They'll have definitely acted on legal advice. Possibly, there are moral arguments which people can argue about for months, legally though they haven't done anything wrong.
S83- Have I said that - no - underage sex abuse is totally wrong - esp by an her older iconic role model - abit of a odd post when my views are plainly given in my previous posts - very emotional issue though
What Gazza has in common with Johnson is that they are both numb as boots when it comes to brain power..
You said it was a big difference because her Dad knew. I don't feel it's any different at all. Both are sick men and one's not worse than the other because one got 'okayed' to do it.
True I'm not condoning it but it was the girls dad who reported it - the morals of the other dad may be in doubt - I'm just making a minor- point not justifying at all
Seems to me that SAFC are damned if they do and damned if they don't. They will be over the moon when this sorry mess is over with.
Won't we all. This bloody trial is dragging on! Sick of it all now. I just wish the judge would say, **** it, heard enough, guilty, 2 years. Don't think it'll happen though.
So what if we did know? The PFA and a Lawyers had us by the balls, clearly we legally couldn't keep the suspension in place. That's all that matters. Legally we did what any other club would have done. The club has done nothing wrong at all.
She had never had the option to drop all charges, one of the charges was grooming. Even if she said he didn't do it the po-po would have still followed up on their inquiries. Sacking probably wasn't an option, at the time but refusing to lift his suspension was definitely an option, no PFA intervention could have ever forced your club to lift a suspension pending an inquiry. It was probably a calculated gamble based on the lies he fed your club at the time. People are suspended in every profession for long periods pending internal investigations, this is no different.
Well they didn't have to play him. Honestly if the club knew and played him , I for one will be gutted. $$$$ before people again
So what should we have done with him? Made him train with the kids and make him play with the youths? He's on the sex offenders register so obviously not. Wouldn't making him train alone and not make him available for selection be akin to suspension, from a legal stand point that is? Why should we risk relegation by not playing a player who's lifted suspension has been legally forced and given not guilty pleas? Should we risk relegation in the name of morals? Should we let that nonce risk the clubs long term stability? I'm glad we've used him. The club didn't ask for any of this, Aj has brought this on everybody not the other way round. The moral vs legality argument is a non starter for me. I don't live inside miss worlds head. We live in a world governed by laws not morals. Standing by morals can be very costly indeed and what does it even achieve? SAFC is company not a person, it's ethically bound not morally bound. That's my feelings on it anyway.
He`s admitted under cross examination he lied to the police so the copy statement the club got was wrong anyway.
Obv not train with the kids haha All points taken on board. It just makes my skin crawl thinking they knew about it. Has it been confirmed btw? I wonder if the players were aware, cant have been great for moral. Even when standing behind him i thought at the time we probably should have pulled him out the lime light.
Yep! They've certainly got some explaining to do. I have to say I am bitterly disappointed in Sunderland AFC over this.
