FabSwingers.com > Forums > Scotland > Goodwillie the footballs
Goodwillie the footballs
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Thoughts folks
Witch-hunt or deserves all he gets?"
He’s not been found guilty of anything.
What I don’t understand is how he played for Clyde with no issues now there’s a problem. There’s a bigger sex abuse scandal in Scottish football, where people have been convicted, that the SNP won’t address yet they can make statements about Goodwillie. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Thoughts folks
Witch-hunt or deserves all he gets?
He’s not been found guilty of anything.
What I don’t understand is how he played for Clyde with no issues now there’s a problem. There’s a bigger sex abuse scandal in Scottish football, where people have been convicted, that the SNP won’t address yet they can make statements about Goodwillie. "
The verdict was Not Proven. A later Civil Court found he was guilty and he was ordered to pay compensation |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Thoughts folks
Witch-hunt or deserves all he gets?
He’s not been found guilty of anything.
What I don’t understand is how he played for Clyde with no issues now there’s a problem. There’s a bigger sex abuse scandal in Scottish football, where people have been convicted, that the SNP won’t address yet they can make statements about Goodwillie.
The verdict was Not Proven. A later Civil Court found he was guilty and he was ordered to pay compensation "
A civil court doesn’t give you a criminal conviction.
He was never prosecuted to get a not proven verdict. Do your homework before labelling someone with such a horrendous tag |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *alcon43Woman
over a year ago
Paisley |
He deserves all he gets. Just because he’s a professional footballer doesn’t change anything. It’s not just one person making those decisions sponsors were going to pull out of one team he’d signed for, the women’s team were going to leave at another team and now the council are threatening to remove the lease from the team currently in dispute. Part of the issue is he’s shown no remorse.
I wouldn’t be happy if my employer hired a rapist. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Thoughts folks
Witch-hunt or deserves all he gets?
He’s not been found guilty of anything.
What I don’t understand is how he played for Clyde with no issues now there’s a problem. There’s a bigger sex abuse scandal in Scottish football, where people have been convicted, that the SNP won’t address yet they can make statements about Goodwillie.
The verdict was Not Proven. A later Civil Court found he was guilty and he was ordered to pay compensation
A civil court doesn’t give you a criminal conviction.
He was never prosecuted to get a not proven verdict. Do your homework before labelling someone with such a horrendous tag "
Whether it was a criminal or civil court he has been found to be a rapist. Those facts don't change no matter how much you want it to. He is a rapist. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
In my opinion, David Goodwillie is an good footballer when on the pitch with mediocre players. I don’t understand why teams take the risk of signing him. His refusal to apologise or show any remorse suggests that he may view it as an admission of guilt. Personally, I think any team interested in him deserves the consequences. Also, don’t forget that while he may not have a ‘criminal’ conviction for r*pe, he has been convicted of assault in 2008, 2009 and again in 2010, to me, that’s suggests a pattern of aggressive and violent behavior. He comes across as a vile, arrogant, and entitled individual who has yet to learn his lesson, but never will! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
The verdict was Not Proven. A later Civil Court found he was guilty and he was ordered to pay compensation "
No it wasn’t. There was not enough evidence for the cps to take it to court.
He was also not found guilty in a civil court, it was found that the chances of the female being too d*unk to consent was ‘most probable’. So they were fined £100k
This is where the law is very tricky, he has not been convicted or found guilty for r**e at all, if he had the money for the legal bills he quite possibly could sue the papers and all for referring to him as a rapist.
What I find the saddest parts are that there is a woman who’s trauma is brought up in the papers as and when they have nothing else to write about. She hasn’t been able to fully move on which is actually quite upsetting. Then there’s the kids, of the female if she has any and of David G, his kids will be slaughtered at school when they are of age, again which is really sad.
Look at big players, Cristiano Ronaldo was accused of r*pe, paid the female off with £300k. No-one cares.
Then there’s the current one with Mason Greenwood, if you have heard the voice recording you will know he r@ped that young lassie, he’s still on the books at Man Utd and will probably be sent to Saudi on loan. Why are r*pe crisis and such like not hounding him? Simple, he can afford the costs to sue, Goodwillie can’t.
It’s a topic that will split opinion.
Is Goodwillie a r@pist? I really don’t know, but there wasn’t evidence to charge him in a criminal court, he has requested a criminal court many times and the civil court didn’t rule him as guilty of r*pe. He’s never been on criminal trial. That’s the facts of it.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
The verdict was Not Proven. A later Civil Court found he was guilty and he was ordered to pay compensation
No it wasn’t. There was not enough evidence for the cps to take it to court.
He was also not found guilty in a civil court, it was found that the chances of the female being too d*unk to consent was ‘most probable’. So they were fined £100k
This is where the law is very tricky, he has not been convicted or found guilty for r**e at all, if he had the money for the legal bills he quite possibly could sue the papers and all for referring to him as a rapist.
What I find the saddest parts are that there is a woman who’s trauma is brought up in the papers as and when they have nothing else to write about. She hasn’t been able to fully move on which is actually quite upsetting. Then there’s the kids, of the female if she has any and of David G, his kids will be slaughtered at school when they are of age, again which is really sad.
Look at big players, Cristiano Ronaldo was accused of r*pe, paid the female off with £300k. No-one cares.
Then there’s the current one with Mason Greenwood, if you have heard the voice recording you will know he r@ped that young lassie, he’s still on the books at Man Utd and will probably be sent to Saudi on loan. Why are r*pe crisis and such like not hounding him? Simple, he can afford the costs to sue, Goodwillie can’t.
It’s a topic that will split opinion.
Is Goodwillie a r@pist? I really don’t know, but there wasn’t evidence to charge him in a criminal court, he has requested a criminal court many times and the civil court didn’t rule him as guilty of r*pe. He’s never been on criminal trial. That’s the facts of it.
"
Spot on mate |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I think it’s shocking the way the laddie has been hounded by the media when them at the top are the worst kind going with horendous things getting done to poor innocent kids the world over on a daily basis. 1st ashton kutcher then mel gibson now mark walhberg coming out against these scum. David g wasnt even in a court of law over this. A civil court means nothing it’s a 50/50 court where some days it will go 1 way others the other way for this boy to have been hounded everywhere he has went since that night being front page news is shocking he is trying to provide for his family like any other father.
But on the other hand if he did r**e her then no he shouldn’t have the chamce to do it through football where there is stupid money in it he should b doing it by hard graft. I dont think any of them r***d her was a night that she regreted in the morning. Read into all the facts about it and u will see she was in control of her thoughts and choices all night |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I think it’s a very dangerous precedent to set by essentially cancelling his and the co accused David Robertson’s work life. Robertson was tracked and plastered all over the papers for taking a job in a central heating company, loosing him his job.
Goodwillie after 5 years then was cancelled overnight by Nicola Sturgeon and a wealthy female club sponsor for raith rovers. He’s now been stopped from even playing amateur football.
It’s all great when it’s someone you don’t like so you don’t mind their entire life and future has been cancelled but what happens when it’s someone you know or believe in, neither player was found guilty in a criminal court and it only went to civil court because of their jobs and potential for a cash payout.
I read the criminal case notes, the victim alleges that she had one drink and couldn’t remember the rest of the night. CCTV footage was used to show that she had more than one drink was filmed talking to goodWillie then later leaving with him. She was also recorded taking her shoes off, unlocking her phone and sending a message, this was later established it was to her brother. All this was also done without any visible signs of the complete intoxication that was later claimed in the civil case.
The victim left the bar with both men, only Goodwillie dna was found but Robertson also handed himself into police and voluntarily gave a statement admitting he also had sex with the female. He wanted to tell the truth and do the right thing.
Due to there being no other corroborating evidence to support the victims claims of being dr@gged or too intoxicated the evidence did not meet the threshold for a full criminal case.
The civil case found that it was probable she was d*unk and just can’t remember and they took the view that meant she didn’t give consent. And found in her favour for a financial compensation.
We have a criminal justice system for a reason we shouldn’t be using the civil courts for cases like this. For me Scotland needs to look at the threshold of evidence and there also needs to be a change in how victims are looked after during and after cases because it’s not good enough presently.
There was a lot of other circumstances surrounding the victim in this particular case and she has never once called either of them r@pist just she can’t remember She had a partner at the time of the incident and that also sheds a dark cloud over the entire matter too.
Looking at the case notes from the criminal investigation I felt that it wasn’t r@pe, but a case of someone waking up and regretting their actions saying something to someone to dig themselves out of a tricky situation and then being forced to report it and once that started she couldn’t go back on it.
I do think that the laws need to change and there has to be a burden placed on men to prove consent was given rather than the victim to prove there was a r@pe committed. And when someone is convicted we need to have statutory minimum sentences and no more segregation for sexual predators, perhaps that might be the deterrent to stop some of these sick bastards.
Anyways rant over lol if anyone has actually read this you deserve a crackerjack pencil and a blue Peter badge lol
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ilkand2Couple
over a year ago
edinburgh |
What I don't get is Craig thomson who played for hearts did get convicted and plead guilty to ch*ld s*x offences and then went onto captain Edinburgh City for 4/5 seasons and nobody batted an eyelid |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"In my opinion, David Goodwillie is an good footballer when on the pitch with mediocre players. I don’t understand why teams take the risk of signing him. His refusal to apologise or show any remorse suggests that he may view it as an admission of guilt. Personally, I think any team interested in him deserves the consequences. Also, don’t forget that while he may not have a ‘criminal’ conviction for r*pe, he has been convicted of assault in 2008, 2009 and again in 2010, to me, that’s suggests a pattern of aggressive and violent behavior. He comes across as a vile, arrogant, and entitled individual who has yet to learn his lesson, but never will!"
Why should he apologies if he didn’t do it?
I know him personally and you aren’t far away when describing him  but that doesn’t making him a r**ist. I don’t like him much but think he’s been treated terribly.
For what it’s worth I think men accused of such crime should remain anonymous until they have been found guilty. Their lives could be ruined by false accusations. Only 3 people will really know what went on that night but what happened to innocent until proven guilty. He’s had a trial by media.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *orl1971Couple
over a year ago
Glasgow |
If he is a guilty of the crime then why is he not in prison ? Because in a criminal court the crime has to be beyond reasonable doubt which it was not.
If he was a plumber, instead of a footballer, would someone take him to a civil court seeking £500k in damages to be only awarded £100k ?
Also if you are found guilty of something are you allowed to take the punishment and then move on with your life ? His punishment was financial and he went bankrupt. He also seems to be hounded out of every way of supporting his family yet does not have a criminal record.
It’s a bit of a mess but if he is an alleged criminal then he should be tried in a court. Instead he’s living in purgatory with no way out. If he was a plumber or guy in the street this would not be the case.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Where does it stop? Will he ever be employed out with football? He did a bad thing, one that affects the victim for ever. However the facts are he is either on universal credit bouncing along the bread line to survive or he is allowed to work. Sounds brutal but it's true. Does he have innocent mouths to feed?
Are we saying that all doors are closed to him and he has no options except for an option that is unspeakable? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Where does it stop? Will he ever be employed out with football? He did a bad thing, one that affects the victim for ever. However the facts are he is either on universal credit bouncing along the bread line to survive or he is allowed to work. Sounds brutal but it's true. Does he have innocent mouths to feed?
Are we saying that all doors are closed to him and he has no options except for an option that is unspeakable? "
Listen to the James English podcast with DG on YouTube
DG is working a “normal” job to make ends meet
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"He deserves all he gets. Just because he’s a professional footballer doesn’t change anything. It’s not just one person making those decisions sponsors were going to pull out of one team he’d signed for, the women’s team were going to leave at another team and now the council are threatening to remove the lease from the team currently in dispute. Part of the issue is he’s shown no remorse.
I wouldn’t be happy if my employer hired a rapist. "
How can you you say he deserves all he gets when he’s not convicted in a criminal court?…..
listen to the James English podcast
DG is willing to go to criminal court to have the evidence heard there. Now why would someone who has already “dodged” a conviction be willing to go through that and risk it?……
Why did Robertson who was in the clear and never under suspicion come forward and admit to having sex with the female at the same time…. Risking a conviction for himself………
Lots of things don’t add up for that night in question hence why this case never got to court.
Like someone has already said on here Ronaldo has paid a female off and the world has moved on from that. But why pay someone off if you never done it?……….
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Due process has happened. Whatever our views of that... it has happened. Judgement has been arrived at. Verdicts have been made. The moving hand hath writ and having writ moves on. We do not live in an endless revolving door of repeat sentencing for the same crime.
Why Ms Aitken has decided that she is now going to create a different kind of sentencing that has nothing to do with a Court of Law is strange. Apparently Ms Aitken has said that despite being found by a civil court judge to be a rapist, Goodwillie 'has never once shown any kind of contrition or remorse'. As if showing remorse and contrition in front of Ms Aitken will decide your future and the endless sentencing she is going to deliver down on those she deems guilty. Apparently for Ms Aitken the law doesn't deliver enough... she has decided she is going to provide additional sentencing for those she feels merit additional punishment from her... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
The whole case boils down to simple facts.
Something happened that night as both admit having sex for the woman.
Evidence wise there was not enough for COPFS to prove it was r*pe and not a consentual act.
Many r*pe allegations done make court because of this kind of “morning after” reaction when the partner finds out. Many don’t even get to COPFS as the police were able to get to the truth quickly.
Either way both were never convicted and never even put on trial for the alleged criminal offence.
Civil actions are a much easier place to get a judgement due to the lower burden of proof being “we think they did it” rather than “we know they did it”.
Another factor to be considered is the “damages award formulae” the judges use which considers prooortion of blame and awards a relevant % of the South amount accordingly.
She sought £500k and got awarded £100k. That’s 20%. Meaning her award was reduced by 80%. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Wonder if Aitken had thought through her comments before making them as a lawyer could easily sue her for discrimination unless GCC bans ALL criminals or alleged criminals from using their facilities, esp those involving sex crimes. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The thought of young men chanting his name horrifies me. I hope he never has a public gig again in his life. "
They did, at Clyde for 4 years and no one batted an eyelid |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Wonder if Aitken had thought through her comments before making them as a lawyer could easily sue her for discrimination unless GCC bans ALL criminals or alleged criminals from using their facilities, esp those involving sex crimes."
It surprises me why Aitken hasn’t called for Glasgow city council to sever ties with their contractor City Building after one of their senior members of staff has had a complaint upheld against him for sexual harrassing a pregnant female member of staff…….
This complaint was upheld so therefore the man is guilty yet no MP
has spoken out about it or calling for any business contracts to end!
Yet Aitken wants to carry on crushing DG even after NO criminal charges came or even got upheld in a court of law……..
double standards from her in my view |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"If he is a guilty of the crime then why is he not in prison ? Because in a criminal court the crime has to be beyond reasonable doubt which it was not.
If he was a plumber, instead of a footballer, would someone take him to a civil court seeking £500k in damages to be only awarded £100k ?
Also if you are found guilty of something are you allowed to take the punishment and then move on with your life ? His punishment was financial and he went bankrupt. He also seems to be hounded out of every way of supporting his family yet does not have a criminal record.
It’s a bit of a mess but if he is an alleged criminal then he should be tried in a court. Instead he’s living in purgatory with no way out. If he was a plumber or guy in the street this would not be the case.
"
Totally agree. If he decided not to play football again and took up a labouring job would he be hounded out from doing that? How is this guy supposed to make a living?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
He does have a labouring job
Listen to the James English podcast with DG he tells you there he’s working as an electricians mate
Basically labouring for an electrical company.
I had DG guilty but having listened to that and hearing some evidence that I wasn’t aware of changed my opinion……..
why would he be wanting to take this back to court to prove he is right having already dodged one with never being charged?…..
Why did Robertson come forward when he wasn’t even implicated in the offence to say he has sex with the female at the same time and it was all consensual?……. Why would he risk being convicted if he didn’t have to from the start…… he done that as it was the right thing to do to allow ALL the facts to be gained and assessed that’s why! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *andN2Couple
over a year ago
Glasgow |
"He does have a labouring job
Listen to the James English podcast with DG he tells you there he’s working as an electricians mate
Basically labouring for an electrical company.
I had DG guilty but having listened to that and hearing some evidence that I wasn’t aware of changed my opinion……..
why would he be wanting to take this back to court to prove he is right having already dodged one with never being charged?…..
Why did Robertson come forward when he wasn’t even implicated in the offence to say he has sex with the female at the same time and it was all consensual?……. Why would he risk being convicted if he didn’t have to from the start…… he done that as it was the right thing to do to allow ALL the facts to be gained and assessed that’s why! "
One simple reason could be because getting found guilty is very rare, so he is likely to win regardless if he did it or not. So statistically it’s in his favour to go to court.
The reporting rate of this type of offence, to the police, is tiny! Only about 1 in 6 women actual report it to the police. The police then only charge about 2 people for every 100 incidents reported to them, and then only a small percentage of those end up in court and a smaller number are found guilty. For the prosecution it’s a bit like trying to push the Moon up Mount Everest. For the defence, it’s a bit of a wet dream.
The criminal justice system in this area is broken, and doesn’t work. All the data and evidence points to that. To ram it home, there is circa 1 in 30 women a victim of this time of crime every year in the UK! that’s 798,000 victims, it’s disgusting. What’s more digesting is the vast majority of perpetrators get away with it.
DG case is unusual as normally the victim, unless they get a stonewall conviction, gets annihilated in the court of public opinion. This time it’s the accused, which is very rare. But probably because of they lost the civil case. Which means on the balance of probabilities they did it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"He does have a labouring job
Listen to the James English podcast with DG he tells you there he’s working as an electricians mate
Basically labouring for an electrical company.
I had DG guilty but having listened to that and hearing some evidence that I wasn’t aware of changed my opinion……..
why would he be wanting to take this back to court to prove he is right having already dodged one with never being charged?…..
Why did Robertson come forward when he wasn’t even implicated in the offence to say he has sex with the female at the same time and it was all consensual?……. Why would he risk being convicted if he didn’t have to from the start…… he done that as it was the right thing to do to allow ALL the facts to be gained and assessed that’s why!
One simple reason could be because getting found guilty is very rare, so he is likely to win regardless if he did it or not. So statistically it’s in his favour to go to court.
The reporting rate of this type of offence, to the police, is tiny! Only about 1 in 6 women actual report it to the police. The police then only charge about 2 people for every 100 incidents reported to them, and then only a small percentage of those end up in court and a smaller number are found guilty. For the prosecution it’s a bit like trying to push the Moon up Mount Everest. For the defence, it’s a bit of a wet dream.
The criminal justice system in this area is broken, and doesn’t work. All the data and evidence points to that. To ram it home, there is circa 1 in 30 women a victim of this time of crime every year in the UK! that’s 798,000 victims, it’s disgusting. What’s more digesting is the vast majority of perpetrators get away with it.
DG case is unusual as normally the victim, unless they get a stonewall conviction, gets annihilated in the court of public opinion. This time it’s the accused, which is very rare. But probably because of they lost the civil case. Which means on the balance of probabilities they did it."
You can’t completely ruin someone’s life on the balance of probability. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *andN2Couple
over a year ago
Glasgow |
"He does have a labouring job
Listen to the James English podcast with DG he tells you there he’s working as an electricians mate
Basically labouring for an electrical company.
I had DG guilty but having listened to that and hearing some evidence that I wasn’t aware of changed my opinion……..
why would he be wanting to take this back to court to prove he is right having already dodged one with never being charged?…..
Why did Robertson come forward when he wasn’t even implicated in the offence to say he has sex with the female at the same time and it was all consensual?……. Why would he risk being convicted if he didn’t have to from the start…… he done that as it was the right thing to do to allow ALL the facts to be gained and assessed that’s why!
One simple reason could be because getting found guilty is very rare, so he is likely to win regardless if he did it or not. So statistically it’s in his favour to go to court.
The reporting rate of this type of offence, to the police, is tiny! Only about 1 in 6 women actual report it to the police. The police then only charge about 2 people for every 100 incidents reported to them, and then only a small percentage of those end up in court and a smaller number are found guilty. For the prosecution it’s a bit like trying to push the Moon up Mount Everest. For the defence, it’s a bit of a wet dream.
The criminal justice system in this area is broken, and doesn’t work. All the data and evidence points to that. To ram it home, there is circa 1 in 30 women a victim of this time of crime every year in the UK! that’s 798,000 victims, it’s disgusting. What’s more digesting is the vast majority of perpetrators get away with it.
DG case is unusual as normally the victim, unless they get a stonewall conviction, gets annihilated in the court of public opinion. This time it’s the accused, which is very rare. But probably because of they lost the civil case. Which means on the balance of probabilities they did it.
You can’t completely ruin someone’s life on the balance of probability. "
I suppose you’d need to define “completely ruining” someone’s life. He is a 34 year old striker., so at the tail end of his career. He’s had 3 criminal convictions for assault, and the above civil case loss. But he’s still had a pretty full footballing career nonetheless. He had a club every year as far as I can tell. Dundee Utd until 2011, Blackburn 11 to 14, Aberdeen 14 to 16, Argyle 16 to 17 and Clyde 17 to 22. Various loans in there too. Playing over 400 games and scoring about 150 goals. His best return being with Clyde, so that’s probably his level. So it’s not what I’d class as completely ruined. Probably pretty good compared to victims of such crimes. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"He does have a labouring job
Listen to the James English podcast with DG he tells you there he’s working as an electricians mate
Basically labouring for an electrical company.
I had DG guilty but having listened to that and hearing some evidence that I wasn’t aware of changed my opinion……..
why would he be wanting to take this back to court to prove he is right having already dodged one with never being charged?…..
Why did Robertson come forward when he wasn’t even implicated in the offence to say he has sex with the female at the same time and it was all consensual?……. Why would he risk being convicted if he didn’t have to from the start…… he done that as it was the right thing to do to allow ALL the facts to be gained and assessed that’s why!
One simple reason could be because getting found guilty is very rare, so he is likely to win regardless if he did it or not. So statistically it’s in his favour to go to court.
The reporting rate of this type of offence, to the police, is tiny! Only about 1 in 6 women actual report it to the police. The police then only charge about 2 people for every 100 incidents reported to them, and then only a small percentage of those end up in court and a smaller number are found guilty. For the prosecution it’s a bit like trying to push the Moon up Mount Everest. For the defence, it’s a bit of a wet dream.
The criminal justice system in this area is broken, and doesn’t work. All the data and evidence points to that. To ram it home, there is circa 1 in 30 women a victim of this time of crime every year in the UK! that’s 798,000 victims, it’s disgusting. What’s more digesting is the vast majority of perpetrators get away with it.
DG case is unusual as normally the victim, unless they get a stonewall conviction, gets annihilated in the court of public opinion. This time it’s the accused, which is very rare. But probably because of they lost the civil case. Which means on the balance of probabilities they did it.
You can’t completely ruin someone’s life on the balance of probability.
I suppose you’d need to define “completely ruining” someone’s life. He is a 34 year old striker., so at the tail end of his career. He’s had 3 criminal convictions for assault, and the above civil case loss. But he’s still had a pretty full footballing career nonetheless. He had a club every year as far as I can tell. Dundee Utd until 2011, Blackburn 11 to 14, Aberdeen 14 to 16, Argyle 16 to 17 and Clyde 17 to 22. Various loans in there too. Playing over 400 games and scoring about 150 goals. His best return being with Clyde, so that’s probably his level. So it’s not what I’d class as completely ruined. Probably pretty good compared to victims of such crimes. "
He’s the victim in this instance. He may have continued to play football but he’s had many false accusations labelled at him from people who don’t know the facts. Look at the first couple of posts someone said he got found not proven. Others said he’s guilty because of a civil trial. We have a judicial system in this country for a reason.
