I don't think it would have worked any differently had the independent party came to the similar conclusion without revealing how they came to that conclusion their integrity would have been questioned as well they would have been accused of doing clubs bidding .
Mason Greenwood | Please be respectful and stay on topic
- Thread starter keithsingleton
- Start date
I don't think it would have worked any differently had the independent party came to the similar conclusion without revealing how they came to that conclusion their integrity would have been questioned as well they would have been accused of doing clubs bidding .
It may be true that convictions are difficult especially in certain types of cases. But that’s not a justification for the public taking matters into their own hands. That’s a justification for working on the system to improve outcomes.
The detail we’ve seen paints a picture and no it’s not a pretty picture. But I would have absolutely asked people to accept that they don’t know all the facts.
I think someone probably did do something wrong. But that’s the point. “I think”, “probably” and “something”.
I appreciate you taking the time to read my banner, but what relavance does the number of posts I have written in this forum have?
You are correct in implying that my means of responding to the post in question was rather obstrepertous, but, quite frankly, there seems to be an increasing trend where condoscending, arrogant, and rather downright rude responses have been given to those individuals who do not share the same black and white interpretation as another (rightly or wrongly). Whilst I certainly understand that the audio and visuals will be sufficiently damning for many individuals, it, in my view, is also incorrect to belittle those for whom it does not render an interpretation open and shut and, in my opinion, this standpoint can also have some validity. However, we would most likely be here for days if we were to dissect the nuances and finer details required in such a case and, even if we did, we would still most likely be left with "assumptions", "it is most likely that", and "literature and real-world evidence would more strongly suggest that". Whilst this is incredibly unfortunate, and I know that it inevitably causes severe distress and pain for certain indvidiuals involved in difficult-to-prove criminical cases, cannot form the basis of neither a legal nor a moral justice system.
Last edited:
His partner and their baby should be the key overriding factor going forwards. Having a baby is a life changing event.
Moving to a foreign country where english isnt the first language is hard enough without a baby to consider. Its a massive strain on any relationship.
I would understand if she and her family were reluctant to allow her to move abroad with a baby at such a young age.
If they have to go abroad, then maybe USA would be best idea. Soccer is so down the list of sports in that country that they might be left alone, bar the usual hounding from british media which will happen anywhere they go.
If a family member of mine was accused of something, I would hope they were innocent. If they had done something wrong, I’d hope they use it as a learning curve and get the help of those around them, not persecuted by online bullies who don’t know the full story.
If you are talking about a family member of mine being an alleged victim, it’s a different story. I’d be furious and of course forgiveness would be on the table but more difficult. But this is a difficult comparison because it’s not a family member. If someone stole money from my dad, I’d punch them. If they stole money from your dad, I’d feel sympathetic but not violently. We can’t just use the “what if it was someone you knew” and go around being 7-8 billion vigilantes looking for revenge. The world doesn’t work like that. Anyway, the family of the alleged victim have offered forgiveness (if there was any forgiveness required) so I don’t see why it’s so hard for me to do the same.
If I was being cynical, I'd suggest that's the exact reason why.
They knew something was up, but they wanted to protect the asset.
Maybe not in terms of him staying, but in terms of media coverage and him finding another club it could only help.
But the public didn't take matter into their own hands now did they? Arnold and Greenwood have both said directly they take full responsibility for this decision. Are they lying? Did bigman6969 on twitter make that decision?
And how do you explain the fact that there are two so-called mobs out there, who made that decision to pick between then?
All of that is of course rhetorical, they don't need answering. But so you at least see what I'm saying? It can be said "we don't know" to pretty much all aspects of this case. Especially the things we don't know for a fact.
But one of the things we do know is who has taken responsibility for this. So if we are to take the CPS at their word and we are to accept we don't know all the facts, why can we not take the people directly involved at their word?
ChatGPT is a hell of a thing
Last edited:
Plus in the longer term, you wouldn't want this to be what comes up when your children, friends or family put your name into google either.
This was an internal disciplinary investigation between employer and employee which would ordinarily take place outside of the public eye. Given the public nature of the allegations and Mason's profile, I acknowledge that this was not an ordinary situation, but I felt it important that we still follow due process
In hindsight, probably should/would have done it differently - but I think the above is an insight into the rationale.
