Ched Evans

[Blue2]

Interesting reading https://www.crimeline.info/case/r-v-che ... edwyn-evan

Don't see why someone should admit a crime, even after conviction, if they didn't do it.

[kinkylola]

Interesting reading https://www.crimeline.info/case/r-v-che ... edwyn-evan

Don't see why someone should admit a crime, even after conviction, if they didn't do it.

article taken down?

[Blue2]

Sorry, missed a letter
https://www.crimeline.info/case/r-v-che ... dwyn-evans

[Slim]

This thread really made me depressed the first time around but thanks Slim, Hutch, Nigel and Lev for bringing some sense into the thread.

I work at uni where there is a strict non-racism policy. If I had been caught calling students racist words, I don't see a future for me in uni. I burnt that bridge. It's what I trained for my entire life by first going to regular school for twelve years and then at uni for 5 more before I started my PhD. That doesn't mean I have a right to stay at uni. It's back to square one for me. That doesn't mean I'm a bad person, it just means that I'm incompatible with uni for the rest of my life. I can probably work somewhere else and make a decent living, have a family, and so on. So can Evans, even if he doesn't play football again.

Having been thrown out of a country for unknowingly breaking a law, does that mean my wife loses the trust of every potential university employer in the world? Or, as happened, did a top tier university see fit to consider that against her ability to do the job? Technically, as a Finance Director any breach of trust or criminal offence, really should see her banished on your logic?

In your own field, if you are faculty or a researcher and guilty of racism, how would every university in the world know about this unless you underwent trial by media as Evans is now? And even if it was racism, good faculty will always get another chance because of the economic potential they bring to a university. A racist is a racist, but if he has the potential to find a cure for cancer, most Universities will overlook that for the greater good and their own personal enrichment.

But even 2nd rate faculty can improve a 3rd rate university! See the link here......surely it's the same thing.....the economic potential helps a potential employer see past the bad a person may have done, and most balanced people accept that people make mistakes and learn from them.

And this is the exact situation we have here. A guy has made a mistake, been punished for it, and now is being subject of a witch hunt when he tries to resume his career.

I'm not even interested in the argument about his guilt, that's secondary and will be dealt with in time, but the argument that he should be treated the same as other professions is bollocks and based on petty jealousy that he will retain some degree of his former earning power. Doctors/teachers have a specific position of responsibility towards the people in their care, of course they should be struck off if they fundamentally breach that trust. The guy kicks a football around for a living, and that profession as far as I know, poses no more risk to the general public, as striking off a window cleaner, a postman, or a joiner!

Are you welcome back in that country? I know in Australia there was a guy who got convicted of GBH, he was English born but came out here when he was a baby. He never bothered getting naturalised and as such, was kicked out of the country and back to England, barred forever from entering Australia again. He had no family back there, no friends and never visited. It was insane to think that a crime he committed could have far reaching consequences isn't it? Luckily we're not after anything that extreme in this case are we? Are we really?

Honest question, should a rapist after serving his sentence be allowed to move in next door to his victim?

[Nigels Tackle]

This thread really made me depressed the first time around but thanks Slim, Hutch, Nigel and Lev for bringing some sense into the thread.

I work at uni where there is a strict non-racism policy. If I had been caught calling students racist words, I don't see a future for me in uni. I burnt that bridge. It's what I trained for my entire life by first going to regular school for twelve years and then at uni for 5 more before I started my PhD. That doesn't mean I have a right to stay at uni. It's back to square one for me. That doesn't mean I'm a bad person, it just means that I'm incompatible with uni for the rest of my life. I can probably work somewhere else and make a decent living, have a family, and so on. So can Evans, even if he doesn't play football again.

Having been thrown out of a country for unknowingly breaking a law, does that mean my wife loses the trust of every potential university employer in the world? Or, as happened, did a top tier university see fit to consider that against her ability to do the job? Technically, as a Finance Director any breach of trust or criminal offence, really should see her banished on your logic?

