Should Greenwood be allowed to play for us again?

They did charge him

The testimony the key witness was due to provide was sufficiently important to the case that once removed it was no lounger feasible to take it to court.

He was charged, date was set for November IIRC. Therefore the case must’ve been sufficiently strong for them to push for a conviction ?

Originally Posted by ZiggyStardust

Whether he serves prison time is for the criminal courts

Utd’s decision to keep him or get rid of him isn’t based on whether he is found guilty or innocent in a court of law
It’s a judgement call based on all the information they have at hand

You can try to play mental gymnastics with this as much as you want but it’s a very simple situation
Either you think those pictures and audio were faked or they are real
There is no in between
If they are real then he is clearly a physically abusive rapist and should have nothing to do with the club ever again

As far as I’m concerned they are clearly real and not faked because if they were faked we would have heard about it by now as it wouldn’t be that hard to figure out

That's a false dichotomy. They're not the only options.

Originally Posted by dunk

They did charge him

They didn't!

If they'd charged him he'd be going to court.

They arrested him (i think). They interviewed him. That's it.

Originally Posted by atticusgrinch

That's a false dichotomy. They're not the only options.



They didn't!

If they'd charged him he'd be going to court.

They arrested him (i think). They interviewed him. That's it.

He was charged. Court date set for November ‘23 in October. Charges dropped due to the witness dropping out.

Mason Greenwood charged with attempted rape and assault https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-63272019

Originally Posted by dunk

They did charge him

The testimony the key witness was due to provide was sufficiently important to the case that once removed it was no lounger feasible to take it to court.

He was charged, date was set for November IIRC. Therefore the case must’ve been sufficiently strong for them to push for a conviction ?

How do you know this? Have the police or CPS said it?

Police bail?

Originally Posted by atticusgrinch

Realistic prospect of a conviction.

And no one is 'found innocent' after a trial in England and Wales. It's a binary result.

This isn't Law it's English 101.

To be found' innocent requires a determination eg a process that sets out rules.

MG is clearly legally innocent until proven otherwise but as he hasn't entered the determination phase he hasn't been 'found ' innocent.

Originally Posted by atticusgrinch

How do you know this? Have the police or CPS said it?

Police bail?

Yes. He was charged. The reason for charges being dropped were given as such.

Mason Greenwood charged with attempted rape and assault https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-63272019

Have you any idea what the £#%&! is going on?

Mason Greenwood: Trial date set for Manchester United player https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-englan...ester-63699399

And was re arrested on suspicion of breaching bail conditions.

Originally Posted by redhegemony

And was re arrested on suspicion of breaching bail conditions.

The controlling and coercive behaviour charge relates to a period between November 2018 and October 2022, where Mr Greenwood is alleged to have made threatening and derogatory comments towards the complainant, as well as accessing and monitoring her social media accounts.

Innocent.

grinchers right now

Originally Posted by dunk

Innocent.

What a guy

Stick him up front to bang in some goals for us

Originally Posted by atticusgrinch

Oh yeah.

Don't even remember that.



Literally got no memory of that happening.

So you’ve been arguing for a week that he should play again under the impression that he’d just had a quick chat with the old bill a year ago?



Remind me not to enlist you in any potential legal defence.

Jesus grinchy.....

Isn't this literally your job aswell ...

FFS

I'd imagine the CPS asked all those questions as to who it was etc of the victim before charging him.

At any rate, even with charges dropped his premier career is done (most likely)

There would be too much media scrutinity, bad press, and potential loss of sponsers if he returns. I can't imagine even a regulation side taking him on

....so probably best for people to concentrate on the upcoming game, he's the past.

Originally Posted by dunk

They did charge him

The testimony the key witness was due to provide was sufficiently important to the case that once removed it was no lounger feasible to take it to court.

He was charged, date was set for November IIRC. Therefore the case must’ve been sufficiently strong for them to push for a conviction ?

So are you suggesting that the primary basis of the case against him was going to be hearsay from an individual and that the CPS weren’t confident that the tape and photos could get them a conviction?

Doesn’t sound like they had a massively incriminating case against him if that’s true.

Again, I should point out I’m in no way defending Greenwood. At the very best he’s clearly an unpleasant character, but I’d have hoped that to take such a high profile case to court they’d be reliant on more that just one individual testimony.

Originally Posted by Selhurst Samurai

So are you suggesting that the primary basis of the case against him was going to be hearsay from an individual and that the CPS weren’t confident that the tape and photos could get them a conviction?

Doesn’t sound like they had a massively incriminating case against him if that’s true.

More that the evidence (pics and audio) was in the public domain and therefore could prejudice the case, I believe, so they needed testimony on top of it. All DV and Rape cases pretty much fall apart without witness testimony I’d have thought.

Doesn’t mean the incidents never occurred and the person wasn’t guilty of carrying them out.

I’d have thought the pics and audio made this case extremely odd, had they not gone public it could’ve properly £#%&!ed him.

Originally Posted by dunk

More that the evidence (pics and audio) was in the public domain and therefore could prejudice the case, I believe, so they needed testimony on top of it. All DV and Rape cases pretty much fall apart without witness testimony I’d have thought.

Just edited my post a bit to clarify where I was coming from.

May have been more than one and all withdrew? Victim and the friend that released it..

<Insert your opinion here>

Hope that is ok.