Can't believe what Sky News reporter just said re child sex abuse victim of Adam Johnson

[ofuckit]

Did anybody else see this? I'm horrified and a bit disturbed tbh.

The reporter was talking to an ex footballer about the case and said 'Do you think it's hard for people to understand how hard it is to deal with the temptations put in the way of footballers'.... 😟
The ex footballer responded in agreement with the reporter, saying how oh yes it's very hard for them, etc....

So we can assume from this that these men see children as 'temptations put in their way'?

i feel sick 😞

Yes, he admitted that he pleaded not guilty to start with because he hoped that the victim would back down didn't he? And the club knew about that?!

Quaint - was the victim in that case publicly shamed and vilified on social media?

Yes - they saw the grooming texts and we're told that he admitted kissing her, but weren't bothered because he'd probably get off.

If they hadn't seen those messages, it would he different. But they did. And no one could read them without noticing that (a) he knew her age, (b) he groomed her, all the sexual talk was initiated by him, (c) sexual activity had taken place, and is referred to in the texts, and (d) he met her through his position at the club, so it was linked to his role there, not a private matter separate to work.

So they knew full well that he was guilty. They had more than enough evidence to sack him.

This is an interesting interview with Mandy Smith, now a grown woman and mother who works with teenagers.
www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1266664/Mandy-Smith-I-DID-sleep-Bill-Wyman-I-14--man-life-God.html

Not that I'm aware of WomanWithAltitude. It was just an example of the legal system's failure to protect child victims. The public shaming seems to be reserved for females only.

I've been arguing with someone today who is insistent that you are an adult at 15.

It's a good job people like that aren't on the jury during cases like this. I can't believe even after he's been found guilty, people are still so pig headed as to insist that a 15 year old, naive girl is 'far from innocent'.

The whole system seems set up to protect perpetrators of sexual offences, and judges seem only too keen to accept excuses.

Does he also think 15 year olds a should vote, drive, drink, get married, join the army?

Not one of our "adult" markers is set at 15!

Generally good article by Janice Turner in the times today about porn culture and footballers - referencing "teenage" being just another porn option to many and noting that AJ constantly watched porn on his phone, according to team mates.

Does he also think 15 year olds a should vote, drive, drink, get married, join the army?

In England at least even a 16 year old cannot join the army or get married legally without it being cosigned by an adult. They can't vote or buy alcohol until 18, and you can't drive most vehicles on the public roads until 17. I know a couple of those things differ in other parts of the British Isles. The idea that a 16 yr old is an adult in the eyes of the law is laughable.

Does he also think 15 year olds a should vote, drive, drink, get married, join the army?

The person I was arguing was in fact a woman. Who will apparently raise her daughter to 'know right from wrong'. Unlike the parents of AJ's victim, who are obviously the most negligent parents ever.

Maybe Adam Johnson's parents should have raised him to not go chasing after schoolgirls no body ever thinks to mention that though do they. I can't abide victim blaming.

Teachers legally can't sleep with their students even if they are over 16, because there is an acknowledged imbalance of power which would make any relationship unethical.

There's a clear imbalance of power in this case too. If anyone thinks that the power lies with a 15 year old school girl and not a millionaire England player, then they're a fucking idiot.

And It seems there are a lot of fucking idiots residing in the UK currently.

imwithspud me too. I wonder if we're arguing with the same person.

Although there are lots of them.

One in particular has even messaged me privately to warn me off and call me names, then thrown the mother of all tantrums when I called her on it publicly.

People are depressing sometimes.

There are a lot of them, they all seem to come crawling out on Facebook. I thought people had more sense than to blame a minor for an adults wrong doings.

Guess I shouldn't be surprised really.

And now I see that a 22 year old has become pregnant by a married famous footballer and wants maintenance, which "only goes to prove that they are all in it for the money"

Ugh. Because God forbid a man actually pay for a child that is biologically his. Ffs.

People have always held these views. It's just that FB and twitter and comments sections are now the garden fence or the queue in the Post Office.

a 22 year old has become pregnant by a married famous footballer and wants maintenance, which "only goes to prove that they are all in it for the money"

Nothing has changed much AuntieFlaubert. Fifty years ago she'd have probably have had the baby and given it up for adoption. Forty-nine years ago she might have had a legal abortion.

But she'd have still been blamed whereas the married man wouldn't. It might have been different if they were both single. Then he'd have been blamed a bit if he didn't marry her but she'd have been blamed a lot for 'trapping him'.

The new case you mentioned (I'll jump on Google for the gossip in a minute) is a purely private matter - despite my admission of being interested in the gossip.

He will have to make financial arrangements for his child. Why should the State do it? Why should anyone care so long as those hard working tax payers we keep hearing about aren't affected? Luckily, as a famous footballer, he should have more than enough money to do that without State intervention to help his blameless child. But if he didn't earn £60,000 a week he'd still have to take responsibility for his decision to fuck without a condom.

Off to Google now. What is the betting that I've never heard of this person who earns a fortune for kicking a ball about?

limitedperiod
His name is being keep secret at the moment (think super injunction). But of course this case is being conflated with the 15 year old. Which is an entirely different issue since one is quite legal and the other isn't.

There is no reason whatever why the 22 y.o's case should be in the news at all, but the gutter press are always interested to encourage controversy/scandal.

I work for the gutter press, though as a freelance so that's why I don't know the names yet. There's no particular reason why this case isn't a legitimate news story for a tabloid newspaper.

I guess the man has persuaded a judge to grant an injunction banning the publication of any names - not a super injunction banning the mention of anything - while he establishes paternity and if he is the father, makes an appropriate settlement.

That seems fair. It may be that the woman would prefer it to remain private too, and is in favour of the injunction.

If that happens it will remain private. If not, the injunction may be lifted. At that stage, she might want it lifted.

It is related to the case of Adam Johnson sexually abusing a 15 year old girl in that many people think that the main issue is that women are money-grubbing scum primarily after ripping off poor benighted rich men, rather than someone who wants a man to provide for his child and someone else who was sexually abused.

The footballer's name must be doing the rounds on FB and twitter. If he is named enough times, a judge may decide there is no point to the secrecy any more and lift the injunction. That's happened before.

Allegedly the family of AJ's victim have decided not to sue.

First the victim blaming mob said the girl did this for the money. Now they're saying she's not claiming compo because she knows it's her fault, she was in the wrong and she doesn't deserve it. It seems the victim can't win no matter what.

Allegedly the family of AJ's victim have decided not to sue.

You're not helping.

How do you know what was in their thoughts? Are you a close friend or a legal adviser?

By suggesting Adam Johnson's victim was considering sueing him but has decided against, you are making it all about money, just like the people you seek to condemn.

The girl has achieved a criminal conviction against him. That was difficult enough and I am quite sure was the most important thing for her and her family.

Are they saying that? Or do they just want it all to go away and for her to resume some sort of normal life as quickly as possible?