JtotheC Posted April 20, 2012 Share Posted April 20, 2012 Have United said they are going to still be paying his wages ? Â United have refused to make a statement about any aspect of this case, any talk of what they may or may not be saying is just guesswork. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
missymoo73 Posted April 20, 2012 Share Posted April 20, 2012 yup and if united do get promotion in 2nd place they will owe it in part to the 35 goals scored for them fielding a convicted rapist, although he wasnt convicted at the time, no one will care.. Â Thats a bit low Special - expect more from you to be fair Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colin conker Posted April 20, 2012 Share Posted April 20, 2012 Im a blade an cant believe that other blades are sticking by a rapist, he wouldnt have been convicted if he didnt do it, there must have been solid evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Where's Spot Posted April 20, 2012 Share Posted April 20, 2012 i believe there was new evidence but the actual double jeopardy law WAS changed  Yes, before someone couldn't be tried again even if there was new evidence. Another of the cases that led to a change in the law was a killer who was aquitted of murder and then spent years boasting about how he got away with it. I believe he was one of the first to be convicted once the law was rightly changed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheffgrow Posted April 20, 2012 Share Posted April 20, 2012 yup and if united do get promotion in 2nd place they will owe it in part to the 35 goals scored for them fielding a convicted rapist, although he wasnt convicted at the time, no one will care.. Â So Utd played someone who was at the time an innocent man who was under contract to them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrome Posted April 20, 2012 Share Posted April 20, 2012 I too am confused by the one did one didn't verdict, only time will tell what the end result will become. Â I do have to say however, that despite not being her fault, the woman involved should have known better than to go back to a hotel room with a stranger, drunk or not. Nobody should get that drunk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
missymoo73 Posted April 20, 2012 Share Posted April 20, 2012 Im a blade an cant believe that other blades are sticking by a rapist, he wouldnt have been convicted if he didnt do it, there must have been solid evidence. Â Who has stuck up for him ? I havent seen a post on here thats for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JtotheC Posted April 20, 2012 Share Posted April 20, 2012 So Utd played someone who was at the time an innocent man who was under contract to them  .. and technically not convicted !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
melthebell Posted April 20, 2012 Share Posted April 20, 2012 They were only tried again because there was significant new evidence. Without that there wouldn't have been a second trial. That's why Stephen's three other killers are still free - there wasn't any new evidence against them.  no they were sent for retrial BECAUSE of new evidence....BUT they could only be tried because the law was changed  http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2012/jan/03/double-jeopardy-change-law-retrial Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Sidney Posted April 20, 2012 Share Posted April 20, 2012 Its of much lesser importance than the girl herself but this is a massive blow for the club. They've lost their best player at a crucial time and if they still do go up there is a big black cloud hanging over them because their success is down to a sex offender. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts