The Adam Johnson Trial

  • 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!
Number 1 Jasper said:
Am I the only one who, all things considered, is uncomfortable with this way of trial by Internet?

I have voiced my opinion / liked a post etc, just a general question.
Click to expand...
Internet works by simplification. Words like "nonce" are the only thing in the debate I find unpleasant, because it reduces the argument down to an "evil" vs "good" dynamic which I, personally, believe we use to help us reject a semblance of ourselves we see in the perpetrator (see overlong post a while back! ha). It is more helpful to see Johnson as a human who has allowed his desires to control his good sense. If we say he did it because he is a "nonse" then that forgives society all the other evils which contribute to this view of teens which we have rightly discussed and attacked through this thread.

I think most of this thread is actually interesting and often quite insightful. If you compare it to some of the mindless vitriol being spat about this on other boards, we come out quite well...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Clem Fandango, Number 1 Jasper, OddRiverOakWizards and 1 other person
I do find it interesting how quickly people make a decision based on emotion before hearing a fraction of the evidence. It bothers me that people assume people are guilty just because they're on trial for something especially if it's rape or something involving children. I'm talking generally here not specifically about this trial. I just hope that the people on juries don't react that way. Obviously if it was a crime against a relative or friend of mine I'd be stringing the accused up but most people don't know anything about the people involved.

It's clear that Johnson is a scumbag, guilty of the crimes he's admitted but what else has happened I still don't know. The evidence so far is not great.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ......loading......
Whiteley Saint said:
I do find it interesting how quickly people make a decision based on emotion before hearing a fraction of the evidence. It bothers me that people assume people are guilty just because they're on trial for something especially if it's rape or something involving children. I'm talking generally here not specifically about this trial. I just hope that the people on juries don't react that way. Obviously if it was a crime against a relative or friend of mine I'd be stringing the accused up but most people don't know anything about the people involved.

It's clear that Johnson is a scumbag, guilty of the crimes he's admitted but what else has happened I still don't know. The evidence so far is not great.
Click to expand...

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2000/aug/30/childprotection.society
 
billyvegas said:
What the hell are you talking about?

Huge difference in the two cases, but nice try!
Click to expand...

I'm demonstrating how ludicrous it sounds to blame the victim of a crime. I'm glad you recognise that when someone gets murdered that it's typically not their fault.
So lets not start blaming children for being groomed and exploited by predatory men
 
  • Like
Reactions: SaintinSerbia
Clem Fandango said:
She's not blameless. 15 year olds in this day and age know a lot. I believe they know better than to meet up with a stranger in his Range Rover down a dark ally. She wouldn't have done t if he wasn't a celebrity.
Click to expand...

He's on trial. Not her. He discovered her age, and proceeded to break the law. "She wouldn't have done t if he wasn't a celebrity," quite he knew that, and methodically escalated the situation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Le Tissier’s Laces
It is interesting the different opinions and the ensuing arguments as to what is right and wrong. What is and is not acceptable. At the end of the day AJ deserves anything he gets now simply because he should have known better to get into that kind of situation. He is a 28 year old male and it is clear to most he was using his celebrity status to the full. While there may be an argument for did he or didn't he, he deserves about 10 years for what he has admitted in my book anyway.
 
I'd be surprised if he got more than a few years, but has also lost his career (not that he doesn't deserve to). I think the girl will suffer....at a time she should be out experimenting with her peers, she will be viewed now as notorious. And we all know how sweet teenagers are. The name calling has only just started. She will get over it (if she has any strength of character), but it will make the next few years (which should be fun years) difficult. And all because a man old enough to know better couldn't just smile at her and give her an autograph.
 
  • Like
Reactions: saintlyhero
fran-MLs little camera said:
I'd be surprised if he got more than a few years, but has also lost his career (not that he doesn't deserve to). I think the girl will suffer....at a time she should be out experimenting with her peers, she will be viewed now as notorious. And we all know how sweet teenagers are. The name calling has only just started. She will get over it (if she has any strength of character), but it will make the next few years (which should be fun years) difficult. And all because a man old enough to know better couldn't just smile at her and give her an autograph.
Click to expand...
If there is any justice she should get substantial compensation so her and her family can move to a new area where her name will be unknown. If she has any sense at all she'll give up watching Sunderland anyway.
 
To make myself clear, I think AJ deserves everything he gets. I just think in this day and age girls of that age need to act with a bit more savvy.
 
ChilcoSaint said:
If there is any justice she should get substantial compensation so her and her family can move to a new area where her name will be unknown. If she has any sense at all she'll give up watching Sunderland anyway.
Click to expand...
Although it may not sound like it :), losing her football team is another punishment for being naïve and silly. If he had just treated her like a fan, she would still support Sunderland and still be hero worshipping Johnson. I suspect her family were originally pleased that she was a football fan...probably thought it was a nice safe hobby.
 
fran-MLs little camera said:
Duplicate post. Should learn to be patient....go and make a cup of tea whilst it posts. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

As you've brought it up, I've just used my unusual method of checking whether a message I've just posted has actually worked when it appears not to have. [This will be like a foreign language to some, I know, but try to get the gist]

1. Open a new tab in the browser.
2. Go to Not606 and find the exact thread you've been writing in.
3. Check whether you've succeeded in posting the message. You'll find it often happens.

There, that wasn't so bad, was it. All in English, hopefully. If you don't have tabbed browsing, open a new browser and do from No.2 onwards.
 
TheSecondStain said:
As you've brought it up, I've just used my unusual method of checking whether a message I've just posted has actually worked when it appears not to have. [This will be like a foreign language to some, I know, but try to get the gist]

1. Open a new tab in the browser.
2. Go to Not606 and find the exact thread you've been writing in.
3. Check whether you've succeeded in posting the message. You'll find it often happens.

There, that wasn't so bad, was it. All in English, hopefully. If you don't have tabbed browsing, open a new browser and do from No.2 onwards.
Click to expand...
Soz, don't even know what you mean by open another tab in the browser. All words are English, but together mean nothing to me. I'll carry on being patient.
 
TheSecondStain said:
As you've brought it up, I've just used my unusual method of checking whether a message I've just posted has actually worked when it appears not to have. [This will be like a foreign language to some, I know, but try to get the gist]

1. Open a new tab in the browser.
2. Go to Not606 and find the exact thread you've been writing in.
3. Check whether you've succeeded in posting the message. You'll find it often happens.

There, that wasn't so bad, was it. All in English, hopefully. If you don't have tabbed browsing, open a new browser and do from No.2 onwards.
Click to expand...
Not so easy on your phone.
 
Your post didn't come across like that to be fair. I haven't blamed anyone for anything, just found your post a little odd.

I do think its unfair that most people are forming opinions without all the facts, clearly AJ could have known better and should have demonstrated greater responsibility when he had the facts, ie her age etc but none of us know a huge amount of everything that went on.

I agree with Clem in that many 15 yo know much more and are not as naive as we are always led to believe, which is by no means condoning what happened but I would be surprised if she knew nothing about what was going on and perhaps also could demonstrate a degree of responsibility too.

That said AJ has potentially broke the law and deserves anything that comes his way...

saintlyhero said:
I'm demonstrating how ludicrous it sounds to blame the victim of a crime. I'm glad you recognise that when someone gets murdered that it's typically not their fault.
So lets not start blaming children for being groomed and exploited by predatory men
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Clem Fandango
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back