Eni Aluko and Drew Spence ‘were discriminated against by Mark Sampson’, FA apologise
/dnl.eurosport.com/sd/img/placeholder/eurosport_logo_1x1.png){kind=logo}
ByEurosport
Updated 18/10/2017 at 15:42 GMT
The FA have released a statement saying that they "sincerely apologise" to Eni Aluko and Drew Spence after "new evidence" was submitted to independent barrister Katherine Newton.
Eni Aluko
Image credit: Getty Images
The evidence was in relation to Aluko and Spence's allegations of racism against former England women's manager Mark Sampson.
The initial finding from Newton found no wrongdoing by Sampson, but the report was heavily criticised for Newton having failed to speak to many key witnesses, including Aluko.
Based on the updated report Newton "has now found that they were both [Aluko and Spence] subject to discriminatory remarks made by an FA employee."
In a statement FA CEO Martin Glenn issued the apologies but also pointed out that Newton concluded "that Mark Sampson was not racist".
/origin-imgresizer.eurosport.com/2017/09/21/2171440-45386210-2560-1440.jpg)
Mark Sampson
Image credit: Getty Images
FULL STATEMENT FROM MARTIN GLENN
"On behalf of The Football Association I would like to sincerely apologise to Eniola Aluko and Drew Spence.
"Based on new evidence submitted to independent barrister Katharine Newton, she has now found that they were both subject to discriminatory remarks made by an FA employee. This is not acceptable.
"In her final report Katharine Newton concluded that on two separate occasions Mark Sampson made ill-judged attempts at humour, which as a matter of law were discriminatory on grounds of race within the meaning of the Equality Act 2010. Katharine Newton did however conclude that Mark Sampson was not racist.
"She also concluded that there was no evidence to support the allegations that Eniola Aluko was subjected to “a course of bullying and discriminatory conduct” by Mark Sampson.
"Our ambition has always been to find the truth and take swift and appropriate action if needed. It was our decision to have the original, second and final investigation to ensure that due diligence was taken. It is regrettable that Eniola did not participate in the first external investigation as this would have enabled Katharine Newton to conduct and complete her investigation sooner.
"We will fully support the recommendations from the report."
Aluko, giving evidence to the Digital, Culture, Media and Sport select committee, responded; saying:
I feel vindicated and relieved Although I'm grateful to be here today, does it have to come to this? There's been an agenda to protect Mark Sampson, and an agenda to protect the FA's reputation. They were very keen to say there was no wrongdoing without looking at the video evidence. They were dismissive straight away in the first meeting. We didn't speak about specific itemised issues.
Scan me
Related Topics
Share this article
Advertisement
Advertisement