Have you ever been in trouble when you were younger? Goodwillie got into a couple of scuffles it doesn’t make him a sex attacker. Declan Gallagher attacked someone with a bat no one ever mentions that |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *andN2Couple
over a year ago
Glasgow |
"He does have a labouring job
Listen to the James English podcast with DG he tells you there he’s working as an electricians mate
Basically labouring for an electrical company.
I had DG guilty but having listened to that and hearing some evidence that I wasn’t aware of changed my opinion……..
why would he be wanting to take this back to court to prove he is right having already dodged one with never being charged?…..
Why did Robertson come forward when he wasn’t even implicated in the offence to say he has sex with the female at the same time and it was all consensual?……. Why would he risk being convicted if he didn’t have to from the start…… he done that as it was the right thing to do to allow ALL the facts to be gained and assessed that’s why!
One simple reason could be because getting found guilty is very rare, so he is likely to win regardless if he did it or not. So statistically it’s in his favour to go to court.
The reporting rate of this type of offence, to the police, is tiny! Only about 1 in 6 women actual report it to the police. The police then only charge about 2 people for every 100 incidents reported to them, and then only a small percentage of those end up in court and a smaller number are found guilty. For the prosecution it’s a bit like trying to push the Moon up Mount Everest. For the defence, it’s a bit of a wet dream.
The criminal justice system in this area is broken, and doesn’t work. All the data and evidence points to that. To ram it home, there is circa 1 in 30 women a victim of this time of crime every year in the UK! that’s 798,000 victims, it’s disgusting. What’s more digesting is the vast majority of perpetrators get away with it.
DG case is unusual as normally the victim, unless they get a stonewall conviction, gets annihilated in the court of public opinion. This time it’s the accused, which is very rare. But probably because of they lost the civil case. Which means on the balance of probabilities they did it.
You can’t completely ruin someone’s life on the balance of probability.
I suppose you’d need to define “completely ruining” someone’s life. He is a 34 year old striker., so at the tail end of his career. He’s had 3 criminal convictions for assault, and the above civil case loss. But he’s still had a pretty full footballing career nonetheless. He had a club every year as far as I can tell. Dundee Utd until 2011, Blackburn 11 to 14, Aberdeen 14 to 16, Argyle 16 to 17 and Clyde 17 to 22. Various loans in there too. Playing over 400 games and scoring about 150 goals. His best return being with Clyde, so that’s probably his level. So it’s not what I’d class as completely ruined. Probably pretty good compared to victims of such crimes.
He’s the victim in this instance. He may have continued to play football but he’s had many false accusations labelled at him from people who don’t know the facts. Look at the first couple of posts someone said he got found not proven. Others said he’s guilty because of a civil trial. We have a judicial system in this country for a reason.
Have you ever been in trouble when you were younger? Goodwillie got into a couple of scuffles it doesn’t make him a sex attacker. Declan Gallagher attacked someone with a bat no one ever mentions that "
The judicial system is broken with regard this type of crime. The facts / data around that speak for themself. Which I’ve already pointed out.
While a civil trail is a lower burden of proof, it’s not a kangaroo court by any stretch of the imagination. The outcome is an important element to consider when forming an opinion on this matter. So I don’t see how you can draw the conclusion he is the victim based on the facts.
The actual victim in this case has been let down by the broken system and was forced to take the matter into her own hands via a civil case.
Sorry I just can’t agree with your logic on this one. Anyways I’m out, said my 2p worth. Moving on. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"He does have a labouring job
Listen to the James English podcast with DG he tells you there he’s working as an electricians mate
Basically labouring for an electrical company.
I had DG guilty but having listened to that and hearing some evidence that I wasn’t aware of changed my opinion……..
why would he be wanting to take this back to court to prove he is right having already dodged one with never being charged?…..
Why did Robertson come forward when he wasn’t even implicated in the offence to say he has sex with the female at the same time and it was all consensual?……. Why would he risk being convicted if he didn’t have to from the start…… he done that as it was the right thing to do to allow ALL the facts to be gained and assessed that’s why!
One simple reason could be because getting found guilty is very rare, so he is likely to win regardless if he did it or not. So statistically it’s in his favour to go to court.
The reporting rate of this type of offence, to the police, is tiny! Only about 1 in 6 women actual report it to the police. The police then only charge about 2 people for every 100 incidents reported to them, and then only a small percentage of those end up in court and a smaller number are found guilty. For the prosecution it’s a bit like trying to push the Moon up Mount Everest. For the defence, it’s a bit of a wet dream.
The criminal justice system in this area is broken, and doesn’t work. All the data and evidence points to that. To ram it home, there is circa 1 in 30 women a victim of this time of crime every year in the UK! that’s 798,000 victims, it’s disgusting. What’s more digesting is the vast majority of perpetrators get away with it.
DG case is unusual as normally the victim, unless they get a stonewall conviction, gets annihilated in the court of public opinion. This time it’s the accused, which is very rare. But probably because of they lost the civil case. Which means on the balance of probabilities they did it.
You can’t completely ruin someone’s life on the balance of probability.
I suppose you’d need to define “completely ruining” someone’s life. He is a 34 year old striker., so at the tail end of his career. He’s had 3 criminal convictions for assault, and the above civil case loss. But he’s still had a pretty full footballing career nonetheless. He had a club every year as far as I can tell. Dundee Utd until 2011, Blackburn 11 to 14, Aberdeen 14 to 16, Argyle 16 to 17 and Clyde 17 to 22. Various loans in there too. Playing over 400 games and scoring about 150 goals. His best return being with Clyde, so that’s probably his level. So it’s not what I’d class as completely ruined. Probably pretty good compared to victims of such crimes.
He’s the victim in this instance. He may have continued to play football but he’s had many false accusations labelled at him from people who don’t know the facts. Look at the first couple of posts someone said he got found not proven. Others said he’s guilty because of a civil trial. We have a judicial system in this country for a reason.
Have you ever been in trouble when you were younger? Goodwillie got into a couple of scuffles it doesn’t make him a sex attacker. Declan Gallagher attacked someone with a bat no one ever mentions that
The judicial system is broken with regard this type of crime. The facts / data around that speak for themself. Which I’ve already pointed out.
While a civil trail is a lower burden of proof, it’s not a kangaroo court by any stretch of the imagination. The outcome is an important element to consider when forming an opinion on this matter. So I don’t see how you can draw the conclusion he is the victim based on the facts.
The actual victim in this case has been let down by the broken system and was forced to take the matter into her own hands via a civil case.
Sorry I just can’t agree with your logic on this one. Anyways I’m out, said my 2p worth. Moving on. "
Not 100% accurate, sorry. The alleged victim in the case wasn’t failed by the judicial system, they were failed by their own actions compundid by a lack of actual evidence to prove r*pe had actually occurred and not consentual sex.
As for the “conviction rate” it is unfortunately low due to the large number of false claims the police have to investigate making it harder for the real victims to get heard and their case proven in court. These false claims cause the stats to be skewed and puts real victims off reporting because it appears they won’t be believed or get justice in the criminal court.
I’d make a few changes to the current system for these types of case.
1. BOTH sides get anonymity until a guilty verdict is rendered
2. Any false claims made which can be proven to have been 100% false & intentionally made lead to a prosecution for Wasting Police time.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"He does have a labouring job
Listen to the James English podcast with DG he tells you there he’s working as an electricians mate
Basically labouring for an electrical company.
I had DG guilty but having listened to that and hearing some evidence that I wasn’t aware of changed my opinion……..
why would he be wanting to take this back to court to prove he is right having already dodged one with never being charged?…..
Why did Robertson come forward when he wasn’t even implicated in the offence to say he has sex with the female at the same time and it was all consensual?……. Why would he risk being convicted if he didn’t have to from the start…… he done that as it was the right thing to do to allow ALL the facts to be gained and assessed that’s why! "
Both accused have jobs outside football now.
When this story resurfaced previously, the media & others tracked Robertson down at his job and got his sacked.
