By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Would you take a risk on him given he’s leaving Man Utd. I think hes done a very bad thing and clearly isn’t a nice guy but I don’t think he’s quite as scummy as some people make out. Perhaps deserves a second chance
Three weeks ago, the same legal process reversed a decision that had wrongly incarcerated a man for the same charge as Greenwood.
Therefore, we must proceed on the basis that the decision to not pursue a prosecution against Greenwood to be for sound legal reasons. We cannot and must not pick and choose our outcomes.
Fact is, I/we don't know the full ins and outs of this saga and crucially, why the case against Greenwood collapsed. Consequently, I, like you, am left to consider and hope that the reason(s) behind the CPS' decision to drop the case are down to untainted and justifiably sound evidence of innocence. If so, then Greenwood has a right to be treated as an innocent man in the eyes of the law and by you and me.
He's clearly the latest product of too much money, pandering, and no controls applied; which create little monsters. Whether that manifested itself in him feeling he could rape a women, we don't know, but the legal system decided not to pursue a case and thus, if anything, his real 'crime' may be one of stupid behaviours.
As I say: we don't know why the case was dropped and maybe if we did, then our views might change accordingly.
However, the two real issues here, are the what cases like Greenwood attack, and which at the end of the day, are the most important in my view: ensuring the legal system does not prevent women from coming forward to make an allegationof rape; while ensuring that any outcome is safe, and if that is one where the case is dropped or the man found not guilty, then innocence must thereafter be presumed.
'Always In Motion' by John Honney available on amazon.co.uk
Nous sommes L’occitane Rs!
The number of folk jumping on speculation published in an article dated January 2022 astonishes me. You should be ashamed of yourselves. What happened to innocent until proven guilty?
In the interests of fairness, here's an up-to-date article:
Before we start chucking stones, it's important to note that Mason denied the allegations, and the alleged victim asked the police to drop their investigation back in April 2022. This request was ignored but eventually all charges were dropped in February 2023. Man United subsequently conducted a 6-month internal investigation which concluded that Mason did not commit the offences in respect of which he was originally charged.
Mason has admitted to making "mistakes" so it appears that he isn't entirely without blame. However, that doesn't make him guilty of abuse or rape. He will leave Man United by mutual consent but remains on their books on full pay. This demonstrates that in 6 months Man United found little or nothing to warrant dismissal.
Whilst Mason clearly needs to learn from his mistakes, the witch-hunt concerns me. Men have rights too and these rights should not be marginalised because its fashionable to do so. Rich footballers, in particular, will be magnets to women, and it's chillingly easy to make false allegations. Care needs to be exercised not to take a moralistic approach to footballers' lifestyles, and to judge each case on the facts.
Ultimately, this is a young man with a partner and a baby. In the eyes of the law Mason is innocent. Until that changes, Mason and his family deserve to live their lives without being judged by the court of social media.
[Post edited 22 Aug 2023 1:14]
Please look at this and tell me that he's innocent.
Here's a transcript of what was said between Mason Greenwood Harriet Robson. 👇 pic.twitter.com/X8QvzRYN8E
Three weeks ago, the same legal process reversed a decision that had wrongly incarcerated a man for the same charge as Greenwood.
Therefore, we must proceed on the basis that the decision to not pursue a prosecution against Greenwood to be for sound legal reasons. We cannot and must not pick and choose our outcomes.
Fact is, I/we don't know the full ins and outs of this saga and crucially, why the case against Greenwood collapsed. Consequently, I, like you, am left to consider and hope that the reason(s) behind the CPS' decision to drop the case are down to untainted and justifiably sound evidence of innocence. If so, then Greenwood has a right to be treated as an innocent man in the eyes of the law and by you and me.
He's clearly the latest product of too much money, pandering, and no controls applied; which create little monsters. Whether that manifested itself in him feeling he could rape a women, we don't know, but the legal system decided not to pursue a case and thus, if anything, his real 'crime' may be one of stupid behaviours.
As I say: we don't know why the case was dropped and maybe if we did, then our views might change accordingly.
However, the two real issues here, are the what cases like Greenwood attack, and which at the end of the day, are the most important in my view: ensuring the legal system does not prevent women from coming forward to make an allegationof rape; while ensuring that any outcome is safe, and if that is one where the case is dropped or the man found not guilty, then innocence must thereafter be presumed.
Again, not pressing charges/dropping a case are not solely (and quite rarely) down to “sound evidence of innocence”. It is simply to do with whether they have enough evidence for the CPS to believe a prosecution is likely. If it’s not they don’t proceed.
In this instance the victim decided to not come forward anymore. Without a victim pressing charges and any witnesses, proving guilt would be hard. Doesn’t mean there is any evidence of innocence.
But not being able to prove guilt does not mean he is innocent of the accusation. Technically we are all legally innocent until proven guilty of something. But that also doesn’t mean we didn’t do whatever we were accused of.
In this instance, with the recording in the public domain, this seems a very likely case of the people/CPS not feeling confident enough in pressing ahead when the alleged victim won’t press charges or take the stand, not enough other witnesses, and not wanting to put limited resources into a case with those challenges.
It is highly unlikely they decided to drop the case was because of “sound evidence of his innocence”. If you’ve not listened to the recording, do so. The bloke is an entitled wrong ‘un.
Again, not pressing charges/dropping a case are not solely (and quite rarely) down to “sound evidence of innocence”. It is simply to do with whether they have enough evidence for the CPS to believe a prosecution is likely. If it’s not they don’t proceed.
In this instance the victim decided to not come forward anymore. Without a victim pressing charges and any witnesses, proving guilt would be hard. Doesn’t mean there is any evidence of innocence.
But not being able to prove guilt does not mean he is innocent of the accusation. Technically we are all legally innocent until proven guilty of something. But that also doesn’t mean we didn’t do whatever we were accused of.
In this instance, with the recording in the public domain, this seems a very likely case of the people/CPS not feeling confident enough in pressing ahead when the alleged victim won’t press charges or take the stand, not enough other witnesses, and not wanting to put limited resources into a case with those challenges.
It is highly unlikely they decided to drop the case was because of “sound evidence of his innocence”. If you’ve not listened to the recording, do so. The bloke is an entitled wrong ‘un.
I'm acutely aware of the machinations of the CPS, having had to deal with the consequences of their decisions in the past. Why the complainant withdrew is again an unknown, albeit that we can speculate.
However, I take umbrage with you on your selective editing of what I wrote and thus, what I said in its entirety. For the avoidance of doubt: the need to ensure a system is there to support women complainants, ensure fairness and confidence in the outcome; whatever that maybe are the primary issues here.
Unless you/we know of nefarious forces at play to subjugate the process, then we have to bare the consequences whether we like it or not.
Failing that, get off your arse and do something about it!
'Always In Motion' by John Honney available on amazon.co.uk
Nous sommes L’occitane Rs!
I’m embarrassed that we have supporters who think this acceptable. And that’s me done with this thread.
Who has said it acceptable? No one I can see.
However, some of us have looked beyond this case to the wider implications and questions it poses. Because if not addressed, then the two worst scenarios will follow: women won't come forward and those acquitted/not pursued may be tarnished forever. Neither are remotely acceptable.
As i have said, I/we don't know the full story, but given the transcript of the conversation posted above has been out there for all to see before, we can - as I previously said - hope the withdrawal of the complainant was not by way of nefarious means.
I will end with this: until such time as you've had to deal with someone wrongly accused of a quite heinous crime, don't rush to judgement. I agree he looks a wrong 'un, but I'm not sure we have all the facts at our disposal to say beyond reasonable doubt, he's a rapist who's got away with it.
'Always In Motion' by John Honney available on amazon.co.uk
Nous sommes L’occitane Rs!
I'm acutely aware of the machinations of the CPS, having had to deal with the consequences of their decisions in the past. Why the complainant withdrew is again an unknown, albeit that we can speculate.
However, I take umbrage with you on your selective editing of what I wrote and thus, what I said in its entirety. For the avoidance of doubt: the need to ensure a system is there to support women complainants, ensure fairness and confidence in the outcome; whatever that maybe are the primary issues here.
Unless you/we know of nefarious forces at play to subjugate the process, then we have to bare the consequences whether we like it or not.
Failing that, get off your arse and do something about it!
I didn’t selectively edit what you wrote. I quoted you, accurately. I just don’t agree with you on that point.
I didn’t selectively edit what you wrote. I quoted you, accurately. I just don’t agree with you on that point.
Which you are of course, entitled to do. Thankfully.
However, I do not agree that you have properly and fully quoted me, certainly not in it's entirety which, if you had, would clearly demonstrate that I had not said the CPS' decision 'was' down to sound reasons rather, that I hoped it was.
For the avoidance of doubt, and to clarify for others, here are my actual words in their entirety:
"...Consequently, I, like you, am left to consider and hope that the reason(s) behind the CPS' decision to drop the case are down to untainted and justifiably sound evidence of innocence. If so, then Greenwood has a right to be treated as an innocent man in the eyes of the law and by you and me...'
Bloody huge difference in meaning. I certainly do not think you were being deliberately obtuse, and I trust my position is now clarified for you.
'Always In Motion' by John Honney available on amazon.co.uk
Nous sommes L’occitane Rs!
Again, not pressing charges/dropping a case are not solely (and quite rarely) down to “sound evidence of innocence”. It is simply to do with whether they have enough evidence for the CPS to believe a prosecution is likely. If it’s not they don’t proceed.
In this instance the victim decided to not come forward anymore. Without a victim pressing charges and any witnesses, proving guilt would be hard. Doesn’t mean there is any evidence of innocence.
But not being able to prove guilt does not mean he is innocent of the accusation. Technically we are all legally innocent until proven guilty of something. But that also doesn’t mean we didn’t do whatever we were accused of.
In this instance, with the recording in the public domain, this seems a very likely case of the people/CPS not feeling confident enough in pressing ahead when the alleged victim won’t press charges or take the stand, not enough other witnesses, and not wanting to put limited resources into a case with those challenges.
It is highly unlikely they decided to drop the case was because of “sound evidence of his innocence”. If you’ve not listened to the recording, do so. The bloke is an entitled wrong ‘un.
He may well be an entitled wrong un and I suspect that is probably the case.
But thank god we have judges, barristers, public prosecutors and, hopefully, some diligent police forces out there.
It is rather chilling that so many are totally convinced of his guilt based on an audio tape. Any defence lawyer will rip that to shreds. I won’t even begin to delve into it but there’s one stand out plausible interpretation and it would have been the first thing public prosecutors would have looked at and quite likely the reason why the lady concerned, Man Utd, or even Greenwood would wish to avoid it being out there in the public domain due to public embarrassment, even if it means the curtailment of his career.
Bottom line is all the public bodies mentioned and Man Utd know far more than we do so please stop rushing to judgment.
I'm flabbergasted that LfW's biggest supporter of Saudi Arabia should turn out to think that Mason Greenwood's a great bloke and hey, men have rights too.
I am not quite sure why people keep mentioning legal proceedings as a way to in a way defend Greenwood. "he wasn't found guilty in a court so we shouldn't pass judgement".
It doesn't matter what proceeded the audio tape, or the bruises, or the blood or what happened after this evidence came out into the public. The audio is there for everyone to hear, if that was me on the audio or anyone else on this forum and our employer heard it we would lose our job. Why should Greenwood treated differently?
If your daughter came home making accusations against someone you're not going to say to her "I don't know love, we should wait until this has gone through the proper prosecution proceedings before I pass judgement"
The number of folk jumping on speculation published in an article dated January 2022 astonishes me. You should be ashamed of yourselves. What happened to innocent until proven guilty?
