A CPS spokesperson said: “We have a duty to keep cases under continuous review.
“In this case a combination of the withdrawal of key witnesses and new material that came to light meant there was no longer a realistic prospect of conviction.
Mason Greenwood (Please post respectfully)
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik @Rood and Imran @Annihilate Now! start with the good news by celebrating Manchester United Women's emphatic FA Cup win over Spurs at Wembley and the future of manager Marc Skinner.
Then it's the bad news and the ever worsening form of our Men with losses to Arsenal and Palace.
Finally the main debate - ETH Out now or keep him until the end of the season - if not longer. Are you Team Nik or Team Imran?
- Status
A CPS spokesperson said: “We have a duty to keep cases under continuous review.
“In this case a combination of the withdrawal of key witnesses and new material that came to light meant there was no longer a realistic prospect of conviction.
It’s not particularly complex, Greenwood is a millionaire footballer.
And abusers and victims stay with each other all the time, and their relationship got normalized and accepted by those around them all the time. My maternal grandparents have been married for 50 years, my grandfather used to beat the crap out of his wife, alongside his mother. His children, including my mom, accepted that. Even now, my mom put the abuse on my grandmother not being strong enough to stand up for herself. People can be very blinkered and cruel, even for loved ones, if they think maintaining those relationships is for the best.
Or domestic abuse victims say they deserved it.
They being back together is irrelevant
Your reaction is in my opinion why HE should be sent on loan if they have the mind to keep him
This whole sordid affair is just so tragic. I loved Greenwood. Man. What a cnut
Have you read the rest of the thread? It’s not football related and people can’t just switch off that part of their brains.
Yes, he can do that elsewhere. But for me, not at United. I don't want to see him in our shirt ever again.
Yeh I've heard, but I have no idea whether its just an one-off incidence or case of regular abuse. But if it is the latter it would be absolutely no for me.
I had a long discussion with Wumminator in the takeover thread regarding my reasons for being okay with the Qatar takeover which I copy here. Also @Seveneric @SolskjaerHasDoneIt since you both replied to me as well.
These are my reasons for favoring the Qatar takeover. Greenwood is different. I celebrated him scoring goals. And then I heard that audio. I cannot reconcile with cheering him on again after hearing that.
I have no desire, nor capacity even if the desire was there, to compartmentalise supporting Greenwood in any way that doesn’t make me feel dirty. Is that potentially at odds with my willingness/apathy regarding the Qatar takeover? Perhaps, but then I don’t view having a homogenous line of thinking in all matters to be a reasonable way to live either.
Not really, it's absolutely disgusting.
99% of rapes aren't the kind of violent in the shadows attacks that people think they are. They are coercion, fear and power imbalance.
Some people in this thread need to get a grip of their moral compass
I'd often wondered why we couldn't discuss the Mason Greenwood issue for so long. This thread now explains why that was actually a good idea.
Im interested to know what new evidence came to light.
Im leaning no but to be perfectly honest, Its hard to answer without all the information.
Bit harsh after all shes been through.
I didn't mean to. I'm definitely not really comfortable with it.
He is that Ronaldo fanatic. It’s not a shock to see him post in favour of greenwood
Yes they are definitely both cnuts. I mean all we really know is that she is the victim of domestic abuse and hasn't been able to separate herself from him, which of course makes her a cnut. Wherever people stand on Mason Greenwood, we must also recognize his partner, the victim, is definitely a cnut. Victims from domestic abuse, I find, are always cnuts.
Oops
Inappropriate Content
We don't personally know neither Greenwood nor his partner to assume anything. It's just as likely to be an abusive relationship as his partner being just as cnut as Greenwood is.
I'm fairly sure he's been told to say nothing, at some point there will need to be something though
I would find it extremely difficult to support the football club while having a player like him in the squad.
I can absolutely fecking guarantee most of those talking about "redemption" and "rehabilitation" would be going the other way if this was about Wout Weghorst rather than Greenwood.
Pathetic.
Pathetic.
This might sum up how I genuinely feel about this forum and Ill bet Im not alone.
A sizeable portion of people on here think they belong to some sort of aristocracy and they should be honoured, revered, respected, looked up to blah blah blah.
Ive got news for you. Your just like the rest of us. Someone who probably needs to get more hobbies and spend less time talking shite on a computer.
I have no problem with anyone's opinion on Mason Greenwood but do have a problem with people trying to vilify others who have a different opinion to their own
I'm really not understanding you at all. I've heard the tapes and know what I heard. In what way do you think she could be just as bad as him?
Is this just a reflection on what an utterly shit state our squad is in terms of forwards and goalscorers...? Would anyone seriously want Greenwood stinking up the place, boos drowning out his every touch - a la Partey but worse - if we had a decent goalscorer?
There's no way anyone would be voting yes to this if it were Weghorst or a mediocre youth talent like Elanga.
There's no way anyone would be voting yes to this if it were Weghorst or a mediocre youth talent like Elanga.
Weghorst is a terrible comparison because nobody would want him here regardless.
You're right we have no idea, but even if it was a "one-off", there needs to be lines that can't be crossed, this is definitely one of them. It's Manchester United we're talking about.
From the sounds of the audio, I doubt it was a one-off either. It sounded like the sort of thing that happened frequently for her to know to record it.
My vote is a resounding no. Exploring why it’s even a point of discussion:
He’s not charged with anything so is technically innocent in the eyes of law. Without naming other players, there are examples of players being under investigation for similar offences who continue to play without having the legal clean chit that Greenwood does. And technically, if someone is not guilty in the eyes of the law, there is no legal ground for the club to terminate his contract. Given he’s still together with the same woman complicates things further.
Having said that, just because he’s not charged with certain offences, doesn’t mean he hasn’t committed those. Our club, as an institution, should have a higher moral standing. Unless the club concludes that all the images and audios were completely fabricated, we have no basis for keeping him on. Terminate his contract and let him become someone else’s problem. It is sad that it becomes a club’s decision rather than a clear guideline being issued by the league or FA.
He’s not charged with anything so is technically innocent in the eyes of law. Without naming other players, there are examples of players being under investigation for similar offences who continue to play without having the legal clean chit that Greenwood does. And technically, if someone is not guilty in the eyes of the law, there is no legal ground for the club to terminate his contract. Given he’s still together with the same woman complicates things further.
Having said that, just because he’s not charged with certain offences, doesn’t mean he hasn’t committed those. Our club, as an institution, should have a higher moral standing. Unless the club concludes that all the images and audios were completely fabricated, we have no basis for keeping him on. Terminate his contract and let him become someone else’s problem. It is sad that it becomes a club’s decision rather than a clear guideline being issued by the league or FA.
It's basically like the player threads, everything is black and white, he's shite, no he's not, there's no shades of grey, same here
I somewhat understand the evidence against the man...and I can admit it has never has looked good.
For myself though, I've been involved in a somewhat high profile lawsuit...and what struck me was how public perception was completely devoid of really an examination of the facts. Which in some ways makes sense, as to fully understand the case you needed to sift through mountains of evidence and understand very specific and unique details of business. The public's individual perception seemed more about personal beliefs and how those beliefs tied to what you wanted to think about the case. For example, when a few months of emails, which internally were known to have been harmlessly deleted to make room for an inbox at one point, were reported...it was assumed by the press and (seemingly the) public that they were deleted for nefarious reasons. If you take that mindset, then the entire case looks more nefarious. This type of thing continued to perpetuate until many likely had their minds made up, based on a lot of incorrect conclusions from incomplete information (or harmless information presented in a way to garner more press and interest).
This case is much different in its details of course, but I have a different opinion of forming an opinion on court cases based on my experience than before. There is a mountain of data points that lead to what an informed judgement should be here, which is hopefully what the club is sifting through. Evidence can seem one way when promoted publicly, but it's hard to make determinations without all of the facts supporting that evidence.
Thats not to say that he is innocent or guilty. I really have no idea. It would appear to me he is, but I lack a boatload of context. The very reason for trials is to hopefully solve this ambiguity, by proving the offense occurred. Because that will never happen at this point, I feel I will never really be able to form a final judgement on it.
So, for me personally...given my experience...this is an area I feel strongly about. Without a clear understanding of guilt, I think the lad should get a second chance. If the club has access to information that essentially proves this guilt...then he should never play for us again. So in some ways I think the club has handled this well, as it would seem they are conducting a thorough review and have not publicly spoken about anything of substance while doing it.
I've been in the position of having things said about me that were untrue...though not to this level, but still publicly. The fear, paranoia, and anxiety it produced is something I have never experienced in my life and hope others never have to experience. In some ways this probably makes me bias, but I will personally always give people the benefit of the doubt and hope for second chances if they are truly innocent of their accused transgressions. I actually trust the club will accurately make that determination, and if they feel he's worthy of playing for us again it's the right call.
