Ched Evans

[Triggaaar]

They're people who believe (rightly or wrongly) that there was NO rape.

Does that mean you believe there was no rape?

 

[severnside gull]

It's not at all a poor analogy. IF he knows that she consented, then he knows no crime was committed, and so why would he apologise? (please remember I am talking hypothetically, and am not suggesting she consented).

You said "a court decided that it was RAPE not consensual sex. To that extent his opinion of what happened is an irrelevance"
Well a court decided the Guilford 4 were guilty of bombing pubs, and killing people. It's a perfect analogy.

Now that is a poor analogy, because putting explosives in a place and giving a warning is a crime, having consensual sex is not.

We will agree to disagree I suspect and it will come down to semantics. My point is that in one case an action is entirely denied while in the other the action is admitted and only the context denied. Using historic injustice as a reason to question another legal decision is tricky. No-one can deny it has happened but once we assume it, then we begin to question the foundation of legal process.. If you're not careful it becomes the old "some coppers are bent therefore all coppers are bent" argument. You end up with 100+ pages because views will polarise.

 

[Triggaaar]

yep thats the one I read, the disturbing thing I read was that girls were bussed into the party

That's certainly a surprising thing for a club to do.

but I am sure not all footballers are like this .....are they?

That's not a serious question is it?

 

[Mellotron]

Can some one answer a query for me? If the girl had no recollection of the incident, including going to the hotel, then how did she know she had sex with both men? Was this something she reported and they agreed with her series of events or did she make the complaint about both parties?
I'm sure it's covered in earlier posts but it 100 pages lol and I can imagine I will get pissed off with some comments if I read them all

She didn't make any complaint. It was Evans and McDonald that went to the police.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

I don't think the above are rape apologist comments at all. They're people who believe (rightly or wrongly) that there was NO rape.

Disagree fundamentally.

There are comments here and elsewhere, that stray VERY close to hinting that she was a little dirtbag anyway, so deserved all she got, and that whether she actually consented doesn't really matter.

(Be clear, I'm not suggesting that you have suggested anything of the sort).

 

[Mellotron]

Disagree fundamentally.

There are comments here and elsewhere, that stray VERY close to hinting that she was a little dirtbag anyway, so deserved all she got, and that whether she actually consented doesn't really matter.

(Be clear, I'm not suggesting that you have suggested anything of the sort).

If that is what some people have insinuated then I am completely with you. I think in some cases though, people have looked at all the facts and do not believe that a rape occurred.

 

[London Irish]

You've been to Guildford then!


apology for gallows humour

If social media existed way back in the old days, No #169: John Betjeman issues grovelling apology to residents of Slough

 

[glasfryn]

We will agree to disagree I suspect and it will come down to semantics. My point is that in one case an action is entirely denied while in the other the action is admitted and only the context denied. Using historic injustice as a reason to question another legal decision is tricky. No-one can deny it has happened but once we assume it, then we begin to question the foundation of legal process.. If you're not careful it becomes the old "some coppers are bent therefore all coppers are bent" argument. You end up with 100+ pages because views will polarise.

now there is a very slippery slope, always been my contension that if a good copper knows a bent one then why is he not getting the cuffs out

 

[Mellotron]

Does that mean you believe there was no rape?

I don't know. It's a very complicated case though, which makes me surprised that a jury were able to decide unanimously beyond reasonable doubt that he was guilty. I've read up on it quite a lot and recommend others do, it's a very difficult one.

 

[Jolene81]

She didn't make any complaint. It was Evans and McDonald that went to the police.

Off their own backs? To report what?
I intend to sit and read case file that's been posted when i get home.

The most bemusing thing for me is if the conviction of rape is around consent (which it mostly is) how is it if the girl has no recollection of going to the hotel at all then surely. McDonald should have been convicted also? Is not possible for one to be guilty of rape and not the other with the argue of consent

 

[hans kraay fan club]

If that is what some people have insinuated then I am completely with you. I think in some cases though, people have looked at all the facts and do not believe that a rape occurred.

12 people that matter, have looked at 'all the facts' and unanimously decided that he was guilty of rape.

