Ched Evans

[Hillian1]

Probably on the instructions of his defence counsel to avoid any hint of misinterpretation.

"Ched, DO NOT whatever you do DO NOT, in any way shape or form let it be known that you wish to distance yourself from death threats and rape threats from people who are acting in your defence"

He may need a new Legal team if that's the case.

 

[BensGrandad]

I would think the instructions are do not make any comment whatsoever in connection with this case.

 

[Barrel of Fun]

Hmm,

You: Look at that video, she doesn't look like she's so drunk she won't remember anything, does she?
Me: That video takes one shot per second, she is only briefly seen walking unaided, and the way someone walks (in a video that has so few frames per second she completely disappears for eight seconds) isn't a clear indication of her blood alcohol level, or what affect the alcohol will later have on her memory
You: You're so biased.

Ok, then.

That is a very good point. A montage of clips doesn't give you any sort of idea as to how in control she was.

 

[Acker79]

That is a very good point. A montage of clips doesn't give you any sort of idea as to how in control she was.

I'd say montage is a very generous description, it evokes the sense of multiple scenes throughout the evening. It was footage from a car outside the doors, the two metre gap between an outer door and an inner door, then no more than 6 metres of the reception area. Two different camera angles. She gets out the car, and stands in the road. She completely disappears without being seen to walk from that spot (the camera takes images infrequently enough for it to miss at least two foot steps as she moved from in view in the road to completely out of view). She then walks in holding his arm (supported?), across the small "vestibule" and then the reception area. She walks no more than 20 metres, stopping half way through half obscured by the outer door.

There is no way to tell from that how the alcohol will affect her memory or how it affects her ability to consciously consent, and any conclusions on how it affects her ability to walk would be questionable (if it misses her stepping out of view in the street, it could have missed stumbling, veering etc).

 

[aolstudios]

But it must be important. Drew wants it to be soooo much

 

[Sheebo]

And just one more point from me tonight:

I have no doubt in my mind that should the convicted rapist Ched Evans followers find me on social media I will be subjected to the same level of abuse as anyone else who dares to speak ill of their friend.

His friends and Rapist Apologists will wish me dead, they will wish rape upon me all in the good name of convicted rapist rapist Ched Evans.

And yet convicted rapist Ched Evans will remain silent, chosing not to condem these attacks, wishing to remain silent, a dignified silence.

Not going to offer a definate opinion without hearing all the evidence although this case seems v v odd... One thing that gets my goat is the use of 'convicted rapist' repetitively on the BBC or you on this thread. Yes I totally understand it's a fact & the correct term in theory, but to think the same label is given to those who have actually committed a calculated horrible crime doesn't sit right with me. There's a huge difference between a 'convicted rapist' in a case like this and say a 'convicted rapist' who grabs someone round the throat in a dark alley and rapes them. Please take that in the mature normal way it's meant & don't make me out to be a 'rape apologist' cos I think the crime of rape is sick. I just feel that cases that divide opinion like this are so different to a clean cut crime - and they get labelled with the same term. It just doesnt sit right with me. In my opinion of course...

 

[dazzer6666]

Not going to offer a definate opinion without hearing all the evidence although this case seems v v odd... One thing that gets my goat is the use of 'convicted rapist' repetitively on the BBC or you on this thread. Yes I totally understand it's a fact & the correct term in theory, but to think the same label is given to those who have actually committed a calculated horrible crime doesn't sit right with me. There's a huge difference between a 'convicted rapist' in a case like this and say a 'convicted rapist' who grabs someone round the throat in a dark alley and rapes them. Please take that in the mature normal way it's meant & don't make me out to be a 'rape apologist' cos I think the crime of rape is sick. I just feel that cases that divide opinion like this are so different to a clean cut crime - and they get labelled with the same term. It just doesnt sit right with me. In my opinion of course...

But you never will hear all the evidence. 12 people, plus a judge, plus others (appeal) have heard all the evidence and decided it was sufficient to decide he was guilty. Until he's cleared, I'll go with those that made an informed decision they believed was beyond reasonable doubt, that he committed, as you put it, a calculated horrible crime.

 

[drew]

I'd say montage is a very generous description, it evokes the sense of multiple scenes throughout the evening. It was footage from a car outside the doors, the two metre gap between an outer door and an inner door, then no more than 6 metres of the reception area. Two different camera angles. She gets out the car, and stands in the road. She completely disappears without being seen to walk from that spot (the camera takes images infrequently enough for it to miss at least two foot steps as she moved from in view in the road to completely out of view). She then walks in holding his arm (supported?), across the small "vestibule" and then the reception area. She walks no more than 20 metres, stopping half way through half obscured by the outer door.

