You've summed up my thoughts better than I did in my own post. Total agreement
Mason Greenwood | Please be respectful and stay on topic
- Thread starter keithsingleton
- Start date
Goodness me.
On a purely footballing term. It’s their equivalent of us getting Falcao, but replace world class with potential generational talent.
Both players that neither club would have been able to get if not for their absence from the game. Both gambles, but both huge talents that could bring huge rewards.
I’m not sure of Greenwood’s reputation (footballing) outside of the U.K. so no doubt a lot of the fans hype is probably also because of his connection to us.
Way to miss the point, my friend.
New evidence supposes that the incident happened regardless. I didn't suggest he go back and assault her with additional camera crews present.
A couple of points. The CPS dropped the case because the evidence they had changed part way through the investigation.
The evidence changed because the accuser removed her evidence. She is likely to have given a contradictory statement or a reason for withdrawing her initial statement. That is new evidence.
Greenwood was not found innocent, he was not found not guilty, the case was dropped. No further action was taken.
Without her statement, and likely with it the ownership of the video and audio, the only other evidence would be hearsay at best. No direct evidence.
Anybody who has ever been NFA'd for something they have actually done knows how limited the CPS is, criminal trails are expensive. I've been NFA'd a few times from street fights when I was younger.
We also know Greenwood broke his bail conditions straight away. The accused of domestic violence broke bail and moved in with the supposed victim almost instantaneously.
I hope I am the only one in this thread who has been accused of domestic violence. My next door neighbor misunderstood my flashbacks and night terrors from my CPTSD and called the police a number of times.
I was told by the police to leave the family home and was not to have any contact with the supposed victim (my then and still wife) while they concluded their investigation.
My lawyer told me any communication would be breaking bail, even if it was my wife who called me, not even allowed to pass messages through third parties. They would have told him the same. It was his bail, it was his responsibility to stick to the conditions of that bail, no matter the circumstances, with the punishment for breaking that bail being sent to jail in violation of a court order.
That meant me not seeing my wife or baby daughters for over a month. I missed emergencies because only the lawyers could pass me any information through. I was fecking horrible, but I did it because that's what you are supposed to do, especially given the consequences of breaking a court order, consequences Greenwood seemingly disregarded as he got her pregnant while on bail.
The club statement only refers to the initial accusations, attempted rape and physical assault. It mentions nothing of the subsequent charges of coercive behaviour, emotional abuse, threatening behaviour, and of course, breaking a court order. At least one of those subsequent charges we know he was guilty of.
And a further point about the supposed victims father and family. People are assuming that because they are supporting the couple, that they are doing from a point purely of loving their daughter, which I don't think they would be doing if the family wasn't white.
If her family was of colour, he father's statements would be looked at through the prism of "religion" and "culture". I don't think that's right, but I do think that's what would be happening.
The facts of the matter are that Greenwood is guilty of a crime, whether he was punished or not. The only way he didn't is if that's not his baby. Breaking bail in a DV case is a serious thing.
The evidence changed because the accuser removed her evidence. She is likely to have given a contradictory statement or a reason for withdrawing her initial statement. That is new evidence.
Greenwood was not found innocent, he was not found not guilty, the case was dropped. No further action was taken.
Without her statement, and likely with it the ownership of the video and audio, the only other evidence would be hearsay at best. No direct evidence.
Anybody who has ever been NFA'd for something they have actually done knows how limited the CPS is, criminal trails are expensive. I've been NFA'd a few times from street fights when I was younger.
We also know Greenwood broke his bail conditions straight away. The accused of domestic violence broke bail and moved in with the supposed victim almost instantaneously.
I hope I am the only one in this thread who has been accused of domestic violence. My next door neighbor misunderstood my flashbacks and night terrors from my CPTSD and called the police a number of times.
I was told by the police to leave the family home and was not to have any contact with the supposed victim (my then and still wife) while they concluded their investigation.
