Antony under investigation by Brazilian authorities for domestic abuse | Back in the squad

[moses]

Men should standing up against women trying to take advantage of men, Some women have gotten away with falsely accusing men and that ain't fair.

I'm not saying this case is that but the General assumption once a case like this is brought public is that the man is guilty.

Antony is innocent until proven other wise, the Club shouldn't suspend him.

That's not the assumption at all.

Sometimes there is a precautionary barring order, but it's precautionary. Guilt would mean jail. The suspension from place of work, especially for someone like Antony can be two fold, to show the alleged victim she is being heard and to remove the accused from the glare. Imagine him playing away Elland Road in the middle of this.

If there is a trial and he is innocent the whole affair would he a massive pain in the ass and a really awful black mark on his reputation.

If he's guilty, and everybody backs him unconditionally then the effect that would have on the victim and other victims whi never saw justice is huge and often debilitating, and literally insult to injury.

These situations suck and are really lose lose, but you just have to try find the least harmful course of action.

It's not always fair. I brought my ex partner to court for hitting my kids. She denied it. Said I made it up as part of my plan is to constantly undermine and intimidate her. The judge placed a restriction order on me. I wasn't allowed knock on her door to pick up my kids. I had to text. For three years. Until I proved she was beating the kids and heR accusations towards me were lies. It fecking hurt, but I understand the court's caution when I see the figures of abuse and violence towards women.

My only gripe was it took years for the court to act on her hitting the kids, but thats a different story.

I guarantee you the amount of false accusations are nothing in comparison to the amount of women being assaulted.

 

[Zlaatan]

Men should standing up against women trying to take advantage of men, Some women have gotten away with falsely accusing men and that ain't fair.

I'm not saying this case is that but the General assumption once a case like this is brought public is that the man is guilty.

Antony is innocent until proven other wise, the Club shouldn't suspend him.

Or.. everyone should stand up against anyone when we know they're doing the wrong thing. Right now we don't know what happened in this case which means it's a terrible time to stand up against any of them, even if a few of the people involved are women and you happen to be a man.

Btw, a lot of men, far, far more than the women you speak of have gotten away with DA which I presume you think isn't fair either, so that you still think it's a good idea to "stand up against" one side out of principle is just baffling, and the fact that you've presented it as a men vs women type thing just makes it that much worse.

 

[Ted Lasso]

Yikes.

Should the burden of proof be on the accused party to prove they were not violent? Is that the sort of dystopia we're aiming for?

How can you call it antiquated while conceding that there isn't a better standard that exists?

Yes, you're right. Let's try "guilty until proven innocent". I'm sure it'll work better.

Quoting you all together because you are similarly restricting your perspective to black and white. Perhaps my phrasing made you feel that way. The challenge I'm trying to highlight is that the vast majority of you talking about innocence until proven guilty is that you're using that as a clause to condemn the victims as untruthful and manipulative. In essence you also presume their guilt in trying to inflated anothers' innocence.

https://thebluebench.org/about-us/m...ng-survivors-sexual-assault-legal-system.html

With both Antony and MG the objections have been resoundingly demonizing of the victims in question. Money and attention seeking. It's the most common criticism of women accusing men of public status. And yet as the me two movements showed, these victims tend to more often truthful than not.

So that presents a very very hard to manage and conflicting scenario where public opinion and even the legal system struggles.

This is in contrast to the issue faced by black men for generations where guilt is presumed. Ironically this innocent is guilty talk is typically reserved for white men rather than helping the historical 7:1 wrong convictions in men of color even up through today. So most of your dialogue on it is from ideology versus current status of the judicial system.

A system in which innocent til proven guilty leads to innocents being convicted.

And an innocent until proven guilty philosophy that leads to victims not being believed because they don't have a home recording of their trauma that was not mishandled in the legal discovery process in a way that it would not be admissable in court.


So in case it is still needed let me clarify that my opinion is that we have to work with shades of gray here.That's a broken process and by espousing it you are much to restricted in your thinking. THINK.

 

[Ted Lasso]

I usually keep out of the Greenwood talk and this thread as the waffle spouted in both threads is unbearable to read but this really takes the cake.

See above champ.

 

[redcucumber]

Quoting you all together because you are similarly restricting your perspective to black and white. Perhaps my phrasing made you feel that way. The challenge I'm trying to highlight is that the vast majority of you talking about innocence until proven guilty is that you're using that as a clause to condemn the victims as untruthful and manipulative. In essence you also presume their guilt in trying to inflated anothers' innocence.

https://thebluebench.org/about-us/m...ng-survivors-sexual-assault-legal-system.html

With both Antony and MG the objections have been resoundingly demonizing of the victims in question. Money and attention seeking. It's the most common criticism of women accusing men of public status. And yet as the me two movements showed, these victims tend to more often truthful than not.

So that presents a very very hard to manage and conflicting scenario where public opinion and even the legal system struggles.

This is in contrast to the issue faced by black men for generations where guilt is presumed. Ironically this innocent is guilty talk is typically reserved for white men rather than helping the historical 7:1 wrong convictions in men of color even up through today. So most of your dialogue on it is from ideology versus current status of the judicial system.

A system in which innocent til proven guilty leads to innocents being convicted.

And an innocent until proven guilty philosophy that leads to victims not being believed because they don't have a home recording of their trauma that was not mishandled in the legal discovery process in a way that it would not be admissable in court.


So in case it is still needed let me clarify that my opinion is that we have to work with shades of gray here.That's a broken process and by espousing it you are much to restricted in your thinking. THINK.

A masterclass: 'How to say a lot while saying absolutely nothing at all'

 

[Herschel Krustofsky]

Quoting you all together because you are similarly restricting your perspective to black and white. Perhaps my phrasing made you feel that way. The challenge I'm trying to highlight is that the vast majority of you talking about innocence until proven guilty is that you're using that as a clause to condemn the victims as untruthful and manipulative. In essence you also presume their guilt in trying to inflated anothers' innocence.

https://thebluebench.org/about-us/m...ng-survivors-sexual-assault-legal-system.html

With both Antony and MG the objections have been resoundingly demonizing of the victims in question. Money and attention seeking. It's the most common criticism of women accusing men of public status. And yet as the me two movements showed, these victims tend to more often truthful than not.

So that presents a very very hard to manage and conflicting scenario where public opinion and even the legal system struggles.

This is in contrast to the issue faced by black men for generations where guilt is presumed. Ironically this innocent is guilty talk is typically reserved for white men rather than helping the historical 7:1 wrong convictions in men of color even up through today. So most of your dialogue on it is from ideology versus current status of the judicial system.

A system in which innocent til proven guilty leads to innocents being convicted.

And an innocent until proven guilty philosophy that leads to victims not being believed because they don't have a home recording of their trauma that was not mishandled in the legal discovery process in a way that it would not be admissable in court.


So in case it is still needed let me clarify that my opinion is that we have to work with shades of gray here.That's a broken process and by espousing it you are much to restricted in your thinking. THINK.

An interesting take, fair play for taking the time to explain as I’ve been trying to work out WTF you were on about. Can’t say I’m any the wiser now though.

So what’s your alternative solution?

 

[Ted Lasso]

A masterclass: 'How to say a lot while saying absolutely nothing at all'

Very demeaning, man. I'm sharing meaningful thought process and you're dismissing it without fair shake.

90% of domestic abuse and sexual assault victims tell the truth.

Race, social status and wealth affect conviction.

Black men are significantly wrongfully convicted more often. Historically, white women accusations lead to presumed guilt. Even TODAY - simply calling the cops on an innocent black person is a potential death sentence (in the US at least)

How do you navigate these contradictions? That's what I'm saying. Just because I have no conclusion or solution does not mean it's meaningless. Shame on you for being so close minded.

 

[Ted Lasso]

An interesting take, fair play for taking the time to explain as I’ve been trying to work out WTF you were on about. Can’t say I’m any the wiser now though.

So what’s your alternative solution?

Appreciate giving it thought. It's hard, man! As you can see there's some circular logic and consistency is tough. I don't know that we can currently say there's a great fits all solution.

Perhaps the best example is from how police officers are investigated for situations they're involved in that we see in the news a lot with a supposed innocent person being shot or worse. They're put on leave until the investigation process is completed. In cases where it's not a black or white scenario, you often see the cop transferred or resigning anyway. If fully innocent they resume. If guilty to the standards required currently you see convictions.

