Until proven guilty? Forget about it

The ancient principles of our jurisprudence, such as “innocent until proven guilty”, must now be followed with a disclaimer consonant with new morality. Take your pick out of “However, if…”, “Unless, of course,…” or “Except in cases involving…”.

Following the ellipses in each case will be any transgression that violates new morality taking precedence over old legality. For example, any suggestion that a man had sex with a woman without her explicit permission may invalidate presumption of innocence, whatever the evidence.

Even if the transgressor can’t be tried in a court of law, or has been tried and found not guilty, or has served some time in prison but was then exonerated, he is then submitted to another trial, that by woke mob. And such judges neither show any mercy nor recognise any extenuating circumstances.

Mason Greenwood, one of the most promising English footballers, has found that out the hard way. His case was first tried in social media, specifically the posts coming from his allegedly wronged girlfriend.

She uploaded an audio where she tells a man she calls Mason: “I don’t want to have sex”. Apparently, her partner is reluctant to take no for an answer. He replies: “I don’t give a f*** what you want … I’m going to f*** you, you t*** … I don’t care if you want to have sex with me … I asked you politely, and you wouldn’t do it, so what else do you want me to do?” After a long pause, the man says: “Push me again one more time and watch what happens to you.”

The girl cried foul, Greenwood was arrested and charged with rape, assault and controlling behaviour. He was immediately suspended by his club, Manchester United, and dropped by his principal sponsor, Nike.

However, the Crown Prosecution Service dismissed all charges against Greenwood a few months later, stating he had no legal case to answer because the “alleged victim requested the police to drop their investigation” and “new material came to light”.

Greenwood had been denying all charges anyway, although he did admit he had “made mistakes”. Neither the CPS nor the alleged victim nor Greenwood himself proffered any lurid details, but, assuming that the audio was authentic, Mason isn’t the kind of chap you’d want your daughter to have an unchaperoned date with.

He’s probably a nasty bit of work, and his powerful libido may indeed sometimes compel him to take shortcuts through the rigamarole of courtship. Personally, I don’t know whether he ever overstepped the line separating forceful wooing from rape. Maybe he did or maybe he didn’t.

Then again, I have no illusions about footballers, much as I like watching them work. Few of them are ever likely to be candidates for canonisation, and the last time I looked none of them had a pair of wings on his back.

Most of these young lads grew up in abject poverty, surrounded not by good books and Debrett’s etiquette manuals but by crushed beer cans and even discarded syringes. Those who make it as professional players manage to rise above all that and devote themselves full time to mastering their trade.

The best of them, such as Greenwood, become multi-millionaires in their teens, and not all of them can handle such windfalls with grace and dignity. When wealth isn’t accompanied by culture and refinement, it may become an invitation to loutish behaviour and all sorts of excesses.

I’ll spare you a long list of footballers who had brushes with the law or even went to prison, but take my word for it: the list is long. One player, ‘Drunken’ Duncan Ferguson, even served three months in the poky for what he did during a game. (He headbutted an opponent.)

But after Ferguson paid his debt to society, the case was closed and all was forgotten. He went on playing and subsequently coaching, basking in the warm glow of admiration emitted by his fans.

Greenwood, on the other hand, wasn’t tried and found guilty. On the contrary, all charges against him were dismissed. Whatever his character might be (I suspect it isn’t of sterling quality) or whatever pangs of conscience he may feel about his “mistakes” (I doubt he feels any), his case ought to be closed too. But it isn’t.

You see, Ferguson transgressed only against the man whose nose he smashed with what’s affectionately called a ‘Glasgow kiss’. Greenwood, on the other hand, trespassed against the whole ethos of woke rectitude. And to this crime no presumption of innocence applies.

Once the CPS dropped the case, Manchester United tried to reincorporate Greenwood into the squad. To no avail: women’s groups backed up by likeminded organisations screamed bloody murder, or rather bloody “sexual assaults occasioning actual bodily harm”. As far as they were concerned, Greenwood was guilty as no longer charged.

Manchester United had to send the player out on loan to mid-table Spanish club Getafe. The shrieks followed him there, but they were slightly less shrill. Greenwood managed to play until the end of the season, although another English footballer playing in Spain, Jude Bellingham, did call him a rapist during the match.

Now Manchester United has sold Greenwood to a top French club, Marseilles, where he scored twice in his first game. But the weeping and wailing and the gnashing of teeth have resumed with gusto – the French woke brigade must have more stringent standards of probity than the Spanish equivalent.

By all accounts, Greenwood will continue to play in France for a while, although he may have to plug up his ears permanently. But he has admitted ruefully that he’ll never play for England again. He also qualifies for Jamaica through his parents, but that’s not quite the same thing, is it?

Now let’s imagine for the sake of argument that, instead of the sex assault Greenwood is no longer charged with, he’d be no longer charged with another crime, say armed robbery or GBH. I’d venture a guess that, once the CPS dropped the case, it would be forgotten with a few weeks. Greenwood would continue to score for his club and country, with happiness all around.

We are looking at a dual classification of crimes, one put forth by the legally instituted authorities, the other by the mob. England’s ancient law has clearly defined standards of proof and, until these are met, the accused person is presumed innocent.

The woke mob has no such standards, and neither is it capable of showing mercy. Once a person – especially a man – is accused of any fashionable -ism or -phobia, he is guilty even if he can prove his innocence (which in the English Common Law he wouldn’t be required to do). If the mob can’t put him in prison, it’ll do all it can to destroy his career. No appeals are allowed.

This is worrying by itself, but the real problem is that it’s not going to stop here. Once the mob has gathered strength, and it’s getting bigger and stronger by the day, it’ll widen its reach. The very essence of the English Common Law will come under fire, with the mob constantly trying to make it irrelevant by overriding its verdicts.

When that happens, Britain will no longer be Britain. I’m assuming of course that she still is, which may not be a safe assumption.