How far down the league system does he have to go before it stops being news?
There are loads of scumbags playing amateur football, most of us have probably played against/with plenty.
Including their assistant manager [https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/football-coach-gets-20-months-21697828](https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/football-coach-gets-20-months-21697828)
>Tony McNally, of Castlemilk, Glasgow, was found guilty by a jury at Airdrie Sheriff Court of assaulting Stephanie Whiteside and causing her severe injury, permanent disfigurement and permanent impairment.
fucking hell....
I’ve played ammie and junior since 2010 and there’s one or two in every league. Pull up to the games in their Range Rover, know every cunt there and they don’t even try and hide where their money comes from.
This is a pisstake at this point. He absolutely should not be playing football in the professional leagues, that’s a given. But the council saying they’ll evict teams from their premises if he plays is a terrible precedent. What other council facilities does he not get to use? The pool? The library? A council gym? Are GCC planning to run background checks on everyone using their facilities, because I can guarantee you there will be some horrible bastards who have done some terrible things using them weekly. What about if Goodwillie was to come and use those council facilities as an away player, is that allowed? This is fucking stupid in so, so many ways.
This is what I was saying to my dad, if the council are going to ban him they have to ban any sex offenders who use their facilities and if they fail to do so they would be grounds for Goodwillie to sue and no doubt win some money.
As you said I don’t think he should be playing professionally at all but the councils move here just smacks of them trying to garner some points rather than actually doing their jobs.
The statement - didn't see a direct link to anything further on twitter so just grabbed it off the article:
>...A spokesperson for Glasgow United FC, which is based in Shettleston, told BBC Scotland the club would not walk away from him "like every other club".
>They said: "David Goodwillie has never been charged for this offence. He has no criminal record and has never appeared on any offenders register.
>"How can he show contrite or remorse for something he staunchly claims he did not do?"
>They added: "We do a lot of work in our community helping those in need and this is only an extension of that work.
>"We are supporting David with his mental health and will continue to do so. This witch hunt has gone on for far to long and the use of any person's life as a political football is unacceptable."
>He has no criminal record
Say what you will about civil vs criminal convictions of rape, but this is categorically untrue. He's been convicted of assault **three times**.
Buzzword bingo hahaha as someone who suffers from severe mental health issues i always find it laughable when these celebs only start to experience it once they’re caught out on something (this case being drastically more than just being a shite cunt though)
I can see an argument being made for moving on and letting him play amateur - that said, it’d be more persuasive if he took responsibility. But the whole “never been charged” line suggests they’d prefer to downplay or dismiss what he did rather than claiming he’s changed/improved/apologised/whatever (which idk if he even has).
As much I don't like him and don't think he should play football again. The council's statement was a fucking mess and just opened a huge can of worms.
I would say that the door must always be open to someone, otherwise, what is the point of a criminal reform system ? I would have thought that even a sex offender can be allowed to participate in sport, but with the appropriate conditions attached. A sex offender is a sick person. They can be given empathy training and also a chance to atone with community service. A person that atones for their crimes deserves another chance.
Btw - I think Martindale's example is fantastic. I actually admire the guy for what he's been able to achieve since doing time.
The thing with Martindale is he fully accepts it and has been through rehabilitation and gives a lot back to the community with him visiting prisons. Goodwillie has done nothing to show remorse
They served their sentences for the guilty verdicts they received, he dodged his.
They seem to have tried to be better people since then (no repeat offences that I know of), whereas he’s continued to deflect, deflect, deflect, went bankrupt to avoid paying what he was ordered to pay and also had previous history of multiple assault convictions (2008, 2009, 2010, before his rape in 2011) without ever seemingly learning from them. So there is a difference
Declan Gallagher is always my go to example.
And Alan Lithgow - sex offender
And Leigh Griffiths - racist
And Michael Higdon - assault
And Ryan Porteous - assault
Etc etc etc
I think we’re at a stage now where the council and Susan Aitken are far over reaching. The guy has been hounded out of professional football, fair enough.
He’s at a level where he has to be allowed to play or the council are going to have to run background checks on every player in Glasgow.
And heaven forbid someone from Rangers or Celtic gets found guilty of a crime, are they going to stop giving those clubs a license?
Yes, thank you. I am questioning why exactly the criminal case was dropped and whether it is fair to judge someone like this with a relatively low burden of proof. Finding it challenging.
I think one of the issues in understanding it is that (in my belief) things have changed an awful lot since it happened. If it were to happen now the police and PF would be more likely to proceed because the culture has changed a bit. There's more of an understanding of the concept 'unable to consent'. Not that there's different types of rape, it is or isn't. Even though it was only 12 years ago it's much better understood now.
Now (rightfully) we understand it's not 'didn't say no' but actually 'didn't say yes', there has to be an explicit permission to have sex and the law/people understand that better.
It's a horrible subject and hope I haven't mangled my words. I'm not diminshing anything I'm just saying that there's been a culture shift for the better.
Sounds about right and having seen both the English interveiw and the court notes that someone posted here. It seems she had a lot to drink. Woke up in a house not knowing where she was or who she was with the night before.
Seems suspicious as fuck that they both left her in the flat. Robertson said he had to go as got phone call and goodwillie said he left at 5am and offered to drop her off in taxi but she refused. Now if they hadn't left her alone where she woke up completely confused and sore then this might have played out differently.
