Ched Evans

[Triggaaar]

Why not comment on the article directly, or ask the author to clarify your points ?

The article has been linked to here, with praise, and when I read it there seemed to be things stated as fact etc, that are not. The article doesn't seem very good to me, so I've said so. I have no interest in directly contacting the author, why would I have? Is that what you usually do when you disagree with an article in the press?

 

[Triggaaar]

Oh and it was Evans who booked the room.

Agree with the rest of your post, but to be clear, neither of them booked the room knowing what state she was in.

 

[Guerrero]

Agree with the rest of your post, but to be clear, neither of them booked the room knowing what state she was in.

So who booked the room and when?

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

The article has been linked to here, with praise, and when I read it there seemed to be things stated as fact etc, that are not. The article doesn't seem very good to me, so I've said so. I have no interest in directly contacting the author, why would I have? Is that what you usually do when you disagree with an article in the press?

No never. But, surely it seems a more sensible approach to ask the author directly than to get posters on here to guess his evidence, meaning, or thought processes ?

The author now has no means of reply to your slant on his article.

 

[Creaky]

Agree with the rest of your post, but to be clear, neither of them booked the room knowing what state she was in.

True but the prosecution case, presented at the trial, was that the room had been booked with the intention of taking a girl or girls back there. This was dealt with by the Lord Chief Justice when considering whether to grant an appeal or not.

The prosecution case was that the applicant had booked the room at the hotel with the main or sole purpose of procuring a girl or girls later that night. According to the Crown's case, both men were on the look-out for any girl who was a suitable target. The complainant had literally stumbled across McDonald's path.

 

[Triggaaar]

This case is very different than most where the defendant claims their innocence following conviction.

Normally in such cases it's a matter of whether or not a particular act was carried out by an individual - not so in the case of Ched Evans. The whole question of guilt or innocence revolves not around how Evans behaved but whether or not the girl was so drunk that she was not in a position to give consent or whether she was just very drunk but still was able to grant that consent.

I disagree. The court has to consider the things your saying, but that is not the case that Ched claims. Sure we're not discussing whether the act of sex took place, but we are discussing whether the act of rape took place. And while it might be a fine line between the two, it's possible that the reality was very clear. There are a range of possibilities of what happened, from her being practically unconscious and him being well aware he was raping her, to her being very clearly with it, and asking him to have sex with her and being an active participant in bed. He claims that the latter is the case, and IF that is the truth, then he very clearly didn't rape anyone, so the act did not happen, and it's not a fine line (in his version). Yes, he should still see that what he has done is immoral (because there's no claim that she asked McDonal to invite a friend), but that is very different to rape.

None of that however changes one iota the way Evans behaved and he either feels that the way he behaved is something he should apologise for or not. Had he apologised from day one it would not have had any affect on the legal decision on the state the girl was in but would have demonstrated that he recognised that how he did behave is not acceptable to the majority of people.

Yes, but I wasn't talking about just apologising, I was referring to the suggestion that it would have been better for him to accept the verdict rather than try to appeal it. If his version of events is true, of course he should appeal it. I'm not disputing that he should also apologise for being scummy.

I fully support Evans's right to follow all legal paths to prove his innocence in law and have many doubts in my mind as to whether or not the guilty verdict is sound and how it was possible for the jury to come to that conclusion beyond a reasonable doubt. I do however firmly believe that the way he behaved was something he should be ashamed of and for which he should apologise for unreservedly.

Yes, so do I.

 

[Husty]

Mob rule really is a pathetic, self defeating thing isn't it.

On a side note I don't see any of these radfems who are starting and signing the various petitions making any move to denounce the rape and death threats made towards Oldham Athletic staff and families. Says it all really.

 

[Guerrero]

So two randy young men with a few quid in their pocket book a hotel room on the off chance that they might pull and have need of it.
One of them bumps into an inebriated young woman who willingly (though drunk) goes back to the room and has sex with him.
A second young man then arrives and is presumably let into the room and the first one leaves him alone with his conquest.
Then the second man has sex with her.Still probably drunk.
How can one man be given five years and the other nothing?
Seems ludicrous.

 

[Triggaaar]

So who booked the room and when?

Evans booked the room in advance for his mate(s) to stay in.

True but the prosecution case, presented at the trial, was that the room had been booked with the intention of taking a girl or girls back there.

Yes, but Guerrero said "McDonald,who presumably booked the hotel room knowing what a state she was in" and you replied saying "Oh and it was Evans who booked the room", which gives the impression that Evans booked the room knowing what state the girl was in.

I know what the prosecution claimed, but I don't see any evidence that the room had been booked for that purpose. The evidence around the girl going back with McDonald does not look like he was chasing her, but more the opposite.

 

[Triggaaar]

So two randy young men with a few quid in their pocket book a hotel room on the off chance that they might pull and have need of it.
One of them bumps into an inebriated young woman who willingly (though drunk) goes back to the room and has sex with him.
A second young man then arrives and is presumably let into the room and the first one leaves him alone with his conquest.
Then the second man has sex with her.Still probably drunk.
How can one man be given five years and the other nothing?
Seems ludicrous.

