Let's All Laugh At... let's all laugh at United

ItsBoris · Aug 17, 2023

Tucker said:
That’s not a good look for United is it. Yes the charges were dropped, but we all heard the recording etc. They’ll take an absolute kicking from the rape and domestic abuse charities and rightly so.

I didn't pay that close attention to this whole thing, but why would prosecutors drop the case if the recordings made it such an open and shut case? Maybe there's more to it that we don't know.

Personally I believe that if someone is exonerated in the courts criminally and civilly then they shouldn't be further punished because the court of public opinion demands it. People's lives have been ruined because they've been judged before they get a a chance to exercise their legal rights.

HildoSpur · Aug 17, 2023

It is disgraceful if Greenwood plays for Utd again. Says a lot about the standards of the club and how they have fallen in the last decade. Absolutely shameful decision.

Bluto Blutarsky · Aug 17, 2023

ItsBoris said:
Personally I believe that if someone is exonerated in the courts criminally and civilly then they shouldn't be further punished because the court of public opinion demands it.

I think many people would likely agree with you - to an extent.

But the key difference here is that Greenwood has not been exonerated in the courts...

Timbo Tottenham · Aug 17, 2023

ItsBoris said:
I didn't pay that close attention to this whole thing, but why would prosecutors drop the case if the recordings made it such an open and shut case? Maybe there's more to it that we don't know.

Personally I believe that if someone is exonerated in the courts criminally and civilly then they shouldn't be further punished because the court of public opinion demands it. People's lives have been ruined because they've been judged before they get a a chance to exercise their legal rights.

Because of "withdrawal of the cooperation of key witnesses", ie the victim dropped charges I believe.
Source: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-64502021

Which screams of continued coercive behaviour to me... (I am also aware that I am jumping to a conclusion).

HildoSpur · Aug 17, 2023

ItsBoris said:
I didn't pay that close attention to this whole thing, but why would prosecutors drop the case if the recordings made it such an open and shut case? Maybe there's more to it that we don't know.

Personally I believe that if someone is exonerated in the courts criminally and civilly then they shouldn't be further punished because the court of public opinion demands it. People's lives have been ruined because they've been judged before they get a a chance to exercise their legal rights.

The victim dropped all charges (and is still in a relationship with him) as far as I am aware. If you listened to that appalling audio recording at the time it would tell you everything you need to know about the lad.

chas vs dave · Aug 17, 2023

ItsBoris said:
I didn't pay that close attention to this whole thing, but why would prosecutors drop the case if the recordings made it such an open and shut case? Maybe there's more to it that we don't know.

Personally I believe that if someone is exonerated in the courts criminally and civilly then they shouldn't be further punished because the court of public opinion demands it. People's lives have been ruined because they've been judged before they get a a chance to exercise their legal rights.

The defendant dropped the case, which makes it difficult to prosecute without your lead witness.

She got back together with him.

ItsBoris · Aug 17, 2023

Bluto Blutarsky said:
I think many people would likely agree with you - to an extent.

But the key difference here is that Greenwood has not been exonerated in the courts...

Prosecutors would not be able to convict him in criminal court which is why the charges were dropped. Why - we don't know exactly. But we have courts for a reason. It's the job of courts and juries to decide the question of a person's guilt. The prosecutors dropped the case because they themselves said it would be impossible for a jury to convict him. I just don't like this trend of people on the internet deciding that they are better arbiters of justice than the justice system, especially when they're basing their opinions on extremely truncated information compared to what an actual jury sees and deliberates over. It's a dangerous trend that has already ruined people's lives undeservedly.

In my opinion, let the prosecution service and the courts decide who's guilty and decide their punishment. Someone convicted in the court of public opinion has no ability to defend themselves fairly (like they do in actual courts) and so to take away someone's career and life on that basis is just wrong I think. Not just talking about greenwood, but anyone who's been accused of wrongdoing. The courts exist to shake out who's guilty and who's not.

