Goodwillie rape

Forums New posts

C4MMY

Private Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2016
A judge has found him and Cowdenbeath player David Robertson of rape in 2011, both have been ordered to pay £100000 in damages.....crazy only getting a fine for raping someone
 
C4MMY said:
A judge has found him and Cowdenbeath player David Robertson of rape in 2011, both have been ordered to pay £100000 in damages.....crazy only getting a fine for raping someone
Click to expand...

Not a criminal court Cammy - civil case.
 
Confuses me, not guilty in court of law, but guilty in civil courts??
 
Criminal court verdict of guilty requires 'beyond reasonable doubt' or 'proof he done it'. A civil court only requires that the balance of probability suggests 'he done it' but irrefutable proof not required,

Simples.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dub
Wannabehibee said:
Correct. Her word against theirs and the judge opted for her version of events along with some pretty damning evidence from a nightclub bouncer about how intoxicated she was.
Click to expand...

Good knowledge Wannabe.
:thumbgrin


You had the burger van parked outside the Courts?

:detective:
 
Sir Shrink said:
Criminal court verdict of guilty requires 'beyond reasonable doubt' or 'proof he done it'. A civil court only requires that the balance of probability suggests 'he done it' but irrefutable proof not required,

Simples.
Click to expand...

There we go, learnt something new today
 
HATTIE said:
Confuses me, not guilty in court of law, but guilty in civil courts??
Click to expand...
Never taken to trial in criminal court because there was insufficient evidence for crown to proceed. There shouldn't be the option to find guilty in another court.
 
Sir Shrink said:
No, a private prosecution can still result in jailtime for instance.
And needs a 'go-ahead' whereas a civil case can just be undertaken.
Click to expand...

You seem to know an awful lot about the law young feller.

Are you a master criminal?

Don't answer that if doing so means you have to kill me.
 
Dub said:
You seem to know an awful lot about the law young feller.

Are you a master criminal?

Don't answer that if doing so means you have to kill me.
Click to expand...

I've done a bit of legal studies in my time Dub, many hours in the University Library pre-internet days, and some of it I can recall.
Sometimes.

Have to maintain a bit of an interest for professional reasons too.

:wink:
 
Surely you are either guilty in the eyes of the law , or not??.
Apparently that's not the case.
A lot to be said , that just needs left alone , I suppose.
 
tayside hibee said:
Surely you are either guilty in the eyes of the law , or not??.
Apparently that's not the case.
A lot to be said , that just needs left alone , I suppose.
Click to expand...

They weren't prosecuted in a criminal court so there was no prior decision on guilty or not guilty.
It didn't get that far.

No real contradiction, only the Procurator Fiscal's crew will know why they thought it was not worth proceeding with a criminal trial.


I'm quite happy to make a snap judgement without knowing all the facts - Goodwillie (open goal there if anyone's interested) seems to me to be a bit of a prick. His alleged behaviour with this lassie, the fact he forced an ex to get a paternity test and then allegedly refused to pay up when proved to be the father of the bairn and the indisputable fact that he has got a face that is made for slapping hard with a hardwood bat proves his guilt beyond any reasonable doubt.

The PF fcuked this one up.

Send him down.
:glassraise:
 
Sir Shrink said:
They weren't prosecuted in a criminal court so there was no prior decision on guilty or not guilty.
It didn't get that far.

No real contradiction, only the Procurator Fiscal's crew will know why they thought it was not worth proceeding with a criminal trial.


I'm quite happy to make a snap judgement without knowing all the facts - Goodwillie (open goal there if anyone's interested) seems to me to be a bit of a prick. His alleged behaviour with this lassie, the fact he forced an ex to get a paternity test and then allegedly refused to pay up when proved to be the father of the bairn and the indisputable fact that he has got a face that is made for slapping hard with a hardwood bat proves his guilt beyond any reasonable doubt.

The PF fcuked this one up.

Send him down.
:glassraise:
Click to expand...
The law seems quite complicated to me.

Obviously you should never judge a book by it's cover but BadCock has always seemed a right rex hunt lying twat to me!!!:yas:

Having read what i have now read, i go back to thinking that he is a complete evil **** faced bastard!!!:lookaround:
 
Sir Shrink said:
They weren't prosecuted in a criminal court so there was no prior decision on guilty or not guilty.
It didn't get that far.

No real contradiction, only the Procurator Fiscal's crew will know why they thought it was not worth proceeding with a criminal trial.


I'm quite happy to make a snap judgement without knowing all the facts - Goodwillie (open goal there if anyone's interested) seems to me to be a bit of a prick. His alleged behaviour with this lassie, the fact he forced an ex to get a paternity test and then allegedly refused to pay up when proved to be the father of the bairn and the indisputable fact that he has got a face that is made for slapping hard with a hardwood bat proves his guilt beyond any reasonable doubt.

The PF fcuked this one up.

Send him down.
:glassraise:
Click to expand...

