Ched Evans

[marshy68]

I do wish people would stop using this phrase.

He has NOT served 'his time'.

He has served a portion of 'his time' and is out on license. He is still effectively serving his sentence, and that comes (or at least, is supposed to) with certain conditions. He is not, as you wish to suggest, free to do exactly as he pleases.

Actually he is, as you state there will be certain conditions to his licence, I would assume not to contact the victim, not to give any press interviews, probably see his probation officer once a week and not to commit any other crimes other than that he will be free to do as he pleases.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Actually he is, as you state there will be certain conditions to his licence, I would assume not to contact the victim, not to give any press interviews, probably see his probation officer once a week and not to commit any other crimes other than that he will be free to do as he pleases.

And to sign the sex offenders register, presumably.

Point remains, his sentence is not complete. He is still 'serving' the remaining part of it, but out (on license).

(Quite how he is eligible for release on license, having shown no contrition, is another argument entirely, and one for which I have no answer).

 

[marshy68]

So if we signed Evans tomorrow, you'd both be fine with him signing all the kids autographs outside the club shop after a game? Attending the Gully's Christmas Party? Sending out signed photo's of himself in the Young Seagulls Birthday cards? Having his picture on club promotions?

That would all be perfectly fine with you because he is entitled to return to employment as he did before?

Yes. I dont have a problem with Evans trying to resume his career. It would be up to the club how they intergrated him into PR roles, I would imagine relatively slowly. I dont understand why it appears he is being singled out because of his profession. What is it you want him to do? Is it not ok for any person convicted of any crime once released from prison to try to rebuild their lives and working is a significant step in doing that.

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

having shown no contrition,

Wouldn't really fit when he is appealing it though.

I obviously have NO idea what went on so won't even dare second guess, but if I felt I had been wronged I wouldn't apologise/show any contrition at all.

 

[KZNSeagull]

Sheffield United are obviously GAGGING to re-employ the convicted rapist. By letting him train, they're testing the water as to the reaction. With patrons disassociating themselves from the club and sponsors threatening to pull out, they now have a pretty good idea what the reaction would be if they re-employed him. And that's not even counting the potential STH reaction. By all means allow the guy to try to resume his trade. But whether anybody wants to be associated with him is quite another matter.

Yup, that's the way I see it too. This is not a legal issue, it is a moral one and with Jessica Ennis now saying she wants her name removed from the stand if they re-employ him, they should know how lots of people are going to react. I will be amazed if they give him a contract.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Yes. I dont have a problem with Evans trying to resume his career. It would be up to the club how they intergrated him into PR roles, I would imagine relatively slowly. I dont understand why it appears he is being singled out because of his profession. What is it you want him to do? Is it not ok for any person convicted of any crime once released from prison to try to rebuild their lives and working is a significant step in doing that.

I've pretty much said that basically, only I think it should be down to the FA to set what relatively slowly means. Relatively slowly to me means no first team football until he is at least off license. While not in first team football, he should only be paid a development player salary. He should have to complete, lets call it 'training workshops', a number of hours / days grass roots work. This could be anything from helping at the local Rec. to helping with local coaches doing their FA badges, worthwhile stuff. I'm not saying this is further punishment, this is a reintroduction, a period of integration - I don't think it should be down to clubs to decide this.

In terms of your other point, if I was convicted of rape, I couldn't return to my profession, it would be over, done. I'd have to find another career, try to earn a living another way. Would I be singled out because of my profession, actually no, because like many other professions they would prevent a convicted member returning as well. You seem to believe everyone has a right to return to their previous jobs after a serious crime - many of us don't have that right. It is not singling out footballers at all. Perhaps football just needs to catch up with other professions.

 

[Del Fenner]

The problem that Ched Evans is facing is that to rebuild your life after a criminal conviction, you need first to come to terms with what has happened before you can then engage with how society is going to respond to you.

As he denies his guilt he is unable to come to terms with his conviction, and has two courses of action open to him.

One, admit his guilt, apologise to his victim and modify his future behaviour.

