The mancityfans.net football forum

I Just Blue Myself wrote:Erm, I know that headlines have to be somewhat concise, but how exactly has "arrogance led to child sexual assault" here? I'd say what has led to child sexual assault were the deliberate acts of a sicko.

I think that's a direct quote from Kate Blackwell QC's opening statement for the prosecution.

Reading some of that, it's not looking good for him, and in no way looks like an 'innocent mistake'.

Some livetext from the court room

https://twitter.com/JoshHalliday

PeterParker wrote:Some livetext from the court room

https://twitter.com/JoshHalliday

If you're interested in following this, the link which Charvet Wonderland threw up on the last page offers some good coverage.

charvet_wonderland wrote:http://m.sunderlandecho.com/live/event?1834584

Doubt he's getting off with a caution

Alioune DVToure wrote:

PeterParker wrote:Some livetext from the court room

https://twitter.com/JoshHalliday

If you're interested in following this, the link which Charvet Wonderland threw up on the last page offers some good coverage.

charvet_wonderland wrote:http://m.sunderlandecho.com/live/event?1834584

Doubt he's getting off with a caution

Cheers.

dave watson's perm wrote:

Sister of fu wrote:He is fucked. Just reading what has gone on today at court. I know footballer has no moral compass but this is even beyond that. He's a sex offender and needs locking up. Something very wrong with him.

I don't think there is any doubt that he is going to be eating porridge for a while

Here here. Feck me I've just read these transcripts of social media message. The fact he asked and knew her age prior to anthing happening yet went ahead with meeting her and feeling her up is enough. I would imagine (haven't seen the other two charges) this is what he's pleaded guilty to as they have more than enough evidence. Are he other two charges in relation to sex? To then go and Google 'legal age of consent' shows he knew he was doing wrong.

The blokes a sick bastard and deserves locking up. Jesus he must be morally disengaged and thick as shit.

ruralblue wrote:

dave watson's perm wrote:

Sister of fu wrote:He is fucked. Just reading what has gone on today at court. I know footballer has no moral compass but this is even beyond that. He's a sex offender and needs locking up. Something very wrong with him.

I don't think there is any doubt that he is going to be eating porridge for a while

Here here. Feck me I've just read these transcripts of social media message. The fact he asked and knew her age prior to anthing happening yet went ahead with meeting her and feeling her up is enough. I would imagine (haven't seen the other two charges) this is what he's pleaded guilty to as they have more than enough evidence. Are he other two charges in relation to sex? To then go and Google 'legal age of consent' shows he knew he was doing wrong.

The blokes a sick bastard and deserves locking up. Jesus he must be morally disengaged and thick as shit.

I'm just curious how he was thick enough to get busted do it as well. I'm sure he isn't the first footballer to try and bang a cute 15 yo.

Dick.

Cheers

DoomMerchant wrote:

ruralblue wrote:

dave watson's perm wrote:

Sister of fu wrote:He is fucked. Just reading what has gone on today at court. I know footballer has no moral compass but this is even beyond that. He's a sex offender and needs locking up. Something very wrong with him.

I don't think there is any doubt that he is going to be eating porridge for a while

Here here. Feck me I've just read these transcripts of social media message. The fact he asked and knew her age prior to anthing happening yet went ahead with meeting her and feeling her up is enough. I would imagine (haven't seen the other two charges) this is what he's pleaded guilty to as they have more than enough evidence. Are he other two charges in relation to sex? To then go and Google 'legal age of consent' shows he knew he was doing wrong.

The blokes a sick bastard and deserves locking up. Jesus he must be morally disengaged and thick as shit.

I'm just curious how he was thick enough to get busted do it as well. I'm sure he isn't the first footballer to try and bang a cute 15 yo.

Dick.

Cheers

I think her Dad became aware and reported him. If that was my kid i would have gone and got a crowbar.....

Sister of fu wrote:

DoomMerchant wrote:

ruralblue wrote:

dave watson's perm wrote:

Sister of fu wrote:He is fucked. Just reading what has gone on today at court. I know footballer has no moral compass but this is even beyond that. He's a sex offender and needs locking up. Something very wrong with him.

I don't think there is any doubt that he is going to be eating porridge for a while

Here here. Feck me I've just read these transcripts of social media message. The fact he asked and knew her age prior to anthing happening yet went ahead with meeting her and feeling her up is enough. I would imagine (haven't seen the other two charges) this is what he's pleaded guilty to as they have more than enough evidence. Are he other two charges in relation to sex? To then go and Google 'legal age of consent' shows he knew he was doing wrong.

The blokes a sick bastard and deserves locking up. Jesus he must be morally disengaged and thick as shit.

I'm just curious how he was thick enough to get busted do it as well. I'm sure he isn't the first footballer to try and bang a cute 15 yo.

Dick.