Is it unfortunate to be wrongfully accused? Yes. Do public figures become targets more than others , probably. As a public figure, however, it is perhaps to be considered a professional hazard and to be handled in a particular way. For instance, coming out with agent and player interviews is not it. Let social media swirl and let the investigations happen in privacy.

Public opinion is fickle. Someone else quoted Mike Tyson as an example and at first I recoiled but that person was correct. He's got an idolized following and even a fecking cartoon show on Adult Swim. Not to mention the movie cameos. A convicted rapist. Is he absolved by serving time? Public opinion seems to be so. Point being that going through the process appropriately doesn't end someone's career - as was mentioned about "poor Masons career being ruined" and similarly w Antony because of the accusations and charges. Johnny Depp another good example. Guys got a new Netflix special and Disney begging for him back.

 

[yeti]

did she go to the police? that is the proper and credible course of action for a victim of a crime.

 

[hobbers]

Quoting you all together because you are similarly restricting your perspective to black and white. Perhaps my phrasing made you feel that way. The challenge I'm trying to highlight is that the vast majority of you talking about innocence until proven guilty is that you're using that as a clause to condemn the victims as untruthful and manipulative. In essence you also presume their guilt in trying to inflated anothers' innocence.

https://thebluebench.org/about-us/m...ng-survivors-sexual-assault-legal-system.html

With both Antony and MG the objections have been resoundingly demonizing of the victims in question. Money and attention seeking. It's the most common criticism of women accusing men of public status. And yet as the me two movements showed, these victims tend to more often truthful than not.

So that presents a very very hard to manage and conflicting scenario where public opinion and even the legal system struggles.

This is in contrast to the issue faced by black men for generations where guilt is presumed. Ironically this innocent is guilty talk is typically reserved for white men rather than helping the historical 7:1 wrong convictions in men of color even up through today. So most of your dialogue on it is from ideology versus current status of the judicial system.

A system in which innocent til proven guilty leads to innocents being convicted.

And an innocent until proven guilty philosophy that leads to victims not being believed because they don't have a home recording of their trauma that was not mishandled in the legal discovery process in a way that it would not be admissable in court.


So in case it is still needed let me clarify that my opinion is that we have to work with shades of gray here.That's a broken process and by espousing it you are much to restricted in your thinking. THINK.

Seems like you just want an excuse to shift this onto a whole different topic.

We're not talking about race and, actually, we're not talking about normal domestic violence victims either. We're talking about high profile celebrities accusing each other of violence and manipulative/deceitful behaviour in tv interviews.

 

[Red00012]

I can’t see Utd giving the ok to do this interview so I presume he did it without been advised

 

[Ted Lasso]

Seems like you just want an excuse to shift this onto a whole different topic.

We're not talking about race and, actually, we're not talking about normal domestic violence victims either. We're talking about high profile celebrities accusing each other of violence and manipulative/deceitful behaviour in tv interviews.

I may have prematurely included that subject to cover all bases of discussion.

The main thing here that is most relevant is there victims tell the truth more often than not and high profile wealthy individuals have resources they use that do not equate to fair and social media is a whole another variable. We should not be quick to brand victims/accusors as liars just because they don't have evidence like the audio in the other case.

 

[lex talionis]

Speculation will drive all of us bonkers. The justice system will be called on to sort out the truth, but the club has a reputational interest to protect -- which absolutely does include protecting the rights of the accused -- and it seems pretty obvious that the club should announce soon -- before ETH submits himself to the wolves -- that it will put Antony on administrative leave for the time being.

 

[Dazzmondo]

How do you prove domestic violence when there is physical trauma but there is no recorded proof audio of video? For every Amber Heard case there's a dozen actual victims who've got no recourse. It's an awful situation for the victims and a challenging one for the legal system.

"Innocent until proven guilty" is as antiquated and barbaric here as sharia law. In fact, quite ironically the kind of burden of proof some are expecting here of the women is the very same that the Saudis do for women. It heavily heavily favors the men whether adultery or violence.

I don't know or have any ideas to make it better but certainly being steadfast in the old ways of addressing it is the worst thing that could happen.

