‘Disappointed’ Marlon King maintains his innocence and will appeal
London, 01 Nov 2009: Marlon King, the Wigan Athletic forward, could appeal against his conviction and 18-month prison sentence for sexual assault and actual bodily harm and his consequent dismissal by his club.
King, 29, was found guilty yesterday over an incident which took place in a London nightclub in December, while he was on loan from Wigan Athletic to Hull City. Wigan announced their intention to cancel his contract shortly afterwards.
King had previous convictions for violence against women, fracturing another player’s cheekbone, and receiving a stolen BMW – the only offence for which he had previously been jailed, for five months, in 2002.
But Tony Finnegan, King’s agent, told Sky Sports News that King – whose defence was based on an assertion of mistaken identity – refuses to acknowledge his guilt and intends to appeal. “I understand the lawyers are looking at the files and the transcripts to launch an appeal,” Finnegan said.
A successful appeal against the conviction would have to show that it was “unsafe”, either because of the discovery of fresh evidence or a misdirection by the judge during his summing-up. In areas of alleged mistaken identity, the judge’s direction to the jury about identification evidence must be extremely careful. Guidelines known as the “Turnbull directions” specify warnings against accepting identification evidence too uncritically and without realising the potential for mistakes on the part of honest witnesses. However, a legal source told The Times that the trial judge is highly experienced and most unlikely to have slipped up.
An appeal against the sentence would have to show that it was excessive or wrong in principle.
“No one saw this coming in light of the evidence,” Finnegan had earlier told BBC Radio 5 Live. “He’s very, very disappointed – because clearly, as he said in his evidence, it’s mistaken identity. He didn’t do that.
“He’ll be devastated, sitting in a cell with someone tonight. But he’s a grown man; he’s been there before and he’ll take it on the chin. I asked Marlon and he said ‘I’m not guilty, Tony – I didn’t do it. I want the British justice system to find me not guilty’.”
Finnegan was critical of the Professional Footballers’ Association, whose deputy chief executive, Bobby Barnes, had claimed King had brought the situation on himself. “I thought Bobby Barnes’ comments were out of order,” Finnegan said. “I thought Bobby should have been alongside him at the court to see how it developed during the week. What’s the union there for? To support their members. Why wouldn’t they support him? They’re supporting other players.”
Wigan intend to follow correct procedure in dispensing with King’s services. “We have to follow the rules and regulations, which means we will have to give him 14 days’ notice that his contract will be cancelled,” Dave Whelan, the Wigan chairman, said. “He is absolutely sacked – we will not tolerate football players who get sent to jail for 18 months. As far as we are concerned, he is finished with football at Wigan Athletic.”
Finnegan was unhappy about Wigan’s intentions. “You can’t just dismiss someone because he has been convicted,” Finnegan said. “There are procedures. He has the right to resume his playing career.”
Wigan’s decision is likely to mean the end of King’s not particularly glittering Premier League career, but Finnegan said hewas “110%” confident that King would find another club at some level.
“He’s employed in football to score goals,” Finnegan said. “Anyone who’s played with Marlon King will tell you he’s a great professional. When he trains he works hard, he’s a leader and he’s a winner, and he scores goals – he’s good at it. If he fails again he’ll go and suffer the consequences.”
Support for Finnegan’s view came from Arsene Wenger, the manager of Arsenal. “When he has paid his sentence, of course you would consider signing someone like that,” Wenger said. “Otherwise you would never forgive anybody anything. When he has paid his sentence, some clubs, if they want, they will take him.”
Southwark Crown Court was told that King had been celebrating both his wife’s pregnancy and scoring a winning goal hours earlier when he was repeatedly “cold-shouldered” by women revellers in the Soho Revue Bar in central London. King had lashed out in an outburst of “completely gratuitous violence” when a university student objected to his advances.
King claimed he was a victim of mistaken identity. But after hearing evidence from several witnesses, including a football coach who insisted King was the assailant, the jury found him guilty by a 10-2 majority.
Source: http://www.timesonline.co.uk
Leave a Reply