Off Topic Adam Johnson

Well said both of you.

There is a scale of wrongdoing, and that will be reflected in the sentence. However, being at a 'better' point on the scale does not make what he has done any less serious. It is the same for any offence. Just because there are worse offenders out there (either now or historically) does not take away the wrongness of what AJ has done. He is a grown man who knowingly and willingly took advantage of a child. Like others have said, if he was a younger man himself with a much smaller age difference, and if he had been unaware of the crime he was committing, then that may have been mitigation (mitigation not pardon). None of that applies in this case though.

The comparison with Saville seems more than a little irrelevant. You could extend the example out and apply it to other offences to show how silly your argument is. If AJ had committed a murder in cold blood (a relevant wording in that it was planned and done in full knowledge of being wrong) then we would not be condoning him and saying 'well at least he isn't a mass murderer'. We wouldn't be letting him off the hook because he wasn't a serial killer. We would probably expect mass murderers and serial killers to get more severe sentences (ie never being eligible for release), but we wouldn't be expecting anything less than an extremely severe sentence. If he had met her in a club and thought she was 18 then we may well think there were some extenuating circumstances, just as we would for an accidental killing that would be classed as manslaughter. Even manslaughter is a criminal offence though.

To suggest that we are picking on him because he is a Sunderland player is beyond stupid. The same conversations would be going on regardless of what club he played for - including Newcastle United. Perhaps if you visited your own board more often then you may realise that exactly the same comments and conversations are going on on the Sunderland board too. So far you are the only person who has tried to defend him on either board!

 

I am not an angel by any means. I remember, at 18, I had a quite attractive 16 year old besotted with me. Though I dithered and fantasised rather a lot before doing so, I declined to shag her as she was too much younger. I wouldn't have had to think twice (beyond the odd ****) about a 15 year old. Either of them when I was 21 would have been out of the question.

A 27 chasing a 15 year old is not normal or ok

 

I don't get this... She is two years younger...
Not saying **** her, but that's ridiculous you wouldn't consider dating her on the fact she was 16, at 18 years old.

Do you not know couples with an age gap of 2 years like?!

A 27 year old sniffing round a 15 year old is sick though. Half your age plus seven dude!

Also, Sunderland fans are a disgrace. I see not one of the ****s is willing to apologise to the lass for the abuse she suffered. Liar, slut, slag... It was in a club, she was probably tarted up...

Low-lifes!

 

Have an age gap of 7 years with my missus. A decade at 40 is less than a couple of years at 16.

And I didn't want to date her. I just wanted to shag her

 

fair enough

 

I have never at any stage said that what he has done is not wrong and he has already paid the price for his actions, his punishment by the courts has still to be decided, my argument is with the scale of the criticism here, I think back to before I was married and went out with girls that at the time were probably in the 16 to 18 age group and NEVER did I ask them of proof of their age, and in fact it never entered my head to do so, am I to believe that the moral standards over the past sixty years have improved, here in Australia I can categorically state say that they have not and I find it very hard to believe things are different in Newcastle , I would be interested to hear your opinions of my behaviour compared with your own ( Except for Fredd who I will readily admit has standards that I did not have )

 

We're not talking about 16-18 year olds who can legally consent to sex. We are talking about a 15 year old child and a 27 year old man. Personally, when I was 23, a 17 year girl was too young for me so yes I wouldn't have gone with a 15 year old kid to answer your question. The other thing here is Johnson did ask her age, he knew she was underage, but went ahead grooming her anyway. Since you raise it, and not that it's really relevant to the case, but I think standards have changed massively in the last 60 years in the UK - most adult men would not touch a 15 year old girl with a barge pole, not least because they know it would make them a paedophile in the eyes of the law, resulting in a jail sentence and being put on a sex offenders register potentially for the rest of their lives. If there ever was a grey area on this, there is not anymore.

 

Has anybody mentioned when Gazza was dating a 15 year old and how over the years all Newcastle supporters have talked fondly of him? Or is that different because he never ended up in court for it?

****ing piss head should die with Johnson. Thankfully, Gazza will be dead in the next 18 months anyway. Hopefully somebody in jail can put an end to the other child abusers life

 

My whole emphasis all along has been about moral standards, that is the standard that you set for yourself in EVERYTHING you do, it has nothing to do with the fear of being caught and punished

 

I will treat your insinuations with the contempt they deserve coming from an imbecile that cannot differentiate the affect on a five year old child

 

If only Adam had known the rule of 7...

If you don't here it is:

Take your age and divide by two, then plus 7 years and your golden (so for example if you were say, as a random age, 27 you would be looking at 20.5 years old not 15) (disclaimer - don't use this rule if you are **** at Maths...)

 

Not sure about this. If you are say 30-40, you don't want to be missing out on 19 yr old prime meat If you have the money to pull a 19 yr old that is (only way its happening unless you have a majestic wanger)

Seriously though at 27 you don't want a 15 yr old regardless what they look like. Its just wrong.

As for this Gazza thing that often gets raised, has a case been brought against him, or just some tabloid gossip? We're talking about very different things. If he is guilty of such behaviour then I'd hope he'd be dealt with, however as far as I'm aware no case has ever been brought against him, let alone proven. Seems a strange defensive movement from Mackems to raise this. Not least because I don't know anyone who likes Gazza, bar his Three Bulls drinking buddy

 

Haha yeah I'm pretty sure Hugh Hefner doesn't stick to these rules!!!

In terms of the whole Gazza thing I have a) never heard anything about it a b) can't find anything about it anywhere so it was probably just either tabloid BS or someone looking for a quick 15 mins of fame and a payday, obviously Gazza has made a raft of bad decisions in his life and if true he should be subject to the same as Johnson but I don't think you would see any NUFC fans trying to say "its not that bad as she was 15"...

 

Yes it is different and that's what you don't get. Did Gazza groom her with sexual intent as Johnson did? Was he brought before a court of law and prosecuted for anything as Johnson has? Did he kiss her (sexually) as Johnson did?

You can't compare what may or may not have happened 30 years ago to present day laws and attitude.

 

You are comparing apples and oranges.

I will readily admit that the very best I can say is that I don't think I ever engaged in sexual activity with an underage girl in the days that I used to go out clubbing (a long time ago). I cannot say for certain though because as you said people didn't ask for ID if they were pissed up and in a club. I was married by the time I was 27 so rarely went clubbing at that time (it was classed as fun and as such barred from married life). However before that, even in my mid 20s, I would probably have happily gone with a girl if I was attracted to her (ie she had a pulse) and I believed she was over 18 - which a drunken brain tends to do in a club.

What AJ did was entirely different. He cultivated a relationship with a girl he knew had only just turned 15 and then proceeded to engage in at least some sexual activity (passionate kissing) with a girl that he knew was below the age of consent. He did this sober and in full knowledge of what he was doing. There are no mitigating circumstances in his case.

You mention moral standards. Moral standards should prevent any grown man from pursuing a girl that he knows is under 16. They are children - regardless of what they look like, past experience or anything else. We should all have a moral compass that stops us from pursuing sexual activity with an underage girl. There is probably not a man alive who has not at some point (as an example) been walking behind a 'woman' with a nice arse and thought 'I would', only for her to turn around and you realise that she has the face of a child. At that point we have an inner button that immediately kicks in and any adult thoughts disappear. It has to be said the same also happens at the other end of the scale where she can turn around and you realise she is mutton dressed as lamb! The point is that we use all of the information available to us to make an informed decision. AJ had all of the information he needed and chose to do wrong.

There are no grey areas under the law. Johnson was on the wrong side of the law. Perhaps because of my age and the times I grew up in, I do believe there are grey areas for adolescents. When I was at school/uni it would not be uncommon for a boy to have a girlfriend 2 or 3 years younger than him. When I was 23 I had a 19 year old girlfriend. I know for a fact that when I was 17 at least 2 of my friends had 15 year old girlfriends. That is a whole different can of worms though and very different to a grown man pursuing a child.

 

please log in to view this image

 

The jury is back............

 

Breaking: Adam Johnson found NOT guilty on one count of sexual activity with a child. Undecided on other count.

 

Not Guilty one one charge - no verdict on the other as yet...

 

Breaking: Adam Johnson found GUILTY of one count of sexual activity with a child and NOT GUILTY of another