Mason Greenwood

The vile c’nt should be behind bars and getting the same treatment as Ian Watkins, but unfortunately the poor woman has been brainwashed and her family are soft as sh’te and have been blinded by the money.

 

While I'm not in any way, shape or form condoning Greenwood's behaviour, are you seriously equating someone who was in the end not convicted due to lack of evidence of attempting to force her himself on an adult woman with whom he has very obviously had consensual sex on other occasions in the past, with someone who has been convicted and jailed for raping a baby?

 

Yes. Sex offenders are all the same in my book. Only difference between Greenwood and Watkins is that one is rightly locked up and the other has wrongly escaped justice.

Should the scumbag be allowed to play again I hope he gets two footed every game.

 

Not *prosecuted* due to lack of evidence and the withdrawal of the accuser. It never went to court to try to get a conviction.

He could have paid her off. It could have been revenge that went too far. It could have been a recording of a consensual sex game. We don't - and likely won't - know for certain.

All we do know is that the prosecution wasn't continued and the couple have now had a baby together.

 

He hasn't escaped justice. He has been prosecuted but there has been insufficient evidence to allow the CPS to continue with the case. We do not generally convict people without evidence in this country, let alone punish them!

 

Let's be clear, if you have consensual sex once, it doesn't lessen it as an offence. I don't see how anyone having heard that video can try to minimise it Rape is rape.

 

I'll just quote this tweet again.

 

Then I'll quote this.

 

You can quote it as many times as you like, but in the absence of the complainant being prepared to attend as a witness it can not be put into evidence. Without evidence there can be no conviction.

 

....

 

I completely agree Helen. But it's fair to say that there are different degrees of seriousness of sexual offence, something which the law takes into account. While I'm not trying to minimise the seriousness of Greenwood's actions, I can't see how they could be considered to be on the same level of vileness as what paedophile and multiple child rapist Ian Watkins did.

 

They're not though, and that's something the law takes into account. Ian Watkins is a predatory paedophile, who has been found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of raping a baby, something which he planned meticulously with the child's mother. As far as we know, this was not a remotely isolated incident. That doesn't in any way make Greenwood's actions excusable. It just illustrates that there are different levels of seriousness of what is ostensibly the same crime. It's the same reason why the sentences for murder vary so dramatically. Or do you think that the person who finally snaps and murders their abusive spouse after years of being mentally tortured is the same as someone who has killed several, random people for nothing more than the fun of it?

 

Tbf I never initially said I put Greenwood in same ‘league’ as Watkins. I said Greenwood should be inside getting same treatment as Watkins, as in what Watkins recently experienced. And see how Greenwood would like being put in a situation in where he felt powerless just like what he put that poor woman through.

 

I’ll repeat, it wasn’t just the dropping out of witnesses, the cps received more material evidence. We don’t know what that was. The videos and audio alone even without witness evidence in court seems pretty strong, so to drop the prosecution there must be other evidence that gives context or raises doubt about the video and audio.

Did Harriet Robson fabricate all or part of it? Was the video faked (I mean I’d doubt that, it looked pretty real to me, but she does fancy herself as a social Media producer and influencer). It seems far fetched to think it wasn’t real, but do we actually know that?

Is the audio part of a bigger recording that shows a different light?

Most people it seems won’t entertain any possibility that greenwood is anything but an abuser and attempted rapist. Some even calling him a rapist despite the fact it has never been suggested that he raped anyone and it ever being on his charge list.

The two bits of evidence in the public domain do appear to be quite damning. That is for sure.

But the number of people assuming guilt isn’t right either. We do not know what else is on file.

I read something (just a few comments from unknowns, so possibly completely unsubstantiated and false) on a news thread about this that Robson accepted a police caution late last year or early this year for attempting to pervert the course of justice. The whole thing being an act of revenge for him messaging another girl, done for her to just put on her socials initially, to get attention and get back at him, which snowballed and got out of hand.

Trial by social media is a dangerous thing. Mason Greenwood has almost universally been written off as a violent sex offending thug - and the small Sample of evidence in the public domain suggests that - yet not one person outside those involved, the CPS and Greater Manchester Police, actually know what the further evidence obtained is.

The chances are we will never know what the new material evidence is. So the chances are that Mason Greenwood’s career in this country is probably untenable. But that doesn’t make it right to assume guilt on the basis of what is likely to be a very small percentage of all the evidence available.

 

It's open to Mason Greenwood to come out with whatever new evidence there might be. If there was any compelling evidence which clears him you'd think he would be pretty eager to make it public.

 

Kin ell. What a way to describe rape.

 

I’d agree. You’d think if there was evidence that offers context and a different explanation he’d have at least had it leaked by now even if the law states he couldn’t release it publicly and be up front with it.

But he’s also engaged to be married to the mother of his child, who also happens to be the alleged victim. Maybe she doesn’t want it known, maybe he values her reputation more than his own ruined one and so hasn’t done it so far.

Maybe he’s waiting on finding out if his club want to keep him, maybe they have advised him to keep his trap shut whilst they consider it, so as not to further bring the club into disrepute, and maybe we will find more out if they chose to keep him at the club.

Maybe any suggestion she fabricated evidence is all boll.ocks and he actually did do it and is keeping quiet to try and let the dust settle.

Maybe there is another explanation showing him to not be guilty.

The point is, we don’t know.

There is, whilst only unsubstantiated rumour, an explanation of the evidence which would suggest him to not be guilty. Yet the possibility of this is ignored and the majority have him pegged as a girlfriend abusing sex offender.

I’ll qualify this post, I don’t personally think the video was fabricated, looked pretty compelling to me.

But I don’t know that. So I can’t conclude he’s guilty of anything, and I think it’s wrong that most people have.

I haven’t seen or heard all the other evidence. We live in a country that has one of the best developed and fairest legal systems in the world. It is massively imperfect and is shown to have gotten things wrong, of course. But the mistakes are outnumbered massively.

The CPS don’t even see a point in continuing to prosecute. In my admittedly limited dealings with criminal law, the removal of a key witness can lead to that yeah but with the material evidence that is in the public domain, that alone looks to be enough to give a reasonable chance of conviction. Forget his money, forget she won’t testify. That video and audio on its own looks compelling.

You have to think that there must be more to it and plenty we haven’t seen. Just summarily dismissing the cps decision being solely due to her not wanting to testify and him having money I don’t think is a realistic reflection of what the cps do and will have done here.

I may be wrong. But they have said there was more evidence discovered after his initial charge. And whilst I’m not naive enough to think the criminal justice system is infallible, I have more faith in it than to just think they’ve let it go as she’s dropped out of being a witness and he has a few quid. They just don’t work like that.

 

Actually read the rest of what I've written for some context, rather than expressing faux outrage. It's reactions like that which kill any sort of reasoned discussion about sensitive topics.

 

We all know that. Doesn't alter the facts of the recording though, and it's worse listening to it than reading it.

 

I think you know full well that Merde Tete isn't trivialising rape and you have taken his post out of context.