Adam Johnson Arrested

  • The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...

    Get involved!

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Sort by date Sort by reaction score
Flannerz said:
If they met in a nightclub could he assume that because she is in there that she is 18+?
Click to expand...
Yes - since the girl is over 13, the prosecution must prove not only that they had sex, but that Johnson did not reasonably believe she was at least 16. It'd be a very, very good defence that he met her in an age-restricted environment where she was fraudulently claiming to be above the age of consent. Such a good defence, though, that I really struggle to believe that's what's happened - if it is it shouldn't even go to court because there's an absolutely minimal chance of successful prosecution. Unfortunately that makes me think there's something at least slightly more sinister going on here :(
 
ArcspacE said:
Says the helmet who fantasises about the underage-looking girls in his local grocery store

:goonermong:
Click to expand...
Oh, so you've given up calling people a hampton? Back to helmet?

It's a "look, don't touch" sort of thing. And for that matter, wondering if a girl is 18 =/= fucking a girl aged 15.

So yeah, you don't have much of a point, do you?
 
VirginiaSpur said:
Oh, so you've given up calling people a hampton? Back to helmet?

It's a "look, don't touch" sort of thing. And for that matter, wondering if a girl is 18 =/= fucking a girl aged 15.

So yeah, you don't have much of a point, do you?
Click to expand...
You're a massive hypocrite, that's the point, fella

Wanna bet it would be a similar case to Ribery, Lowe, etc.?
 
Last edited:
VirginiaSpur said:
Wow, talk about a cultural divide. I had no idea.

It's statutory rape in the US. Would be registered as a sex offender for life and prison is likely. The courts are not very lenient on this matter.
Click to expand...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prison–industrial_complex

images
 
ArcspacE said:
You're a massive hypocrite, that's the point, fella
Click to expand...
I'm still in my 20's, therefore if a youngish checkout girl wants to wear yoga pants then I'm reasonably comfortable with that.

So, because the topic at hand is someone fucking children, I think it's a mighty stretch to label me a massive hypocrite.
Wanna bet it would be a similar case to Ribery, Bryant, etc.?
Click to expand...
Why?
 
Last edited:
SpartanSpurs said:
Ridiculous that his name's everywhere though when he's not been convicted. His career is already ruined, whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty?!
Click to expand...
Do you feel that it is a realistic expectation that people don't draw any opinion until a legal verdict is handed down? If so, do you think that it is realistic to expect people to only have an opinion that matches it?
 
ILSpur said:
Do you feel that it is a realistic expectation that people don't draw any opinion until a legal verdict is handed down? If so, do you think that it is realistic to expect people to only have an opinion that matches it?
Click to expand...
No, people for some reason love to slander others. Which is why I think it's ridiculous his name was released before he has even been charged let alone convicted.
 
SpartanSpurs said:
No, people for some reason love to slander others. Which is why I think it's ridiculous his name was released before he has even been charged let alone convicted.
Click to expand...
He was arrested and released on bail. That would imply that he has had charges leveled against him, that's why it is an issue. This isn't a sleazy tabloid writing up a story about it, he's been arrested.

If he goes to court on this and happens to be found not guilty for some other reason than he didn't actually engage in the act (i.e. falsifying age or some other technicality), people can and will still vilify him for having sex with a 15 year old. That's not slandering the person, it just that people don't take too kindly to the idea of an adult male with an underage girl. If he ends up being found not guilty of the act, he will still be guilty in the public eye as an idiot and the guy that had sex with a 15 year old.

There have been a number of stories where people have been falsely accused or suckered in by some people looking to get some cash out of them or to sell their story, so I'm sympathetic to what you are saying. Let's not pretend though that people won't/can't/shouldn't be able to form an opinion about a person's actions in these instances.
 
VirginiaSpur said:
I'm still in my 20's, therefore if a youngish checkout girl wants to wear yoga pants then I'm reasonably comfortable with that.
Click to expand...
Johnson's also in his 20s - not sure how that makes a difference

As for the Ribery case, etc - I'm 99.9% certain they'd argue along similar lines of defence
 
Carlito Brigante said:
I see, the no comment defence.....*dons judges wig and gavel*

"ALL STAND, JUDGE CARLITO PRESIDING"
Click to expand...

Carlito may I approach the bench? I too believe in the half your age plus 7 rule but I wonder if the North of England and in the US there is a different formula.

I wonder if when the girl physically cannot be old enough to be their daughter, the offender believes they are still fuckable, in the cases of Mr Virginia and Mr Johnson - aged about 27/28 this would be the case, just wonder if that is in the psyche anywhere
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom