Legally not allowed share it
Racist? Where does that come from?
I mean this is getting into ifs and buts which is no good really
People saying she only cares about money now?
Question they must have asked that how do you prove it without bringing his wife into it. I dont want to speculate but you do understand that there are very few ways he can be proven innocent and none that actually keeps his wife out of the equation. So i guess even if by any chance there is something that helps his case, they wouldn’t want to release to public.
They also said they didn’t have access to all the evidence and their decision was based only on what they had. They also clearly avoided saying he was innocent, Greenwood referred to him being found innocent in his own statement which Sky and others have redacted for being inaccurate.
It would make sense to send him out on loan for a year.
The prospect of losing access to the lifestyle that he can provide her with is every bit as likely an explanation for her change of attitude during this process as any other that has been brought forward. I was just pointing out the ridiculousness of the original post presenting the posters opinion as if it was a verified fact, we don't know why they are back together.
What we shouldn’t do is assume things, like that his mental health is so damaged. Some people cope with things, some people have issues with diversity but we have no idea where he is at.
Saudi Arabia.
Greenwood can share it, absolutely nothing to stop him or his girlfriend sharing it.
Of course he'll be back. Rival fans will forget about him in a few months and I wouldn't be surprised to see him back in the PL within two years.
That was part of the reason reason too. For months prior to that he was breaking the requirement to stay away from her. Naughty boy
Of course they are, surprised it took this long.
Innocent of what he was charged with - Mason said the same thing. It's either a load of shit or some carefully chosen words.
Yes it is. Please do read what innocent before law means. And his opinion was as a lawyer and not some vigilante journalist.
Felt exception not rule but I get you.
Each to their own indeed.
Course you were
Completely different sort of case - Doherty pleaded guilty. DV cases - where the defendant denies the charges - will rarely result in a conviction if the complainant is not cooperating. Burglaries are different, as there will likely be physical evidence and potentially independent witnesses linking the defendant to the crime, meaning the complainant’s cooperation is less vital.
You don't think his girlfriend (she's not his wife) would want this all cleared up? Of course she would need to get involved if she wanted this cleared up.
People drop charges, make out of court settlements, sign NDA's, get back with people, forgive people because of money all the time.
He hasn’t admitted to whatever he did though. He just said “mistakes” which is far too vague to stop the questions. If he wanted to stay at OT he needed to come out,’have an interview and be transparent about what happened. But he didn’t so the questions will always be there. Especially for DV
Not if you believe he did it, it's not. It's fairly straightforward then.
Believe what you want, the post in question stated as fact a number of things that were anything but facts however you clearly support the original posters agenda so I will leave you to continue writing your Mason Greenwood fanmail.Course you were
None of them were found guilty of anything.
Going on loan for a year and bringing him back the next will only confirm Richard Arnold's status as the mother of all snakes. Nobody is fooled with that sort of meaningless action. It will only bring more disrepute to the club later on.
I don't know how easy it is. And I guess we won't find somebody who is able to compare those to from an affected perspective. But I see your point, there is an actual difference, still don't know the extent. Especially seeing that social media is a much more integral part of younger peoples life than say mine. Don't know about you though.
True. There certainly isn't much and the things with the most substance while not being the end of all things are certainly concerning.
Agreed.
I think, there is a misunderstanding. I meant "strange people" in a sense that people who don't know Greenwood personally would go after him for a certain event, in Greenwoods perspective maybe even only a version of that certain event. This is kind of the connection with the actual witch hunts, people got diffamated for whatever reasons and it triggered strong feelings by completely other people who didn't know the actual involved people.
Because its wrong
Easier said than done - IIRC under UK legislation the alleged victim has a right for anonymity for life - and if the supposed evidence the club used to ascertain he's not guilty of what he was initially charged with compromises said right for anonymity/the alleged victim - how would they publish those findings? Greenwood and the girl have just had a kid and are in a relationship - would he even want that? would their families? Too many unknowns and variables.
I think we are talking about different things. You are talking more general. I am talking more specific.
Should have been sacked the same hour the video was postedOut of context right guys?
Oh i thought they are married. My mistake.
