Agree Or Disagree?

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3480476/KATIE-HOPKINS-away-rope-Adam-Johnson-broke-law-girl-knew-EXACTLY-doing-s-not-paedophile-doesn-t-deserve-prison-Twitter-lynching.html

I wager that most are thinking exactly what Kate Hopkins has dared to say, but have been frightened in case they are accused of siding with a 'paedophile' or showing no sympathy for a 'child's' suffering etc etc.

Please don't turn this thread into a anti-Kate Hopkins or even anti-AOG, just comment on the case itself.

Yes we all know that he committed a UK criminal act, but is the media blowing this case out of all proportion?

[B00]

"But none of these things make Adam Johnson worthy of prison."

I disagree- he broke the law.

[ummmm]

I disagree too. The judge and jury seen the exchanges between the two.

[anotheoldgit]

I think that I am right in believing that the girl had been cleared of lying, but then I read this.

/// However the girl told the court the former winger "put his hands down her pants" and she performed an oral sex act on him. ///

/// The jury, which had been deliberating since Tuesday morning following a three-week trial, cleared Johnson over the oral sex claim but convicted him by a 10-2 majority on the sexual touching charge. ///

I further read:

/// The judge said his preliminary view was that the case falls into the category of a five-year prison sentence with a range of four to 10 years. ///

That would be more than the two and half years that Stuart Hall served, how can that be right in any stretch of the imagination?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-35711213

[Booldawg]

Surely his legal representation could get him off on the fact that professional footballers don't know how to behave around females based on 'cultural differences' ?

[Hypognosis]

@douglas9401
//
If Mr Johnson had had the foresight to have been born in Somalia he may have had a slightly easier time of things.
Cultural doncha know. Trumps the law every time, apparently.
10:32 Tue 08th Mar 2016
//

If you took the trouble to actually read the press article, under AOG's thread about the Somalian station platform guy, you will see that it entailed an attempted kiss; a "lunge" (whatever that means) and troubling conversation, causing concern. Three separate girls/women affected.

No sexual touching involved (or else, strangely, a heavily abridged news report). Different sentencing tariff, I'd imagine.

If cases are not like for like then don't play this absurd game of comparing severity of sentencing.

I'm sure you'd love to be able to carp on about certain minorities being treated with kid gloves but, unless you furnish us with the stories which prove it, don't expect people to fall for your rhetoric.

ditto @booldawg

[Retrochic]

Boo - yes he broke the Law -not every law broken results in a custodial sentence, including car theft, assault and burglary

[Gromit]

// That would be more than the two and half years that Stuart Hall served, how can that be right in any stretch of the imagination? //

Hall confessed everything, and saved the victims the ordeal of a trial. That would have been taken into consideration.

[jackthehat]

divebuddy - What do you think it should mean?

[hc4361]

It can't be right to vilify and condemn a young victim in the media in the way Hopkins has done here. Shameful

[Gromit]

// I've long been of the opinion that most left wingers do have arrested brain development. //

Johnson plays on the right wing.

[Retrochic]

There are some very naive posters on here who believe this 15 year old was 100% a 'victim'. If she was my daughter and this had happened I would have sorted it privately then given her a blinking good lecture on what where and why you should not be flirting with men twice your age and getting into the back seat with then. She was absolutely NOT forced to do anything. This does not mean I agree or condone in any way what this excuse for a man did, but the parents and the girl have to take some responsibility of why and how it happened.

[jackthehat]

Not naive just a differing point of view.

Many of us wouldn't wish to appear as any sort of apologists for a grown man taking advantage of a girl in her mid-teens.

[hc4361]

Retrochic, the law is there because 15 year olds have raging hormones and no sense. They need protecting from themselves and predatory adults.

Yours is the same attitude as the police and CPS had for years when faced with abused, under age teens.

[jackthehat]

///one who suffers injury, hardship, loss, etc. ///

I feel that this would apply to a teenaged girl who has had, and continues to have, her reputation traduced in the media.

[Gromit]

Retrochic,

The law is there to protect 15 year olds.
Not just from predatory perverts but also from making their own mistakes.
The whole, "she deserved it" , "she was gagging for it" excuses are very worrying from posters who are adults and shoyld know that sexual activity with a 15 year old will get you into trouble - no excuses.

[agchristie]

Retro > I would have sorted it privately then given her a blinking good lecture on what where and why you should not be flirting with men

And if he had gone on to do it again?

[Retrochic]

if he went on to do it again -not my problem