|
|
Post by toughatthetop on Dec 19, 2015 13:09:33 GMT 1
Good to see whatever happened he's decided not to come no place in our club for paedophiles
|
|
|
|
Post by Auldnick on Dec 19, 2015 14:21:53 GMT 1
|
|
|
|
Post by edinlivi on Dec 19, 2015 20:31:24 GMT 1
He did something stupid?
He nonced on a few young girl.. that sort of behaviour is unacceptable. I do not want that sort of filth at the club. We are a team that is grossly lacking in public appeal, this will only exacerbate that image further.
Absolute no to signing him from me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Auldnick on Dec 19, 2015 23:41:47 GMT 1
If you read the article he engaged in exchanging lewd photos of himself, with underage girls and is apparently sincerely sorry for his actions. He didn't molest anyone. He was a naughty boy that got caught. His behaviour was unacceptable, he was dealt with and has promised to behave himself.
I'm not saying sign him, I'm saying the article is interesting and I agree with it.
So, what sort of filth do you want at the club?
|
|
|
|
Post by edinlivi on Dec 20, 2015 0:08:40 GMT 1
If you read the article he engaged in exchanging lewd photos of himself, with underage girls and is apparently sincerely sorry for his actions. He didn't molest anyone. He was a naughty boy that got caught. His behaviour was unacceptable, he was dealt with and has promised to behave himself. I'm not saying sign him, I'm saying the article is interesting and I agree with it. So, what sort of filth do you want at the club? What sort of filth do I want at the club? None.. Everything that we do as a club is a PR disaster. Whilst I like Declan Gallagher (I think he's probably our best player..) I think the re-signing of him brought unnecessary spotlight onto the club. Yet again, even being associated with Thomson has attracted bad publicity towards the club. We, as a club, just need to keep our heads down and steer clear of negative publicity. |
|
|
|
Post by Auldnick on Dec 20, 2015 0:15:16 GMT 1
So you disagree with the idea that there is no such thing as bad press?
|
|
|
|
Post by edinlivi on Dec 20, 2015 0:20:12 GMT 1
So you disagree with the idea that there is no such thing as bad press? Yes. I entirely disagree with that statement. How can the combination of re-signing a suspected felon, having a convicted drug dealer pulling the strings behind the scenes and being linked with a footballer who sends indecent images to girls of the age of 12/13/14 (!?) not be considered as bad press? As I said, PR disaster at Livingston. |
|
|
|
Post by Auldnick on Dec 20, 2015 0:22:58 GMT 1
Livingston FC - the club that gives you a second chance and offers rehabilitation.
|
|
|
|
Post by edinlivi on Dec 20, 2015 0:27:36 GMT 1
Livingston FC - the club that gives you a second chance and offers rehabilitation. As no other club would.. |
|
|
|
Post by jonsnow on Dec 20, 2015 1:49:37 GMT 1
Made up story by EEN.
|
|
|
|
Post by liviman on Dec 20, 2015 10:26:31 GMT 1
If we sign him then I will not renew my season ticket. There are lines & this signing would cross the line for me
|
|
|
|
Post by livilion on Dec 20, 2015 16:40:18 GMT 1
We weren't trying to sign him in the first place and they've made a U turn saying he's turned us down rather than admit they were wrong/lied. Journalists, eh?
|
|
|
|
Post by liviman on Dec 20, 2015 17:43:26 GMT 1
Even the Livi for Life Trust backed this guy unbelievable they sure didn't canvass support before talking to the media.
|
|
|
|
Post by Auldnick on Dec 20, 2015 18:14:57 GMT 1
Livingston FC - the club that gives you a second chance and offers rehabilitation. As no other club would.. Have you read the article I linked...while no other club is mentioned by name, it states there were others. Back to not wanting any kind of filth at the club....rhetorical questions for you....how old were you when you first "copped a feel"? How old was the other party involved? What would have happened if you had been caught by either set of parents? How many people would still be allowed to attend matches or be involved with the club in any way shape or form if your zero tolerance stance was to be upheld? |
|
|
|
Post by bobafett on Dec 22, 2015 2:33:05 GMT 1
....rhetorical questions for you....how old were you when you first "copped a feel"? How old was the other party involved? What would have happened if you had been caught by either set of parents? How many people would still be allowed to attend matches or be involved with the club in any way shape or form if your zero tolerance stance was to be upheld? You seem to be incredibly far from the mark, this was not some innocent teenage guy who has being hauled over the coals for having a consensual relationship with someone the same age as them or even the sort of misunderstanding that could be attributed to Graham Rix i.e you are at a Nightclub and you meet a girl whom you have a reasonable defence of assuming is 18 years old given the circumstances. Thomson was 20 years and the girls were 12 and 14 and he sent them "lewd" pictures and asked them to reciprocate. He had known the 12-year-old from the age of six, therefore its premeditated paedophilia as he what he was attempting to and to whom. It would seem your "anything goes" tolerance stance suggests you think his actions are perfectly acceptable, which is very worrying to say the least?! Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2009263/Craig-Thomson-banned-Hearts-sending-vile-pictures-schoolgirls.html#ixzz3v0Ymexao |
|
|
|
Post by Auldnick on Dec 23, 2015 0:20:19 GMT 1
According to the article I posted he was 17 or 18. If that is inaccurate then clearly I was misinformed.
