CPS Drops Charges Against Mason Greenwood

[Coach]

^United will be looking for a fee. If they can’t ship him before Europe and Saudi windows close, then perhaps a termination. Would come as no surprise if there’s lobby for all proceeds of a sale to go to Women’s refuges and domestic abuse charities. United are in an awful possession. Is it ever worth it.

[metalalloy]

Nonsense. If there was no offence/wrongdoing committed a leviathan such as Man United stepping forward and clarifying the falsification would not bring a harsh spotlight. On the contrary, effectively sacking Greenwood, suggests they were not happy for him to represent the organisation. Why not put him through sugar coated rehab services ala gentleman Joey Barton, have him go on courses deemed necessary and commit to supporting women’s initiatives. Why have they concluded he cannot represent the organisation?

The tosh on raising a child is absolute tosh, endorsements gone, salary gone, will assume he has plenty of cash stashed but does this dismissal give him the platform and stability to raise the child they are so desperately concerned about?

He wasn't sacked. The club was trying all they could to bring him back, but were threatened with too much blowback from outside and caved.

[metalalloy]

^United will be looking for a fee. If they can’t ship him before Europe and Saudi windows close, then perhaps a termination. Would come as no surprise if there’s lobby for all proceeds of a sale to go to Women’s refuges and domestic abuse charities. United are in an awful possession. Is it ever worth it.

What grounds would they have to terminate his contract if the CPS dropped all charges against him, and the club's own investigations concluded that he didn't commit the offense for which he was charged?

[metalalloy]

Man Utd effed up.... they caved and gave in. Probably junior's (Ten Hag) doing. Sir Alex would have played him and damned the vultures. If it's confirmed he didn't do what he's accused of, then let him get on with his life. Here's wishing him a great career.

There are reports that he wanted Greenwood back

Indeed, it is understood that Ten Hag was among those in favour of a return for Greenwood and had reached out to the player. There had also been work in the analysis department on how best to use Greenwood should he return given the change in playing style and personnel since his last appearance.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footb ... sible.html

[metalalloy]

Cleared or were the charges dropped? That a charge is dropped does not imply innocence. If he was cleared then surely United have committed wrongful dismissal and Greenwood has a right to be reinstated.

The witness, his girlfriend, withdrew her statement and as such, there was no case to he heard. He has not been legally cleared of anything, other than his Man United contract. Only has himself to blame. Hopefully, young black athletes will take heed to this example.

Ok we're dealing semantics, cleared or charges dropped. But the club said they'll conduct their own investigation before determining next steps. They did and found out he did not commit the original offence based on the evidence they had. Per Sir Alex, there's precedent for my comments:

Jonny Evans was arrested for raping a barmaid at the club xmas party around 2007/2008. Like Greenwood, Evans was later not prosecuted. Van Persie and Ronaldo were also accused of rape. Dwight Yorke couldn't get out of the headlines for nights of debauchery. Rooney and 50 yr old hags. Nani, Anderson and Ronaldo having an orgy in CRon's pool. Fergie didn't condone these behaviours, after the roasting comes the embrace to refocus on football. I really don't think he would have cast aside Greenwood.

Those are more than semantics. There is a big difference between "cleared" and "charges dropped." A lot of times, charges are dropped when it will be difficult to get a conviction. It doesn't mean that whatever was charged did not occur.

Regarding United's investigation, it was self serving by an entity that stood to gain from a finding in his favor. They should have used a neutral third party to do for it to have real credibility.

[metalalloy]

Greenwood is innocent so why sack him? This is the same club where Eric Cantona assaulted a fan while playing live on OT. What about CR7 that was accused of rape in the US and still can't come to the US? What about Ryan Giggs? Mehn what a useless club.

Greenwood is innocent of what? Who do you think inflicted those injuries on his partner?

Thats the million dollar question. United claims to have been given explanations and are satisfied that he did not physically abuse her. The girl and her family have not yet refuted that. She allegedly released those pics and tapes hours after he broke up with her. It is highly unlikely they would make a statement that strong without seeing/hearing something compelling. They appear to be hamstrung from sharing that info by UK laws protecting sexual assault victims.

