Adam Johnson

[Nemo]

Not sure why animal pornography is illegal? You can go out into the countryside at any time and see cows and sheep at it, why is filming that illegal?

I haven't looked up the material in question, but isn't the issue usually a human being erm... involved?

[Ells]

I haven't looked up the material in question, but isn't the issue usually a human being erm... involved?

I think/hope he was joking !

[suttonred]

Obviously each case is different and in 99% of cases I would hope they had their dicks chopped off or put down. My opinion on this case is that 6 years is too much. Iv seen countless stories in the news where people have done a lot worse with kids and received less.

Too much eh? How many kids do you have to formulate this expert opinion? If the shithead was in my world it wouldn't have gone to court...

[RedRag]

The NSPCC letter has really annoyed me, not just because I dislike the NSPCC generally, but it really is nonsense. They seem to be equating the fact that he was allowed to continue work (before the trial! I.e. Innocent) as brushing child cruelty under the carpet. Fuck them.

Only caught a 30 second clip on the TV news from the NSPCC, so you are doubtless right about the letter.  Innocent until proven guilty and all that. 

For me, it is not so much whether Johnson should have been in work or not (but Sunderland could have suspended him on full pay) but firstly that it turned out just before the trial that he was after all by his own admission, guilty of two charges, and then after the trial, that he was found guilty of two further charges.

This young girl/woman has therefore (predictably) had to suffer the "slag" type comments on a national scale as well as the usual offensive social media put downs from Johnson's friends and supporters over a long period - all whilst Johnson would have known the true background.

Johnson's right to be innocent until proved guilty is unquestionable but his decision to exercise that right has in this case significantly compounded the damage to his victim.

[RobertT]

And part of the problem people seem to have with Sunderland is that Johnson told them what he did, well some of it, but they let him play because he said he would be pleading not guilty to it, which he then flipped on at trial.  Sunderland therefore knew he was actually guilty but used his choice to plead not guilty as a way of making it seem like it was alright.

In terms of sentence, he got the lower end based on the offences he was guilty of.  It would be interesting to see which cases people think got off lightly in that event?  More likely is that people compare it to different charge are offences that weren't proved but part of a trial where lesser charges were.  There may also be mitigating circumstances but in this case it seems the judge saw none - hence the reference to his predatory nature rather than any predilection to children as such.

[singingiiiffy]

Too much eh? How many kids do you have to formulate this expert opinion? If the shithead was in my world it wouldn't have gone to court...

Jump down off your horse. I clearly put in comparison to other well publicised cases including ones recently in local news that others have also referred to. The variation in sentencing lengths is the issue. I still can't believe you can kill someone with intent and be out in 20 years.

[singingiiiffy]

Most recently this one was all over social media and the news

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/teaching-assist-spared-jail-despite-6848058

A teaching assistant who was spared jail for having sex with a 15-year-old student has had her sentence quashed.

Caroline Berriman, 30, was allowed to walk free from court despite admitting charges of sexual activity with a child, and sexual activity with a child by a person in a position of trust.

But today her suspended sentence was quashed and she was locked up for two years after the Court of Appeal decided it was too lenient.

The victim, now 17, claimed the pair had sex up to 50 times.

[jayohaitchenn]

It's not just sex crimes. Women regularly get away with shorter sentences and fewer convictions than men.

http://www.law.umich.edu/newsandinfo/features/Pages/starr_gender_disparities.aspx

[RobertT]

I think in that case she plead d guilty to two counts of the same charge as Johnson but the third one was different, grooming being the one that Johnson was guilty of.  The boy then publically told his story where it seems much juicier but that wasn't the charges she faced.

[RobertT]

I believe that there is some research that shows the general public are more likely to suggest lower sentences than judges when presented with case facts.  It is is mainly that we hear more about the ones that are deemed lenient.

[Talk Talk]

The victim, now 17, claimed the pair had sex up to 50 times.

Bloody hell, that was quite a session.

[jayohaitchenn]

Bloody hell, that was quite a session.

Serious question. Would you make that joke if the victim was female?

[Ells]

Serious question. Would you make that joke if the victim was female?

Please tell me you're not an MRA.

[Ginginho]

Please tell me you're not an MRA.

Had to Google that also.

I've met John, he's definitely not a Magnetic Resonance Angiogram.

[Flashheart]

Ha.

I did exactly the same and came to the same conclusion. Although I've not met him, you can call it a hunch.