NG32 Posted October 14, 2016 Share Posted October 14, 2016 This is going to be mega awkward for everyone in football who had their say. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ponsaelius Posted October 14, 2016 Share Posted October 14, 2016 What the hell did the lass' sexual relations with former partners have to do with the case? That seems completely bizarre. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crumpy Gunt Posted October 14, 2016 Share Posted October 14, 2016 Should get some compo. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klaus Posted October 14, 2016 Share Posted October 14, 2016 The whole idea that she should now be put on trial is lifting tbh. It isn't how the justice system works, not that it matters to some. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hanshithispantz Posted October 14, 2016 Share Posted October 14, 2016 Wasn't it the police that moved forward with the charges as she admitted she had no idea what happened? Not her going to the police saying she'd been raped? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hanshithispantz Posted October 14, 2016 Share Posted October 14, 2016 A woman should have as many sexual partners as she wishes and should have no bearing upon a rape case. I fear Ched's career will not recover. I haven't read anything today other than what I'm seeing on here, but if it's a fairly regular occurrence that she's meeting people and fucking them on a night out then it obviously looks better for Evans. Not saying there's anything wrong with her like, she can do what she wants. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klaus Posted October 14, 2016 Share Posted October 14, 2016 Wasn't it the police that moved forward with the charges as she admitted she had no idea what happened? Not her going to the police saying she'd been raped? That was how I understood it, aye. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happinesstan Posted October 14, 2016 Share Posted October 14, 2016 Didn't have a clue. Seems to be your thing. Funnily enough, restarting your life after a false rape allegation is an issue I can speak with authority on. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Posted October 14, 2016 Share Posted October 14, 2016 just getting a not guilty verdict doesn't mean lack of guilt. He did a bad thing but has just got himself off the hook because he was prepared and able to pay enough legal fees. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ndegwa Posted October 14, 2016 Share Posted October 14, 2016 just getting a not guilty verdict doesn't mean lack of guilt. He did a bad thing but has just got himself off the hook because he was prepared and able to pay enough legal fees. Did he? Has that been proven beyond reasonable doubt? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hanshithispantz Posted October 14, 2016 Share Posted October 14, 2016 just getting a not guilty verdict doesn't mean lack of guilt. He did a bad thing but has just got himself off the hook because he was prepared and able to pay enough legal fees. :lol: It works both ways. Nobody knows if he raped her or not, that's why it was ludicrous to completely ruin his life. Once he'd served his time he should have been allowed to get back to his job. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Crooks Posted October 14, 2016 Share Posted October 14, 2016 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisJbarnes Posted October 14, 2016 Share Posted October 14, 2016 Morally bad and criminally illegal are different things. The man has not been found guilty beyond reasonable doubt. Regardless of what happened, our criminal justice system is the best we have and he should now be accepted into society and compensated for the time in prison. Whether he is able to continue as a footballer is a moral issue, and clubs will have different views on that. When you have the likes of Barton (legitimately convicted) playing, I think its difficult to continue the witch hunt against Evans. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ndegwa Posted October 14, 2016 Share Posted October 14, 2016 Morally bad and criminally illegal are different things. The man has not been found guilty beyond reasonable doubt. Regardless of what happened, our criminal justice system is the best we have and he should now be accepted into society and compensated for the time in prison. Whether he is able to continue as a footballer is a moral issue, and clubs will have different views on that. When you have the likes of Barton (legitimately convicted) playing, I think its difficult to continue the witch hunt against Evans. I'm not sure tag-teaming a willing girl in a hotel room is morally bad anyway (if that's what actually happened). And no, I'm not a misogynistic woman beater. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
afar Posted October 14, 2016 Share Posted October 14, 2016 Having looked at all the evidence available, it's clear this is the right verdict, he should never have been found guilty in the first place. Having said that, what the hell was he thinking with his actions, amazed his girlfriend stood by him. He'll always be tarnished with this, despite the verdict, there will always be some who won't fully accept it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
healthyaddiction Posted October 14, 2016 Share Posted October 14, 2016 Morally bad and criminally illegal are different things. The man has not been found guilty beyond reasonable doubt. Regardless of what happened, our criminal justice system is the best we have and he should now be accepted into society and compensated for the time in prison. Whether he is able to continue as a footballer is a moral issue, and clubs will have different views on that. When you have the likes of Barton (legitimately convicted) playing, I think its difficult to continue the witch hunt against Evans. I'm not sure tag-teaming a willing girl in a hotel room is morally bad anyway (if that's what actually happened). And no, I'm not a misogynistic woman beater. Either way he was cheating on his girlfriend, so still a bad thing really. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted October 14, 2016 Share Posted October 14, 2016 Wasn't it the police that moved forward with the charges as she admitted she had no idea what happened? Not her going to the police saying she'd been raped? That was how I understood it, aye. Aye, same. Afaik it hinged on the judge deciding she couldn't possibly have been in a fit state to give consent even if she did actually consent at the time. That was always the mental bit for me; the lass was obviously pissed but assuming she did say aye the judge was saying she wasn't in a fit state to make that decision. Welcome to every fucking weekend Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJ_NUFC Posted October 14, 2016 Share Posted October 14, 2016 Sorry, I've a hazy memory of reading up on this case ages back. So if she didn't press charges, how on earth did the police get called and involved initially? I know she was in the hotel room with one of his mates, and he went and joined or something? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klaus Posted October 14, 2016 Share Posted October 14, 2016 So, two lads came forward for the re trial and described a similar scenario that she was involved in previously? The lass clearly had a promiscuous history like despite only being 19 at the time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted October 14, 2016 Share Posted October 14, 2016 Sorry, I've a hazy memory of reading up on this case ages back. So if she didn't press charges, how on earth did the police get called and involved initially? I know she was in the hotel room with one of his mates, and he went and joined or something? Yeah he joined in. She woke up with no memories in her own piss iirc. Think her mates advised her to speak to the coppers, they found out Evans paid for the room and pursued the case from there. Something like that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJ_NUFC Posted October 14, 2016 Share Posted October 14, 2016 So, two lads came forward for the re trial and described a similar scenario that she was involved in previously? The lass clearly had a promiscuous history like despite only being 19 at the time. Fascinating, but surely this is irrelevant where consent is concerned in this particular case? It's interesting how certain times past history is allowed as evidence, and other times it's not. Sorry, I've a hazy memory of reading up on this case ages back. So if she didn't press charges, how on earth did the police get called and involved initially? I know she was in the hotel room with one of his mates, and he went and joined or something? Yeah he joined in. She woke up with no memories in her own piss iirc. Think her mates advised her to speak to the coppers, they found out Evans paid for the room and pursued the case from there. Something like that. I wonder if she'd have called the cops if she'd not been persuaded by her friends, especially if she's done these kinds of things before? Again, none of this excuses the notion of a lack of consent, which is a crime and inexcusable. But in this scenario, it seems like she didn't recall consenting, if I'm reading it correctly? If so, this seems like a gargantuan waste of public resources and time for everyone involved. Especially with the not-guilty verdict, which pretty much calls the whole thing a sham. What a clusterfuck for everyone involved, especially the girl who, I'm sure, didn't want her life turned upside down by either the (alleged) rape or the ensuing court dramas. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted October 14, 2016 Share Posted October 14, 2016 So, two lads came forward for the re trial and described a similar scenario that she was involved in previously? The lass clearly had a promiscuous history like despite only being 19 at the time. Fascinating, but surely this is irrelevant where consent is concerned in this particular case? It's interesting how certain times past history is allowed as evidence, and other times it's not. Sorry, I've a hazy memory of reading up on this case ages back. So if she didn't press charges, how on earth did the police get called and involved initially? I know she was in the hotel room with one of his mates, and he went and joined or something? Yeah he joined in. She woke up with no memories in her own piss iirc. Think her mates advised her to speak to the coppers, they found out Evans paid for the room and pursued the case from there. Something like that. I wonder if she'd have called the cops if she'd not been persuaded by her friends, especially if she's done these kinds of things before? Again, none of this excuses the notion of a lack of consent, which is a crime and inexcusable. But in this scenario, it seems like she didn't recall consenting, if I'm reading it correctly? If so, this seems like a gargantuan waste of public resources and time for everyone involved. Especially with the not-guilty verdict, which pretty much calls the whole thing a sham. What a clusterfuck for everyone involved, especially the girl who, I'm sure, didn't want her life turned upside down by either the (alleged) rape or the ensuing court dramas. That's exactly it, she remembered literally nothing at all about the evening which the prosecution and judge took to mean she couldn't consent and that equalled rape. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shays Given Tim Flowers Posted October 14, 2016 Share Posted October 14, 2016 Think the Jury felt first time round she was too drunk to give consent, it's not really a sensational position but in this case it was odd as McDonald was cleared. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueStar Posted October 14, 2016 Share Posted October 14, 2016 Think the Jury felt first time round she was too drunk to give consent, it's not really a sensational position but in this case it was odd as McDonald was cleared. She went back to his room with him, which is an additional potential act of consent. She didn't go back to a room with Ched. I think that's why there were two different verdicts first time round. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted October 14, 2016 Share Posted October 14, 2016 Think the Jury felt first time round she was too drunk to give consent, it's not really a sensational position but in this case it was odd as McDonald was cleared. She went back to his room with him, which is an additional potential act of consent. She didn't go back to a room with Ched. I think that's why there were two different verdicts first time round. Yeah, wasn't it that they deemed she'd consented with him earlier in the evening or they knew each other, something like that? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now