Two, launch a successful campaign to overturn his conviction.

Until he has followed one of these options he cannot begin to resume his career in football with any possibility of success.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Wouldn't really fit when he is appealing it though.

I obviously have NO idea what went on so won't even dare second guess, but if I felt I had been wronged I wouldn't apologise/show any contrition at all.

I don't have the energy to go over this yet again, but there is PLENTY in his actions that night that he can feel contrite / shameful about, even if he does still maintain he is innocent of rape.

 

[drew]

You haven't heard all the evidence. The jury have and they found him guilty

Are you sure the jury heard all the evidence or did they just hear what the court allowed. For example, as far as I'm aware, no evidence was presented to the jury relating to the character of the 'victim' because the defence weren't allowed to.

I don't have the energy to go over this yet again, but there is PLENTY in his actions that night that he can feel contrite / shameful about, even if he does still maintain he is innocent of rape.

A bit of a cop out. He had sex with a stranger. Exactly what else, from what you know, do you consider was reprehensible.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

A bit of a cop out. He had sex with a stranger. Exactly what else, from what you know, do you consider was reprehensible.

read back through the thread from the start, if you care enough to bother. I'm not typing it all out again.

 

[keaton]

Are you sure the jury heard all the evidence or did they just hear what the court allowed. For example, as far as I'm aware, no evidence was presented to the jury relating to the character of the 'victim' because the defence weren't allowed to.

.

They heard what the court allowed which is a lot more than you heard. They may decide in appeal they were wrong to exclude some evidence which casts doubt on the verdict. But at the moment they heard all the relevant evidence and decided he was guilty.

 

[DIFFBROOK]

Professional Football is a bit different from working on a building site, or in Accounts or serving customers in a shop. Professional clubs are pillars of our society. Players whether they like it or not are role models. Youngsters look up to them. I would argue that their behaviour is extremely important. Obviously they are young men, so cant be expected to be angels and I wouldn't class having a drink pre game, having an affair etc as a problem - except maybe for the club itself. But where that "bad" behaviour becomes serious such as wife beating, killing people after drink driving, sexual offences then I think football clubs do need to show a greater responsibility. That this behaviour (past or present) is not part of what a Football Club, within its community considers fit and proper.

I think the message that should be sent out, is that Evans can resume his life in society (subject to certain restrictive professions - teaching etc) but his offence cannot allow him to be a role model or part of a pillar of society. I wouldnt expect that be part of Law, but I would expect Sheff Utd to consider it very carefully.

If I were in charge of Sheff Utd, I would have waited until his appeal had been heard. If his conviction is over turned, then as far as I am concerned he is as innocent of charges. But, if not then I wouldn't employ him for the reasons I give.

 

[Simster]

The problem that Ched Evans is facing is that to rebuild your life after a criminal conviction, you need first to come to terms with what has happened before you can then engage with how society is going to respond to you.

As he denies his guilt he is unable to come to terms with his conviction, and has two courses of action open to him.

One, admit his guilt, apologise to his victim and modify his future behaviour.

Two, launch a successful campaign to overturn his conviction.

Until he has followed one of these options he cannot begin to resume his career in football with any possibility of success.

This is exactly where I'm at. Either admit his guilt or have the conviction overturned. There is no reason why society should "accommodate" him in the meantime, especially as he's only out of prison under license.

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

This is exactly where I'm at. Either admit his guilt or have the conviction overturned. There is no reason why society should "accommodate" him in the meantime, especially as he's only out of prison under license.

Sadly though, football seems to think it lives in its own little bubble with its own moral code. Takes society to give it a good slap now and again to remind it that football is part of the wider world.

 

[drew]

You haven't heard all the evidence. The jury have and they found him guilty

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.

Bankrolled by the millionaire father of his amazingly forgiving girlfriend.

I said no such thing.

I said he 'doesn't appear to be sorry'. i.e. he's made no PUBLIC apology for what he did.

The thing is - he DOESN'T appear to regret anything, other than getting caught.

Well this is the whole crux of the issue, isn't it? I don't think Ched Evans is lying when he says he is innocent, I believe that he genuinely thinks he is. That doesn't mean that he's right, though. He took advantage, of a girl, in no state to make decisions (in such a state that she lost her bag and didn't notice until the morning) to satisfy his own selfish urges. He doesn't think that constitutes rape though - so in his mind he's innocent. 12 of his peers have heard all the evidence and disagree.

You and I have a different set of standards. We not going to find common ground here, so I'll leave this for now.

He should apologise for his behaviour, and show remorse, because if he had a shred of decency he would recognise that his actions were horrible.

I've passed no comment on the sentence. Not having heard all the evidence, I wouldn't feel qualified to. I've only commented on his behaviour, and his lack of remorse for it.

Isn't it clear?

The fact that she did not make the accusations is massively relevant, to how important (or otherwise) these disputed tweets are. Because she did not, all you could say about the tweets is to allege that she was expecting to profit from a subsequent payout (and why should she not enjoy some compensation if she has been wronged?) - not that any potential payout was actually the motive for bringing the case in the first place - which is pretty much the only way they could be used to discredit her account.

Disagree entirely. The only angle by which you could possibly use those tweets (if you can establish beyond doubt what they referred to - you'd need to see what they were in response to, to give them some context) would be to claim that compensation were the girl's motive for making the accusations. I repeat, again - she didn't make the accusations.

1. They were 'aired' five months BEFORE the trial.

2. They would have made no difference at all. SHE was not the one on trial. Even if the court were to accept your GUESS that it is compensation money she is referring to in those disputed tweets, its still a totally distinct issue from the case itself. Remember that she did not concoct this whole story in an attempted money grab - as you are trying to ininsuate. The CPS brought this case, based on information the accused provided to the police under interview. She did not make up and report a rape.

Please quit with quoting from the convicted rapist's propaganda site. How are you expecting people to take your side of this debate seriously when your only supporting source is the accused and his family??

Indeed. And a jury of 12 randomly selected men and women, UNANIMOUSLY decided that it DID.

Fair enough.

I'm not going to go right through the thread to quote all your posts, and obviously you haven't explicitly stated that - but sadly, to me at least, that is exactly the impression you have given - that you feel it can't be considered rape if she was the type of girl to be up for it, a girl who got in a taxi with a bloke she'd just met, etc.

Once again though - SHE is not the one on trial. She may very well be exactly as you wish to paint her - promiscuous and money grabbing, and not at all traumatised - but that isn't what this trial was about. Unless - and you wont like this, but its what I'm reading in your posts so I'm going to write it - you feel that promiscuous young girls deserve no legal protection from rape.

You don't understand the law you are quoting.

A sentence being 'served' and being 'spent' are two VERY different things.

But there was a huge public and media outcry over what Lee Hughes did. Its more noticeable this this round because of the huge increase in social media, etc since Hughes committed his crime, though.

There are important differences between the two cases though. Hughes admitted his guilt, and has shown contrition / remorse - these are not abstract ideals, btw - they are basic tenets of our penal / rehabilitation systems.

As [MENTION=21414]Del Fenner[/MENTION] has mentioned above, the most basic understanding of the law, suggests that having been found guilty, and having shown no remorse, Evans should not even be out on license, let alone back playing football.

Seriously?? You're seriously going to suggest that the woman's earlier career as a model, denies her the right to an opinion on the football club she loves embracing a convicted, unremorseful rapist?

Webster does a heap of work with women's shelters / campaigns raising awareness of domestic violence, etc. There is no way she was ever going to remain linked to Sheff United in any capacity if Evans returned.

read back through the thread from the start, if you care enough to bother. I'm not typing it all out again.

I don't have the energy to go over this yet again, but there is PLENTY in his actions that night that he can feel contrite / shameful about, even if he does still maintain he is innocent of rape.

And to sign the sex offenders register, presumably.

Point remains, his sentence is not complete. He is still 'serving' the remaining part of it, but out (on license).

(Quite how he is eligible for release on license, having shown no contrition, is another argument entirely, and one for which I have no answer).

I do wish people would stop using this phrase.

He has NOT served 'his time'.

He has served a portion of 'his time' and is out on license. He is still effectively serving his sentence, and that comes (or at least, is supposed to) with certain conditions. He is not, as you wish to suggest, free to do exactly as he pleases.

My view is that even if you take Evans' statement of the events as the gospel truth, then his actions that night are an utter disgrace. He went round to a hotel room, and took advantage of a young woman in no state to be making sensible choices, whilst a gang of his mates enjoyed the show. If he honestly feels that he did nothing that night that he needs to be apologising for that says volumes about his character. If you agree with him, it says pretty sorry things about yours.

So, as sad as I am, here are all your quotes and I can only assume you refer to the one immediately above. Take out the sex, then it would appear the only other thing you find reprehensible is a couple of his mates watching at the window. Bearing in mind the curtains were apparently subsequently drawn by someone on the inside then surely it is the mates outside that should apologise for that behaviour.

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

So, as sad as I am, here are all your quotes and I can only assume you refer to the one immediately above. Take out the sex, then it would appear the only other thing you find reprehensible is a couple of his mates watching at the window. Bearing in mind the curtains were apparently subsequently drawn by someone on the inside then surely it is the mates outside that should apologise for that behaviour.

Indeed. If he is standing by the stance that he didnt commit rape then I ask:

Should he apologise to his PARTNER for cheating on her? Absolutely.

Should he PUBLICLY have to apologise for cheating on his parter and publicly show remorse? No. Why should he? It's an issue for him and his partner to sort out.

 

[drew]

Indeed. If he is standing by the stance that he didnt commit rape then I ask:

Should he apologise to his PARTNER for cheating on her? Absolutely.

Should he PUBLICLY have to apologise for cheating on his parter and publicly show remorse? No. Why should he? It's an issue for him and his partner to sort out.

This.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Which is why Del Fenner makes such a good point...

Indeed. If he is standing by the stance that he didnt commit rape then I ask:

Should he apologise to his PARTNER for cheating on her? Absolutely.

Should he PUBLICLY have to apologise for cheating on his parter and publicly show remorse? No. Why should he? It's an issue for him and his partner to sort out.

This.

The problem that Ched Evans is facing is that to rebuild your life after a criminal conviction, you need first to come to terms with what has happened before you can then engage with how society is going to respond to you.

As he denies his guilt he is unable to come to terms with his conviction, and has two courses of action open to him.

One, admit his guilt, apologise to his victim and modify his future behaviour.

Two, launch a successful campaign to overturn his conviction.

Until he has followed one of these options he cannot begin to resume his career in football with any possibility of success.

 

[Tooting Gull]

The problem that Ched Evans is facing is that to rebuild your life after a criminal conviction, you need first to come to terms with what has happened before you can then engage with how society is going to respond to you.

As he denies his guilt he is unable to come to terms with his conviction, and has two courses of action open to him.

One, admit his guilt, apologise to his victim and modify his future behaviour.

Two, launch a successful campaign to overturn his conviction.

Until he has followed one of these options he cannot begin to resume his career in football with any possibility of success.

Agree with that.

In fact, though for a different crime and in different circumstances, this is very much the situation snooker fixer Stephen Lee has wrestled with - so far unsuccessfully.

He has never admitted his guilt after being handed a long ban, even though privately his main beef seems to be others may have got away with it while he hasn't, which is clearly no defence.

He has appealed all the way up the line, with at least two QCs basically saying they thought he was lying.

So with no admission there has been no remorse, and with no mea culpa no real way back and almost certainly no book because a publisher would think long and hard about making allegations about others based on the say-so of a convicted cheat.

 

[SAC]

Good to see his supporters getting behind him on Twitter with some reasoned debate.
[MENTION=18269]RICK[/MENTION]ieLambert07: “Jessica Ennis-Hill is a stupid c***. Saying she will remove her name if Ched Evens [sic] is signed. I hope he rapes her"

@CoreyOC21: “Hope Ched Evans gets you you little slut.”