I always knew he was innocent! Sue her for damages now.
(media.communities.win)
Comments (34)
sorted by:
I follow soccer/football closely and I've seen a lot of accusations against famous soccer players fall apart -- in fact, most recent accusations against superstars have fallen apart (Neymar, Ronaldo, Mendy, etc.). I think I have a good understanding of the public-facing aspects of this case, so I'd like to share my perspective here.
Mason Greenwood was and is a phenomenal young striker, with world class potential, who is still contracted with Manchester United. He rose to media prominence quickly, and within half a year of being in the spotlight, was accused by his girlfriend Harriet Robson of coercive and controlling behaviour, multiple beatings, and multiple rapes.
Unlike most cases against footballers, Robson appeared to have audio and video evidence against Greenwood. Robson had secretly recorded minutes of audio footage of what sounded like Greenwood aggressively forcing himself on her despite her protests that she didn't want to have sex. Robson also posted public videos of what appeared to be semi-dried blood running from her mouth, down her chin, and the front of her throat.
As you can no doubt guess, Greenwood was absolutely excoriated by fans and media following the release of this alleged evidence. Virtually every member of the ultimate coalition for championing women's justice, the soccer subreddit, met this news and evidence with abject condemnation. Greenwood was charged by UK police following the outcry.
However, there are some issues with the case:
So based on that, and based on the incalculable number of incentives that women have to accuse famous, rich footballers of sex crimes, I thought skepticism was a healthy approach. Apparently, the absolute walnut brains that are European football fans refuse to learn their lessons, refuse to believe that this isn't some unprecedented miscarriage of justice and women's rights, and refuse to support presumption of innocence.
Fuck them, lol.
Remains his girlfriend? What the fuck? Assuming she's lying, and you know she's lying, why would you keep her?
The bitch wants his money.
And Greenwood is a fucking idiot.
Because the government is helping her extort him.
If authenticated, seems bad enough to me.
Right, but see point 4.
Damn my impatience and inability to count past 3!
I think that if the guy can prove that it was sexual roleplay, then sure, whatever. I don't think it should be a get out of jail free card if he cannot. It would be very easy for anyone to make that claim, without providing evidence, and get off scot-free.
Now that I learned to count past 3, point 5 is also legitimate. That said, a lot of folks stay with abusers, so while it definitely is a point in his favor, I wouldn't say it alone makes it open-and-shut.
Hahah, shush.
I've had girlfriends who wanted similar treatment, so my kneejerk wasn't to judge it as darkly as I guess most others did. I also give the audio clips less credibility in the context of her fake blood videos.
On the surface, this stuff doesn't make Greenwood look good, but I err on the side of presuming innocence.
I know you foreign fucks aren't big on rights but innocent until proven guilty. She should have to prove its not roleplay.
Foreign? What are you talking about? You're the American here.
That is stupid. You clearly don't understand the law, of any place, if you think that. Imagine if every rapist could get off by saying that it was 'roleplay'.
Yes obviously it's a foreign country hence me calling talking about you being foreign fucks.
In America in a criminal trial you have to affirmatively prove that the evidence is what you claim it is through authentication. She has proven nothing and refuses to even testify against him because it's all bullshit. Yall apparently have a very low standard over there though. Hope no chick or dude ever ask for rough sex with you records it and then claims you raped them to blackmail you because clearly you're guilty from the jump and should have to prov your innocence lmao.
America is the foreign country. Nice try.
You have no idea what you're talking about.
Authentication refers to a rule of evidence which requires that evidence must be sufficient to support a finding that the matter in question is what its proponent claims.
Is the fact that this guy talked about raping a woman sufficient to establish that he was talking about raping a woman? Why, yes. If wants to prove that aliens kidnapped him and brainwashed him into saying it, that's his claim to prove, not anyone else's to disprove.
That's a different matter.
Apparently? So you have no more of an idea about our system than you do about your own?
And for the record, our system sucks. As does yours.
I think it's clear, with the evidence the other user added about them now being engaged, that the aim of this was to get him to sign a marriage contract under duress.
If he reneges on it, will the CPS see through her? Probably not. They'd probably take it on again, given more time to fabricate evidence.
Women's tactics get ever more disturbing.
I think this development deserves a post later. Women try new tactics on famous people first, then on nobodies. Look at MeToo.
Man blackmailed into not leaving his girlfriend.
She owns him now.
Yep. And they'll start doing this thing to non-famous people now that they know it works.
Time to update our protection against them, because their strategies have mutated again.
Sue her? Charges were dropped because she went back to him and they got engaged - she refused to testify against him.
Initial audio for those unfamiliar with the situation: https://youtu.be/qolU4gPe54s
So, she got what she blackmailed him for.
How is that not signing a contract under duress?
I can't understand a word they're saying.
Been watching a lot of football YouTube for ages now, and something came up that I honestly forgot, because I do need to look at the full story again, but supposedly, she didn’t even release the video and audio, they were leaked.
Like Pamela Anderson's sex tape.
The words "plausible deniability" come to mind, for in case he realised her plan and sued her.
Is there anyone with a worse record of not telling the truth than women?
Even FTX's accountants are closer to reality than they are.
Her "evidence" was a bigger fraud than the wage gap and all the damage control BS on twitter from women reposting it is hilarious. The woman didn't drop the charges, the CPS did. She wasn't threatened, she wasn't bribed. The enemy lost, because they couldn't fabricate enough evidence in three years.
Welcome back to football, Mason Greenwood.
Anyone?
"health professionals".
Jokes aside, is there any group that has made forcing people to believe open lies a bigger part of their identity than women have?
I'll never forget when the chair of a women's group said they don't believe in the justice system because it doesn't always favor the women.
You are thoroughly damaged.
I just have a good memory.
No, you are thoroughly damaged. Because no normal person makes conclusion about 'women' based on one insane women's organization.
One? I can get you way more examples, but the most damning thing I have the link for is this.
61%.
Which says nothing about your initial claim, Ms. Damaged.