SACKED
- Thread starter BackO'TheNet
- Start date
-
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
-
I do mate, because people will associate Johnson with Sunderland.
Just another **** stain on our wonderful club.
I think guilty or innocent is something decided in a court of law. Which means the club didn't need to do anything until the 10th when he pleaded guilty on one count in court.
Not sure if that was aimed toward me or not but I'll reply anyway.
I agree they didn't need to, they stood by him just as the majority of fans did. As you say, innocent until proven guilty.
What I'm saying is he'll forever be associated with Sunderland AFC as a 'brand'.
Giacc, it wasn't aimed at anybody in particular mate - promise. I was just giving a point of view on this case.
Hahaha!! Just woke the missus up laughing at that!!It's not looking great for him is it
If he is to be believed he didn't even get a shag.
Unlucky bastard.
I think at the moment he's looking at a year, tops. It's ****e but his defence will say he's no previous, nobody else has come out of the woodwork so he's not serial, he never plied her with drugs and what happened was consensual, although it is still wrong. The judge will have a field day with him for abusing his position though and is sure to mention that during the sentencing. If he gets found guilty on the other two charges after going not guilty, he could be looking at having the sentence trebled.
Think you're right regardless of the fact that papers say 2 and a half years for the 2 counts and up to 14 if found guilty of the others!
I reckon he might get away with no inside time but house arrest type thing! Just from working in the courts and knowing how it works with the rich brigade!
Yeah, we both know that's bollocks. I was thinking 6-9 months, so far, but hadn't ruled a suspended sentence with a load of orders and costs...
I think it would be difficult trying to sue him to get his wages back as he was fulfilling his contract and playing/working for SAFC.
Don't know if they could go for loss of sell on value or any other stuff though, be interesting to see if SAFC do chase any compensation or damages from him.
Oh and yes, sacking him was spot on but I felt it was a tad late, I think they should have hoofed him out after he admitted his guilt but they obviously had to go through the legality of that process unless he sued for unfair dismissal??
Don't know if they could go for loss of sell on value or any other stuff though, be interesting to see if SAFC do chase any compensation or damages from him.
Oh and yes, sacking him was spot on but I felt it was a tad late, I think they should have hoofed him out after he admitted his guilt but they obviously had to go through the legality of that process unless he sued for unfair dismissal??
Found guilty the girl has the option to sue him for damages under the tort of assault. Under the balance of probabilities she would win if she can prove a 'loss' or 'damage' that was reasonably foreseeable.
He will most likely get 6 months based on sentencing guidelines. If I am not mistaken, the girl was a couple of months off reaching the age of consent which is a mitigating factor. If he is found guilty of all 4 charges, then 2 years.
It's not. "The club has today terminated his contract with immediate effect." From the official statement.
Not sure why they'd offer him a mutual termination when they have no need to.
Johnson has done this without the knowledge or encouragement from either the club or the fans, so anyone who associates his actions with the club is only doing so in out of their own selfish or anti Sunderland interests..
Can't stand Fat Sam so hope you go down
Love Defoe so hope you stay up
My conflict runs deep
But Johnson is scum and imho Sunderland had an impossible choice. .. they could of sack or suspended him before the trial and if he had been found innocent they would have punished an innocent man (like Southampton did with their manager ... Dave Jones... back in 2000).
Instead they chose to treat him as innocent until proven guilty. ..they sacked him when he pleaded guilty to 2 charges.
So this does not reflect badly on Sunderland. .. it simply reflects what he is.
Gross misconduct then. Allows an employer to teeminate an employment contract summarily without the need for disciplinary warnings.