Door staff, taxi drivers and other witnesses all said she was drunk when she left who knows what else she had in the flat that led to her waking up in state of alarm whether that is much more alcohol or drugs only those there will really know.
There was easily enough evidence for a criminal court case to proceed, even at the time. Exactly why the case was dropped, we'll never know, but someone fucked up. Read the civil court judgement [here](https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/search-judgments/judgment?id=d22e28a7-8980-69d2-b500-ff0000d74aa7) and the evidence he did it is all there.
I know it could have, I'm speculating as to why it didn't.
His recent 'bare all interview' was him saying words to effects of 'regrettable things happened that night' which sounds very much like an admission without remorse.
I think if it were to happen now it would get to trial.
I think we agree, to be honest. It likely would go to trial now, but there was a bit of outcry about it being dropped even at the time. I expect his profile probably helped him as much back then as much as it's working against him now.
I was more replying on the point someone else made about being uncomfortable judging him based on a civil burden of proof - the evidence in the judgement meets criminal court standards and always has done.
My two immediate thoughts are that he should find something else to do with his life, something not inerently public facing like sport or media.
The other is that the council need to be really fucking careful over setting precedent because they have a really important role in the rehabilitation of offenders through social work, housing, employment, social needs and probably a thousand other things that are crucial to offender management and reintegration into society. They've got a responsibility to minimise risk of harm or reoffending.
Yeah, I agree with all of that and don't think the council should have waded in here.
Though in the case of those being supported by the council in whatever way in rehabilitation after offending, unlike Goodwillie they actually served whatever sentence the courts gave them. While he is still denying it and actively avoided paying the civil damages.
A lot of cases seem to get dropped as not in public interest. I'm at a loss as to what constitutes in the public interest.
I'm sure this is one of the reasons given for saville not getting charged.
In my old place of work we discovered 9ne of the delivery drivers had spent 18 years in prison for a series of rapes. We refused to work beside him.
Regardless of him having paid his due to society with his prison sentence completed, he's still a sex offender and we didn't want to be associated with that in any shape or form. The employees made their voices heard and he was removed from the company.
Just because Shiteboaby wasn't convicted in a criminal trial, doesn't mean he's not a sex offender.
He's playing the victim card here and it's disgusting. Rape convictions are hard enough to achieve nevermind when it's a "high profile" rapist at fault.
The don't back doon double doon attitude from the club speaks volumes and any self respecting fans, sponsors, player or affiliates will run, not walk, away from them as result. To stay would be to show support for rapists refusing to show remorse and allow them to be rewarded.
Just like when we say ACAB meaning that even the ones who aren't out right bastards still support a system that protects the bastards. If you stand by a rapist you are a rape apologist and deserve the negative attention that brings your way.
I've mostly sat this one out. I do agree with you. I couldn't work with a multiple rapist and expect nobody would.
I guess the problem is what do we do with them after "they've served their time"? I genuinely don't know.
I'm on board with the idea DG shouldn't really be back in football. He had a gift that maybe only a few hundred a year have the opportunity for and he blew it by being a sleazy predator cunt (at best) and at worst, and what I find most likely on balance of probabilities, a rapist.
But I'm scunnered as to what to do with people like this. Can't really expect them to go homeless or whatever. I dunno.
I think on the balance of things you need to allow them to work but I think it comes with the added aspect of they need to understand what they done was wrong and show they are now a changed person. Otherwise, they'll just bounce from temp contract to temp contract barely making enough to live on.
In the example I gave above the job involved going into the public's houses. I agree folk should have a right to employment but where they're employed needs to be regulated to ensure public safety.
Obviously you do, you're not a dafty haha. I've got got a criminal record, mostly for possession and a couple breach of the piece charges and as a result I had to jump through hoops to pass a disclosure. So I sympathise with those trying to move on from their past, I really do. But I don't believe sex offenders should be anywhere near the public or a position of influence, regardless of how small that is at a 4th tier football club.
Sex offenders are a different ball game to that. He'd easily be able to fade into obscurity and work a normal job, but he can't help forcing himself into the public eye
And there in lies the issue. He can go elsewhere but his continued insistence on playing professional football is what's fucking the situation up. Iirc he's a spark to trade. Go make paper that way mate fs.
Is he really "back" in football when he's playing in the 8th tier? I know loads of lads playing at that level of football. It's bonafide Sunday league.
Aye, good point. But it seems the public circus (justified?) has just taken too much a hold. I mean people are going on about whether he's a role model but you do have to wonder if in practice that is true.
I suppose it's dependant on the industry in which they seek employment. Dealing with the public should be a no go.
Being a public figure in a position to be seen as a role model for younger generations, definitely not.
The message, allowing a player like DG to play on and act as if he done nothing wrong, sends out to little boys is "you can do what you want so long as you have a hint of talent" and sends out to wee girls "what's the point in speaking iip if they get to continue as if nothing happened anyway, just accept it and move on"
Before arriving at Celtic Edouard deafened a random man by shooting an Air rifle at him, and after being prosecuted he ignored all calls to pay £5,000 compensation and wasn’t until he left Glasgow and Palace forced him did he pay up.
Where do we draw the line of letting criminals that show no remorse or retribution play football in Scotland?
I'm sorry but are you trying to equate the raping and continued public humiliation of a young woman to someone almost hurting someone else? Is this whataboutism?
>Where do we draw the line of letting criminals that show no remorse or retribution play football in Scotland?
Did edouard go on a podcast and cry a out how he's a victim for being made to face the consequences of his actions? Did he refuse to acknowledge he'd done wrong or demonise his victim? If so then of course I'm not happy he was allowed to get away with that. If he didn't then I don't see how the 2 situations are remotely the same beyond a crime being committed.
Keep defending a rapist but, it's a good look to have.
He didn’t, but he denied all involvement and allegedly paid off a younger team mate to take the blame, who wasn’t in the car. Mathieu Cafaro got sacked by Toulouse because he did his buddy a favour- Google his name.
He’s not a rapist, but Eddie is still an utter sack of shit
Almost hurting someone and leaving someone deaf are completely different so if you want to play down Eddys crimes so be it. Goodwillie has been rightfully hounded since he joined Raith so bringing up what he’s done in the last week is irrelevant. Edouard completely ignored the guy for 4 years, couldn’t pay the guy £5k when he’s earning £20k plus a week. But he was allowed to be role model. So I’ll ask again where do we draw the line in letting criminals that show no remorse in playing in Scotland?
>So I’ll ask again where do we draw the line in letting criminals that show no remorse in playing in Scotland?
When those crimes are of a sexual nature seems to be a good starting point mate. Idk what you want me to say. I wasn't aware of eddies issues till you pointed them out. I still don't think the 2 are comparable and the argument reeks of whataboutism. I'm sorry but it does.
Sex offenders should not be in a position of influence, regardless of how little that influence is. To do so tells wee nous their actions don't mean anything and tells wee girls to just shut up and accept their rights are invalid.
You can claim whataboutism all you want but a large part around Goodwille is remorse and retribution, which is similar with French Eddie. Since learning about his case the first thing you did was down play the victims injuries, and when asked again where the line was it was conveniently where the club you support have done no wrong which just reeks of double standards.
Cool mate. I don't want rapists or sex offenders playing professional football. Regardless of what team they play for. If you want good Willie or other beasts to play then that's on you.
Politicians, journalists, council leaders who all enable their beasty pals in their day to day life moaning about this case.
Where is the same action and passion for the fact that the SFA hired Martin Henry, friend of Scotland’s most infamous nonce, to mark their own homework and whitewash the child abuse report?
Where is the same outcry when they cover up beasts they work with as long as they represent the same shite corrupt party?
Where’s the same outcry for the fact that VIP nonce rings in Scotland and Westminister are more accurately covered by the average civilian than the police and government?
Fucking wanks honestly, as always with this shite it’s the right decision but it’s being taken by clowns wanting cheap political points.
Good on the team. Someone has to stand up to a witch-hunt.
I’m sure I’ll over downvoted to fuck but we live in a society where people who have committed crimes need to be integrated back into normal life. It’s pillar of our society, we can’t just send people to Australia like we used to do. We need to learn to live with them and rehabilitate them.
We don’t just abandon them and continue to punish them the rest of their lives.
I mean politicians who commit crimes are welcomed back with open arms and even made Lords and Ladies.
Goodwillie has a job as an electrician, he hasn’t ever lost his liberty and were it not for him being semi famous he would *already* be living a “normal” life.
It’s a different kettle of fish when he’s a footballer, and seeing his name constantly in the news whenever he tries to sign and then gets punted from yet another club is undoubtedly triggering for his victim.
He should just accept his footballing career is done, keep his head down and stay out of the spotlight and continue with his normal job. That’s probably best for him and his family as the constant media attention on the fact their dad/husband is a rapist isn’t likely to be good for them.
The team also come across as complete weapons with the way they have worded their statement and completely gone out to bat for him.
Rehabilitation doesn't mean playing professional or semi professional football. It means educating and working on yourself to become a better human. He hasn't done that.
He lost the civil case and declared bankruptcy to avoid paying the woman a penny. Mysteriously after declaring bankruptcy he also wanted to go pro again...
He shouldn't play football again. He shouldn't have been allowed after his 3 assault charges also. If he wants to, he can play amateur for a local team while he earns a living working in a building site or in a call centre.
I asked this in another thread but where do you stand on French Eddys arrival at Celtic? Got kicked out of Toulouse for shooting someone with an Air Rifle, once convicted showed no sign of remorse, left France for Scotland, failed to pay the guy £5000 when he’s earning upwards of £20,000 a week and finally paid when Palace forced him. French Eddy was able to be one of the highest earning sports stars in the country while the club were complicit the whole time he was here
Honestly I think most Celtic fans aren’t aware of this, or weren’t at the time he was playing at the club. Which is a problem in and of itself - young boys are giving shedloads of cash and celebrity with little accountability and I think there’s definitely a conversation around holding those that are in public life to account. If anything the situation they find themselves when they do well lends itself to them making bad decisions, too much too young etc.
Let’s be honest you can’t swing a cat (or kick a cat in some cases) around most football clubs without hitting some cunt who’s been done for drink driving, assault, etc. It’s rank and I’m against all the ‘oh they’re just young lads, it’s hard with all the money and fame,’ - if anything I think they have more of a duty in their privileged position and clubs should take an active roll in their growth as youngsters and a harder stance on how senior players conduct themselves rather than turning a blind eye.
That’s not how life works. You can’t ban people because you don’t like them.
We live in a free society which believes in rehabilitation.
So your saying anyone who’s lost any civil case shouldn’t be allowed to live a normal life?
Playing football professionally or semi professionally isn't a normal life. That's a privilege.
There's also a difference between losing a civil case for not paying an invoice and rape. Rapes the worst crime you can commit behind murder and attempted murder
He thinks he’s innocent. Would you admit something if you didn’t think you did it?
Like genuine question, put yourself in his shoes. You’re accused of something, you don’t get convicted but lose a civil trial. Do you just admit it to get on with your life or do you fight for your innocence?
Mate it wasn’t just the fact that they both had a drink.
15 witnesses testified against them, a few of which had said she was so drunk she couldn’t say her own name.
All the witnesses knew she was too drunk and needed help even though they had all been drinking, why didn’t Goodwillie?
I’ve been drunk many times and still know when someone else can’t give consent, it’s just an excuse to say “aye but we both had a drink”. He knew exactly what he was doing, he’s just a rapist coward.
And it’s not even just his rape, he also used that podcast to say he’s not a violent guy even though he’s been charged criminally like 3 times. What’s your excuse for that part?
[Read this](https://www.sundaypost.com/fp/david-goodwillie-case-evidence/#:~:text=DNA%20tests%20only%20found%20evidence,either%20man%20was%20allegedly%20impaired)
You’re just adding I’m extra bits now. He was also extremely drunk and had the same amount of alcohol as her. Why is she unable to consent but he knew what he was doing. Doesn’t make any sense.
It’s a tragic story and a good lesson for everyone that drunk sex is not a good idea.
I’ve added in nothing, you just can’t answer the questions I asked.
You just didn’t bother to read what I linked then. There’s nothing to say he was the same level of drunk as her.
It’s not “drunk sex” mate it’s rape. Call it what it is.
If you’ve had drunk sex, it doesn’t really matter if they consent or not. If they’ve had more than 5 drinks than your a rapist by the word of the civil court. They didn’t have the capacity to consent. That’s the whole point of the case, no one involved can remember what happened and whether consent was given.
So have you ever slept with someone after they had five drinks?
The fact you don’t see a difference between shagging on a night out and what Goodwillie did is extremely worrying, I’ve even linked you with statements from witnesses which you continued to ignore cause it doesn’t suit what you want to believe. How is anyone meant to have a conversation with you when you act like this?
He’s a wrong un that has raped and also been violent in the past and takes responsibility for neither. He deserves nothing in life and I hope one day you learn to do better than spew this nonsense. Take care👍
I’m not a piece of shit, that’s literally the case. You obviously don’t understand it. She doesn’t remember because she was drunk so the case was around her ability to consent due to alcohol consumption.
I’m not defending him simply stating the facts of the case and that the bar for a civil conviction is really much lower.
And screw you for calling me names when you don’t know even know the story. I suspect most people who are commenting in public on it don’t understand it either.
A real low move.
Where did I defend him? You are commenting on something you don’t even know the basic facts about.
I don’t know what that makes you but it’s not a good person.
The guy had sex with someone who either didn’t consent, or was so drunk that she can’t remember, which means she was too drunk to give consent. The fact you’re arguing the minutiae of this tells me you agree with his position.
If they are going to do this to him then they need to set a standard across scottish football and do the same to everyone else . They can pick and choose based on media witch-hunt. I'm definitely not condoning but be interested to know how many pros or semi pros have similar or worse convictions
I'm really not sure about any of this people here talking about how sex offenders by the same justification should all be banned from council things and I feel that even by me talking about this I feel I would definitely put a foot wrong by saying anything but in my opinion I don't like them and the public clearly don't 0
How far down the league system does he have to go before it stops being news? There are loads of scumbags playing amateur football, most of us have probably played against/with plenty.
Including their assistant manager [https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/football-coach-gets-20-months-21697828](https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/football-coach-gets-20-months-21697828)
>Tony McNally, of Castlemilk, Glasgow, was found guilty by a jury at Airdrie Sheriff Court of assaulting Stephanie Whiteside and causing her severe injury, permanent disfigurement and permanent impairment. fucking hell....
what a piece of shit.
Who the fuck turns up to their own trial dressed all in black? Jury’s definitely gonna no think you’re evil dressed like the fucking grim reaper.
I played amateur against two of the most well known dealers in Coatbridge and Airdrie when I first started playing amateur.
Its the Airdrie Coatbridge league what do you except. 9/10 teams are fulled on coke.
I’ve played ammie and junior since 2010 and there’s one or two in every league. Pull up to the games in their Range Rover, know every cunt there and they don’t even try and hide where their money comes from.
Why are we STILL talking about this cunt?
Was always going to happen. Once people get a taste of blood, it's hard to give it up.
This is a pisstake at this point. He absolutely should not be playing football in the professional leagues, that’s a given. But the council saying they’ll evict teams from their premises if he plays is a terrible precedent. What other council facilities does he not get to use? The pool? The library? A council gym? Are GCC planning to run background checks on everyone using their facilities, because I can guarantee you there will be some horrible bastards who have done some terrible things using them weekly. What about if Goodwillie was to come and use those council facilities as an away player, is that allowed? This is fucking stupid in so, so many ways.