Not only is this take stupid, but it's also genuinely dangerous. Assumption of guilt has led to so many terrible things throughout history, including "witch hunts" where thousands and thousands of women were burned at the stake under any accusation.

 

[Cloud7]

Not sure how that logic works "he's innocent because he says he is"?

His accusers seem pretty adamant too that he's guilty

I’m not saying or implying that he is innocent. I am saying that these public statements will look far worse if the accusations turn out to be true, so I’m thinking anyone sensible would refrain from doing such unless they’re sure of their innocence.

 

[VorZakone]

I may have prematurely included that subject to cover all bases of discussion.

The main thing here that is most relevant is there victims tell the truth more often than not and high profile wealthy individuals have resources they use that do not equate to fair and social media is a whole another variable. We should not be quick to brand victims/accusors as liars just because they don't have evidence like the audio in the other case.

Your posts read like word salads. What do you actually propose instead of "innocent until proven guilty" as you think that's antiquated.

We know real abuse exists. It is also wrong to immediately blame victims for seeking attention or money. Saying this is just stating the obvious.

 

[Jippy]

Not only is this take stupid, but it's also genuinely dangerous. Assumption of guilt has led to so many terrible things throughout history, including "witch hunts" where thousands and thousands of women were burned at the stake under any accusation.

The current legal processes are clearly not working for sexual offences, given rape conviction rates are under 2%. But yep, obviously reducing the burden of proof is highly problematic.

 

[Von Mistelroum]

Really scary to hear people essentially advocating 'guilty until proven innocent' as this does seem to be the way things are heading in society now with trial by social media and being 'cancelled' as soon as anyone is accused of anything ever.

The idea that it's too hard to prove things, so we should just assume guilt is absurd.

 

[MackRobinson]

Quoting you all together because you are similarly restricting your perspective to black and white. Perhaps my phrasing made you feel that way. The challenge I'm trying to highlight is that the vast majority of you talking about innocence until proven guilty is that you're using that as a clause to condemn the victims as untruthful and manipulative. In essence you also presume their guilt in trying to inflated anothers' innocence.

https://thebluebench.org/about-us/m...ng-survivors-sexual-assault-legal-system.html

With both Antony and MG the objections have been resoundingly demonizing of the victims in question. Money and attention seeking. It's the most common criticism of women accusing men of public status. And yet as the me two movements showed, these victims tend to more often truthful than not.

So that presents a very very hard to manage and conflicting scenario where public opinion and even the legal system struggles.

This is in contrast to the issue faced by black men for generations where guilt is presumed. Ironically this innocent is guilty talk is typically reserved for white men rather than helping the historical 7:1 wrong convictions in men of color even up through today. So most of your dialogue on it is from ideology versus current status of the judicial system.

A system in which innocent til proven guilty leads to innocents being convicted.

And an innocent until proven guilty philosophy that leads to victims not being believed because they don't have a home recording of their trauma that was not mishandled in the legal discovery process in a way that it would not be admissable in court.


So in case it is still needed let me clarify that my opinion is that we have to work with shades of gray here.That's a broken process and by espousing it you are much to restricted in your thinking. THINK.

Innocent until proven guilty has nothing to do with the victim and everything to do with the accused. Everything else is just speculation on what could have happened.

The race bit is random as Antony nor Greenwood are not white.

 

[Dazzmondo]

The current legal processes are clearly not working for sexual offences, given rape conviction rates are under 2%. But yep, obviously reducing the burden of proof is highly problematic.

I sympathise with the many women that do suffer from this, because it is unfortunately an incredibly difficult thing to prove, but we have to be careful to not go back to an extreme where everyone accused of everything is presumed guilty by default. It's always important to consider the motives of the accusers and any evidence that is available. The system of innocent until proven guilty might not be perfect, but there's a reason that it's the system that most institutions have adopted over time. The alternative is worse.

 

[JediSith]

Reading the posts on the MG and this thread. here’s predominantly 2 camps of people.. which is actually scary.

1) woman is making it up no matter what.
2) player is guilty no matter what

What’s scary is that for a lot of people the opinion appear to be set and has very little to do with the actual facts of the case.

What’s my point. Well it just occurred to me when reading some comments that jury’s are formed from randomly selected people in the population.

