How can you be 100 % sure it isn't that?
I can't remember exactly but wasn't the audio was leaked by someone else not her? Then the police proceeded to arrest him and investigate because of the audio?
Mason Greenwood | Please be respectful and stay on topic
- Thread starter keithsingleton
- Start date
I can't remember exactly but wasn't the audio was leaked by someone else not her? Then the police proceeded to arrest him and investigate because of the audio?
He doesn't get charged if that's what it was.
He doesn't stay quiet and have people think he's a woman beater and potential rapist for 2 years if that's what it was.
The club doesn't get rid of him if that's what it was.
It clearly wasn't some sort of sexual roleplay. It baffles me that it still gets brought up as a possibility.
Come on. The fact that it was leaked and nobody, at all, ever said that's what it was would be a big hint. Even then, listen to it, on the balance of probabilities it's not that. It sounds nothing like that.
Yeah you got a point here if he didn't do it he should have gone public and tell people so. But then why he said he didn't do it after the case was dropped? I mean he was probably lying but if he was lying why he didn't lie at the very start of the investigation? It'd help him a lot more in saving his name and probably even his career imo. And it's not like the jury would charge him a couple more years for lying anyway. Of course if he was convicted.
Again I still think he did it. But tbf we can't be 100 % sure. Unless we know all the details of the investigation reports from the police. Especially wtf is that new material.
And tbh the true reason why the club let him go was money. They wanted to keep him but they were afraid that the backflash might affect the commercial activities. That's the simple but ugly truth imo.
The obvious view/take, yes.
The counter argument here seems to be that she didn't actually post those pics/that content (it was a hack of some kind). Or - she did post it, but it wasn't what it seemed to be.
But given what followed (he was arrested, he was suspended, a grand scale shit show for him personally ensued), that seems feckin' unlikely.
If the audio wasn't what it seemed to be (the ludicrous "role play" angle), and/or if the pictures weren't what they seemed to be (she slipped on a bar of soap and made the most of it), the obvious explanation is that she was trying to - well - stitch him up, yes?
And he reacted to this attempt to stitch him up (and thus potentially ruin his promising career as a professional footballer at the highest level) by....seemingly desperately trying to get back togetheher with her (to the point of breaking his bail conditions on multiple occasions). Rather than fighting her false accusations tooth and nail. With a team of lawyers.
Seems legit? Not really, no.
Seems far more legit that he managed to get back together with her, as numerous other domestic abusers have done for numerous reasons.
Life isn't simple, it's actually horribly complicated.
I won't pass judgment on that couple. I wish them well (especially their kid).
But the "logic" applied on here by people who are obviously trying to justify their own desire to get him back in the United starting XI is...what? Interesting? I suppose it could be. If you're writing a thesis. But I'm not, so I just find it rather depressing.
Well said.
I'm no expert but imo because of the audio even if she told the police he didn't do it the police would not believe her and drop the investigation. Since in many cases the criminal manage to coerce the victim into withdrawing the charge or even defending the criminal.
As someone has said above that she withdrew 10 months before the police closed the case so obviously the police closed it not because of that but the new material imo.
Edit: the more I think about this the more I'm curious about wtf is that new material. If that new material was able to convince the police that he's innocent and drop the case and he didn't show it to the public to clear his name then imo it must be some really crazy shit. That's the only logical explanation imo.
Then if he already had that material why he didn't show it to the police at the very start of the investigation? The whole thing is just fecking weird.
Last edited:
To me the most likely explanation is that the new material was that her and Greenwood were back together and having a baby and she would now no longer back her original statement.
Bring him back.
Someone will take him. Why not us? We're "too good" for him?
Someone will take him. Why not us? We're "too good" for him?
Come on mate no way the police would drop the case just because of that. That's obviously not how the police and the juridical shit work.
Or he's too radioactive for the nations most media covered club.
The club statment told us that the audio we all heard was part of a longer clip. It's reasonable to think the additional audio introduces some degree of reasonable doubt.
I think the reasonable doubt is probably related to the idea that they were violent towards each other.
Oh this probably explain why he didn't show it to the police at the very start of the investigation I think. Imo he simply didn't have it since it's her who recorded the audio.
This is the most logical explanation.
What that audio is though we’ll likely never know.
The CPS explicitly said new material in their statement. Something else clearly came to light, in addition to her withdrawing (and potentially others)
My guess is in the longer audio she relents and they have consensual sex (no weird sex games before anyone jumps in). This negates the attempted rape charge and makes the coercive behaviour charge difficult to achieve as well.
