Adam Johnson

[Gemmill 44843]

Would you not question your ceo on what exactly went on.I'd expect mine to give me all the facts without me asking for them.

She says in her statement that she withheld those details man. If I'm her and I'm losing my job anyway, am I fuck admitting to basically lying to my employer over something this serious, unless I actually did it.

[Gemmill 44843]

Well, either Short didn't ask her what the basis of Johnson's reinstatement was or she lied then. Personally on a matter as important as this I'd go to the top for as advice. Well no actually, I'd have suspended him as a matter of common sense. But if I was short, I'd ask why he wasn't suspended considering the CPS had a case against him.

 

I mean ffs, even without her being privy to the evidence, there was only one reasonable course of action. The owner can't ignore this. He knew imo.

She's effectively admitted to lying by saying she didn't clue the board in on the details of what she knew. She'd be mental to take this all on the chin unless she actually did it or she's been given some sort of comfortable retirement level payoff, and even then they couldn't really afford to do that in case it gets leaked at a later date.

[Rayvin 5217]

Exactly, the pay off was the only other thing that makes sense but it's hugely risky.

[Renton 21603]

She says in her statement that she withheld those details man. If I'm her and I'm losing my job anyway, am I fuck admitting to basically lying to my employer over something this serious, unless I actually did it.

Unless you're getting a large backhander maybe? Johnson was a 12 million quid asset, its simply not plausible to me he didn't know more.

 

Anyway, since apparently no illegal act has been carried out, there will never be proof either way.

[Rayvin 5217]

Just as another point on this, she is paid about 5 times what Charnley is and yet was incompetent enough to do this despite a background in law. Says it all.

[Renton 21603]

She's effectively admitted to lying by saying she didn't clue the board in on the details of what she knew. She'd be mental to take this all on the chin unless she actually did it or she's been given some sort of comfortable retirement level payoff, and even then they couldn't really afford to do that in case it gets leaked at a later date.

If Short knew, this is exactly the course of action he'd take. What other option does he have? She's already implicated, with no further paper trail she can't prove owt anyway.

[Renton 21603]

Just as another point on this, she is paid about 5 times what Charnley is and yet was incompetent enough to do this despite a background in law. Says it all.

I don't think she was incompetent, this was a cynical calculation.

[Gemmill 44843]

If Short knew, this is exactly the course of action he'd take. What other option does he have? She's already implicated, with no further paper trail she can't prove owt anyway.

She can stand her ground and insist that they fire her, and create a media storm by pointing the finger at the club. Which, if you didn't do it, is exactly what you'd do.

[Rayvin 5217]

@ Renton - If she retires following this then maybe you're right. I just can't see why she would take the fall for this, especially given she was already being paid over half a million a year. How much money would it take to persuade someone to admit to this if you're already paying them that much?

 

I guess the other scenario is that she went to Short/the board, told them and told them her plan for dealing with it. They potentially then agree as long as she takes the fall if it goes south. Seems like this she only resigned because the Guardian got their hands on something.

 

Either way, as you say there's no way of knowing. At least someone has been held responsible though.

Edited March 8, 2016 by Rayvin

[essembeeofsunderland 811]

She wasn't losing her job when she came out with her first statement though.Maybe Short lives in a cave and only comes out of his cave on a match day.This shit was in every paper for days yet some on here believe Short wasn't aware of all the details.

[Gemmill 44843]

She wasn't losing her job when she came out with her first statement though.Maybe Short lives in a cave and only comes out of his cave on a match day.This shit was in every paper for days yet some on here believe Short wasn't aware of all the details.

Your opinion isn't worth listening to. Just FYI.

[Renton 21603]

There really should be an independent investigation but can't think of any authority or mandate for it. Think SAFC are getting off very lightly though, very handy to have a single scape goat.

[essembeeofsunderland 811]

Would worth reading

[essembeeofsunderland 811]

but worth reading

[Rayvin 5217]

...

 

What?

[Gemmill 44843]

Would worth reading

Precisely.

[Sonatine 11372]

https://twitter.com/zenxv/status/707279844351090688

 

 

Fuck me, there's some thick cunts in this world

[Howay 12496]

Regardless of one trampy mother with horrific parenting ideals view it is still against the fucking law. How many times are these daft twats going to say something like "well it would be legal in France" or "I think you can make your own mind up at 15" before they realize that is all irrelevant, it is against the law in the UK.

Edited March 8, 2016 by Howay

[Kid Dynamite 7025]

Mad that the age of consent in Germany, Italy, Portugal

Etc is 14. France's used to be 13 until recently!

[Renton 21603]

One of those daft twats on the smb was saying that it was the girl that had groomed Johnson. Seriously.

Edited March 8, 2016 by Renton

[Rayvin 5217]

Mad that the age of consent in Germany, Italy, Portugal
Etc is 14. France's used to be 13 until recently!

 

And yet they have a lower rate of teen pregnancy than we do...weird world.

Edited March 8, 2016 by Rayvin

[Renton 21603]

Denmark is interesting, think they have a lower age of consent but there are specific laws to protect against abuse caused by differences in age, like in the Johnson case.

[Kitman 2204]

I think the admissions of wrongdoing from Byrne and SAFC conclusively put paid to the argument that SAFC did the right thing in not suspending Johnson.

 

We'll have your apology whenever you're ready, ILDC

[scoobos 298]

Same in Canada Renton

 

[Howay 12496]

I have to admit these fucking yokels are doing my head in now, seeing shite on facebook like "well all I know is that when I was 15, 365 days went by and suddenly I was able to make decisions at 16 amazing right?!?" That's one I've copy and pasted from there actually, how can they sit and think that? The law has to put a mark down somewhere, if the law said 15 was okay and he was doing this with a 14 year old lass I'm sure these idiots would say the same fucking thing. Pointing to other countries is fucking daft too, Japan's is 13 are they all fine with that too?

 

The fact is he broke the law, as I've said before regardless of her being "only months away" the bloke is 29, I'd find it rank if he was trying to get fired into a 16 year old anyway. The law is put in place to protect kids that are in school from old predators, this is EXACTLY what this skinny little mope has done. I do not understand how this is still an ongoing discussion and I find it appalling from the mackems (and people from other parts I may add) that are trying to stick up for this utter creep.

 

I have far less respect for these mackems (I understand it is not all, most definitely it is a minority) than I ever thought I could, he has been found guilty for fuck sake pack in defending him by trying to make out that the law is daft you are on about a 29 year old man with a kid picking a girl who hasn't took her GCSE's up from school in his Ferrari, I'd say preventing that sort of behavior is a good law.