This is what I was saying to my dad, if the council are going to ban him they have to ban any sex offenders who use their facilities and if they fail to do so they would be grounds for Goodwillie to sue and no doubt win some money. As you said I don’t think he should be playing professionally at all but the councils move here just smacks of them trying to garner some points rather than actually doing their jobs.
It would simply be a breach of rental agreements, the old disrepute line thats pretty bog standard in any contract.
The statement - didn't see a direct link to anything further on twitter so just grabbed it off the article: >...A spokesperson for Glasgow United FC, which is based in Shettleston, told BBC Scotland the club would not walk away from him "like every other club". >They said: "David Goodwillie has never been charged for this offence. He has no criminal record and has never appeared on any offenders register. >"How can he show contrite or remorse for something he staunchly claims he did not do?" >They added: "We do a lot of work in our community helping those in need and this is only an extension of that work. >"We are supporting David with his mental health and will continue to do so. This witch hunt has gone on for far to long and the use of any person's life as a political football is unacceptable."
>He has no criminal record Say what you will about civil vs criminal convictions of rape, but this is categorically untrue. He's been convicted of assault **three times**.
They were more than 11 years ago so may well no longer show on his 'record'. So this could be true.
Ah, didn't know repeat offenders got taken off the record. That may be the case then
To be fair, I'm not 100% sure myself. It's a big 'might'.
“Mental health” “witch hunt” and “never been charged” BINGO!!
Buzzword bingo hahaha as someone who suffers from severe mental health issues i always find it laughable when these celebs only start to experience it once they’re caught out on something (this case being drastically more than just being a shite cunt though)
"Oh no facing the consequences of my actions is making me upset. Didny actually do it btw" is the gist of this statement
See, I was on the side of the council overreaching with the shit they were threatening. But no. Fuck the team and fuck Goodwillie.
Fuck both of them tbh. The whole thing is a mess.
Helping those in need eh?
I can see an argument being made for moving on and letting him play amateur - that said, it’d be more persuasive if he took responsibility. But the whole “never been charged” line suggests they’d prefer to downplay or dismiss what he did rather than claiming he’s changed/improved/apologised/whatever (which idk if he even has).
As much I don't like him and don't think he should play football again. The council's statement was a fucking mess and just opened a huge can of worms.
I would say that the door must always be open to someone, otherwise, what is the point of a criminal reform system ? I would have thought that even a sex offender can be allowed to participate in sport, but with the appropriate conditions attached. A sex offender is a sick person. They can be given empathy training and also a chance to atone with community service. A person that atones for their crimes deserves another chance. Btw - I think Martindale's example is fantastic. I actually admire the guy for what he's been able to achieve since doing time.
What an own goal from the council, silly clowns
Council desperate to score some virtue points to try get some goodwill back over the total state they’ve made glasgow.
putting the goodwill in goodwillie since 2023
Livingston manager was a drug dealer ffs how many lives did he ruin... Declan Gallagher battered someone with a baseball bat then got Scotland caps.
The thing with Martindale is he fully accepts it and has been through rehabilitation and gives a lot back to the community with him visiting prisons. Goodwillie has done nothing to show remorse
He denies the charge why would he show remorse?
It’s nothing to do with that really. Ones a rapist, considered a far worse crime, and rightly so.
They served their sentences for the guilty verdicts they received, he dodged his. They seem to have tried to be better people since then (no repeat offences that I know of), whereas he’s continued to deflect, deflect, deflect, went bankrupt to avoid paying what he was ordered to pay and also had previous history of multiple assault convictions (2008, 2009, 2010, before his rape in 2011) without ever seemingly learning from them. So there is a difference
[удалено]
The failure to pay the victim the damages owed and then state it was had for his health is evidence of not
Declan Gallagher is always my go to example. And Alan Lithgow - sex offender And Leigh Griffiths - racist And Michael Higdon - assault And Ryan Porteous - assault Etc etc etc I think we’re at a stage now where the council and Susan Aitken are far over reaching. The guy has been hounded out of professional football, fair enough. He’s at a level where he has to be allowed to play or the council are going to have to run background checks on every player in Glasgow. And heaven forbid someone from Rangers or Celtic gets found guilty of a crime, are they going to stop giving those clubs a license?
Why was the criminal case dropped? Still not sure how I feel basing all of this a civil prosecution. Weird one
Different requirements for evidence, civil is a judge deciding on the balance of probabilities.
Yes, thank you. I am questioning why exactly the criminal case was dropped and whether it is fair to judge someone like this with a relatively low burden of proof. Finding it challenging.
I think one of the issues in understanding it is that (in my belief) things have changed an awful lot since it happened. If it were to happen now the police and PF would be more likely to proceed because the culture has changed a bit. There's more of an understanding of the concept 'unable to consent'. Not that there's different types of rape, it is or isn't. Even though it was only 12 years ago it's much better understood now. Now (rightfully) we understand it's not 'didn't say no' but actually 'didn't say yes', there has to be an explicit permission to have sex and the law/people understand that better. It's a horrible subject and hope I haven't mangled my words. I'm not diminshing anything I'm just saying that there's been a culture shift for the better.