 

[Beachryan]

I mean, thousands of posts later by people that care, but have no access to actual evidence is pretty good evidence to me why these things should never be instigated in the media.

File police charges. Lawyer up. Present your evidence to a judge. Let the courts and law enforecement departments decide what happens next. Is it infallible, and not biased against the poorer party? No, of course it has issues.

But it's a much better solution than the court of public opinion. And that's where this is now. And regardless of what happened in the cases, for me this is the end of Antony as a footballer for Manchester United. Not because I believe x or y, or the club have done x or y. But because in England, if you play for Manchester United, you are judged by the media more harshly than anyone else. You don't get to curse after scoring, you don't get to pick up a red card in a friendly. And you certainly will never be given the benefit of the doubt.

I would wager strongly that the outcome of lawsuits or police investigations will never matter to Antony's United career at this point. And I find that really troubling, personally, but that's where we are.

 

[Rhyme Animal]

If you're going to start throwing accusations about then back them up. So what's my agenda?

Social media pitchfork brigade? That's nonsensical word salad, my only participation in social media is pretty pictures of the countryside. But hey why let facts colour your opinion?

Petty sarcasm is the only way to let me indicate what I think of the posts I read back and saw without breaching the site rules. So petty sarcasm it is, you absolutely delightful renaissance man. X

You don’t have an agenda but you’ve been affected by these issues personally and it’s hurt and scarred you.

I have also, and am also scarred by them, deeply.

I remember talking with you in the past and you said that your kids have been affected by these issues in posts that I found really upsetting and moving.

I think this, understandably, puts you into a fatherly and protective mode the moment any issue linked with this topic comes up, both noble qualities and far better than the opposite.

But I think it means that you take anyone offering nuance or a more neutral stance as a bit personal - as if they must be a bad person.

I always remember when I said that after seeing Mason and H’s baby photo, it made me hope that they’re a happy family and who cares about the football side of it - and you said you found it sinister, whereas all I meant was exactly what I said. Something that I think is realistically the best thing to hope for.

On top of this you’re having to mod the biggest Utd forum on the internet during the most divisive and troubled time the club has experienced in modern history.

 

[hobbers]

I may have prematurely included that subject to cover all bases of discussion.

The main thing here that is most relevant is there victims tell the truth more often than not and high profile wealthy individuals have resources they use that do not equate to fair and social media is a whole another variable. We should not be quick to brand victims/accusors as liars just because they don't have evidence like the audio in the other case.

But the alleged victim is also high profile and wealthy. Who happens to be giving tv interviews without producing significant evidence, seemingly unconcerned about prejudicing ongoing police investigations, in order to weaponise social and traditional media.

 

[talking robot]

And what exactly is the truth?

i dont know. but i dont think the club cares

 

[Ted Lasso]

Innocent until proven guilty has nothing to do with the victim and everything to do with the accused. Everything else is just speculation on what could have happened.

The race bit is random as Antony nor Greenwood are not white.

The problem I'm calling out is so much of the commentary of late is focused on victim blaming.

The race thing is a counter point - that black men are more quickly assumed guilty.

Point being there's not a good solution and the way the system works is not adequate

A lot of posters are having trouble interpreting my comments because they think I'm on one specific side of Antony guilty or not guilty whereas in fact I'm neither. My opinion is Antony is accused and in question. And I believe the victim(s) have suffered some sort of domestic abuse.

 

[fallengt]

I'm not saying this case is that but the General assumption once a case like this is brought public is that the man is guilty.

Antony is innocent until proven other wise, the Club shouldn't suspend him.

Its human instinct to side with women in DV case. Even more so with social network.

"Innocent until proven guilty" is never true in court of public opinion.

 

[talking robot]

Let us be absolutely clear about one thing: Antony was not -and neither was Greenwood for that matter- 'accused of wrongdoing by a social media mob'.
He was accused of assault by three specific women, via radio/TV/newspaper media interviews and to the police.

This is already a very complicated discussion, at least not get the most basic facts wrong from the beginning.

