Johnson gets 6 years

Actually, fair enough, that's a good point. I didn't consider the fact that he lied and tried to get out of it before hand.

If he had told the truth before hand and apologised, I'd have said 6 months would have been apt.

However, since he lied, then it says something about him as a person, and makes it more severe.

6 years seems apt. I was wrong. Apologies.

 

He may well have avoided prison if he admitted everything from the start. Possibly the guy could have got away with a suspended sentence but from day one of his trial he was being disrespectful in court and the judge is never going to take kindly to that. He's a victim of his own stupidity.

 

I totally agree with you.

If genders had been reversed and all other factors the same then I agree the female should receive exactly the same sentence.

 

I do think 6 years is kinda harsh.

Still, plenty of time to **** off over a Yemeni whore being gang-banged by three camels.

 

I understand the judge in his summing up also noted "he played for and is associated with Sunderland, I have little choice but to throw the book at the scummy ****"

 

But isn't that the point IF she was a virgin then she still is a virgin they did not have full sex. She was also the one who wanted to follow the meetings up in fact stalking his house when he did not turn up for the third meet. Johnson was wrong no question about it but things have been blown out of all proportion in my view.

 

I wasn't talking about AJ I was talking hypothetically.

Catch up.

 

She was 15yo. He was 27yo.

 

Fentonpell must work for the BBC

 

A spoilt rich sexual predator with a liking for underage girls gets locked up and some people defend him.
It beggars belief.

Reading what the judge, psychiatrist, doctors had to say, there is no doubt the best place for him is to be locked up, and get the necessary treatment so he won't re-offend on his release.

If you're defending the bloke, you really should give yourself a good slap.

 

Everyone else was discussing Johnson and you were talking hypothetically yeh!

 

Cisse ..

 

Yes I did say he was totally in the wrong. but as other posters and various people, and many of them, have stated the sentence was somewhat disproportionate.

 

Nobody else, including the person I was discussing it with, seemed to have any trouble comprehending me. Maybe you should just accept you were only ever given crayons to write with for good reason.

 

Fentonpell
"Yes I did say he was totally in the wrong. but as other posters and various people, and many of them, have stated the sentence was somewhat disproportionate.he tenor of what you were saying was effectively saying or suggesting that she was partly to blame."

Penfold
She was only 15yo. The law is there to protect her from predators like AJ. She is deemed too young mentally to handle situations such as this and the responsibility lies 100% on Johnson for all that has happened and rightly so. He after all was the adult and should have behaved like one and not a base animal.

You can have the view that the sentence was over the top but not on the basis that you appeared to me to imply namely that the girl should bear some of the responsibility for what happened.

With regard to the sentence you may wish to check the factors the Judge cited in relation to the offences including breach of trust, the predatory nature of the offences, the lack of remorse, the denial of the offences (including pleading not guilty to the two offences he admitted at the start of the trial) and the impact of the denials on the victim, the girl. My view is the sentence seems right.

 

Is there any chance that this thread will be finished before he comes out of gaol ? I find it ironic that the Sunderland name is once more synonymous with records

 

Quite why people are still trying to defend the indefensible is beyond me. He has been proved to be a *****phile, liar, sexual pervert and serial adulterer all in one go. What the **** is there to defend. And just how long should somebody like that get sentenced? 6 years seems lenient to me bearing in mind he will be back out in three.

Its gone way beyond him being a (ex) SAFC player and NUFC fans seizing the opportunity to 'have a go', read the most recent reports FFS....................... weather the lass was stunning or a minger, a virgin or the village bike, a prude or a prick tease the FACT remains that she was 15 when he had sexual contact with her. ****ing 15!! Mentally she was clearly ill equipped to deal with the situation, regardless of her physicality. And the law is the law....................... even for ****ing footballers!!

I do wonder how these people would feel if it was their 15 year old daughter or granddaughter or niece getting molested in the front seat of some arrogant arseholes Range Rover behind the local takeaway. Seriously................... have a ****ing word with yourselves.

 

Or you know, grandson or nephew. Because **** double standards right?

 

What case or cases are you referring to?

 

Every case ever where an older woman has done something with an under-age boy but 99/100 will get shrugged off as "way to go son!" You know the double standards exist.