The PF has to adhere to performance figures like every other public body in this country nowadays. Value for money it's called. They have to ensure a conviction percentage that's quite high. Much in the same way as hospital waiting times.
The fiscal reviewing the evidence would appear to have not been confident of a conviction so would have red penned it before it started draining the public purse with no win likely.
Like everything else these days, 'What's it going to cost' outweighs every other consideration including the people involved.
 
Wannabehibee said:
Its fairly interesting that there was actually 2 blokes involved with this and yet only one is being lambasted for it, not just here but seemed to be the case on the news last night as well.
DAVID ROBERTSON - just in case anyone forgot.
Click to expand...

They certainly mentioned Robertson on the news I was watching but I reckon it's just down to Goodwillie being more high profile.
 
Beagle said:
They certainly mentioned Robertson on the news I was watching but I reckon it's just down to Goodwillie being more high profile.
Click to expand...

ex Arab, ex EPL, ex Sheepshagger, ex Scotland player, nearly an ex Hun

whats the other ones name and who did he play for
 
Madmike said:
The law seems quite complicated to me.
:
Click to expand...

Lawyers made the law complicated so you'd need their services to interpret it. I'm with Shakespeare on this when he said "let's kill all the lawyers". I'm sorry Shrink if that's your area but needs must..



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Bofahibee said:
Lawyers made the law complicated so you'd need their services to interpret it. I'm with Shakespeare on this when he said "let's kill all the lawyers". I'm sorry Shrink if that's your area but needs must..



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

No apology necessary my good man.

My knowledge of the law is pretty limited and in a specialist area, I just happen to remember some of the basic broader issues of Scots Law from my studies many years back.
I’m not a big fan of Shakespeare to be honest, and I can’t say much about his work although his sentiments towards lawyers seem to be reasonable.
 
Sir Shrink said:
No apology necessary my good man.

My knowledge of the law is pretty limited and in a specialist area, I just happen to remember some of the basic broader issues of Scots Law from my studies many years back.
I’m not a big fan of Shakespeare to be honest, and I can’t say much about his work although his sentiments towards lawyers seem to be reasonable.
Click to expand...

His sister was pish too
 
I see he's now vowing to "speak his truth" on social media after yet another club tears up a contract.

You have to wonder what benefit he thinks this will have. I can only see three scenarios:

1. He denies it again. Nobody believes him because the civil case found him to be a rapist.

2. He admits it but tries to excuse it with "I was as drunk as her" or something along those lines which would likely lead to a criminal case.

3. He admits it but claims there was consent which again would likely lead to a criminal case.

Given that he has never paid his victim a penny of the damages she was due the latter two might provide some justice.
 
Declared himself bankrupt and signed a decent contract the week after he was discharged.

I’m all for rehabilitation if someone is contrite, he hasn’t shown any. But he’s an ex story anyway.

Bet he wishes he had shut up and stayed at Clyde.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Zab
He’s not stupid, he knows the script and although he‘s not paid the victim directly, his punishment is he’s unemployable in the football world and possibly beyond.
 
Purple & Green said:
Declared himself bankrupt and signed a decent contract the week after he was discharged.

I’m all for rehabilitation if someone is contrite, he hasn’t shown any. But he’s an ex story anyway.

Bet he wishes he had shut up and stayed at Clyde.
Click to expand...
Did the cooncil not threaten to cancel the stadium lease if he stayed at Clyde?
 
Huns on twitter stating if he was “a tarrier” he would still be playing… The irony totally lost on them that Alan the rage mcgregor is getting a testimonial for them… both in the same situation of not being found guilty of anything…. But goodwill a celtc man is guilty and the rage isn’t… all beasts are the same irelevant of their religion, but clearly not in the Huns eyes🙈
Their answers “The rage wasn’t convicted of anything” neither was goodwillie.
And I’m not sticking up for goodWillie.. Just their utter madness That its All about religion and who they support… crazy mutha fuckas
 
He just really needs to find a club with no fans or sponsors to upset. Glasgow United might be perfect. Miles below his ability.

Putting aside the contrition, I still feel rehabilitation is the best way forward and it seems highly unlikely he will repeat offend. I just can't square off though that I would be the first to withdraw support and funding to any club I supported who took him on.
 
It's another case of the law being unable to keep up with media. Similar in some ways to the Huw Edwards stuff going on just now.

That's not to excuse anyone or anything but the punishments of loss of earnings etc are being dished out by the public based on news reports and gossip. Right outcome, wrong method.

Perhaps it's a more true reflection of what punishment is felt fair by the public. Maybe that's one for a future Black Mirror episode.
 
I watched a couple of episodes of series 1 recently as I’d never seen the originals.

Its either too clever for me (more than likely) or over rated pish.

Should I go for episode 3?
 
Doc Shrink said:
I watched a couple of episodes of series 1 recently as I’d never seen the originals.

Its either too clever for me (more than likely) or over rated pish.

Should I go for episode 3?
Click to expand...
Weirdly enough I've never seen any of them but watched the very first tonight. Should I watch the second?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
  • Menu
  • Home
  • Hibs Chat
  • New Posts
  • Just Back
  • Chatroom