Yes you are right. Specific women made these allegations originally, and you are right to emphasize that. Nevertheless, the social mob is very quick to believe the accusations, with many calling immediately for suspension of the player or sponsorship deals. The larger point is that we (as random people not working in the courts or individually implicated in the cas), should realize that we are not in a position to pass moral judgment. The original source of the allegations doesnt change this.

 

[owlo]

That's not the assumption at all.

Sometimes there is a precautionary barring order, but it's precautionary. Guilt would mean jail. The suspension from place of work, especially for someone like Antony can be two fold, to show the alleged victim she is being heard and to remove the accused from the glare. Imagine him playing away Elland Road in the middle of this.

If there is a trial and he is innocent the whole affair would he a massive pain in the ass and a really awful black mark on his reputation.

If he's guilty, and everybody backs him unconditionally then the effect that would have on the victim and other victims whi never saw justice is huge and often debilitating, and literally insult to injury.

These situations suck and are really lose lose, but you just have to try find the least harmful course of action.

It's not always fair. I brought my ex partner to court for hitting my kids. She denied it. Said I made it up as part of my plan is to constantly undermine and intimidate her. The judge placed a restriction order on me. I wasn't allowed knock on her door to pick up my kids. I had to text. For three years. Until I proved she was beating the kids and heR accusations towards me were lies. It fecking hurt, but I understand the court's caution when I see the figures of abuse and violence towards women.

My only gripe was it took years for the court to act on her hitting the kids, but thats a different story.

I guarantee you the amount of false accusations are nothing in comparison to the amount of women being assaulted.

It's become acceptable for women to offend against men/kids, and to blackmail to shield themselves from that offending. Or for the offending to be normalised, celebrated, and acceptable. The justice system is also tilted towards women. Wrongful convictions are higher than pre-dna USA. And the scope of what constitutes serious sexual assault has been widened too far to make it statistically rounder for better political football.

None of this resolves the structural deficiencies around 1. the crumbling state of our justice system (it's not uncommon for a defence barrister to spend 10 hours on a train, only to find the court date has been moved. Or the client has been moved etc. A case can take 3+ years. Disclosure is fecked etc) 2. The 'embarrassment' factor which simply stop women reporting sexual violence. 3. The genuine desire of women in domestic violence to often want to 'fix' and 'resolve' the relationship, rather than seeing the dad of their kids and man they love in jail. This is a tricky one, but often is a good goal. 4. Lack of funding for womens refuges and advice on how to move on 5. A push onto the judicial path. (women can be denied support if they dont want to prosecute for whatever reason) 6. Lack of education for men, lack of mental health support, lack of awareness. 7. 'embarrassment' of men to deal with anger/impulse issues 8. criminalising/demonising those issues instead of treating them early. 9. The state of our media frenzy, and how it's used. 10. Men, especially poor men feeling marginalised and hostile to women. They don't see balance in the system. 11. Rich powerful men are too able to manipulate and control the justice system, and strong legal representation poses problems.

Violence against women from men is a genuine problem, which requires long term structural change and funding.

 

[RMD83]

Not comparable to the greenwood case. The leaked audio was damming enough to suspend greenwood with or without trial. Antony may turn out to have committed many of these allegations, he may not. Let’s not forget Jonny Depp was black balled from Hollywood for 5 or so years and that turned out to be a farce.

 

[owlo]

Not comparable to the greenwood case. The leaked audio was damming enough to suspend greenwood with or without trial. Antony may turn out to have committed many of these allegations, he may not. Let’s not forget Jonny Depp was black balled from Hollywood for 5 or so years and that turned out to be a farce.

No doubt he was in a toxic relationship where both sides were angry and abusive as feck though. Amber Heard is a turd who tried to profit off it, but the demonisation and blackballing of her in the media is likely undeserved, given they were simply both terrible. Often toxic relationships are 'abusive,' in the literal sense, but it's probably something that needs resolved with a breakup and deleting each other from their phones rather than the legal system. (For example, if the woman is throwing plates at antony and slapping him round the face, and he's responding by pushing her into walls, and she's responding by abusing him further etc, that's simply a toxic relationship for me.) We don't know as we aren't privy to it. The Greenwood situation was something else though....

 

[MackRobinson]

The problem I'm calling out is so much of the commentary of late is focused on victim blaming.

The race thing is a counter point - that black men are more quickly assumed guilty.