In your own field, if you are faculty or a researcher and guilty of racism, how would every university in the world know about this unless you underwent trial by media as Evans is now? And even if it was racism, good faculty will always get another chance because of the economic potential they bring to a university. A racist is a racist, but if he has the potential to find a cure for cancer, most Universities will overlook that for the greater good and their own personal enrichment.

But even 2nd rate faculty can improve a 3rd rate university! See the link here......surely it's the same thing.....the economic potential helps a potential employer see past the bad a person may have done, and most balanced people accept that people make mistakes and learn from them.

And this is the exact situation we have here. A guy has made a mistake, been punished for it, and now is being subject of a witch hunt when he tries to resume his career.

I'm not even interested in the argument about his guilt, that's secondary and will be dealt with in time, but the argument that he should be treated the same as other professions is bollocks and based on petty jealousy that he will retain some degree of his former earning power. Doctors/teachers have a specific position of responsibility towards the people in their care, of course they should be struck off if they fundamentally breach that trust. The guy kicks a football around for a living, and that profession as far as I know, poses no more risk to the general public, as striking off a window cleaner, a postman, or a joiner!

chedwin knew exactly what he was doing though

[Im_Spartacus]

This thread really made me depressed the first time around but thanks Slim, Hutch, Nigel and Lev for bringing some sense into the thread.

I work at uni where there is a strict non-racism policy. If I had been caught calling students racist words, I don't see a future for me in uni. I burnt that bridge. It's what I trained for my entire life by first going to regular school for twelve years and then at uni for 5 more before I started my PhD. That doesn't mean I have a right to stay at uni. It's back to square one for me. That doesn't mean I'm a bad person, it just means that I'm incompatible with uni for the rest of my life. I can probably work somewhere else and make a decent living, have a family, and so on. So can Evans, even if he doesn't play football again.

Having been thrown out of a country for unknowingly breaking a law, does that mean my wife loses the trust of every potential university employer in the world? Or, as happened, did a top tier university see fit to consider that against her ability to do the job? Technically, as a Finance Director any breach of trust or criminal offence, really should see her banished on your logic?

In your own field, if you are faculty or a researcher and guilty of racism, how would every university in the world know about this unless you underwent trial by media as Evans is now? And even if it was racism, good faculty will always get another chance because of the economic potential they bring to a university. A racist is a racist, but if he has the potential to find a cure for cancer, most Universities will overlook that for the greater good and their own personal enrichment.

But even 2nd rate faculty can improve a 3rd rate university! See the link here......surely it's the same thing.....the economic potential helps a potential employer see past the bad a person may have done, and most balanced people accept that people make mistakes and learn from them.

And this is the exact situation we have here. A guy has made a mistake, been punished for it, and now is being subject of a witch hunt when he tries to resume his career.

I'm not even interested in the argument about his guilt, that's secondary and will be dealt with in time, but the argument that he should be treated the same as other professions is bollocks and based on petty jealousy that he will retain some degree of his former earning power. Doctors/teachers have a specific position of responsibility towards the people in their care, of course they should be struck off if they fundamentally breach that trust. The guy kicks a football around for a living, and that profession as far as I know, poses no more risk to the general public, as striking off a window cleaner, a postman, or a joiner!

Are you welcome back in that country? I know in Australia there was a guy who got convicted of GBH, he was English born but came out here when he was a baby. He never bothered getting naturalised and as such, was kicked out of the country and back to England, barred forever from entering Australia again. He had no family back there, no friends and never visited. It was insane to think that a crime he committed could have far reaching consequences isn't it? Luckily we're not after anything that extreme in this case are we? Are we really?

Honest question, should a rapist after serving his sentence be allowed to move in next door to his victim?

Yes, we could go back any time. We were only thrown out of the country because no employer = no visa/right to stay in the country.