[Coach]

^United will be looking for a fee. If they can’t ship him before Europe and Saudi windows close, then perhaps a termination. Would come as no surprise if there’s lobby for all proceeds of a sale to go to Women’s refuges and domestic abuse charities. United are in an awful position.

Is it ever worth it.

[Coach]

^the statement was withdrawn, that does not mean he didn’t do whatever. If a claimant drops the charges what charges should the formerly accused face? None. Not sure why this is so difficult to grasp and why the confusion with being cleared, legally. Greenwood was found neither guilty nor not guilty, there was no case for him to be trialled.

The question then is, if Man United have done due diligence, conducted a wholesome investigation and found no fault, why have they forbade him from representing their organisation? Their address is steeped in legal lexicon, they cannot say Greenwood did commit an offence, they’re not a legal entity and cannot conclude as such. They can and have however, repeated what is well known, the statement was withdrawn, claims taken back, charges dropped and therefore, no crime for trial.

However, they have equally said, as Greenwood has too, “he made mistakes”. What are those mistakes? Whatever they are, as concluded by their investigation and admitted by Greenwood through employment of that very line, they were enough for him to be removed from Manchester United, one way or another.

If he is not sold, they will agree a mutual termination of his contract. Had United found no wrong doing, reinstating Greenwood with a clear, concise clarification for the audience baying for blood would have quelled the circus. United did not do that, what’s more have opened themselves up to more scrutiny in their process.

[metalalloy]

^the statement was withdrawn, that does not mean he didn’t do whatever. If a claimant drops the charges what charges should the formerly accused face? None. Not sure why this is so difficult to grasp and why the confusion with being cleared, legally. Greenwood was found neither guilty nor not guilty, there was no case for him to be trialled.

Im not sure if this was directed at me, but FYI, The government does not need the claimant's permission to proceed with a prosecution, it just makes their job more difficult. They could have continued with or without her participation. They withdrew the case because they didnt think they could get a conviction.

While victims are rightly at the centre of everything we do, the CPS prosecutes on behalf of the Crown and for the good of the wider public.

That means we can prosecute domestic abusers without the support or direct involvement of victims through ‘evidence-led prosecutions’ - for example relying on witness accounts or CCTV footage.

https://www.cps.gov.uk/crime-info/domes ... 20footage.

The CPS also cited "new material" as part of the reson for dropping the charges. No one knows what that new material is.

The question then is, if Man United have done due diligence, conducted a wholesome investigation and found no fault, why have they forbade him from representing their organisation? Their address is steeped in legal lexicon, they cannot say Greenwood did commit an offence, they’re not a legal entity and cannot conclude as such. They can and have however, repeated what is well known, the statement was withdrawn, claims taken back, charges dropped and therefore, no crime for trial.

They wanted him to continue to represent their organization and made several moves to that effect. They faced massive backlash as a result and changed course. Adam Crafton has done some excellent reporting on this whole matter.
https://theathletic.com/4790552/2023/08 ... ed-u-turn/


However, they have equally said, as Greenwood has too, “he made mistakes”. What are those mistakes? Whatever they are, as concluded by their investigation and admitted by Greenwood through employment of that very line, they were enough for him to be removed from Manchester United, one way or another.

His mistakes had nothing to do with the offenses he was charged with. Which is why they were eager to get him back into the fold till they recieved public backlash.

If he is not sold, they will agree a mutual termination of his contract. Had United found no wrong doing, reinstating Greenwood with a clear, concise clarification for the audience baying for blood would have quelled the circus. United did not do that, what’s more have opened themselves up to more scrutiny in their process.

In a statement, Arnold said on Monday: “While we were unable to access certain evidence for reasons we respect, the evidence we did collate led us to conclude that Mason did not commit the acts he was charged with.”

