Has Matthew Johns been treated unfairly?

[hellteam]

Cheers :thumn, someone here actually understands how this wasn't all actually consensual, and the responsibility Johns had in that.

I still don't think anyone understands this... they think just because he had 'consent' to have sex with her its okay that there were all those people in the room. Ahhh :crazy:

 

[renouf]

Is it not possible that Matthew Johns could sue this woman for coming out and speaking about him like this? A police investigation cleared Johns 7 years ago, on what grounds does she have the right to now come out and tarnish his name?

 

[myanonymoususername]

They are turning into a witch hunt, now the league apparently has to identify the other players according to grimshaw.

What they have done is cause enormous pain to his wife and children, they are disgusting vultures.

That could be achieved in 5 minutes, something like this:

Gallop (picks up phone and calls Zappia): Hi Tony, here's the deal. If you guys don't man up and fully disclose everything you know about this incident including who did what, there will be consequences for your club. Furthermore I want your full co-operation in undertaking to remove anyone involved that is still there, from your club.

Zappia: and?

Gallop: if you don't play ball, you won't be playing ball at all - you know the grant we give you, not happening until you lot are fully frank and forthcoming about what happened.

hangs up.

 

[Pete Cash]

Is it not possible that Matthew Johns could sue this woman for coming out and speaking about him like this? A police investigation cleared Johns 7 years ago, on what grounds does she have the right to now come out and tarnish his name?

It is not defamation if it is true so that means it will become a massive sh*tstorm in a public place as she argues what she said was fact.

Why in the name of God would Matthew Johns want to sue a girl that A)the public seem to have a lot of sympathy for and B) would just create a massive scene in court.

The best thing he can do is let the story die and be seen doing charity work or some sh*t like that.

 

[El Diablo]

That could be achieved in 5 minutes, something like this:

Gallop (picks up phone and calls Zappia): Hi Tony, here's the deal. If you guys don't man up and fully disclose everything you know about this incident including who did what, there will be consequences for your club. Furthermore I want your full co-operation in undertaking to remove anyone involved that is still there, from your club.

Zappia: and?

Gallop: if you don't play ball, you won't be playing ball at all - you know the grant we give you, not happening until you lot are fully frank and forthcoming about what happened.

hangs up.

do you think before hitting submit :crazy:

how would Zappia know and how many of the players are there now?

 

[bartman]

No crime was committed at all, She CONSENTED to do it.

The second bit doesn't necessarily follow from the first.

The first is no doubt true... but the correct second bit would be there was not sufficient evidence that she didn't consent to the acts that followed.

Technical I know, but kind of important when people are jumping to conclusions on an issue like this. There is a grey area in between no crime and total consent...

 

[analyst]

I'm sorry analyst, I am having a lot of difficulty reading your posts and trying to work out your point.

The beauty of typing is that you can look at what you say and then edit or delete it as you see fit.

With what are you having difficulty understanding? I was being sarcastic about 9 and the NRL being the victum, I understand you may not agree with my perspective on the issue, also my point if it was not already obvious is that yes im of the opinion that johns was treated unfairly

honstly, Im happy to clarify anything for you ,of course raping someone is worse than taking drugs, but I dont think someone should be punished if they were not convicted of any wrong doing, is this not a resonable statement? should we not apply the idea that he is innocent until proven guilty? if so he should not have lost his job as he is innocent since he has not been proven guilty.

 

[Apey]

The second bit doesn't necessarily follow from the first.

The first is no doubt true... but the correct second bit would be there was not sufficient evidence that she didn't consent to the acts that followed.

Technical I know, but kind of important when people are jumping to conclusions on an issue like this. There is a grey area in between no crime and total consent...

Sort of like how you've been jumping to conclusions by implying the other guys never had consent to join? I know you can keep dressing it up with words like 'seems' and 'appears' or even 'supposedly' but it's clear that your stance implies you have an opinion about what happened. Aren't you jumping to conclusions like everyone else?

 

[Cloud9]

Johns' wife doesn't think highly of Kiwi Clare and I concur.

 

[Ziggy the God]

Good to see that he was punted, and I haven't spoken to one person since Monday night that thought that he would survive.

At the end of the day, why did he apologise to the girl in the carpark if everything was kosher? He did that because he knew what he did was wrong, but the damage was done. Why not stop it earlier? He didn't because he is a gutless turd.

If people cannot see why the general public are revolted by this incident, maybe you should book into the classes run by Mark O'Neill and Nigel Vagana.

The game comes first, and it is bigger than any individual.

Johns can go and get pharked. I wouldn't piss on him if he was on fire.

 

[bmwpower]

WHAT a load of bullsh*t this happened 7 years ago and he was cleared of any wrong doing. he cheated on his wife which is wrong but ffs leave the poor bloke alone, hes career is now in shatters.

 

[Surely]

Johns' wife doesn't think highly of Kiwi Clare and I concur.

Kiwi girls are pretty easy, they even give mt druitt girls a run for their money.

 

[myanonymoususername]

do you think before hitting submit :crazy:

how would Zappia know and how many of the players are there now?

Zappia could ask Pierce who was there, and there are quite likely others around the club who know.

 

[myanonymoususername]

Johns' wife doesn't think highly of Kiwi Clare and I concur.

On what basis does she make her assessment? What he told her. Is that what really happened? Who knows? She has chosen to believe him - doesn't make it true at all, its just his version of events.

And on what basis do you concur? Some remarkable character assessment capability of yours? Blind faith that footy heroes are never in the wrong? Hatred of women? You were there and met Clare?

 

[myanonymoususername]

It is not defamation if it is true so that means it will become a massive sh*tstorm in a public place as she argues what she said was fact.

Why in the name of God would Matthew Johns want to sue a girl that A)the public seem to have a lot of sympathy for and B) would just create a massive scene in court.

The best thing he can do is let the story die and be seen doing charity work or some sh*t like that.

Dont forget too that evidence that is inadmissable in a criminal case would be admissable in a civil one. We could really get the dirty laundry aired.

 

[El Diablo]

Zappia could ask Pierce who was there, and there are quite likely others around the club who know.

or Gallop could ask Pierce

 

[Cloud9]

On what basis does she make her assessment? What he told her. Is that what really happened? Who knows? She has chosen to believe him - doesn't make it true at all, its just his version of events.

And on what basis do you concur? Some remarkable character assessment capability of yours? Blind faith that footy heroes are never in the wrong? Hatred of women? You were there and met Clare?

What he told the police.
Either Johns is lying or Kiwi Clare is embellishing her story.
Do you know Clare's background and intentions?

Are you Clare?

 

[Ice Ice Brady]

Dont forget too that evidence that is inadmissable in a criminal case would be admissable in a civil one. We could really get the dirty laundry aired.

He clearly doesn't want to name the others involved too.

 

[bmwpower]

that girl is a s**t and she brought it upon her self

 

[myanonymoususername]

or Gallop could ask Pierce

which is exactly what he should do.