For more than three years, Thomas Partey played for Arsenal after being accused of very serious sexual offences.

“You can’t get away from Arsenal,” says one of the women who made allegations against him, referencing the huge impact of the Premier League club with fans all around the world.

She watched him play knowing that this was a choice the club had consciously made; to let him play on despite the huge legal and moral questions about how appropriate it was for Partey to continue to represent the club.

Partey, 32, left Arsenal on the expiration of his contract on June 30, having made 167 appearances for the club he joined in October 2020 from Atletico Madrid for a fee of £45million (now $61m).

Four days later, he was charged with five counts of rape and one count of sexual assault. The alleged offences are reported to have taken place between 2021 and 2022 and relate to three women. Partey denies all the charges and his lawyer, Jenny Wiltshire of Hickman and Rose, said in a statement her client welcomed “the opportunity to finally clear his name.”

Arsenal are a club that takes pride in its adherence to the rules, for example the financial laws which govern the game. It is one of the core principles of the club.

They are not the first football club at which a player has been accused of sexual offences and they will not be the last. The court process will decide whether he is guilty or not but questions are now being asked about how Partey’s former club handled the accusations against the midfielder, and the impact of their decisions: on fans of the club and the women who complained.

Partey could not be named publicly under UK law until he was charged, while those who report alleged sexual offences are entitled to anonymity for life. That is also why comments are turned off on this article. But the world of social media does not play by the same rules.

Every time Partey played for Arsenal, one alleged victim says she received online abuse. Sometimes it was directed at her; other times, it was people talking in general and derogatory terms about Partey’s accusers.

“I would frequently get messages from fans,” she says. “They’d send me pictures of him playing or scoring… I would get death threats, rape threats, people saying they’d set me on fire. If he scored, for example, the abuse would be worse.”

In this report, The Athletic can detail:

• In August 2021, Partey was reported to police for the first time.
• In September 2021, Arsenal were contacted by one woman to make them aware of the traumatic experiences she said she had with Partey.
• Arsenal were also subsequently contacted by the police to inform them that Partey was being investigated for serious sexual offences.
• Arsenal were aware that the Crown Prosecution Service — which decides whether cases should be prosecuted — was in the process of making its charging decision when they entered into talks with Partey about a new contract earlier this year.

Arsenal said in a statement: “The player’s contract ended on June 30. Due to ongoing legal proceedings, the club is unable to comment on the case.”

Here, The Athletic examines what Arsenal knew when, and whether, realistically, based on legal guidance, they could have done anything differently.

Should they have continued to play Partey? Were there other options? Why did they enter in discussions about extending his contract earlier this year? And how did that make people feel?

Partey was first reported to police in 2021. The complainant’s next step was to inform his club of the allegations.

“It’s Arsenal,” she reasoned. “They won’t just ignore it.”

She initially wrote to the club’s safeguarding team, who passed her on to the legal department.

Arsenal’s response was that they were following all the requisite safeguarding legislation, given she was not under 18.

She also alerted the English Football Association, which gave a similar response and said her claims fell outside of the FA’s safeguarding remit. When contacted by The Athletic, the FA said that on account of the ongoing and live criminal investigation, it is not in a position to comment.

In her dialogue with Arsenal, which took place over phone and email, she occasionally felt that those she engaged with — including some of the club’s senior figures — did not show an appropriate degree of sympathy.

Arsenal were later informed by the Metropolitan Police that Partey was being investigated for serious sexual offences. Throughout the remainder of Partey’s time with Arsenal — and their contract negotiations earlier this summer — the club were aware that there was a possibility charges would be issued.

Despite the club telling the alleged victim they were taking the matter “extremely seriously”, Partey continued to play for Arsenal — and was promoted via their media channels. In the days following her initial complaint to the club, he appeared prominently on a number of social media posts.

🔙 in the squad 😊

👋 @Thomaspartey22 #ARSNOR pic.twitter.com/TPXNlmytU7

— Arsenal (@Arsenal) September 11, 2021

This continued intermittently over the seasons that followed. While Partey’s involvement in promotional and marketing materials did appear to reduce, his continued presence in the team meant he never disappeared entirely from view. At international level, he also represented Ghana at the 2022 World Cup.

Arsenal’s stance never shifted. Partey continued to play a prominent role at Arsenal; when he was first arrested in July 2022, and when the case was passed to the CPS in December 2024.

“It felt so disheartening… even when the police specified that they had made the allegations clear to the club, and how serious they (the alleged offences) are,” says one woman.

Arsenal’s decision to offer Partey a new contract is arguably what has raised most questions.

In October 2020, Partey signed a five-year deal that made him one of the club’s highest earners. That deal was set to expire this summer, and the expectation had been that he would leave the club on a free transfer, especially given the added complication of the allegations and the risk he could soon be charged. As the end of his contract approached, however, his role in the first team remained prominent.

Last season, Partey made 52 appearances across all competitions. In May 2025, manager Mikel Arteta confirmed his desire for Partey to remain at the club.

“Yeah,” said the Arsenal manager when asked if he wanted to retain Partey. “In regards to Thomas, consistency-wise, it’s been his best season. I think the way he’s played, performed, his availability has been exceptional, and he’s a really important player for us.”

It was not the first time Arteta had been publicly supportive of Partey. In October 2022, after Partey scored against Tottenham Hotspur, Arteta told TNT Sports: “For what he’s been through, and the injuries, and for the effort he’s put in this week to be available for the team, I’m so happy for him, he deserves it.”

These remarks appear emblematic of the attitude of the football side of the business. As one senior member of staff remarked in 2022, “We have to believe him, he is our player.”

Partey celebrates with his Arsenal team-mates in April 2025  (Alex Pantling/Getty Images)

For some fans, however, the issue is not so black and white. When a player faces such serious allegations, irrespective of the strength of the claims or denials, it causes a moral dilemma. Should that player continue to wear the shirt until the matter is resolved?

Then, in April, The Athletic broke news of Arsenal’s discussions with Partey over a new contract. On June 4, Arsenal confirmed on their website that “discussions are ongoing”.

News of a potential extension provoked anger and disappointment from some supporters. The fan group Arsenal Supporters Against Sexual Violence wrote an open letter to the club in November 2024, “regarding the widespread issue of tolerating footballers facing sexual offence allegations within the game we love.” It attracted 9,000 signatories. The group also protested outside the Emirates Stadium ahead of games.

Throughout this process, a number of Arsenal staff have been torn or disappointed about the club’s response. When Arsenal stated they were in contract talks with Partey, employees reached out to The Athletic to express disbelief and disappointment, adding that they felt they were not alone in their concerns.

For one of the alleged victims, the decision to try to extend Partey’s deal came as no surprise. For her, it was a reflection of Arsenal’s attitude over the previous three years.

But, ultimately, Arsenal could not come to an agreement with Partey. He left the club on the expiration of his contract on June 30.

Within four days of his departure, he was charged with serious sexual offences. But at the time the charges became public, he was still listed on the club’s official website as an Arsenal player.

Arsenal have faced considerable scrutiny for continuing to play Partey during this period. As part of the writing of this story, The Athletic sent the club a number of questions. These included:

• When were Arsenal made aware of the allegations?
• What did Arsenal’s internal process entail?
• Were the women’s team consulted at all?
• Was any decision made regarding reducing Partey’s media obligations?
• Who made the decisions to continue playing Partey and enter into negotiations over a contract extension?

Arsenal declined to answer, citing the ongoing legal proceedings.

Alex Clarke, a senior employment lawyer at Onside Law, explains that opting to take action against a player accused of serious sexual offences would not be straightforward under current UK legislation.

“Even in cases involving the most serious allegations and understandable calls for players to be suspended, the way the standard Premier League playing contract is worded makes this difficult for clubs,” says Clarke.

“The standard Premier League contract has been collectively agreed with the PFA (Professional Footballers’ Association, the players’ union) over time and, as a result, contains some fairly player-friendly clauses. In terms of suspension, clubs can only suspend a player for a maximum of two weeks on full pay. There is no automatic right to withhold pay for any period of suspension or to extend the suspension beyond two weeks.”

Extending the suspension beyond the initial fortnight would need to be mutually agreed with the player — rather unlikely if said player maintains his innocence.

This situation differs from a standard employment contract. “The world of football generally doesn’t mesh well with employment law, and this is a very stark example,” adds Clarke.

Partey playing for Arsenal against Brentford in February 2023 (David Price/Arsenal FC via Getty Images)

As things stand, Premier League clubs do not have the power to suspend players without pay in cases of alleged severe misconduct, and changing that would require a renegotiation with the PFA.

Arsenal would also have given consideration to the fundamental legal principle that Partey is innocent until proven guilty.

“Arsenal also owed a duty of care to Partey as his employer and may have felt that any action they took against him would have undermined that duty, particularly as any suspension could be seen as Arsenal publicly implying that they consider him to be guilty,” explains Clarke. The club also needed to balance this against the duty of care it owed to its other employees, who may have felt uncomfortable around someone suspected of such serious offences, as well as safeguarding concerns that come with such serious allegations.

Although Arsenal may not have had the contractual right to suspend Partey without pay, the club confirmed to police that they had looked into the allegations, according to documents seen by The Athletic.

There is also a lack of clear guidance for clubs in these circumstances. Lisa Nandy, the UK’s Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, expressed concern this week on the Sports Agents podcast that clubs do not have a “standard approach” when “very, very highly paid” players face claims of sexual assault.

After former Manchester City defender Benjamin Mendy was charged with rape and sexual assault in August 2021, he was suspended without pay from September 2021 until June 2023. Mendy was later cleared of all charges. In 2024, a judge determined that Mendy was entitled to the majority of his unpaid salary from City — everything except the amount owed during the five months he spent in custody — which came to around £8.5m.

Had Arsenal taken action against Partey — and if he were later cleared — they could be financially liable. There would also be the reputational cost of punishing a player for a crime of which they were ultimately not guilty.

Instead, Arsenal opted to continue to play and promote a player facing such serious allegations.

There is another important question worth asking, however: did they have to play him? Football is a squad game — many players are regularly left out and their omission does not result in legal action. The likes of Mesut Ozil and Pierre-Emerick Aubameyang have previously spent protracted spells excluded from the team, seemingly without any significant consequence.

Was Partey’s ability as a footballer — and his value as an asset — given greater consideration than the moral and ethical implications of continuing to play him?

“There is no obligation on a club to pick a player for any match,” says Clarke. “For highly skilled employees like footballers, clubs are likely to be subject to an implied employment law duty to provide them with work to allow them to maintain their skills. However, as long as Arsenal allowed Partey to train and continued to pay him a wage, they would probably be satisfying that obligation.

“There are some FIFA regulations which may have given Partey a technical right to terminate his contract for what’s called ‘sporting just cause’ if Arsenal refused to play him at all during a full season, but this sort of claim would probably not have been in Partey’s interests given the nature of the allegations against him and the risk of making these more public.

“They may (also) have had in mind the perception this could have created that they believe Partey to be guilty in circumstances where he has maintained his innocence.”

In this instance, Arsenal may feel they have observed the letter of the law. Their compliance remains intact.

But Arsenal have other key tenets: culture, community, diversity and forward-thinking. This is a club that celebrates its women’s team, the current Champions League holders. It welcomes a diverse fanbase into its stands. Have those facets of the club’s identity been served in this case? On the club’s career page, it states that they “do the right thing (even when no one is looking)”.

When it comes to the handling of the Thomas Partey allegations, everyone is now looking.

Legally, Arsenal may feel they have done the right thing. Morally and ethically, there are still questions to be answered.

(Top photos: James Gill – Danehouse/Getty Images; design: Eamonn Dalton)