Tracy Grimshaw interview...fair?

[Eels Dude]

With all due respect to Clare, 4 corners could have asked her the same question.

They could have... but that was not the angle they were ever going to take for that story. Hey had that other nutcase woman for that side of things.

 

[Pete Cash]

Yeah, it wasn't like the ABC was shy to show the women who really chase after Rugby League players. They featured the one with the most "fame" and her rather terrible collection of trophies.

 

[Hanscholo]

I thought the interview was pretty hard to watch. You could tell that johns wasnt in the mood for any speaches on high morals. he admited it was a mistake, which it was. But to go on and on about it like grimshaw did, trying to pull out a confession of guilt over the terrible conduct was a bit lame. Obviously he regrets it, I dont see the point in making him try to martyr himself to the game. They had group sex, never at any point did the woman say she was uncomfortable or said no. I admit she probably didnt think she was going to be in for what she got either, and there in lays the main issue. I feel sorry for him, I have some sympathy for the girl too. I dont think i can judge what happened unless i was there.

 

[typicalfan]

Umm, there has never been a court case. The police decided not to press charges because they didn't believe there was enough evidence of a crime.

And the whole police investigation would have been he said/she said.

So, on the one hand the he said information that the players provided to police investigation is valid, but the she said information then and now is not. You are trying to have it both ways.

That is my whole point, there isnt enough evidence to suggest a crime was committed. Do you know what evidence was presented if any? Is her story accurate and the same it was 7 years ago?

I think I will leave it to the people that do this as a profession. :sarcasm:


The fact there was never a court case shows how weak the initial evidence was.

 

[badav]

every time Grimshaw tried to get him to share the blame with the other players or on the NRL's culture, he deflected it and took it all on himself - he seems very careful not to expose anyone else involved.

And why the hell should he expose anyone else involved?? Its completely ridiculous that this had come to light in 2009 in the first place. They should come forward of their own accord, if they so wish.


It would be very interesting to know what kind of skeletons some of these very judgemental so called "journalists" and media people have in their closets. But all they ever do is try to shovel sh*t on other people.

 

[Eels Dude]

That is my whole point, there isnt enough evidence to suggest a crime was committed. Do you know what evidence was presented if any? Is her story accurate and the same it was 7 years ago?

I think I will leave it to the people that do this as a profession. :sarcasm:


The fact there was never a court case shows how weak the initial evidence was.

I wouldn't say that. The problem with finding evidence for sexual assault cases is because more often than not there IS NO evidence. It's one person's word against anothers. When that's the case then it's very difficult for charges to be laid, it's as simple as that. If a sexual assault allegation is made and the alledged victims says 'he did it' and the accused says 'no i didn't'... there's not much the police can do. And it's even more difficult once it does go to court, because it's up to the prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt that a sexual assault occured, and that's very difficult to do.

 

[typicalfan]

It would be interesting to see exactly what was said in the investigation. And how much it differs from today

 

[Eels Dude]

It would be interesting to see exactly what was said in the investigation. And how much it differs from today

It would be. That will never happen though. That's priveliged information and the NZ police would never be allowed to release that information. Matt Johns and anyone else who made statements to police would have copies of those, but obviously would never share them with the public and nor would this young Clare woman.

 

[duck_dodgers]

GRIMACE ....................... GRIMMERS

 

[kia ora storm]

I asked myself the same thing but then I thought, how would we know? We have always know him as somewhat of an energetic character - we have no idea what he's like when he's sad and it would be pretty baseless for anyone to accuse him that didn't know him personally of not being genuine.

Agree...which is why I don't want to make an assumption.

 

[Dazraider]

That was totally out of context how she ridiculed Johns
This happens 7yrs ago, now she sees MONEY from it and cashes in with the media.
Its such Bullsheet how this has turned out and why only give it to Johns , why are the others left out of it.
Just someone getting cash for nothing

 

[Raidersrawesome]

If the sex was consensual then its legal , it doesnt matter that after the act she feels ashamed and then decides it was the wrong decsion, it doesnt become illegal.

You have to ask why Johns was the only one named?

I feel for the girl only for the fact that she has made a choice which she totally regrets and she has had to live with that. which is clearly affecting her.

Johns had to be stood down by the NRL and Nine , what he has done is morally wrong and he has lost all respect , not because he is guilty of doing anything illegal though.

As i see it , there are 2 people ( possible more if you include the other players ) who have made bad decisions and now regret their actions.

 

[piesplus]

There's a pretty big flaw in Johns's story.

He claims the whole thing was consensual, she was a willing participant and at no time did she indicate she did not want to be there.

Yet he said on Four Corners that he deliberately sought her out later in the carpark to apologise for the other men entering the room.

If she was such a willing participant in the whole thing, what was he apologising for?

 

[Bengal]

There's a pretty big flaw in Johns's story.

He claims the whole thing was consensual, she was a willing participant and at no time did she indicate she did not want to be there.

Yet he said on Four Corners that he deliberately sought her out later in the carpark to apologise for the other men entering the room.

If she was such a willing participant in the whole thing, what was he apologising for?