It's worth noting that Arnold's statement stressed the need to respect the wishes of the victim - and that their findings were presented to the victim and the victim's family for correction - and they did not do so.
Curiously, The Athletic article makes mention that the GMP and CPS don't appear to have agreed with the conclusion of United's internal investigation - and cite Greenwood being arrested in Jan, and the CPS deciding to proceed to trial in October as corroboration - but makes no mention of what The Guardian reported - "A court heard last October a central plank in the inquiry had collapsed only four months after Greenwood was arrested.I t is understood that police and prosecutors initially decided to continue with the case because of the significant level of public interest, given Greenwood’s high profile and the seriousness of the allegations.
But a review of the case by CPS lawyers has concluded that there was no realistic prospect of conviction given the collapse of the case."
Also, The Athletic article states the following - "United say the social media posts were made in the early hours of January 30 last year, after Greenwood had fallen out with the complainant. The picture this paints is that the complainant sought revenge on him." It might be eluding me now, but I don't remember reading that in the club statement or Arnold's letter.
Ah, I love it when a plan comes together!ChatGPT is a hell of a thing
https://www.atptour.com/en/news/zve...eted#:~:text=Independent Safeguarding Report,
A recent and at least somewhat similar situation in the Tennis world for a top player.
Its an interesting insight in terms of the quite stark difference in tone and content and how even in the case where no further action was being taken, you can give people some clarity or at least a feeling that a robust process has been undertaken by suitably qualified people/with a consistent rationale.
For the same reason watching on the news a bombed building in ukraine with dead bodies on the street is much more powerful and makes us much angrier than reading on the newspaper that saudi arabia bombed a village in yemen without any pictures.
Denying this difference only makes sense if you're a robot.
Even if he won the balon d’or in a few years it wouldn’t prove United wrong at all. United never claimed or indicated that they didn’t rate him as a footballer. The opposite actually, because if he wasn’t such a good footballer United would have let him go / paid off his contract ages ago.
I keep reading Fergie would have done this and that. But no one actually knows. Giggs was a womaniser, Beckham got very young in a relationship with one of the most famous and most photographed person in the universe, but neither of them ever ended up with such evidence/audio recording as players. During Giggs playing career the most he was accused of or there was proof of was cheating. While strong leadership helps, you can’t change the character of a person.
But even if we assume Fergie was a magician and controlled the relationship and sex life of his players (yes, I know he pulled Giggs and Sharpe out of parties, but that’s not controlling their (sex) life), he retired 10 years ago.
So how many of our players have done similar to Greenwood since then? Zero. People despise Pogba and Lingard for their social media exposure, but thankfully they didn’t do anything even close to that bad or vile.
There was always something extremely strange with Greenwood. Remember when he gave an interview with England and Ole was absolutely fuming why they had allowed him to give an interview when he hasn’t even been allowed to give interviews for United. That was also when due to his behaviour he was sent home along with Foden. Then Southgate’s never ending explanations why Greenwood was not getting England calls “we are in constant dialogue with his club/manager/family, he needs to focus on his club career for now, we will integrate him into the England set up when the time is right…”
I didn’t hear this kind of stuff with other young players such as Saka.
Rashford was also called up by England when he was really young, but we never heard England or Southgate talk about him like that. Injuries, out of form, Rashford did not want to be with us, … but never the Greenwood explanation.
So people can blame whoever they want, but it all comes down to Greenwood and his character.
As for getting picked up by our PL rivals … well, calm down, one step after the other. For now it seems he is struggling to find any club, let alone a half decent club.
Really sad event but he has no one else but himself to blame.
I keep reading Fergie would have done this and that. But no one actually knows. Giggs was a womaniser, Beckham got very young in a relationship with one of the most famous and most photographed person in the universe, but neither of them ever ended up with such evidence/audio recording as players. During Giggs playing career the most he was accused of or there was proof of was cheating. While strong leadership helps, you can’t change the character of a person.
But even if we assume Fergie was a magician and controlled the relationship and sex life of his players (yes, I know he pulled Giggs and Sharpe out of parties, but that’s not controlling their (sex) life), he retired 10 years ago.
So how many of our players have done similar to Greenwood since then? Zero. People despise Pogba and Lingard for their social media exposure, but thankfully they didn’t do anything even close to that bad or vile.