Bluto Blutarsky · Aug 17, 2023

ItsBoris said:
Prosecutors would not be able to convict him in criminal court which is why the charges were dropped. Why - we don't know exactly. But we have courts for a reason. It's the job of courts and juries to decide the question of a person's guilt. The prosecutors dropped the case because they themselves said it would be impossible for a jury to convict him. I just don't like this trend of people on the internet deciding that they are better arbiters of justice than the justice system, especially when they're basing their opinions on extremely truncated information compared to what an actual jury sees and deliberates over. It's a dangerous trend that has already ruined people's lives undeservedly.

In my opinion, let the prosecution service and the courts decide who's guilty and decide their punishment. Someone convicted in the court of public opinion has no ability to defend themselves fairly (like they do in actual courts) and so to take away someone's career and life on that basis is just wrong I think. Not just talking about greenwood, but anyone who's been accused of wrongdoing. The courts exist to shake out who's guilty and who's not.

You are confusing legal guilt, with actual guilt. They are not the same. If I kill someone, but you can't prove it in court - does not change the fact that I killed someone.

I would be extremely disappointed if Spurs signed Greenwood. I think United will be rightly vilified, and Greenwood will face much more scrutiny as a member of United, than if he left the team and pursued work like everyone else.

ItsBoris · Aug 17, 2023

Bluto Blutarsky said:
You are confusing legal guilt, with actual guilt. They are not the same. If I kill someone, but you can't prove it in court - does not change the fact that I killed someone.

I would be extremely disappointed if Spurs signed Greenwood. I think United will be rightly vilified, and Greenwood will face much more scrutiny as a member of United, than if he left the team and pursued work like everyone else.

Right but we never really know if someone is actually guilty, we can only come to an educated conclusion based on a preponderance of evidence. Our legal system is designed to do that fairly and accurately. The internet mob is probably the most inaccurate and unfair method of judging guilt and innocence. So I’m saying leave the question of guilt to the legal system - that’s why we have it.

KILLA_SIN · Aug 17, 2023

You can't help people that can't help themselves if she doesn't want to help herself and cooperate then doesn't really leave much.

Trix · Aug 17, 2023

So I've just had a chat with an agent who has a player at United. There are a group of players who don't want him back some members of the women's team have threatened to walk, sponsors are asking what's going on and are awaiting an onslaught on their socials. Not to mention large sections of their own supporter base want him nowhere near the club.

I just can't see they'd value him as a player over everything they'll face if he plays for them again.

This just won't go away over time, and he'll get abuse from fans for the rest of his career.

kmk · Aug 17, 2023

How can United terminate his contract, if he has not been charged with any crime?

BorjeSpurs · Aug 17, 2023

kmk said:
How can United terminate his contract, if he has not been charged with any crime?

Maybe they can’t, but they can allow the contract to run its course (or pay him out). His contract ends at the end of next season.

kungfujoe98 · Aug 17, 2023

For public-facing employees whose actions could impact the image of the employer, especially something as high profile as being a Man U player, I’d expect the employment contract to include clauses around bringing the club into disrepute, or at least a broader definition of “gross misconduct” than a regular office job contract would have. Not being found guilty isn’t the same as being innocent, and regardless, his actions have damaged the image of the club. Especially if they continue to employ him. The club’s actions haven’t helped in that regard either, but that’s a secondary issue.

But I’ve no idea if his contract does or doesn’t cover this kind of possibility. If it doesn’t, they need to get a smarter HR team.

McFlash · Aug 17, 2023

ItsBoris said:
Right but we never really know if someone is actually guilty, we can only come to an educated conclusion based on a preponderance of evidence. Our legal system is designed to do that fairly and accurately. The internet mob is probably the most inaccurate and unfair method of judging guilt and innocence. So I’m saying leave the question of guilt to the legal system - that’s why we have it.

Our legal system is fucking useless, especially when it comes to domestic violence and sexual assault, on both sides of the case.
And that's speaking from experience.

