There is a big story breaking in Australia this week about rugby player Matthew Johns. He was also a TV commentator, but due to a sex scandal that broke recently which involved him, he was removed from the Australian TV Nine Network indefinitely.

Johns went public to talk about the allegations on the Nine Network this week (part 1, part 2, part 3) and his interview is fascinating. When he sits down to talk to the reporter, before he ever says a word, his face ticks with many movements, one of which appears to be contempt. He actually appears to show contempt many times in this interview.

Several people from Australia have contacted me and are interested to know what I think so below I will share with you my personal opinion.

Read moreIn this interview, I see Johns as someone who is continually holding himself back, self-censoring and angry. Look at how tense his lips and body are. You can feel it just watching him. It’s palpable. Other times, he clenches his teeth, takes deep breaths, and pulls his lips in. He sighs heavily. We see his nose twitch upwards rapidly once or twice, too–all of which suggest anger. I suspect if you were to talk to Johns in private, he would be full of anger, not genuinely sorry for his actions and what happened that night, but sorry and angry that he was exposed and is being held accountable, at the very minimum, in the public eye. I also suspect there is more to this story than what we know right now.

Because of his anger, his apology comes off very weak and insincere. When we take responsibility for our actions, hold ourselves accountable, and are truly sorry, it is natural for anger to dissipate. Instead, with Johns, I see resistance, incredible resistance, and I don’t feel Johns is owning up to an apology, outside of empty words, which are easy to say. Giving a heart felt apology is entirely different.

At one point in the interview, Johns even says, “….my thoughts and my energies are directed towards my family, all the pain I’ve caused them.” It confirms for me the woman, who is at the center of this matter, isn’t truly a concern of his.

Johns doesn’t seem to show any anger at himself for his actions either. I would expect him to say he was angry at himself, if he was. There would be absolutely no reason to hide it. It would only support his apology, make it stronger and more believable, but it is oddly missing. And at the end of the interview when the reporter says he career is over, and he finishes speaking, he cries. I suspect he is crying for himself.

Also, when Johns talks, he hedges, stammers, searches for words, has long pauses and many false starts, because he is thinking as he speaks, instead of speaking from his heart about what he knows to be true. This behavior does not support honesty. It does not support that Johns is telling us what he truly believes, if you want my opinion.

When Johns say, “I take full responsibility… for the predicament I find myself in” watch as he finishes. There is this slight head shake afterward (no), which I suspect is a gut response–a subconscious response. But as he thinks about what he said consciously, you then see him nod slightly yes. It’s fascinating body language.

Notice how Johns doesn’t answer the reporter’s question here?

TG: How could she in going back to the room with two of you have ended up being a willing participant in a queue of blokes at the foot of the bed having sex with her?

MJ: Well, at the time, when we went back, I was totally unaware that other people were coming into the room. At the point that they did, I stepped away…. from it. Ugh………….In the statements that were made…. to the police…. it says that….. she encouraged players to come forward….. and then she actually………………….what she, she said “someone come forward and have sex with me”, um…..at which one player said he would…. and she said “no no, anyone but you” and pointed to me again, which I declined.

This is really confusing! He stepped out of the room at the point when other people entered? Earlier Johns said, “I was there on the night and I did see what happened and at no point did she object, at any stage, to what was going on.” How can he then make the latter statement, conclusively, if he stepped away at some point? Even more odd, he cites police report statements, yet in a weird twist, suddenly he is back to being in the room again. If he stepped away, then how could she point to him again, and how could he decline? How could he leave as soon as others came in unexpectedly, but still be there when she supposedly picked and chose her men (which is ridiculous)?

Johns story doesn’t make sense, and doesn’t follow chronological order of how we remember things. It’s is riddled with inconsistencies, which is a red flag. Was Johns there the whole time or not? Why does he refer to police statements instead of sticking to his memories?

Johns continues:

MJ: After I declined, I stepped out of the room, but I stepped back in to make sure that everything… was okay, that she was not under any distress…. and at no time was she under any distress.

Again, when did Johns step out? Before or after the other players arrived? I don’t believe he was the saint he is portraying himself to be that night. Notice the pauses, which indicate he is thinking on his feet, not talking from the heart.

TG: You see Matthew, most right-thinking people would be listening to you right now saying how could you have looked at that scenario and seen anything that was OK in it.

MJ: Morally, it’s not OK.

TG: She was 19 years old, she was naked, she was outnumbered, there was a very clear power imbalance in that room, wasn’t there?

A minute later:

TG: Isn’t there something in your mind, that says this is wrong, this is wrong on every level, this is a vulnerable woman, she wants more from this situation than we’re ever going to give her, and this is just wrong (time marker 7:47, video 1).

Watch Johns response before he even talks. He shakes his head no, and he gives another expression of contempt. Does that seem like he is sorry to you? As he responds, he wrinkles his nose very briefly, which is an expression of anger as well, repressed anger. Why does this make him angry? Why does he feel contempt?

More of the interview:

TG: You have a perfect opportunity right now to step up and send a message to other players about this culture. This is your opportunity Matt.

MJ: Tracey, I would say to players, if it’s a situation where . . . I’m just looking for the right words . . . if it’s a situation where……… things occur which are dangerous and they’re stupid and you make decisions that you most certainly will regret later, that at the time you give no thought to, but Tracey at the moment, as much as I love the game of rugby league and the people who play it, my thoughts and my energies are directed towards my family, all the pain I’ve caused them.

TG: And what about to this girl?

MJ: For the pain and the trauma that she’s felt out of all this and the embarrassment, I’m truly sorry. It’s caused a lot of pain and embarrassment to a lot of people.

Here the reporter gives Johns an opportunity to speak about his situation, and offers him a way to help others. Does his answer reflect any concern for the woman whatsoever? Does it expresses sorrow or regret for what happened to the woman here, or other women due to this sex culture among the athletes? Or does Johns show more concerned about himself and his love of rugby and the people who play it? You tell me….Notice he has to be prompted to think of the woman at all.

Johns talks about being afraid about this all coming out for seven years, and that when the reporter called him, it was a relief to “ending all the fear”. Why would he be so afraid if it was all consensual? If he did nothing wrong?

When the reporter asks the couple at the very end, what effect has all of this commotion had Johns and his wife, both of them look around and don’t answer for a notable amount of time. They obviously don’t want to discuss their true feelings, or they would have spoke right up. They didn’t know what to say (perhaps because they’ve been really angry?) and finally John’s wife spoke up, and talks about how they had to remove the children because they didn’t want them to be a part of it.

The interview continues:

TG: Well, you’ve lost your career to speak of, you came awfully close to losing your marriage, what do you do now?

MJ: Well, I’ve got to go away and make it up to my wife and make it up to my family, that’s where my priorities lay. As far as my career at Channel 9, that’s the furthest thing from my mind at the moment.

Johns tears up finally, because I suspect he realizes his career is over, and that is his pain. This is all about Johns and his family, not the woman who is the center of this. I just don’t believe Johns is sorry about what happened to her in any way, and I do not believe the woman had consensual sex with a group of rugby players by choice.

Notice at the end of the interview how Johns wife takes a minute before she defends him and says they have worked it all through (past tense) and are closer than ever before? But once she is finished talking, she abruptly walks off the set without him? Her body language and actions speak volumes louder than her words, don’t they? So do Matthew Johns.