bill40
Well-known member
BS x 3
Mason Greenwood
- Thread starter ElBurroSinNombre
- Start date
- Status
BFC_BFC_BFC
Well-known member
I didn’t raise a question about “guilt or innocence”, I said that the fact that the charges have been withdrawn does not mean that they were unfounded, which is what you suggested.
You were wrong…. It’s really that simple
bill40
Well-known member
If the charges had of been founded they would have been brought. They weren't so they're not. What exactly do you need need to show the charges were BS? And yes you did bring up the innocent or guilty thing.I didn’t raise a question about “guilt or innocence”, I said that the fact that the charges have been withdrawn does not mean that they were unfounded, which is what you suggested.
You were wrong…. It’s really that simple
BFC_BFC_BFC
Well-known member
Go on then bill… go find the post where I mention guilt and innocence and quote it below.. I haven’t mentioned it at all… You did!
There’s a hundred and one potential reasons why charges might not have been brought, many of which have nothing to do with the charges being unfounded.
You’ve made an unfounded assumption, likely borne out of confirmation bias.
What I would need to show me the charges were BS isn’t really up for discussion. I’m not suggesting they are bullshit, I’m simply correcting your bullshit
Hazi
Well-known member
Key witnesses withdrew, possibly including the claimant. The charges before that point were founded
He probably will. They were more than willing to employ Ronaldo so see no reason they would have any morals this time around.
todayistheday
Well-known member
Think there should be a public inquiry into sex offenders in Football.
todayistheday
Well-known member
Especially Man Utd.
Shandypants
Well-known member
Can I put the myth to bed about victims "pressing charges". It's bollocks, if a crime has been committed the police or CPS do not require people to press charges. In this case there can't have been any direct evidence, so it would require the alleged victim to play her part and give evidence in court. If she wasn't prepared to do so, the case can't proceed but it doesn't mean that Greenwood didn't commit a crime.
That said I'm not sure why he can't continue to play for United?
That said I'm not sure why he can't continue to play for United?
bill40
Well-known member
Why? I think there should be an inquiry into why so many carpet baggers make false accusations about footballers.
bill40
Well-known member
let me get this straight. Charges are founded on allegation and continue to be founded even after they are withdrawn. That's one crazy reality you're living there, enjoy.
bill40
Well-known member
Go on then humour me, what was Ronaldo convicted of? You people are sick, get help.
BFC_BFC_BFC
Well-known member
No… You really do seem to be struggling to grasp a very simple concept.
The fact that charges are withdrawn does not mean that those charges were unfounded.
Warton2710
Well-known member
Horrible, horrible vermin.
Hear bits and pieces in my job and if my daughter was with him I'd be absolutely mortified. He was completely and utterly off the rails from 2019-2021. United constantly covering up his constant police issues as he was 'starboy'.
Shouldn't be on the street.
Hear bits and pieces in my job and if my daughter was with him I'd be absolutely mortified. He was completely and utterly off the rails from 2019-2021. United constantly covering up his constant police issues as he was 'starboy'.
Shouldn't be on the street.
bill40
Well-known member
Yes it does, it's exactly what it means. It means the charges were not brought because the charges were unfounded. How can I put that more clearly?
bill40
Well-known member
Neither should you. I have no evidence for this but I'll just say it anyway because I can.
BFC_BFC_BFC
Well-known member
I don’t think there’s any requirement for you to put it more clearly, you’re just wrong.
There’s not a great deal more to say… Maybe go and seek expert advice if you think it might clear things up for you.
Warton2710
Well-known member
I know what, I know and I trust the people who have told me said information. Run along.
No they were not. Charges were dropped as a key witness dropped out. Harriet has got back with him, hence why the charges were dropped as she was not willing to continue with the pressing of charges.
There is a big difference between charges being dropped and unfounded. I’d learn about the basics of our legal system before spouting rubbish.
Bloodtangerine
Well-known member
All I will say is I hope Utd get rid of him one way or another
but I guess that’s up to them
but I guess that’s up to them
bill40
Well-known member
I did, charges dropped means not guilty in law, as to you judgmental fucks I don't know.I don’t think there’s any requirement for you to put it more clearly, you’re just wrong.
There’s not a great deal more to say… Maybe go and seek expert advice if you think it might clear things up for you.
bill40
Well-known member
Key witnesses dropped out AND new information was gained. The charges were BS, same for Mendy and Giggs. Please stop making false allegations into something they're not.
bill40
Well-known member
Why? He's done nothing wrong in law and is this board really full of pristine individuals? Bollocks.
BFC_BFC_BFC
Well-known member
What are you talking about?
Nobody has tested his guilt, the case hasn’t been tried as he hasn’t been charged with a crime.
We’re not talking about that, we’re talking about your incorrect statement that the charges / allegations were unfounded.
I’m not sure what being judgemental has to do with it…
bill40
Well-known member
Can you please explain to me how not being charged = not being innocent. Does accusation = guilt? the answer is no hence innocent.
Warton2710
Well-known member
Can tell you’re a closet Manc. Odd.
Can you please explain the audio and the pictures of the girl battered and bruised after Greenwood beat her? I’d love to hear your reasoning for that.
Mendy still has a trial to come…
AngelBFC
Well-known member
And Giggs
Torycorner
Well-known member
Nor does it mean they were applicable.
FFS what’s this board up to now?
Trial by AVFTT!
In the meantime England lost a great potential talent that could have helped us win the World Cup in Doha and the Euros at Wembley
If you genuinely believe that then you’re a complete ** moron.
Ah yes, cos that’s what’s really important here. Vile **.In the meantime England lost a great potential talent that could have helped us win the World Cup in Doha and the Euros at Wembley
Charliecleanstonysheens
Well-known member
Not interested. You make your bed and you lye in it, as my dear mum used to say.