Cheers

I think her Dad became aware and reported him. If that was my kid i would have gone and got a crowbar.....

To twat your kid for being such a stupid fuckin idiot I assume?

Which part of "age of consent" is difficult for you? If she was wasn't old enough to consent it is non-consensual. Non-consensual is rape. It carries a lesser or greater penalty depending on circumstances, age of the parties, whether violence or coercion was used but rape is rape and your defence of grown men sleeping with children is frankly sickening and you would be best advised to keep them to yourself as, if I was the authorities I would be having a good look at you.

Socrates by name only I see. Answer, All of it. Its been ignored ever since it was introduced. Otherwise half the population would be in nick as everyone who has lead half a life knows.Or read any study of sexual activity. I think you will find girls become sexually active before boys and tend to have sexual relations with older boys Read the texts between the couple.The most disturbing thing is the lack of facility with the art of communication. These issues currently produce the sickening moral rectitude in your post which betrays a total lack of awareness of human behaviour and a total inability to focus on principles of natural justice over knee jerk reactions.There are literally millions of paedophiles out there intent on abusing children and babies and we focus on a stupid young man who got involved sexually with a physically mature young woman who was willingly involved. Prat, yes. Immoral yes.Worthy of a fine or suspended sentence? perhaps. But for fuck's sake put it in. perspective. He'll never play pro football again. He may well go to prison for a lengthy period. And he'll be pilloried every where he goes. Is that proportionate in your view, because in mine it is way over the top. Another soft target for the media so we can all be morally indignant.And by the way, I don't know what you mean about "sleeping with children" As far as I can see that is a gross misrepresentation of what went on and/or is a desperately sad euphemism. What you can be sure of is that there will be a sentence to reflect the moral outrage which the court and the media believes exists. You feel moral outrage. Fine. But don't assume as the media and courts appear to do that this is something felt equally by everyone. I believe we as a society should look at each matter on its merits and in my view the main question should be what harm, physical or mental has been done.Let's see what emerges but I can tell you from the many female friends and associates I have known down the years who have given these matters some thought, the idea that a female is necessarily a victim in a sexual relationship is not only often wrong, but demeaning to women. And by the way, because I express these views openly on the assumption we are grown up, don't assume I an in favour of mature men having sex with 15 year olds. I'm not. Nor do I have any desire to do so. But in my view this is not a case to feel outrage, merely to be sad at his stupidity and the fact that the girl will have to go through a trial which will probably cause her more psychological damage than an encounter with a dim footballer might do. But now, lets get on with the stoning and we'll all feel better.

I thought the original story was he pulled her in a club? This is proper peado stuff this. Scum bag.

getdressedmctavish wrote:Socrates by name only I see. Answer, All of it. Its been ignored ever since it was introduced. Otherwise half the population would be in nick as everyone who has lead half a life knows.Or read any study of sexual activity. I think you will find girls become sexually active before boys and tend to have sexual relations with older boys Read the texts between the couple.The most disturbing thing is the lack of facility with the art of communication. These issues currently produce the sickening moral rectitude in your post which betrays a total lack of awareness of human behaviour and a total inability to focus on principles of natural justice over knee jerk reactions.There are literally millions of paedophiles out there intent on abusing children and babies and we focus on a stupid young man who got involved sexually with a physically mature young woman who was willingly involved. Prat, yes. Immoral yes.Worthy of a fine or suspended sentence? perhaps. But for fuck's sake put it in. perspective. He'll never play pro football again. He may well go to prison for a lengthy period. And he'll be pilloried every where he goes. Is that proportionate in your view, because in mine it is way over the top. Another soft target for the media so we can all be morally indignant.And by the way, I don't know what you mean about "sleeping with children" As far as I can see that is a gross misrepresentation of what went on and/or is a desperately sad euphemism. What you can be sure of is that there will be a sentence to reflect the moral outrage which the court and the media believes exists. You feel moral outrage. Fine. But don't assume as the media and courts appear to do that this is something felt equally by everyone. I believe we as a society should look at each matter on its merits and in my view the main question should be what harm, physical or mental has been done.Let's see what emerges but I can tell you from the many female friends and associates I have known down the years who have given these matters some thought, the idea that a female is necessarily a victim in a sexual relationship is not only often wrong, but demeaning to women. And by the way, because I express these views openly on the assumption we are grown up, don't assume I an in favour of mature men having sex with 15 year olds. I'm not. Nor do I have any desire to do so. But in my view this is not a case to feel outrage, merely to be sad at his stupidity and the fact that the girl will have to go through a trial which will probably cause her more psychological damage than an encounter with a dim footballer might do. But now, lets get on with the stoning and we'll all feel better.