They couldnt be more clear that they did not find any evidence that he committed the acts he was charged with. They did try to reinstate him before they were faced by massive backlash and withdrew. Again, read the Atlantic article.

https://theathletic.com/4790552/2023/08 ... ed-u-turn/

[metalalloy]

^the statement was withdrawn, that does not mean he didn’t do whatever. If a claimant drops the charges what charges should the formerly accused face? None. Not sure why this is so difficult to grasp and why the confusion with being cleared, legally. Greenwood was found neither guilty nor not guilty, there was no case for him to be trialled.

It can now be reported, however, that key witnesses withdrew cooperation from the police investigation in April 2022.

A court heard last October how a central plank in the inquiry had collapsed only four months after Greenwood was arrested.

It is understood that police and prosecutors initially decided to continue with the case because of the significant level of public interest, given Greenwood’s high profile and the seriousness of the allegations.

Coach, even in this case the prosecution continued the case even after the victim withdrew her cooperation. The charges did not go away because she withdrew her complaint.
https://amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/202 ... -greenwood

[Coach]

^without complainant participation how does one logically pursue a charge of attempted rape. Did he try to rape you? I want all charges dropped and retract my earlier statements. Not even Columbo could crack such a case.

Did Greenwood commit rape in that incident? Evidently not. Did he try to commit rape? Given the withdrawal of statements and dropping of charges, evidently not. What he did do, as evidenced by his admissions, is make mistakes. Whatever these mistakes, they rendered his position untenable. More than anything, this is about business and Greenwood is simply bad for business.

In most disciplines, this incident’s endpoint is inevitable. Of course there are spaces where it’s utterly acceptable, Rashid Kassim, Honourable at that. Here isn’t there. Word of warning to all UK-based Cyberians, sons or self will face the same for such altercations. No matter how normal to a culture or household. This is England.

For context, unwanted male attention (in public) that casually ignores her “go away”, “I’ve got a man”, is public sex-based harassment. If reported and found guilty, maximum sentence, 2 years courtesy of new legislation. Men must wake up to the society surrounding them or face the consequences. It’s not worth it. Never has been.

[metalalloy]

^without complainant participation how does one logically pursue a charge of attempted rape. Did he try to rape you? I want all charges dropped and retract my earlier statements. Not even Columbo could crack such a case.

Did Greenwood commit rape in that incident? Evidently not. Did he try to commit rape? Given the withdrawal of statements and dropping of charges, evidently not. What he did do, as evidenced by his admissions, is make mistakes. Whatever these mistakes, they rendered his position untenable. More than anything, this is about business and Greenwood is simply bad for business.

In most disciplines, this incident’s endpoint is inevitable. Of course there are spaces where it’s utterly acceptable, Rashid Kassim, Honourable at that. Here isn’t there. Word of warning to all UK-based Cyberians, sons or self will face the same for such altercations. No matter how normal to a culture or household. This is England.

For context, unwanted male attention (in public) that casually ignores her “go away”, “I’ve got a man”, is public sex-based harassment. If reported and found guilty, maximum sentence, 2 years courtesy of new legislation. Men must wake up to the society surrounding them or face the consequences. It’s not worth it. Never has been.

Yup. Thats what it boils down to.

[felarey]

Cleared, charges dropped...whatever... He may not be legally cleared, but he's definitely legally innocent. Not sure what the standard is in the UK, but elsewhere, you are innocent until proven guilty. As of today, Mason has no record of guilt legally...end of... Then the club went further and decided to conduct their own investigation after dropped charges and their evidence showed to them that he did not commit the original offences (their own words).

I blame Junior, were it Sir Alex, the decision to stay or leave would have started and ended with him. Hawking his name around womens' groups, team, lionesses for their opinions or consent is something that would never happen to a Fergie player.

He's too savvy to know that a Mason allowed back in the fold would be running his legs out game to game to payback the loyalty and that could be worth 10 to 15 goals a season. He would owe the manager big time and know it! Let the peanut gallery knock themselves out while the points are registered on the table. At the end of the day, Man Utd is a football club.

[The YeyeMan]

Then the club went further and decided to conduct their own investigation after dropped charges and their evidence showed to them that he did not commit the original offences (their own words).