I don't have an "anything goes" stance, he was wrong to do what he did, however I believe that if someone is punished for a crime for which they show remorse and recognise they were wrong, once that punishment has been served then they have a right to earn a living. I would also say this, I often think the punishments handed out are too lenient but they are what they are. All I am trying to highlight is that none of us are 100% innocent in our lives, anyone who says otherwise is a liar or deluded, or both. That being the case what gives any of us the right to be "holy wullies?
I'm also not advocating we sign him, just that if we were I'm not sure I'd be as outraged as others. If there was no remorse or recognition of wrongdoing then I would agree wholeheartedly that we shouldn't.
|
|
|
|
Post by toughatthetop on Dec 23, 2015 10:38:04 GMT 1
There is crimes that are wrong but how he never got the jail I don't know worst crimes 1, murder ,2 child abuse and rape followed by housebreakings
|
|
|
|
Post by gustav on Dec 23, 2015 11:55:10 GMT 1
You have to ask Why Craig Thompson wanted to Stay with his junior club for the rest of the season training 2 nights a week .
Instead of playing full time in the Championship .
I think this shows the mentality of him .
Could have signed full time till end of season but chose to stay Junior
|
|
|
|
Post by Auldnick on Dec 23, 2015 18:35:48 GMT 1
You seem to be incredibly far from the mark, this was not some innocent teenage guy who has being hauled over the coals for having a consensual relationship with someone the same age as them or even the sort of misunderstanding that could be attributed to Graham Rix i.e you are at a Nightclub and you meet a girl whom you have a reasonable defence of assuming is 18 years old given the circumstances. Thomson was 20 years and the girls were 12 and 14 and he sent them "lewd" pictures and asked them to reciprocate. He had known the 12-year-old from the age of six, therefore its premeditated paedophilia as he what he was attempting to and to whom. It would seem your "anything goes" tolerance stance suggests you think his actions are perfectly acceptable, which is very worrying to say the least?! Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2009263/Craig-Thomson-banned-Hearts-sending-vile-pictures-schoolgirls.html#ixzz3v0Ymexao Incidentally...the bit I highlighted...are you saying this is okay? Because it reads like you would give someone a "slap on the wrist" for being a naughty boy for doing this....but it isn't okay. But I can guarantee millions of guys the world over have gotten away with it. Also, what about signing someone from a country where the age of consent is lower than ours & would be considered paedophilia in this country but not in theirs? |
|
|
|
Post by toughatthetop on Dec 24, 2015 9:19:21 GMT 1
A long shot but maybe his agent got wind of burchill getting the sack
|
|
|
|
Post by bobafett on Dec 24, 2015 13:41:21 GMT 1
Incidentally...the bit I highlighted...are you saying this is okay? Because it reads like you would give someone a "slap on the wrist" for being a naughty boy for doing this....but it isn't okay. But I can guarantee millions of guys the world over have gotten away with it. Also, what about signing someone from a country where the age of consent is lower than ours & would be considered paedophilia in this country but not in theirs? If a 13 year old does something with his equally aged girlfriend then I would argue that they should not be treated in the same category as an older person doing the same thing with someone several years than them and not of the lawful age. As for people who may have committed what we would consider abuse in this country but deemed OK in their local culture, then no I wouldn't want them at the club as if someone gets theirs jollies off of 12yr old kids then they have no place in decent society let alone a football club. I assume, however, you would be happy having pedo's at the club and letting them near your children? |
|
|
|
Post by Auldnick on Dec 24, 2015 14:46:08 GMT 1
Paragraph 1: I would agree with you but it is still wrong...I was also thinking about situations where a 16 year old is seeing a 15 year old...again it is wrong but if they have been seeing each other since they were both underage is it any worse once one turns 16?
Paragraph 2: I would agree with this too but I wasn't thinking as low as 12 when I asked the question. I was thinking about Holland as they have top quality players and I was thinking theirs was 14 but in fact it is 16... However it is apparently legal to have sex with someone 12-16 years old, regardless of your age as long as it is consensual. Which falls into the scope you mentioned. So, yes I agree with you.
Paragraph 3: Your assumption would be wrong, I abhor paedophilia at least as much as you do; my argument is not so much about the crime but about the person having served their punishment, shown remorse, recognised the serious wrong they have done and given assurances that it won't happen again. IMO any person should be given a chance to prove themselves as changed characters. According to the article I linked earlier Thomson has done that, so I agree with Graham Spiers comments.
|
|
