Ched Evans

[nwgull]

I know very many people who dropped out of education before O levels that I would much rather sit on a Jury than many of the University educated people I know.

A Jury is elected to listen to the evidence presented and judge on the facts presented to them.

I've done it twice, the cross section of people in the Jury room is as far ranging as you would get at any Football match.

I wouldn't want a cross section of society as that would include people who think that having sex before marriage is a crime in itself, never mind accept that any woman would engage in group sex.

 

[Beach Seagull]

That is something that crossed my mind too

Would both of you care to elaborate please on your insinuations at a conspiracy theory please?

 

[Hillian1]

I wouldn't want a cross section of society as that would include people who think that having sex before marriage is a crime in itself, never mind accept that any woman would engage in group sex.

Ah I get it. You want people who think being paid thosands of pounds every week is a good reason to give a bird one, even if she's not able to judge the situation she's in.

Silly cow, should have stayed in watching Corrie like all the other good girls.

 

[The Rivet]

The main issue on this thread seems to be disagreement with the way our justice system works. Perhaps if proper sentences were awarded and served then perhaps society wouldn't be so keen on further retribution.

 

[glasfryn]

The main issue on this thread seems to be disagreement with the way our justice system works. Perhaps if proper sentences were awarded and served then perhaps society wouldn't be so keen on further retribution.

only trouble with that is if all prisoners done their full sentence, we would have to build more prisons

 

[Bold Seagull]

I wouldn't want a cross section of society as that would include people who think that having sex before marriage is a crime in itself, never mind accept that any woman would engage in group sex.

But if you were a victim, neither would you want a jury full of people who thought it was fine to have sex with someone even if they couldn't communicate properly or were passed out. That's why it's a balance, that's why 12 is thought to be a number where you establish a reasonable spread of opinion and balance any prejudice. Have you ever read 'To Kill A Mockingbird', well worth a look if you haven't.

 

[The Rivet]

Glasfryn I was being a little tounge in cheek.
Do we leave punishment up to the courts or do we feel we have the right to restrict employment and trade after punishment?

 

[nwgull]

But if you were a victim, neither would you want a jury full of people who thought it was fine to have sex with someone even if they couldn't communicate properly or were passed out. That's why it's a balance, that's why 12 is thought to be a number where you establish a reasonable spread of opinion and balance any prejudice. Have you ever read 'To Kill A Mockingbird', well worth a look if you haven't.

Yes. I don't think any of my peers think it's fine to have sex with someone passed out, but they would accept that people get drunk and have sex they might regret.

The woman in this case wasn't passed out anyway. Video evidence shows that and the toxicologist report has her at about 2.5x the drink drive limit - drunk but not passed out.

 

[Hillian1]

Yes. I don't think any of my peers think it's fine to have sex with someone passed out, but they would accept that people get drunk and have sex they might regret.

The woman in this case wasn't passed out anyway. Video evidence shows that and the toxicologist report has her at about 2.5x the drink drive limit - drunk but not passed out.

That makes it OK then.

Good stuff.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Glasfryn I was being a little tounge in cheek.
Do we leave punishment up to the courts or do we feel we have the right to restrict employment and trade after punishment?

We already have the right to restrict employment. There are many professions you cannot return to or face restrictions if you are convicted of a crime. For example in this case, an architect found possessing indecent images of a child, will never be able to be a registered architect again - http://www.arb.org.uk/Content/Index/MzE4M35zdg==. The professional body is protecting the overall reputation of it's profession. The FA is in a similar position to protect itself and the reputation of the game against serious criminal offences by its members.

 

[Lower West Stander]

Evans is undoubtedly a toe-rag and his girlfriend obviously a bit odd too for defending his actions so vehemently.

But he has done his time, so technically can work again.

My problem is the total lack of remorse he has shown and his constant implication that it is he who is the victim. If he displayed an iota of regret for his actions I think there may be some support for him returning to the game - but he hasn't.

At least McCormick apologised. I know this could be seen as a meaningless gesture, but Evans hasn't even done that.

 

[drew]

Which is why we have an adversarial court system and a jury made up of a varied selection of 12 our peers.