There was always something extremely strange with Greenwood. Remember when he gave an interview with England and Ole was absolutely fuming why they had allowed him to give an interview when he hasn’t even been allowed to give interviews for United. That was also when due to his behaviour he was sent home along with Foden. Then Southgate’s never ending explanations why Greenwood was not getting England calls “we are in constant dialogue with his club/manager/family, he needs to focus on his club career for now, we will integrate him into the England set up when the time is right…”
I didn’t hear this kind of stuff with other young players such as Saka.
Rashford was also called up by England when he was really young, but we never heard England or Southgate talk about him like that. Injuries, out of form, Rashford did not want to be with us, … but never the Greenwood explanation.
So people can blame whoever they want, but it all comes down to Greenwood and his character.
As for getting picked up by our PL rivals … well, calm down, one step after the other. For now it seems he is struggling to find any club, let alone a half decent club.
Really sad event but he has no one else but himself to blame.
Why would that make a difference?
He’s is/was a top top talent, we all know he’s capable of that
So it is a case of having double standards then. I guess you're honest about it.
I don't think anyone is looking for revenge, I just think most are glad the club is rid of a wrong 'un. Nobody's talked about violence towards him (that I've seen). I absolutely don't think he deserves a second chance at this club. If he can rebuild his career elsewhere in due time, I don't really care, but I certainly do think that before he's given the opportunity he should at least take some steps to show that he's willing to change.
Which I find ironic given we're repeatedly told by those in favour of Qatar that morals shouldn't be in business or sport and we should stand with our new overlords. Yet with Mason it's a different story.
Just further demonstrates the shite fan base we have.
Well somebody got a thesaurus for their birthday!
If I was being cynical, I'd suggest that's the exact reason why.
They knew something was up, but they wanted to protect the asset.
Maybe not in terms of him staying, but in terms of media coverage and him finding another club it could only help.
But the public didn't take matter into their own hands now did they? Arnold and Greenwood have both said directly they take full responsibility for this decision. Are they lying? Did bigman6969 on twitter make that decision?
And how do you explain the fact that there are two so-called mobs out there, who made that decision to pick between then?
All of that is of course rhetorical, they don't need answering. But so you at least see what I'm saying? It can be said "we don't know" to pretty much all aspects of this case. Especially the things we don't know for a fact.
But one of the things we do know is who has taken responsibility for this. So if we are to take the CPS at their word and we are to accept we don't know all the facts, why can we not take the people directly involved at their word?
ChatGPT is a hell of a thing
command reads: 'defend the indefensible in the style of an eccentric Victorian gentleman'.One thing is saying something "abhorrent" another is verbally demanding someone to have sex with you, weird comparison. Really clutching those straws.
Amigos, we're at the "It is what it is." stage and that's that.
But there is value in offering suggestions to the club, which no doubt has someone on staff who monitors the caf and perhaps even RedIssue (if you think this place is bonkers have a look at RI). Here are my suggestions to make sure this doesn't happen again and, if it happens again, how to handle it:
When you bring in a young player into the academy, make sure you attend to his psychological as well as educational needs. I'm sure there is someone on staff who is in effect a counselor, but there's a good chance it's a check-the-box job. Even for young men who flame out at 19 go through incredible emotional stresses in their teens to make it as far as 18 or 19 under the United umbrella. I can't speculate as to what happened to Mason, but he clearly was nowhere close to being mature enough to handle the emotional stresses associated with international fame. And when that boy becomes a young man, make sure he has the support he needs, and the firmness he needs, to handle everything that comes at him. Most players who come through our academy seem pretty balanced young men, but Greenwood was clearly not.
What about when the shit hits the fan? The club should retain a third party to conduct the investigation. Say the outcome is that the man and the woman have patched things up, she forgives him, has his baby and gets married. Charges are dropped. The man needs to make a public statement admitting that his behavior was very wrong and that he has apologized to her and that they have reconciled. And to apologize to club supporters in the most profuse manner possible, that he not only mistreated the woman but that brought disgrace to the club. The club itself could beyond that, acknowledging the bad behavior (while avoiding any suggestion of criminal behavior) and agreeing to meet directly with organizations dedicated to combatting domestic violence. What most of would find acceptable in such a case is acknowledgment, expression of remorse, genuine reconciliation and an ambiguous commitment that this will never happen again. Most of us have the capacity to forgive when the doer of the wrongful action expresses remorse and can be genuinely believed to never do this again.