So they decided to not share their evidence and told him to leave the club. Interesting.

[Coach]

Again, UK legislation offers 2 years in His Majesty’s choice establishments for public sex-based harassment ie. Stopping a woman in the street, asking for her number and refusing her request to be left alone. This is 2023 England, not even Clark Kent in cape and costume could’ve saved Greenwood. Cultural tolerances differ. For some, it’s just the normalcy of domestic disputes, for others, it’s much worse.

The main charge against Greenwood was attempted rape. The bruises and blood staining however speak for themselves. Don’t recall any incident where Ferguson was faced with evidence of a battered WAG and choose to go 4-4-2 with the accused up top. He may have however, the 90s were rugged.

Wherever tolerances lie, at the end of whatever procedure they conducted, United decided he can no longer represent the organisation. Not only that, he’s not allowed in any of the facilities despite being under contract. They’ve distanced themselves from the social media assumed miscreant.

Mason Greenwood made mistakes, as admitted and mistakes come with their penance. No matter how normal it is for some it’s abnormal for others. Born and bred in the UK, he knew that.

[felarey]

Again, UK legislation offers 2 years in His Majesty’s choice establishments for public sex-based harassment ie. Stopping a woman in the street, asking for her number and refusing her request to be left alone. This is 2023 England, not even Clark Kent in cape and costume could’ve saved Greenwood. Cultural tolerances differ. For some, it’s just the normalcy of domestic disputes, for others, it’s much worse.

The main charge against Greenwood was attempted rape. The bruises and blood staining however speak for themselves. Don’t recall any incident where Ferguson was faced with evidence of a battered WAG and choose to go 4-4-2 with the accused up top. He may have however, the 90s were rugged.

Wherever tolerances lie, at the end of whatever procedure they conducted, United decided he can no longer represent the organisation. Not only that, he’s not allowed in any of the facilities despite being under contract. They’ve distanced themselves from the social media assumed miscreant.

Mason Greenwood made mistakes, as admitted and mistakes come with their penance. No matter how normal it is for some it’s abnormal for others. Born and bred in the UK, he knew that.

I thought you were exaggerating to warn our brothers. Are you really saying a man's freedom would be taken away (talkless 2 yrs) because he asked for a woman's number and didn't walk on the first sign of pushback?? Is that really what passes for a felony in the UK? Criminal intent? What happened to restraining orders? Is freedom that cheap? You must have some very triggered feminists in the court system. Does it work the same way if it's a woman approaching a man? Anyway, Mendy seemed to survive albeit a setback in career.

This whole issue with the club is anchored on them saying they investigated and the evidence showed he did not commit the original offences.

[txj]

Again, UK legislation offers 2 years in His Majesty’s choice establishments for public sex-based harassment ie. Stopping a woman in the street, asking for her number and refusing her request to be left alone. This is 2023 England, not even Clark Kent in cape and costume could’ve saved Greenwood. Cultural tolerances differ. For some, it’s just the normalcy of domestic disputes, for others, it’s much worse.

The main charge against Greenwood was attempted rape. The bruises and blood staining however speak for themselves. Don’t recall any incident where Ferguson was faced with evidence of a battered WAG and choose to go 4-4-2 with the accused up top. He may have however, the 90s were rugged.

Wherever tolerances lie, at the end of whatever procedure they conducted, United decided he can no longer represent the organisation. Not only that, he’s not allowed in any of the facilities despite being under contract. They’ve distanced themselves from the social media assumed miscreant.

Mason Greenwood made mistakes, as admitted and mistakes come with their penance. No matter how normal it is for some it’s abnormal for others. Born and bred in the UK, he knew that.

I thought you were exaggerating to warn our brothers. Are you really saying a man's freedom would be taken away (talkless 2 yrs) because he asked for a woman's number and didn't walk on the first sign of pushback?? Is that really what passes for a felony in the UK? Criminal intent? What happened to restraining orders? Is freedom that cheap? You must have some very triggered feminists in the court system. Does it work the same way if it's a woman approaching a man? Anyway, Mendy seemed to survive albeit a setback in career.