Which doesn't get it right every time. a fact you have previously acknowledged but still continually ignore when it suits you.

All rape is rape and you suggest that Evans (or anyone for that matter) could have assumed consent.

Did Evans say he assumed consent or does he claim she verbally consented? Big difference.

If only there was a process to decide who is telling the truth or not.

Oh, hang on...

A court cannot determine who is actually telling the truth when it is a case of one word against another (in fact even with witnesses as the jury must decide the integrity of the witnesses). It can just come to an opinion as to whom they think are telling the truth. Until they invent an infallible lie detector or you actually witnessed the events first hand, it still remains an opinion.

I know very many people who dropped out of education before O levels that I would much rather sit on a Jury than many of the University educated people I know.

A Jury is elected to listen to the evidence presented and judge on the facts presented to them.

I've done it twice, the cross section of people in the Jury room is as far ranging as you would get at any Football match.

I've only done it once (two cases though) and would agree the cross section is far ranging. However, there is no doubt that every jury, by the randomness of the selection process is not always going to have enough people with sense (irrespective of level of education). Law of averages suggest that there will be one jury made up of applicants for the Jeremy Kyle show!!!! I'd hate to be the innocent man in the dock on that occasion!

 

[Bold Seagull]

Yes. I don't think any of my peers think it's fine to have sex with someone passed out, but they would accept that people get drunk and have sex they might regret.

The woman in this case wasn't passed out anyway. Video evidence shows that and the toxicologist report has her at about 2.5x the drink drive limit - drunk but not passed out.

Yeah, we know what you think about the case. I thought we were discussing the make up of juries and their function in justice? That was far more interesting than your intimate knowledge of female alcohol tolerance.

 

[drew]

Evans is undoubtedly a toe-rag and his girlfriend obviously a bit odd too for defending his actions so vehemently.

But he has done his time, so technically can work again.

My problem is the total lack of remorse he has shown and his constant implication that it is he who is the victim. If he displayed an iota of regret for his actions I think there may be some support for him returning to the game - but he hasn't.

At least McCormick apologised. I know this could be seen as a meaningless gesture, but Evans hasn't even done that.

I thought he had apologised for his behaviour that evening but has not shown remorse for the 'rape' because he claims he did not rape her.

 

[The Rivet]

We already have the right to restrict employment. There are many professions you cannot return to or face restrictions if you are convicted of a crime. For example in this case, an architect found possessing indecent images of a child, will never be able to be a registered architect again - http://www.arb.org.uk/Content/Index/MzE4M35zdg==. The professional body is protecting the overall reputation of it's profession. The FA is in a similar position to protect itself and the reputation of the game against serious criminal offences by its members.

and that's why I set up an employee drug and alcohol testing service so that I can profit on that. Indeed I help companies and professional organisations 'can' anyone I catch. Including checkable records for people to check online forever (subject to the right to be forgotten laws) For me the debate is about our laws, punishment and public sense of entitlement to continue a 'punishment'. I want to see robust punishments, rehabilitation and a right to make a productive life for prisoners after release. Meanwhile, look out I might be at a workplace near you!...

 

[JCL - the new kid in town]

Would both of you care to elaborate please on your insinuations at a conspiracy theory please?

Only that in all the time you've been registered you've not really commented on anything however this thread has doubled your post count. As an aside you do know you can debate a point without slagging off the other side/party or are you a politician?

 

[Hillian1]

I thought he had apologised for his behaviour that evening but has not shown remorse for the 'rape' because he claims he did not rape her.

He said sorry for his infidelety, nothing more.

 

[Lower West Stander]

I thought he had apologised for his behaviour that evening but has not shown remorse for the 'rape' because he claims he did not rape her.

That may very well be the case. But it is not apologising to the victim - even if he continues to deny rape he could still show remorse to her. Just saying "I shouldn't have behaved like that" may be good enough for his girlfriend but not for most people.

 

[drew]

He said sorry for his infidelety, nothing more.

In your opinion then, for the sake of argument assuming it wasn't rape, what else should he apologise for?

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

He said sorry for his infidelety, nothing more.

I read his appeal was being fast-tracked. Anyone know when we'll hear the outcome of this?