Ched Evans: Oldham Athletic sponsors told deal is close (deal off)

[theonlywayisup]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/30681333

[cabbageandribs1875]

it's not close...it's agreed, one sponsor pulled out so far


One of the club's main sponsors, Verlin Rainwater Solutions, have ended their association with the club due to the "imminent signing" of the convicted rapist


sure i read the other day that oldham signed another ex-convict a few years back as well, is evans seriously a great player or what ? makes you wonder why on earth a football club is willing to lose sponsors by signing him

[The Hibee Harp]

it's not close...it's agreed, one sponsor pulled out so far


One of the club's main sponsors, Verlin Rainwater Solutions, have ended their association with the club due to the "imminent signing" of the convicted rapist

Brave decision by the club. IMO Evans should be free to return to football and I find the interference of government and other influential figures in the matter disgusting.

[Pete]

Looks like that blogger who started these petitions will be ripping up her Oldham season ticket then just like she did with her Sheffield United one.

[MB62]

Brave decision by the club. IMO Evans should be free to return to football and I find the interference of government and other influential figures in the matter disgusting.

:agree:

[The_Exile]

Brave decision by the club. IMO Evans should be free to return to football and I find the interference of government and other influential figures in the matter disgusting.

Agreed :agree:

[R'Albin]

it's not close...it's agreed, one sponsor pulled out so far




If only Ched had thought of pulling out, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

[SeanWilson]

Brave decision by the club. IMO Evans should be free to return to football and I find the interference of government and other influential figures in the matter disgusting.

:agree: could not agree more. So many sanctimonious morons in powerful positions all over this country.

[Pretty Boy]

When all is said and done there is no legal reason why Evans can't return to football, it's a decision that is entirely up to a club whether they feel they want to deal with the backlash and also whether it is morally the right decision.

If you attempt to stop players convicted of certain crimes from becoming football players again you open a huge can of worms. Every player joining the professional game would have to undergo CRB/Disclosure checks. I'm sure there would be more than a fee legal challenges to such a move.

Morally Evans disgusts me, even if he isn't guilty of rape (as he claims) he's most definitely partaken in some pretty grubby behaviour but legally there's nothing can be done to stop him returning to football.

[easty]

Brave decision by the club. IMO Evans should be free to return to football and I find the interference of government and other influential figures in the matter disgusting.

He is free to return to football. Sponsors of the clubs linked with him are free to withdraw their support though. If I owned a company, would I want a convicted rapist running about with my company name on it? Probably not.

[Bronson]

Brave decision by the club. IMO Evans should be free to return to football and I find the interference of government and other influential figures in the matter disgusting.

Agreed, it's the biggest witch hunt I've ever seen.

Lee Hughes and Luke Mccormick both played football again without interference after killing people through drunk/dangerous driving, is Ched Evans' crime more heinous than that? And don't get me started on Marlon King ffs...

[Craig_HFC]

There wouldn't be as big an issue here if Evans had shown any remorse for what he did. He hasn't and he still pleads his innocence.

He just can't go back to his life before all this happened because he thinks he's not done anything wrong; that's not how it works, especially with him being in the public eye.

If he is so adamant that he is innocent; his time should be devoted to clearing his name rather than trying to go back to his normal life.

[McIntosh]

He is free to return to football. Sponsors of the clubs linked with him are free to withdraw their support though. If I owned a company, would I want a convicted rapist running about with my company name on it? Probably not.

However, another Oldham sponsor, Web Applications UK, said it would continue to support the club irrespective of its decision over Evans, "To deprive a human being of the right to work in their chosen profession should be a decision taken by a judicial system that dispassionately balances the rights of the individual against that of the society as a whole. There are cases where such rights should be restricted for the good of the whole, but it is not a decision that should be made by an IT company. Whether Oldham Athletic choose to employ Ched Evans is a decision for the manager and board of directors of the club. We will not interfere with that decision."

[The Hibee Harp]

There wouldn't be as big an issue here if Evans had shown any remorse for what he did. He hasn't and he still pleads his innocence.

He just can't go back to his life before all this happened because he thinks he's not done anything wrong; that's not how it works, especially with him being in the public eye.

If he is so adamant that he is innocent; his time should be devoted to clearing his name rather than trying to go back to his normal life.

Why can't he do both.

Mike Tyson was far bigger profile and he was allowed to return to his normal life.

[steve75]

Agreed, it's the biggest witch hunt I've ever seen.

Lee Hughes and Luke Mccormick both played football again without interference after killing people through drunk/dangerous driving, is Ched Evans' crime more heinous than that? And don't get me started on Marlon King ffs...

The issue for a lot of people is he has shown no remorse and still has refused to apologies for anything that took place that night.

[McIntosh]

There wouldn't be as big an issue here if Evans had shown any remorse for what he did. He hasn't and he still pleads his innocence.

He just can't go back to his life before all this happened because he thinks he's not done anything wrong; that's not how it works, especially with him being in the public eye.

If he is so adamant that he is innocent; his time should be devoted to clearing his name rather than trying to go back to his normal life.

Are you willing to keep him and pay his legal expenses? Evans believes that he is a victim of a miscarriage of justice and it is apparent to many posters here that he has been made a complete scapegoat.

[The_Exile]

He is free to return to football. Sponsors of the clubs linked with him are free to withdraw their support though. If I owned a company, would I want a convicted rapist running about with my company name on it? Probably not.

A convicted rapist yes but the conviction has huge question marks over it. Any publicity is good publicity and all that.

[Ireallywasthere]

The issue for a lot of people is he has shown no remorse and still has refused to apologies for anything that took place that night.
It was a rather bizarre decision by the jury to convict him. Macdonald took her back to the hotel room and had sex with her, Evans joined in. The jury decided that she was too drunk to give consent but returned a not guilty verdict on Macdonald, and a guilty verdict on Evans. He is quite right to appeal

[Craig_HFC]

Why can't he do both.

Mike Tyson was far bigger profile and he was allowed to return to his normal life.

I'm just saying that if I were in his position; my main concern would be clearing my name. Anything else would be secondary.

Regarding the point about Hughes & McCormick being allowed to return to football relatively unscathed; this happened before Twitter etc. I think that the explosion of social media along with the apparent current cultural obsession to be offended on other people's behalfs etc has resulted in this being as big a witch hunt as it is.

[jacomo]

Are you willing to keep him and pay his legal expenses? Evans believes that he is a victim of a miscarriage of justice and it is apparent to many posters here that he has been made a complete scapegoat.

Scapegoat for what exactly?

As it stands, Evans is a convicted criminal who is still serving his sentence (on probation) and on the sex offenders register. As such, there are certain jobs he is not allowed to do, such as work with children or vulnerable adults. I think it is entirely reasonable to add football to this list, as he would be in the public eye, and in a position of influence over children and young people.

No one is saying he should not be able to work again - but some jobs bring specific privileges and responsibilities with them, and as it stands I think he is now unsuitable.

I would be disgusted if Hibs signed him, tbh. I bet Hearts are interested, though.

[The Hibee Harp]

I'm just saying that if I were in his position; my main concern would be clearing my name. Anything else would be secondary.
Regarding the point about Hughes & McCormick being allowed to return to football relatively unscathed; this happened before Twitter etc. I think that the explosion of social media along with the apparent current cultural obsession to be offended on other people's behalfs etc has resulted in this being as big a witch hunt as it is.

I dont know his financial circumstances but perhaps he needs to work to pay for any campaign to clear his name.

[Onceinawhile]

If only Ched had thought of pulling out, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

That's a really poor comment. Rape shouldn't be trivialised.

I realise it's a joke, but it's not very funny.

[The Hibee Harp]

Scapegoat for what exactly?

As it stands, Evans is a convicted criminal who is still serving his sentence (on probation) and on the sex offenders register. As such, there are certain jobs he is not allowed to do, such as work with children or vulnerable adults. I think it is entirely reasonable to add football to this list, as he would be in the public eye, and in a position of influence over children and young people.

No one is saying he should not be able to work again - but some jobs bring specific privileges and responsibilities with them, and as it stands I think he is now unsuitable.

I would be disgusted if Hibs signed him, tbh. I bet Hearts are interested, though.

Yet, as it stands, football is not on that list.

[jacomo]

I dont know his financial circumstances but perhaps he needs to work to pay for any campaign to clear his name.

He should look for any job he can get then. Why should he get a contract as a footballer, a role which carries huge profile and influence?

[McIntosh]

I'm just saying that if I were in his position; my main concern would be clearing my name. Anything else would be secondary.

Regarding the point about Hughes & McCormick being allowed to return to football relatively unscathed; this happened before Twitter etc. I think that the explosion of social media along with the apparent current cultural obsession to be offended on other people's behalfs etc has resulted in this being as big a witch hunt as it is.

Craig how would you clear your name without income? I am thankful that people are now waking up to the tyranny of twitter and as you say this has become a witchhunt.

[McIntosh]

He should look for any job he can get then. Why should he get a contract as a footballer, a role which carries huge profile and influence?

because that is what he is trained to do and allegedly good at.

[jacomo]

Yet, as it stands, football is not on that list.

Hence why individual clubs are making their own moral judgements? Would you be happy if he signed for Hibs? I would be disgusted.

We all seem to agree that football clubs do or should play very important roles in the community. The players are their most important ambassadors. I would be very unhappy if Ched Evans was representing Hibs.

[The Hibee Harp]

He should look for any job he can get then. Why should he get a contract as a footballer, a role which carries huge profile and influence?

Because he can make substantial amounts of money playing football, which ultimately is his trade.

[flash]

It was a rather bizarre decision by the jury to convict him. Macdonald took her back to the hotel room and had sex with her, Evans joined in. The jury decided that she was too drunk to give consent but returned a not guilty verdict on Macdonald, and a guilty verdict on Evans. He is quite right to appeal

He did appeal. He lost. He has also orchestrated a campaign to vilify the victim.

[jacomo]

Craig how would you clear your name without income? I am thankful that people are now waking up to the tyranny of twitter and as you say this has become a witchhunt.

Do you know what a witch hunt means?

How about his victim who has been hounded on Twitter?

[jacomo]

Because he can make substantial amounts of money playing football, which ultimately is his trade.

You make it sound as if it's his right to earn a football contract. It's not - it's a privilege.

[Craig_HFC]

I dont know his financial circumstances but perhaps he needs to work to pay for any campaign to clear his name.

And I'm sure that he is aware that getting a job in the public eye is not going to help his 'campaign'.

[hibbybob]

Some interesting views.

I wonder how many of us would have supported Craig Thomson in any attempt to rejoin Hearts?

[jacomo]

It was a rather bizarre decision by the jury to convict him. Macdonald took her back to the hotel room and had sex with her, Evans joined in. The jury decided that she was too drunk to give consent but returned a not guilty verdict on Macdonald, and a guilty verdict on Evans. He is quite right to appeal

As you (presumably) weren't really there in court to hear all the evidence, maybe you've jumped to the wrong conclusion?

[Craig_HFC]

Some interesting views.

I wonder how many of us would have supported Craig Thomson in any attempt to rejoin Hearts?

I wasn't aware that they'd stopped paying that particular referee.

:greengrin

[Pete]

Some interesting views.

I wonder how many of us would have supported Craig Thomson in any attempt to rejoin Hearts?

The whole issue for me wasn't really Thomson, it was his chairman's refusal to sack him.

[easty]

A convicted rapist yes but the conviction has huge question marks over it. Any publicity is good publicity and all that.


It was a rather bizarre decision by the jury to convict him. Macdonald took her back to the hotel room and had sex with her, Evans joined in. The jury decided that she was too drunk to give consent but returned a not guilty verdict on Macdonald, and a guilty verdict on Evans. He is quite right to appeal

He can have his appeal, but who are you or I to question the verdict? I've heard this sort of argument a few times about this case now. As things stand he's a convicted rapist, regardless of how questionable or bizarre anyone might find it.

[Pete]

You make it sound as if it's his right to earn a football contract. It's not - it's a privilege.

Who has the right to grant that privilege?

[easty]

Who has the right to grant that privilege?

society?

[Andy74]

Convicted or not he is now free to take up his work again. That's the system we have in place for everyone. I don't see any reason why being a footballer is any different. I think the campaign against him is quite disturbing.

[hibbiedon]

Some interesting views.

I wonder how many of us would have supported Craig Thomson in any attempt to rejoin Hearts?

I have to be honest I was pleased that hearts stood by him as this gave me another reason to have a pop at them, if he was with another club it would not have bothered me so much.
gordon Strachan gave a terrific interview during the World Cup regarding Sanchez and the double standards of football fans, our players are innocent and theirs are guilty is the normal attitude

[The Hibee Harp]

You make it sound as if it's his right to earn a football contract. It's not - it's a privilege.

The point I am trying to make is that it is what he is trained to do and what he naturally would look to return to doing. The fact he can make far more playing football than say being a Joiner would obviously help finance any campaign to clear his name.



And I'm sure that he is aware that getting a job in the public eye is not going to help his 'campaign'.

Perhaps, or maybe he feels by being in the public eye it keeps what he perceives as a miscarriage of justice in the limelight.

[easty]

Convicted or not he is now free to take up his work again. That's the system we have in place for everyone. I don't see any reason why being a footballer is any different. I think the campaign against him is quite disturbing.

That lassie will have to deal with the fact she was raped for the rest of her life, why shouldn't he have to?

[Andy74]

That lassie will have to deal with the fact she was raped for the rest of her life, why shouldn't he have to?

There's a justice system in place to deal with that question.

[The Hibee Harp]

That lassie will have to deal with the fact she was raped for the rest of her life, why shouldn't he have to?

There is no question he will.

[The_Exile]

He can have his appeal, but who are you or I to question the verdict? I've heard this sort of argument a few times about this case now. As things stand he's a convicted rapist, regardless of how questionable or bizarre anyone might find it.

The fact the CCRC have prioritised his case and made a point to mention it had nothing to do with his relative fame or trade would suggest it's a case where they're keen to make sure justice is seen to be served quickly, whatever that outcome may be, read into that what you like, all IMO of course.

[Kato]

Convicted or not he is now free to take up his work again. That's the system we have in place for everyone. I don't see any reason why being a footballer is any different. I think the campaign against him is quite disturbing.

Several jobs are already proscribed for convicted rapists/sex offenders.

No reason why football, given it's place in the community, shouldn't be added to that list.

[robinp]

Patrick Kluivert actually killed somebody and was convicted of death by dangerous driving (doing 60 in a 30), he didn't even spend time in jail for it,got 200+ hrs of community service. I don't recall any public backlash whenever he played matches in the UK for club or country, during Euro 96!

Edit: I also don't like that fact that all the UK news outlets are billing their articles: "convicted Rapist Ched Evans". I don't see Cheryl Cole lambasted as "convicted violent criminal" or "Pervert George Michael", "Kerb Crawler Hugh Grant" etc.

[easty]

There's a justice system in place to deal with that question.

Aye, there's an argument that says he's served his time. I'd argue that the 'rapist' tag isn't taken away just because you've served your sentence though. Unless his conviction is overturned he'll always be a rapist.

[Ross4356]

Brave decision by the club. IMO Evans should be free to return to football and I find the interference of government and other influential figures in the matter disgusting.


:agree:


Agreed :agree:


:agree: could not agree more. So many sanctimonious morons in powerful positions all over this country.

Would you's all be happy with him playing for us then?

[CropleyWasGod]

Patrick Klivert actually killed somebody and was convicted of death by dangerous driving (doing 60 in a 30), he didn't even spend time in jail for it,got 200+ hrs of community service. I don't recall any public backlash whenever he played matches in the UK for club or country, during Euro 96!

We're in a different era now. With social media, people are more able and likely to latch on to "causes" than they ever were.

Whether that's a good thing (more political awareness) or a bad thing (bandwagon-jumping) is for another discussion, but I don't think it's right to compare this situation with the likes of Kluivert.

[The Hibee Harp]

Would you's all be happy with him playing for us then?

Personally, I would have no problem with it.

[easty]

The fact the CCRC have prioritised his case and made a point to mention it had nothing to do with his relative fame or trade would suggest it's a case where they're keen to make sure justice is seen to be served quickly, whatever that outcome may be, read into that what you like, all IMO of course.

I don't know the details of the case, and if the conviction is overturned then I'd have no reason to believe that was the wrong decision. As things stand though, it hasn't been overturned, and equally I have no reason to believe that this is the wrong decision.

[The_Exile]

Would you's all be happy with him playing for us then?

Not particularly no, I don't like the guy at all, but I certainly don't think anybody convicted of a crime should be left to rot in a bedsit somewhere if they're still capable of redemption and contributing to society.

[The_Exile]

I don't know the details of the case, and if the conviction is overturned then I'd have no reason to believe that was the wrong decision. As things stand though, it hasn't been overturned, and equally I have no reason to believe that this is the wrong decision.

I respect your stance easty, and I don't have enough reason to believe that this is the right decision yet, we'll see in due course.

[Steve20]

I am stunned the amount of people who say he should be allowed to return to Football. And disgusted to be honest. People wanting to sweep as serious a crime as this under the carpet now, while the girl will have to live with it forever now.

He was found guilty of one of the most horrendous crimes you can do. If he ever signed for Hibs, that would be me finished attending Easter Road.

[easty]

Patrick Kluivert actually killed somebody and was convicted of death by dangerous driving (doing 60 in a 30), he didn't even spend time in jail for it,got 200+ hrs of community service. I don't recall any public backlash whenever he played matches in the UK for club or country, during Euro 96!

Edit: I also don't like that fact that all the UK news outlets are billing their articles: "convicted Rapist Ched Evans". I don't see Cheryl Cole lambasted as "convicted violent criminal" or "Pervert George Michael", "Kerb Crawler Hugh Grant" etc.

Maybe something to do with peoples interpretations of the intent involved? Killing someone by dangerous driving is obviously horrible, but it's not intentional, it's something horrific that's happened due to doing something mindless. Rape isnt the same in that respect.

I suppose they introduce those people by what they're most famous for. Ched Evans is far more infamous for this than he was famous as a footballer.

[The_Exile]

People wanting to sweep as serious a crime as this under the carpet now

How you've come to that conclusion is absolutely baffling. If, after the investigation into the conviction is done, and is upheld, then he will be guilty of a henious crime and will obviously need to acknowledge this. But, IMO, everybody is capable of redemption and can change for the better and even offer themselves up for an example of how to redeem themselves.

What are the alternatives? Execution? A life of unemployment? Why can't society offer help and support the perpetrators (to turn their lives around) as well as the victims (to help them through their ordeal)?

[flash]

How you've come to that conclusion is absolutely baffling. If, after the investigation into the conviction is done, and is upheld, then he will be guilty of a henious crime and will obviously need to acknowledge this. But, IMO, everybody is capable of redemption and can change for the better and even offer themselves up for an example of how to redeem themselves.

What are the alternatives? Execution? A life of unemployment? Why can't society offer help and support the perpetrators (to turn their lifes around) as well as the victims (to help them through their ordeal)?

Have you followed his behaviour since he got out? Not sure it's redemption he is seeking.

[CropleyWasGod]

Patrick Klivert actually killed somebody and was convicted of death by dangerous driving (doing 60 in a 30), he didn't even spend time in jail for it,got 200+ hrs of community service. I don't recall any public backlash whenever he played matches in the UK for club or country, during Euro 96!

We're in a different era now. With social media, people are more able and likely to latch on to "causes" than they ever were.

Whether that's a good thing (more political awareness) or a bad thing (bandwagon-jumping) is for another discussion, but I don't think it's right to compare this situation with the likes of Kluivert.

[Leithenhibby]

Do you know what a witch hunt means?

How about his victim who has been hounded on Twitter?

:agree: Her life is in pieces, and nobody seems to care too much from where I'm sitting. This can and will, end in tears IF Oldham Ath proceed, IMO

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cTI9mRZfkaw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hv48S8ycQN8

I also notice, Mike Ashley's SD are a sponsor.........

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2900150/Rapist-footballer-Ched-Evans-handed-two-half-year-contract-Oldham-Athletic-tomorrow-despite-opposition-sponsors-campaigners.html

[jacomo]

Who has the right to grant that privilege?

