Jump to content

The Annexed Goodwillie Thread


Recommended Posts

On 20/07/2023 at 17:03, ICTChris said:

I don't think Goodwillie or Robertson ever paid the money to Denise Clair that the court ordered.  Both declared bankruptcy following the ruling.  I don't know what impact that has on your requirements to pay a civil ruling.  The rumour at the time was that he waited until 2022 to sign for Raith as he was out of bankruptcy proceedings so he could keep more money.

It's also worth saying that Goodwillie and Robertson offered Denise Clair money to drop her legal case before the civil case.

The fact she turned down their offer of hush money is one that seems lost on many people defending Goodwillie. It has never been about financial gain or even financial compensation for Denise Clair. She has always wanted justice for the crime that was committed against her and to my knowledge she personally has never received a single penny following her horrendous ordeal.
That combined with what is written in the transcripts leaves me with little doubt DG and DR are absolutely guilty of Rape. There is little defence when you factor in the levels of intoxication of both sides. I don’t care what she did or didn’t say at the time (if anything) there is no way anyone that intoxicated can give meaningful consent, hell you’d be lucky if she knew where she was or who she was with at that point. They knew she was in that state and still admit to having sex with her.  
 

like most reading it makes my skin crawl.  I was utterly disgusted when our board brought Shame on RRFC and signed this individual, the response from people involved within Raith Rovers to stop him ever playing for us was the only light during a very dark period.  
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Pie Of The Month said:

I think with McCormick along with him having served his sentence and shown remorse the victims' family said he'd served his time and everyone deserved to move on.

Looks like Glasgow City Council are looking into doing a NLC with Clyde and turfing Glasgow United out of their council owned facilities.

 

I see the city council have now issued a statement which will open a big can of worms. You can't ban people from public sports facilities because their face doesn't fit 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, AyrExile said:

I see the city council have now issued a statement which will open a big can of worms. You can't ban people from public sports facilities because their face doesn't fit 

NLC already threatened it to Clyde. The precedent has already been set

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AyrExile said:

I see the city council have now issued a statement which will open a big can of worms. You can't ban people from public sports facilities because their face doesn't fit 

I think hiring (and publicly backing) a rapist is a very good reason to kick a club out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AyrExile said:

I see the city council have now issued a statement which will open a big can of worms. You can't ban people from public sports facilities because their face doesn't fit 

The umbrella of duty of care to their customers will cover cans of any variety.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AyrExile said:

I see the city council have now issued a statement which will open a big can of worms. You can't ban people from public sports facilities because their face doesn't fit 

Agreed, banning people because their face doesn’t fit is not where we want to be as a society.

On the other hand, banning people who have been found guilty of a crime by judges in a court seems entirely reasonable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, stevoraith said:

Agreed, banning people because their face doesn’t fit is not where we want to be as a society.

On the other hand, banning people who have been found guilty of a crime by judges in a court seems entirely reasonable. 

Generally, I don’t think we should be starting to ban people found guilty of things from community venues. That doesn’t exactly feed into rehabilitation. The Goodwillie story is obviously completely different to that though - given the community aspect of a football team and their terrible statement on the matter. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, No_Problemo said:

Generally, I don’t think we should be starting to ban people found guilty of things from community venues. That doesn’t exactly feed into rehabilitation. The Goodwillie story is obviously completely different to that though - given the community aspect of a football team and their terrible statement on the matter. 

Agree with that mate. 
 

I should have written “found guilty of certain crimes”. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Broken Algorithms said:

Worth remembering that for all the bleating about how he "just wants to support his family" he's still had a chunk of this figure below from our accounts.

Screenshot_20230723-133351.thumb.png.cbd9c5c56ba923212181535c11548580.png

People don’t know how to do basic research do they? they just want to defend him to the hill because he wasn’t and I quote “ wasn’t found guilty in a criminal court” 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Zen Archer (Raconteur) said:

Fucked if I'm quoting it, the BBC Tweet on the subject casts a huge doubt on the morals and levels of education of some of the population of Scotland.

As a manager of a leading non-league club's digital comms, I have the misfortunate of seeing some fairly dreadful takes from footballers. They'll likely play against Goodwillie. What is it with male footballers?

Edited by Josuke Higashikata
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Josuke Higashikata said:

As a manager of a leading non-league club's digital comms, I have the misfortunate of seeing some fairly dreadful takes from footballers. They'll likely play against Goodwillie. What is it with male footballers?

And a club in our league liked Goodwillie's spiel. Pathetic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Broken Algorithms said:

Worth remembering that for all the bleating about how he "just wants to support his family" he's still had a chunk of this figure below from our accounts.

Screenshot_20230723-133351.thumb.png.cbd9c5c56ba923212181535c11548580.png

There’s a good chance he doesn’t given he was once earning that every single month and still ended up bankrupt. 

Edited by parsforlife
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, AyrExile said:

You can't ban people from public sports facilities because their face doesn't fit 

Glasgow City Council is under no obligation to provide sporting facilities to private football clubs, whether those football clubs happen to be run by registered charities or not. If those football clubs choose to make decisions that can endanger the public, such as signing unrepentant rapists, then the council has a duty of care to the public to do something about it.

"Face doesn't fit", jesus fucking christ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Mr Meeker said:

This thread needs to be kept on topic. That girl was raped. The rapist is now trying to make money from this. Football is irrelevant 

Football is entirely relevant here tbh. No one cares if he gets a job in Tesco. He just shouldn't be allowed back into the sport. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...