ChatterBank0 min ago
Maybe Footballer Adam Johnson Won't Get Such A Harsh Jail Sentence After All?
180 Answers
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
sp1814 - //Superficially, I can see similarities in the two cases, but as has been pointed out before, there are enough differences (admission of guilt is a huge one) to explain the one year difference in the sentences. //
Indeed - my post was only to point out the similarity in the respective judges' remarks - in all other respects, the cases are individual, as all such cases must be.
Indeed - my post was only to point out the similarity in the respective judges' remarks - in all other respects, the cases are individual, as all such cases must be.
Gromit
AOG,
/// Your views on Johnson grooming a 15 year old girl seem to be in sharp contrast to your views on Asian men in Rochdale doing the same thing. ///
And I would have thought that it would be, at least to most sane persons.
There is no way that the Asian grooming gangs in Rochdale and a great number of other Towns and Cities across England can possible be compared with the Johnson case.
The poor unfortunate children in these areas were purposelessly groomed and then systematically gang raped by these deviants.
How you can lesser their evil crimes, by comparing them to either the Johnson case or even this lesbian's crime is beyond belief.
But then this is what all this is about isn't it, the fact that I and others, while not in any way excusing this footballer's inexcusable actions, but are just trying to put some perspective to it.
But in doing so we have committed the cardinal sin of sticking up for justice and fair play, but in doing so have dared to criticise Pakistani Asians (you brought them into the proceedings) and a female who also happens to be a lesbian.
Three subjects that must not be criticised in any way, according to the Liberal Left's book of etiquette.
AOG,
/// Your views on Johnson grooming a 15 year old girl seem to be in sharp contrast to your views on Asian men in Rochdale doing the same thing. ///
And I would have thought that it would be, at least to most sane persons.
There is no way that the Asian grooming gangs in Rochdale and a great number of other Towns and Cities across England can possible be compared with the Johnson case.
The poor unfortunate children in these areas were purposelessly groomed and then systematically gang raped by these deviants.
How you can lesser their evil crimes, by comparing them to either the Johnson case or even this lesbian's crime is beyond belief.
But then this is what all this is about isn't it, the fact that I and others, while not in any way excusing this footballer's inexcusable actions, but are just trying to put some perspective to it.
But in doing so we have committed the cardinal sin of sticking up for justice and fair play, but in doing so have dared to criticise Pakistani Asians (you brought them into the proceedings) and a female who also happens to be a lesbian.
Three subjects that must not be criticised in any way, according to the Liberal Left's book of etiquette.
jno
/// I can't see any members of the liberal left defending the woman here? Have I missed something? ///
No they chose not to post any criticisms of her case, but turned it back on the Johnson case and even in Gromit's case back to the Asian grooming gangs.
The usual ploy of the liberal left, they use these kind of tactics that often, that they have become so predictable.
It is interesting to note however, that if I had dared to level another ABer's reactions to either of these cases, with their reactions to the multi Asian grooming gangs, I would have been lampooned from all angles.
But because a fellow liberal leftie happened to do so, nil response from the usual suspects.
/// I can't see any members of the liberal left defending the woman here? Have I missed something? ///
No they chose not to post any criticisms of her case, but turned it back on the Johnson case and even in Gromit's case back to the Asian grooming gangs.
The usual ploy of the liberal left, they use these kind of tactics that often, that they have become so predictable.
It is interesting to note however, that if I had dared to level another ABer's reactions to either of these cases, with their reactions to the multi Asian grooming gangs, I would have been lampooned from all angles.
But because a fellow liberal leftie happened to do so, nil response from the usual suspects.
AOG
Your defence of the groomer Adam Johnson is admirable. But isn't it you who usually lambast the liberal lefties for going soft on criminals. Yet here you are, trying to minimise the crime and almost exonerate this vile man of any wrong doing.
I fine that most odd, especially when you have been very tough on child groomers in the past.
Why the inconsistency?
Your defence of the groomer Adam Johnson is admirable. But isn't it you who usually lambast the liberal lefties for going soft on criminals. Yet here you are, trying to minimise the crime and almost exonerate this vile man of any wrong doing.
I fine that most odd, especially when you have been very tough on child groomers in the past.
Why the inconsistency?
Gromit
/// Your defence of the groomer Adam Johnson is admirable. ///
I am in no way defending Adam Johnson, as well you know it.
/// But isn't it you who usually lambast the liberal lefties for going soft on criminals. ///
Yes because the liberal lefties are only prone at going soft on criminals that are not White Christian British, and you know what I am like regarding fighting for a level playing field.
/// Yet here you are, trying to minimise the crime ///
This crime is in need of minimising from the very high level that some have chosen to place it.
/// and almost exonerate this vile man of any wrong doing. ///
Where have I or anyone else on here tried to do that, no they haven't and well you know it, but then that doesn't fit in with your agenda does it?
/// I fine that most odd, especially when you have been very tough on child groomers in the past. ///
/// Why the inconsistency? ///
The inconsistency is caused by the magnitude of the child grooming, which you apparently seem to have difficulty with.
Anyone can see (apart from yourself) that the grooming of one 15 year old girl is vastly different from the nationwide grooming and raping of children, carried out by some Pakistani men.
/// Your defence of the groomer Adam Johnson is admirable. ///
I am in no way defending Adam Johnson, as well you know it.
/// But isn't it you who usually lambast the liberal lefties for going soft on criminals. ///
Yes because the liberal lefties are only prone at going soft on criminals that are not White Christian British, and you know what I am like regarding fighting for a level playing field.
/// Yet here you are, trying to minimise the crime ///
This crime is in need of minimising from the very high level that some have chosen to place it.
/// and almost exonerate this vile man of any wrong doing. ///
Where have I or anyone else on here tried to do that, no they haven't and well you know it, but then that doesn't fit in with your agenda does it?
/// I fine that most odd, especially when you have been very tough on child groomers in the past. ///
/// Why the inconsistency? ///
The inconsistency is caused by the magnitude of the child grooming, which you apparently seem to have difficulty with.
Anyone can see (apart from yourself) that the grooming of one 15 year old girl is vastly different from the nationwide grooming and raping of children, carried out by some Pakistani men.
But leaving aside your obvious agenda here, and the sidebar which is the Asian grooming cases, this particular case has enough differences to the Adam Johnson case to justify the reduced sentence.
Did you know that the defendant in this case pleaded guilty, which automatically takes a third off the sentence?
Does that answer the question?
Or is it still tongue in cheek, and if so, should we not try to answer you?
Did you know that the defendant in this case pleaded guilty, which automatically takes a third off the sentence?
Does that answer the question?
Or is it still tongue in cheek, and if so, should we not try to answer you?
-- answer removed --
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.