Oldham FC are legally entitled to offer him a contract, if that's what you mean. I think they are ducking their wider responsibilities to the community - but then they've done similar before, so no real surprise there.

Hibs (rather than Hibernians) are also legally allowed to employ him, but I would be disgusted if we did so.

People have certain inalienable rights - the right to a free trial is an important and relevant one. No one has the right to earn a living playing football - it is a privilege that only a tiny minority of aspiring footballers enjoy. It is based on ability, but also how an individual conducts themselves.

Therefore, to say Evans has 'the right' to another football contract is plain wrong.

[Pretty Boy]

I am stunned the amount of people who say he should be allowed to return to Football. And disgusted to be honest. People wanting to sweep as serious a crime as this under the carpet now, while the girl will have to live with it forever now.

He was found guilty of one of the most horrendous crimes you can do. If he ever signed for Hibs, that would be me finished attending Easter Road.

It's not a case of sweeping it under the carpet but legally how do you prevent him returning to football without asking every professional player to undergo a CRB check and banning every player with certain convictions from playing the game?

To single out one man just because he is high profile would be ridiculously easy to challenge in any court. You have to have consistent employment laws from Manchester United down to those on pro contracts in the Highland League.

[jacomo]

Convicted or not he is now free to take up his work again. That's the system we have in place for everyone. I don't see any reason why being a footballer is any different. I think the campaign against him is quite disturbing.

You've chosen to be disturbed by fans who don't want Ched Evans to represent their club? Dear God.

[Andy74]

Aye, there's an argument that says he's served his time. I'd argue that the 'rapist' tag isn't taken away just because you've served your sentence though. Unless his conviction is overturned he'll always be a rapist.

He will but equally he is allowed to get on with his work.

[Andy74]

You've chosen to be disturbed by fans who don't want Ched Evans to represent their club? Dear God.

By the orchestrated attempts on Twitter and so on. Largely by people with no interest in football. It's taking the law further than was intended and yes. I find it a bit disturbing.

[Andy74]

Several jobs are already proscribed for convicted rapists/sex offenders.

No reason why football, given it's place in the community, shouldn't be added to that list.

Those jobs are generally where people may be in direct dealings with kids, vulnerable people etc and is pretty generalised as it stands. I don't see why football would be included at all.

[easty]

He will but equally he is allowed to get on with his work.

Indeed. I'm looking at it from a football club, or from a sponsors side, I wouldn't want his name linked to my team, or my company. I wouldn't want any kids in my family asking for his name on the back of their strip.

[ColintonHibs]

Brave decision by the club. IMO Evans should be free to return to football and I find the interference of government and other influential figures in the matter disgusting.

I find raping people disgusting

[Keith_M]

It's not a case of sweeping it under the carpet but legally how do you prevent him returning to football without asking every professional player to undergo a CRB check and banning every player with certain convictions from playing the game?

To single out one man just because he is high profile would be ridiculously easy to challenge in any court. You have to have consistent employment laws from Manchester United down to those on pro contracts in the Highland League.


There are numerous examples of events that have ended the careers of those in 'show business' (e.g. Barrymore and the death in his swimming pool). Football is part of showbusiness nowadays, which benefits players via high salaries but also gives them standards to live up to that us mere mortals don't.

The fact is that if you put people in a position where they are idolised, but have dubious past records, it will drive many people away. That is something that any business needs to consider, aside from any moral implications.


Also, (not aimed at you PB), I can't imagine he's going to be consigned to sitting in some bedsit with no money to his name anytime soon.

[Leithenhibby]

He will but equally he is allowed to get on with his work.

Is he on the sex register?

I'd imagine there would be problems when kids are involved :confused: Ball boys & girls, Oldham Ath are about to enter real murky waters IMO

[jacomo]

Is he on the sex register?

I'd imagine there would be problems when kids are involved :confused: Ball boys & girls, Oldham Ath are about to enter real murky waters IMO

Yes he is, and because of this there is already a list of jobs he is not allowed to do. Football is not one of them, but the principle that restricts his future employment choices already exists in law.

[Andy74]

I find raping people disgusting

Indeed and it carries a sentence. I just don't really see why a football player is being picked up as a special case to ensure that there additional restrictions over and above what anyone else woukd be met with.

My wife hates football and thinks players are all idiots. She likes rugby though.

She's taken an interest in this too and so think it is linked to her dislike of the people involved in the game and a good illustration to back up the behaviour they think footballers are all into.

[robinp]

Is he on the sex register?

I'd imagine there would be problems when kids are involved :confused: Ball boys & girls, Oldham Ath are about to enter real murky waters IMO

Yes he is, although I don't think there are any restrictions placed on him in regard to who he comes into contact with - i.e. he is not a paedophile, he's a convicted sex offender!

[easty]

Indeed and it carries a sentence. I just don't really see why a football player is being picked up as a special case to ensure that there additional restrictions over and above what anyone else woukd be met with.

My wife hates football and thinks players are all idiots. She likes rugby though.

She's taken an interest in this too and so think it is linked to her dislike of the people involved in the game and a good illustration to back up the behaviour they think footballers are all into.

When Rolf Harris comes out of prison, would you be happy for him to slip back into entertainment on TV? He'll have served his time. If, say, 8 out of 10 cats wanted him as a regular on the show, should the public (whether they watched the show previously or not) just accept that?

[CRAZYHIBBY]

Is anyone here certain that he did rape her? ......Why not make him take a lie detector test

[Andy74]

Is he on the sex register?

I'd imagine there would be problems when kids are involved :confused: Ball boys & girls, Oldham Ath are about to enter real murky waters IMO

Why would kids be at risk?

[easty]

Is anyone here certain that he did rape her? ......Why not make him take a lie detector test

There's only one in the country and Jeremy Kyle has it pretty much permanently?

[Andy74]

When Rolf Harris comes out of prison, would you be happy for him to slip back into entertainment on TV? He'll have served his time. If, say, 8 out of 10 cats wanted him as a regular on the show, should the public (whether they watched the show previously or not) just accept that?

Fair point. It's up to those who would wish to employ him and the public on whether they would watch!

Edit: I think there also some difficult lines here too and each to their own on where they are drawn. A serial offender who has preyed on kids for example I'd place as a bit more abhorrent than the details if the Evans case.

[Leithenhibby]

Yes he is, and because of this there is already a list of jobs he is not allowed to do. Football is not one of them, but the principle that restricts his future employment choices already exists in law.

So the sex register is taylor made to each case, is that right?


Why would kids be at risk?

I'm not saying they are, just not sure what he is and isn't allowed to do when on the sex register. I was looking for clarification :wink:

[McIntosh]

Do you know what a witch hunt means?

How about his victim who has been hounded on Twitter? Very much so I have witnessed a few of them and unfortunately two wrongs never make a right.

[McIntosh]

You make it sound as if it's his right to earn a football contract. It's not - it's a privilege. No - it is a job

[heretoday]

When Rolf Harris comes out of prison, would you be happy for him to slip back into entertainment on TV? He'll have served his time. If, say, 8 out of 10 cats wanted him as a regular on the show, should the public (whether they watched the show previously or not) just accept that?

Rolf Harris may end up on Big Brother or out in the jungle. No doubt his fellow performers will make a pretence of pulling out of the show before reluctantly accepting the cash.

[Sir David Gray]

Incredible decision considering how much this is going to cost them in lost revenue from lack of sponsorship.

Apart from anything else, I think they'll lose the support of a lot of fans, particularly those who have families.

There's no way I would want Hibs to go anywhere near this guy.

[jacomo]

Is anyone here certain that he did rape her? ......Why not make him take a lie detector test

The evidence was strong enough to convince a jury beyond all reasonable doubt.

[McIntosh]

As you (presumably) weren't really there in court to hear all the evidence, maybe you've jumped to the wrong conclusion?

There is a real and distinct possibility that a miscarriage of justice has occured. I would remind you of the following facts, the application to Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) was drafted July 2014. Representations to CCRC to prioritise consideration of application on legal grounds succeeded in October 2014.

[McIntosh]

He can have his appeal, but who are you or I to question the verdict? I've heard this sort of argument a few times about this case now. As things stand he's a convicted rapist, regardless of how questionable or bizarre anyone might find it. With your logic why did campaigners questions the verdicts in relation to the Birmingham Six or the Guildford Four. Well that is simple they were unsound. What don't you understand about that?

[jacomo]

Very much so I have witnessed a few of them and unfortunately two wrongs never make a right.

Ok - a witch hunt is where people believe a wrong doing has been committed and search for the alleged perpetrator, often on flimsy evidence.

In this case, no one is searching for an individual responsible. It is not contested by Ched Evans that he was at the hotel that night.

By definition - not a witch hunt.

[Pretty Boy]

There are numerous examples of events that have ended the careers of those in 'show business' (e.g. Barrymore and the death in his swimming pool). Football is part of showbusiness nowadays, which benefits players via high salaries but also gives them standards to live up to that us mere mortals don't.

The fact is that if you put people in a position where they are idolised, but have dubious past records, it will drive many people away. That is something that any business needs to consider, aside from any moral implications.


Also, (not aimed at you PB), I can't imagine he's going to be consigned to sitting in some bedsit with no money to his name anytime soon.

I agree.

The point I was making that those calling for him to be 'banned' from football need to be aware that is a legal issue. As it stands this is a moral issue and a matter for the football club involved and the player. Same as Barrymore was a matter for the TV companies to decide, not the courts.

It's funny how moral standards differ when talking about different spheres of showbusiness though isn't it? Evans is, quite rightly, vilified yet someone like Roman Polanski who admitted sexual contact with a minor continues to make critically acclaimed films that attract huge numbers of people with almost no protest at all.

[Leithenhibby]

Incredible decision considering how much this is going to cost them in lost revenue from lack of sponsorship.

Apart from anything else, I think they'll lose the support of a lot of fans, particularly those who have families.

There's no way I would want Hibs to go anywhere near this guy.

:agree:

It's just bonkers, and I can't understand the reasoning behind it. This could cost Oldham Ath thousands & thousands in lost revenue. Away fans will also take a stance, I'm sure.

[jacomo]

There is a real and distinct possibility that a miscarriage of justice has occured. I would remind you of the following facts, the application to Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) was drafted July 2014. Representations to CCRC to prioritise consideration of application on legal grounds succeeded in October 2014.