Point being there's not a good solution and the way the system works is not adequate

A lot of posters are having trouble interpreting my comments because they think I'm on one specific side of Antony guilty or not guilty whereas in fact I'm neither. My opinion is Antony is accused and in question. And I believe the victim(s) have suffered some sort of domestic abuse.

I don’t see it as victim blaming at all. It seems like posters are saying, if he didn’t abuse her this is what could have happened. Aren’t you essentially doing the same if you think domestic abuse occcured?

 

[RMD83]

No doubt he was in a toxic relationship where both sides were angry and abusive as feck though. Amber Heard is a turd who tried to profit off it, but the demonisation and blackballing of her in the media is likely undeserved, given they were simply both terrible. Often toxic relationships are 'abusive,' in the literal sense, but it's probably something that needs resolved with a breakup and deleting each other from their phones rather than the legal system. (For example, if the woman is throwing plates at antony and slapping him round the face, and he's responding by pushing her into walls, and she's responding by abusing him further etc, that's simply a toxic relationship for me.) We don't know as we aren't privy to it. The Greenwood situation was something else though....

Amber Heard doesn’t deserve demonisation? She was happy to torpedo his career and reputation off the back of false allegations to further her own career and further her reputation from the perspective of being a victim of domestic abuse. She deserves exactly what she got in my opinion. She was happy to hijack the sympathy of actual domestic abuse victims. That said he did not come across well himself I agree. It was clearly a toxic relationship but two high profile junkies having spats continuously is sadly relatively normal in their world of Hollywood seemingly. However as far as we know regarding Antony, unless I’ve missed some key information then it’s once again he said/she said. And there’s plenty of men who commit these crimes and plenty of women falsely reporting these crimes. The point I was making was just that unless there’s damming public information like the greenwood case then he shouldn’t be treated the same.

 

[Zlaatan]

i dont know. but i dont think the club cares

If you don't know what the truth is then it's pretty strange to accuse the club of not defending it.

 

[Ted Lasso]

I don’t see it as victim blaming at all. It seems like posters are saying, if he didn’t abuse her this is what could have happened. Aren’t you essentially doing the same if you think domestic abuse occcured?

And there's the rub!

Which is why my posts seems so contradictory. And my emphasis is that these are not simple cases where we can pass judgment on the outside and certainly not as simple as accepting charges dropped as indicating innocence in the other case for instance.

Player needs to be placed on leave not making public statements. I dislike that the victims are taking to social media in addition to pressing charges but I also sympathize because for so many generations they are typically ignored or not believed especially against rich powerful men and social media levels the playing field for them. But it also disrupts the judicial process which in itself is flawed (see wrongful convictions).

 

[MackRobinson]

And there's the rub!

Which is why my posts seems so contradictory. And my emphasis is that these are not simple cases where we can pass judgment on the outside and certainly not as simple as accepting charges dropped as indicating innocence in the other case for instance.

Player needs to be placed on leave not making public statements. I dislike that the victims are taking to social media in addition to pressing charges but I also sympathize because for so many generations they are typically ignored or not believed especially against rich powerful men and social media levels the playing field for them. But it also disrupts the judicial process which in itself is flawed (see wrongful convictions).

Is that what you are doing by saying you believe they were abused? I'm confused.

 

[Cheimoon]

Appreciate giving it thought. It's hard, man! As you can see there's some circular logic and consistency is tough. I don't know that we can currently say there's a great fits all solution.

Perhaps the best example is from how police officers are investigated for situations they're involved in that we see in the news a lot with a supposed innocent person being shot or worse. They're put on leave until the investigation process is completed. In cases where it's not a black or white scenario, you often see the cop transferred or resigning anyway. If fully innocent they resume. If guilty to the standards required currently you see convictions.

Is it unfortunate to be wrongfully accused? Yes. Do public figures become targets more than others , probably. As a public figure, however, it is perhaps to be considered a professional hazard and to be handled in a particular way. For instance, coming out with agent and player interviews is not it. Let social media swirl and let the investigations happen in privacy.