 

[Triggaaar]

We will agree to disagree I suspect

Unfortunately I might be a bit too arrogant for that in this instance

My point is that in one case an action is entirely denied while in the other the action is admitted and only the context denied.

My point is that in both cases, the crime is denied. Let's not talk about Evan's case for a second, let's imagine a similar case - and imagine that new phone video evidence was found that showed both parties were fully consensual, and the verdict was over-turned. Would you still expect the accused to show remorse?

Using historic injustice as a reason to question another legal decision is tricky.

Oh no no, I am not doing that. I am not questioning the verdict for one second. A jury found that he was guilty 'beyond reasonable doubt'. That's our legal system, and I think it's a good one. However, I do appreciate that as with most cases, it is not beyond the bounds of possibility that they were wrong, and in the hypothetical scenario that they are, I would not expect a wronged defendant to show remorse.

 

[Jolene81]

12 people that matter, have looked at 'all the facts' and unanimously decided that he was guilty of rape.

Yet 12 people found McDonald 'not guilty' with the same Evidence. Plenty of ro for Human error.
Also Jury's are picked on the basis of the right people for the defence & prosecution are they not?

 

[Triggaaar]

The most bemusing thing for me is if the conviction of rape is around consent (which it mostly is) how is it if the girl has no recollection of going to the hotel at all then surely. McDonald should have been convicted also? Is not possible for one to be guilty of rape and not the other with the argue of consent

The circumstances were different. She met McDonald in the street, and agreed to go to a hotel with him. A porter heard them having sex (I would imagine what he heard was relevant, but I don't know what he heard, other than it was nothing to worry about).

While the circumstances were different, it certainly seems like a strange one. I don't know how can she have been too drunk to give consent to one person, but not to give it to another.

 

[Creaky]

Off their own backs? To report what?
I intend to sit and read case file that's been posted when i get home.

The most bemusing thing for me is if the conviction of rape is around consent (which it mostly is) how is it if the girl has no recollection of going to the hotel at all then surely. McDonald should have been convicted also? Is not possible for one to be guilty of rape and not the other with the argue of consent

In the case of McDonald his defence was that it was reasonable for him to assume consent, based on the fact that he had been with her earlier in the evening and her actions during that period - the jury obviously accepted this defence, hence the not guilty verdict. Evans however only met the girl whilst she was having sex with McDonald in the hotel room.

 

[Bold Seagull]

She didn't make any complaint. It was Evans and McDonald that went to the police.

Which is actually one of the significant factors in the evidence. She didn't make a statement to police looking to secure a conviction. There is no motivation for her to cover that up if she remembered and was looking for some kind of payout or revenge. The police uncovered the rape themselves. Pretty damning if you ask me.

 

[Mellotron]

12 people that matter, have looked at 'all the facts' and unanimously decided that he was guilty of rape.

By this logic, there is no point in debating or discussing any interesting or unusual crime case ever.

 

[Nibble]

Off their own backs? To report what?
I intend to sit and read case file that's been posted when i get home.

The most bemusing thing for me is if the conviction of rape is around consent (which it mostly is) how is it if the girl has no recollection of going to the hotel at all then surely. McDonald should have been convicted also? Is not possible for one to be guilty of rape and not the other with the argue of consent

Off their own BATS. Not backs. Please stop getting this wrong.

 

[symyjym]

yep thats the one I read, the disturbing thing I read was that girls were bussed into the party, but I am sure not all footballers are like this .....are they?

This sort of thing has been going on for thousands of years in some shape of form. The rich and famous have party organisers and if it is girls, boys, women or men needed for an event, the people suppliers will oblige.

 

[Jolene81]

The circumstances were different. She met McDonald in the street, and agreed to go to a hotel with him. A porter heard them having sex (I would imagine what he heard was relevant, but I don't know what he heard, other than it was nothing to worry about).

While the circumstances were different, it certainly seems like a strange one. I don't know how can she have been too drunk to give consent to one person, but not to give it to another.

The girl in her evidence States not remembering leaving the bar and only a vague recollection of ordering food. She met McDonald After that so she obviously doesn't remember giving consent to him either