Your example happens far too often in the Middle East. I know loads of Indians, Syrians etc who have never lived in their 'native country' but cannot get citizenship in their adopted country. The minute they fuck up or the work dries up, they are thrown out to a country they have no real connection to. Crazy world we live in!

As for your last statement, no of course not. But by the same token, it doesn't mean that he has to follow a different profession out of the media spotlight to protect her feom psychological trauma every time he scores a goal and name appears in the sports pages (I assume that's where you were going with it?)

[Im_Spartacus]

This thread really made me depressed the first time around but thanks Slim, Hutch, Nigel and Lev for bringing some sense into the thread.

I work at uni where there is a strict non-racism policy. If I had been caught calling students racist words, I don't see a future for me in uni. I burnt that bridge. It's what I trained for my entire life by first going to regular school for twelve years and then at uni for 5 more before I started my PhD. That doesn't mean I have a right to stay at uni. It's back to square one for me. That doesn't mean I'm a bad person, it just means that I'm incompatible with uni for the rest of my life. I can probably work somewhere else and make a decent living, have a family, and so on. So can Evans, even if he doesn't play football again.

Having been thrown out of a country for unknowingly breaking a law, does that mean my wife loses the trust of every potential university employer in the world? Or, as happened, did a top tier university see fit to consider that against her ability to do the job? Technically, as a Finance Director any breach of trust or criminal offence, really should see her banished on your logic?

In your own field, if you are faculty or a researcher and guilty of racism, how would every university in the world know about this unless you underwent trial by media as Evans is now? And even if it was racism, good faculty will always get another chance because of the economic potential they bring to a university. A racist is a racist, but if he has the potential to find a cure for cancer, most Universities will overlook that for the greater good and their own personal enrichment.

But even 2nd rate faculty can improve a 3rd rate university! See the link here......surely it's the same thing.....the economic potential helps a potential employer see past the bad a person may have done, and most balanced people accept that people make mistakes and learn from them.

And this is the exact situation we have here. A guy has made a mistake, been punished for it, and now is being subject of a witch hunt when he tries to resume his career.

I'm not even interested in the argument about his guilt, that's secondary and will be dealt with in time, but the argument that he should be treated the same as other professions is bollocks and based on petty jealousy that he will retain some degree of his former earning power. Doctors/teachers have a specific position of responsibility towards the people in their care, of course they should be struck off if they fundamentally breach that trust. The guy kicks a football around for a living, and that profession as far as I know, poses no more risk to the general public, as striking off a window cleaner, a postman, or a joiner!

chedwin knew exactly what he was doing though

Ok, I'll. bite on whether I think he's guilty.........

Yes, I bet he did know exactly what he was doing, but if shagging a pissed up bird is an offence mate, we are all fucked aren't we? The opposite is also true. No joke here, I've woken up on one particular occasion so seriously disturbed at what I found next to me and told myself there is no fucking way I would have agreed to THAT, and honestly felt fucking violated, physically sick. If I'd gone to the nick and complained that I think I was raped because I didn't remember anything, I'd have been laughed out of the fucking place.

The whole premise of the case disturbs me to fuck when you put it like that, that there is absolutely no evidence that she didn't consent, evidence that lack of memory doesn't equate to lack of capacity to consent, yet a guy gets convicted of rape on the balance of probabilities. So whilst, yes, he knew what he was doing, what the fuck happened to 'beyond reasonable doubt?' There isn't even any evidence that a crime was actually committed!

This shit happens week in, week out up and down the country. In the morning, you dust yourself down, chalk it down to experience and move on. If he wasn't 1: male, 2: a footballer, this would never have gotten as far as it did in the first place, so is he not a victim of his own circumstances?

[Lev Bronstein]

Ooooo, the "if the Death Doctors in the Nazi concentration camp had discovered a cure for cancer, would we refuse to use it on moral grounds" question. Of course we would, but that wouldn't mean that the doctors should escape punishment for their actions.

