It looks really bad, IMO. She's apparently willing to blow up an NDA and subject herself to a lawsuit over it, so?
I realize there are lots of scumbags out there and Partey may very well be one. However, I have also seen tons of cases of false claims from women looking to get a payday or hurt the guy that pissed them off. The "evidence" presented on social media looks very sketchy to me. I personally need more before I'm willing to condemn him. That said, I have no issue with the club seeking out a contingency because let's be honest, if innocent, Partey is gonna be lucky to play 60+% of our matches given his injury history in London.
Does the Premier league dole out suspensions for players, who have been accused of female assault? Deshaun Watson's ongoing problems in the NFL, would be a prime example, as they are waiting for the league's ruling, then the player's union appeal
Found the twitter account and, if what she's saying is true, then Partey should never play for the club again.
One of my best friends is a family practice lawyer 20+ years and I've learned over the years of conversations with him not to rush to judgement about these types of situations. When I read the above my first thought was "damn, chjoak must be a law dog too" or at least know one pretty well. Anyway, it takes a person who--every single day, deals with someone's worst day ever--to have this kind of perspective. Or it could just be that I've seen and read enough triggered social media posts over the years to know better than to react to something I know nothing about, except for the triggered social media post itself. Regardless, time will tell, despite its often a virtue that no one has time for these days.
Im not a "law dog" but I am a very logic driven individual that is drawn to proof/truth. The tweet in question comes across to me as an irrational ex looking to ruin a guy that pissed her off. If he is guilty, I hope he is punished accordingly but I have seen too many "vengeful ex" situations to immediately take a side without some sort of truth. What is presented in that tweet is not proof.
I have a law degree. But I'm not speaking from a legal perspective, as I don't practice in the UK and, thus, would not be speaking from any informed vantage point. I'm saying morally/ethically, it looks really bad. Again, I realize false accusations happen. But this woman got paid, signed an NDA, but then was willing to blow it up because she was angry that law enforcement was not taking anything seriously (apparently her NDA had a carve out regarding criminal investigation or something odd along those lines). That doesn't necessarily mean she's telling the truth, of course. But that's an awful lot to risk when being quiet would've been easier and more financially lucrative.
Right—there is really no material gain for this woman to do this. She’s certainly not going to benefit from the publicity. She will more than likely materially suffer as a result of this decision. This is kind of cheap to say in retrospect but Partey has always kinda given me weird vibes. And right as all this shit was going down he suddenly went off the deep end with some weird ass social media behavior—changing his name, religious conversion, marriage, etc. Guy should clearly not be in the club’s plans at this point. Depressing after how productive this club’s offseason has been.
A couple of weeks ago most Journos (and for that matter many members of this board) were quite reticent to use Partey’s name. I believe the reason stated was that the police had publicly identified the accused only as a premier league footballer who was likely heading to the World Cup and who was arrested in Barnet(?). And that using his name could very easily run afoul of the UK’s strict labor laws. Today y’all are using his name freely, which prompts me to ask this question: what has changed, other than the accuser going public with a Twitter post (which I haven’t read by the way and don’t really plan to)? Have the police published his name or charged him?
Well according to the latest news reports, one of the accusations against him has already been dropped. There are apparently still 2 being investigated.
So a charge was dropped, however my understanding is the twitter snapchat convo dump is due to the incident happening with the people involved being 10 days before UK law changed allowing UK police forces jurisdiction over crimes committed outside the UK. So I wonder if the charge that got dropped was the one that couldn't be prosecuted due to that UK law? In the twitter thread the woman also says people had worked out who she was already, and had received vile emails etc so thats why she felt she had nothing to lose coming out with this information. From what I have read this happened in Spain, so I wonder if he will be extradited for this.
I wouldn't take that claim too seriously, until we see some actual legal analysis The UK has extra territorial jurisdiction where a citizen or a resident commits a crime abroad, and can of course work together with Spanish authorities. It might be more usual to be charged where the crime was committed, but where both complainant and accused are in the UK, they can be prosecuted locally as I understand it. ETA - one allegation by one woman has been dropped. So as it stands police are investigating two separate incidents involving 2 women.
I did a short stint in criminal law in UK and with about a year in Family law now I basically don't believe anything anymore. Especially the the "public has a right to know" type accusations. I'm firmly in the camp of no sanctions without convictions camp at this point of my career. I've had too many fishy conversations with clients and OC to be comfortable with society's current trends. Been a party to payouts where innocence or culpability is basically impossible to prove and I've only been doing this for under 2 years. Hell I have client right now being rail roaded by her university on the basis of a 2 sentence complaint by a clear bad faith actor. I think the "why would she lie" camp grossly underestimates how people motivate themselves and the energy and conviction the emotional need to be right gives. In so many seperations it's not sufficient that a person feels like they don't want to be married to the other party. It's necessary that the other party be a bad person to justify the failing of the relationship.
What I do think organisations need to do is stop paying people hush money I get why it happens with celebrities, even when innocent, and why victims take the money - but the likes of Arsenal can end up with reputational damage where a claimant has been paid off, then more turn up (as has happened big style in US cases). We don't have firm confirmation of a payoff here, and we don't know if Arsenal knew about it, or whether they were involved in it - but IMO it is the kind of thing the club should run a mile from.
I've been practicing law for over 20 years now and have certainly seen my share of bald-faced liars---many of them clients. So I don't think I grossly underestimate anyone's ability to prevaricate.
Without knowing more, I'm reluctant to describe this as a payoff - the amount alleged is in this weird no man's land.
If the club had anything to do with hush money that would be one of the stupidest decisions/actions I ever heard of.
Other than that Mrs. Lincoln, how was the show? It’s not even orgs—athletes and celebs at all levels are handing out NDAs to every Insta thot that gets aboard the (literal and proverbial) boat. The defacto mode of interaction in sexual relationships with celebrities/athletes is that everyone is acting in bad faith. Sounds incredibly conducive to mental illness from my perspective. The commentary above isn’t meant to demean the integrity of the accuser in this case, just pointing out that essentially all hookups involving at least one famous person and one non-famous/social media famous person are effectively treated as sex work these days. Which necessarily involves a lot of legal hoops for all sides
We know that, for example, Fergie had all the bouncers in Manchester on United payroll. Recently, Szczesny and McKennie insinuated in a podcast that Juve bugged and tracked their cats. It’s not outside the realm of possibility that Arsenal get fixers involved on a case by case basis.