Ched Evans

[El Presidente]

Under the FA's present rules he would be allowed to be a club director or owner once he has been removed from the sex offender's register.

 

[BensGrandad]

Under the FA's present rules he would be allowed to be a club director or owner once he has been removed from the sex offender's register.

Totally immaterial until he is cleared on appeal or waits some years.

 

[surrey jim]

Under the FA's present rules he would be allowed to be a club director or owner once he has been removed from the sex offender's register.

How long does he remain on that for?

 

[Thunder Bolt]

How long does he remain on that for?

The court determined that when he was sentenced. Some are for life, others ten years etc.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Under the FA's present rules he would be allowed to be a club director or owner once he has been removed from the sex offender's register.

How was Owen Oyston able to remain a director and owner of Blackpool?

 

[clippedgull]

Out of interest, was it a unanimous decision by the Jury or a Majority decision?

Just finished listening to Nicky Campbell on Radio 5 and a lawyer on there commented that it was a unanimous verdict. The overall verdict of the callers was that he should be given a second chance when he shows remorse/apologises. Unlikely as he still thinks he is not guilty.

 

[lawros left foot]

Is it a grey area or do you not understand it? He's been found guilty and an appeal was turned down. Why are people so eager to believe his innocence?

Perhaps, because of the evidence?

 

[nwgull]

Perhaps, because of the evidence?

I don't believe his innocence or guilt either way so much as think that it was a very thin case against him.

It's concerning and disturbing to think that, in a case where guilt is supposed to be beyond reasonable doubt, a man can be sent to prison for 2-4 years based on no evidence other than the fact that he said he had consensual sex with a woman, and she says she can't remember the night.

 

[SAC]

I don't believe his innocence or guilt either way so much as think that it was a very thin case against him.

It's concerning and disturbing to think that, in a case where guilt is supposed to be beyond reasonable doubt, a man can be sent to prison for 2-4 years based on no evidence other than the fact that he said he had consensual sex with a woman, and she says she can't remember the night.

It's concerning that a jury can find a man guilty but some on here feel that they know better.

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

It's concerning that a jury can find a man guilty but some on here feel that they know better.

Same. I find the very professional (and no doubt very expensive) website of the convicted rapist distasteful in the extreme. Won't give the link any more publicity but it smacks of denial at best or disgusting spin at worst. 'FAQ' FFS. If the Albion ever sign the convicted rapist in question, I'm out.

 

[lawros left foot]

It's concerning that a jury can find a man guilty but some on here feel that they know better.

Yeah, I felt the same over the Birmingham six the Guildford four, Stefan Kishkov, and many, many others

 

[mona]

Yeah, I felt the same over the Birmingham six the Guildford four, Stefan Kishkov, and many, many others

Good lord, sir! Our judicial system never makes mistakes. 10 Rillington Place happened in pre-history.

 

[Bold Seagull]

I don't believe his innocence or guilt either way so much as think that it was a very thin case against him.

It's concerning and disturbing to think that, in a case where guilt is supposed to be beyond reasonable doubt, a man can be sent to prison for 2-4 years based on no evidence other than the fact that he said he had consensual sex with a woman, and she says she can't remember the night.

Little bit more to it than that.

 

[lawros left foot]

Having read the Court transcript, the thing that struck me was every time Evans was mentioned, Iit was "the Footballer Ched Evans" from the Prosecution brief. It did make me wonder if had he been a plumber it would even have got to Court

 

[Rodney Thomas]

If the Albion ever sign the convicted rapist in question, I'm out.

This

 

[nwgull]

Little bit more to it than that.

My info is based on an unbiased summary of the case, which I linked to earlier in the thread. There is nothing other than anecdotal evidence against the players and the fact that the victim was estimated to be 2.5x the drink drive limit at the time.

What other compelling stuff was there? This is a genuine question, not rhetorical.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Same. I find the very professional (and no doubt very expensive) website of the convicted rapist distasteful in the extreme.

Bankrolled by the millionaire father of his amazingly forgiving girlfriend.

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

Bankrolled by the millionaire father of his amazingly forgiving girlfriend.

C*nt can SPIN as much as he likes so far as I'm concerned and most decent folks are probably concerned. Still a convicted rapist.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

C*nt can SPIN as much as he likes so far as I'm concerned and most decent folks are probably concerned. Still a convicted rapist.

I really struggle to reconcile the girlfriend's standpoint, with all I've read about the case.

"All he's guilty of is cheating on me"

Oh, well that's okay then. I'm not sure my wife would take that view, if I indulged in a night of twos-up with one of my mates and a drunk girl. If the gf had any self-respect she'd have run a mile, consensual or not.

 

[drew]

Same. I find the very professional (and no doubt very expensive) website of the convicted rapist distasteful in the extreme. Won't give the link any more publicity but it smacks of denial at best or disgusting spin at worst. 'FAQ' FFS. If the Albion ever sign the convicted rapist in question, I'm out.

Pretty narrow minded comment. At best, he is innocent of rape but disgusting spin at worst!

It's concerning that a jury can find a man guilty but some on here feel that they know better.

What makes you think that a jury will get it right every single time? You could be innocent of a crime and find yourself being judged by a jury made of rejects from Jeremy Kyle! There are an alarming number of cases which upon review have been deemed 'unsafe'.

I don't believe his innocence or guilt either way so much as think that it was a very thin case against him.

It's concerning and disturbing to think that, in a case where guilt is supposed to be beyond reasonable doubt, a man can be sent to prison for 2-4 years based on no evidence other than the fact that he said he had consensual sex with a woman, and she says she can't remember the night.

Especially when that same jury don't consider another party to be guilty under what appears to be the exact same circumstances!

Just finished listening to Nicky Campbell on Radio 5 and a lawyer on there commented that it was a unanimous verdict. The overall verdict of the callers was that he should be given a second chance when he shows remorse/apologises. Unlikely as he still thinks he is not guilty.

Think the point is that if someone committed a murder and you were charged and found guilty of the crime then whilst you would be a convicted murderer, you would know yourself that you were innocent!

Little bit more to it than that.

Out of interest, what do you see as the other salient points?