Ched Evans - should he play football again?

Memento Mori wrote:
Ironhide wrote:I think the lesson to be learned here is don't have drunken one night stands.

I think the lesson to be learned here is don't go into a hotel room where your friend is having sex with a drunk woman and then start having sex with the drunk woman and then flee from the scene.

But what if she has pizza? i believe pizza was involved.

Does this make me now an 'innocent person' apologist now?

Photek wrote:Does this make me now an 'innocent person' apologist now?

I don't think he's definitely innocent is he? Difficult to prove is all.

Blue Eyes wrote:
Photek wrote:Does this make me now an 'innocent person' apologist now?

I don't think he's definitely innocent is he? Difficult to prove is all.

Hmm.

Daily Mail right on the attack :lol:

Memento Mori wrote:
Blue Eyes wrote:
Photek wrote:Does this make me now an 'innocent person' apologist now?

I don't think he's definitely innocent is he? Difficult to prove is all.

Hmm.

What the strawberry float? That can't be legal!

Blue Eyes wrote:
Photek wrote:Does this make me now an 'innocent person' apologist now?

I don't think he's definitely innocent is he? Difficult to prove is all.

So I'm still a 'rape' apologist then. :dread:

Rape apologist is a silly term to just silence anyone who might offer even a slightly different view to the pack.

Whatever you say about Ched Evans, its clear he did not rape this woman. His behaviour was quite disgusting on that night but it wasn't rape. It's amazing how many people on my Facebook feed were spouting about how justice was done on the original verdict, but now see this as a failing justice system despite this case being looked at in depth at least 3 times now.

Just been looking at the reaction on Twitter and whilst it's hard to completely agree with the feminist groups it's the Ched Evans supporters who are really saying sickening things. What a bunch of banana splits.

In rape trials, defence lawyers are banned from cross-examining an alleged victim about their sexual behaviour or history to protect them from humiliating treatment.
But there can be exceptional reasons to ditch that rule in the interests of a fair trial. The Court of Appeal said Mr Evans' case was one of those very rare exceptions.
It said that two other men who had sex with the woman had described their encounters with her in highly specific terms that were virtually indistinguishable from Mr Evans's own account of what had happened.
One of the encounters occurred days before the alleged rape - and the other in the days that followed.
On each occasion the woman had been drinking heavily and the sex occurred in a very specific way - including the words she used to encourage her partner.
Each time she woke up saying she had no memory of what had happened

Lady Justice Hallett, one of the country's top judges, said that these events were so similar to what Mr Evans had described that a jury had to hear about them before deciding whether the woman had been incapable of giving her consent

From bbc.

Memento Mori wrote:
Blue Eyes wrote:
Photek wrote:Does this make me now an 'innocent person' apologist now?

I don't think he's definitely innocent is he? Difficult to prove is all.

Hmm.

Whilst that should absolutley be illegal, and really surprised if it isn't, that in no way signifies any type of guilt on Ched Evans part.

If my loved one was being incorrectly found guilty, and I knew a witness could clear their name, i would do anything in my power to get them to attest.

The word 'offered' implies it wasn't paid ultimately? Is that right?

Photek wrote:I think I'm deserved an apology from certain forumites. I endured a torrid time/bullying for suggesting he may not be guilty.

Hexx wrote:The word 'offered' implies it wasn't paid ultimately? Is that right?

Reading the article I don't really see what she did wrong. She pointed the witness to a £50,000 reward that was part of Ched Evans campaign.

I can see how it would be frowned upon as you could interpret that as a bribe, but is it really any different to a crime stoppers reward?

Edit: Just want to be clear I'm not aiming that at you Hexx, just generally discussing the issue of the reward.

Didn't think you were sir - my question was just did he take/accept the reward/bribe?

I'd assume not as they would put paid in headline but haven't seen it covered anywhere

Hexx wrote:Didn't think you were sir - my question was just did he take/accept the reward/bribe?

I'd assume not as they would put paid in headline but haven't seen it covered anywhere

I can't imagine he will claim the reward now because the accusation of a bribe would be too big. I think he said in court he wasn't going to accept it but the reason he gave sounded a bit weak.

Sorry Hexx, I know we have butted heads before and I re-read my post and it sounded accusatory in my head so wanted to clarify!

Oh you silly sweet thing

It seems to me from reading the news story that the case for the defence was that the bird was a slapper.

People calling her a slag when sweet innocent Ched strawberry floated her when she was blind drunk when he had a girlfriend. He's a strawberry floating slag.

Albear wrote:
In rape trials, defence lawyers are banned from cross-examining an alleged victim about their sexual behaviour or history to protect them from humiliating treatment.
But there can be exceptional reasons to ditch that rule in the interests of a fair trial. The Court of Appeal said Mr Evans' case was one of those very rare exceptions.
It said that two other men who had sex with the woman had described their encounters with her in highly specific terms that were virtually indistinguishable from Mr Evans's own account of what had happened.
One of the encounters occurred days before the alleged rape - and the other in the days that followed.
On each occasion the woman had been drinking heavily and the sex occurred in a very specific way - including the words she used to encourage her partner.
Each time she woke up saying she had no memory of what had happened

Lady Justice Hallett, one of the country's top judges, said that these events were so similar to what Mr Evans had described that a jury had to hear about them before deciding whether the woman had been incapable of giving her consent

From bbc.

Well this seems a tad dodgy to me.

Ched Evans - should he play football again?

Who is online

Affiliates