If so, and the case is overturned, he will be entitled to continue with his life with his reputation intact. I understand that is easier said than done, but still - it seems pretty clear that he would have little difficulty picking up his career again. Until then, however, I stand by my view that I would not want him representing my club, and do not see that he has any right (as a convicted criminal) to enjoy the privileged life of a pro footballer.

[easty]

There is a real and distinct possibility that a miscarriage of justice has occured. I would remind you of the following facts, the application to Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) was drafted July 2014. Representations to CCRC to prioritise consideration of application on legal grounds succeeded in October 2014.

Is there a real and distinct possibility that he was convicted correctly?


With your logic why did campaigners questions the verdicts in relation to the Birmingham Six or the Guildford Four. Well that is simple they were unsound. What don't you understand about that?

Yeah, thats what my logic suggests..:confused:

Did I, or did I not, say he can have his appeal?

[StarMan10]

It's a tricky one. The case itself is a confusing one (how Macdonald was not charged but Evans was etc). IF and it's a big IF he was as innocent as he claims he is, i can understand his reaction. He's trying his upmost to clear his name and if someone had wrongly accused you of rape you would not be feeling sorry for the accuser. But as I say it's a big if. I do think politicians getting involved is ludicrous and think they should have plenty better ways to be spending their time than trying to influence football gossip

[jacomo]

I agree.

The point I was making that those calling for him to be 'banned' from football need to be aware that is a legal issue. As it stands this is a moral issue and a matter for the football club involved and the player. Same as Barrymore was a matter for the TV companies to decide, not the courts.

It's funny how moral standards differ when talking about different spheres of showbusiness though isn't it? Evans is, quite rightly, vilified yet someone like Roman Polanski who admitted sexual contact with a minor continues to make critically acclaimed films that attract huge numbers of people with almost no protest at all.

Good point.

However, the fact that this sort of behaviour might have been swept under the carpet in the past is not a good argument for continuing to do so.

[Ireallywasthere]

With your logic why did campaigners questions the verdicts in relation to the Birmingham Six or the Guildford Four. Well that is simple they were unsound. What don't you understand about that?
I was making the point that the jury decided that she was sober enough to consent to having sex with MacDonald (and therefore not guilty of rape )but too drunk to consent to having sex with Evans. Both Evans and Macdonald were having sex with her at the same time - they do not deny this

[McIntosh]

Ok - a witch hunt is where people believe a wrong doing has been committed and search for the alleged perpetrator, often on flimsy evidence.

In this case, no one is searching for an individual responsible. It is not contested by Ched Evans that he was at the hotel that night.

By definition - not a witch hunt. Hold on a witch hunt does not need to be framed in the narrative of wrong doing for example, the Mccarthy witch hunts should strike accord. People who were members of the communist were blacklisted from film and television because they were members of the communist party. In relation to Evans you are advocating restricted to trade after due process, punishment after the fact. This is why it is a witch hunt.

[McIntosh]

If so, and the case is overturned, he will be entitled to continue with his life with his reputation intact. I understand that is easier said than done, but still - it seems pretty clear that he would have little difficulty picking up his career again. Until then, however, I stand by my view that I would not want him representing my club, and do not see that he has any right (as a convicted criminal) to enjoy the privileged life of a pro footballer.

First point, my previous statement is a fact, so it is not an 'if'. Secondly, you see a footballer as a 'privileged life' I see in terms of employment and framed within that content. Finally, our club has had many players who have played for us who have been guilty of domestic violence, living of immoral earnings and assault and battery. I wonder if you cheered them on happily in your ignorance.

[McIntosh]

Is there a real and distinct possibility that he was convicted correctly? Yeah, thats what my logic suggests..:confused: Did I, or did I not, say he can have his appeal?

At the moment it is being reviewed because the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) consider it unsound. There is a logic there but it is biased. Your comments remind me of Alan Clarke's comments, when he said it would have been better to have hanged the Guildford Four because the state would not have had to admit error.

As for Evans's review the team that has been appointed from Garden Court Chambers are very strong. The team from the case manager to junior counsel are very thorough, indeed. David Emanuel is leading the application but it will be very interesting to see who accepts the brief as senior counsel. I believe eventually Evans will be cleared - the degree of misrepresentation and misdirection in this case is remarkable. Justice will be done and justice will be seen to be done.

[jacomo]

Hold on a witch hunt does not need to be framed in the narrative of wrong doing for example, the Mccarthy witch hunts should strike accord. People who were members of the communist were blacklisted from film and television because they were members of the communist party. In relation to Evans you are advocating restricted to trade after due process, punishment after the fact. This is why it is a witch hunt.

I agree, that's why I referenced 'believed' wrong doing and alleged perpetrators.

Doesn't make this a witch hunt though. This is a campaign by people who don't think Evans should represent their club.

[jacomo]

First point, my previous statement is a fact, so it is not an 'if'. Secondly, you see a footballer as a 'privileged life' I see in terms of employment and framed within that content. Finally, our club has had many players who have played for us who have been guilty of domestic violence, living of immoral earnings and assault and battery. I wonder if you cheered them on happily in your ignorance.

I am indeed ignorant in that case, because I can't think of anyone who been convicted of a serious sexual offence and then went on to represent Hibs.

[Vini1875]

No way would I want a convicted sex offender at Hibs. Now if that makes me a sanctimonous moron then so be it. Sex offenders can go to work, fair enough but not in high profile roles, which carry huge prestige and influence on younger members of our society.

[easty]

At the moment it is being reviewed because the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) consider it unsound. There is a logic there but it is biased. Your comments remind me of Alan Clarke's comments, when he said it would have been better to have hanged the Guildford Four because the state would not have had to admit error.

As for Evans's review the team that has been appointed from Garden Court Chambers are very strong. The team from the case manager to junior counsel are very thorough, indeed. David Emanuel is leading the application but it will be very interesting to see who accepts the brief as senior counsel. I believe eventually Evans will be cleared - the degree of misrepresentation and misdirection in this case is remarkable. Justice will be done and justice will be seen to be done.

WTF are you on about? How is that even nearly the same thing as what I'm saying? :confused:


I don't know the details of the case, and if the conviction is overturned then I'd have no reason to believe that was the wrong decision. As things stand though, it hasn't been overturned, and equally I have no reason to believe that this is the wrong decision.

[Pete]

Doesn't make this a witch hunt though. This is a campaign by people who don't think Evans should represent their club.

This is actually a campaign by those who don't think he should be representing any club at all.

If Oldham or Sheffield United are willing to employ him then who are you to be telling them that they shouldn't. They want to offer him a job as a pro footballer so why shouldn't he be allowed to enjoy the life that comes with it?

It's up to Oldham to make a decision and their direct customers should be the only ones who's opinions are taken into consideration.

[McIntosh]

I agree, that's why I referenced 'believed' wrong doing and alleged perpetrators.

Doesn't make this a witch hunt though. This is a campaign by people who don't think Evans should represent their club. Well I wish the latter sentence was correct - Jean Hatchett is a professional blogger who is located here in London. I think my dog will know more about football than this person.

[Pete]

No way would I want a convicted sex offender at Hibs. Now if that makes me a sanctimonous moron then so be it. Sex offenders can go to work, fair enough but not in high profile roles, which carry huge prestige and influence on younger members of our society.

Youngsters will look up to him when he takes the field and perhaps try and copy what he does there.

Or maybe George Best is to blame for all these 50 year old alcoholic hibs fans.

[McIntosh]

I am indeed ignorant in that case, because I can't think of anyone who been convicted of a serious sexual offence and then went on to represent Hibs.

Older fans may let you know the names but we know. It is better I don't shock you anymore. The supporters with fragile temperaments may not be able to take the shock.

[CropleyWasGod]

Older fans may let you know the names but we know. It is better I don't shock you anymore. The supporters with fragile temperaments may not be able to take the shock.

I'm old. I'm not aware of any Hibs player being found guilty of living off immoral earnings.

[Pete]

Incredible decision considering how much this is going to cost them in lost revenue from lack of sponsorship.

For every sponsor or patron who takes a negative stance there will be one who believes in second chances.

And remember, there is no such thing as bad publicity.

[McIntosh]

WTF are you on about? How is that even nearly the same thing as what I'm saying? :confused:

You stated, "He can have his appeal, but who are you or I to question the verdict?". Citzens have every right to question a verdict which is palpably inconsistent and unfair. If people never questioned a verdict because it was produced through a jury system we would be accepting injustice by default.

[McIntosh]

I'm old. I'm not aware of any Hibs player being found guilty of living off immoral earnings.

Roy Barry - http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=2507&dat=19840317&id=-sBAAAAAIBAJ&sjid=2qUMAAAAIBAJ&pg=6334,3840055

[CropleyWasGod]

Roy Barry - http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=2507&dat=19840317&id=-sBAAAAAIBAJ&sjid=2qUMAAAAIBAJ&pg=6334,3840055

Cheers, told you I'm old.

Mind you, he was less a player and more of a minder. :greengrin

[Vini1875]

Youngsters will look up to him when he takes the field and perhaps try and copy what he does there.

Or maybe George Best is to blame for all these 50 year old alcoholic hibs fans.

A bit naive Peter. George Best might not be to blame for any alcoholics, but his example has done nothing to discourage anyone from drinking too much. Like or not stars do influence a population and it is the reason why you no longer see stars smoking on TV. Not everyone can make the distinction. There is still an attitude in some places that believe women who are wearing short skirts are asking for it.

If this guy is proved to be innocent, I'd have no problem with him, but I repeat I would not want a convicted sex offender at Hibs.

[The Hibee Harp]

Roy Barry - http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=2507&dat=19840317&id=-sBAAAAAIBAJ&sjid=2qUMAAAAIBAJ&pg=6334,3840055

Wow. First I've ever heard of this!

[easty]

You stated, "He can have his appeal, but who are you or I to question the verdict?". Citzens have every right to question a verdict which is palpably inconsistent and unfair. If people never questioned a verdict because it was produced through a jury system we would be accepting injustice by default.

I meant, you or I weren't involved in the court case, so what do we know.

I've also stated that he has a right to appeal, and that if the appeal was successful I'd accept he wasn't a rapist.

[HibeeMG]

With your logic why did campaigners questions the verdicts in relation to the Birmingham Six or the Guildford Four. Well that is simple they were unsound. What don't you understand about that?

Most people, like myself, think along the lines of 'innocent until proven guilty' and then 'guilty until proven otherwise'.

He already had an appeal chucked out. He's still guilty whether you think it an unsound verdict or not.

[CropleyWasGod]

I meant, you or I weren't involved in the court case, so what do we know.

I've also stated that he has a right to appeal, and that if the appeal was successful I'd accept he wasn't a rapist.

He's had an appeal, though, hasn't he?

Do you mean the referral to the Review Body?

[McIntosh]

Wow. First I've ever heard of this! You would not want to know about the domestic violence cases of some of our former 'legends' - it would bring tears to your eyes for all sort of different reasons. It is best we draw a line under them because courts have dealt with them. Our club like every other has a lot of dirty linen. I for one will let sleeping dogs lie.

[McIntosh]

I meant, you or I weren't involved in the court case, so what do we know.

I've also stated that he has a right to appeal, and that if the appeal was successful I'd accept he wasn't a rapist.

Apologises I misunderstood your statement, Thanks for the clarification.

[McIntosh]

Most people, like myself, think along the lines of 'innocent until proven guilty' and then 'guilty until proven otherwise'.

He already had an appeal chucked out. He's still guilty whether you think it an unsound verdict or not.

Sadly history is littered with this flawed logic.

[Speedy]

I am stunned the amount of people who say he should be allowed to return to Football. And disgusted to be honest. People wanting to sweep as serious a crime as this under the carpet now, while the girl will have to live with it forever now.

He was found guilty of one of the most horrendous crimes you can do. If he ever signed for Hibs, that would be me finished attending Easter Road.

I wouldn't want him at Hibs but he should be allowed to return to football - if anyone will take him.

[blackpoolhibs]

I wouldn't want him at Hibs but he should be allowed to return to football - if anyone will take him.

:agree:

[easty]

He's had an appeal, though, hasn't he?

Do you mean the referral to the Review Body?

Aye, I mean if his conviction is overturned then I'll accept that.

[Pretty Boy]

Sadly history is littered with this flawed logic.

I think you probably need to examine your own logic across both threads on this topic.

Evans is not some poor, innocent man who has been wrongly accused of a crime he had absolutely no involvement in. He wilfully made the decision to have sex with a woman who was heavily intoxicated, he wilfully made the decision to go there from another location to join in the fun and games with his mate, he knew his friends where filming his actions and he made the decision to leave the scene whilst the victim was unconscious. Unless he's been living in a cave for the last 10 years or never read a paper then he must have known of the controversy surrounding 'drunken consent' and therefore must have been aware of the risk he was taking yet he chose to continue with his actions. He had a choice to do the morally decent thing and he made the opposite choice.

All that of course doesn't make him a rapist if a jury or appeal judge had intetpreted the technicalities of the law differently but they didn't and as it stands he's a rapist. Even if he's not a rapist I'd still question the morals of someone involved in the behaviour described across this case. An appeal which essentially boils down to 'well if I'm a rapist then my mate must be to' isn't gaining much sympathy from me I'm afraid.

I have every sympathy for people falsely acussed of crimes, the effects of it must be devestating on their life but the 'poor Ched' routine is wearing pretty thin for me. Regardless of the legality of his behaviour, it was immoral and exploitative.

[Speedy]

It was a rather bizarre decision by the jury to convict him. Macdonald took her back to the hotel room and had sex with her, Evans joined in. The jury decided that she was too drunk to give consent but returned a not guilty verdict on Macdonald, and a guilty verdict on Evans. He is quite right to appeal

Agree it is bizarre.

From what I read on another forum; they judged that the victim was too drunk to give consent but the situation leading to them having sex gave MacDonald reasonable grounds to believe she had given consent, they judged that Evans didn't have such reasonable grounds. 'Reckless to consent' I think the phrasing is.

[HibeeMG]

Sadly history is littered with this flawed logic.

Trust me, the balance of sound convictions versus unsound convictions throughout history is massively in favour of the former.

[Kato]

Roy Barry - http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=2507&dat=19840317&id=-sBAAAAAIBAJ&sjid=2qUMAAAAIBAJ&pg=6334,3840055


Years after he finished playing for anyone.


Who are the others?

[Bronson]

The issue for a lot of people is he has shown no remorse and still has refused to apologies for anything that took place that night.

He still pleads his innocence, and he has a case. But that aside, you can't tell me Marlon King has shown remorse for his offences? Have a look at how many charges he's had!

Look into it the Ched Evans case, the whole thing is far from black and white. Personally I think the guy has been made an example of, why him and this instance I'm not sure, but so many people are taking the moral high ground who have turned a blind eye to previous offenders of this nature (Marlon King, Luke McCormick, Lee Hughes, Mike Tyson).

In this country we're happy to let serial killers come out of jail and set them up with new identities but there is a national agenda against Evans, I'm yet to hear the media refer to him just by his proper name, it's always 'Convicted Rapist Ched Evans', as if that's on his birth certificate. Ridiculous IMO, why never convicted rapist Mike Tyson, why only Ched Evans?:confused:

[BSEJVT]

Sadly history is littered with this flawed logic.

I have read your utterances on this thread with some interest and some disbelief.

As things stand he has been found guilty at trial and has lost his appeal.

He is therefore " at least in the eyes of the law" guilty.

As I understand it the case is being referred to the CCRC.

You present as fact the assertion that he is not guilty and there has been a miscarriage of justice.

At the moment this is not fact it is opinion, the only facts of the matter are that right now he is a convicted criminal.

One of the saving graces of our justice system are the further layers of appeal

As it happens I found the initial verdict and the appeal verdict baffling.

I have no problem with his not apologising for his offence as why would you apologise for something you haven't done.

An apology for his actions would have been appropriate.

As things stand that he is guilty of sex offences I wouldn't want him near ER as IMO it condones his actions and sends entirely wrong messages.

Offenders are entitled to be rehabilitated, but part of the price of their crime is that their rehabilitation into the previous role might be difficult or impossible.

If the case is overturned at review I still wouldn't want him at ER, but that's because I find his conduct morally reprehensible, whether it proves to be illegal or not.

Am I stupid enough to believe that Hibs don't, won't or have never employed someone else whose conduct I would also find morally reprehensible. No.

I honestly have no idea how I would deal with that situation if it occurred.

[BSEJVT]

I think you probably need to examine your own logic across both threads on this topic.

Evans is not some poor, innocent man who has been wrongly accused of a crime he had absolutely no involvement in. He wilfully made the decision to have sex with a woman who was heavily intoxicated, he wilfully made the decision to go there from another location to join in the fun and games with his mate, he knew his friends where filming his actions and he made the decision to leave the scene whilst the victim was unconscious. Unless he's been living in a cave for the last 10 years or never read a paper then he must have known of the controversy surrounding 'drunken consent' and therefore must have been aware of the risk he was taking yet he chose to continue with his actions. He had a choice to do the morally decent thing and he made the opposite choice.

All that of course doesn't make him a rapist if a jury or appeal judge had intetpreted the technicalities of the law differently but they didn't and as it stands he's a rapist. Even if he's not a rapist I'd still question the morals of someone involved in the behaviour described across this case. An appeal which essentially boils down to 'well if I'm a rapist then my mate must be to' isn't gaining much sympathy from me I'm afraid.

I have every sympathy for people falsely acussed of crimes, the effects of it must be devestating on their life but the 'poor Ched' routine is wearing pretty thin for me. Regardless of the legality of his behaviour, it was immoral and exploitative.

:top marks

[Lago]

He was accused, arrested and convicted. He was sentenced to 5 years prison.
He would not either plead guilty or apologise, he served half his sentence and was released on licence.

He has a review of his conviction accepted, and wants to resume employment as a professional footballer, however it would now appear to me that he is being tried again via twitter, facebook and online petitions. Maybe in future we could save the public purse a bundle of money by putting people on trial via the internet.

[McIntosh]

I think you probably need to examine your own logic across both threads on this topic.

Evans is not some poor, innocent man who has been wrongly accused of a crime he had absolutely no involvement in. He wilfully made the decision to have sex with a woman who was heavily intoxicated, he wilfully made the decision to go there from another location to join in the fun and games with his mate, he knew his friends where filming his actions and he made the decision to leave the scene whilst the victim was unconscious. Unless he's been living in a cave for the last 10 years or never read a paper then he must have known of the controversy surrounding 'drunken consent' and therefore must have been aware of the risk he was taking yet he chose to continue with his actions. He had a choice to do the morally decent thing and he made the opposite choice.

All that of course doesn't make him a rapist if a jury or appeal judge had intetpreted the technicalities of the law differently but they didn't and as it stands he's a rapist. Even if he's not a rapist I'd still question the morals of someone involved in the behaviour described across this case. An appeal which essentially boils down to 'well if I'm a rapist then my mate must be to' isn't gaining much sympathy from me I'm afraid.

I have every sympathy for people falsely acussed of crimes, the effects of it must be devestating on their life but the 'poor Ched' routine is wearing pretty thin for me. Regardless of the legality of his behaviour, it was immoral and exploitative.

Thank you for observing I have been entirely consistent on this matter. I have made no comments on McDonald or Evan's character or their morality - their action speak for themselves. However, you are aware that McDonald was found 'not guilty' because the complainant by her actions earlier in the evening gave unqualified 'consent'. This not withstanding, I cannot help but note you place a strong emphasis on morality so I ask you a direct question. If it was to pass that a current Hibs player was having a relationship with someone under the age of consent - what sanction would you propose?

[McIntosh]

Years after he finished playing for anyone.


Who are the others?

His first warning was received during the early 1970s.

[Pretty Boy]

He was accused, arrested and convicted. He was sentenced to 5 years prison.
He would not either plead guilty or apologise, he served half his sentence and was released on licence.

He has a review of his conviction accepted, and wants to resume employment as a professional footballer, however it would now appear to me that he is being tried again via twitter, facebook and online petitions. Maybe in future we could save the public purse a bundle of money by putting people on trial via the internet.

