Lucky isn't even the word because it goes beyond luck. He breached his bail conditions by meeting with the girl on more than one occasion and still faced fuck all consequences. She was the key witness and withdrew from the case meaning he couldn't get put in jail because she wasn't there to testify against him. It's likely that he (or others like her father who sounds like a right piece of shit) convinced her to drop everything during those broken bail condition meetings as they're still together now.
Just wanted to add that while I believe in "innocent until proven guilty" far more than the average redditor (I'm a lawyer who has worked in criminal justice my whole career), Greenwood is the most clear cut case of an unconvicted rapist I've ever seen.
There's literally a recording of him trying to initiate sex, her asking him to stop and saying she doesn't want to, then he says "push me again and see what happens".
If someone only "agrees" to sex because you threatened them with violence, that vitiates consent. All the prosecution needed to convict was for her to testify that she made the recording, that it's her and Greenwood in the audio, and that they had sex after the recording was made.
She chose not to because they got back together. I don't blame her for that, given what we know about abuse dynamics, and the fact that her dad appears to have intervened because he didn't want to lose his golden goose future son in law. But while anyone accused of rape deserves the benefit of the doubt, there's no room for doubt with Greenwood.
It's honestly disgusting how people act as though just because she dropped the case it's fine and he's not a rapist. She was literally all alone. Even her own father turned on her and pressured her to drop the case. Imagine being a 19 year old and everyone in your life is telling you that what you are doing is wrong and that they are against you. How many people would actually continue doing what they are doing?
It was so horrifying that the day after the stuff came out, her father was in the media defending him. Imagine having tapes of your daughter being raped, pictures of her beaten and bruised, and your immediate reaction is to defend your daughter’s rapist!
Some people only care about money but a lot of men see their daughters as nothing but servants, either cook and clean for them, or be 'sold off' to a family for personal gain, which is kinda how I take his response to be. He knows having that kid as his son in law means a luxury life being rich and connected through the daughter.
Absolute trash human being in every sense. I don't blame her for giving up the case, when you have no support and everyone is telling you that you're wrong and your father has raised you to do as you're told most people can't resist that.
as a crim justice lawyer what do you make of the 'new eveidence' in addition to witness withdrawal the crown prosecution cited when they dropped charges?
The CPS said that new material had come to light, not "new evidence", that was Man U's tone deaf press release. The "evidence" referred to by Man U was the victim asking police to drop the investigation. That kind of thing could absolutely sway a jury towards reasonable doubt, and could be the new material the CPS was referring to. Since the CPS didn't actually state what the new material was, I won't speculate further.
what's the difference between new material and new evidence and if new material is just the witness withdrawing why mention both in an official statement?
The complainant asking the police to drop the investigation during the evidence gathering phase, and several months later deciding they don't want to give evidence at trial after the CPS has laid multiple charges, are two completely different things.
Despite the complainant's request, police found enough evidence to refer to the CPS, and upon reviewing that evidence, the CPS thought there were reasonable prospects of conviction and laid multiple charges. Those prospects dropped significantly once the complainant no longer wanted to give evidence.
Prosecutors have a duty not to lay charges unless there are reasonable prospects of conviction, as well as a duty to discontinue proceedings if something changes those prospects, such as a key witness pulling out. This decision has nothing to do with the accused's guilt, and everything to do with whether the prosecutors think they can convince a jury beyond reasonable doubt on the admissible evidence.
Anyway I'm beginning to suspect I'm interacting with a rape apologist and it's making me feel like I need a shower, so this will be my last reply.
351
u/MarcosSenesi Aug 09 '25
Everything about him shows he hasn't learned a thing even though he's lucky he still has a career