Ched Evans + Adam Johnson court cases

[The Bear]

He hardly groomed her. She was up for it more than he was. He was the one who stopped the relationship before they had full sex. She wanted to continue.

 

[Tony Towner]

As the CPS said outside court today, the age of consent is set where it is to protect children from predators and THEMSELVES

 

[Kenny]

He hardly groomed her. She was up for it more than he was. He was the one who stopped the relationship before they had full sex. She wanted to continue.

As he (eventually) admitted the Grooming charge, it's fair to say he Groomed her.

 

[MARKakaJIM]

I thought she stopped messaging him because word got around her school and she didn't like how it was panning out? Rather than Johnson binning her off as Bear suggests.

 

[So Long Architect]

The judges remarks today:

The judge said the victim had been a Sunderland fan, who would wait after matches to take pictures of her favourite player, Johnson, who had known her age.

He said: “That was known to you. To put it another way, she had only just turned 15 when you began grooming her, because, as you were to admit, you found her sexually attractive.”

He added that the footballer’s intention had been to engage in sexual activity with her, knowing that she was under 16.

The judge said Johnson had exchanged more than 800 messages with her, which had largely been innocent.

But he added: “You continued in your grooming of this girl even after you were engaged in sexual activity with her. You wanted no one to know that you and she were exchanging messages."

 

[So Long Architect]

He hardly groomed her. She was up for it more than he was. He was the one who stopped the relationship before they had full sex. She wanted to continue.

Bear, I can only assume you haven't spent much time around 15-year-olds as an adult. They're not known for being the most sensible of people. They are most definitely still children - whatever they may say or do or how they look.

 

[Sniffer]

Forget what she said, what her school mates were saying, and who ended what and why.

Johnson admitted to the courts that he had groomed a 15 year girl and engaged in sexual activity with her. He was also convicted by a jury of a further count of sexual activity. He abused his position as an idol to a schoolgirl supporter of the Premier League football team that he played for.

Anything else is irrelevant and the victim deserves the chance to chance to put this behind her rather than be subjected to some of the crap being spouted by friends of the Johnson family and others.

 

[The Bear]

As he (eventually) admitted the Grooming charge, it's fair to say he Groomed her.

He didn't really have much choice I expect. As I said, better to plead guilty and show contrition than contest charges you have no chance of winning.

Mark - As far as I could tell from the testimonies published, there was a further meeting set up which he didn't go through with. The victim's friend said that she was annoyed and upset that it didn't happen.

 

[Johnny75]

He hardly groomed her. She was up for it more than he was. He was the one who stopped the relationship before they had full sex. She wanted to continue.

I find this a deeply unpleasant and disturbing point of view.

 

[The Bear]

Sometimes real life is.

 

[Paddingtonwolf]

Fucking hell Bear. Change the record. Johnson is a fucking cunt and got off lightly.

 

[Kenny]

He didn't really have much choice I expect.

because all the evidence would mean he would be found Guilty if he denied it? Yes, I agree

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/r-v-johnson-sentencing.pdf

Sentencing remarks in full.

 

[The Bear]

Yet if it had happened 12 months later the law would be perfectly fine with it all. She wouldn't be a child or a victim and he wouldn't have been grooming her. The age difference would have been frowned upon but that's it. When in reality those 12 months could have made no difference to her actual maturity on the issue.

I just find it all very arbitrary and rigid when in real life it's much more complex, with both sides contributing to what happened.

Sorry if this is at odds with other people's views but I tend to look at all sides of an issue and try and understand what happened and why, not just rigidly quote the law and an arbitrary age of consent, which is different all over the world.

 

[Penk Wolf]

@JoshHalliday
It can now be reported that Adam Johnson was arrested for possessing extreme pornography - bestiality - on his laptop last year

 

[So Long Architect]

Yet if it had happened 12 months later the law would be perfectly fine with it all. She wouldn't be a child or a victim and he wouldn't have been grooming her. The age difference would have been frowned upon but that's it. When in reality those 12 months could have made no difference to her actual maturity on the issue.

I just find it all very arbitrary and rigid when in real life it's much more complex, with both sides contributing to what happened.

Sorry if this is at odds with other people's views but I tend to look at all sides of an issue and try and understand what happened and why, not just rigidly quote the law and an arbitrary age of consent, which is different all over the world.

So if she'd been 12 and acted in the same way, you'd have been comfortable with that? I'm not about to look up ages of consent around the world but I imagine there's somewhere in the world where you can marry a 12-year-old. If you wouldn't be comfortable with that can you explain why?

 

[Kenny]

not just rigidly quote the law and an arbitrary age of consent

Yet that is all that matters in this case and he knew that.

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

If you read the sentencing remarks then you will see that it is pretty much the dictionary definition of grooming. No matter how 'up for it' the child was.

 

[The Bear]

So if she'd been 12 and acted in the same way, you'd have been comfortable with that? I'm not about to look up ages of consent around the world but I imagine there's somewhere in the world where you can marry a 12-year-old. If you wouldn't be comfortable with that can you explain why?

Of course I wouldn't be comfortable with that. There would be no way a 12 year old could handle that sort of relationship or be anywhere near sexual maturity. Especially since puberty wouldn't have even been reached fully by then.

This highlights my point. The age of consent isn't necessarily a good indicator of sexual maturity. The actions and emotions shown by the individuals involved is a better barometer.

I agree that there needs to be an age limit whereby underage relationships need to be investigated to make sure that those involved are not being taken advantage of or abused, but don't agree that this automatically makes either side guilty. I accept that this is too liberal a view for some people.

 

[Paddingtonwolf]

It isn't liberal. It is just wrong.