Whilst it's infinitely more public he's really only experiencing similar difficulties most people convicted of a serious crime suffer when looking to return to employment.

Obviously those convicted of sexual crimes are banned from certain jobs but even applying for a job not covered by PVG would require an unspent conviction to be disclosed. Officially or unoficially a rape conviction on a job application isn't going to be looked upon favourably. Whislt convictions are treated confidentially by and employer if they become knowledge amongst new work mates, and these things have a habit of slipping out, then that presents a whole new set of problems. There are of course schemes to get convicted sex offenders back to work but Evans has chose to continue to pursue a career in football rather than follow this path so has to face the difficulties that go with such a decsion imo.

[HibeeMG]

He was accused, arrested and convicted. He was sentenced to 5 years prison.
He would not either plead guilty or apologise, he served half his sentence and was released on licence.

He has a review of his conviction accepted, and wants to resume employment as a professional footballer, however it would now appear to me that he is being tried again via twitter, facebook and online petitions. Maybe in future we could save the public purse a bundle of money by putting people on trial via the internet.

The only people questioning the verdict are those who think it unsound.

He is guilty of rape. Until told otherwise by those reviewing all the evidence, he is guilty.

So, whether he has served half his sentence or his full sentence, the fact that he is a convicted rapist will be on his record for ever. It will not lapse or be spent.

As has been discussed loads of times on this thread, he is free to choose football as a profession. If a club want to offer him a contract then that's their business.

The discussion, which we're all having, is whether it is morally right for a rapist to be in a position where they are role models for kids.

If he wasn't a footballer he wouldn't get a look in for lots of jobs that he is still allowed to do.

[McIntosh]

I have read your utterances on this thread with some interest and some disbelief.

As things stand he has been found guilty at trial and has lost his appeal.

He is therefore " at least in the eyes of the law" guilty.

As I understand it the case is being referred to the CCRC.

You present as fact the assertion that he is not guilty and there has been a miscarriage of justice.

At the moment this is not fact it is opinion, the only facts of the matter are that right now he is a convicted criminal.

One of the saving graces of our justice system are the further layers of appeal

As it happens I found the initial verdict and the appeal verdict baffling.

I have no problem with his not apologising for his offence as why would you apologise for something you haven't done.

An apology for his actions would have been appropriate.

As things stand that he is guilty of sex offences I wouldn't want him near ER as IMO it condones his actions and sends entirely wrong messages.

Offenders are entitled to be rehabilitated, but part of the price of their crime is that their rehabilitation into the previous role might be difficult or impossible.

If the case is overturned at review I still wouldn't want him at ER, but that's because I find his conduct morally reprehensible, whether it proves to be illegal or not.

Am I stupid enough to believe that Hibs don't, won't or have never employed someone else whose conduct I would also find morally reprehensible. No.

I honestly have no idea how I would deal with that situation if it occurred.

I find your comments odd because mid-way through you start agreeing with me. There are many on here who are saying exactly the same things and a lot more robustly.

[Pretty Boy]

Thank you for observing I have been entirely consistent on this matter. I have made no comments on McDonald or Evan's character or their morality - their action speak for themselves. However, you area aware that McDonald was found 'not guilty' because the complainant by her actions earlier in the evening gave unqualified 'consent'. This not withstanding, I cannot help but note you place a strong emphasis on morality so I ask you a direct question. If it was to pass that a current Hibs player was having a relationship with someone under the age of consent - what sanction would you propose?

Suspension pending investigation. If they were found guily of a crime by the judicial process then dismissal for gross misconduct.

[ancient hibee]

Agree it is bizarre.

From what I read on another forum; they judged that the victim was too drunk to give consent but the situation leading to them having sex gave MacDonald reasonable grounds to belief she had given consent, they judged that Evans didn't have such reasonable grounds. 'Reckless to consent' I think the phrasing is.

Not bizarre at all-as you yourself have explained perfectly:greengrin

[McIntosh]

He was accused, arrested and convicted. He was sentenced to 5 years prison.
He would not either plead guilty or apologise, he served half his sentence and was released on licence.

He has a review of his conviction accepted, and wants to resume employment as a professional footballer, however it would now appear to me that he is being tried again via twitter, facebook and online petitions. Maybe in future we could save the public purse a bundle of money by putting people on trial via the internet. :top marks

[MrSmith]

Scapegoat for what exactly?

As it stands, Evans is a convicted criminal who is still serving his sentence (on probation) and on the sex offenders register. As such, there are certain jobs he is not allowed to do, such as work with children or vulnerable adults. I think it is entirely reasonable to add football to this list, as he would be in the public eye, and in a position of influence over children and young people.

No one is saying he should not be able to work again - but some jobs bring specific privileges and responsibilities with them, and as it stands I think he is now unsuitable.

I would be disgusted if Hibs signed him, tbh. I bet Hearts are interested, though.


Could not agree more! A disgusting individual who abused his privileged status and caused harm to another human being who will suffer for the remainder of their life as well as having to watch this cretin achieve hero status again! I can't understand how anyone after looking at the evidence, could either excuse him or even employ him. I know survivors of rape and it's heartbreaking to see them try to lead a 'normal' life while attempting to start new relationships. Try working with or volunteering with woman's aid and you experience a different world. It makes me so angry to read the excuses and apologists come out in support!

[Kato]

His first warning was received during the early 1970s.

That seems to be an interesting uncheckable "fact".

Again, who were the others?

[Just Alf]

He was accused, arrested and convicted. He was sentenced to 5 years prison.
He would not either plead guilty or apologise, he served half his sentence and was released on licence.

He has a review of his conviction accepted, and wants to resume employment as a professional footballer, however it would now appear to me that he is being tried again via twitter, facebook and online petitions. Maybe in future we could save the public purse a bundle of money by putting people on trial via the internet.

Part of his problem is that he hasn't (as mentioned above) apologised for his actions, which I take it we all agree are out of order? (The argument re "was it rape" is additional to that) and the girl in question has had her life ruined so much she's now had to move house 5 times.

If he'd come out and said, "it wasn't rape, but, yeah I took advantage of the situation, I'm sorry for that, let's move on and to the morons hounding the girl, leave her alone we've both been through enough"
...... Maybe then people would view him a little less unfavourably?

[McIntosh]

Suspension pending investigation. If they were found guily of a crime by the judicial process then dismissal for gross misconduct. We are fortunate that the club has not been placed in this situation. I just wonder if this would happen in reality - I suspect not.

[Kato]

His first warning was received during the early 1970s.

Here's a clipping that states he became employed as a bouncer at the premises in question after his attempt at a coaching career fell through, which led to him managing the premises and the subsequent charges against him.

Was he working here in the early 70's when he received his first warning?

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=2507&dat=19840317&id=-sBAAAAAIBAJ&sjid=2qUMAAAAIBAJ&pg=6334,3840055

[jacomo]

Roy Barry - http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=2507&dat=19840317&id=-sBAAAAAIBAJ&sjid=2qUMAAAAIBAJ&pg=6334,3840055

Close to unreadable, but seems to suggest he ran the brothel after he played for Hibs, seeing as the headline references an 'ex-player'.

So, let me ask again - which convicted rapists have represented Hibs?

[Kato]

Close to unreadable, but seems to suggest he ran the brothel after he played for Hibs, seeing as the headline references an 'ex-player'.

So, let me ask again - which convicted rapists have represented Hibs?


Readable on my pc, mate.

[Just Alf]

Close to unreadable, but seems to suggest he ran the brothel after he played for Hibs, seeing as the headline references an 'ex-player'.

So, let me ask again - which convicted rapists have represented Hibs?


Readable on my pc, mate.

:agree: also mentions he played for Hearts (and Dunfermline)

[jacomo]

Readable on my pc, mate.

Ooh, aren't you the lucky one? :wink:

My phone ain't up to the task.

[McIntosh]

That seems to be an interesting uncheckable "fact".

Again, who were the others? Very checkable as is your question. If you really want to know, start digging however, you may be pretty shocked. For domestic abuse look at the divorce papers. The point is a lot of Hibs players have been involved in some down right immoral behaviour. We are no better nor worse than any other club to pretend otherwise is foolish.

[Kato]

Very checkable as is your question. If you really want to know, start digging however, you may be pretty shocked.

Maybe you could point me in the right direction.

Was Barry running a brothel in the early 70's whilst carrying on with his football duties?


For domestic abuse look at the divorce papers. The point is a lot of Hibs players have been involved in some down right immoral behaviour. We are no better nor worse than any other club to pretend otherwise is foolish.

I'm pretty unshockable and realise we are all human and that Hibs are just the same as any other football. Not pretending anything at all. Just interested in the wide-ranging selection of accusations you made.

[McIntosh]

Close to unreadable, but seems to suggest he ran the brothel after he played for Hibs, seeing as the headline references an 'ex-player'.

So, let me ask again - which convicted rapists have represented Hibs? No one mentioned convicted rapists - go back to the post. If you were students it would be a zero for critical analysis - increase your reading i.e. go to other contemporary sources. The same for Kato. You don't need spoon feed.

Here endeth the lesson.

[McIntosh]

Maybe you could point me in the right direction.

Was Barry running a brothel in the early 70's whilst carrying on with his football duties?



I'm pretty unshockable and realise we are all human and that Hibs are just the same as any other football. Not pretending anything at all. Just interested in the wide-ranging selection of accusations you made.

Yes in Leith of all places. I have made no accusations my friend. They are on public record but I take the view what someone did 20 years ago should stay there. People change and they should be allowed to move on.

[Kato]

Yes in Leith of all places. I have made no accusations my friend. They are on public record but I take the view what someone did 20 years ago should stay there. People change and they should be allowed to move on.


You are accusing Roy Barry though. Never heard of the "warning" you're referring to but it seems I'll just have to take your word for it, or not.

[Kato]

No one mentioned convicted rapists - go back to the post. If you were students it would be a zero for critical analysis - increase your reading i.e. go to other contemporary sources. The same for Kato. You don't need spoon feed.

Here endeth the lesson.


Yeah, I've come across those type of cryptic "lessons" many times on forums like this one. I'll pass on yours given your total lack of substance. I looked out for your spoon and could see nothing but air.

