I don't think anybody can say that he's totally innocent. Maybe in the letter of The Law, but it would have become clearer if the CPS had said ( if they could ) that they were satisfied that in the light of new evidence and withdrawn witness statements, that Greenwood is indeed not guilty as charged.

Instead they are no longer confident of a successful prosecution.

He's damaged goods, but football has few morals so he'll find a home somewhere. Probably Chelsea.

Old, Ungifted and White

For something like this - there will be quite vociferous protests wherever he goes. I can't see anyone wanting him. For instance: he's much better than what we have - should we take him on a free? No f***ing way, in my opinion. I don't see why they don't still prosecute and force the witnesses to attend, or use the transcripts they have. Despite the complaints being withdrawn, I believe the CPS can still prosecute if they believe it is in the public interest.
In my opinion, we can't let people get away with stuff because they pay people off. Just means the rich and famous can do what they like and just pay us oiks off.

Red and Blue Army!

There is not guilty and then there is innocent, not quite the same thing. On the trial I was on we found the bloke not guilty very quickly we then had a show of hands who thought something nasty had happened, most of us did.

The law is very specific sometimes too specific something rape campaigners should focus on.

In the case I was on the judge said to find this person guilty you must believe they did A+B+C each of which was a very specific and detailed act of touching. A and B was a probable but C was just not believable.

If he had been charged with something more general e.g. coping a feel I think we probably would have voted guilty.

Edited by Badger11 (03 Feb 2023 1.49pm)

One more point

Gary Neville says it's fine so I take it all back.
[Link]

Red and Blue Army!

I haven't heard this audio ether.

The point is that all of us are viewing this through the lens of the media which can distort one way or the other.

If he is guilty then he has gotten away with it. If the victim has made it up all then she has gotten away with it and done her fellow women no favours at all.

If she was to frightened to testify because people on social media are publishing her picture and address (pure speculation on my part*) then the authorities are guilty for not protecting a vulnerable person.

*In previous cases involving footballers people have done this type of thing.

Edited by Badger11 (03 Feb 2023 3.28pm)

One more point

I don't really get your point - the story is barely in the media and certainly the audio/images aren't, so I don't really see how it's through that lens.

The only lens through which he is 'innocent' is that of a lawyer where you can create all sorts of unlikely, bordering ridiculous, hypotheticals as possible explanations - any sort of common sense view on it is that he is, at best, an absuer and a nasty piece of work, and at worst, a rapist.

I think the legal system is quite clearly failing in this space and so the idea that it should be blindly trusted does not make sense to me - with the conviction rates for sexual abuse and rape as low as they are, the options are either that a vast majority of accusers/women are lying and inventing stories, or that the system doesn't work.

Whilst there are undeniably some accusers who do invent these tales, I think anyone would struggle to make an argument that this accounts for over 90% of these cases.

If you accept that, then you accept that the legal system is failing to achieve convictions on these charges, and therefore the 'innocent until proven guilty' argument does not really hold up.

To be clear, I am not for one minute suggestion we now label everyone a rapist at the first chance, but when there is clear evidence available in the public domain which is so obviously incriminating, I think people need to be more receptive to that rather than trying to invent a ridiculous scenario where it might not be what it so obviously is.

It's hugely inhibitive to victims and future victims to see someone who had a mountain of proof still have it thrown in her face that she must be lying, must be a golddigger, must like it really... it's already a crime which goes unreported in so many cases because people see no chance of a conviction, and public reaction like that just makes that worse.

Indeed, a friend of mine was nearly driven to suicide by such an accusation. However I have heard the audio and there is no doubt that the bloke is an awful excuse for a human being. It is very unfortunate that the audio can’t be used as the sole evidence. Has the ex been paid or frightened off? Has to be one or the other.
As I said before, do Utd keep him? Release him or try to sell him? Can’t see the money grabbers just releasing him. Surely he cannot play in England again

Having worked for BF and FCO I am bound by the Official Secrets Act ( probably said more on HOL than I should). I do not understand how a former head of CPS should be tweeting anything about this case

Just thinking about it, I'm wondering if Everton or West Ham are cnuts enough to sign him? If he were made a free agent, would they have time?

Red and Blue Army!

What a terrible shambles this country has become.