I don't get why anybody that's already plead guilty to anything would risk pissing off a judge. How ****ing dumb do you have to be? Hey, I guess he's got about six years to think about what a moron he's been, eh?
Sounds like an all round wonderful guy! Hope he likes donkey cocks, he'll most likely be seeing a few of them soon!...
Utd's value has decreased by one billion since van Gaal became manager. It's a good job football is not about money.
Will that increase the interest rates on the Glazer repayments of whatever their outstanding debt is ??
It's interesting when you compare sentences for the same sort of stuff (for want of a better phrase) : * graham Rix has full sex with a 15 year old : 1 year. * Ched Evans, convicted of rape : 5 years * A female head teacher, convicted of 13 sexual offences against pupils in her school, including full sex with 13 year old boys : 6 years * adam Johnson, kissing and possibly groping a 15 year old : 6 years. It seems pretty clear that Johnson's legal team were of the view that this judge had got it in for johnson, and that they knew he was going to be given a heavy sentence but were going to appeal it. On the basis that 6 years is roughly what people get for : - premeditated attempted murder - cases of gbh causing severe permenant disability - causing death by reckless drunk driving (eg racing other cars while drunk) they might have a point. Time will tell.
Exactly, and that's why the judge had it in for him. No remorse means a longer sentence, quite rightly. Johnson doesn't seem capable of even understanding what he has done wrong. The 3 years that he will have to do might actually make his grow up, the Judge has done him a favour. If he'd done that to my daughter and treated it a a joke, I'd be going to prison not him, he'd be going to hospital to have his genitals stitched back on.
I think some of those older sentences would be higher now that sexual offences are more "high profile". I'm not arguing any particular case, but there would appear to be some disconnect between the scale of sentences for sexual offences compared to others. I'm sure that people who have killed others while driving disqualified or drunk etc have had lighter sentences. Again, not arguing for a lesser sentence for Johnson as has been said, he didn't even seem to show remorse. However, the current (tabloid?) mindset seems to make sexual offending about the worse thing you can do, which kinds of misses the point when it comes to someone being dead as a result of others actions.
Agree with much of that. The degree to which we, as a society, are manipulated by the popular press, is frightening. The fact that we now appear to be seeing the judiciary being influenced by it, shows just how far down the road we have fallen. And it is falling, in my view, rather than climbing, because it appears to me to smack very much of mop rule, and trial by popular demand. I've seen similar in community facebook groups and such like, where the self appointed few appear to have power of judge and jury, in a process akin to a medievil witch hunt. I don't think it's too far fetched to imagine a system of criminal law in the future, where accused criminals are convicted and sentenced on the basis of a popular vote on prime time tv.
Would cutting off his genitals really be suitable punishment ? There was a case a few years ago in south africa, where a guy killed someone with an axe, and claimed to have done it because the guy he killed had raped his daughter and infected her with AIDS. It turned out to be bollocks, but I think many would have supported him if it had turned out to be true, and I think I would have done too. But is what Johnson did, remotely similar to that ? Not in my view. My understanding of what happened is this : 1. A physically mature 15 year old girl, was besotted with Adam Johnson. 2. She contacted him via facebook. 3. They exchanged a protracted series of messages which amounted to heavy flirting (because of the girl's age, the flirting is deemed to be 'grooming' on johnson's part). 4. They agreed to meet up, on the premise of Johnson giving her a shirt. 5. After the meeting, they continued flirting/grooming, and Johnson said he wanted a kiss, and possibly to touch the girl up. 6. The girl's parents knew of the budding 'relationship', and allowed their daughter to continue with it. 7. The two lovebirds met up again, and Johnson asked the girl if there was somewhere more private they could go. The girl told him somewhere, and they went and 'made out'. 8. They continued flirting by text afterwards. 9. The parents still did not intervene. 10. The girl told friends at school, that she had made out with adam johnson. 11. She comtacted another footballer that she apparantly also fancied, via facebook. 12. She became upset that her friends didnt believe she had made out with Johnson, and she became angry with johnson for not disclosing their 'relationship'. 13. The girl's mother insisted that the police were involved. 14. Sunderland fans then began threatening the girl, and she appears to have gone through a lot of very serious stress etc as a result. But what has Johnson done ? : a) flirted with/ 'groomed' a physically mature 15 year old girl, who was besotted by him. (which obviously was inappropriate on his part) b) kissed the girl, and put his hand down her jeans, with her 'consent' (again inappropriate on his part) c) denied he kissed her when she told her friends (dont blame him tbh) Admittedly, a 27 or whatever year old guy kissing an albeit physically mature 15 year old, is not really acceptable, but on the basis that : - it was probably exactly the encounter the girl had sought when she approached him - the parents apparently knew and did not object I don't see how the parents can then turn round and say they want to cut the guy's bollocks off. In fact, to me, a 6 year prison sentence, whilst being labelled a 'nonce', is totally disproportionate. And that's without comparing it to other offences such as those mentioned above. The guy was obviously an arrogant prick, who needed to reset his sexual radar a bit. But his life has been utterly and irreovcably ruined. And that doesn't fit the crime. Imo. So far as I can see, the actual harm that has come to the girl, wasn't directly caused by Johnson at all (although without him of course, none of it would have happened), but due to the prosecution and publication of the incident as a crime. That doesn't excuse Johnson, but imo it casts substantial doubt on whether society as a whole is treating such issues in the right way. Ideally the incident wouldnt have happened at all. But the next best scenario for those involved would have been for the girl to accept and live with the fact, that her friends didnt believe she'd pulled a footballer. What actually happened instead, to both of them was far, far worse. And to me, there's something extremely peverse, about a society that hugely exaccerbates the suffering of a victim, just so that it can take revenge on the perpitrator. And that's one of the very good reasons, why the judiciary needs to apply the law in a logical and considered way, rather than be governed by the vitreol of popular impulse. Regardless of that point though, when you look at what the guy actually did, it is in no wayyyyy comparable to crimes which attract similar punishments, and imo, in no way comparable with what he is having to pay as a result. I don't expect this opinion to make me hugely popular tbh. I like to say things how I see them though, so there you go.
I've already expressed the same view (albeit in a lot less detail) and many others have also. I'm sure, as HIAG said, that the sentence will be lessened on appeal as it appears the Judge either took a huge dislike to Johnson or wanted a bit of limelight (or both). As he hasn't been tried for what was found on his hard drive, that shouldn't be taken into account.
Good posts RobSpur. The age of consent in Germany and Italy (amongst others) is 14, France and Denmark 15. In these countries, Johnson would just be guilty of being an immature pillock. But these countries are backwards and full of barbarians aren't they? They couldn't possibly understand the magnitude of his heinous crimes and the psychological effect on a vulnerable child, could they?
The fact that the girl was 15 and emotionally immature seems to have been overlooked in some of these posts. As has been said, the law is there to protect the girl from herself as well as from sexual predators. Johnson, a mature man of 28, tried to take cynical advantage of her pubescent infatuation. Let's be clear this is a grown man taking advantage of a schoolgirl. He should have known far better that's why he's in trouble.
He's not just "in trouble" though. He has : - lost his partner (possibly deservedly) - lost his job - lost his whole career - been labelled a child abuser - been sent to prison for 3-6 years (categorised as a child abuser) - had to pay one and a half million pounds in costs and damages - missed the first 3-6 years of his child's life, and possibly banned from access to his child thereafter For a snog and a quick grope with a luved up teenager. Not saying what he did was right. It wasn't. Plus he was clearly a ****ing idiot. But it wasn't THAT not right. Imo. The phrase "nobody died" is often used in hyperbole. In this instance though, the saying's relevant in its literal usage.
...and who's fault is all that?... And maybe he should have thought of all that before he planned to get a quick shag out of a schoolgirl!.?...
Nobody disputes that the fact that he broke the law and should be punished. But he received a sentence similar to what he might have got for aggravated burglary had he forced his way into a person's home with a weapon, confronted the householder and stolen their belongings. Or killed a pedestrian by driving dangerously at speed. Or glassing someone in a pub and disfiguring them for life. Reasonable? Proportionate? ......when he wouldn't even be viewed as a criminal in countries like Germany, France and Italy?
Luke, we've done all this. Yes, the sentence is excessive and will almost certainly be reduced on appeal. However, Johnson is a grade A tosspot! He tried to take advantage of an infatuated, pubescent schoolgirl. When caught, he lied, tried to decry her story, even got his mates involved. He pleaded not guilty for ages and dragged the girl and her family through a lot of unnecessary approbrium and trauma. He only belatedly changed his plea in the face of overwhelming evidence. Lastly, he treated the court, the trial, and the proceedings with arrogant contempt. He was even heard to say, "I hope this is over soon, I'm bored" Is it any wonder the judge gave him the sentence he did?