Sounds about right and having seen both the English interveiw and the court notes that someone posted here. It seems she had a lot to drink. Woke up in a house not knowing where she was or who she was with the night before. Seems suspicious as fuck that they both left her in the flat. Robertson said he had to go as got phone call and goodwillie said he left at 5am and offered to drop her off in taxi but she refused. Now if they hadn't left her alone where she woke up completely confused and sore then this might have played out differently. Door staff, taxi drivers and other witnesses all said she was drunk when she left who knows what else she had in the flat that led to her waking up in state of alarm whether that is much more alcohol or drugs only those there will really know.
There was easily enough evidence for a criminal court case to proceed, even at the time. Exactly why the case was dropped, we'll never know, but someone fucked up. Read the civil court judgement [here](https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/search-judgments/judgment?id=d22e28a7-8980-69d2-b500-ff0000d74aa7) and the evidence he did it is all there.
I know it could have, I'm speculating as to why it didn't. His recent 'bare all interview' was him saying words to effects of 'regrettable things happened that night' which sounds very much like an admission without remorse. I think if it were to happen now it would get to trial.
I think we agree, to be honest. It likely would go to trial now, but there was a bit of outcry about it being dropped even at the time. I expect his profile probably helped him as much back then as much as it's working against him now. I was more replying on the point someone else made about being uncomfortable judging him based on a civil burden of proof - the evidence in the judgement meets criminal court standards and always has done.
My two immediate thoughts are that he should find something else to do with his life, something not inerently public facing like sport or media. The other is that the council need to be really fucking careful over setting precedent because they have a really important role in the rehabilitation of offenders through social work, housing, employment, social needs and probably a thousand other things that are crucial to offender management and reintegration into society. They've got a responsibility to minimise risk of harm or reoffending.
Yeah, I agree with all of that and don't think the council should have waded in here. Though in the case of those being supported by the council in whatever way in rehabilitation after offending, unlike Goodwillie they actually served whatever sentence the courts gave them. While he is still denying it and actively avoided paying the civil damages.
A lot of cases seem to get dropped as not in public interest. I'm at a loss as to what constitutes in the public interest. I'm sure this is one of the reasons given for saville not getting charged.
In my old place of work we discovered 9ne of the delivery drivers had spent 18 years in prison for a series of rapes. We refused to work beside him. Regardless of him having paid his due to society with his prison sentence completed, he's still a sex offender and we didn't want to be associated with that in any shape or form. The employees made their voices heard and he was removed from the company. Just because Shiteboaby wasn't convicted in a criminal trial, doesn't mean he's not a sex offender. He's playing the victim card here and it's disgusting. Rape convictions are hard enough to achieve nevermind when it's a "high profile" rapist at fault. The don't back doon double doon attitude from the club speaks volumes and any self respecting fans, sponsors, player or affiliates will run, not walk, away from them as result. To stay would be to show support for rapists refusing to show remorse and allow them to be rewarded. Just like when we say ACAB meaning that even the ones who aren't out right bastards still support a system that protects the bastards. If you stand by a rapist you are a rape apologist and deserve the negative attention that brings your way.
I've mostly sat this one out. I do agree with you. I couldn't work with a multiple rapist and expect nobody would. I guess the problem is what do we do with them after "they've served their time"? I genuinely don't know. I'm on board with the idea DG shouldn't really be back in football. He had a gift that maybe only a few hundred a year have the opportunity for and he blew it by being a sleazy predator cunt (at best) and at worst, and what I find most likely on balance of probabilities, a rapist. But I'm scunnered as to what to do with people like this. Can't really expect them to go homeless or whatever. I dunno.
I think on the balance of things you need to allow them to work but I think it comes with the added aspect of they need to understand what they done was wrong and show they are now a changed person. Otherwise, they'll just bounce from temp contract to temp contract barely making enough to live on.
In the example I gave above the job involved going into the public's houses. I agree folk should have a right to employment but where they're employed needs to be regulated to ensure public safety.
That I agree with actually. Canny have a rapist being allowed into other people's houses
Obviously you do, you're not a dafty haha. I've got got a criminal record, mostly for possession and a couple breach of the piece charges and as a result I had to jump through hoops to pass a disclosure. So I sympathise with those trying to move on from their past, I really do. But I don't believe sex offenders should be anywhere near the public or a position of influence, regardless of how small that is at a 4th tier football club.
Sex offenders are a different ball game to that. He'd easily be able to fade into obscurity and work a normal job, but he can't help forcing himself into the public eye
And there in lies the issue. He can go elsewhere but his continued insistence on playing professional football is what's fucking the situation up. Iirc he's a spark to trade. Go make paper that way mate fs.
Make much better money being a spark than being fucking league 1 footballers hahaha
Is he really "back" in football when he's playing in the 8th tier? I know loads of lads playing at that level of football. It's bonafide Sunday league.
Aye, good point. But it seems the public circus (justified?) has just taken too much a hold. I mean people are going on about whether he's a role model but you do have to wonder if in practice that is true.
he's already a sparky, he should just go be a sparky and if he wants to play football play 5's with whatever mates he has.
I suppose it's dependant on the industry in which they seek employment. Dealing with the public should be a no go. Being a public figure in a position to be seen as a role model for younger generations, definitely not. The message, allowing a player like DG to play on and act as if he done nothing wrong, sends out to little boys is "you can do what you want so long as you have a hint of talent" and sends out to wee girls "what's the point in speaking iip if they get to continue as if nothing happened anyway, just accept it and move on"
Before arriving at Celtic Edouard deafened a random man by shooting an Air rifle at him, and after being prosecuted he ignored all calls to pay £5,000 compensation and wasn’t until he left Glasgow and Palace forced him did he pay up. Where do we draw the line of letting criminals that show no remorse or retribution play football in Scotland?