Ched Evans did not make a mistake, he committed a crime. Repeat: he did not make a mistake he committed a crime. Surely, you see the difference.

As for him suffering a witch-hunt, he's not suffering as much as his victim.

For the most part professional footballers are very well paid and have a prominent status. With that should come a realisation that they are going to be in the spotlight and are going to suffer judgements that others don't. If they can't stand that, then tough shit - become a pluber

[kinkylola]

Ched evans isn't moving in next to his victim though is he? Does this lady live in Oldham? I could see him with a restraining order that he could not come within however many km of her, and then could not effectively sign for a club in that area. Wouldn't be able to play an away match near there either, which is something that any club looking to sign him would have to consider.

Ched Evans did commit a crime ... and is following his sentence. The idea of him being reported on causing further pain is something that I think is taking it too far. Is it that he should not be allowed to be in any position that may possibly get reported on or have his name anywhere in print where this lady could possibly see it? I don't know, I just don't think that is the answer. The system is just so bad when dealing with anything like this. The amount of false rape convictions is staggering, as is the number of actual rapes that go without any consequences. If Evans is found innocent on appeal, I wonder how he would be compensated for the missed work opportunities and harassment he's received.

[Im_Spartacus]

Ooooo, the "if the Death Doctors in the Nazi concentration camp had discovered a cure for cancer, would we refuse to use it on moral grounds" question. Of course we would, but that wouldn't mean that the doctors should escape punishment for their actions.

Ched Evans did not make a mistake, he committed a crime. Repeat: he did not make a mistake he committed a crime. Surely, you see the difference.

As for him suffering a witch-hunt, he's not suffering as much as his victim.

For the most part professional footballers are very well paid and have a prominent status. With that should come a realisation that they are going to be in the spotlight and are going to suffer judgements that others don't. If they can't stand that, then tough shit - become a pluber

So different rules should apply to a plumber and a footballer? Yes their personal lives are subject to more scrutiny, but the court of public opinion is very different to a court of law. The entire premise of the legal system is there to protect against exactly that type of subjective judgement.

As for the 'ooh' question, I've never heard that one about nazis before, it's a genuine dilemma I've found myself in several times over controversial faculty appointments in recent years. The premise of this case is absolutely identical........the perpetrator HAS been punished by losing his job and doing time in prison, but if the person has something to offer to his profession. it doesn't serve anybody any purpose at all to stop him continuing that profession. Is he anymore a danger to the public as a footballer as he would be a plumber?

And when talking about the witch hunt of his 'victim', its not right that there is ANY witch hunt on either side. Unfortunately the lady's conduct in the weeks following the incident appears to have been rather controversial to say the very least, and because of information she put into the public domain via Facebook, the witch hunt she is undergoing is essentially her being tried in the very same court of public opinion that you seem to expect Evans to have be tried in because of his status.

It's a right fuck up of a situation that nobody is coming out of well!

[Im_Spartacus]

Ched Evans did not make a mistake, he committed a crime. Repeat: he did not make a mistake he committed a crime. Surely, you see the difference.

On that point, such a black and white view of the world is completely out of touch.

My wife committed a crime, through recording a conversation with someone who was bullying her - error of judgement

I committed a crime when I was 17, driving away from the scene of an assault with the offender because I panicked and didn't know what to do - error of judgement

Evans has been convicted of rape. He has the same conviction as a bloke who sets out to hide in a bush, drag a woman screaming by the hair and horrifically sexually assaults her. He clearly, in the eyes of the jury made a grave error of judgement about whether she was capable of consenting, which appears to have resulted in an offence being committed for which he was found guilty.

Errors of judgement, eg mistakes, are frequently the cause of criminal convictions mate, when added to your view that judgements should be subjective of the perpetrators status rather than objective to the incident itself, I can see why you hold the views that you do, but they aren't based on any reality of the inherent fallibility of human nature or the law of the land.

[Lev Bronstein]

This thread really made me depressed the first time around but thanks Slim, Hutch, Nigel and Lev for bringing some sense into the thread.