Up till the point where GoodWillie became a political punchbag nobody was bothered about either of them from he day of the Civil judgement until DG joined Raith and a Vocal Political fan of a certain party got involved and pulled her “friends” into the issue which thereafter kicked the whole thing off again.
It’s likely DG doesn’t need to play professionally again as Raith had to pay out his 4yr contract to get him to leave the club. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *alcon43Woman
over a year ago
Paisley |
"
The verdict was Not Proven. A later Civil Court found he was guilty and he was ordered to pay compensation
No it wasn’t. There was not enough evidence for the cps to take it to court.
He was also not found guilty in a civil court, it was found that the chances of the female being too d*unk to consent was ‘most probable’. So they were fined £100k
This is where the law is very tricky, he has not been convicted or found guilty for r**e at all, if he had the money for the legal bills he quite possibly could sue the papers and all for referring to him as a rapist.
What I find the saddest parts are that there is a woman who’s trauma is brought up in the papers as and when they have nothing else to write about. She hasn’t been able to fully move on which is actually quite upsetting. Then there’s the kids, of the female if she has any and of David G, his kids will be slaughtered at school when they are of age, again which is really sad.
Look at big players, Cristiano Ronaldo was accused of r*pe, paid the female off with £300k. No-one cares.
Then there’s the current one with Mason Greenwood, if you have heard the voice recording you will know he r@ped that young lassie, he’s still on the books at Man Utd and will probably be sent to Saudi on loan. Why are r*pe crisis and such like not hounding him? Simple, he can afford the costs to sue, Goodwillie can’t.
It’s a topic that will split opinion.
Is Goodwillie a r@pist? I really don’t know, but there wasn’t evidence to charge him in a criminal court, he has requested a criminal court many times and the civil court didn’t rule him as guilty of r*pe. He’s never been on criminal trial. That’s the facts of it.
"
Ronaldo showed remorse, Goodwille hasn’t. A grown man must surely know when a woman is too dr*nk to give consent. I know of men who have taken the woman home, made sure she’s ok and not done anything else. People have to live with the consequences of their actions. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ookie69Man
over a year ago
Whistle Dixie |
"
The verdict was Not Proven. A later Civil Court found he was guilty and he was ordered to pay compensation
No it wasn’t. There was not enough evidence for the cps to take it to court.
He was also not found guilty in a civil court, it was found that the chances of the female being too d*unk to consent was ‘most probable’. So they were fined £100k
This is where the law is very tricky, he has not been convicted or found guilty for r**e at all, if he had the money for the legal bills he quite possibly could sue the papers and all for referring to him as a rapist.
What I find the saddest parts are that there is a woman who’s trauma is brought up in the papers as and when they have nothing else to write about. She hasn’t been able to fully move on which is actually quite upsetting. Then there’s the kids, of the female if she has any and of David G, his kids will be slaughtered at school when they are of age, again which is really sad.
Look at big players, Cristiano Ronaldo was accused of r*pe, paid the female off with £300k. No-one cares.
Then there’s the current one with Mason Greenwood, if you have heard the voice recording you will know he r@ped that young lassie, he’s still on the books at Man Utd and will probably be sent to Saudi on loan. Why are r*pe crisis and such like not hounding him? Simple, he can afford the costs to sue, Goodwillie can’t.
It’s a topic that will split opinion.
Is Goodwillie a r@pist? I really don’t know, but there wasn’t evidence to charge him in a criminal court, he has requested a criminal court many times and the civil court didn’t rule him as guilty of r*pe. He’s never been on criminal trial. That’s the facts of it.
"
Well said Boyo  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
The verdict was Not Proven. A later Civil Court found he was guilty and he was ordered to pay compensation
No it wasn’t. There was not enough evidence for the cps to take it to court.
He was also not found guilty in a civil court, it was found that the chances of the female being too d*unk to consent was ‘most probable’. So they were fined £100k
This is where the law is very tricky, he has not been convicted or found guilty for r**e at all, if he had the money for the legal bills he quite possibly could sue the papers and all for referring to him as a rapist.
What I find the saddest parts are that there is a woman who’s trauma is brought up in the papers as and when they have nothing else to write about. She hasn’t been able to fully move on which is actually quite upsetting. Then there’s the kids, of the female if she has any and of David G, his kids will be slaughtered at school when they are of age, again which is really sad.
Look at big players, Cristiano Ronaldo was accused of r*pe, paid the female off with £300k. No-one cares.
Then there’s the current one with Mason Greenwood, if you have heard the voice recording you will know he r@ped that young lassie, he’s still on the books at Man Utd and will probably be sent to Saudi on loan. Why are r*pe crisis and such like not hounding him? Simple, he can afford the costs to sue, Goodwillie can’t.
It’s a topic that will split opinion.
Is Goodwillie a r@pist? I really don’t know, but there wasn’t evidence to charge him in a criminal court, he has requested a criminal court many times and the civil court didn’t rule him as guilty of r*pe. He’s never been on criminal trial. That’s the facts of it.
Ronaldo showed remorse, Goodwille hasn’t. A grown man must surely know when a woman is too dr*nk to give consent. I know of men who have taken the woman home, made sure she’s ok and not done anything else. People have to live with the consequences of their actions. "
Have you seen the Ronaldo interview with piers Morgan?……. He doesn’t say sorry when asked about it……. Infact he says he told his mum everything would be ok the law will do it’s job and it did so I am happy….. is what he said
In the media it says he said sorry to the female right after sex.
So if DG comes out today and says sorry then quite simply all this goes away based on him showing remorse?…….
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The whole case boils down to simple facts.
Something happened that night as both admit having sex for the woman.
Evidence wise there was not enough for COPFS to prove it was r*pe and not a consentual act.
Many r*pe allegations done make court because of this kind of “morning after” reaction when the partner finds out. Many don’t even get to COPFS as the police were able to get to the truth quickly.
Either way both were never convicted and never even put on trial for the alleged criminal offence.
Civil actions are a much easier place to get a judgement due to the lower burden of proof being “we think they did it” rather than “we know they did it”.
Another factor to be considered is the “damages award formulae” the judges use which considers prooortion of blame and awards a relevant % of the South amount accordingly.
She sought £500k and got awarded £100k. That’s 20%. Meaning her award was reduced by 80%."
Except she didn’t get a penny because , if memory serves me right, Goodwillie immediately filed for bankruptcy to avoid paying her.
I think everyone should read the civil court judgement as that paints a very poor picture of Goodwillie and his buddy. The judge is quite clear about how he saw the evenings events play out.
He says the girl was incapacitated to such an extent that she couldn’t possibly have given consent. It’s way too easy for males to play the old we were all d*unk card. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The whole case boils down to simple facts.
Something happened that night as both admit having sex for the woman.
Evidence wise there was not enough for COPFS to prove it was r*pe and not a consentual act.
Many r*pe allegations done make court because of this kind of “morning after” reaction when the partner finds out. Many don’t even get to COPFS as the police were able to get to the truth quickly.
Either way both were never convicted and never even put on trial for the alleged criminal offence.
Civil actions are a much easier place to get a judgement due to the lower burden of proof being “we think they did it” rather than “we know they did it”.
Another factor to be considered is the “damages award formulae” the judges use which considers prooortion of blame and awards a relevant % of the South amount accordingly.
She sought £500k and got awarded £100k. That’s 20%. Meaning her award was reduced by 80%.
Except she didn’t get a penny because , if memory serves me right, Goodwillie immediately filed for bankruptcy to avoid paying her.
I think everyone should read the civil court judgement as that paints a very poor picture of Goodwillie and his buddy. The judge is quite clear about how he saw the evenings events play out.
He says the girl was incapacitated to such an extent that she couldn’t possibly have given consent. It’s way too easy for males to play the old we were all d*unk card."
No he didn’t
He says he filed for bankruptcy due to HMRC coming after him for £40l worth of taxes from a previous transfer agents fee
He was willing to pay the woman but unable to pay HMRC
I only know this due to listening to DG on the podcast where he got the chance to put his version of events forward.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The whole case boils down to simple facts.
