Premier League footballer arrested on suspicion of child sex offences

It's been confirmed he plays for Everton.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/footb...=breaking-news

If the police are going to mention his age they may aswell name him. There's only two 31 year olds in Everton's squad

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Bloop

If the police are going to mention his age they may aswell name him. There's only two 31 year olds in Everton's squad

---

Yes anyone can google squad ages. They should now say as it is not fair on the one who is completely uninvolved.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Bloop

If the police are going to mention his age they may aswell name him. There's only two 31 year olds in Everton's squad

---

His name's been on Twitter a lot apparently and, if it's right, he's no stranger to south Wales - I think what happened was that the police did not name his club, but Everton have subsequently confirmed he plays for them.

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-s...-idUKKBN2EQ071

It’ll all come out in the wash.
Be careful though…Jimmy Tarbuck/Bill Cosby to name a few
- innocent 😇
Time will tell Bob

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the other bob wilson

His name's been on Twitter a lot apparently and, if it's right, he's no stranger to south Wales - I think what happened was that the police did not name his club, but Everton have subsequently confirmed he plays for them.

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-s...-idUKKBN2EQ071

---

The wife of "a 31 year old everton football player with links to south wales" has denied he's been arrested for anything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sunnysideup

It’ll all come out in the wash.
Be careful though…Jimmy Tarbuck/Bill Cosby to name a few
- innocent ��
Time will tell Bob

---

Was Bill Cosby innocent?

We’ve got to remember that whoever it is should be treated innocent until proven Gylfi

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zowhore

We’ve got to remember that whoever it is should be treated innocent until proven Gylfi

---

:hehe:

The more money you’ve got determines how guilty you are it seems?
OJ got off - best lawyers money could buy
Oscar Pistorious not so lucky
Prince Andrew never met the girl in question
Harry Rednapp’s dog was guilty 😂

.?

31 and a regular international.

Gilfy is the only one at that age that plays international football, other one at that age is Delph who obviously doesn't play.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zowhore

We’ve got to remember that whoever it is should be treated innocent until proven Gylfi

---

Well played.

Can hear the chants now, when we finally play the Jack's.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-57899127

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ita...ews/amp/125552

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cardiff55

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-57899127

---

"The 31-year-old man,who has not been named for legal reasons, was detained on Friday by Greater Manchester Police."

Just a reminder for anyone wanting to share the name: don't.

https://global247news.com/2021/07/19...-offences/amp/

Innocent until proven guilty!!
I’m not sure how the Police can actually police what’s said online?
Especially after my dealings with ActionFraud
Complete waste of fecking time
Look what happened a few years back with the Ryan Giggs super injunction trying to gag the press.
Social media won.
If the authorities can only prosecute one solitary racist for the hate crimes directed at Rashford and Co after they’re unlucky penalty misses ( and that was after the retard posted online under his own name pmsl) then what chance of successful prosecutions over speculation?
Good luck with that.
We don’t even know if it’s true or what he’s actually accused of?
There is hope however….a serial shagger and adulterer (proven) with assault charges thrown in to spice up proceedings and you could still manage your country 🤔

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RonnieBird

https://global247news.com/2021/07/19...-offences/amp/

---

Wind up website!!!

Steve Days site isnt it with quotes from football presenter Adam Brown???!!°. Isnt he the UKIP bloke from Merthyr.?

FFS.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by surge

"The 31-year-old man,who has not been named for legal reasons, was detained on Friday by Greater Manchester Police."

Just a reminder for anyone wanting to share the name: don't.

---

It's Gylfi

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by surge

"The 31-year-old man,who has not been named for legal reasons, was detained on Friday by Greater Manchester Police."

Just a reminder for anyone wanting to share the name: don't.

---

I thought legal reasons also meant releasing any information from which his identity could be derived.
Whomever it is, he's not Gylfi until proven otherwise.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Bloop

I thought legal reasons also meant releasing any information from which his identity could be derived.
Whomever it is, he's not Gylfi until proven otherwise.

---

No. The law stops the name from being reported as he hasn't been charged, but they are free to use other details to describe who it is.

Like how the mail said a 31 year old married Everton player who regularly plays for his international team was arrested by North Manchester police. I don't know why you or the other guy is trying to pretend otherwise, there's no legal ramifications for any of us by saying it's quite obviously Gylfi that's been arrested. No-one is saying he's guilty.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

Was Bill Cosby innocent?