I think perhaps you should start at the beginning, as you are jumping to all sorts of wrong conclusions.

 

[Triggaaar]

No never. But, surely it seems a more sensible approach to ask the author directly than to get posters on here to guess his evidence, meaning, or thought processes ?

I wasn't asking the posters here to guess his evidence - they were rhetorical questions, and I don't think he has the evidence. Of course he hasn't done a poll to find out what people think of the verdict and how many of those people support clubs he was linked with.

Someone said they thought his article was good, and I'm merely saying that I think there are unfounded claims in it. People often give opinions on articles written in the press, I know you don't expect us all to write our opinions to the authors so they have a right to reply.

 

[Creaky]

Evans booked the room in advance for his mate(s) to stay in.

Yes, but Guerrero said "McDonald,who presumably booked the hotel room knowing what a state she was in" and you replied saying "Oh and it was Evans who booked the room", which gives the impression that Evans booked the room knowing what state the girl was in.

I know what the prosecution claimed, but I don't see any evidence that the room had been booked for that purpose. The evidence around the girl going back with McDonald does not look like he was chasing her, but more the opposite.

There is very little evidence to support Ched Evans's claim that he booked the room "for his mate(s) to stay in" - certainly his mate returned to the room but didn't stay there.

The fact neither men stayed in the room despite having the opportunity to do so and that a drunk girl was left there instead would on the face of it seem to support the prosecution's assertion rather than the defendant's.

 

[The Merry Prankster]

Mob rule really is a pathetic, self defeating thing isn't it.

On a side note I don't see any of these radfems who are starting and signing the various petitions making any move to denounce the rape and death threats made towards Oldham Athletic staff and families. Says it all really.

Firstly- first sentence doesn't make sense.
Secondly - you don't have to be a radfem to sign one of the petitions. Many I know who signed aren't even fem let alone rad.
Thirdly - it says nothing at all.

 

[Triggaaar]

There is very little evidence to support Ched Evans's claim that he booked the room "for his mate(s) to stay in" - certainly his mate returned to the room but didn't stay there.

The fact neither men stayed in the room despite having the opportunity to do so and that a drunk girl was left there instead would on the face of it seem to support the prosecution's assertion rather than the defendant's.

It's very difficult to know without further evidence. On the one hand, why did McDonald have the key if Evans booked it and Evans was only supposed to be there? On the other hand, I don't see any evidence that McDonald had any possessions in the hotel, which is weird if he was supposed to be staying there. It's possible there's CCTV footage of him leaving with the possessions, but I've not heard of it. And it's difficult to know why McDonald didn't stay with her, maybe they wanted to laugh about what had happened etc.

 

[aolstudios]

Oh, Gordon Taylor...

http://www.sportsjoe.ie/football/pf...?utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=onsite_share

 

[drew]

It's very difficult to know without further evidence. On the one hand, why did McDonald have the key if Evans booked it and Evans was only supposed to be there? On the other hand, I don't see any evidence that McDonald had any possessions in the hotel, which is weird if he was supposed to be staying there. It's possible there's CCTV footage of him leaving with the possessions, but I've not heard of it. And it's difficult to know why McDonald didn't stay with her, maybe they wanted to laugh about what had happened etc.

According to the undisputed facts section of his website, Evans booked the room for McDonald and named him as the lead occupant along with another friend. After leaving the hotel, they went to Evans' family home and slept there. I'm not sure where but i think I read somewhere there was a party at Evans family home but that there wasn't room for McDonald to stay there hence the booking.

 

[Ernest]

Cameron joins the debate now, bell end

 

[Harry H]

Cameron joins the debate now, bell end

To all females.

If you are going to go out and get drunk out of your skulls.
Either make sure you have a good friend who is going to see you home.
Or stay with the pack and get a taxi together.

If you get separated from your friends and are off your head on alcohol or drugs then there may well be a male or a group of males who will try to take advantage of you sexually.

It isn't right and it isn't proper,but it is reality.

Look after yourselves!

 

[Bombadier Botty]

Spot on that woman on Question Time in the white jacket! Come on gang, we can easily get this up to 160 pages overnight!

 

[Acker79]

To all females.

If you are going to go out and get drunk out of your skulls.
Either make sure you have a good friend who is going to see you home.
Or stay with the pack and get a taxi together.

If you get separated from your friends and are off your head on alcohol or drugs then there may well be a male or a group of males who will try to take advantage of you sexually.

It isn't right and it isn't proper,but it is reality.

Look after yourselves!

Good grief. Hey ladies, we're just gonna make no effort whatsoever to hold men accountable for their actions, we're not going to try to put pressure on men to simply be decent human beings, we are going to absolve men of any responsibility and just instruct you not to get drunk or go anywhere alone. That's life!