Offside Trust excludes Andy Woodward, is the net closing

Andy Woodward Accused of Rape

It has just being reported in National press that Andy Woodard has been excluded from the offside trust, NOT simply retired or stepped down as previously reported…

 

Woodward excluded from the Offside Trust

Comments below reported on the Daily Mail website about Woodward being excluded from the offside trust….

He [Andy Woodward] is no longer an ambassador and has effectively been excluded from the offside trust. A reconciliation is not on the cards.”   – Strong words…

and

Woodward declined to comment…” – Odd as he has always loved the limelight.  Why has he gone quiet now!

and

Andy has sent text messages and so has his partner [Zelda Worthington] but they have had no response,’ the source added

and

The source added that Woodward was still unsure over why he was no longer involved [in the Offside trust]. ‘I don’t think he knows why this has happened,’ they said. ‘He feels let down by it. He feels isolated.’

Offside Trust
Offside Trust without Woodward

Woodward is fully aware of the reasons..!

Woodward is a disgraced ex Lancashire Police officer, he was SACKED, for an ‘alleged‘ rape that has ‘strangely’ gone without prosecution, yet he was still sacked.   His dismissal was watered down to inappropriate sexual relationship with a crime victims sister!  We fully support he is ‘innocent until proven guilty‘ however, without a trial and being proven innocent,  Woodward will always be an ‘alleged’ rapist.

Since this allegation, another victim has come forward and there has been evidence of other further rapes and sexual assaults from Woodward’s own partner (Zelda Worthington, who now supports him!), but still no arrest or prosecution.  Is this Lancashire protecting their own (ex) Police officer?

Woodward has even been accused by his own partner (Zelda Worthington) of making ‘inappropriate’ sexual comments about a female MINOR (her own daughter) who live at his home, yet, Woodard is still published as some sort of hero, no thanks to Daniel Taylor of the Guardian who has made some pretty nasty comments about our FACTUAL comments about Woodward on this website.

It is only a matter of time before the press report the full story.  It is a pity the reporter, Daniel Taylor TURNED A BLIND EYE.  Daniel Taylor of the Guardian was FULLY aware of these allegations but decided to ‘omit’ them from his ‘farcicle’ (opps, I mean article), he was clearly more interested in a good story rather that the truth and the victims of Woodward.

 

4 Comments

  1. Can’t agree more about the lovely Mr Taylor. Just recently picked up awards for this story yet ignoring many elephants in the room . He’s been very quiet on the whole thing for a while now

  2. What needs to be appreciated here is that the Guardian is a left-wing newspaper which prizes and prioritises diversity and community cohesion above all. “Rotherham Model”, industrial scale group/gang grooming is really a dagger to the heart of all they hold most dear. Large scale group arrests and charges are simply not reported by them

    https://www.westyorkshire.police.uk/news/29-defendants-charged-non-recent-child-sexual-offences

    Nor are major grooming trials

    http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/crime/how-100-men-were-able-to-prey-on-one-vulnerable-halifax-schoolgirl-for-two-years-1-7969702

    So they grab at any diversion as a drowning man would a lifebelt – they’ve done a big number on Adam Johnson and alleged abusers football generally, which on the face of it appears to amount to a number of coaches mostly already in the public domain; Rotherham, Rochdale, Keighley, Dewsbury, Halifax, Oxford, Derby, Aylesbury, Telford etc etc, it’s not.

    So Woodward coming out after he had been sacked accorded not only with the Guardian’s over-riding politically correct priorities but also Woodward’s – as a get out of jail card. Because who is going to look too closely into an alleged victim wrapped round with the mantle of abuse survivor? Not one of our community cohesion obsessed plod forces, or indeed the national MSM that’s for sure – and most especially not the Guardian.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*


WordPress spam blocked by CleanTalk.