I work at uni where there is a strict non-racism policy. If I had been caught calling students racist words, I don't see a future for me in uni. I burnt that bridge. It's what I trained for my entire life by first going to regular school for twelve years and then at uni for 5 more before I started my PhD. That doesn't mean I have a right to stay at uni. It's back to square one for me. That doesn't mean I'm a bad person, it just means that I'm incompatible with uni for the rest of my life. I can probably work somewhere else and make a decent living, have a family, and so on. So can Evans, even if he doesn't play football again.

Having been thrown out of a country for unknowingly breaking a law, does that mean my wife loses the trust of every potential university employer in the world? Or, as happened, did a top tier university see fit to consider that against her ability to do the job? Technically, as a Finance Director any breach of trust or criminal offence, really should see her banished on your logic?

In your own field, if you are faculty or a researcher and guilty of racism, how would every university in the world know about this unless you underwent trial by media as Evans is now? And even if it was racism, good faculty will always get another chance because of the economic potential they bring to a university. A racist is a racist, but if he has the potential to find a cure for cancer, most Universities will overlook that for the greater good and their own personal enrichment.

But even 2nd rate faculty can improve a 3rd rate university! See the link here......surely it's the same thing.....the economic potential helps a potential employer see past the bad a person may have done, and most balanced people accept that people make mistakes and learn from them.

And this is the exact situation we have here. A guy has made a mistake, been punished for it, and now is being subject of a witch hunt when he tries to resume his career.

I'm not even interested in the argument about his guilt, that's secondary and will be dealt with in time, but the argument that he should be treated the same as other professions is bollocks and based on petty jealousy that he will retain some degree of his former earning power. Doctors/teachers have a specific position of responsibility towards the people in their care, of course they should be struck off if they fundamentally breach that trust. The guy kicks a football around for a living, and that profession as far as I know, poses no more risk to the general public, as striking off a window cleaner, a postman, or a joiner!

chedwin knew exactly what he was doing though

Ok, I'll. bite on whether I think he's guilty.........

Yes, I bet he did know exactly what he was doing, but if shagging a pissed up bird is an offence mate, we are all fucked aren't we? The opposite is also true. No joke here, I've woken up on one particular occasion so seriously disturbed at what I found next to me and told myself there is no fucking way I would have agreed to THAT, and honestly felt fucking violated, physically sick. If I'd gone to the nick and complained that I think I was raped because I didn't remember anything, I'd have been laughed out of the fucking place.

The whole premise of the case disturbs me to fuck when you put it like that, that there is absolutely no evidence that she didn't consent, evidence that lack of memory doesn't equate to lack of capacity to consent, yet a guy gets convicted of rape on the balance of probabilities. So whilst, yes, he knew what he was doing, what the fuck happened to 'beyond reasonable doubt?' There isn't even any evidence that a crime was actually committed!

This shit happens week in, week out up and down the country. In the morning, you dust yourself down, chalk it down to experience and move on. If he wasn't 1: male, 2: a footballer, this would never have gotten as far as it did in the first place, so is he not a victim of his own circumstances?

Well, if he wasn't "1. male" he might not have raped her.

There's shagging a pissed up bird who goes along with it, and one who is too far gone to know what she's doing. The law says it's rape in the second case. Do you honestly think that his lawyers didn't put the lass through the mill during the trial? The jury thought that it was "beyond all reasonable doubt", and so far that's the verdict that stands. Maybe you were in court every day of the trial: I wasn't, so I don't know if there was "absolutely no evidence that she didn't consent".

As for the "balance of probabilities", get real: in any trial, the jury have to decide to believe a witness or not. They chose not to believe Evans.

"There isn't any evidence that a crime was actually committed" - as Euripedes once said "against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain"

[Piccsnumberoneblue]

This thread really made me depressed the first time around but thanks Slim, Hutch, Nigel and Lev for bringing some sense into the thread.

