old child, 10 year old child etc..but someone on the verge of being 16 and is certainly not innocent and a sweet little innocent school girl. like i said....it reminds me of the female judge who blamed the school girl for grooming the teacher by temptation. There may be nothing in the law to punish her, however her behaviour grates on a mind if it can think for itself.
I don't see why, though. Even if she was the one doing all of the running, it's impossible for her to commit any offence. He's the adult and it's his responsibility to say no, especially as he knew that she was a child.
yeah i get that.......hes getting his punishment no doubt. Im not questioning that. I just dont agree with her being totally innocent.
This is Adam Johnson's missus: please log in to view this image Who do you think she's going to sell her story to, which reality TV programme will she appear on and which footballer will she shag next?
Aye...but, it depends on what form the 'grooming' took, and did he in fact know how old she was? We'll find out during the course of the trial. If he did, then he's a wrong 'un, no argument. If he didn't, the mere fact that he engaged with her with social media / text conversation that was intimating they meet etc, would fall under the 'grooming' charge, irrespective of whether he knew her age or not. He's a snake whichever way you cut it, as he's being doing all of this behind his Mrs back. PL footballers ffs.
There's no way that he'd admit the grooming charge if they couldn't prove that he knew that she was underage.
You reckon that's gonna be his defence then? Hard to say without seeing the messages I suppose. Interesting that he's still denying the other 2 'sexual activity' charges, do you think they were more serious? Eg. He's admitting to touching her up a bit but not full on sex?
The prosecution will have electronic evidence of the conversations between them, so he's patently had no choice but to cough for it. Not knowing isn't a defence in itself. However, I'm sure his legal counsel will go big on the fact that he was unaware of her age, and therefore the 'grooming' wasn't what it might appear.... We'll see mate. His £60k a week contract being ripped up as we speak though. Expensive error of judgement. A real life changer. What a cock.
****in' hell! That makes him an even bigger twat. If I had that at home I'd be all,over it like a rash!...
Yeah I reckon so, how can you prove it without physical evidence? It's basically his word against the victims. Not sure it'll wash with the jury though.