Bluto Blutarsky · Aug 17, 2023

kmk said:
How can United terminate his contract, if he has not been charged with any crime?

I imagine most professional athlete contracts contain a morals clause - that does not require a crime, nor a conviction.

But, I don't know what is in Greenwood's contract. Clearly they found cause to suspend him from the team, and team activities, without a conviction.

The publicly known facts have not changed.

If the victim in this case recanted her testimony, and said she made it all up - I would expect for her to face charges for making false claims...I don't think that happened though.

The crown cannot prove their case in court without the victim's testimony. (I don't know English law, but they probably would not even be able to introduce the tape into trial, without the victim to authenticate it). But, that does not make Greenwood innocent. There are consequences for actions in life - not all of them legal consequences. Some of them play out in the court of public opinion.

I do think United probably feel like they are "helping" him if they bring him back into the squad, and give him a foundation to rebuild his life. But, I think that will backfire spectacularly since he will be targeted at every away match, and most home matches.

McFlash · Aug 17, 2023

KILLA_SIN said:
You can't help people that can't help themselves if she doesn't want to help herself and cooperate then doesn't really leave much.

And that's a sad situation because people get trapped in toxic relationships through coercive and controlling behaviour, so much so that it affects their behaviour and mental health.

There needs to be more support for victims who, for whatever reason, cannot speak up for themselves.

We shouldn't just wipe our hands of them and say "well, they just won't help themselves" because that's massively misunderstanding the situation that they are in.

quackers · Aug 17, 2023

ItsBoris said:
I didn't pay that close attention to this whole thing, but why would prosecutors drop the case if the recordings made it such an open and shut case? Maybe there's more to it that we don't know.

Personally I believe that if someone is exonerated in the courts criminally and civilly then they shouldn't be further punished because the court of public opinion demands it. People's lives have been ruined because they've been judged before they get a a chance to exercise their legal rights.

He basically got her pregnant and she 'forgave' him... She was the only witness and hard to prosecute of she doesn't want to.

Her dad basically worships the footballer lifestyle he gives them. Imagine your dad giving the OK for your partner to rape you. It's a horrible situation and no way he should be playing football again.

End.

KILLA_SIN · Aug 17, 2023

McFlash said:
And that's a sad situation because people get trapped in toxic relationships through coercive and controlling behaviour, so much so that it affects their behaviour and mental health.

There needs to be more support for victims who, for whatever reason, cannot speak up for themselves.

We shouldn't just wipe our hands of them and say "well, they just won't help themselves" because that's massively misunderstanding the situation that they are in.

Yeah I agree but in this case I think money has played a part

kmk · Aug 17, 2023

Bluto Blutarsky said:
I imagine most professional athlete contracts contain a morals clause - that does not require a crime, nor a conviction.

But, I don't know what is in Greenwood's contract. Clearly they found cause to suspend him from the team, and team activities, without a conviction.

The publicly known facts have not changed.

If the victim in this case recanted her testimony, and said she made it all up - I would expect for her to face charges for making false claims...I don't think that happened though.

The crown cannot prove their case in court without the victim's testimony. (I don't know English law, but they probably would not even be able to introduce the tape into trial, without the victim to authenticate it). But, that does not make Greenwood innocent. There are consequences for actions in life - not all of them legal consequences. Some of them play out in the court of public opinion.

I do think United probably feel like they are "helping" him if they bring him back into the squad, and give him a foundation to rebuild his life. But, I think that will backfire spectacularly since he will be targeted at every away match, and most home matches.

But if his partner is unwilling to testify against him and there is no video evidence or eyewitnesses, isn't he innocent until proven guilty?

Forums

What's new

Matches

Sportsbook

Members

Let's All Laugh At... let's all laugh at United

Well-Known Member

Likes Erik Lamela, deal with it.

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Likes Erik Lamela, deal with it.

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

In the corner, eating crayons.

Well-Known Member

In the corner, eating crayons.

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads