Johnson formally charged

  • 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!
diddles said:
Sunderland footballer Adam Johnson 'to deny' child sex charges
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-32777071
Click to expand...
Sunderland footballer Adam Johnson 'to deny' child sex charges
You must log in or register to see images

Adam Johnson arrived at court with his partner Stacey Flounders
England and Sunderland footballer Adam Johnson will deny having sexual activity with a 15-year-old girl, a court has been told.

The 27-year-old, from Castle Eden, County Durham, was arrested in March.

His solicitor told magistrates in Peterlee he intended to deny three counts of sexual activity with a child under 16 and another of grooming.

The player was released on conditional bail to appear before Durham Crown Court on 3 June.

The court was told the three counts of sexual activity with a child are alleged to have taken place on one night in January at two locations in County Durham, while the grooming offence was said to have happened between December and February.

Born in Sunderland, Johnson began his career at Middlesbrough before moving to Manchester City and then Sunderland for £10m in 2012.

During the five-minute hearing, his solicitor, Paul Morris, indicated he would plead not guilty when he next appeared in court.

He did not comment as he left court with his partner Stacey Flounders and was driven away in a Range Rover
 
DAPARKERSAFC said:
June 3rd is sharp IMO. Good for all involved as well

Still don't see how he can have a fair trial at a north east crown Court. High potential there could be Sunderland and Newcastle fans on the jury.
Click to expand...
Given the decency of most NUFC fans and fellow North Eastern people..I can't envisage anyone being bent enough or prejudiced enough to stitch someone up on this. I could though envisage a collective fury if he is proven guilty and a collective togetherness if he is innocent...but not anything else IMHO
 
Last edited:
Funky Dick said:
They don't need any real evidence thanks to the Public Interest rule. See the Michael Le Vele case of how little evidence they need to drag a celeb to court. They could have charged him to cover their own backs in case they get it wrong by letting him of and he does commit a crime. All these public interest case achieve is identifying a yet to be found guilty man and a route for the police to pass the buck and cover their own arse.
Click to expand...
Exactly Funk. The Police have no choice..the CPS have less choice. If they reject the case an d it is later proven true they are on are a hiding to nothing. If they try the case and are proven wrong they are doing their job. There is not ever smoke without fire but the key is how much fire,
 
  • Like
Reactions: Brian Storm
MrRAWhite said:
It really bugs me how these things take so long. I'm sure that both the prosecution and the defence have everything they need, so why the delay?
Click to expand...

Dunno mate, concrete Tony or MontysOptician I think could answer that one.

Maybe they need to find a gap of X amount of days where everybody can be gathered, or maybe paperwork, getting the jury together etc. It's all bollocks innit, just give him 10 minutes with Jeremy Kyle and a lie detector and have done with it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gordon Armstrong and MrRAWhite
MrRAWhite said:
It really bugs me how these things take so long. I'm sure that both the prosecution and the defence have everything they need, so why the delay?
Click to expand...

Haway mate, how these judges ever gonna improve their golf handicaps if they spend all day in court!

Be reasonable man!
 
  • Like
Reactions: MrRAWhite
Typical_Juan said:
Dunno mate, concrete Tony or MontysOptician I think could answer that one.

Maybe they need to find a gap of X amount of days where everybody can be gathered, or maybe paperwork, getting the jury together etc. It's all bollocks innit, just give him 10 minutes with Jeremy Kyle and a lie detector and have done with it.
Click to expand...

Is there a jury involved though? I know someone that was convicted in a magistrates court and decided against appealing because the retrial would have involved a high court judge and two magistrates (I think) but his solicitor said there was no jury and the judge involved was a complete and utter b***ard if he was found guilty again. It may depend on the type of charge but one of the legal eagles on here might be able to enlighten us.
 
Slippery Dick said:
Is there a jury involved though? I know someone that was convicted in a magistrates court and decided against appealing because the retrial would have involved a high court judge and two magistrates (I think) but his solicitor said there was no jury and the judge involved was a complete and utter b***ard if he was found guilty again. It may depend on the type of charge but one of the legal eagles on here might be able to enlighten us.
Click to expand...

I think a trial involves a jury by default doesn't it?

I dunno mate, the only time I ever gave evidence in my old job was to get assets frozen and it never required crown court.
 
Typical_Juan said:
I think a trial involves a jury by default doesn't it?

I dunno mate, the only time I ever gave evidence in my old job was to get assets frozen and it never required crown court.
Click to expand...

It may have something to do with it originally being tried in a magistrates court but as I say one of the more genned up on here may be able to clarify
 
MrRAWhite said:
I'm almost certain that this will be held at a Crown Court which entails a jury..
Click to expand...

Isn't there some sort of maximum sentence that a Mag's court can hand out? Like 6 months or something? No chance it's gonna be anywhere other than Crown if that's the case.
 
Typical_Juan said:
Isn't there some sort of maximum sentence that a Mag's court can hand out? Like 6 months or something? No chance it's gonna be anywhere other than Crown if that's the case.
Click to expand...
I think they can go up to a year at a magistrates court, but the principle still stands..
 
Slippery Dick said:
Is there a jury involved though? I know someone that was convicted in a magistrates court and decided against appealing because the retrial would have involved a high court judge and two magistrates (I think) but his solicitor said there was no jury and the judge involved was a complete and utter b***ard if he was found guilty again. It may depend on the type of charge but one of the legal eagles on here might be able to enlighten us.
Click to expand...

It will be in front of a jury, maximum sentence exceeds what the mags can hand out. Those sort of jail stretches needs a jury and a crown court.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back