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 😞

Of course, it's not over for the poor girl, as Johnson will be appealing :(

For those saying ANY 14/15/'nearly 16' yr old = girl who 'knew what she was doing'

Please know things:

You are shaming all those CHILDREN who have been brave enough to report SA in the past. EVERY SINGLE TIME this sort of story reaches the press and your sort of response comes out, those children (now adults) who have reported know that this is how some in Society view them. Even now.
I have worked with many many adult survivors whose mental health suffers because of statements like yours.

You make it far far far less likely for any 14/15/nearly 16 year old CHILD to be able to report the Child Abuse they have suffered. Do you have any concerpt of how hard it is to be abused? how hard to report? How low the conviction rates are? No, probably not.

I hope you feel OK with that, because I don't.

'For fucks sake he's admitted in court that he wanted to make her feel like she owed him sexual favours, what more do you need to accept that she is the victim, 100%, because he was the predator in this situation? '

Exactly. Some people are determined to tie themselves in knots finding ways to blame the victim, rather than the man who pled guilty to grooming someone who was legally a child. Anyone who is blaming this young girl for any part of this disgusting story needs to ask themselves how they got so messed up in the head

On what grounds will he be able to appeal? You don't just get to appeal because you don't like the verdict.

And it's a topsy turvy world. There's a bunch of young SAFC supporters on another forum I visit who are furious that it took so long for him to be kicked out and that someone who knew him must have known what was going on.

I suspect she thought she was going to get in trouble and got scared and then latched onto this whole victim mentality as a way out

In case it escaped your notice she has been a victim of a crime.

He broke the law in a very conscious and deliberate way. The only explanation or mitigation I have seen offered is an acknowledgement of his own arrogant and weak character. It is impossible, IMO, to feel any sympathy for him.

No idea what grounds. I'm sure his SHLs will find something
www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/could-adam-johnsons-child-sex-10980929

Apparently he was vile in court too; laughing and joking, chatting and rolling his eyes in mock 'boredom'. I think that tells us just how guilty he feels .

Hygge and others, fantastic posts thank you. As for those of you with your disgusting victim shaming posts which are devoid of humanity, I hope you feel ashamed of yourselves. I hope even more that my two daughters never come across people with your stomach-turning views.

You might not have a clue but his barrister will have a very good one.

The barrister is giving his client's instructions to the court. Clients often say unrealistic things when verdicts don't go their way and the truth has not yet sunk in. That's what their representative is obliged to convey.

But he's a QC, not a superhero. He can't conjure a Get Out Of Jail Free card out of nowhere.

If the grounds don't exist - new evidence or a misdirection by the judge to the jury - then an application for appeal will fail. If they do, Johnson is entitled to appeal his conviction just like everyone else.

There's been no sentencing yet, so he can't appeal on those grounds. If the judge oversteps the guidelines, then Johnson could consider an appeal there.

Would be interesting to go back and read the bowie threads after this. Many of the arguments on this thread (which I fully agree with) were shot down and dismissed on that one as it was different in those days.
why did someone say "ffs xenia" on page 2? I can't find a post from her at all.

I suspect she thought she was going to get in trouble and got scared and then latched onto this whole victim mentality as a way out

In case it escaped your notice she has been a victim of a crime

100% this.

It appears to have escaped the notice of some posters that he has plead guilty so even he has acknowledged he broke the law

Of course Gooseberry and absolutely agree with all
Your posts. smile

God some posts are depressing.

When I see a teenage girl with a short skirt, Makeup and heels I view her as dressing up like an adult and having fun. I see her to be protected and enjoying her journey into womanhood.

I know my lads and my dh and all the nice men out there see that too.

Only really evil cunts view underage girls or lads as sexually available and that doesn't matter if the teens themselves do either.

Adults are adults and should unite to protect and guide children.

If some of these apologist posters are mothers that's truly shocking.

I really feel for the poor girl. Speaking from experience, it is likely she will never be able to get on with her life fully, always being known as 'that girl'. Victim-blaming is vile, the girl may (wrongly) blame herself anyway.

Many will disagree and can't see it ever happening, I propose, alongside, a massive shake-up of sex education the age of consent be raised to 17/18 if one partner is significantly older as IMO 15/16 is a grey area. Many girls this age are not emotionally mature for sex even if they appear physically ready. But that's just my bitter thoughts .

to Johnson's victim, hope she will gain the right support to recover from this.

Stealth, that was me. I don't want to derail the thread but a comment from her was there.

I was discussing this with DH this morning. There was a pic of AJ with his wife, and DH said something about his charmed life with his beautiful wife and baby - why would he risk it all? I said that there's obviously something wrong with him because he knowingly pursued a child.
He then said that some of his work colleagues were of the opinion that it wasn't as simple as that because 'she looked a lot older than 15' and my head nearly exploded.
So firstly, people are publishing pictures of the victim?! And secondly... Well the evidence speaks for itself, doesn't it.
I'm horrified at the victim-blaming here. And shame on bloody sky news and that reporter and anyone else who thinks there is the slightest excuse for any of his actions. If he knew her age and couldn't control himself, then he is a paedophile. End of.

If he knew her age and couldn't control himself, then he is a paedophile. End of.

Exactly. I don't think there's an room to manoeuvre here. It's not even as if she told him she was older, he KNEW she'd just turned 15.

Thanks samantuha. I'll look harder

pink I think that already happens to an extent as police probably wouldn't be interested in 2 15 year olds having consensual sex. I agree the age difference should be a huge aggravating factor with grooming.

Seems to me the police got this right while some mothers on here would condone child abuse.

And victim blaming is condoning child abuse.

So odd still can't find it
Reason I was surprised was I didn't think she'd been around for years and idly thought oh she's back.

I actually think that even if she had just turned 16, rather than just turned 15, the she's still be a victim of hideous grooming here. The legal line in the sand may be 16 but what sort of 'man' exploits the immaturity of a young female fan? One who talks in her texts about football and signed shirts whilst he continually turns the conversation to sex. What the fuck was wrong with him?

Stealth, she is in this thread under a different name. Her posting style is very recognisable and she has been using her new name a while. I don't know why she bothers namechanging as it doesn't take long for her to mention exhusbands/4 sets of school fees/woman must work 50h+/ islands.

Ah ok thank you.

The paedophile things that done posters are picking up on is because technically, paedophilia is defined as having a sexual interest in the immature child like body. Therefore, whilst having sexual interest in young girls of 14,15,16 is both illegal and immoral, it's not technically paedophilia as they (usually) have the body of a woman even though emotionally they are far behind.
So it's technically correct to say that on the evidence presented, he is not a paedophile. It doesn't change the fact that he is a child sex abuser.