Edit: no idea about the assault charge but have to assume a few devices were subpoenaed and additional things uncovered. Of all the questions this one needs an explanation the most.
Last edited:
What about the victim and her parents?
Agree.
As I've said above the police would not close the case just because of her withdrawing. In other cases which have no hard evidence yes. But in this case the police have the audio. So they can proceed the case even if she withdrew because the case was not based on her words but hard evidence.
So the only thing matters here is the new material imo. Yeah we'll never know wtf it is. Which makes me even more curious ffs.
Agree that sounds the most plausible imo.
Regarding the assault charges as someone said above they're probably quite violent to each other. The police simply can't charge him if they both hit each other I think.
Edit: I started to think he actually didn't do it.
Last edited:
I disagree.
I think 90% of fans would rather have us win with him than to continue losing without him. If bringing him back leads to us winning, then people will quickly move on. Couple game winning goals and that'll be that. Better than giving him away for cheap.
I think the most obvious and logical "new material" explanation is she's put forward a new statement completely contradicting the first statement, on which the whole case was probably built. Not sure why everyone's first thought is the clip has more context.
Why speculate? It could be anything. And nobody's guess, which is all ye are doing, is enough to counter what I saw. Yes, it might be a big ol' joke or he could be a abuser. The clip I saw had no punchline.
Richard Arnold's open letter tells us there is more to the audio than what was posted online, that's why.
A new statement is also plausible. Perhaps both things are true as well.
This is exactly it and why you should never assume what you see or hear, is what you saw or heard.
We should all be aware by now that things aren't always as they seem. That's not me saying someone faked the audio or video, or that it was role play or anything else. Just that things aren't always as they seem, particularly short audio or video clips. Anyone following the Israel Palestine recently will know this as well.
For me, the investigation into to facts was more in depth than would usually occur for this type of allegation and that was partly due to he high profile nature of the accused as well as the significant public interest. So for them to reach the conclusion they did, to drop the charges was in itself significant before the additional factors including new material. Enough to change a person's opinion from "he did it" to "he didn't do it" I am not sure, but enough to pose the question... It should be.
At the same time, nobody can be 100% certain he did not do it. I'm not. To repeat myself again in this thread, and what probably amounts to a complete cop out, I just don't know. I'll never know either. So with that in mind how can I condemn a person?
The images and audio in the public view were enough to convict imo so my brain needs to understand why the CPA chose not to pursue the case. Speculation is all we have because we are not entitled to the information used to reach that decision.
It is and to reference another thread you've been active in, as well as I mentioned above, it doesn't always add to the discussion but rather brings it down to a level a forum like this is above.
Seems to be starting in a midfield 3 oddly, at least thats how SofaScore has predicted it
Maybe playing as a 10
I read a quote a bit back from their manager saying he rates his link up play in the build up phase too so maybe trying to get him more on the ball away to a bigger side
Agree largely with what you said.
Tbh I didn't know she withdrew 10 months before the police closed the case. Nor about the new material. It was pretty much 'she withdrew so the police dropped it' for me. So I thought he probably managed to coerce her into doing that. However now knowing these new information imo it's quite safe to say he actually didn't do it. Otherwise no way the police would close the case I think.
]
What? How is it safe to say he didn't do it?
Pretty much what the Doc says.
The CPS statement about new material then the United statement which specifically mentions additional audio not released does make the two seem intertwined.
Ultimately United seemed very happy to openly state this in their statement when they really didn’t need to do so;
“Based on the evidence available to us, we have concluded that the material posted online did not provide a full picture and that Mason did not commit the offences in respect of which he was originally charged”
When you read the CPS statement, then that of the club, it’s really quite obvious there was more to it than the victim withdrew.
Read the posts above mate.
Anyway I don't think that would change your mind so let's agree to disagree then. That did change mine though.
If there actually is further evidence that provides a fuller picture then it would be really stupid to withhold it from the public.
Getting into the game after a slow start, Getafe are playing a very high line and pretty much leaving the greenwood on the wing up top
He’s looking good! Gliding past the opposition and a great one two which led to a shot just over
Just put the game on and looks like Getafe are playing 4-4-2 with Greenwood on the right side of midfield
You can see how he's already their best player. They just need to keep giving him the ball. Has his fullback on toast.
Best game for him so far. Definitely has some of his sharpness back.
Getafe have been the best side in the opening 20 minutes. Defensively, they look very organised. There has been a couple of misplaced passes which could have lead to some real opportunities, but they are doing well.