Ched Evans - should he play football again?

The reason people are bringing your daughter into this, rightly or wrongly, is because your thoughts on this are wide of the mark and they have gone to extremes to make you see sense. I'm trying not to be aggravating or patronising, but honestly, the law has moved on in recent years, and women can be considered to be too drunk to give reasonable consent. It's just the way it is.

I know this is a different case totally, but read this:

http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/nor ... ed-2522642

This took place in a crowded place - so she obviously wasn't screaming out no. Is that as good as consent?

For reference, the law explicitly states the following:

If, through drink (or for any other reason) the complainant has temporarily lost her capacity to choose whether to have intercourse on the relevant occasion, she is not consenting, and subject to questions about the defendant’s state of mind, if intercourse takes place, this would be rape.”

You'd assume there must have been a specific piece of evidence that allowed the jury to draw a different conclusion on her capacity to choose at the moment when she supposedly consented to MacDonald and when she supposedly consented to Evans.

[iup=3595106]Photek[/iup] wrote:I really have no idea why people are mentioning my 4 year old girl in this. It has no place in here so kindly strawberry float off Sandy.

From what I have read, they are not talking about your 4 year old daughter, they are talking about your 18 year old daughter in the future. The reason she has been brought up is to try and make you look at this from a different angle, if it was your (adult!) daughter or sister that was so drunk that they couldn’t remember what happened, would you just assume that they had probably consented?

Society (well most of society) has moved on from the days where it was acceptable to get a girl pissed just so you could shag her.

Yep, I do understand, but she cant remember having sex with either, so other lad is equally culpable according to Skarjo's agruments is he not?.

Potentially he would be, but that wasn't what either the case or the evidence suggested.

Perhaps the fact that she had already agreed to go back to the hotel room with the first bloke sort of leaned the issue of consent back towards his favour a tad.

At least he could argue he assumed they were simply going back to the hotel to shag in the first place. It becomes more difficult for Evans to argue the same thing.

Also there's the question of when consent is given; if a girl implies consent earlier in the evening but reaches a higher level of drunkenness just before sex, does that become borderline rape? Perhaps she loses the ability to change her mind? It's a tricky one.

But Evans turning up like that, shagging and shooting off - added to her saying she has no memory of consenting to him - you can see why a rape verdict was given to him and not the other lad.

Does Photek also support Gamergate? Cos that's the level of wrongness he's showing in this thread. :fp:

I know the reasoning behind mentioning Sophie but wasn't needed as you can use same phraseology to say 'what if your son was accused' etc. There's literally no point in it.

I think croplolites post above explains why Evans got done. I'm only mentioning that there could be some doubt to things.

Having an alternate view on one case doesn't make me a rapist sympathiser nor and advocate to demean women and issue death threats but thanks eighthours.

[iup=3595119]Poser[/iup] wrote:The reason people are bringing your daughter into this, rightly or wrongly, is because your thoughts on this are wide of the mark and they have gone to extremes to make you see sense. I'm trying not to be aggravating or patronising, but honestly, the law has moved on in recent years, and women can be considered to be too drunk to give reasonable consent. It's just the way it is.

But not men?

[iup=3595150]Photek[/iup] wrote:Having an alternate view on one case doesn't make me a rapist sympathiser...

You're right, it doesn't.

This however;

[iup=3595054]Photek[/iup] wrote:The crux of the matter here is that she cant remember what happened in the room at all. How can anyone be accused of rape if no evidence is available.

Does.

Well, perhaps 'Rape sympathiser' is the wrong term. But you certainly convey a mindset that seems to suggest that her not being able to remember the night means that she can't have been raped or, at least, is not in a position to be able to accuse others of rape. The idea that the victim cannot make an accusation of rape because she was too drunk to remember consenting is the very definition of rape apologism.

I'm a rape 'apologist' now. :fp:

Jesus christ. :lol:

You literally denied her the right to accuse her attacker because she was too drunk to remember her consent or lack thereof.

I HEAR YOU'RE A RAPIST NOW FATHER!

[iup=3595187]Skarjo[/iup] wrote:You literally denied her the right to accuse her attacker because she was too drunk to remember her consent or lack thereof.

She never accused anyone of raping her, at least get your facts straight.

[iup=3595187]Skarjo[/iup] wrote:You literally denied her the right to accuse her attacker because she was too drunk to remember her consent or lack thereof.

And, like you've tried to explain, the fact she was too drunk to remember giving the consent is now, in the eyes of the law, a huge indicator that consent could not effectively be given.

I think this argument is going round in circles now. I can't see what's difficult to understand about it, TBH.

[iup=3595176]Bigerich[/iup] wrote:
[iup=3595119]Poser[/iup] wrote:The reason people are bringing your daughter into this, rightly or wrongly, is because your thoughts on this are wide of the mark and they have gone to extremes to make you see sense. I'm trying not to be aggravating or patronising, but honestly, the law has moved on in recent years, and women can be considered to be too drunk to give reasonable consent. It's just the way it is.

But not men?

I assume you're just being picky. I didn't wilfully exclude men from that; it was just rhetoric.

That's irrelevant to your saying that someone shouldn't be allowed to accuse someone of rape if they're too drunk to remember what's happened to them.

Edit;@Photek

My main point as others have pointed out is that its a tricky one to call and its not as simple as some people are making out, also the words and phraseology used in here has been borderline juvenile at times. At least try and be devils advocate for a second when constructing your posts.

[iup=3595193]Skarjo[/iup] wrote:That's irrelevant to your saying that someone shouldn't be allowed to accuse someone of rape if they're too drunk to remember what's happened to them.

I'm not saying that at all. Be better.

[iup=3595197]Photek[/iup] wrote:
[iup=3595193]Skarjo[/iup] wrote:That's irrelevant to your saying that someone shouldn't be allowed to accuse someone of rape if they're too drunk to remember what's happened to them.

I'm not saying that at all. Be better.

That is literally what you said.

[iup=3595054]Photek[/iup] wrote:The crux of the matter here is that she cant remember what happened in the room at all. How can anyone be accused of rape if no evidence is available.

[iup=3595186]Photek[/iup] wrote:I'm a rape 'apologist' now.

Jesus christ.

Yet from the evidence of your own words, you are. It's pretty ridiculous of you to try to laugh off people's conclusions about what your views mean, when the evidence is right here in the thread. The conclusions aren't ridiculous at all - what you said led to these conclusions.

If you don't recognise the description of you and think it doesn't represent your actual views, then you should look back at your contributions to this thread and figure out where the communication of your intended points has gone so badly wrong. As the words you've written on this subject are shocking, frankly.

With the way Photek has behaved in this thread, I had to double check if Ched Evans ever played for Liverpool or was ever employed by Microsoft.

Ched Evans - should he play football again?

Who is online

Affiliates