This whole issue with the club is anchored on them saying they investigated and the evidence showed he did not commit the original offences.

Did they really say that?

[Coach]

^^@Fela,

‘The Protection from Sex-based Harassment in Public Bill is a private member's bill which provides for a new offence of causing intentional harassment, alarm or distress to a person in public because of that person's sex or presumed sex. The bill has cross-party support and has passed all stages in the House of Commons’.

- sauce: Parliamentary marmalade.

In short, try that normal for Afs approach here and its Wormwood Scrubs, 18-24 months.

This bill will see a large number of Uncle, JJCs, Yardies and Polaks enjoying porridge at His Majesty pleasure followed by swift deportation. Again, men need to wake up to the society surrounding them.

[metalalloy]

Again, UK legislation offers 2 years in His Majesty’s choice establishments for public sex-based harassment ie. Stopping a woman in the street, asking for her number and refusing her request to be left alone. This is 2023 England, not even Clark Kent in cape and costume could’ve saved Greenwood. Cultural tolerances differ. For some, it’s just the normalcy of domestic disputes, for others, it’s much worse.

The main charge against Greenwood was attempted rape. The bruises and blood staining however speak for themselves. Don’t recall any incident where Ferguson was faced with evidence of a battered WAG and choose to go 4-4-2 with the accused up top. He may have however, the 90s were rugged.

Wherever tolerances lie, at the end of whatever procedure they conducted, United decided he can no longer represent the organisation. Not only that, he’s not allowed in any of the facilities despite being under contract. They’ve distanced themselves from the social media assumed miscreant.

Mason Greenwood made mistakes, as admitted and mistakes come with their penance. No matter how normal it is for some it’s abnormal for others. Born and bred in the UK, he knew that.

I thought you were exaggerating to warn our brothers. Are you really saying a man's freedom would be taken away (talkless 2 yrs) because he asked for a woman's number and didn't walk on the first sign of pushback?? Is that really what passes for a felony in the UK? Criminal intent? What happened to restraining orders? Is freedom that cheap? You must have some very triggered feminists in the court system. Does it work the same way if it's a woman approaching a man? Anyway, Mendy seemed to survive albeit a setback in career.

This whole issue with the club is anchored on them saying they investigated and the evidence showed he did not commit the original offences.

Did they really say that?

This is from their statement.

Based on the evidence available to us, we have concluded that the material posted online did not provide a full picture and that Mason did not commit the offences in respect of which he was originally charged. That said, as Mason publicly acknowledges today, he has made mistakes which he is taking responsibility for.”

https://www.manutd.com/en/news/detail/m ... ugust-2023

[metalalloy]

^^@Fela,

‘The Protection from Sex-based Harassment in Public Bill is a private member's bill which provides for a new offence of causing intentional harassment, alarm or distress to a person in public because of that person's sex or presumed sex. The bill has cross-party support and has passed all stages in the House of Commons’.

- sauce: Parliamentary marmalade.

In short, try that normal for Afs approach here and its Wormwood Scrubs, 18-24 months.

This bill will see a large number of Uncle, JJCs, Yardies and Polaks enjoying porridge at His Majesty pleasure followed by swift deportation. Again, men need to wake up to the society surrounding them.

[Coach]

^Porridge, powdered eggs and government cheeses. 2 years, out in 1 for good behaviour, hand delivered to London Heathrow, handcuffed and chained like Hannibal Lecter. Deportation swifter than a De Zerbian counterattack. “Bye Felicia”.

The sooner people wake up to that reality the better. With G4S and Serco buying up prison real estate and pressing hard for 10% profit margins, convictions will/are skyrocketing. Laws like such will ensure a fresh supply of Uncles, JJCs and Polaks. MoD data shows it costs the taxpayer roughly £240/day per inmate. G4S are doing it for less. Maximal returns rely on filling the cages like London Zoo. Men need to wake up, quick fast like Ramadan, it’s the rap phenomenon don-dada…Simple.

[wiseone]

[wiseone]

Getafe fans were delighted at the signing.