Something happened that night as both admit having sex for the woman.
Evidence wise there was not enough for COPFS to prove it was r*pe and not a consentual act.
Many r*pe allegations done make court because of this kind of “morning after” reaction when the partner finds out. Many don’t even get to COPFS as the police were able to get to the truth quickly.
Either way both were never convicted and never even put on trial for the alleged criminal offence.
Civil actions are a much easier place to get a judgement due to the lower burden of proof being “we think they did it” rather than “we know they did it”.
Another factor to be considered is the “damages award formulae” the judges use which considers prooortion of blame and awards a relevant % of the South amount accordingly.
She sought £500k and got awarded £100k. That’s 20%. Meaning her award was reduced by 80%.
Except she didn’t get a penny because , if memory serves me right, Goodwillie immediately filed for bankruptcy to avoid paying her.
I think everyone should read the civil court judgement as that paints a very poor picture of Goodwillie and his buddy. The judge is quite clear about how he saw the evenings events play out.
He says the girl was incapacitated to such an extent that she couldn’t possibly have given consent. It’s way too easy for males to play the old we were all d*unk card.
No he didn’t
He says he filed for bankruptcy due to HMRC coming after him for £40l worth of taxes from a previous transfer agents fee
He was willing to pay the woman but unable to pay HMRC
I only know this due to listening to DG on the podcast where he got the chance to put his version of events forward.
So, you read what the judge said in the civil case then. Im not in a position to dispute your last comment. Though I don’t think Goodwillie is reliable or credible through any of this. Again though, I have not read anything about this HMRC circumstance. Still, good to know that he managed to bail out of his responsibilities there too
"
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The whole case boils down to simple facts.
Something happened that night as both admit having sex for the woman.
Evidence wise there was not enough for COPFS to prove it was r*pe and not a consentual act.
Many r*pe allegations done make court because of this kind of “morning after” reaction when the partner finds out. Many don’t even get to COPFS as the police were able to get to the truth quickly.
Either way both were never convicted and never even put on trial for the alleged criminal offence.
Civil actions are a much easier place to get a judgement due to the lower burden of proof being “we think they did it” rather than “we know they did it”.
Another factor to be considered is the “damages award formulae” the judges use which considers prooortion of blame and awards a relevant % of the South amount accordingly.
She sought £500k and got awarded £100k. That’s 20%. Meaning her award was reduced by 80%.
Except she didn’t get a penny because , if memory serves me right, Goodwillie immediately filed for bankruptcy to avoid paying her.
I think everyone should read the civil court judgement as that paints a very poor picture of Goodwillie and his buddy. The judge is quite clear about how he saw the evenings events play out.
He says the girl was incapacitated to such an extent that she couldn’t possibly have given consent. It’s way too easy for males to play the old we were all d*unk card.
No he didn’t
He says he filed for bankruptcy due to HMRC coming after him for £40l worth of taxes from a previous transfer agents fee
He was willing to pay the woman but unable to pay HMRC
I only know this due to listening to DG on the podcast where he got the chance to put his version of events forward.
So, you read what the judge said in the civil case then. Im not in a position to dispute your last comment. Though I don’t think Goodwillie is reliable or credible through any of this. Again though, I have not read anything about this HMRC circumstance. Still, good to know that he managed to bail out of his responsibilities there too
"
How can you say DG is in your opinion not reliable or credible?……..
Hundreds of business and ordinary folk bail out on HMRC every year I don’t see them being hounded! But now you are finding fault with him for doing it?…….. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The whole case boils down to simple facts.
Something happened that night as both admit having sex for the woman.
Evidence wise there was not enough for COPFS to prove it was r*pe and not a consentual act.
Many r*pe allegations done make court because of this kind of “morning after” reaction when the partner finds out. Many don’t even get to COPFS as the police were able to get to the truth quickly.
Either way both were never convicted and never even put on trial for the alleged criminal offence.
Civil actions are a much easier place to get a judgement due to the lower burden of proof being “we think they did it” rather than “we know they did it”.
Another factor to be considered is the “damages award formulae” the judges use which considers prooortion of blame and awards a relevant % of the South amount accordingly.
She sought £500k and got awarded £100k. That’s 20%. Meaning her award was reduced by 80%.
Except she didn’t get a penny because , if memory serves me right, Goodwillie immediately filed for bankruptcy to avoid paying her.
I think everyone should read the civil court judgement as that paints a very poor picture of Goodwillie and his buddy. The judge is quite clear about how he saw the evenings events play out.
He says the girl was incapacitated to such an extent that she couldn’t possibly have given consent. It’s way too easy for males to play the old we were all d*unk card.
No he didn’t
He says he filed for bankruptcy due to HMRC coming after him for £40l worth of taxes from a previous transfer agents fee
He was willing to pay the woman but unable to pay HMRC
I only know this due to listening to DG on the podcast where he got the chance to put his version of events forward.
So, you read what the judge said in the civil case then. Im not in a position to dispute your last comment. Though I don’t think Goodwillie is reliable or credible through any of this. Again though, I have not read anything about this HMRC circumstance. Still, good to know that he managed to bail out of his responsibilities there too
How can you say DG is in your opinion not reliable or credible?……..
Hundreds of business and ordinary folk bail out on HMRC every year I don’t see them being hounded! But now you are finding fault with him for doing it?…….. "
Should have been clearer. The judges opinion was that both Goodwillie and Robertson were unreliable as witnesses. So I’ll take the judges position on that.
HMRC will hound anyone for not paying what they are due to pay. Occasionally some businesses will come to an arrangement but private individuals unless wealthy will always be chased for outstanding amounts owed.
Anyway I’m sure his circumstances will always divide opinion and I suppose it’s healthy that everyone doesn’t see everything the same way. I just feel there’s always an element in these cases of blaming the female. It’s not a discussion that will change peoples opinions anyway, so I’ll leave it at that. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The whole case boils down to simple facts.
Something happened that night as both admit having sex for the woman.
Evidence wise there was not enough for COPFS to prove it was r*pe and not a consentual act.
Many r*pe allegations done make court because of this kind of “morning after” reaction when the partner finds out. Many don’t even get to COPFS as the police were able to get to the truth quickly.
Either way both were never convicted and never even put on trial for the alleged criminal offence.
Civil actions are a much easier place to get a judgement due to the lower burden of proof being “we think they did it” rather than “we know they did it”.
Another factor to be considered is the “damages award formulae” the judges use which considers prooortion of blame and awards a relevant % of the South amount accordingly.
She sought £500k and got awarded £100k. That’s 20%. Meaning her award was reduced by 80%.
Except she didn’t get a penny because , if memory serves me right, Goodwillie immediately filed for bankruptcy to avoid paying her.
I think everyone should read the civil court judgement as that paints a very poor picture of Goodwillie and his buddy. The judge is quite clear about how he saw the evenings events play out.
He says the girl was incapacitated to such an extent that she couldn’t possibly have given consent. It’s way too easy for males to play the old we were all d*unk card."
1 of the reasons COPFS abandoned the case was the police uncovered evidence she wasn’t as incapacitated as claimed as she was capable of walking to the cab, texting her brother, etc.
Apparently to this day has never said she knows for certain if she was r*ped as she cannot recall anything after going out and waking up in the house with the 2 accused.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Judge believed the plaintiff rather than the defendants, 1 of whom came forward to the police himself despite never being accused by the alleged victim.
Civil cases are more opinion than proven fact.
She knew both accused were facing bankruptcy before she got the court award.
Robertson was traced and forced out his job by the media when the Raith story broke.
Goodwillie played for years at Clyde with no concern raised by anyone.
It was only when he went to Raith that it became a “Political Football” kicked around by members of a specific political party.
Even now, that same party is still sticking their nose in where it doesn’t concern them. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The whole case boils down to simple facts.
Something happened that night as both admit having sex for the woman.
Evidence wise there was not enough for COPFS to prove it was r*pe and not a consentual act.
