• We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies from this website. Read more here

Mason Greenwood Verdict

Average Joe

Active member
Joined
Jun 20, 2010
Messages
1,106
Location
England
So Mason Greenwood is not guilty. I wonder if we'll be seeing him in a united shirt this season. As much as I find the verdict hard to believe, if he's not guilty then poor chap. It's ruined his career so far
 

Jason H

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 1, 2004
Messages
36,827
Location
Hounslow, Middlesex
Charges dropped - while one can debate the rights and wrongs of what might have gone on, he should now be free to resume his career.
 

Colesman Ballz

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Dec 28, 2014
Messages
14,846
So Mason Greenwood is not guilty. I wonder if we'll be seeing him in a united shirt this season. As much as I find the verdict hard to believe, if he's not guilty then poor chap. It's ruined his career so far
To be specific, he has not been found not guilty, but rather the charges against him have been dropped. It is difficult to speculate on the reasons for this happening, the possibilities are wide ranging.
 

Alistair20000

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
May 5, 2009
Messages
52,234
Location
Avoiding the Hundred
So Mason Greenwood is not guilty. I wonder if we'll be seeing him in a united shirt this season. As much as I find the verdict hard to believe, if he's not guilty then poor chap. It's ruined his career so far
Charges dropped by Plod/CPS so no verdict from a jury. He will revive his career.

Ched Evans has rescued his career after an even worse scenario of being convicted but an appeal was successful later. In his case I really had serious doubts about the guilty verdict. He did a decent job against Spurs as a hold up player for PNE in the Cup last weekend.
 

Alistair20000

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
May 5, 2009
Messages
52,234
Location
Avoiding the Hundred
Charges dropped - while one can debate the rights and wrongs of what might have gone on, he should now be free to resume his career.
Absolutelty. The issue for me is whether Manure should have suspended him. Smacks a bit of guilty until proved not guilty and that does not sit easily with me.
 

Average Joe

Active member
Joined
Jun 20, 2010
Messages
1,106
Location
England
Absolutelty. The issue for me is whether Manure should have suspended him. Smacks a bit of guilty until proved not guilty and that does not sit easily with me.
Suspended on full pay, I personally think it was the right decision and I'm sure United have helped Mason in many ways with his court case.
 

Colesman Ballz

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Dec 28, 2014
Messages
14,846
Absolutelty. The issue for me is whether Manure should have suspended him. Smacks a bit of guilty until proved not guilty and that does not sit easily with me.
But that is still speculation, we are not appraised with either detailed knowledge of either (a) the allegations or (b) the reason charges were dropped. I am not suggesting that this has happened, but for example there is always the possible scenario of charges being dropped due to a witness withdrawing their testimony in return for an out of court settlement.
 

Alistair20000

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
May 5, 2009
Messages
52,234
Location
Avoiding the Hundred
But that is still speculation, we are not appraised with either detailed knowledge of either (a) the allegations or (b) the reason charges were dropped. I am not suggesting that this has happened, but for example there is always the possible scenario of charges being dropped due to a witness withdrawing their testimony in return for an out of court settlement.
Makes no difference to me.

Our criminal law has a presumption of innocence until a guilty plea is entered or a guilty verdict delivered by the jury in the Court. The suspension of the payer in the interim cuts across that fundamental principle.
 

Colesman Ballz

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Dec 28, 2014
Messages
14,846
Makes no difference to me.

Our criminal law has a presumption of innocence until a guilty plea is entered or a guilty verdict delivered by the jury in the Court. The suspension of the payer in the interim cuts across that fundamental principle.
Alas practicality dictates that it is not always the case. Offenders can be detained in custody until their trial takes place when bail is not considered to be a suitable option.
 

Alistair20000

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
May 5, 2009
Messages
52,234
Location
Avoiding the Hundred
Alas practicality dictates that it is not always the case. Offenders can be detained in custody until their trial takes place when bail is not considered to be a suitable option.
My point remains.

Bail can only be refused in certain limited circumstances as this extract from m'learned friends explains

The Right To Bail – What Does It Mean?
Do I have a right to bail?
This article refers to the position relating to the right to bail for adults. The situation in relation to youths is different.

As an adult, the starting point is that you have a “right” to be granted bail. This right can only be taken away in certain circumstances. These circumstances are where the court has substantial grounds to believe that if you were granted bail you would:

  • Fail to surrender;
  • Commit further offences on bail; or
  • Interfere with witnesses
In some rare instances bail can be denied for a defendant’s own protection or welfare.
 
Top