In the interests of fairness, here's an up-to-date article:
Before we start chucking stones, it's important to note that Mason denied the allegations, and the alleged victim asked the police to drop their investigation back in April 2022. This request was ignored but eventually all charges were dropped in February 2023. Man United subsequently conducted a 6-month internal investigation which concluded that Mason did not commit the offences in respect of which he was originally charged.
Mason has admitted to making "mistakes" so it appears that he isn't entirely without blame. However, that doesn't make him guilty of abuse or rape. He will leave Man United by mutual consent but remains on their books on full pay. This demonstrates that in 6 months Man United found little or nothing to warrant dismissal.
Whilst Mason clearly needs to learn from his mistakes, the witch-hunt concerns me. Men have rights too and these rights should not be marginalised because its fashionable to do so. Rich footballers, in particular, will be magnets to women, and it's chillingly easy to make false allegations. Care needs to be exercised not to take a moralistic approach to footballers' lifestyles, and to judge each case on the facts.
Ultimately, this is a young man with a partner and a baby. In the eyes of the law Mason is innocent. Until that changes, Mason and his family deserve to live their lives without being judged by the court of social media.
[Post edited 22 Aug 2023 1:14]
This! The feminisation of the culture (cf. MeToo), as you rightly point out, accelerates this kind of thing now, and men need to stand up and be men (without, of course, taking out their - in some cases - anger about the culture on women). There are ugly things about men and women, especially in the domain of passion and sexuality. That audio fragment, whatever the context, didn't sound pretty, I grant you. But, obviously, the alleged victim and/or the CPS, didn't feel strongly enough about her 'case' to pursue it in the end, which all helps to tell a story.
I don't see, actually, why any of this should impact Greenwood's professional career as a footballer - mind you, I was one of the (probably) few who felt the same way about Ched Evans. (Until recently, we had a prime minister who threatened to beat up a journalist, lied to the House/Queen, and committed Covid crimes while in office. Go figure!)
Three weeks ago, the same legal process reversed a decision that had wrongly incarcerated a man for the same charge as Greenwood.
Therefore, we must proceed on the basis that the decision to not pursue a prosecution against Greenwood to be for sound legal reasons. We cannot and must not pick and choose our outcomes.
Fact is, I/we don't know the full ins and outs of this saga and crucially, why the case against Greenwood collapsed. Consequently, I, like you, am left to consider and hope that the reason(s) behind the CPS' decision to drop the case are down to untainted and justifiably sound evidence of innocence. If so, then Greenwood has a right to be treated as an innocent man in the eyes of the law and by you and me.
He's clearly the latest product of too much money, pandering, and no controls applied; which create little monsters. Whether that manifested itself in him feeling he could rape a women, we don't know, but the legal system decided not to pursue a case and thus, if anything, his real 'crime' may be one of stupid behaviours.
As I say: we don't know why the case was dropped and maybe if we did, then our views might change accordingly.
However, the two real issues here, are the what cases like Greenwood attack, and which at the end of the day, are the most important in my view: ensuring the legal system does not prevent women from coming forward to make an allegationof rape; while ensuring that any outcome is safe, and if that is one where the case is dropped or the man found not guilty, then innocence must thereafter be presumed.
Women are not obstructed from making rape complaints - in fact, in the context of 'Me Too's 'Believe women' mantra (credible or not, sane or not), the boot is now firmly on the other sociocultural foot.
Just for the record, Greenwood's alleged victim, Harriet Robson, had a child with him last month (18 months after this all blew up) and they're getting married, apparently. Makes you wonder, eh?
I don't know what went on between them, and nor do any of us. However, I would supplement your last paragraph to the effect that, when women (or indeed men) are shown to have fabricated or exaggerated claims of rape or sexual assault for malicious and/or manipulative reasons, they should likewise face the full force of the law to the same magnitude as actual rapists.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