My lawyer told me any communication would be breaking bail, even if it was my wife who called me, not even allowed to pass messages through third parties. They would have told him the same. It was his bail, it was his responsibility to stick to the conditions of that bail, no matter the circumstances, with the punishment for breaking that bail being sent to jail in violation of a court order.
That meant me not seeing my wife or baby daughters for over a month. I missed emergencies because only the lawyers could pass me any information through. I was fecking horrible, but I did it because that's what you are supposed to do, especially given the consequences of breaking a court order, consequences Greenwood seemingly disregarded as he got her pregnant while on bail.
The club statement only refers to the initial accusations, attempted rape and physical assault. It mentions nothing of the subsequent charges of coercive behaviour, emotional abuse, threatening behaviour, and of course, breaking a court order. At least one of those subsequent charges we know he was guilty of.
And a further point about the supposed victims father and family. People are assuming that because they are supporting the couple, that they are doing from a point purely of loving their daughter, which I don't think they would be doing if the family wasn't white.
If her family was of colour, he father's statements would be looked at through the prism of "religion" and "culture". I don't think that's right, but I do think that's what would be happening.
The facts of the matter are that Greenwood is guilty of a crime, whether he was punished or not. The only way he didn't is if that's not his baby. Breaking bail in a DV case is a serious thing.
thank you for sharing an obviously personal situation for you and the context of breaking bail conditions in DV case. It's there to protect the most vulnerable, even if you believe he's innocent, people should be able to see why it's a serious offence.
Not sure I fully agree with your last point, I get you said it's a personal opinion though, so will leave it at that.
€80 wouldn't cover the admin fee
There's no point living an interesting life if you wont tell anyone about it.
With regards to my final paragraph, it's exactly what happened to me. Both families are aware of my childhood trauma and were telling the police, as were my mental health team, but the police gave us the impression that they didn't believe it because of our "secretive culture". As you can tell, I'm not a very secretive person.
Its interesting watching it from the other side now, I'm involved in an on going police investigation against my cousin for that childhood trauma.
Its a fecking weird post. To have a 'dream scenario' in cases like this is weird enough but to then not have that 'dream scenario' including someone not being abused is even fecking weirder.
Weird dream.
Dream scenario is that she isn’t together with and has a child with someone who was 100% guilty surely?
My dream scenario is that they have a great life as a family and that the evidence we saw/heard actually had much more to it, meaning that she and the baby aren’t “trapped” in a foreign country with an abuser.
Obviously it doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things. I'm just interested to see what the people who think he's innocent actually think happened as I can't wrap my head around a situation where he's innocent but that audio exists.
Gosh you lot are a tiresome bunch sometimes.
Let's have it your way then. Dream scenario, turns out I'm actually not interested in this futile pastime any more, Putin invading Ukraine is just a Dallas-style plot twist waiting to happen, and we discover there is such a thing as objective moral goodness and everyone just suddenly subscribes to that idea and stops raping. And if we're being really silly, Uefa finds City guilty on all counts of financial cheating while Liverpool are found to be violating PED use through asthma medication, stripping them both of their recent titles.
There's no defense for that audio and I find it deeply disturbing and distressing how many on social media ignore that part and think Greenwood has been victimized in this situation.
I am actually kind of curious if Getafe is helping us out here and doing us a massive favor by giving him a heros welcome and in the lexicon of these days 'normalizing' him.
This is actually a deep cultural thing and a deep cultural debate now.
Their approach in Spain is hey he was found innocent, innocent until proven guilty, who are we to argue, the court system has spoken whereas in UK there is a court of public opinion, the cancel culture too yes as much as some dont like to hear it and there is no rehabilitation, forgiveness, understanding even etc..
Given that ultimately I don't think he can return to the UK and I dont think he should either.
It was very eye opening too. Cultural differences exist still big time even within Europe.
As for Mason, he doesnt show a lot of emotions, maybe he is a psychopath indeed, what do I know but he seems pretty unfazed by it all. Must be weird to go from this villain, cancelled etc to getting a heroes welcome.
Ultimately however I dont think he can ever return to the UK and he shouldnt.
If he really gets going again I can see Barca, Atletico or Real going for him. He does owe a huge debt of gratitude to Getafe though maybe to the extent that he should stay there and reject the approach from any bigger teams in the future. If he signs with them permanently that is.
In any case he would be nuts to ever want to return to the UK. But he does seem a weird dude so who knows.
This is actually a deep cultural thing and a deep cultural debate now.
Their approach in Spain is hey he was found innocent, innocent until proven guilty, who are we to argue, the court system has spoken whereas in UK there is a court of public opinion, the cancel culture too yes as much as some dont like to hear it and there is no rehabilitation, forgiveness, understanding even etc..
Given that ultimately I don't think he can return to the UK and I dont think he should either.
It was very eye opening too. Cultural differences exist still big time even within Europe.
As for Mason, he doesnt show a lot of emotions, maybe he is a psychopath indeed, what do I know but he seems pretty unfazed by it all. Must be weird to go from this villain, cancelled etc to getting a heroes welcome.
Ultimately however I dont think he can ever return to the UK and he shouldnt.
If he really gets going again I can see Barca, Atletico or Real going for him. He does owe a huge debt of gratitude to Getafe though maybe to the extent that he should stay there and reject the approach from any bigger teams in the future. If he signs with them permanently that is.
In any case he would be nuts to ever want to return to the UK. But he does seem a weird dude so who knows.
The audio and images were so horrific that I didn't go through them again until this morning. Even this morning I didn't listen to an actual audio, but read the transcript of it. Can't help, but feel much more at peace he isn't kicking the ball around here. I've seen and heard enough DV as a child.
On the other hand, I've also seen a picture of them holding a baby arm together. And I can't help but hope they can move on together raising that child in love and happiness. Which, for the sake of that child, is by far the most important thing here and everything else (including how Greenwood's career will go on) becomes pretty pale in comparison.
On the other hand, I've also seen a picture of them holding a baby arm together. And I can't help but hope they can move on together raising that child in love and happiness. Which, for the sake of that child, is by far the most important thing here and everything else (including how Greenwood's career will go on) becomes pretty pale in comparison.
And it's also very important to hear, coming from someone who's not experienced it.
I hope everything is well with you and your family and your cousin gets the support he needs in a tough time.
As for Greenwood, in all of this I want the best for him in some regards, as ultimately him doing the best translates to the kid and partner having a good life. Personally though, Ithink he's a cnut and hope he steps on Lego every week for the rest of his life. Or some other sort of mild annoyance.
The best thing to do when you have a bunch of opinions is to stick with the facts.
The facts are when cases like these are present evidence is normally enclosed out of site for the main public due to the fact they don’t always represent the full picture.
Now what you are requesting is to see the full picture of something that has not gone to trial. It’s not your right to neither should it be presented as the matter did not need to be cleared by the jury of Public Opinion.
The more people accept our actual lives do not matter to this scenario the easy it gets for people to move past it. Too many self -righteous from the United fanbase.
Me and my family are good. All that being accused of DV was over a decade ago. It actually helped me get trauma therapy.
As for my cousin, I am the alleged victim and he is the accused, so he can die a horrible death as soon as possible for all I care.
I don't wish that for Greenwood, I don't care what he does, I just don't want him at my club. I don't even care if we play against him, as long as we win.
Well good that you can take some positive out of it then.
Ah I see, apologies. Wasn't too sure on the details so played it safe. Hope you get your justice.
I share your views on him as well, but until I actually see some sort of remorse or real responsibility, I still hope he steps on Lego.
No chance, but my responsibility to the world at large was to report it and I've done it. They've been investigating for over a year now, and they've been doing a thorough job, so the people who need to know the risk know the risk.
Maybe the odd up turned plug
Not arguing with your post, just correcting a point.
Nobody is ever declared “innocent” in the court of law. The courts only decide if the accused is “guilty” or “not guilty”. I don’t see why the CPS not choosing to prosecute due to lack of evidence is considered a more damning scenario than if they did prosecute but the court found him “not guilty”. I think you’re setting up an unwinnable scenario where nobody who is ever accused of any crime can be considered innocent.
This is complete nonsense. Acts of violence directly affect our lives and the society that we live in even when they are not perpetrated against us directly, and when evidence of violence arises we shouldn't just turn a blind eye and move past it. What a ridiculous lack of responsibility.
Maybe that's where you are going wrong, in your approach. With you its a binary he's innocent or guilty, and if someone doesn't say they think he's guilty then that means they think he's innocent. When a lot of people are saying that none of us know the details and rather than play a guessing game of what happened etc we defer to the authorities and United's review (regardless of what we think their motive behind it is). If 1) there is no case to answer, 2) united state he didnt do what he was accused, 3) the family support the findings then who am I to say he's guilty.
You’ve completely ignored the presumption of innocence.
That doesn’t seem to apply to Greenwood because, rightly or wrongly, he has been basically presumed guilty because we’ve all heard the audio.
Will there be a thread open just for football chat?
I'd just like to drop in and see how he is performing on loan, rather than go round and round arguing about the morals behind everything he does.
I'd just like to drop in and see how he is performing on loan, rather than go round and round arguing about the morals behind everything he does.
Give it a few week
I think we all make our personal opinions on the balance of probabilities. My personal opinion is that what I heard was vile and I don't want that audio associated with my club anymore
I don't feel the need to come to any conclusions about what exactly happened because it's just going to be speculation anyway, but we can surely agree that there is more to this story than the initial release of audio/pics suggested.
It's quite clear that they'd had a volatile relationship (confirmed by public break up/make up in the past, comments from her father etc) for some time and, as he admits himself, Greenwood made 'mistakes' but we dont know what exactly these were.
I feel like he has had some form of punishment for his mistakes anyway with 18 months out of the game and now having to go abroad to restart his career while still having the stigma of being an abuser hanging over him.
I just hope he can now avoid any controversey and the family can have a fresh start.
Yes I think it is possible - although I think there are many out there who will not accept him back without some clear explanation of what happened. I am surprised that he didn't do some kind of PR interview already at the very least.
Plus we have to see how he fares both on and off the pitch, it's likely he will be targeted by away fans even in Spain so let's see how he deals with it.
I'm sure there will be football chat here once he actually plays a game.
This is what I think could happen. MG will have a pretty good season this year and we'll sell him for 20m or so. The next season he'll be great and we'll buy him back for 120m in summer of 2025. That's pretty on par with how the club is run.
Seriously, I wish him the best. I think most young adults should be given a second chance.
Seriously, I wish him the best. I think most young adults should be given a second chance.
Sorry to hear of all the trouble you’ve been through fella. Hope it’s all a bit more plain sailing these days!
I wish, currently am out of action with 4 broken ribs, a broken heel bone, a broken nose, a broken cheekbone and a slowly healing punctured lung
Scared to ask, what happened ??
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
There's only really one scenario (some sort of roleplay) but if that were the case it would be strange for either of them to record the audio.
Good post although you can prosecute without a supporting victim if it remains serious enough and in the public interest to do so.
Hearsay evidence can be introduced and in some instances the victim can be compelled to give evidence.
Whilst the withdrawal of the victim was very important I also believe there was additional evidence that undermined the case and as such prevented this route being viable.
I’ve lifted the below from the CPS for those interested;
Evidence led prosecutions
The prosecution strategy should, from the outset, consider the possibility of proceeding without the victim's support and this should be clearly recorded within the prosecutor’s review. Prosecutors should rarely need to apply to the court for further time to investigate this possibility. Prosecutors should always consider whether there is any risk to the safety of the victim in the case proceeding without their support; a victim should not be placed at increased risk through this course of action. Where there is an evidence led prosecution, victims must still be kept informed of progress.
Prosecutors should consider the following in the order outlined:
- Using evidence other than that of the victim - the prosecutor should consider the potential evidence available that could be adduced. The following should be considered but is not an exhaustive list:
- First contact with the police such as 999 calls or the attending officers’ statements, which may cover the demeanour of the victim and the suspect and show the state of the scene
- Body worn footage – this could cover the demeanour of the victim or suspect (if they remain present at the time the footage was obtained), a first account, capture any injuries and may have significant comments
- Injuries which could include photos or the comments of what the attending officers have seen and any medical evidence available
- Independent witness statements
- CCTV – may capture the incident or demeanour of the parties
- Suspect’s interview – including any inconsistencies with significant statements
- House to house enquiries
- Telephone – messaging and social media
- Expert evidence
- Res gestae – A statement is admissible as evidence of any matter stated if:
- the statement was made by a person so emotionally overpowered by an event that the possibility of concoction or distortion can be disregarded, or
- the statement accompanied an act which can be properly evaluated as evidence only if considered in conjunction with the statement, or
- the statement relates to a physical sensation or a mental state (such as intention or emotion).
- Making an application under section 116(2)(e) of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 (CJA 2003) - consideration should be given to applying to admit a victim's statement as hearsay under section 116(2)(e) of the CJA 2003, if there is evidence that the victim is in fear The court will assess various factors under s116(4) CJA 2003 such as:
- the statement’s contents
- any risk that its admission or exclusion will result in unfairness to any party to the proceedings and in particular to how difficult it will be to challenge a statement if the relevant person does not give oral evidence
- any special measures for the giving of evidence by the fearful witness; and
- any other relevant circumstances.
- Making an application under section 114(1)(d) of the CJA 2003 - where there is other evidence, consideration should be given to applying to adduce hearsay if it would be in the interests of justice to do so (prosecutors should refer to the legal guidance on Hearsay). For example, any third-party witness statements from neighbours or support representatives assisting the victim.
Adducing evidence under the res gestae Principle
Before considering adducing evidence by way of res gestae prosecutors should ensure that proper inquiries have been made to determine why a victim has not/will not appear at court, in accordance with the principles set out in Wills v CPS [2016] EWHC 3779 (Admin).
Where the prosecutor concludes that the material is res gestae, they should indicate to the court that the prosecution position is that the evidence is admissible, and they intend to adduce it under the res gestae principle. The prosecutor should remind the court (if necessary) that the requirement for a written application under Crim PR 20.2 does not apply and oral notice can be given of the intention to adduce the evidence as res gestae. (Crim PR 20.5(1)(b)).
Prosecutors should summarise the important details of the evidence, identifying the relevant content for example within the body worn footage or the 999 call.
The court should be referred to s118(4) CJA 2003 which preserves the rules of law relating to res gestae:
Any rule of law under which in criminal proceedings a statement is admissible as evidence of any matter stated if-
- The statement was made by a person so emotionally overpowered by an event that the possibility of concoction or distortion can be disregarded,
- The statement accompanied an act which can be properly evaluated as evidence only if considered in conjunction with the statement, or
- The statement relates to a physical sensation or a mental state (such as intention or emotion)
R v Andrews [1987] 84 Cr App R 382 in which the House of Lords said that the trial judge must ask whether the possibility of concoction or distortion can be disregarded. In answering that question the judge must have regard to:
- how startling or dramatic the event was
- how spontaneous the statement was
- whether the triggering event was still operative when the statement was made
- Any special features relevant to the possibility of distortion or concoction (e.g. evidence of a motive to fabricate false evidence); and
- Any special features relevant to the possibility of error (e.g. an identification made by a witness with particularly poor eyesight).
And it surely would have came out a long time ago.
Perhaps, I don't know.
I suppose both of them would have to be comfortable having such a private matter made public.
For what it's worth I personally doubt that was the case anyway.
My neighbors next to my art studio had a domestic, she set the mattress and the couch on fire, I had to escape through my bathroom window