I work at uni where there is a strict non-racism policy. If I had been caught calling students racist words, I don't see a future for me in uni. I burnt that bridge. It's what I trained for my entire life by first going to regular school for twelve years and then at uni for 5 more before I started my PhD. That doesn't mean I have a right to stay at uni. It's back to square one for me. That doesn't mean I'm a bad person, it just means that I'm incompatible with uni for the rest of my life. I can probably work somewhere else and make a decent living, have a family, and so on. So can Evans, even if he doesn't play football again.

Having been thrown out of a country for unknowingly breaking a law, does that mean my wife loses the trust of every potential university employer in the world? Or, as happened, did a top tier university see fit to consider that against her ability to do the job? Technically, as a Finance Director any breach of trust or criminal offence, really should see her banished on your logic?

In your own field, if you are faculty or a researcher and guilty of racism, how would every university in the world know about this unless you underwent trial by media as Evans is now? And even if it was racism, good faculty will always get another chance because of the economic potential they bring to a university. A racist is a racist, but if he has the potential to find a cure for cancer, most Universities will overlook that for the greater good and their own personal enrichment.

But even 2nd rate faculty can improve a 3rd rate university! See the link here......surely it's the same thing.....the economic potential helps a potential employer see past the bad a person may have done, and most balanced people accept that people make mistakes and learn from them.

And this is the exact situation we have here. A guy has made a mistake, been punished for it, and now is being subject of a witch hunt when he tries to resume his career.

I'm not even interested in the argument about his guilt, that's secondary and will be dealt with in time, but the argument that he should be treated the same as other professions is bollocks and based on petty jealousy that he will retain some degree of his former earning power. Doctors/teachers have a specific position of responsibility towards the people in their care, of course they should be struck off if they fundamentally breach that trust. The guy kicks a football around for a living, and that profession as far as I know, poses no more risk to the general public, as striking off a window cleaner, a postman, or a joiner!

chedwin knew exactly what he was doing though

Ok, I'll. bite on whether I think he's guilty.........

Yes, I bet he did know exactly what he was doing, but if shagging a pissed up bird is an offence mate, we are all fucked aren't we? The opposite is also true. No joke here, I've woken up on one particular occasion so seriously disturbed at what I found next to me and told myself there is no fucking way I would have agreed to THAT, and honestly felt fucking violated, physically sick. If I'd gone to the nick and complained that I think I was raped because I didn't remember anything, I'd have been laughed out of the fucking place.

The whole premise of the case disturbs me to fuck when you put it like that, that there is absolutely no evidence that she didn't consent, evidence that lack of memory doesn't equate to lack of capacity to consent, yet a guy gets convicted of rape on the balance of probabilities. So whilst, yes, he knew what he was doing, what the fuck happened to 'beyond reasonable doubt?' There isn't even any evidence that a crime was actually committed!

This shit happens week in, week out up and down the country. In the morning, you dust yourself down, chalk it down to experience and move on. If he wasn't 1: male, 2: a footballer, this would never have gotten as far as it did in the first place, so is he not a victim of his own circumstances?

I'm glad somebody else has posted this. A remarkable conviction on such flimsy evidence. The main prosecution witness unable to actually provide any evidence because she was apparently so pissed she couldn't rember anything other than something to do with kebabs and pizza boxes. I'm not surprised he is not showing remorse. It is as though he has been convicted on a theory. At 2.5 x drink drive limit, could this woman really have NO recollection. And does that mean she couldn't consent?
The evidence convinced rhe jury she happily went to the hotel willingly, and this was the reason his co accused was found innocent.
Would you be happy be happy to have your Liberty removed, your profession closed off to you and become a national pariah based on the evidence of somebody who openly claims to be so pissed they don't actually know what happened?
Did he do it? I have no idea.
Is it really a safe conviction? Christ there are a hell of a lot of us who could find ourselves removed from the moral high ground, if that is the case.

[Lev Bronstein]

I suppose the appeal will decide whether the conviction was safe or not. However, he could have avoided all this this if he had used his brain to think with and not his dick.

As I've already said, the girl is the one who is being harassed, Ched is getting off lightly

[Im_Spartacus]

This thread really made me depressed the first time around but thanks Slim, Hutch, Nigel and Lev for bringing some sense into the thread.

I work at uni where there is a strict non-racism policy. If I had been caught calling students racist words, I don't see a future for me in uni. I burnt that bridge. It's what I trained for my entire life by first going to regular school for twelve years and then at uni for 5 more before I started my PhD. That doesn't mean I have a right to stay at uni. It's back to square one for me. That doesn't mean I'm a bad person, it just means that I'm incompatible with uni for the rest of my life. I can probably work somewhere else and make a decent living, have a family, and so on. So can Evans, even if he doesn't play football again.

Having been thrown out of a country for unknowingly breaking a law, does that mean my wife loses the trust of every potential university employer in the world? Or, as happened, did a top tier university see fit to consider that against her ability to do the job? Technically, as a Finance Director any breach of trust or criminal offence, really should see her banished on your logic?

In your own field, if you are faculty or a researcher and guilty of racism, how would every university in the world know about this unless you underwent trial by media as Evans is now? And even if it was racism, good faculty will always get another chance because of the economic potential they bring to a university. A racist is a racist, but if he has the potential to find a cure for cancer, most Universities will overlook that for the greater good and their own personal enrichment.

But even 2nd rate faculty can improve a 3rd rate university! See the link here......surely it's the same thing.....the economic potential helps a potential employer see past the bad a person may have done, and most balanced people accept that people make mistakes and learn from them.

And this is the exact situation we have here. A guy has made a mistake, been punished for it, and now is being subject of a witch hunt when he tries to resume his career.

I'm not even interested in the argument about his guilt, that's secondary and will be dealt with in time, but the argument that he should be treated the same as other professions is bollocks and based on petty jealousy that he will retain some degree of his former earning power. Doctors/teachers have a specific position of responsibility towards the people in their care, of course they should be struck off if they fundamentally breach that trust. The guy kicks a football around for a living, and that profession as far as I know, poses no more risk to the general public, as striking off a window cleaner, a postman, or a joiner!

chedwin knew exactly what he was doing though

Ok, I'll. bite on whether I think he's guilty.........

Yes, I bet he did know exactly what he was doing, but if shagging a pissed up bird is an offence mate, we are all fucked aren't we? The opposite is also true. No joke here, I've woken up on one particular occasion so seriously disturbed at what I found next to me and told myself there is no fucking way I would have agreed to THAT, and honestly felt fucking violated, physically sick. If I'd gone to the nick and complained that I think I was raped because I didn't remember anything, I'd have been laughed out of the fucking place.

The whole premise of the case disturbs me to fuck when you put it like that, that there is absolutely no evidence that she didn't consent, evidence that lack of memory doesn't equate to lack of capacity to consent, yet a guy gets convicted of rape on the balance of probabilities. So whilst, yes, he knew what he was doing, what the fuck happened to 'beyond reasonable doubt?' There isn't even any evidence that a crime was actually committed!

This shit happens week in, week out up and down the country. In the morning, you dust yourself down, chalk it down to experience and move on. If he wasn't 1: male, 2: a footballer, this would never have gotten as far as it did in the first place, so is he not a victim of his own circumstances?

Well, if he wasn't "1. male" he might not have raped her.

There's shagging a pissed up bird who goes along with it, and one who is too far gone to know what she's doing. The law says it's rape in the second case. Do you honestly think that his lawyers didn't put the lass through the mill during the trial? The jury thought that it was "beyond all reasonable doubt", and so far that's the verdict that stands. Maybe you were in court every day of the trial: I wasn't, so I don't know if there was "absolutely no evidence that she didn't consent".