For myself though, I've been involved in a somewhat high profile lawsuit...and what struck me was how public perception was completely devoid of really an examination of the facts. Which in some ways makes sense, as to fully understand the case you needed to sift through mountains of evidence and understand very specific and unique details of business. The public's individual perception seemed more about personal beliefs and how those beliefs tied to what you wanted to think about the case. For example, when a few months of emails, which internally were known to have been harmlessly deleted to make room for an inbox at one point, were reported...it was assumed by the press and (seemingly the) public that they were deleted for nefarious reasons. If you take that mindset, then the entire case looks more nefarious. This type of thing continued to perpetuate until many likely had their minds made up, based on a lot of incorrect conclusions from incomplete information (or harmless information presented in a way to garner more press and interest).
This case is much different in its details of course, but I have a different opinion of forming an opinion on court cases based on my experience than before. There is a mountain of data points that lead to what an informed judgement should be here, which is hopefully what the club is sifting through. Evidence can seem one way when promoted publicly, but it's hard to make determinations without all of the facts supporting that evidence.
Thats not to say that he is innocent or guilty. I really have no idea. It would appear to me he is, but I lack a boatload of context. The very reason for trials is to hopefully solve this ambiguity, by proving the offense occurred. Because that will never happen at this point, I feel I will never really be able to form a final judgement on it.
So, for me personally...given my experience...this is an area I feel strongly about. Without a clear understanding of guilt, I think the lad should get a second chance. If the club has access to information that essentially proves this guilt...then he should never play for us again. So in some ways I think the club has handled this well, as it would seem they are conducting a thorough review and have not publicly spoken about anything of substance while doing it.
I've been in the position of having things said about me that were untrue...though not to this level, but still publicly. The fear, paranoia, and anxiety it produced is something I have never experienced in my life and hope others never have to experience. In some ways this probably makes me bias, but I will personally always give people the benefit of the doubt and hope for second chances if they are truly innocent of their accused transgressions. I actually trust the club will accurately make that determination, and if they feel he's worthy of playing for us again it's the right call.
Again, I’m not being sarcy or prickly, but I genuinely think the evidence around the Ronaldo case is far more damning.
The audio, which is all there is, could have a number of issues with it - it could’ve been edited easily in this day and age, her phone could’ve been hacked / stolen (her Dad suggested this straight away).
I think it’s very likely that the ‘new evidence’ is to do with the phone recordings and if it’s enough for the police and crown prosecution to literally drop all charges - which they can pursue without Hariet - then I feel it’s important to at least step back and hear that out.
I know it’s a very emotive issue, and it’s a very serious topic, but we mustn’t project that onto a man who has been extensively investigated and found NOT WORTH EVEN TRYING.
The couple are supposedly having a baby together and I just think that with the above considered, we shouldn’t be deciding what’s gone on here. We know very little of it.
it’s actually the perfect example
No it's fair enough, like I said, you're entitled to your own views and it is definitely easier to split the club from the owners than it is an actual player. But that's pretty much my question isn't it? One is directly there in your face, the other is bankrolling what is happening in front of you. I don't want either, but think it's pretty much in the same world, but also can see that you'd have more Greenwood no's than Qatar no's for the reason you said. I do think you're more in the minority of pro Qatar (not sure if you prefer Qatar of Ratcliffe or just fine with either).
For me, there's pretty much nothing that would stop me from being a United fan - but it would be super dark and morally shit of the club if both of these scenarios were to happen. Just prefer to not have to deal with my club being attached to all that.
Better not to speculate. Partly because I don't think it would be acceptable to the forum moderators but also because we will never know.
Then why do others don't try to keep it football-related like what the thread opener (and admin) requested? There should be a good reason why he wanted to keep the discussion about football and not other topics.
The victims go through some major psychological changes that many people are ignorant to. There are even instances where they defend their abusers to the point of attacking people coming to their defence. There really should be more done to educate society about this as far too many people have a black and white opinion on the actions of the victim.
Best for all parties is if he leaves. He still have a high value, and I'm sure clubs abroad love to have a player like him in the team.
There's always a place for the likes of them: Overmars is with Antwerp now, Rai Vloet is playing in Russia. Maybe even lower division clubs in England, but I think he doesn't want to drop down. Just sell him and use the money to reinvest in the team.
There's always a place for the likes of them: Overmars is with Antwerp now, Rai Vloet is playing in Russia. Maybe even lower division clubs in England, but I think he doesn't want to drop down. Just sell him and use the money to reinvest in the team.
Good nuanced post. Thank you for sharing your story.
I bet you're not alone. We're all wankers talking shite but some do it more than others (myself in 99% of my posts) but it just so happens in this thread the people voting yes and defending him are in this case even bigger cnuts than I and others usually are.
- Status