Torycorner
Well-known member
Didn’t realise you knew him so well
AngelBFC
Well-known member
FFSNor does it mean they were applicable.
FFS what’s this board up to now?
Trial by AVFTT!
In the meantime England lost a great potential talent that could have helped us win the World Cup in Doha and the Euros at Wembley
BFC_BFC_BFC
Well-known member
I haven’t said that not being charged = not being innocent.
Do you actually know what unfounded means ?
I haven’t suggested they were applicable, you’ve just picked up half a conversation and made a massive assumption … A wrong oneNor does it mean they were applicable.
FFS what’s this board up to now?
Trial by AVFTT!
In the meantime England lost a great potential talent that could have helped us win the World Cup in Doha and the Euros at Wembley
Of course, the audio tape and photographs were all rather damning, but no trial, no charges, no guilt (as far as the legal system is concerned) …. Of course, the rest of us are free to make our own minds up… Had I been Mason (and innocent) I’d have relished my day in court and an opportunity to clear my name.
BFC_BFC_BFC
Well-known member
I thought I was reaching a breakthrough moment there as well… Ah well
Torycorner
Well-known member
Correct
Under “English Law” an individual is innocent until proven guilty…..
Perhaps individuals on AVFTT don’t grasp this
I am not judging one way or the other but the charges don’t stand any more therefore he is an innocent man, for those that don’t know:
“It’s called The Law”
Talking about you but it applies to him as well.Didn’t realise you knew him so well
BFC_BFC_BFC
Well-known member
Pretty much Everyone Grasps it on here tbh..Correct
Under “English Law” an individual is innocent until proven guilty…..
Perhaps individuals on AVFTT don’t grasp this
I am not judging one way or the other but the charges don’t stand any more therefore he is innocent m, for those that don’t know:
“It’s Calked The Law”
What Bill (and seemingly you are struggling to grasp) is that charges being withdrawn does not make them unfounded.
As for ‘innocence’ … (legally speaking) it’s a presumption and not something the law seeks to test. The law is merely about establishing whether there is sufficient evidence to prove that someone is guilty of any charges that are brought, if not then they are found not guilty.
A not guilty verdict is not proof of innocence any more than dropped charges are proof of innocence.
Last edited:
Warton2710
Well-known member
Nor does it mean they were applicable.
FFS what’s this board up to now?
Trial by AVFTT!
In the meantime England lost a great potential talent that could have helped us win the World Cup in Doha and the Euros at Wembley
Good point. Maybe we should have Harold Shipman upfront with him too!
Thick **.
AngelBFC
Well-known member
Correct but I fear some on here will not grasp this concept
JJpool
Well-known member
He might inject some creativity into the attack.
At least we might put the opposition defence to sleep....permanently.
The bloke would have been lethal during the pandemic...
The charges have not been “withdrawn” or “dropped”- phrases borrowed from above.
The police have gone through a process called “discontinuance”. That is not an end to the case necessarily, it brings a temporary halt to proceedings.
The case could be resurrected at any time in the future, there is no limitation period for charges like this.
It is completely different from a case where somebody is found not guilty after a trial, or even when no evidence is offered in court, whereupon the charges are marked “dismissed”. In these cases, the charges cannot be brought again, except in very unusual cases where the double Jeopardy rule does not apply, usually murder.
So he hasn’t been vindicated or found to be not guilty as the evidence has never been tested
Theoretically if the previous complainant decides to re engage with the police and prosecution he could find himself back in the dock
The police have gone through a process called “discontinuance”. That is not an end to the case necessarily, it brings a temporary halt to proceedings.
The case could be resurrected at any time in the future, there is no limitation period for charges like this.
It is completely different from a case where somebody is found not guilty after a trial, or even when no evidence is offered in court, whereupon the charges are marked “dismissed”. In these cases, the charges cannot be brought again, except in very unusual cases where the double Jeopardy rule does not apply, usually murder.
So he hasn’t been vindicated or found to be not guilty as the evidence has never been tested
Theoretically if the previous complainant decides to re engage with the police and prosecution he could find himself back in the dock
King Billy
Well-known member
So in the meantime we assume hes guilty?
BFC_BFC_BFC
Well-known member
People are free to assume whatever they want. The fact they ‘assume it’ doesn’t make it so.
I didn’t say that KB. Just clarifying what had happened in this case as there seens to have been a lot of confusion
People will assume what they want to
Jaffa_The_Hut
Well-known member
Man Utd are now to carry out their own enquiry let’s hope they see it differently than todays findings.
BFC_BFC_BFC
Well-known member
There haven’t been any findings.
bill40
Well-known member
there was no not guilty verdict you terminally thick fucks. This could be you so accused don't you get it?
BFC_BFC_BFC
Well-known member
Why do you need to resort to such appalling and unnecessarily abusive language bill? Nobody has suggested there was a not guilty verdict.
Any of us could also find ourselves as the Victim in this case. You seem perfectly happy to make an unfounded judgement about the victim and her accusation. Where is your evidence that enables you to make that judgement ?
Jaffa_The_Hut
Well-known member
Well let’s put it this way I don’t think the powers to be at Old Trafford will see things so clear cut as todays announcement.There haven’t been any findings.
And I’ll say here and now that he’ll never pull a United shirt on ever again.
BFC_BFC_BFC
Well-known member
I don’t want to labour a point, but there’s nothing clear cut about the announcement. It’s not a vindication, just a procedural response to a change in circumstances (I.e. the victim currently choosing not to press on)
Not sure what United can or will do… I suppose we’ll find out soon enough.
- Status