The footballer gets arrested thread

[P!ssed Off]

Also, one thing I'd stress is that the charge of sexual activity with a child is silent on consent. If there is no consent they charge with sexual assault. Sexual activity with a child is only normally charged when the child consented to the activity. So, there's no suspicion in this case that the girl was raped/did something against her will - or else there would have been a different charge.

Edit:

In terms of sentencing, have a peek at pages 46-48 here:

https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/wp ... t_web1.pdf

Page 64 onwards has the stuff on grooming.

I'd guess he's looking at a category 3A activity offence and a category 3 grooming offence - so the starting point of 18 months is about right.

Guilty plea will get it down to about 16 months I guess. Probably suspended if he's lucky. In any case, his career's now over.

If Marlon King managed to keep going despite his numerous sex offence convictions I doubt the two charges admitted by Johnson would be the end of his career.

Different story if he's found guilty of the more serious charges, of course.

[mx]

Also, one thing I'd stress is that the charge of sexual activity with a child is silent on consent. If there is no consent they charge with sexual assault

Not sure that is true. I thought that, legally, a child is not capable of consent. so its assault/rape etc, regardless.

[Ian Royal]

Also, one thing I'd stress is that the charge of sexual activity with a child is silent on consent. If there is no consent they charge with sexual assault

Not sure that is true. I thought that, legally, a child is not capable of consent. so its assault/rape etc, regardless.

Whether a teen is legally able to consent, there clearly is a difference between being forced and willingly participating. So it would make perfect sense to have difference sentences and offences to take into account that distinction. If the teen was able to give legal consent, the first one wouldn't be an offence at all.

[Winston Smith]

Durham police have warned internet users that it is a crime to identify alleged sexual assault victims ahead of England footballer Adam Johnson’s child sexual assault trial.

The force said officers would deal robustly with anyone who broke the law by naming the 15-year-old schoolgirl at the centre of the Johnson case.

The Sunderland midfielder, 28, is due to go on trial on Friday accused of two child sexual assault charges.

“Victims of sexual assault are guaranteed the legal right to lifetime anonymity, and publishing any details, including on social media, which may lead to their identification, is contrary to the Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1992.

[Pepe the Horseman]

Adam Johnson pleads guilty to sexual activity with a child and child grooming.

We've all been there, right guys?

[No Fixed Abode]

Adidas have called an end to Johnsons boot deal. They're quite protective over their brand aren't they?

UK Athletics due to this drug cheating malarky.
Liverpool Football Club due to lack of European Football.

[tmesis]

Probably suspended if he's lucky. In any case, his career's now over.

If Marlon King managed to keep going despite his numerous sex offence convictions I doubt the two charges admitted by Johnson would be the end of his career.
.

In the weird moral climate we live in, it wouldn't surprise me if there are a lot of people now who regard Johnson's underage sex as being far worse than Marlon King's sexual assault (or even Ched Evans' rape).

[AthleticoSpizz]

Now sacked by the mackems

[Royal Ginger]

...and now he's been sacked by Sunderland.

There must be some pretty damning texts/online messages for him to plead guilty on it.

[Royal Ginger]

...and now he's been sacked by Sunderland.

There must be some pretty damning texts/online messages for him to plead guilty on it.

All the law requires is two contacts (regardless of content) and then agreeing to meet up or arranging to meet up, and the defendant intends for the underage party to commit a relevant offence when they meet. So the content of the messages (except with regard to proving what the defendant had in mind) could be completely irrelevant.

Message 1 could be: Hi I'm Adam
Message 2 could be: You're fit, can I suck your tits? If so, shall we meet underneath the clock at Bournemouth station at 3pm tomorrow?

And then if he gets on the train, or even buys a train ticket, he's grooming.*

*This is simplified, but the gist is just about right

Love your work.

I meant the bit about him not saying he didn't realise how young she was.

[Winston Smith]

His boot deal was apparently £10,000 a season.

Surprised by the low figure tbh

[P!ssed Off]

All the law requires is two contacts (regardless of content) and then agreeing to meet up or arranging to meet up, and the defendant intends for the underage party to commit a relevant offence when they meet. So the content of the messages (except with regard to proving what the defendant had in mind) could be completely irrelevant.

Message 1 could be: Hi I'm Adam
Message 2 could be: You're fit, can I suck your tits? If so, shall we meet underneath the clock at Bournemouth station at 3pm tomorrow?

And then if he gets on the train, or even buys a train ticket, he's grooming.*

*This is simplified, but the gist is just about right

Love your work.

I meant the bit about him not saying he didn't realise how young she was.

Oh I was just showing off.

The thing I can't get around is the logic of his mixed plea. Only thing that works is that he originally didn't know, and then developed knowledge of her age, and carried on regardless.

Seems you're suggesting he will argue he had sex with her before he knew she was underage.

But I would have thought his defence will be that he didn't have sex with her at all, and they only kissed/touched.
Which doesn't seem a particularly complicated argument.

