• The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...

    Get involved!

Adam Johnson Arrested

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

No he didn't. He admitted to kissing a 15yo, having groomed her in some fashion. Which is, of course a serious crime.

However, I withhold judgement until I've actually seen what the court says happened. It does appear that he's done serious wrong but I don't like to judge someone on headlines. I'd rather know the facts first.

When grooming comes to mind, I think of to catch a predator. I hope he likes prison food, and penis.
 
Which is exactly why I say wait for the facts before making assumptions based on emotive words.
Sometimes, the grooming is more serious than the act itself that follows from it. Think of it this way- millionaire, famous person gets into the head of vulnerable, impressionable child. They end up having a snog. What is more serious? The snog, or the emotional damage that the actual grooming causes? The feeling of embarrassment at being manipulated, perhaps feelings of rejection (very often "groomed" children think they are in love with the perpetrator) & so on...

The psychological harm is often far more destructive than the physical act & that goes for a lot of crimes.
 
Sometimes, the grooming is more serious than the act itself that follows from it. Think of it this way- millionaire, famous person gets into the head of vulnerable, impressionable child. They end up having a snog. What is more serious? The snog, or the emotional damage that the actual grooming causes? The feeling of embarrassment at being manipulated, perhaps feelings of rejection (very often "groomed" children think they are in love with the perpetrator) & so on...

The psychological harm is often far more destructive than the physical act & that goes for a lot of crimes.

Granted, but we don't yet actually know what he did, or to what extent. Which is my point. It could have been two text messages, it could have been a year long campaign. I don't know.

There are grades to everything. Someone breaking into an OAP's flat and stealing a priceless heirloom that means the world to her is theft; so is nicking a pound from your mum's purse. Same crime, worlds of difference between them.

I'm not saying Johnson isn't guilty or shouldn't serve a sentence, I'm saying I don't like to judge until I know the actual specifics.
 
When grooming comes to mind, I think of to catch a predator. I hope he likes prison food, and penis.
That show was such a guilty pleasure. It was terrible, don't get me wrong, but it was delightful to watch people get caught red handed and try to act like it was all just a big misunderstanding.

Except for this one guy I saw once. He had a 12 pack of Smirnoff Ice (they always did) and stripped all of his clothes off at the door, and just straight up was proud to say that "I'm here to party!"
 
That show was such a guilty pleasure. It was terrible, don't get me wrong, but it was delightful to watch people get caught red handed and try to act like it was all just a big misunderstanding.

Except for this one guy I saw once. He had a 12 pack of Smirnoff Ice (they always did) and stripped all of his clothes off at the door, and just straight up was proud to say that "I'm here to party!"
I saw that one. Also the one where he turned up with his infant daughter. Absolute scum.

The show may be iffy, but it did a job and I have no doubt some children have been saved an ordeal through it.
 
12715447_494425770763631_2423299526111026328_n.jpg
 
I see Adidas decided to drop Adam Johnson. You think it would have been a marketing masterclass having him run around in Predator boots.
 
All these cases predate Saville.
The media attention on child abuse cases is such that the Judiciary are imposing far more severe sentences (& rightly so) for them, particularly those where there has been grooming beforehand-the act itself has been prepared & built up to over a period of time in most cases-usually via social media/internet.

It will ultimately depend on the gory details of the actual sexual contact & whether he is convicted of the offences he denies, but it remains child abuse where he has groomed his victim & likely abused his fame & fortune to achieve this.

I agree with the general principle that acquisitive crime has historically been treated far more seriously than offences of violence or abuse, but I think you'll find that there is a groundswell of public disgust at these offences & their perpetrators that the Judiciary are responding to.
I don't know. Why should they sentence a man, like Glitter, because at the time of his offences Sex acts against children were not as harshly treated. Why was the climate different to paedophiles then?
Historically some crimes were treated with harsher sentences, but they don't give you the same harsh sentence if you get nicked 10 years after.
For Instance if you got nicked for a burglary you did 10 years ago after having your prints taken you may be sentenced leniently or harshly depending on the current climate towards burglars. Not on how the average burglar would have been sentenced in 2005.


here's one example of many:

Just last March a man from Bradford, Mohammed Ahmed was sentenced for having unlawful sex with a 14 yr old.
He was cleared of rape with violence as he produced witnesses, a Mr Khan, who said they heard the dad beating the girl after he was caught in the house by the father and ran off. He had claimed he did not touch her, the father did the injuries.
So, plead not guilty to rape and unlawful sex with a child. He was found guilty of Unlawful sex with a child of 14yrs of age.
The Judge said in summing up:
"You knew her age and took advantage of her vulnerability. She was easy prey and you encouraged her advances.

"Her mother warned you off but you went on to fulfil your sexual desires.

"You pleaded not guilty and came across to me as an arrogant and self-centred young man who has shown no real remorse.

"I don't think you will respond to a long custodial sentence in any meaningful way, but anyone who takes sexual advantage of a child must expect prison."

He was jailed for 2 years, 2 fucking years after pleading not guilty and having the front to mitigate he was sorry and made a mistake and please give me a sex offender programme after found guilty.
The climate towards such offences was the same then. He still got Bail too. Some wouldn't for lesser offences.
12 month and he'll be out.
Well, he's probably out next month.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top