Load of bollocks that, mate. 'Physically mature' does not mean emotionally or psychologically mature. This is a girl who had not long since taken her Year 9 SATS and who had never known an independent life outside her family home. A girl who was only just old enough to go and watch a 15-rated film at the cinema. He carefully persuaded her to meet him in secret so that he could have his way with her. Rather than apologise for him, you need to give your head a massive wobble. The fact that he's not as sick as, say, Ian Watkins doesn't mean that he's not a wrong 'un. Your argument to that effect is nothing short of bizarre.

getdressedmctavish wrote:Which part of "age of consent" is difficult for you? If she was wasn't old enough to consent it is non-consensual. Non-consensual is rape. It carries a lesser or greater penalty depending on circumstances, age of the parties, whether violence or coercion was used but rape is rape and your defence of grown men sleeping with children is frankly sickening and you would be best advised to keep them to yourself as, if I was the authorities I would be having a good look at you.

Socrates by name only I see. Answer, All of it. Its been ignored ever since it was introduced. Otherwise half the population would be in nick as everyone who has lead half a life knows.Or read any study of sexual activity. I think you will find girls become sexually active before boys and tend to have sexual relations with older boys Read the texts between the couple.The most disturbing thing is the lack of facility with the art of communication. These issues currently produce the sickening moral rectitude in your post which betrays a total lack of awareness of human behaviour and a total inability to focus on principles of natural justice over knee jerk reactions.There are literally millions of paedophiles out there intent on abusing children and babies and we focus on a stupid young man who got involved sexually with a physically mature young woman who was willingly involved. Prat, yes. Immoral yes.Worthy of a fine or suspended sentence? perhaps. But for fuck's sake put it in. perspective. He'll never play pro football again. He may well go to prison for a lengthy period. And he'll be pilloried every where he goes. Is that proportionate in your view, because in mine it is way over the top. Another soft target for the media so we can all be morally indignant.And by the way, I don't know what you mean about "sleeping with children" As far as I can see that is a gross misrepresentation of what went on and/or is a desperately sad euphemism. What you can be sure of is that there will be a sentence to reflect the moral outrage which the court and the media believes exists. You feel moral outrage. Fine. But don't assume as the media and courts appear to do that this is something felt equally by everyone. I believe we as a society should look at each matter on its merits and in my view the main question should be what harm, physical or mental has been done.Let's see what emerges but I can tell you from the many female friends and associates I have known down the years who have given these matters some thought, the idea that a female is necessarily a victim in a sexual relationship is not only often wrong, but demeaning to women. And by the way, because I express these views openly on the assumption we are grown up, don't assume I an in favour of mature men having sex with 15 year olds. I'm not. Nor do I have any desire to do so. But in my view this is not a case to feel outrage, merely to be sad at his stupidity and the fact that the girl will have to go through a trial which will probably cause her more psychological damage than an encounter with a dim footballer might do. But now, lets get on with the stoning and we'll all feel better.

So basically the premise of your shocking post is this: yes, engaging in sexual intercourse with a minor, whether consensual or non-consensual, is morally wrong, but hey, the societal outlook on this practice is too rigid and the implementation of its laws reflects an unrealistic take on modern day trends, because girls mature sexually and often willingly engage in intercourse at an age younger than what the law dictates, "with older boys" and earlier than boys of their own age group, so society and the lawmakers should just lighten up a tad and base its judgement on the "merit" of each occurrence.

I must say that your train of thought is at least, irresponsible, and at most, dangerous, because this is exactly the mode of thinking that motivates the perpetrators of statutory rape, and gives them the self-justification needed to commit these acts.

With reference to your experiences over the years of engaging with several females that it is often the view that the victim mentality is often unfounded and even "demeaning to women", it does not matter how many of these females you have crossed paths with who have these views, and it certainly does not make these acts any less morally or lawfully abject than they are, because these views are overridden by the guidelines as set out by an organised society. Conversely, the same would apply to underage boys engaging in sexual acts with females of a consenting age, as well as with same-sex scenarios, so the above point nullifies the validity of your reference to sexism.

You also seem to be illuminating the concept that because the underage victim is sexually aroused, it renders the unlawful act permissible. If you research case studies of even violent rape, you will find that it is human nature to feel sexually aroused at some stage of the act, regardless of how willing or unwilling the victim initially was. Whether the fifteen year girl invited or consented to the act, does not in any way lessen the moral depravity or lawlessness of the act.

You need to reconcile yourself with the realism that, in an organised and civilized society, the guidelines set out by either the moral or legal fraternities thereof, or both, are not established as any form of "indignation" as you put it, but rather to protect and preserve the interests of all its people, and therefore it is imperative that any deviation from said guidelines, from a logical perspective, can be neither tolerable nor negotiable.

If he puts the effort in in training, he might get in then prison side. Although probably only as an impact sub.

He could get Stuart Hall to commentate on the game and Glitter to write some chants.