[McIntosh]

You are accusing Roy Barry though. Never heard of the "warning" you're referring to but it seems I'll just have to take your word for it, or not.

I am not accusing Roy Barry of anything his convictions speak for themselves. You don't have to take my word just do your research properly. If you really want to be clever go to contemporary sources, former colleagues interviewed at the time. If you really want to know who at the club was informed about his activities at the time - it was Cecil Graham who dispatched him virtually immediately. Pretty boy would agree with this course of action.

[McIntosh]

Yeah, I've come across those type of cryptic "lessons" many times on forums like this one. I'll pass on yours given your total lack of substance. I looked out for your spoon and could see nothing but air. you cannot help but embarrass yourself - see the above post for lack of substance. It is a pity you do not put the effort as much as you are vocal.

[ScottB]

I don't really get it, is the guy good enough to warrant all the angst, supporter and sponsor boycotts to make it worthwhile for Oldham?

Regardless, even if he was, I wouldn't want him anywhere near my club.

[Hibs Class]

I am not accusing Roy Barry of anything his convictions speak for themselves. You don't have to take my word just do your research properly. If you really want to be clever go to contemporary sources, former colleagues interviewed at the time. If you really want to know who at the club was informed about his activities at the time - it was Cecil Graham who dispatched him virtually immediately. Pretty boy would agree with this course of action.

Out of interest, why do Barry's convictions speak for themselves but Evans' doesn't?

[Kato]

you cannot help but embarrass yourself - see the above post for lack of substance. It is a pity you do not put the effort as much as you are vocal.


Air.

[McIntosh]

Air. If the cap fits....

[McIntosh]

Out of interest, why do Barry's convictions speak for themselves but Evans' doesn't? Barry didn't appeal them or more accurately have them reviewed.

[lEXO]

Part of his problem is that he hasn't (as mentioned above) apologised for his actions, which I take it we all agree are out of order? (The argument re "was it rape" is additional to that) and the girl in question has had her life ruined so much she's now had to move house 5 times.

If he'd come out and said, "it wasn't rape, but, yeah I took advantage of the situation, I'm sorry for that, let's move on and to the morons hounding the girl, leave her alone we've both been through enough"
...... Maybe then people would view him a little less unfavourably?

Agree with this.


Very checkable as is your question. If you really want to know, start digging however, you may be pretty shocked. For domestic abuse look at the divorce papers. The point is a lot of Hibs players have been involved in some down right immoral behaviour. We are no better nor worse than any other club to pretend otherwise is foolish.

I wouldn't mind being pointed in the right direction to look at these guys. Any tips? A PM if you don't want to stick it on here. Cheers

[Hannah_hfc]

To all those believing Evans deserves a chance, imagine it was your wife/daughter / sister/ niece who was the victim. I'm sure the sight of Evans being resigned for a club and running out to thousands of fans week in and week out would make you sick.

I'm disgusted by this whole case and how Evans can come out not giving a single f*** about what the victim has gone through. Happy enough to have his way with her that night but not one single apology that she has had to relocate and change name 5 times due to his 'supporters' hunting her out.

Enough of this poor Ched Evans excuse, he had a promising career and a court found him guilty of rape. He messed up big time, to come out of jail and pull the poor me card and not even look one bit remorseful was idiotic and disgusting. Absolutely sick of Evans being made to be a victim for not being signed to a football team to earn thousands a week while the real victim hides in fear for her life.

Whole thing makes me furious.

[OsloHibs]

To all those believing Evans deserves a chance, imagine it was your wife/daughter / sister/ niece who was the victim. I'm sure the sight of Evans being resigned for a club and running out to thousands of fans week in and week out would make you sick.

I'm disgusted by this whole case and how Evans can come out not giving a single f*** about what the victim has gone through. Happy enough to have his way with her that night but not one single apology that she has had to relocate and change name 5 times due to his 'supporters' hunting her out.

Enough of this poor Ched Evans excuse, he had a promising career and a court found him guilty of rape. He messed up big time, to come out of jail and pull the poor me card and not even look one bit remorseful was idiotic and disgusting. Absolutely sick of Evans being made to be a victim for not being signed to a football team to earn thousands a week while the real victim hides in fear for her life.

Whole thing makes me furious.

Ditto.

[Eyrie]

To all those believing Evans deserves a chance, imagine it was your wife/daughter / sister/ niece who was the victim. I'm sure the sight of Evans being resigned for a club and running out to thousands of fans week in and week out would make you sick.

I'm disgusted by this whole case and how Evans can come out not giving a single f*** about what the victim has gone through. Happy enough to have his way with her that night but not one single apology that she has had to relocate and change name 5 times due to his 'supporters' hunting her out.

Enough of this poor Ched Evans excuse, he had a promising career and a court found him guilty of rape. He messed up big time, to come out of jail and pull the poor me card and not even look one bit remorseful was idiotic and disgusting. Absolutely sick of Evans being made to be a victim for not being signed to a football team to earn thousands a week while the real victim hides in fear for her life.

Whole thing makes me furious.
Agreed, especially the point about who the real victim is.

[Pete]

One thing that's clear is that rape is an emotive subject.

I'm just glad that our justice system doesn't let such raw emotion interfere with its decision making. Well most of the time it doesn't.

[BSEJVT]

I find your comments odd because mid-way through you start agreeing with me. There are many on here who are saying exactly the same things and a lot more robustly.

I think you see what you want to see.

I have reservations about the conviction on the basis of what I have read, but am not qualified or possessed of sufficient information to decide and am happy to have the courts do so.

Whereas you have presented the CCRC as a fait accompli and that he is not guilty of the charge.

My point to you is that he has presently been found guilty of the charge and had an appeal turned down, he is therefore as we stand guilty and will remain so until due process has been concluded.

Under such circumstances he is dealing with the inevitable fall out of his conviction.

Regardless of whether the conviction is upheld or not Evans is an odious individual on any level and I cant for the life of me understand why anyone would want to defend him.

As others have said, sympathy for the victim is in short supply.

If Evans made an error of judgement as his supporters would argue, surely at worst from her perspective she did too and is eminently more deserving of support than Evans.

[Brizo]

To all those believing Evans deserves a chance, imagine it was your wife/daughter / sister/ niece who was the victim. I'm sure the sight of Evans being resigned for a club and running out to thousands of fans week in and week out would make you sick.

I'm disgusted by this whole case and how Evans can come out not giving a single f*** about what the victim has gone through. Happy enough to have his way with her that night but not one single apology that she has had to relocate and change name 5 times due to his 'supporters' hunting her out.

Enough of this poor Ched Evans excuse, he had a promising career and a court found him guilty of rape. He messed up big time, to come out of jail and pull the poor me card and not even look one bit remorseful was idiotic and disgusting. Absolutely sick of Evans being made to be a victim for not being signed to a football team to earn thousands a week while the real victim hides in fear for her life.

Whole thing makes me furious.

Hear hear. Excellent post which cuts to the very core of the matter.

Allowing him to resume a career in the public eye will inevitably lead to every single game he participates in being played out to a soundtrack of pro and anti Evans terracing "banter". His victims suffering will be perpetuated and trivialised every time he steps onto a pitch.

[Speedy]

Not bizarre at all-as you yourself have explained perfectly:greengrin

On the face of it it's bizarre. At least it must be a very uncommon occurrence.

[Pete]

Hear hear. Excellent post which cuts to the very core of the matter.

Allowing him to resume a career in the public eye will inevitably lead to every single game he participates in being played out to a soundtrack of pro and anti Evans terracing "banter". His victims suffering will be perpetuated and trivialised every time he steps onto a pitch.

So when should he be allowed back into the "public eye"?

when he's released from jail? After his whole sentence? Never??

The justice system has already punished him and taken the victims feelings into consideration when handing down a sentence.

[McIntosh]

I think you see what you want to see.

I have reservations about the conviction on the basis of what I have read, but am not qualified or possessed of sufficient information to decide and am happy to have the courts do so.

Whereas you have presented the CCRC as a fait accompli and that he is not guilty of the charge.

My point to you is that he has presently been found guilty of the charge and had an appeal turned down, he is therefore as we stand guilty and will remain so until due process has been concluded.

Under such circumstances he is dealing with the inevitable fall out of his conviction.

I wish your first sentence was so. Sadly that is not the case. This notwithstanding let us suppose that Evans's position is correct that there has been a miscarriage of justice and he is ultimately vindicated it only makes "the inevitable fall out" more perverse. This is a most tragic case on so many levels, particularly for the complainant. "Pretty Boy" alluded to a central issue - morality. The men's behaviour was immoral and callous by any standard of decency. However, the fact remains that McDonald was found "not guilty" because the complainant actions were considered as "consent". Fortunately, we do not judge a person on their morality but on the legality of their action. Time will tell in relations to Evans's case - it always does.

[Kato]

If the cap fits....

Normal discourse flows in that someone makes an assertion, someone else might ask for evidence. I've produced the only evidence on the matter so far and you have produced heehaw. I don't really care if you are right or wrong btw, I've made no assertions at all I'll remind you just in case you haven't noticed, but the wee treasure hunt you're inviting people on to back up your assertions isn't really my bag.

Do you have any evidence? If not it's you that's the bad student.

[Brizo]

So when should he be allowed back into the "public eye"?

when he's released from jail? After his whole sentence? Never??

The justice system has already punished him and taken the victims feelings into consideration when handing down a sentence.

Certainly not into the public eye which is English and UK football because of the undoubted circus I alluded to in my previous post. The FA should have cancelled his registration. if he wants to ply his trade abroad he will still be in a far better employment position than the vast majority of ex offenders.

[Eyrie]

I'm intrigued that McIntosh has a better understanding of what happened than the jury who heard the evidence during the trial.


Certainly not into the public eye which is English football because of the undoubted circus I alluded to in my previous post. The FA should have cancelled his registration. if he wants to ply his trade abroad he will still be in a far better employment position than the vast majority of ex offenders.
He can't play abroad because he is a convicted sex offender who has to report to his probation officer.

[H18Y GW]

I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with anyone on hear, as I have daughters and sons , but the court manuscript was "kangaroo" to say the least .

[Swedish hibee]

He has been found guilty by a jury. He is a convicted rapist.

