Ched Evans

[drew]

You would think so. I can't see why he's not been charged.

PS, your last post is quoting someone else, but you've accidentally edited it to look like you're quoting me.

Apologies, there were quite a few posts as I'd been away from the thread for a little while!!

 

[JCL - the new kid in town]

Oldham withdrawn their offer apparently. As I said previously I think the FA should take control and if they say yes he can play back the club that takes him by saying whatever you lose through sponsors pulling out we will cover that loss for this season as it is will be a div 1 or 2 club and that money wont be astronomical. If they decide no then refuse to register him end of story no problem.

Perhaps the FA could compensate a club for me to play for them for a year, i'm cack so won't earn them any money either but if the FA is paying clubs to take on players.....

 

[Acker79]

What I would struggle with in this case is that the rape is based on her being to intoxicates to consent. How does a jury then decide one is guilty and one is not?

This has been addressed many times in this thread.

It isn't just about whether she was aware enough to consent, it's also about whether it was reasonable for each of them to assume consent.

To a point, drunken consent is still consent. To a point. The jury had to decide if it was reasonable for the accused to assume the consent was the right side of that line

One of them met a drunk women in town and she got in a taxi and went back to a hotel room alone with him. Quite common circumstances up and down the country. So it would be difficult to unanimously say it was unreasonable for him to assume the consent she was given was coming from a place of complete awareness.

The other lied to a porter to get access to someone else's room (yes, it was in his name, but it wasn't 'his room') to sneak uninvited into a room where his friend was having sex, then when the friend stopped having sex with her, he started. This is not a common circumstance, this isn't how a lot of women get themselves a man.

That is how they came to different decisions. It wasn't simply 'was she too drunk to consent?'. Different circumstances creating different reasonable expectations of consent.

 

[Triggaaar]

To a point, drunken consent is still consent. To a point

Are you sure? I read the reports to say that drunken consent is consent, full stop. It is of course possible to be so drunk that you can't give consent at all, but then that's not consent (drunken or otherwise).

 

[JCL - the new kid in town]

The website is obviously a PR exercise to try and help the case for proving his innocence. It may not be everybodies cup of tea but then we do live in the age of social media. It is of course slanted heavily in his favour but for those that don't know much about the case (and bearing in mind a transcript of the original court case isn't online) it does provide a good starting point.

but any case to prove his innocence would be heard in court and not in the general public so how does it help? in fact surely it could hinder in so far as it may mean he can't get an impartial jury that hasn't heard about the case

You could take that view. However, do you not think most adults would be able to get a good indication, without hearing the voices, as to whether someone is a willing participant, non willing or just comatose!

possibly but people have been shown to misconstrue heated arguments for joviality and happiness for sadness without sound so it wouldn't be clear especially as the witnesses had been drinking i believe

Are you for real, comparing a lottery win with a rape case! It doesn't stretch the imagination very much to see that she may have been thinking of seeking compensation from Evans via a civil case. She may even have been referring to possible compensation as a victim of crime awarded by the court. Of course she may even have been referring to something entirely different and unrelated.

how am i comparing a lottery win with rape? I said that those tweets could mean anything. my main point was victims of crime don't recieve big payouts even in the most heineous of crimes. My comment was it could mean anything and if you google "winning big" all the results are to do with lottery/gambling wins

The facebook messages haven't been retrieved

so the recipients either saw nothing in them or are sticking up for her despite her "lying" is your implication and despite 10k on offer from Evans for the details. Surely someone would have come forward for that?

 

[drew]

This "mob rule" claim is a total fallacy.

The vast majority of decent, law abiding football supporters wouldn't want a rapist playing for their club.

I agree and disagree.

It is clearly mob rule but on a social media rather than in the street. The woman that has started the petition appears to have no connection to football or to Oldham. There is no suggestion that she even knows anything about the case other than the fact she knows he has been convicted of rape. She doesn't even acknowledge that his case is under review. An attention seeker who has got the attention she sought!

https://twitter.com/jeanhatchet

As for your last sentence, I agree, until such time that due process is complete. If he is found innocent then I'm sure you would be happy for him to sign for BHA if you also felt he football skills were good enough.

 

[Dandyman]

I agree and disagree.

It is clearly mob rule but on a social media rather than in the street. The woman that has started the petition appears to have no connection to football or to Oldham. There is no suggestion that she even knows anything about the case other than the fact she knows he has been convicted of rape. She doesn't even acknowledge that his case is under review. An attention seeker who has got the attention she sought!

https://twitter.com/jeanhatchet

As for your last sentence, I agree, until such time that due process is complete. If he is found innocent then I'm sure you would be happy for him to sign for BHA if you also felt he football skills were good enough.

Surely mob rule is the hounding of Evans' victim ?

 

[Screaming J]

Oldham withdrawn their offer apparently. As I said previously I think the FA should take control and if they say yes he can play back the club that takes him by saying whatever you lose through sponsors pulling out we will cover that loss for this season as it is will be a div 1 or 2 club and that money wont be astronomical. If they decide no then refuse to register him end of story no problem.

If we go down that route where would it end? Any club losing a sponsor for whatever reason could claim the 'Oldham/Ched Evans' precedent' as a reason why they too should be compensated. Sorry, BG; but I can't agree with that idea; whichever side of the fence one is on on the Ched Evans situation.

 

[JCL - the new kid in town]

You need to be a little more specific. A criminal record could include shoplifting as 16 year old, should that prevent you from changing your life and having a career in football. Motoring offences are part of your criminal record. In an ideal world it would be great if all footballers, or for that matter, any 'celebrity' led an altruistic life from cradle to grave but that isn't the real world. It may be a case of where do you draw the line and then who decides where that line is?

well i was speaking tongue in cheek but you could say any crimes before they came into football could be "ignored" so that you could have rehabilitation for troubled youngsters however make it aware that its a public eye career and they must toe the line and there is no second chance. Perhaps it would help some of them that get more money than they can cope with and lose control? I'm sure the clubs aren't happy when one of their players is in the papers again for the wrong reasons as the sponsors won't be happy. In a slightly related point why does it always seem to be the british players that have the trouble, considering the number of foreign players over here, it still seems to be the Brits that end up in trouble or do we not hear about it as much?

 

[Hillian1]

Surely mob rule is the hounding of Evans' victim ?

This.

 

[spring hall convert]

As I said previously I think the FA should take control and if they say yes he can play back the club that takes him by saying whatever you lose through sponsors pulling out we will cover that loss for this season as it is will be a div 1 or 2 club and that money wont be astronomical.

Yeah, you're right. The FA's number one priority should be paying for an unrepentant convicted rapist to play football.

An early contender for most stupid post of the year. I can't even begin to imagine a) How you dreamt this up? b) How you managed to convince yourself it was a good idea?

 

[drew]

This "mob rule" claim is a total fallacy.

The vast majority of decent, law abiding football supporters wouldn't want a rapist playing for their club.

but any case to prove his innocence would be heard in court and not in the general public so how does it help? in fact surely it could hinder in so far as it may mean he can't get an impartial jury that hasn't heard about the case

Well that is the decision they have made. It may or may not sway public opinion. Campaigns for innocence invariably require some form of publicity.

possibly but people have been shown to misconstrue heated arguments for joviality and happiness for sadness without sound so it wouldn't be clear especially as the witnesses had been drinking i believe

I think we will need to agree to disagree on this.

how am i comparing a lottery win with rape? I said that those tweets could mean anything. my main point was victims of crime don't recieve big payouts even in the most heineous of crimes. My comment was it could mean anything and if you google "winning big" all the results are to do with lottery/gambling wins You haven't heard of compensation for the victims of crime. Alternatively, she could sue him in a civil court for damages where the burden of proof isn't as great as in a criminal court.


so the recipients either saw nothing in them or are sticking up for her despite her "lying" is your implication and despite 10k on offer from Evans for the details. Surely someone would have come forward for that?

What with, there is no evidence, just hearsay as to what were in the FB comments!

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

I agree and disagree.

It is clearly mob rule but on a social media rather than in the street. The woman that has started the petition appears to have no connection to football or to Oldham. There is no suggestion that she even knows anything about the case other than the fact she knows he has been convicted of rape. She doesn't even acknowledge that his case is under review. An attention seeker who has got the attention she sought!

https://twitter.com/jeanhatchet

As for your last sentence, I agree, until such time that due process is complete. If he is found innocent then I'm sure you would be happy for him to sign for BHA if you also felt he football skills were good enough.

Are all petitions really 'mob rule' then ?

 

[drew]

Surely mob rule is the hounding of Evans' victim ?

Don't worry, i'm not condoning any of the tweets or 'outing' of the girl in this case. That is the other side of the same social media coin.

 

[drew]

Are all petitions really 'mob rule' then ?

Where did I say that?

 

[Acker79]

Are you sure? I read the reports to say that drunken consent is consent, full stop. It is of course possible to be so drunk that you can't give consent at all, but then that's not consent (drunken or otherwise).

My point was that "drunken consent is still consent" isn't a 'get out of jail free card', that it doesn't mean that when a person is so drunk they don't understand what they are consenting to when they yes, or act in a manner that implies consent, that you can then turn around and say "drunken consent is still consent, dude!".

Which is for all intents and purposes the same thing as 'when you're too drunk to consent it isn't actually consent so the 'drunken consent is still consent' doesn't count.

Which is, for all intents and purposes the same thing as 'to a point, drunken consent is still consent'.

 

[JCL - the new kid in town]

If he is found innocent then I'm sure you would be happy for him to sign for BHA if you also felt he football skills were good enough.

that is a point i'm not convinced by personally (but i've been known to be wrong). He had 3 seasons at Sheff Utd, and his first two seasons yielded about 7 goals in 60 appearances. Yes he had one amazing season where he got 35 goals in 43 games but is it just a 1 season wonder?

 

[symyjym]

This thread has got a little bit of an OCD about it. Let him prove his own innocence, even I was swayed from my view, it wouldn’t make a damn bit of difference so it’s a waste of time arguing the toss on here. The same arguments and counter arguments have been made hundreds of times on here and it is in an eternal loop without any conclusion.

This thread needs a poll so we can be done with it!

 

[The Camel]

I agree and disagree.

It is clearly mob rule but on a social media rather than in the street. The woman that has started the petition appears to have no connection to football or to Oldham. There is no suggestion that she even knows anything about the case other than the fact she knows he has been convicted of rape. She doesn't even acknowledge that his case is under review. An attention seeker who has got the attention she sought!

https://twitter.com/jeanhatchet

As for your last sentence, I agree, until such time that due process is complete. If he is found innocent then I'm sure you would be happy for him to sign for BHA if you also felt he football skills were good enough.

As it stands he is a rapist.

I would be very surprised if even a third of people would want a rapist playing for their club.

If he eventually exonorated, of course, then he can play for qwhatever team wants him. That is a moot point at the moment though.

 

[JCL - the new kid in town]

You haven't heard of compensation for the victims of crime. Alternatively, she could sue him in a civil court for damages where the burden of proof isn't as great as in a criminal court.

of course i have but you don't get large payouts. In the case of rape, to get more than 10k you have to receive severe physical and mental trauma so that isn't exactly winning big.

What with, there is no evidence, just hearsay as to what were in the FB comments!

i thought you said there were Facebook messages? if they were private messages they would have to be deleted by both parties, the sender and receiver.