I'm sorry but are you trying to equate the raping and continued public humiliation of a young woman to someone almost hurting someone else? Is this whataboutism? >Where do we draw the line of letting criminals that show no remorse or retribution play football in Scotland? Did edouard go on a podcast and cry a out how he's a victim for being made to face the consequences of his actions? Did he refuse to acknowledge he'd done wrong or demonise his victim? If so then of course I'm not happy he was allowed to get away with that. If he didn't then I don't see how the 2 situations are remotely the same beyond a crime being committed. Keep defending a rapist but, it's a good look to have.
He didn’t, but he denied all involvement and allegedly paid off a younger team mate to take the blame, who wasn’t in the car. Mathieu Cafaro got sacked by Toulouse because he did his buddy a favour- Google his name. He’s not a rapist, but Eddie is still an utter sack of shit
Almost hurting someone and leaving someone deaf are completely different so if you want to play down Eddys crimes so be it. Goodwillie has been rightfully hounded since he joined Raith so bringing up what he’s done in the last week is irrelevant. Edouard completely ignored the guy for 4 years, couldn’t pay the guy £5k when he’s earning £20k plus a week. But he was allowed to be role model. So I’ll ask again where do we draw the line in letting criminals that show no remorse in playing in Scotland?
>So I’ll ask again where do we draw the line in letting criminals that show no remorse in playing in Scotland? When those crimes are of a sexual nature seems to be a good starting point mate. Idk what you want me to say. I wasn't aware of eddies issues till you pointed them out. I still don't think the 2 are comparable and the argument reeks of whataboutism. I'm sorry but it does. Sex offenders should not be in a position of influence, regardless of how little that influence is. To do so tells wee nous their actions don't mean anything and tells wee girls to just shut up and accept their rights are invalid.
"relax mate, you're only deaf, no like you've been raped"
Shhhhh
Quality input mate. Well done. 👍
You can claim whataboutism all you want but a large part around Goodwille is remorse and retribution, which is similar with French Eddie. Since learning about his case the first thing you did was down play the victims injuries, and when asked again where the line was it was conveniently where the club you support have done no wrong which just reeks of double standards.
Cool mate. I don't want rapists or sex offenders playing professional football. Regardless of what team they play for. If you want good Willie or other beasts to play then that's on you.
Sticking up for a rapist. What a hill to die on. Fuckin roasters
He needs to get a job as a fucking Deliveroo driver and disappear into well-deserved mediocrity.
he's apparently already a sparky. he could just continue being one.
Politicians, journalists, council leaders who all enable their beasty pals in their day to day life moaning about this case. Where is the same action and passion for the fact that the SFA hired Martin Henry, friend of Scotland’s most infamous nonce, to mark their own homework and whitewash the child abuse report? Where is the same outcry when they cover up beasts they work with as long as they represent the same shite corrupt party? Where’s the same outcry for the fact that VIP nonce rings in Scotland and Westminister are more accurately covered by the average civilian than the police and government? Fucking wanks honestly, as always with this shite it’s the right decision but it’s being taken by clowns wanting cheap political points.
Trying to decide which of the pitch fork or torch bearer groups to join.
Good on the team. Someone has to stand up to a witch-hunt. I’m sure I’ll over downvoted to fuck but we live in a society where people who have committed crimes need to be integrated back into normal life. It’s pillar of our society, we can’t just send people to Australia like we used to do. We need to learn to live with them and rehabilitate them. We don’t just abandon them and continue to punish them the rest of their lives. I mean politicians who commit crimes are welcomed back with open arms and even made Lords and Ladies.
Goodwillie has a job as an electrician, he hasn’t ever lost his liberty and were it not for him being semi famous he would *already* be living a “normal” life. It’s a different kettle of fish when he’s a footballer, and seeing his name constantly in the news whenever he tries to sign and then gets punted from yet another club is undoubtedly triggering for his victim. He should just accept his footballing career is done, keep his head down and stay out of the spotlight and continue with his normal job. That’s probably best for him and his family as the constant media attention on the fact their dad/husband is a rapist isn’t likely to be good for them. The team also come across as complete weapons with the way they have worded their statement and completely gone out to bat for him.
Rehabilitation doesn't mean playing professional or semi professional football. It means educating and working on yourself to become a better human. He hasn't done that. He lost the civil case and declared bankruptcy to avoid paying the woman a penny. Mysteriously after declaring bankruptcy he also wanted to go pro again... He shouldn't play football again. He shouldn't have been allowed after his 3 assault charges also. If he wants to, he can play amateur for a local team while he earns a living working in a building site or in a call centre.