Public opinion is fickle. Someone else quoted Mike Tyson as an example and at first I recoiled but that person was correct. He's got an idolized following and even a fecking cartoon show on Adult Swim. Not to mention the movie cameos. A convicted rapist. Is he absolved by serving time? Public opinion seems to be so. Point being that going through the process appropriately doesn't end someone's career - as was mentioned about "poor Masons career being ruined" and similarly w Antony because of the accusations and charges. Johnny Depp another good example. Guys got a new Netflix special and Disney begging for him back.

For what it's worth, I think you've been making some excellent points in these posts. I suppose you're speaking a bit too much in general to really fit the specific subject of the thread, plus of course people miss a solution/conclusion (since you don't have one). But it's good to highlight the issue even if we can't solve it.

 

[Ted Lasso]

Is that what you are doing by saying you believe they were abused? I'm confused.

To the women, I would say:
hey, I believe you that you've been through something awful and it's brave of you to bring it to light. DV and SA cases with couples or partners can be notoriously tough to navigate and keep in mind that the outcome of this does not dictate whether or not you actually went through something awful and painful. You did and I'm sorry for your suffering. Your openness is helping a lot of silenced women in these situations that let them know they don't have to just tolerate things that happen to them because it has been ignored or not given credence simply because you're with someone. That is a win, regardless of the case.

To Antony, I would say:
You are a famous footballer now playing for the biggest club in the world. There are a lot of young men and women that look up to you as a hero and idol now and just because you have been accused of something they will not immediately jump to conclusions. There is a system and process in place that will prove your innocence. Be careful though about how you speak on this subject publicly. Remember you are an idol. There are a lot of women who are suffering at the hands of abusers and the last thing you want to do is to make it seem like anyone who accuses is a liar and they their suffering is trivial. Be compassionate to your accusor and know they are feeling some sort of pain. The process will show, you already know, that perhaps there is a misunderstanding or maybe something more. If the latter you will have to take responsibility and grow as a person. But you Already know in your heart you are innocent and don't forget that you are presumed innocent until strong evidence is produced. You do not have to worry. You have no need to use your position of wealth and fame to put down the accusor and potentially hurt the movement for women. The courts will redeem you.

It's not perfect and it doesn't resolve anything. But that's the dialogue in my head.

 

[talking robot]

If you don't know what the truth is then it's pretty strange to accuse the club of not defending it.

They said Greenwood was innocent but banished him anyway. I have no idea about whether he’s innocent, but that’s a very dangerous precedent to set. You just need to be accused and then tried in the court of public opinion to be punished. If you are a player and actually are innocent of what you have been accused of (as may or may not be the case with anthony), just sitting back and waiting to let justice be done doesnt seem smart. A statement like that and the precedent it set suggests that truth doesnt matter, or at least takes a back seat to public image.

 

[JediSith]

To the women, I would say:
hey, I believe you that you've been through something awful and it's brave of you to bring it to light. DV and SA cases with couples or partners can be notoriously tough to navigate and keep in mind that the outcome of this does not dictate whether or not you actually went through something awful and painful. You did and I'm sorry for your suffering. Your openness is helping a lot of silenced women in these situations that let them know they don't have to just tolerate things that happen to them because it has been ignored or not given credence simply because you're with someone. That is a win, regardless of the case.

To Antony, I would say:
You are a famous footballer now playing for the biggest club in the world. There are a lot of young men and women that look up to you as a hero and idol now and just because you have been accused of something they will not immediately jump to conclusions. There is a system and process in place that will prove your innocence. Be careful though about how you speak on this subject publicly. Remember you are an idol. There are a lot of women who are suffering at the hands of abusers and the last thing you want to do is to make it seem like anyone who accuses is a liar and they their suffering is trivial. Be compassionate to your accusor and know they are feeling some sort of pain. The process will show, you already know, that perhaps there is a misunderstanding or maybe something more. If the latter you will have to take responsibility and grow as a person. But you Already know in your heart you are innocent and don't forget that you are presumed innocent until strong evidence is produced. You do not have to worry. You have no need to use your position of wealth and fame to put down the accusor and potentially hurt the movement for women. The courts will redeem you.

It's not perfect and it doesn't resolve anything. But that's the dialogue in my head.

To all parties, Antony and the women involved I’ll say the same thing.

if you’re telling the truth. I support you. If you’re lying, then I hope you get punished.