Cardiff City Forum



A forum for all things Cardiff City

Goodwillie!

Tue Jan 17, 2017 5:28 pm

Guilty in civil court.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-e ... e-38651041


A former Scotland international footballer and his ex-teammate have been ruled to be rapists and ordered to pay £100,000 damages despite never facing a criminal trial.

Re: Goodwillie!

Tue Jan 17, 2017 5:32 pm

The Cobra wrote:Guilty in civil court.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-e ... e-38651041

This is very dodgy road to go down

Re: Goodwillie!

Tue Jan 17, 2017 5:37 pm

Less proof of guilt is required and did she gets reputedly £100k compensation! Truly dangerous ground to go on. Doubt if it will go to trial, as no new evidence put forward. :old:

Re: Goodwillie!

Tue Jan 17, 2017 6:34 pm

Badwillie

Re: Goodwillie!

Tue Jan 17, 2017 7:57 pm

Another in a long line of talented Scottish players pissed their talent up against the wall.

Re: Goodwillie!

Wed Jan 18, 2017 11:42 am

:lol:
DreamWelsh wrote:Badwillie

Re: Goodwillie!

Wed Jan 18, 2017 12:00 pm

Goldigger. Pure and simple. Trying to sue for £500,000 originally. :roll:

In my day you woke up next to someone without fully remembering how you got there you just put it down to drunken high jinks or drunken mistake if she was a minger.

Also, how come the drunken state of the man never get taken into consideration? Seems to me women want equality only when it suits them.

Re: Goodwillie!

Wed Jan 18, 2017 1:10 pm

RV Casual wrote::lol:
DreamWelsh wrote:Badwillie

Bet he wishes he could change his name now :laughing6:

Re: Goodwillie!

Wed Jan 18, 2017 9:20 pm

polo wrote:Goldigger. Pure and simple. Trying to sue for £500,000 originally. :roll:

In my day you woke up next to someone without fully remembering how you got there you just put it down to drunken high jinks or drunken mistake if she was a minger.

Also, how come the drunken state of the man never get taken into consideration? Seems to me women want equality only when it suits them.



Exactly, don't complain when it comes to custody

Re: Goodwillie!

Wed Jan 18, 2017 9:26 pm

Gone are the days where you could pump a shit load of vodka down a bird then smash the guts out of her, you need to get them to sign a form these days to consent ffss

Re: Goodwillie!

Wed Jan 18, 2017 9:42 pm

DreamWelsh wrote:Gone are the days where you could pump a shit load of vodka down a bird then smash the guts out of her, you need to get them to sign a form these days to consent ffss

:lol:

Re: Goodwillie!

Wed Jan 18, 2017 9:51 pm

DreamWelsh wrote:Gone are the days where you could pump a shit load of vodka down a bird then smash the guts out of her, you need to get them to sign a form these days to consent ffss

:lol:

Re: Goodwillie!

Thu Jan 19, 2017 10:37 am

DreamWelsh wrote:Gone are the days where you could pump a shit load of vodka down a bird then smash the guts out of her, you need to get them to sign a form these days to consent ffss


Romance is dead, killed by hairy feminists.

Goodwillie is going to appeal the decision.

Re: Goodwillie!

Thu Jan 19, 2017 10:59 am

polo wrote:Goldigger. Pure and simple. Trying to sue for £500,000 originally. :roll:

In my day you woke up next to someone without fully remembering how you got there you just put it down to drunken high jinks or drunken mistake if she was a minger.

Also, how come the drunken state of the man never get taken into consideration? Seems to me women want equality only when it suits them.


If a man really feels that he did not give consent to sex because he was drunk then in law there is no reason why he can't make a compliant of rape or sexual assault.

I believe there have been a few case of where men have taken advantage of men in such circumstances.

I just wonder if you would have the same attitude if you woke up next to a bloke after a drunken night out, whether he was a minger or not?

I assume not so the principle is the same it is not how much you have had to drink which is the deciding factor it's whether you wanted to engage in sexual activity consensually.

Re: Goodwillie!

Thu Jan 19, 2017 11:19 am

Tony Blue Williams wrote:
polo wrote:Goldigger. Pure and simple. Trying to sue for £500,000 originally. :roll:

In my day you woke up next to someone without fully remembering how you got there you just put it down to drunken high jinks or drunken mistake if she was a minger.

Also, how come the drunken state of the man never get taken into consideration? Seems to me women want equality only when it suits them.


If a man really feels that he did not give consent to sex because he was drunk then in law there is no reason why he can't make a compliant of rape or sexual assault.

I believe there have been a few case of where men have taken advantage of men in such circumstances.

I just wonder if you would have the same attitude if you woke up next to a bloke after a drunken night out, whether he was a minger or not?

I assume not so the principle is the same it is not how much you have had to drink which is the deciding factor it's whether you wanted to engage in sexual activity consensually.


Bore me later Tony :sleepy2:

Re: Goodwillie!

Thu Jan 19, 2017 11:42 am

polo wrote:
Tony Blue Williams wrote:
polo wrote:Goldigger. Pure and simple. Trying to sue for £500,000 originally. :roll:

In my day you woke up next to someone without fully remembering how you got there you just put it down to drunken high jinks or drunken mistake if she was a minger.

Also, how come the drunken state of the man never get taken into consideration? Seems to me women want equality only when it suits them.


If a man really feels that he did not give consent to sex because he was drunk then in law there is no reason why he can't make a compliant of rape or sexual assault.

I believe there have been a few case of where men have taken advantage of men in such circumstances.

I just wonder if you would have the same attitude if you woke up next to a bloke after a drunken night out, whether he was a minger or not?

I assume not so the principle is the same it is not how much you have had to drink which is the deciding factor it's whether you wanted to engage in sexual activity consensually.


Bore me later Tony :sleepy2:


:lol: :lol:

Re: Goodwillie!

Thu Jan 19, 2017 11:42 am

DreamWelsh wrote:Gone are the days where you could pump a shit load of vodka down a bird then smash the guts out of her, you need to get them to sign a form these days to consent ffss


:lol:
Very poetically put mate!

Re: Goodwillie!

Thu Jan 19, 2017 1:03 pm

polo wrote:
Tony Blue Williams wrote:
polo wrote:Goldigger. Pure and simple. Trying to sue for £500,000 originally. :roll:

In my day you woke up next to someone without fully remembering how you got there you just put it down to drunken high jinks or drunken mistake if she was a minger.

Also, how come the drunken state of the man never get taken into consideration? Seems to me women want equality only when it suits them.


If a man really feels that he did not give consent to sex because he was drunk then in law there is no reason why he can't make a compliant of rape or sexual assault.

I believe there have been a few case of where men have taken advantage of men in such circumstances.

I just wonder if you would have the same attitude if you woke up next to a bloke after a drunken night out, whether he was a minger or not?

I assume not so the principle is the same it is not how much you have had to drink which is the deciding factor it's whether you wanted to engage in sexual activity consensually.


Bore me later Tony :sleepy2:


So typical can't answer the post so you use and insult :roll:

Re: Goodwillie!

Thu Jan 19, 2017 1:04 pm

OriginalGrangeEndBlue wrote:
polo wrote:
Tony Blue Williams wrote:
polo wrote:Goldigger. Pure and simple. Trying to sue for £500,000 originally. :roll:

In my day you woke up next to someone without fully remembering how you got there you just put it down to drunken high jinks or drunken mistake if she was a minger.

Also, how come the drunken state of the man never get taken into consideration? Seems to me women want equality only when it suits them.


If a man really feels that he did not give consent to sex because he was drunk then in law there is no reason why he can't make a compliant of rape or sexual assault.

I believe there have been a few case of where men have taken advantage of men in such circumstances.

I just wonder if you would have the same attitude if you woke up next to a bloke after a drunken night out, whether he was a minger or not?

I assume not so the principle is the same it is not how much you have had to drink which is the deciding factor it's whether you wanted to engage in sexual activity consensually.


Bore me later Tony :sleepy2:


:lol: :lol:


:roll: :roll: :roll:

Re: Goodwillie!

Thu Jan 19, 2017 1:11 pm

Key here is the stone cold sober doorman saying she was beyond drunk and had to leave. The offer of a taxi home....why didn't he drop her home as he told the doorman he was going to do?

We can all argue about the old days and drunken fumbles but this is a bit different he's seen her drunk being taken out of a club and made his move.

Re: Goodwillie!

Thu Jan 19, 2017 9:04 pm

polo wrote:
Tony Blue Williams wrote:
polo wrote:Goldigger. Pure and simple. Trying to sue for £500,000 originally. :roll:

In my day you woke up next to someone without fully remembering how you got there you just put it down to drunken high jinks or drunken mistake if she was a minger.

Also, how come the drunken state of the man never get taken into consideration? Seems to me women want equality only when it suits them.


If a man really feels that he did not give consent to sex because he was drunk then in law there is no reason why he can't make a compliant of rape or sexual assault.

I believe there have been a few case of where men have taken advantage of men in such circumstances.

I just wonder if you would have the same attitude if you woke up next to a bloke after a drunken night out, whether he was a minger or not?

I assume not so the principle is the same it is not how much you have had to drink which is the deciding factor it's whether you wanted to engage in sexual activity consensually.


Bore me later Tony :sleepy2:

:lol:

Re: Goodwillie!

Thu Jan 19, 2017 10:04 pm

polo wrote:
Tony Blue Williams wrote:
polo wrote:Goldigger. Pure and simple. Trying to sue for £500,000 originally. :roll:

In my day you woke up next to someone without fully remembering how you got there you just put it down to drunken high jinks or drunken mistake if she was a minger.

Also, how come the drunken state of the man never get taken into consideration? Seems to me women want equality only when it suits them.


If a man really feels that he did not give consent to sex because he was drunk then in law there is no reason why he can't make a compliant of rape or sexual assault.

I believe there have been a few case of where men have taken advantage of men in such circumstances.

I just wonder if you would have the same attitude if you woke up next to a bloke after a drunken night out, whether he was a minger or not?

I assume not so the principle is the same it is not how much you have had to drink which is the deciding factor it's whether you wanted to engage in sexual activity consensually.


Bore me later Tony :sleepy2:


:lol:

Re: Goodwillie!

Thu Jan 19, 2017 10:06 pm

Tony Blue Williams wrote:
OriginalGrangeEndBlue wrote:
polo wrote:
Tony Blue Williams wrote:
polo wrote:Goldigger. Pure and simple. Trying to sue for £500,000 originally. :roll:

In my day you woke up next to someone without fully remembering how you got there you just put it down to drunken high jinks or drunken mistake if she was a minger.

Also, how come the drunken state of the man never get taken into consideration? Seems to me women want equality only when it suits them.


If a man really feels that he did not give consent to sex because he was drunk then in law there is no reason why he can't make a compliant of rape or sexual assault.

I believe there have been a few case of where men have taken advantage of men in such circumstances.

I just wonder if you would have the same attitude if you woke up next to a bloke after a drunken night out, whether he was a minger or not?

I assume not so the principle is the same it is not how much you have had to drink which is the deciding factor it's whether you wanted to engage in sexual activity consensually.


Bore me later Tony :sleepy2:


:lol: :lol:


:roll: :roll: :roll:


I can just see where he's coming from.

Re: Goodwillie!

Fri Jan 20, 2017 12:50 am

polo wrote:
Tony Blue Williams wrote:
polo wrote:Goldigger. Pure and simple. Trying to sue for £500,000 originally. :roll:

In my day you woke up next to someone without fully remembering how you got there you just put it down to drunken high jinks or drunken mistake if she was a minger.

Also, how come the drunken state of the man never get taken into consideration? Seems to me women want equality only when it suits them.


If a man really feels that he did not give consent to sex because he was drunk then in law there is no reason why he can't make a compliant of rape or sexual assault.

I believe there have been a few case of where men have taken advantage of men in such circumstances.

I just wonder if you would have the same attitude if you woke up next to a bloke after a drunken night out, whether he was a minger or not?

I assume not so the principle is the same it is not how much you have had to drink which is the deciding factor it's whether you wanted to engage in sexual activity consensually.


Bore me later Tony :sleepy2:



Lool