Picking up a girl in a nightclub and then finding out she was 15 is one thing, knowing she's 15 and then pursuing it anyway deserves castration with rusty scissors

I'll get my tin hat on for this, but whilst I also don't advocate shagging children, getdressedmctavish has a point regarding the relative seriousness of the case.

I always found the law rather clunky in that age 15 years 364 days it's non-consensual, and that the day after its ok, nothing to see here, move on. Minors are exposed to very different stuff these days to what they once were, and I expect on the whole are considerably more emotionally intelligent and worldly wise.

In reality it's impossible in a case like this to measure the maturity of the 'victim', however the reality is that cases like this are far from black and white and often driven by the parents outrage, not by the damage actually done (whether physically or mentally). I bet the girl just wants to move on with her life, but instead she is being dragged through this.

Having said that, he is bang to rights in this case, it's not like he pulled in a nightclub and found out after the fact so he's a fucking idiot at best, and a predator at worst. I'm kinda expecting he's somewhere in the middle

Im_Spartacus wrote:I'll get my tin hat on for this, but whilst I also don't advocate shagging children, getdressedmctavish has a point regarding the relative seriousness of the case.

Think if you make comparisons to other cases of under age stuff then it is not as serious. Earlier in this thread (I think?) I said about the bloke two doors down from us. Systematically sexually abused his daughter over an eleven year period. Real sick shit like putting hoods on her. Cunt got away with it for nearly 50 years. Admitted a guilty plea and got 4 years!!!! Yes four fucking years for wrecking his daughters life and that of his family. This sick fuck will be out soon (hopefully his refusal for cancer treatment inside wi have resulted in a slow and painful death but we don't know if hes still alive), as he'd have been eligible for parole after two years.

All this shits sick.

Obviously I don't have a daughter but if I did and there was strong enough evidence showing something went on I'd get her justice by getting myself a stretch for chopping the perpetrators balls off.

Im_Spartacus wrote:I'll get my tin hat on for this, but whilst I also don't advocate shagging children, getdressedmctavish has a point regarding the relative seriousness of the case.

I always found the law rather clunky in that age 15 years 364 days it's non-consensual, and that the day after its ok, nothing to see here, move on. Minors are exposed to very different stuff these days to what they once were, and I expect on the whole are considerably more emotionally intelligent and worldly wise.

In reality it's impossible in a case like this to measure the maturity of the 'victim', however the reality is that cases like this are far from black and white and often driven by the parents outrage, not by the damage actually done (whether physically or mentally). I bet the girl just wants to move on with her life, but instead she is being dragged through this.

Having said that, he is bang to rights in this case, it's not like he pulled in a nightclub and found out after the fact so he's a fucking idiot at best, and a predator at worst. I'm kinda expecting he's somewhere in the middle

She was a young fifteen, which she made clear to him at the outset. He was 27. A 27 year-old pestering a 16 year-old for sex would be creepy even though it's permitted by the law (in most instances), but the law has to draw an arbitrary line somewhere. Even if she'd been a day short of 16 at the time, which she definitely wasn't, he would be a creep and a pervert. He was almost twice her age. It would be completely different if he'd been 17, of course, even if the law doesn't reflect this. I think we can all accept that. But this is a case of an adult and a child, whichever way you cut the cake. The parents have every right to be outraged and to drag AJ through the courts. I know I fucking would.

ruralblue wrote:

Im_Spartacus wrote:I'll get my tin hat on for this, but whilst I also don't advocate shagging children, getdressedmctavish has a point regarding the relative seriousness of the case.

Think if you make comparisons to other cases of under age stuff then it is not as serious. Earlier in this thread (I think?) I said about the bloke two doors down from us. Systematically sexually abused his daughter over an eleven year period. Real sick shit like putting hoods on her. Cunt got away with it for nearly 50 years. Admitted a guilty plea and got 4 years!!!! Yes four fucking years for wrecking his daughters life and that of his family. This sick fuck will be out soon (hopefully his refusal for cancer treatment inside wi have resulted in a slow and painful death but we don't know if hes still alive), as he'd have been eligible for parole after two years.

All this shits sick.

Obviously I don't have a daughter but if I did and there was strong enough evidence showing something went on I'd get her justice by getting myself a stretch for chopping the perpetrators balls off.

I always used to say that mate. And I didn't mess about. But then your teenagers grow up and do what they want, even though all grew up decent people.

He's a twat but there's a hell of a lot more 15 year old non virgins out there doing exactly the same.

Rich footballer or chavvy crack dealer, take your pick. It's up to the father of course but I wonder if he really thinks she's a child at 15 years 364 days and an adult a day later?

I can tell you his relationship with his daughter will never be the same. Sometimes you just have to let people make their own mistakes, keep your nose out and be there when they need you.

BBC reporting Not Guilty on 1 count of sexual activity with 15yr old......