But there is value in offering suggestions to the club, which no doubt has someone on staff who monitors the caf and perhaps even RedIssue (if you think this place is bonkers have a look at RI). Here are my suggestions to make sure this doesn't happen again and, if it happens again, how to handle it:
When you bring in a young player into the academy, make sure you attend to his psychological as well as educational needs. I'm sure there is someone on staff who is in effect a counselor, but there's a good chance it's a check-the-box job. Even for young men who flame out at 19 go through incredible emotional stresses in their teens to make it as far as 18 or 19 under the United umbrella. I can't speculate as to what happened to Mason, but he clearly was nowhere close to being mature enough to handle the emotional stresses associated with international fame. And when that boy becomes a young man, make sure he has the support he needs, and the firmness he needs, to handle everything that comes at him. Most players who come through our academy seem pretty balanced young men, but Greenwood was clearly not.
What about when the shit hits the fan? The club should retain a third party to conduct the investigation. Say the outcome is that the man and the woman have patched things up, she forgives him, has his baby and gets married. Charges are dropped. The man needs to make a public statement admitting that his behavior was very wrong and that he has apologized to her and that they have reconciled. And to apologize to club supporters in the most profuse manner possible, that he not only mistreated the woman but that brought disgrace to the club. The club itself could beyond that, acknowledging the bad behavior (while avoiding any suggestion of criminal behavior) and agreeing to meet directly with organizations dedicated to combatting domestic violence. What most of would find acceptable in such a case is acknowledgment, expression of remorse, genuine reconciliation and an ambiguous commitment that this will never happen again. Most of us have the capacity to forgive when the doer of the wrongful action expresses remorse and can be genuinely believed to never do this again.
Charges dropped does not mean not guilty. On reflection, odd mistake for the Club to make any sort of definitive statement.
Seems a lot of folks never saw the video or know what's contained in them which is why for so many it is simply an abstract concept of guilt and wrongdoing. Nobody has video or audio of the young woman that accused Ronaldo of date rape and even the supposed dialogue of that incident, while upsetting is not nearly at the level of heinous and disgusting as in this case...
Seems a lot of folks never saw the video or know what's contained in them which is why for so many it is simply an abstract concept of guilt and wrongdoing. Nobody has video or audio of the young woman that accused Ronaldo of date rape and even the supposed dialogue of that incident, while upsetting is not nearly at the level of heinous and disgusting as in this case...
Shite because half think Greenwood should leave? Or because a larger percentage appear to want Qatar and there's obviously overlap with some people? And does this include those who think both Greenwood leaving and Qatar coming in is good for the club to move on from both this mess and the Glazers and isn't based on any moral stance?
You know this is not a dig at yourself mate, at all, it's just "the shite fanbase" has been said a few times and I'm not really sure why and what makes ours worse than any other.
Although, I will say, the RAWK discussion on this was way more reasonable than this one in here last time I looked, so we've definitely moved down the list.
If the charges are dropped, he can't go around apologising and incriminating himself. If he isn't guilty at all, then the woman is of false accusations which in itself is a serious offense, so he can't throw her under the bus if they are to be a family.
What you've written is nice in a fantasy world, but it's not applicable in this one. There isn't some fairytale ending here, which is why I've consistently said from the start that he just wouldn't be able to play here again. One way or another, someone has done something seriously wrong and people can whine and blame all they like but the bottom line is it was always going to end this way. The irksome thing is United never even tried if they believe he is so innocent, that's what keeps being forgotten about and why I personally think they've handled this shambolically and made things worse.
For me it's never been about who's guilty of what, in regards to this outcome, it has always been about how everyone moves on after what ever outcome there was. And in many ways we ended up with the worst possible one for the club and us fans, ambiguity. No court case, no explanations, just more questions and weird statements.
Once again, it's a sad situation all round and you are correct that we need to learn from this. All clubs do, but then this isn't the first young start that has gone off the rails, and definitely not on our watch too.
Last edited:
Probably because we always held ourselves above other fanbases in the past. Mocking those that went through struggles, or those that changed Manager every other week or accepted oil money. Yet here we are, squabbling amongst ourselves on a consistent basis being toxic assholes to one another. Be it through the Jose shite, Pogba, Ronaldo, Ole etc. Now it's Mason and Qatar.
