2024 - 2026 Football Thread - Page 121

On April 02 2026 02:33 evilfatsh1t wrote:

what? there was no verdict at all because the case was never tried. do you even know what it means when prosecution drops charges? and thats not how defamation works at all. if i repeatedly call you a pedophile without concrete evidence to back my claim, and you eventually lose your job because of me, you can sue me for defamation. theres no requirement that my statement needs to refer to a court verdict or any other nonsense.

the claim that greenwood is a domestic abuser is now slanderous because you cannot say that you have proof of what he did. the only "proof" the public had, prosecutors also had (and more) and yet the prosecutions final words on the matter was "In this case a combination of the withdrawal of key witnesses and new material that came to light meant there was no longer a realistic prospect of conviction.". they not only admit to not having enough proof, but they also cast doubt on the truth of the original claim by explicitly referring to the existence of new material (that the public doesnt have) which would damage their case. with all of this being in the public record, it is not a reasonable position for any member of the public to say now that greenwood is a domestic abuser in a court of law.

but yeah ok. act like you know what youre talking about rofl. this is the problem with half the people who jump on the cancel culture agenda. literally clueless about their own legal system and the facts of the case. also, the audacity to say that a "not guilty" verdict in court doesnt mean anything about the innocence of a man. jesus fking christ

On April 02 2026 03:24 evilfatsh1t wrote:
it isnt an organised movement, no. i said movement to make my point but the reality is people like you enable cancel culture by allowing those who are more vocal about their discontent to get their way.

its perfectly fine for you to form your opinion about the matter, as i do. honestly? yeah he probably did hit her in that instance. but as i said before, you want to hate on someone, you do it in private.

the correct course of action for someone in your position would have been to say "i think he may have hit her, but since prosecutors failed to bring charges, greenwood should be allowed to move on with his life".

instead, what youve essentially done is say, "i think he may have hit her, and i understand prosecution failed to prove their case, but i endorse the actions of those who are actively preventing him from returning to his job".

the former is having respect for basic principles your judicial system was founded upon, whereas the latter enables cancel culture because you sat idly by while various individuals and groups announced publically that they would protest his return (eg. the utd womens squad apparently).

lets not pretend there wasnt an agenda against greenwood. it may not have been organised, but every guy and their dog was online saying their piece about how theyre the greatest detectives in the world and they could say with certainty that abuse took place when prosecutors couldnt and that greenwood must never return. cancel culture is all about noise, and at the time, there was heaps of it.

put it another way. if you had a coworker at your average day job and he was an absolute cunt to his wife and kids, are you going to do something about it? youd say hes an asshole and you wouldnt think of him highly, but at the end of the day, his private life and his work life are separate. he does his job and you do yours. if he doesnt suck at his job are you going to run to your boss and ask him to fire the guy? no you arent. its not your place to meddle in his affairs where law enforcement couldnt