---

Free man I think , what did Tarby do ?/

https://davidbanksmedialaw.com/2011/...w-to-avoid-it/

The Contempt of Court Act 1981 swept this aside and created the concept of ‘active’ proceedings. Proceedings are active when someone has been arrested; a warrant has been issued; they have been orally charged or an information has been laid. If none of these things has happened then contempt evaporates as a problem – publish whatever you like.

3. OK, proceedings ARE active, what should I avoid

Publishing something which creates a substantial risk of serious prejudice or serious impediment to those proceedings.

4. What does that mean?

Well, that’s a little subjective, but case law has shown the following to be a problem:

*Photos or descriptions where identity is at issue – ie the defendant claims it was not him who committed the crime and the prosecution has eyewitnesses whose testimony has to be tested by way of an ID parade. They must rely on their memory of the offence, not a photo helpfully published by the media. This action cause the record fine for contempt (so far) £80,000 for the Sun and £20,000 for Kelvin MacKenzie as editor.

*Assumptions of guilt – in crime reports, police have arrested A man, not THE man.

*Previous convictions – not normally allowed in as evidence, so don’t go informing the jury of them.

*Blackening a defendant’s character – if the prosecution do it in front of the jury, that’s fine. Just don’t do it yourself as they await trial.

5. Does this mean a media blackout about a crime if proceedings are active?

No. The CCA 1981 was drafted in response to the Sunday Times coverage of the Thalidomide scandal, which had been found in contempt under the old common law. The ST took an appeal all the way to the European Court of Human Rights, which ruled that the common law contempt, as applied, was in breach of the ST’s right to freedom of speech. So the CCA 1981 includes a Section 5 defence of ‘discussion of public affairs’. So, for example, a euthanasia trial does not shut down all mention or discussion in the media of the issues of euthanasia. But such discussion should avoid direct commentary on the trial.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Llandaff Blue

No. The law stops the name from being reported as he hasn't been charged, but they are free to use other details to describe who it is.

Like how the mail said a 31 year old married Everton player who regularly plays for his international team was arrested by North Manchester police. I don't know why you or the other guy is trying to pretend otherwise, there's no legal ramifications for any of us by saying it's quite obviously Gylfi that's been arrested. No-one is saying he's guilty.

---

I was only querying what the police are or are not allowed to say about the person arrested. I'm not pretending anything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sunnysideup

The more money you’ve got determines how guilty you are it seems?
OJ got off - best lawyers money could buy
Oscar Pistorious not so lucky
Prince Andrew never met the girl in question
Harry Rednapp’s dog was guilty 😂

---

You've just reminded me of a topical (in 1994) knock knock joke

"Knock knock"
"who's there?"
"OJ"
"OJ who?"
"Get sworn in, you're on the jury!"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RonnieBird

https://global247news.com/2021/07/19...-offences/amp/

---

Are you Pedro Martinez, Ronnie? I recognise the writing style.

“He’s defiantly been nicked; all my contacts on Merseyside have confirmed this all day.

You could add, resisting arrest to the charge sheet based on that bit of reporting.

By the way, how did you vote on Browny's Foxy Knoxy poll, Yes or No?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sunnysideup

Innocent until proven guilty!!
I’m not sure how the Police can actually police what’s said online?
Especially after my dealings with ActionFraud
Complete waste of fecking time
Look what happened a few years back with the Ryan Giggs super injunction trying to gag the press.
Social media won.
If the authorities can only prosecute one solitary racist for the hate crimes directed at Rashford and Co after they’re unlucky penalty misses ( and that was after the retard posted online under his own name pmsl) then what chance of successful prosecutions over speculation?
Good luck with that.
We don’t even know if it’s true or what he’s actually accused of?
There is hope however….a serial shagger and adulterer (proven) with assault charges thrown in to spice up proceedings and you could still manage your country 🤔

---

Until proven Gylfi. Keep up mun 😂

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by surge

https://davidbanksmedialaw.com/2011/...w-to-avoid-it/

The Contempt of Court Act 1981 swept this aside and created the concept of ‘active’ proceedings. Proceedings are active when someone has been arrested; a warrant has been issued; they have been orally charged or an information has been laid. If none of these things has happened then contempt evaporates as a problem – publish whatever you like.

3. OK, proceedings ARE active, what should I avoid

Publishing something which creates a substantial risk of serious prejudice or serious impediment to those proceedings.