If a large percentage of people are willing to look the other way and accept Qatar money then isn't it utterly hypocritical to then claim that morals should be in sport and we shouldn't allow Mason to be at the club? Doesn't sit right to me. Is it acceptable to look past morals when it's ok for the club? What rules are there for morals? When are we allowed to have morals and not. Genuine question because to me it seems like a large percentage seem to think you can switch morals off like a switch.
I’m not sure “double standards” applies when we talk about a situation with someone we know, and the same situation with someone we don’t. If it does, then I guess everyone has double standards. Or at least, they should.
You should be hoping that he gets help and he can become a better person for his and his family's sake. Who cares about football, DV is usually a symptom of a larger issue he clearly hasn't addressed or is even attempting to address going by his statement.
Whilst I agree, it's no different to anyone else. We've never been any better, arguably we've handled losing our status as the best worst than the Liverpool fans have.
But it's a bit odd to have a go at people squabbling on a forum. Everyone has opinions on things, we aren't all the same and there will never be full agreement on everything. That's life in general, it's hardly limited to this place. And it hasn't all been toxic nor is everyone being hypocrites about this, there has been some decent discourse among the usual crap and there's been some common ground and even a couple who have actually said they've learned something. And that's worth it all this to me, because it's a subject very close to my life and makes it worthwhile to try.
That's applying to people who are making their judgements based on a purely moral basis, which not everyone is. However I'd argue that that's down to each individual to draw their own line and it's not for you, I or anyone to tell people what and how to think morally. If that makes them hypocrites then it makes them hypocrites. I guess we all are in some ways.
I obviously agree though, it doesn't sit right with me that there is a cross-over with those who desperately want Qatar whilst wanting Greenwood out for moral reasons or some self-important judgement of the man. But again, what is to be expected? What fanbase, or any section of society won't have the same section of people? If we don't talk these things out, then it just gets worse. Pie in the sky hopefulness I know, but as I said above, some have actually thought about it all and are trying.
As I've said repeatedly in here, having a go at the fanbase over this is wrong to me. It's not the fans who started this off, it's not the fans who wanted to be split by this, and it's not the fans who have handled it poorly to say the least which has led to that split. Not when you have dickhead MPs and all sorts of mouths getting involved who are the real hypocrites here. Not when you have a young lad who has accepted blame (well, part) for starting this, and not when you have a Chief Exec who has accepted responsibility for that decision.
Yet a vast amount of these fans that have rightfully scorned Mason are also fully embracing Qatar taking over the club. This same outrage should be applied and yet it isn't.
A big feckin moral black hole. Its laughable.
I guess it's easier for people to ignore given they don't hear or read about it too much. Nor is it on our doorstep, who cares if it's happening to other people hundreds of miles away.
I'm sure Rachel Riley has also declared she won't support United if Qatar takes over... Right?
A big feckin moral black hole. Its laughable.
I guess it's easier for people to ignore given they don't hear or read about it too much. Nor is it on our doorstep, who cares if it's happening to other people hundreds of miles away.
I'm sure Rachel Riley has also declared she won't support United if Qatar takes over... Right?
That is indeed something people should be called out for.
But I think that about people who are desperate for them to take over regardless of their views on Greenwood, but that's not for this thread.
she chooses to be with him so it’s upto her.
Defo don’t want to see him in PL. or any champions league club. Atleast in Saudi he will fit in.
Wow.
All this focus on “the audio” or the “photos” being the reason why he has to go etc makes it feel like people only believe a victim if they’ve heard or seen it with their own eyes. If they haven’t - Ronaldo, Partey, etc - then it’s all good for the player to continue.
I'm not quite following here - in your own example, unfair dismissal by employers is against the law and can be pursued through the justice system. So yes, the rulings of our justice system always supersede those of all others.
Correct, this case didn't even make it to court because the prosecution themselves felt there was no chance of convicting Greenwood. When you think about it, this is actually an even more emphatic outcome than a not guilty verdict in the court room itself, given the case would have had the strength to make that far.
@Sparky Rhiwabon Yes I agree, that is an issue for me. I mean Giggs and Best are still basically revered at United and they have both faced allegations that are equally or more serious, and that is putting it in a very careful way. Not so sure about Ronaldo.