As for the "balance of probabilities", get real: in any trial, the jury have to decide to believe a witness or not. They chose not to believe Evans.

"There isn't any evidence that a crime was actually committed" - as Euripedes once said "against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain"

I can only assume you don't actually know of the case, and are just going on what you read in the press. The link blue2 put up is good, and is a matter of public record.

A toxicologist gave evidence that counting back to when her blood was tested for alcohol, she would have been 2.5 times above the drink drive limit at the time of the offence, and that whilst alcohol may have cause her to lose some inhibitions, this amount of alcohol was not sufficient for most people to lose mental capacity to consent. Nobody contested this evidence - Reasonable doubt?

Another piece of evidence, from a brain shrink, is that losing short term memory does not indicate that the person did not have capacity to consent at the time (whilst accepting that alcohol causes one to lose ones inhibitions), as the two brain functions of memory and cognitive function are very different and not linked. Nobody contested this evidence - Reasonable doubt?

You then have the issue of the jury believing she consented to McDonald because she went back to the hotel with him, yet not consenting to Evans because he arrived 30 minutes later. Now, in the absence of any evidence from her because she can't remember, if they accept she consented to McDonald despite video evidence of her being so pissed she fell on her arse in the kebab shop, how could they know 'beyond reasonable doubt' that she didn't consent to Evans, given there are no witnesses for the prosecution?

So.......in the absence of her remembering anything (which is a matter of public record), and expert witnesses, of course it's balance of probabilities rather than beyond reasonable doubt, because nobody really knows for sure whether a crime was committed, she doesn't for a start - that's why the whole thing is fucked up.

I'm not saying he wasn't wrong to take advantage, but in the legal standard of beyond reasonable doubt, this conviction is odd, very odd.

As I say, nobody has ended up coming out of this well

[Slim]

I wasn't trying to trick you sparty, but you get my point.

We could expand the conversation to Rolf Harris and ask whether he's going to be allowed back on TV, if he ever gets out of prison. But I will stop my participation in this thread by saying my ONLY concern in all of this is with the young girl who was raped. (BTW, don't rejudge the case, I am sure more persuasive people than you and I did this already and he was found guilty) If there is even the remotest possibility that his high profile job would cause her further distress or trauma then that's too high IMO.

In short, I'd say he can fuck off to the eastern bloc leagues and play there or Oldham can ask for her consent to employ him. Either way, I think the papers conducting the 'witch hunt' and the people saying he's paid for his crime are both missing who's side they should be on.

[Wonderwall]

there are lots of cloudy issues in this case, and I am sure they must have been examined in court, or at least you would have hoped so. It amazes me like many have said above that she was deemed to be 2.5 times the legal drink drive limit. For a woman that equates to about 4 pints. WOW she really needs to stay away from alcohol if it has that effect on her, for her safety and the safety of others (drivers in particular).

However, its not the facts of the case I was debating initially, the case had provided the verdict and the sentencing and this has been carried out and he has been allowed to out on licence and as far as the law is concerned he can return to work. However, this has not been the case here because of the public interest in stopping him returning to kicking a plastic inflatable around a field.

Nobody stopped Tyson returning to the ring (no pun intended).

[DoomMerchant]

What I can't understand is that Chedwyn actually comes into the room... Sees his mate with his cock in her and then decides he should go down on her.

Could have eliminated the middleman and avoided jail time. Although maybe he enjoyed that aspect of prison life.

Cheers

[Avalon]

Nobody stopped Tyson returning to the ring (no pun intended).

And let's not forget the fact that there were missing witnesses in that trial and that she was found making at least one false rape accusation before.

[Wonderwall]

What I can't understand is that Chedwyn actually comes into the room... Sees his mate with his cock in her and then decides he should go down on her.

Could have eliminated the middleman and avoided jail time. Although maybe he enjoyed that aspect of prison life.

Cheers

Saying what we were all thinking Doomy