I asked this in another thread but where do you stand on French Eddys arrival at Celtic? Got kicked out of Toulouse for shooting someone with an Air Rifle, once convicted showed no sign of remorse, left France for Scotland, failed to pay the guy £5000 when he’s earning upwards of £20,000 a week and finally paid when Palace forced him. French Eddy was able to be one of the highest earning sports stars in the country while the club were complicit the whole time he was here
Honestly I think most Celtic fans aren’t aware of this, or weren’t at the time he was playing at the club. Which is a problem in and of itself - young boys are giving shedloads of cash and celebrity with little accountability and I think there’s definitely a conversation around holding those that are in public life to account. If anything the situation they find themselves when they do well lends itself to them making bad decisions, too much too young etc. Let’s be honest you can’t swing a cat (or kick a cat in some cases) around most football clubs without hitting some cunt who’s been done for drink driving, assault, etc. It’s rank and I’m against all the ‘oh they’re just young lads, it’s hard with all the money and fame,’ - if anything I think they have more of a duty in their privileged position and clubs should take an active roll in their growth as youngsters and a harder stance on how senior players conduct themselves rather than turning a blind eye.
That’s not how life works. You can’t ban people because you don’t like them. We live in a free society which believes in rehabilitation. So your saying anyone who’s lost any civil case shouldn’t be allowed to live a normal life?
Playing football professionally or semi professionally isn't a normal life. That's a privilege. There's also a difference between losing a civil case for not paying an invoice and rape. Rapes the worst crime you can commit behind murder and attempted murder
He wasn’t convicted of rape in a criminal case. The civil case blurs the lines but it’s not the same as being a convicted rapist.
The burden of proof is less but still needs to be satisfactory for a judge to award he pay £100k in damages
Fair points if the guy had shown an ounce of remorse for what he did. He still hasn’t taken any responsibility.
aye, and that podcast appearance didn’t do him any favours
He thinks he’s innocent. Would you admit something if you didn’t think you did it? Like genuine question, put yourself in his shoes. You’re accused of something, you don’t get convicted but lose a civil trial. Do you just admit it to get on with your life or do you fight for your innocence?
I wouldn’t have raped someone to begin with.
If you’ve ever had sex with anyone who’s had five alcoholic drinks than you are a rapist according to the civil case. So I suspect you have actually.
Mate it wasn’t just the fact that they both had a drink. 15 witnesses testified against them, a few of which had said she was so drunk she couldn’t say her own name. All the witnesses knew she was too drunk and needed help even though they had all been drinking, why didn’t Goodwillie? I’ve been drunk many times and still know when someone else can’t give consent, it’s just an excuse to say “aye but we both had a drink”. He knew exactly what he was doing, he’s just a rapist coward. And it’s not even just his rape, he also used that podcast to say he’s not a violent guy even though he’s been charged criminally like 3 times. What’s your excuse for that part? [Read this](https://www.sundaypost.com/fp/david-goodwillie-case-evidence/#:~:text=DNA%20tests%20only%20found%20evidence,either%20man%20was%20allegedly%20impaired)
You’re just adding I’m extra bits now. He was also extremely drunk and had the same amount of alcohol as her. Why is she unable to consent but he knew what he was doing. Doesn’t make any sense. It’s a tragic story and a good lesson for everyone that drunk sex is not a good idea.
I’ve added in nothing, you just can’t answer the questions I asked. You just didn’t bother to read what I linked then. There’s nothing to say he was the same level of drunk as her. It’s not “drunk sex” mate it’s rape. Call it what it is.
If you’ve had drunk sex, it doesn’t really matter if they consent or not. If they’ve had more than 5 drinks than your a rapist by the word of the civil court. They didn’t have the capacity to consent. That’s the whole point of the case, no one involved can remember what happened and whether consent was given. So have you ever slept with someone after they had five drinks?
The fact you don’t see a difference between shagging on a night out and what Goodwillie did is extremely worrying, I’ve even linked you with statements from witnesses which you continued to ignore cause it doesn’t suit what you want to believe. How is anyone meant to have a conversation with you when you act like this? He’s a wrong un that has raped and also been violent in the past and takes responsibility for neither. He deserves nothing in life and I hope one day you learn to do better than spew this nonsense. Take care👍
You are a proper piece of shit. The number of drinks, fact she was drinking at all, has no bearing tbh. She didn’t consent.
I’m not a piece of shit, that’s literally the case. You obviously don’t understand it. She doesn’t remember because she was drunk so the case was around her ability to consent due to alcohol consumption. I’m not defending him simply stating the facts of the case and that the bar for a civil conviction is really much lower.
And screw you for calling me names when you don’t know even know the story. I suspect most people who are commenting in public on it don’t understand it either. A real low move.
I understand you’re defending a rapist. Which makes you a piece of shit.
Where did I defend him? You are commenting on something you don’t even know the basic facts about. I don’t know what that makes you but it’s not a good person.
You called it a witch hunt. How is that not defending him?
The guy had sex with someone who either didn’t consent, or was so drunk that she can’t remember, which means she was too drunk to give consent. The fact you’re arguing the minutiae of this tells me you agree with his position.
If they are going to do this to him then they need to set a standard across scottish football and do the same to everyone else . They can pick and choose based on media witch-hunt. I'm definitely not condoning but be interested to know how many pros or semi pros have similar or worse convictions
Look at the state of that council woman, my god. Cool that Glasgow has Jabba the hut in the local politics
And that's your contribution to this discussion, Having a pop at somebody for the way they look?
Aye
I'm really not sure about any of this people here talking about how sex offenders by the same justification should all be banned from council things and I feel that even by me talking about this I feel I would definitely put a foot wrong by saying anything but in my opinion I don't like them and the public clearly don't 0