The Gooner Forum

goonersid wrote:

BT wrote:

QuartzGooner wrote:In previous separate incidents both Quincy (affray) and Armand Traore (knuckleduster) were arrested, but both had charges dropped.

Let us see what happens, because it is not unknown for a woman to try and fit up an Arsenal player (RvP).

Quartz, as much as i like to believe rvp is innocent of that rape, and as much as i realise there is a minority of women who target footballers, there are many more women who are genuinely mistreated and then scared/paid off by millionaire footballers and their team of lackeys. Its that universal presumption of predatory woman and innocent man (who in this case is a hero to many) that means no one believes these women, they're told no one will believe them, and the cases are dropped.

A woman has had her arm broken. Wilshere was there. The fact that she's female and Jack plays for arsenal has no parallel to Rvp's arrest at all. We dont even know its the woman pressing charges! Sorry but your post smacks of sexism here and not all arsenal players are whiter than white. They put themselves in these situations to begin with.

Agree with your comments on the RVP case and footballers in general, the police however have been at pains to point out that Willshire is a "witness" to what happened and that he was "peacemaker" in the incident and "very unlikely to face charges"

I think we all hope, and with good reason, that our players are slightly classier than some other team's scum, and i think Jack is probably just in the wrong place/crowd.

I just took exception to Quartz (normally a very intelligent poster) somehow implying there's some group of vindictive women out there ready to accuse innocent arsenal players. Just a slightly strange and misguided comparison to make i thought, it was not really a comment on the actual incidents.

This is why Wenger would rather sign a young foreign lad than a British one. All just a case of history repeating, Pennant, Bentley etc. Will they ever learn?? Jack had just made his breakthrough, playing in all 3 of our league games so far and he's on the piss at 2.45 the night after a match

I read somewhere that Jack is teetotal.

Can anyone confirm?

rodders999 wrote:This is why Wenger would rather sign a young foreign lad than a British one. All just a case of history repeating, Pennant, Bentley etc. Will they ever learn?? Jack had just made his breakthrough, playing in all 3 of our league games so far and he's on the piss at 2.45 the night after a match

I tend to agree with the sentiment, but now that I think about it, RVP and Bendtner have also had 'issues' of a similar nature attributed to them.

olgitgooner wrote:I read somewhere that Jack is teetotal.

Can anyone confirm?

Daily Mail excerpt: "The 18-year-old, who is teetotal, is believed to have acted as a peacemaker".

rodders999 wrote:This is why Wenger would rather sign a young foreign lad than a British one. All just a case of history repeating, Pennant, Bentley etc. Will they ever learn?? Jack had just made his breakthrough, playing in all 3 of our league games so far and he's on the piss at 2.45 the night after a match

Explain this then:



This happened the night after we LOST a match.

But hey, it's only the British lads who like to enjoy themselves a bit, eh?

BT wrote:

QuartzGooner wrote:In previous separate incidents both Quincy (affray) and Armand Traore (knuckleduster) were arrested, but both had charges dropped.

Let us see what happens, because it is not unknown for a woman to try and fit up an Arsenal player (RvP).

Quartz, as much as i like to believe rvp is innocent of that rape, and as much as i realise there is a minority of women who target footballers, there are many more women who are genuinely mistreated and then scared/paid off by millionaire footballers and their team of lackeys. Its that universal presumption of predatory woman and innocent man (who in this case is a hero to many) that means no one believes these women, they're told no one will believe them, and the cases are dropped.

A woman has had her arm broken. Wilshere was there. The fact that she's female and Jack plays for arsenal has no parallel to Rvp's arrest at all. We dont even know its the woman pressing charges! Sorry but your post smacks of sexism here and not all arsenal players are whiter than white. They put themselves in these situations to begin with.

On the contrary there is a presumption imbedded in plain sight within our legal system that basically condemns all men accused of rape. Men accused of rape in this country have no legal recourse to anonymity and as a result many acquitted of the offence have effectively had their lives ruined.

Dont even get me started on the divorce laws.

BT wrote:

BT wrote:

QuartzGooner wrote:In previous separate incidents both Quincy (affray) and Armand Traore (knuckleduster) were arrested, but both had charges dropped.

Let us see what happens, because it is not unknown for a woman to try and fit up an Arsenal player (RvP).

Quartz, as much as i like to believe rvp is innocent of that rape, and as much as i realise there is a minority of women who target footballers, there are many more women who are genuinely mistreated and then scared/paid off by millionaire footballers and their team of lackeys. Its that universal presumption of predatory woman and innocent man (who in this case is a hero to many) that means no one believes these women, they're told no one will believe them, and the cases are dropped.

A woman has had her arm broken. Wilshere was there. The fact that she's female and Jack plays for arsenal has no parallel to Rvp's arrest at all. We dont even know its the woman pressing charges! Sorry but your post smacks of sexism here and not all arsenal players are whiter than white. They put themselves in these situations to begin with.

I just took exception to Quartz (normally a very intelligent poster) somehow implying there's some group of vindictive women out there ready to accuse innocent arsenal players. Just a slightly strange and misguided comparison to make i thought, it was not really a comment on the actual incidents.

BT

I hope you can re-read my above brief post and not get worked up by it, because it is not an inflammatory post.

My post is not unintelligent, and it is not sexist.

Did I say I condone rape?
Or men hitting women?

I said nothing of the sort.

I said was that the initial reports of Wilshere's arrest told us little, and that we should all wait and see what the full story is, if it ever gets a hearing that is, before passing full judgment.
That has got nothing at all to do with gender bias/sexism.

At the time I made the post, the news was that a woman had her arm broken in the fracas.
She was the sole injured party mentioned in the news that I had seen, and I was doing repeated google searches to find out as much as I could in a piece of Breaking News.

It only later emerged that a man had also been injured, after I had made my post.

But yes, there are women out there who try and set men up, particularly men who are in the public eye and/or rich.
It happened with Van Persie.

There are also men out there who try to goad similar high profile targets into fights.

I would say in history many more men would have raped women than vice versa.

As to whether there are more women mistreated by footballers than those who try to set them up, I would not even argue either way, because I do not have comparative statistics.

Sorry but to me, the way i read that, the phrase 'because its not unknown for a woman to fit up an arsenal player (rvp)' is sexist. All we knew was that a woman and man had injuries and Wilshere was there. Nothing to say the woman had accused Wilshere of it or anyone at all. There were 4-5 men present and just one woman. Why single her out? Why not say 'for people to fit up arsenal players'?

Why compare it to a rape case from years ago that is totally irrelevant? Just because robin's charges were dropped (even though he admitted having sex with her and the whole thing was rather murky), you imply the liklihood is this is made up too because there's a woman involved.

I realise you may not have meant to imply all this but the way it was worded left a lot of room for negative interpretation which, frankly, shocked me coming from you, which is why i felt the need to bring it up.

I could go on about rape laws in this country, LDB, but this isnt really the place. But it is a fact that conviction in the UK is the lowest in the western world for the very reason that the legal system is set up to accuse the woman of lying and not on men to prove they had consent as in every other country. Defendents don't get anonymity in any other crime either. It might ruin the man's reputation, but it pales into comparison to what the girl goes through from examination to police handling to court to appeal and beyond. 1 in 10 women is raped. If 10 per cent of that number report it, and 3 per cent of that 10 get a conviction, thats a lot of unconvicted rapists out there which i'm sure out number the odd girl willing to go through all that for some attention. After all, if money, publicity or revenge is these girl's motive, isnt it much less trauma and hassle just to do a kiss and tell?

BT wrote:Sorry but to me, the way i read that, the phrase 'because its not unknown for a woman to fit up an arsenal player (rvp)' is sexist. All we knew was that a woman and man had injuries and Wilshere was there. Nothing to say the woman had accused Wilshere of it or anyone at all. There were 4-5 men present and just one woman. Why single her out? Why not say 'for people to fit up arsenal players'?

Why compare it to a rape case from years ago that is totally irrelevant? Just because robin's charges were dropped (even though he admitted having sex with her and the whole thing was rather murky), you imply the liklihood is this is made up too because there's a woman involved.

I realise you may not have meant to imply all this but the way it was worded left a lot of room for negative interpretation which, frankly, shocked me coming from you, which is why i felt the need to bring it up.

"It not being being unknown for a woman to have previously fitted up an Arsenal player?"
It is simply stating a fact, but I can now understand how you read it as sexist.
My intended emphasis was on the possibility of a "fitting up", rather than whether a man or woman did so.
I mentioned it was a woman because as explained, at the time I posted the injured party was reported as being a woman.

I also mentioned two other previous incidents of charges being made against Arsenal players, which were later dropped.
Neither mentioned gender.

So you think men should be able to be convicted of rape on a "her word against his" basis? Of course the onus is on the prosecution to prove as far as is possible that the defendant is guilty.

That is not an assumption that a woman is lying, merely a legal fundamental that one is innocent until proven guilty, not the other way around.

You're missing the point about anonymity, it should be there to help INNOCENT men. I dont see how comparing what innocent men go through to what victims go through helps your case in the slightest. Neither should have to suffer but one is preventable. Why arent we preventing it?

The fairest way for law to work would be to withhold the names of anyone accused of any crime until a verdict is reached.

If guilty then the name can be published, if innocent the name should never be released.

1989 wrote:



Looks like Jack took a swing at the bird's fella in that first pic.

According to an article in the Daily Heil both parties in the fight claim that Jack's was just trying to stop the fight .

QuartzGooner wrote:The fairest way for law to work would be to withhold the names of anyone accused of any crime until a verdict is reached.

If guilty then the name can be published, if innocent the name should never be released.

The public have a right to know of someone who is accused of an offence, who is subsequently released on bail, so that they can make a decision on what their interaction is with that person.

In addition, important information concerning the "innocent" may be revealed in court that has bearing on previous acts of the innocent that have nothing to with the charges, but would be useful for the public to know in terms of the character and future behaviour of that person.

Why shouldn't he go out? Its hardly all the time, plus he had nothing the next day so let him go out with his mates.

Anyway he did nothing but try to break it up. Really this is a nonsense story