There is no way to tell from that how the alcohol will affect her memory or how it affects her ability to consciously consent, and any conclusions on how it affects her ability to walk would be questionable (if it misses her stepping out of view in the street, it could have missed stumbling, veering etc).

Okay, I'll bite.

I referred to the video but it is just one bit of evidence which, despite repeated requests, Hillian took an age to admit to seeing and then, rather than commenting on what he saw tried to suggest it was about reading her mind!!!

Take the video, which I stated wasn't great, in conjunction with other evidence, ie that she was two and half times the legal drink drive limit, which others suggest is about a bottle of wine, the expert who stated that she even though she may not remember the next morning that wouldn't mean should couldn't have made a reasonable decision to consent. The toxicology report that suggested she had consumed cocaine a few days before which, admittedly, doesn't affect the events of that night but may, in the mind of some, suggest she was the pure and innocent victim that some seem to paint her as. Yes, a jury found him guilty but then juries have been known to get it wrong. Not all juries but a small minority. Hence 374 people have had their convictions quashed since 1998 following a review by the CCRC and their cases going to the court of appeal.

Do I like Ched Evans? I don't know him but from what I can tell, he wouldn't be in my circle of friends.

The trolls that have threatened Jessica Ennis (or anyone else) should be identified and subject to the laws of the land.

Should Evans play for Sheffield? I think I have already said that I don't really see a major problem with him training with them but he shouldn't get a contract until he has cleared his name or failing that, shown remorse.

Do I think a girl is rendered incapable of making a decision having drunk the equivalent of one bottle of wine, no I don't. I base that on the people I know. No, they are not alcoholics, just normal people who enjoy a drink now and again. Yes, they certainly won't be sober but they are not unconscious!

Some will be convinced she was totally incapable and an unwilling participant others may not. Some seem willing to believe everything she says and, ergo, that it was rape. Others have their doubts. Evans said it was consensual. It is one word against another and that is probably the main problem that most juries have to contend with when dealing with rape cases.

 

[dazzer6666]

Okay, I'll bite.

I referred to the video but it is just one bit of evidence which, despite repeated requests, Hillian took an age to admit to seeing and then, rather than commenting on what he saw tried to suggest it was about reading her mind!!!

Take the video, which I stated wasn't great, in conjunction with other evidence, ie that she was two and half times the legal drink drive limit, which others suggest is about a bottle of wine, the expert who stated that she even though she may not remember the next morning that wouldn't mean should couldn't have made a reasonable decision to consent. The toxicology report that suggested she had consumed cocaine a few days before which, admittedly, doesn't affect the events of that night but may, in the mind of some, suggest she was the pure and innocent victim that some seem to paint her as. Yes, a jury found him guilty but then juries have been known to get it wrong. Not all juries but a small minority. Hence 374 people have had their convictions quashed since 1998 following a review by the CCRC and their cases going to the court of appeal.

Do I like Ched Evans? I don't know him but from what I can tell, he wouldn't be in my circle of friends.

The trolls that have threatened Jessica Ennis (or anyone else) should be identified and subject to the laws of the land.

Should Evans play for Sheffield? I think I have already said that I don't really see a major problem with him training with them but he shouldn't get a contract until he has cleared his name or failing that, shown remorse.

Do I think a girl is rendered incapable of making a decision having drunk the equivalent of one bottle of wine, no I don't. I base that on the people I know. No, they are not alcoholics, just normal people who enjoy a drink now and again. Yes, they certainly won't be sober but they are not unconscious!

Some will be convinced she was totally incapable and an unwilling participant others may not. Some seem willing to believe everything she says and, ergo, that it was rape. Others have their doubts. Evans said it was consensual. It is one word against another and that is probably the main problem that most juries have to contend with when dealing with rape cases.

No doubt there is a fair amount of other evidence the jury heard too.......problem we all have is selective reporting by various sources. I sat on a jury in a 'her word against his' rape case and based on that experience am finding it difficult to see how they unanimously found against him if he is innocent. Also, 374 cases in 16 years is a tiny, tiny amount statistically - doesn't mean they got it wrong this time, but makes the odds many thousands to one I'd imagine. Such a minuscule number proves the effectiveness of the system, not the opposite in my view (given no method is foolproof, and accepting that 374 lives have been ruined by wrong decisions)

 

[The Merry Prankster]

Not going to offer a definate opinion without hearing all the evidence although this case seems v v odd... One thing that gets my goat is the use of 'convicted rapist' repetitively on the BBC or you on this thread. Yes I totally understand it's a fact & the correct term in theory, but to think the same label is given to those who have actually committed a calculated horrible crime doesn't sit right with me. There's a huge difference between a 'convicted rapist' in a case like this and say a 'convicted rapist' who grabs someone round the throat in a dark alley and rapes them. Please take that in the mature normal way it's meant & don't make me out to be a 'rape apologist' cos I think the crime of rape is sick. I just feel that cases that divide opinion like this are so different to a clean cut crime - and they get labelled with the same term. It just doesnt sit right with me. In my opinion of course...

Rape is rape.

 

[aolstudios]

Rape is rape.

Nail on head

 

[Dave the OAP]

I love it how on here all the bar room barristers come out passing judgement on a person when they know absolutely nothing whatsoever about the case apart from what we have been fed by hacks trying to make up a story to fill their sheets.

NSC at its finest!

 

[Hillian1]

Not going to offer a definate opinion without hearing all the evidence although this case seems v v odd... One thing that gets my goat is the use of 'convicted rapist' repetitively on the BBC or you on this thread. Yes I totally understand it's a fact & the correct term in theory, but to think the same label is given to those who have actually committed a calculated horrible crime doesn't sit right with me. There's a huge difference between a 'convicted rapist' in a case like this and say a 'convicted rapist' who grabs someone round the throat in a dark alley and rapes them. Please take that in the mature normal way it's meant & don't make me out to be a 'rape apologist' cos I think the crime of rape is sick. I just feel that cases that divide opinion like this are so different to a clean cut crime - and they get labelled with the same term. It just doesnt sit right with me. In my opinion of course...

I do "get" where you're coming from and can see the difference in the scenario you have put forward. All to often we see on Crimewatch some barbaric portrayals of sex crimes.

My continued use of the term Convicted Rapist is my way of constantly reminding the posters on this thread who, for some reason, seem to believe the myths perpetuated by Evans own website and his merry band of Internet Warriors that Evans has in some way been wronged. A jury of 12 found him to unanimously guilty, two further applications to appeal have been turned down by two Judges. Now, unless there is some conspiracy against Evans that reaches to the highest levels of Justice I simply cannot see what possible reasons they may have to doubt the verdict and subsequent applications to appeal. Applications to appeal btw aren't appeals but I'm guessing you already know this.

Maybe Ched Evans somehow believed his status as a professional footballer granted him automatic consent.

Let's not forget here, a teenage girl has, quite literally, had her life ruined. She has had her identity exposed by Internet Trolls not just once but twice now, has been issued death threats, has had to move twice and had her identity changed twice.

My sympathies lie with her and her alone.

 

[spring hall convert]

Putting aside all of the is he innocent or guilty debate (acknowledge as things stand he is guilty in the eyes of the law) why has this particular case caused so much more controversy than the Luke McCormick case? McCormick killed two children when drunk behind the wheel of his car in 2008, upon release from prison he resumed his league career firstly at Oxford and then at Plymouth (who he was playing for when he was convicted), earlier on this year he was made captain of Plymouth. Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't recall 49 page threads on here, online petitions attracting thousands of sigatures, patrons resigning and sponsors threatening to withdraw support. Why is it McComick was able to resume his career in (relative) peace and yet Evans it appears will be unable to? Ditto Marlon King who has a string of convictions including assault of two women who rejcted his advances in a club, yet he was able to resume his career and ironically enough in Sept 2013 joined Sheffield United!! No patrons resigned back then (as far as I know) kit sponsors didn't pull out (as far as I know) and I don't remember Jess Ennis having an issue with his signing.

It seems to me a man will attract far more condemnation who has a rape conviction than a man who has drunkenly killed 2 children. I find it puzzling.

McCormack - Intent. Not saying that it's right but there is a school of thought that says he made a terribly irresponsible decision but he didn't get into the car with the explicit intent of killing those children.

King - This is key for me. At last, at long last we are begining to take sexual crime seriously in this country. Add into the mix that more women than ever before have an interest in the game. King is extremely lucky and I suspect if the timing of the two incidents were reversed King would be experiencing the same issues as Evans.

I can't help but feel that Evans hasn't helped himself here either. If he wants to appeal and maintain his innocence then fine but I don't think that is commensurate with resuming a career in the public eye. It's not fair on the victim.

 

[spring hall convert]

but certainly not life changing (particularly as the girl in question can't even remember what happened).

Second time you've made this point and allied to your earlier comments on different degrees of rape I now have to pick you up on it.

I appreciate the difficulty of your position, you are arguing that Evans may be innocent and that's fine.

However, you can't make assumptions like this about the victim. It could be all the more distressing because she doesn't remember it. By your assertion you suggest that date rape can't be life changing. Let's say you were drugged and raped and remembered nothing of it you seriously think that wouldn't change you as a person?

All rape is a horrifying crime. You seem to be of the opinion that if the rapist isn't hiding in the bushes with a dagger it doesn't count and that is an opinion I can't leave unchallenged.

 

[BigGully]

Rape is rape.

Absolutely not ....

I think your response in someways mirrors the struggle, predominately male law makers and politicians seem to have with this crime, it seems that they have become totally passive with any suggestion which might prompt a case for rape without any significant voice that might challenge its validity.

Rape used to be a random violent crime that has, quite rightly now including date rape, domestic rape and others to protect women, but with this shift it makes ( mostly males ) vulnerable to an allegation of rape, even when it has been a wholly consensual.

If you take a moment to acknowledge the whole spectrum of individuals sexual preferences and then just change the end game, not with a cigarette or a cuddle, but with your partner suddenly and without notice claim she withdrew her consent at some point during your sex, you could be in real problems, even when the whole accurate details are offered to the jury, I am guessing that as long as she maintains that her consent was withdrawn, then it is just a matter of accepting her view, then you become a rapist.

 

[father_and_son]

Some will be convinced she was totally incapable and an unwilling participant others may not. Some seem willing to believe everything she says and, ergo, that it was rape. Others have their doubts. Evans said it was consensual. It is one word against another and that is probably the main problem that most juries have to contend with when dealing with rape cases.

This is the key point here on whether its right to give him or her the benefit of the doubt.

I'll wager no-one on here was present at the trial and heard all the evidence but the jury did. And two Judges have subsequently read the full transcript and made a certain judgement...

...it was beyond reasonable doubt that Ched had penetrative sex with the girl without her consent - RAPE.


I can perfectly understand people arguing that he was guilty had he been acquitted because "reasonable doubt" tends to lead to a guilty person going free far more often than an innocent one being locked up. But the burden of proof was on the prosecution and they have managed to convince the most important 14 people so far that there is NO DOUBT that [to the letter of the law] Ched RAPED the girl.

 

[spring hall convert]

There's a huge difference between a 'convicted rapist' in a case like this and say a 'convicted rapist' who grabs someone round the throat in a dark alley and rapes them.

Why don't you ask someone who has been date raped about how it has affected them?

Actually there's evidence to suggest that date-rape is more diffcult to process than the kind of attack you are talking about because there is no memory of trauma to resolve and address.

But you carry on making sweeping assumptions. This "degrees of rape" makes me sick. It's all rape, all rapes affect people in different ways, all rapes are vile.

 

[spring hall convert]

I wonder if some attitudes towards rape on here would change if people stopped seeing it as a crime perpretated exclusively by men against women.

 

[severnside gull]

I do "get" where you're coming from and can see the difference in the scenario you have put forward. All to often we see on Crimewatch some barbaric portrayals of sex crimes.

My continued use of the term Convicted Rapist is my way of constantly reminding the posters on this thread who, for some reason, seem to believe the myths perpetuated by Evans own website and his merry band of Internet Warriors that Evans has in some way been wronged. A jury of 12 found him to unanimously guilty, two further applications to appeal have been turned down by two Judges. Now, unless there is some conspiracy against Evans that reaches to the highest levels of Justice I simply cannot see what possible reasons they may have to doubt the verdict and subsequent applications to appeal. Applications to appeal btw aren't appeals but I'm guessing you already know this.

Maybe Ched Evans somehow believed his status as a professional footballer granted him automatic consent.

Let's not forget here, a teenage girl has, quite literally, had her life ruined. She has had her identity exposed by Internet Trolls not just once but twice now, has been issued death threats, has had to move twice and had her identity changed twice.

My sympathies lie with her and her alone.

One of the better posts on NSC in recent times.