Many r*pe allegations done make court because of this kind of “morning after” reaction when the partner finds out. Many don’t even get to COPFS as the police were able to get to the truth quickly.
Either way both were never convicted and never even put on trial for the alleged criminal offence.
Civil actions are a much easier place to get a judgement due to the lower burden of proof being “we think they did it” rather than “we know they did it”.
Another factor to be considered is the “damages award formulae” the judges use which considers prooortion of blame and awards a relevant % of the South amount accordingly.
She sought £500k and got awarded £100k. That’s 20%. Meaning her award was reduced by 80%.
Except she didn’t get a penny because , if memory serves me right, Goodwillie immediately filed for bankruptcy to avoid paying her.
I think everyone should read the civil court judgement as that paints a very poor picture of Goodwillie and his buddy. The judge is quite clear about how he saw the evenings events play out.
He says the girl was incapacitated to such an extent that she couldn’t possibly have given consent. It’s way too easy for males to play the old we were all d*unk card.
No he didn’t
He says he filed for bankruptcy due to HMRC coming after him for £40l worth of taxes from a previous transfer agents fee
He was willing to pay the woman but unable to pay HMRC
I only know this due to listening to DG on the podcast where he got the chance to put his version of events forward.
So, you read what the judge said in the civil case then. Im not in a position to dispute your last comment. Though I don’t think Goodwillie is reliable or credible through any of this. Again though, I have not read anything about this HMRC circumstance. Still, good to know that he managed to bail out of his responsibilities there too
How can you say DG is in your opinion not reliable or credible?……..
Hundreds of business and ordinary folk bail out on HMRC every year I don’t see them being hounded! But now you are finding fault with him for doing it?……..
Should have been clearer. The judges opinion was that both Goodwillie and Robertson were unreliable as witnesses. So I’ll take the judges position on that.
HMRC will hound anyone for not paying what they are due to pay. Occasionally some businesses will come to an arrangement but private individuals unless wealthy will always be chased for outstanding amounts owed.
Anyway I’m sure his circumstances will always divide opinion and I suppose it’s healthy that everyone doesn’t see everything the same way. I just feel there’s always an element in these cases of blaming the female. It’s not a discussion that will change peoples opinions anyway, so I’ll leave it at that."
Susan aitken decided to pile in and her husband had massive hmrc debts and is banned from being a company director |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Thoughts folks
Witch-hunt or deserves all he gets?"
He spoke out in a podcast recently about it - the name of the podcast escapes me right now. And still he maintains that at the time the threesome was consensual and they were all having a laugh and enjoying themselves. He was really confused by the allegations. Personally I feel it's a bit of a witch hunt now - and i speak as a victim of sexual assault in the past. At the end of the day, only the people there at the time know what really happened
Mrs |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Thoughts folks
Witch-hunt or deserves all he gets?
He’s not been found guilty of anything.
What I don’t understand is how he played for Clyde with no issues now there’s a problem. There’s a bigger sex abuse scandal in Scottish football, where people have been convicted, that the SNP won’t address yet they can make statements about Goodwillie. "
They dont want to upset thier core vote , so they are will8ng to let over 60 odd convictions at the one club go unchallenged
Its a disgrace . |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Thoughts folks
Witch-hunt or deserves all he gets?
He’s not been found guilty of anything.
What I don’t understand is how he played for Clyde with no issues now there’s a problem. There’s a bigger sex abuse scandal in Scottish football, where people have been convicted, that the SNP won’t address yet they can make statements about Goodwillie.
The verdict was Not Proven. A later Civil Court found he was guilty and he was ordered to pay compensation
A civil court doesn’t give you a criminal conviction.
He was never prosecuted to get a not proven verdict. Do your homework before labelling someone with such a horrendous tag
Whether it was a criminal or civil court he has been found to be a rapist. Those facts don't change no matter how much you want it to. He is a rapist."
Was he found guilty by Jury in the civil case , just asking ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *sh paulCouple
over a year ago
DALKEITH |
"Thoughts folks
Witch-hunt or deserves all he gets?
He’s not been found guilty of anything.
What I don’t understand is how he played for Clyde with no issues now there’s a problem. There’s a bigger sex abuse scandal in Scottish football, where people have been convicted, that the SNP won’t address yet they can make statements about Goodwillie.
The verdict was Not Proven. A later Civil Court found he was guilty and he was ordered to pay compensation "
he never went to court so wasn't found not proven.
I read the 40 odd pages from civil trial, no doubt in my mind the lady could have consented to sex. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Thoughts folks
Witch-hunt or deserves all he gets?
He’s not been found guilty of anything.
What I don’t understand is how he played for Clyde with no issues now there’s a problem. There’s a bigger sex abuse scandal in Scottish football, where people have been convicted, that the SNP won’t address yet they can make statements about Goodwillie.
The verdict was Not Proven. A later Civil Court found he was guilty and he was ordered to pay compensation
A civil court doesn’t give you a criminal conviction.
He was never prosecuted to get a not proven verdict. Do your homework before labelling someone with such a horrendous tag
Whether it was a criminal or civil court he has been found to be a rapist. Those facts don't change no matter how much you want it to. He is a rapist.
Was he found guilty by Jury in the civil case , just asking ?"
Nope. Judge only civil hearing.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Thoughts folks
Witch-hunt or deserves all he gets?
He’s not been found guilty of anything.
What I don’t understand is how he played for Clyde with no issues now there’s a problem. There’s a bigger sex abuse scandal in Scottish football, where people have been convicted, that the SNP won’t address yet they can make statements about Goodwillie.
They dont want to upset thier core vote , so they are will8ng to let over 60 odd convictions at the one club go unchallenged
Its a disgrace ."
Meanwhile across the city they tell their CSA victims to contact the Liquidators as its a diffrent club.
BTW, its a BOYS club who's staff have had the convitions your referring to. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Thoughts folks
Witch-hunt or deserves all he gets?
He’s not been found guilty of anything.
What I don’t understand is how he played for Clyde with no issues now there’s a problem. There’s a bigger sex abuse scandal in Scottish football, where people have been convicted, that the SNP won’t address yet they can make statements about Goodwillie.
They dont want to upset thier core vote , so they are will8ng to let over 60 odd convictions at the one club go unchallenged
Its a disgrace .
Meanwhile across the city they tell their CSA victims to contact the Liquidators as its a diffrent club.
BTW, its a BOYS club who's staff have had the convitions your referring to."
I think you’ll find the reason for it is because it’s the insurance that would be paying out therefore as it’s a difference company they have no control over that issue. There was also no conviction regarding it so it would have to proved.
However if the person did suffer abuse then they have every right to compensation and an apology.
As I said if the scottish government and local councils want to get involved in the Goodwillie incident then they should definitely be holding public inquiries where there has been 9 convictions at one club. Glasgow city council might want to look at their cheap land deals again since they have set a precedent with glasgow united |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
He was ruled to have committed the r*pe, ok, maybe not in a criminal court, but still. He is a role model for kids, specifically young boys, and I think that's the biggest issue. Me personally, he deserves all he gets! J |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *eg2509Woman
over a year ago
Lanarkshire |
That makes me angry too. There is a gentleman who has had his court case deferred a few time now due to his age (80’s). For the same sort of thing. Yet nothing is said in the media or by SNP. It is left to the poor victims to highlight things on social media. It’s a disgrace, he will most prob pass on without having to face what he may have done. Leaving the alleged victims with no justice |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Thoughts folks
Witch-hunt or deserves all he gets?
He’s not been found guilty of anything.
What I don’t understand is how he played for Clyde with no issues now there’s a problem. There’s a bigger sex abuse scandal in Scottish football, where people have been convicted, that the SNP won’t address yet they can make statements about Goodwillie.
They dont want to upset thier core vote , so they are will8ng to let over 60 odd convictions at the one club go unchallenged
Its a disgrace .
Meanwhile across the city they tell their CSA victims to contact the Liquidators as its a diffrent club.
BTW, its a BOYS club who's staff have had the convitions your referring to.
I think you’ll find the reason for it is because it’s the insurance that would be paying out therefore as it’s a difference company they have no control over that issue. There was also no conviction regarding it so it would have to proved.