[BR2]

...and now he's been sacked by Sunderland.

There must be some pretty damning texts/online messages for him to plead guilty on it.

All the law requires is two contacts (regardless of content) and then agreeing to meet up or arranging to meet up, and the defendant intends for the underage party to commit a relevant offence when they meet. So the content of the messages (except with regard to proving what the defendant had in mind) could be completely irrelevant.

Message 1 could be: Hi I'm Adam
Message 2 could be: You're fit, can I suck your tits? If so, shall we meet underneath the clock at Bournemouth station at 3pm tomorrow?

And then if he gets on the train, or even buys a train ticket, he's grooming.*

*This is simplified, but the gist is just about right

In your example as they are both from the North-East it would be very expensive to get down to Bournemouth and so Johnson would expect the girl to be earning enough money to pay for the trip, ergo she is an adult.
Also 3.00 in the afternoon is a bit early for tit-sucking at Bournemouth station-it is usually an after-dark matter.

More seriously, thanks for the good work in explaining the legal position on the charges.
Presumably by pleading guilty to some of the charges it will be taken into account when sentencing because it has saved the girl from having to go through the process of giving evidence, even if that might be in camera?

[Stranded]

So we're all agreed then that we should sign him in time for the 2019/20 season to spearhead our attempts to get out of League 2?

[Hoop Blah]

In the weird moral climate we live in, it wouldn't surprise me if there are a lot of people now who regard Johnson's underage sex as being far worse than Marlon King's sexual assault (or even Ched Evans' rape).

I'm not totally sure where you're going with this tmesis.

King's sexual assaults were, IIRC, just grabbing arses albeit in an aggressive way. Chad Evan's case is quite complex and I still find the rape label to it a little misleading to be honest.

Do I find Johnson the headline* scenario of Johnson going after and having a prolonged sexual relationship with a 15 year old girl (or even younger perhaps) as a 28 year old man in a privileged position worse than those offences?

I think it's worse than King's sexual assault yes, and in some ways worse than Evans' case too. The comparison with Evans is a little futile seeing as the reaction to his case, release and subsequent attempts to get back into the game mean he too has been rejected by both the public and football.

* I'm not really sure on the details of what Johnson has done as yet but the above is based on my assumption that he's met, chased and bedded a girl of 15 or younger and then, once knowing her age, continued in some form of sexual relations.

[P!ssed Off]

In the weird moral climate we live in, it wouldn't surprise me if there are a lot of people now who regard Johnson's underage sex as being far worse than Marlon King's sexual assault (or even Ched Evans' rape).

I'm not totally sure where you're going with this tmesis.

King's sexual assaults were, IIRC, just grabbing arses albeit in an aggressive way. Chad Evan's case is quite complex and I still find the rape label to it a little misleading to be honest.

Do I find Johnson the headline* scenario of Johnson going after and having a prolonged sexual relationship with a 15 year old girl (or even younger perhaps) as a 28 year old man in a privileged position worse than those offences?

I think it's worse than King's sexual assault yes, and in some ways worse than Evans' case too. The comparison with Evans is a little futile seeing as the reaction to his case, release and subsequent attempts to get back into the game mean he too has been rejected by both the public and football.

* I'm not really sure on the details of what Johnson has done as yet but the above is based on my assumption that he's met, chased and bedded a girl of 15 or younger and then, once knowing her age, continued in some form of sexual relations.

You're wrong on a number of accounts.

King has been convicted of at least three sexual assaults that I'm aware of. The most serious was punching a 20 y/o woman in the face and breaking her nose when she rejected his advances in a nightclub. Following an 18 month custodial sentence he was back in the game.

As for Adam Johnson, all three non-grooming offences refer to one particular date: 30/01/2015. There is no allegation of a prolonged sexual relationship.

Anyway, to be clear my original comment to Seb comparing Johnson to King was solely in regards to the two offences Johnson has pleaded guilty to.

[Winston Smith]

text conversation
http://www.thesportbible.com/articles/details-from-the-adam-johnson-trial-120216

[Uke]

https://mobile.twitter.com/kiwilfc/stat ... 5357604865

[Royal Ginger]

Well there's the smoking gun on the grooming charge.

[Hoop Blah]

King has been convicted of at least three sexual assaults that I'm aware of. The most serious was punching a 20 y/o woman in the face and breaking her nose when she rejected his advances in a nightclub. Following an 18 month custodial sentence he was back in the game.

Just for clarity, that's one of his assault/GBH charges and not his sexual assault which I still think are only grabbing of women and nothing more.

The assault is obviously a serious offence in itself. Is it worse than a 28 year old man taking advantage of a child for sex? I'm not sure.

As for Adam Johnson, all three non-grooming offences refer to one particular date: 30/01/2015. There is no allegation of a prolonged sexual relationship.

By prolonged sexual relationship I meant the grooming and sexual nature of their contact (non-physical perhaps), not him sleeping with her on a continued basis.