I still completely understand those who don't want to see him play for us again, I am not even sure how I feel about that myself, but we definitely need to consider the problem of taking such a strong position considering we really don't know the whole story.
I still completely understand those who don't want to see him play for us again, I am not even sure how I feel about that myself, but we definitely need to consider the problem of taking such a strong position considering we really don't know the whole story.
Oh it's that time of the night is it?
Feck sake
Maybe because I didn't say unfair dismissal, you just did?
Not at all, it's the ambiguity which isn't helping anyone here. But that was always going to be the case from the moment she withdrew her statement and it came out they were pregnant.
If it went to court, we'd know all the evidence and facts. Of course that would look incredibly bad on at least one of them, possibly both, and would have ended up with the same result so it's probably for their best that it didn't go.
Strong position yes, but I don't really have an issue with either side as long as they are consistent and truthfull and at least try to see the other point. I don't even know what I "want" in this case in regards to him staying/leaving, as I haven't thought about it that deeply on a personal level because we just don't know enough. What I do know he was never going to play for us again and I do think this is the best outcome all round. My issue lies more with how it's been handled and some of the hypocrite MPs who have run their mouths.
Last edited:
Not me. Feck them both. Either parties involvement with the club would have me questioning my support.
Feck Rachel Riley too.
It’s not Rachel Riley’s fault that our media has been so decimated, news outlets now use tweets from z list celebrities to suit their own narrative.
Obviously anyone who relies on fame for their career is going to take advantage. Free publicity for saying the most obvious things as long as it goes along with the media zeitgeist. She’d be an idiot to not get involved.
Obviously anyone who relies on fame for their career is going to take advantage. Free publicity for saying the most obvious things as long as it goes along with the media zeitgeist. She’d be an idiot to not get involved.
Your entire post made very good points but two are of note. The latter is what I’ve pretty much also said.
The former is something I want to expand on. I think when it’s online and disconnected people act disconnected to reality because they forget these are real people and real lives behind the story.
I wonder how many of those people would in their real lives be the one to ignore the friendly charming liked by everyone neighbour who was a domestic abuser. Or if they knew they boss was a domestic abuser would quit their job. When it’s in real life they have to consider so many factors and will most often take the easy choice. But when it’s online something like the babies future doesn’t even come into their mind.
Most DV are not one off impulse lapse of judgment.
When your GF are wary enough that she feel she needs to record you and actually caught you redhanded, to me it looks like he's done this time and time again.
That, or she got extremely lucky with her timing.
When your GF are wary enough that she feel she needs to record you and actually caught you redhanded, to me it looks like he's done this time and time again.
That, or she got extremely lucky with her timing.
It is a privilege to play for Manchester United and Greenwood is not deserving of that privilege in light of everything that has happened. The journey to get there was painful, but the club made the correct decision in the end.
I have no sympathy for Greenwood. He continues to collect £75k/week and can carry on his football elsewhere once his contract expires.
Talk of "wokeness" and "morality police" is misguided and pathetic. It is Trumpian-level delusion.
I have no sympathy for Greenwood. He continues to collect £75k/week and can carry on his football elsewhere once his contract expires.
Talk of "wokeness" and "morality police" is misguided and pathetic. It is Trumpian-level delusion.
Or before if we can loan or sell him.
Saw a post on Twitter from a woman saying that if your partner is supportive of Greenwood in any way - dump him.
I would definitely agree with that.
I would definitely agree with that.
I wouldn't quit my job. Depending what the scenario was I may well refuse to work with that person. And no reasonable employer would ignore that.
My wife had a situation where someone who worked for her was arrested for DV and sexual abuse of his kids on the morning he was meant to sign a contract extension. She tore it up in case he turned up to sign it. In the end he never showed his face again, but she had told HR (and her boss) that they better not allow him to sign any extension if they expected her, or likely anyone else, to turn up for work if he was on the premises (just in case they felt the need to backtrack if he wasn't convicted).
So I'd say yes. People often do stand up for what is right. A sample size of 2 admittedly.
Although I'm not sure what Joe Bloggs might or might not do for an easy life, has to do with what a club like United should do? The club have protected their reputation (to some degree although belated) without seriously penalising Greenwood. They didn't sack him/tear up his contract, he still gets paid well and will move on to play football in the near future. I'd say the consequences of his actions are less than the minimum you might expect and such behavior would likely have far more serious consequences for you or I.