However if the person did suffer abuse then they have every right to compensation and an apology.
As I said if the scottish government and local councils want to get involved in the Goodwillie incident then they should definitely be holding public inquiries where there has been 9 convictions at one club. Glasgow city council might want to look at their cheap land deals again since they have set a precedent with glasgow united "
Glw Utd put Aitken back in her box with their statement.
And again, the convictions are on BOYS club staff.
Current case has to prove the FOOtTBALL club was linked, and that’s where they’re struggling.
But across the city hey won’t have that issue when ithkse claims hit court as club admitted it happened I& also lied about reporting it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
It amazes me how some folk are willing to destroy someone with very little actual proof.
The cps dropped the case due to not enough evidence to secure a conviction so a civil case was sought there is a massive difference in these systems one deals in fact the other deals with well its plausible.
What ever happened to innocent until proven guilty?
It's trial by media these days to many willing to destroy a life on others words alone
What ever happened to innocent until proven guilty?
He was never found guilty as no criminal case was ever attempted he was found liable in a civil case where the gain is money nothing more!!
It's trial by public opinion these days with many folk believing well I think he/she is guilty so chop of his/her head. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
" It amazes me how some folk are willing to destroy someone with very little actual proof.
The cps dropped the case due to not enough evidence to secure a conviction so a civil case was sought there is a massive difference in these systems one deals in fact the other deals with well its plausible.
What ever happened to innocent until proven guilty?
It's trial by media these days to many willing to destroy a life on others words alone
What ever happened to innocent until proven guilty?
He was never found guilty as no criminal case was ever attempted he was found liable in a civil case where the gain is money nothing more!!
It's trial by public opinion these days with many folk believing well I think he/she is guilty so chop of his/her head."
Kevin spacey |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Glw Utd put Aitken back in her box with their statement.
And again, the convictions are on BOYS club staff.
Current case has to prove the FOOtTBALL club was linked, and that’s where they’re struggling.
But across the city hey won’t have that issue when ithkse claims hit court as club admitted it happened I& also lied about reporting it."
Your whataboutery is disgusting. These were children at all clubs in Scottish football and you are more interested in point scoring. All children that suffered deserve apologies, compensation and justice. A full public inquiry is the best way forward for this yet the SG continuously refuse but feel the need to get involved here. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Just have to say after reading stuff and listening/watching the podcast interview.
Goodwillie was found guilty on a "probably" verdict. She was probably too d*unk to consent. You can't just throw a probably about. There's no evidence for it to even go to the proper courts.
Just non of it adds up at all |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Jo matter what as a parent of a young boy who follows football i dont want him to see someone who has had such serious accusations against them playing in a team. These players are supposed to be role models to our kids. I dont agree that just for his talent and wealth Ronaldo's career wasnt halted. Anyine who has had this sort of accusation shoule not be in public eye, anyone no matter wealth, talent or anything else.
Agree anyone arrested or suspected of this crime should be kept anonymous until proven in court of law.
As for female if she was d*unk she wasnt able to give consent & as mature guys shouldnt have touched her.
Same at clubsnif some single females are too d*unk i always worry about them playing and regret or not remember nxt day. Its a scary world. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I dare say it's having the common sense to not take someone home to have fun if their d*unk etc not putting yourself in that situation to get accused in the first place but he was young and dumb and sounds like they were all d*unk and having fun and maybe she's woke up regretting it? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Jo matter what as a parent of a young boy who follows football i dont want him to see someone who has had such serious accusations against them playing in a team. These players are supposed to be role models to our kids. I dont agree that just for his talent and wealth Ronaldo's career wasnt halted. Anyine who has had this sort of accusation shoule not be in public eye, anyone no matter wealth, talent or anything else.
Agree anyone arrested or suspected of this crime should be kept anonymous until proven in court of law.
As for female if she was d*unk she wasnt able to give consent & as mature guys shouldnt have touched her.
Same at clubsnif some single females are too d*unk i always worry about them playing and regret or not remember nxt day. Its a scary world. "
What team does he follow? Most teams have someone who has been accused or convicted of a crime. Look at tonight for example, there’s a testimonial game for someone who has a conviction for exposing themselves.
I haven’t seen any public outcry regarding it |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
A think u will find said players testimonials
Was let go no further charges
Again another false accusation against someone
And just like a certain retired keeper accusations of another team set free |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"A think u will find said players testimonials
Was let go no further charges
Again another false accusation against someone
And just like a certain retired keeper accusations of another team set free"
Exactly!!!
What about Gazza?……. Smashed his mrs up real bad……. He’s still in the public eye and nothing get said about it!
Seems like DG is being targeted based on the civil courts “opinion” of “ he probably done it”…….and he’s not famous or high profile enough for the media to leave him alone |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Very interesting, thoughtful, intelligent post. Idiot politicians should indeed have shut their mouths. Too many women crying r#@@ or foul play as shown in the Jim Davidson case which proved easily all 3 accusers lied. This impacts on genuine cases where genuine cases where women have suffered deserve proper justice. If it was up to me. Minimum twenty years for r#@@. Many cars where alcohol involved muddies the waters. Ched Evans ( overturned ) Similar. Goodwillie has had a raw deal from the justice system. It's almost as if a civil court is overruling a criminal court |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Thoughts folks
Witch-hunt or deserves all he gets?
He’s not been found guilty of anything.
What I don’t understand is how he played for Clyde with no issues now there’s a problem. There’s a bigger sex abuse scandal in Scottish football, where people have been convicted, that the SNP won’t address yet they can make statements about Goodwillie.
They dont want to upset thier core vote , so they are will8ng to let over 60 odd convictions at the one club go unchallenged
Its a disgrace ."
Dont try to be so staunch, there was child abuse at many clubs in scotland not just the one your salivating over. Not just football clubs lots of organisations where people had power over young people |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Thoughts folks
Witch-hunt or deserves all he gets?
He’s not been found guilty of anything.
What I don’t understand is how he played for Clyde with no issues now there’s a problem. There’s a bigger sex abuse scandal in Scottish football, where people have been convicted, that the SNP won’t address yet they can make statements about Goodwillie.
They dont want to upset thier core vote , so they are will8ng to let over 60 odd convictions at the one club go unchallenged
Its a disgrace .
Dont try to be so staunch, there was child abuse at many clubs in scotland not just the one your salivating over. Not just football clubs lots of organisations where people had power over young people"
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Thoughts folks
Witch-hunt or deserves all he gets?
He’s not been found guilty of anything.
What I don’t understand is how he played for Clyde with no issues now there’s a problem. There’s a bigger sex abuse scandal in Scottish football, where people have been convicted, that the SNP won’t address yet they can make statements about Goodwillie.
They dont want to upset thier core vote , so they are will8ng to let over 60 odd convictions at the one club go unchallenged
Its a disgrace .
Meanwhile across the city they tell their CSA victims to contact the Liquidators as its a diffrent club.
BTW, its a BOYS club who's staff have had the convitions your referring to.
I think you’ll find the reason for it is because it’s the insurance that would be paying out therefore as it’s a difference company they have no control over that issue. There was also no conviction regarding it so it would have to proved.
However if the person did suffer abuse then they have every right to compensation and an apology.
As I said if the scottish government and local councils want to get involved in the Goodwillie incident then they should definitely be holding public inquiries where there has been 9 convictions at one club. Glasgow city council might want to look at their cheap land deals again since they have set a precedent with glasgow united "
Staunch, disgusts me the way fans from the team you quite obviouslly support make out they feel bad for the victims of child abuse yet when ive been in the away end of your ground ive literally seen grown adults sing about it with glee even while mimicking the actions of having sex all of this while young weans are all around. Its grotesque |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Fuck sack, lad not done for R&p*. Scottish Justice told you all that. So why do Scottish Forum to really discuss this and bring others into ( like i know him) me his best ) pal . |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
The majority of these comments defending him are coming from men, so put it this way, of it was your daughter/sister/mum, would you still be defending him??? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