Simple - he's apologizing for the gatecrashers (so to speak) and their actions/behavior. He has no need to apologize for his own presence or behavior. This happens all the time in every day life - we all apologize for a friend/colleague/family member's behavior at one point in time, even though we ourselves did no wrong. If people need to be held accountable here, then it isn't Mr Johns, or at the very least, others, including the girl, need to be held to account "along" with him!!

.

 

[piesplus]

Matt Johns: "I was there on the night and I did see what happened and at no point did she object at any stage to what was going on ... when the incident went on, the woman was a willing participant."

So again, what was he apologising for later?

Further, he was 30 years old and I would not describe him as shy. If he thought it was wrong enough to apologise, why was it not wrong enough to tell his teammates to p*ss off? As a senior player, one would think he would've had the authority to say so.

 

[Shorty]

Simple - he's apologizing for the gatecrashers (so to speak) and their actions/behavior. He has no need to apologize for his own presence or behavior. This happens all the time in every day life - we all apologize for a friend/colleague/family member's behavior at one point in time, even though we ourselves did no wrong. If people need to be held accountable here, then it isn't Mr Johns, or at the very least, others, including the girl, need to be held to account "along" with him!!

.

Yeah, I'm inclined to agree to a certain extent.
However some responsibility must fall on him allowing those that were allegedly not invited entering the room.

Like I can't speculate why he felt the need to approach the woman with an apology after the events took place, but surely why feel the need to apologise?
Especially if she was as assertive as what he makes her out to be?

Also, it definitely questions the integrity of those involved but if Matthew Johns is in fact an innocent man - Are none of the others involved going to come out and back him up?
The guy's life is ruined, surely someone must come forward?

 

[Bengal]

Matt Johns: "I was there on the night and I did see what happened and at no point did she object at any stage to what was going on ... when the incident went on, the woman was a willing participant."

So again, what was he apologising for later?

Two issues (1) legal (2) moral. In a moral, common decency sense, he's apologized for the actions of others. In a legal sense, your comment above is geared towards that.

Further, he was 30 years old and I would not describe him as shy. If he thought it was wrong enough to apologise, why was it not wrong enough to tell his teammates to p*ss off? As a senior player, one would think he would've had the authority to say so.

Fair questions. All easier said than done though, especially given the circumstance. How rational are we when we're deep in the throws of carnal activity? (A question we can ask "all" participants involved!). Otherwise, yes, you would think that someone his age, with his seniority, and his circumstance (being married!) would have acted in a far more dignified manner. Forget about telling his mates to 'p' off...he shouldn't have been there in the first place!

.

 

[Ike E Bear]

If the sex was consensual then its legal , it doesnt matter that after the act she feels ashamed and then decides it was the wrong decsion, it doesnt become illegal.

You have to ask why Johns was the only one named?

I feel for the girl only for the fact that she has made a choice which she totally regrets and she has had to live with that. which is clearly affecting her.

Johns had to be stood down by the NRL and Nine , what he has done is morally wrong and he has lost all respect , not because he is guilty of doing anything illegal though.

As i see it , there are 2 people ( possible more if you include the other players ) who have made bad decisions and now regret their actions.

Good post. I tend to agree.

Mistakes were made and they had had a significant personal cost to some of those involved.

I think it's a bit shabby that it has resurfaced publicly so long after the fact, as well as that Johns is bearing the brunt for everything.

People get fired from jobs and divorced for doing things that aren't illegal all the time. The fact that all of this hasn't cost Johns his marriage (yet) means he's well ahead at this time. A crime doesn't have to be established for the whole situation to be considered bad and for his employers to find his actions - albeit committed long before he was actually an employee in the strictest sense - make his continued employment problematic. He is a "public figure" and you have to accept that sometimes your skeletons will come back and bite you, if you want to pursue that life.

I'm happy to call a spade a spade and say that I personally think the whole situation stinks and I don't have a lot of sympathy for him. I don't watch footy for the commentators and I don't watch the Footy Show ... I'm not a Storm fan either, so in the end, I don't really care about Johns as

 

[Bengal]

However some responsibility must fall on him allowing those that were allegedly not invited entering the room.

The responsibility falls both on him the girl, and whoever else she/they consented to (and I'm not talking about the gatecrashers here, it is my understanding that there was another consensual person involved. Could be wrong, someone will enlighten me I'm sure). If people want to lambaste Matthew Johns, fair enough, but if we want situations like this to discontinue then we need to stop it at both ends. Two played this game, lets scrutinize "all" involved in the hope of stopping, certainly reducing incidents like this from happening again.

Like I can't speculate why he felt the need to approach the woman with an apology after the events took place, but surely why feel the need to apologise? Especially if she was as assertive as what he makes her out to be?

When all is said and done, this is very much a side issue.

Also, it definitely questions the integrity of those involved but if Matthew Johns is in fact an innocent man - Are none of the others involved going to come out and back him up?

Your question infers that he's guilty!

.

 

[Baron Vo Mandor]

Do you guys honestly believe that Johns should have kept his job? Channel Nine had no choice but to sack him.

TV is all about image. Johns did not project a good image for the game.

Mate I completely agree. This is what it comes down too, to me the the only person he should be answering too is his family.

The chick made her bed and so to speak had to lie in it..... If your unhappy about something learn from it and dont do it again like the rest of the world.....

He will continue on as a assistant coach ect but his days as a celebrity are gone, gone, gone, gone..........