4. What does that mean?

Well, that’s a little subjective, but case law has shown the following to be a problem:

*Photos or descriptions where identity is at issue – ie the defendant claims it was not him who committed the crime and the prosecution has eyewitnesses whose testimony has to be tested by way of an ID parade. They must rely on their memory of the offence, not a photo helpfully published by the media. This action cause the record fine for contempt (so far) £80,000 for the Sun and £20,000 for Kelvin MacKenzie as editor.

*Assumptions of guilt – in crime reports, police have arrested A man, not THE man.

*Previous convictions – not normally allowed in as evidence, so don’t go informing the jury of them.

*Blackening a defendant’s character – if the prosecution do it in front of the jury, that’s fine. Just don’t do it yourself as they await trial.

5. Does this mean a media blackout about a crime if proceedings are active?

No. The CCA 1981 was drafted in response to the Sunday Times coverage of the Thalidomide scandal, which had been found in contempt under the old common law. The ST took an appeal all the way to the European Court of Human Rights, which ruled that the common law contempt, as applied, was in breach of the ST’s right to freedom of speech. So the CCA 1981 includes a Section 5 defence of ‘discussion of public affairs’. So, for example, a euthanasia trial does not shut down all mention or discussion in the media of the issues of euthanasia. But such discussion should avoid direct commentary on the trial.

---

You seem like brilliant company.

https://youtu.be/hZXxmhok1AU

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

Was Bill Cosby innocent?

---

ABSOLUTELY NOT.

Well here's what the Attorney general has to say about it, he's a tad more reliable a source than keyboard barristers!
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world...ces/ar-AAMmtn0

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cityhammer

Well here's what the Attorney general has to say about it, he's a tad more reliable a source than keyboard barristers!
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world...ces/ar-AAMmtn0

---

The police put it out the arrested footballer was thirty one and then Everton posted that one of their players had been suspended. Apparently, there are only two players at Everton who fit the bill so to speak, so good luck with trying to get people to stop trying to find out which one of the pair it is and then putting it online. Once something like social media becomes available for large percentages of the population, you won't begin to stop people using it in the manner it has been in this case unless there is direct intervention by the authorities into what can be posted on the various platforms and there's no sign at all yet that is going to be happening anytime soon.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the other bob wilson

The police put it out the arrested footballer was thirty one and then Everton posted that one of their players had been suspended. Apparently, there are only two players at Everton who fit the bill so to speak, so good luck with trying to get people to stop trying to find out which one of the pair it is and then putting it online. Once something like social media becomes available for large percentages of the population, you won't begin to stop people using it in the manner it has been in this case unless there is direct intervention by the authorities into what can be posted on the various platforms and there's no sign at all yet that is going to be happening anytime soon.

---

Narrows to one Bob, as Delph isn't a regular international (sure that was a description in one of the write ups)

Leaves one name.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the other bob wilson

The police put it out the arrested footballer was thirty one and then Everton posted that one of their players had been suspended. Apparently, there are only two players at Everton who fit the bill so to speak, so good luck with trying to get people to stop trying to find out which one of the pair it is and then putting it online. Once something like social media becomes available for large percentages of the population, you won't begin to stop people using it in the manner it has been in this case unless there is direct intervention by the authorities into what can be posted on the various platforms and there's no sign at all yet that is going to be happening anytime soon.

---

Thats besides the point, the point being that if anyone names him, the poster and the message board could potentially be prosecuted for contempt! and we know it has happened in the past in cases like Ched Evans where people named the woman, so its to like it doesnt happen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cityhammer

Thats besides the point, the point being that if anyone names him, the poster and the message board could potentially be prosecuted for contempt! and we know it has happened in the past in cases like Ched Evans where people named the woman, so its to like it doesnt happen.

---

What you might get is a token prosecution or two, but the genies out of the bottle in this instance.

This is how the sun have got round it. Can't see any problems with this...

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">This is simply f***ing disgusting. <a href="https://t.co/KLCLCXW6kF">pic.twitter.com/KLCLCXW6kF</a></p>&mdash; Football365 (@F365) <a href="https://twitter.com/F365/status/1417744803547303936?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 21, 2021</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Apparently slept with a 15 year old prostitute, they've tried to blackmail him for it and he's said no, so they've gone to the old bill.

Like I said, apparently.

Probably a million other stories doing the rounds as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dembethewarrior

Apparently slept with a 15 year old prostitute, they've tried to blackmail him for it and he's said no, so they've gone to the old bill.

Like I said, apparently.

Probably a million other stories doing the rounds as well.

---

Presumably you meant "allegedly" as that might keep you out of trouble in a libel action.