Jump to content

CLYDE FC Season 2017-18 Thread


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 4.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
4 hours ago, Elementary Penguin said:

Wasn't it the girl steward who said this? Either way, of course isn't important. But....

 

Why didn't they fucking well phone one themselves then? Their job, of course is the safety of people within the nightclub first and foremost....arguably the only thing which would show the nightclub in a decent light by being involved in such a case would be if they extended this duty of care where they felt necessary. 

 

I'll bet their gaffer is delighted that he has Captain Hindsight watching the world go by instead of dealing with what sounds like an irregular occurence, if she was that bad, given the state of most of the patrons on the way out of almost every nightclub in the land. 

I see, it's the night club staff that are to blame. Not the people who took her away from there. I think I've got it now.

 

This might play a bit better if Clyde supporters acknowledged the case outcome and went down the rehabilitation of an offender route, rather than tarnish the victim.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, jupe1407 said:

Holy f**k. What a thread. Clyde must have the greatest ratio of supporters on the sex offender's register by an absolute fucking mile.

Incredible. 

What date did Goodwillie have his name placed on the sex offenders register?

Oh. Walt a minute.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


 
This might play a bit better if Clyde supporters acknowledged the case outcome and went down the rehabilitation of an offender route, rather than tarnish the victim.


I have not and will not defended Goodwillie alleged actions. I also have not commented on the merits of the evidence.

Others seem to find it impossible to acknowledge that it was a civil court judgement. He has been found guilty of absolutely nothing.

If we want a society that wants criminal convictions based on the balance of probability, I think you'll find almost all lawyers would campaign against that change on the basis of justice being in peril.

In regard to rehabilitation, it's fans of other clubs that seem to think that he should be prevented from carrying out his occupation.




Link to comment
Share on other sites

As haufdaft says, he has been convicted of nothing as there isn't enough evidence. The cival court decided the incident probably took place but not definitely. My club had first choice on Goodwillie before he joined Clyde but decided his baggage and image was not what our Community club wanted to be associated with. As a player we would love to have him but that is not the be all and end all. Fair play to Clyde for standing by him, for whatever reason, he will be the difference that keeps Clyde out of the bottom play off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Elementary Penguin said:

If we don't give a f**k what soap-dodging tenement-bait like you think now, what makes you think this would change if we were any good?

 

What a thoroughly stupid thing to say. 

 

Your stupidity enthralls us, but your hatred will drive us. 

You are a rape apologist and victim blamer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, AndyCameron88 said:

Just throwing this out there, but how much weight does a verbal consent at the time actually hold, irrespective of the consumption of alcohol? Even if consent is given by one individual to another, try proving that in a court of law after an accusation has been lodged! Should it therefore be recorded? Documented? Acknowledged by proxy? Even then, it could be argued that they were coerced at the time. Seriously, it all boils down to one person's word against another, which is what makes this type of case such a minefield.

If all it takes is a 'victim' changing their mind the next day and going to the police, and this is sufficient to tarnish the 'offender's' reputation to the extend where they should no longer be welcome in society or allowed to do their job, then that's extremely concerning.

On another note, and let it be clear that I am in no way victim-blaming here, but why is the automatic assumption here that Goodwillie and Robertson are the villains? Perhaps they are, perhaps they are not, hence why neither has been formally charged. However, when we consider that all parties concerned were intoxicated, and I'm going to assume their identities and professions were fully acknowledged by Denise, then who exactly was taking advantage of whom? Far too unclear to determine given the circumstances, let alone indict upon. Although not for certain fans it would seem, who would gladly see them and our club slandered.

I'm not going to pretend that I know what happened that night, and really there are only three individuals who potentially do. I'm genuinely interested on people's thoughts on the above, not just the relentless trolling of a self-righteous lynch mob.
 

Tend to agree with your points fwiw.

CPS must have felt there wasn't enough to get a guilty verdict in a criminal court perhaps because the waters are so muddied in this case. It would presumably have come down to who a jury believed because there was no corroborating evidence (one way or the other).

The civil court decision seems to have come to the conclusion that the "victim's" evidence was more trustworthy. To what extent that conclusion was based on the same evidence that the criminal court would have heard and could reasonably be expected to have reached the same conclusion is something we don't know, and it would be unfair to Goodwillie and Robertson to assume it would.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good to see that the club have clarified that Jim Chapman and Norrie Innes are not old/close friends and that they only met last season.

What will we make the next conspiracy theory be? We must be running out by now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good to see that the club have clarified that Jim Chapman and Norrie Innes are not old/close friends and that they only met last season.
What will we make the next conspiracy theory be? We must be running out by now.



So as not to disappoint you

Why does one director hold 226 shares while the rest of us have 1[emoji16]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...