I wouldn't want him near my club.

[McIntosh]

Normal discourse flows in that someone makes an assertion, someone else might ask for evidence. I've produced the only evidence on the matter so far and you have produced heehaw. I don't really care if you are right or wrong btw, I've made no assertions at all I'll remind you just in case you haven't noticed, but the wee treasure hunt you're inviting people on to back up your assertions isn't really my bag.

Do you have any evidence? If not it's you that's the bad student.

It is good that you are quoting my own words back to me in relation to statement and evidence. However, you have not produced any evidence - the only evidence on this matter was produced at 5.17. It was I that produced the link - a schoolboy error on your part there. You seem to want more details in relation to past misadventures by Hibs player well put in the name Angela Wylie and Hibs and start digging.

[McIntosh]

I'm intrigued that McIntosh has a better understanding of what happened than the jury who heard the evidence during the trial.


He can't play abroad because he is a convicted sex offender who has to report to his probation officer.

My word this is why there is a review. If you read the transcript the degree of misdirection and misrepresentation is quite remarkable.

[H18Y GW]

He has been found guilty by a jury. He is a convicted rapist.

I wouldn't want him near my club.

Plenty convicted bombers that were celebrated at there release .

[blackpoolhibs]

The only people questioning the verdict are those who think it unsound.

He is guilty of rape. Until told otherwise by those reviewing all the evidence, he is guilty.

So, whether he has served half his sentence or his full sentence, the fact that he is a convicted rapist will be on his record for ever. It will not lapse or be spent.

As has been discussed loads of times on this thread, he is free to choose football as a profession. If a club want to offer him a contract then that's their business.

The discussion, which we're all having, is whether it is morally right for a rapist to be in a position where they are role models for kids.

If he wasn't a footballer he wouldn't get a look in for lots of jobs that he is still allowed to do.

The guildford 4 were guilty right up until their conviction was quashed, so in fact the were innocent all along. This is what Evans feels too i'd imagine, but we want him further punished as well.

If he is found out to be innocent of this crime, who gives him the time back he spent in jail?

I agree that once you have served your punishment, the person should be free to get on with their lives. And if that means a footballer then fine, just the same as a plumber would do the same.

Whether a football club takes him on is another matter, but they should be able to make that choice. And as a fan of that club you can either keep going or make your stand against it by not.

Your decision.

[weonlywon6-2]

I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with anyone on hear, as I have daughters and sons , but the court manuscript was "kangaroo" to say the least .

Having read the report on the case that was published it really has gaps in it,would not be surprised if his appeal was succesful.

[H18Y GW]

Having read the report on the case that was published it really has gaps in it,would not be surprised if his appeal was succesful.

Its quite frankly scandalous ,i thought this was cut and dry until id read it,and "paying for your fame" is an understatement.

[H18Y GW]

https://www.crimeline.info/case/r-v-ched-evans-chedwyn-evans


For those with an open mind

[leggeto]

Thought he would fit in just fine down gorgie

[NOLA]

he deserves another chance, after all did Lee Hughes not return to football after doing time for drink driving manslaughter?

[portycabbage]

he deserves another chance, after all did Lee Hughes not return to football after doing time for drink driving manslaughter?

A case of 2 wrongs don't make a right IMO. I wouldn't continue to support a club that employed them. They should be looking for jobs where they aren't in a position to be considered as role models.

[leggeto]

he deserves another chance, after all did Lee Hughes not return to football after doing time for drink driving manslaughter?
I'd hand in my season books if we signed him,no wonder sponsors are pulling the plug,would any father or mother want his name on the back of their kids shirt

[H18Y GW]

I'd hand in my season books if we signed him,no wonder sponsors are pulling the plug,would any father or mother want his name on the back of their kids shirt


If we do, can you hand them in to me:aok:

[leggeto]

If we do, can you hand them in to me:aok:

No probs,but only after the last derby

[heretoday]

It might be wise to hold off any decision on Evans until his appeal is over - whenever that is.

[heretoday]

He has been found guilty by a jury. He is a convicted rapist.

I wouldn't want him near my club.

I think I'd rather he was playing football than working as a plumber or painter in a house with a lone female.

[Kato]

It is good that you are quoting my own words back to me in relation to statement and evidence. However, you have not produced any evidence - the only evidence on this matter was produced at 5.17. It was I that produced the link - a schoolboy error on your part there. You seem to want more details in relation to past misadventures by Hibs player well put in the name Angela Wylie and Hibs and start digging.

Yup, you got me bang to rights there guvnor, I missed your post and looked out the same link independently. Still, nothing there on the early 70's warning, if he had previous you'd imagine it would have had made it's way into the papers.

[jacomo]

https://www.crimeline.info/case/r-v-ched-evans-chedwyn-evans


For those with an open mind

Thanks for the link, as I've chipped in with my opinion earlier today I thought I'd better read it. :wink:

I'm no lawyer, but what I take from that is:

1. Ched Evans appeal failed because the appeal court felt that the judge handled the original trial fairly.

2. The jury, having sat through all the evidence, did not believe that the young woman consented to have sex with Ched Evans. Therefore: guilty of rape.

3. The judge clearly told the jury that, in this case, they had to decide on each of the two guys separately, and either could be found guilty, or both, or neither. So the fact that one got off and the other didn't is maybe unusual but does not at all show that Evans went down because he was well known or anything else.

Overall, nothing in that to change my original view - he's a convicted rapist who's shown no remorse and I don't want him anywhere near Hibs. Logically, therefore, I think Oldham or any other club are in the wrong if they offer him a contract.

People can bring Lee Hughes or whoever else up if they like, but opinions on other cases don't really affect my views on this one.

[LaMotta]

To all those believing Evans deserves a chance, imagine it was your wife/daughter / sister/ niece who was the victim. I'm sure the sight of Evans being resigned for a club and running out to thousands of fans week in and week out would make you sick.

I'm disgusted by this whole case and how Evans can come out not giving a single f*** about what the victim has gone through. Happy enough to have his way with her that night but not one single apology that she has had to relocate and change name 5 times due to his 'supporters' hunting her out.

Enough of this poor Ched Evans excuse, he had a promising career and a court found him guilty of rape. He messed up big time, to come out of jail and pull the poor me card and not even look one bit remorseful was idiotic and disgusting. Absolutely sick of Evans being made to be a victim for not being signed to a football team to earn thousands a week while the real victim hides in fear for her life.

Whole thing makes me furious.


On the other hand imagine that your husband/son/brother/nephew had been convicted by a jury of a crime they did not commit. Because that is a possibility here as there is no evidence that consent wasn't given. Being drunk and unable to remember does not prove a lack of consent. The jury guessed what happened that night and none of us will ever truly know what happened that evening in terms of whether consent was provided or not.

He may have been guilty, he may not have been - the worrying thing about this case is that the Jury guessed.

[McIntosh]

Yup, you got me bang to rights there guvnor, I missed your post and looked out the same link independently. Still, nothing there on the early 70's warning, if he had previous you'd imagine it would have had made it's way into the papers. This will sound patronising but finding it is easy. All you need to do is look to the interviews giving by his team mates in particular Alex Edwards. They are both insightful and hilarious. Pat Stanton's comments on Willie Hamilton are equally insightful.

You are saying very little about Angela Wylie.

[McIntosh]

Thanks for the link, as I've chipped in with my opinion earlier today I thought I'd better read it. :wink:

I'm no lawyer, but what I take from that is:

1. Ched Evans appeal failed because the appeal court felt that the judge handled the original trial fairly.

2. The jury, having sat through all the evidence, did not believe that the young woman consented to have sex with Ched Evans. Therefore: guilty of rape.

3. The judge clearly told the jury that, in this case, they had to decide on each of the two guys separately, and either could be found guilty, or both, or neither. So the fact that one got off and the other didn't is maybe unusual but does not at all show that Evans went down because he was well known or anything else.

Overall, nothing in that to change my original view - he's a convicted rapist who's shown no remorse and I don't want him anywhere near Hibs. Logically, therefore, I think Oldham or any other club are in the wrong if they offer him a contract.

People can bring Lee Hughes or whoever else up if they like, but opinions on other cases don't really affect my views on this one. As you said you are no lawyer. The issue centres on misdirection and misrepresentation. Read Blackpool Hibs's comments he sums things up perfectly.

[jacomo]

He was accused, arrested and convicted. He was sentenced to 5 years prison.
He would not either plead guilty or apologise, he served half his sentence and was released on licence.

He has a review of his conviction accepted, and wants to resume employment as a professional footballer, however it would now appear to me that he is being tried again via twitter, facebook and online petitions. Maybe in future we could save the public purse a bundle of money by putting people on trial via the internet.

Sorry, that won't wash. He's already had his trial, and he was found guilty.

This case has generated significant public interest, and lots of people are expressing their opinion. The fact that they can broadcast their opinion to the world is relatively novel, but that is all.

Likewise with online petitions etc - more efficient, but essentially the same thing as knocking on doors asking people to sign a piece of paper.

[BSEJVT]

I wish your first sentence was so. Sadly that is not the case. This notwithstanding let us suppose that Evans's position is correct that there has been a miscarriage of justice and he is ultimately vindicated it only makes "the inevitable fall out" more perverse. This is a most tragic case on so many levels, particularly for the complainant. "Pretty Boy" alluded to a central issue - morality. The men's behaviour was immoral and callous by any standard of decency. However, the fact remains that McDonald was found "not guilty" because the complainant actions were considered as "consent". Fortunately, we do not judge a person on their morality but on the legality of their action. Time will tell in relations to Evans's case - it always does.

Any wrongful conviction or for that matter wrongful accusation of anyone for any crime is highly regrettable and "the inevitable fall out" they have experienced as a result equally so.

The time for such recriminations on the fate of the wrongly accused is surely when a miscarriage of justice has arisen and not beforehand when they are still guilty in the eyes of the law.

I think it's hugely unfortunate that people aren't judged on their morality as societies standards have dropped to such a low level as a result. By the time they are judged on the legality of their actions the impact on victims is far greater.

[Hannah_hfc]

On the other hand imagine that your husband/son/brother/nephew had been convicted by a jury of a crime they did not commit. Because that is a possibility here as there is no evidence that consent wasn't given. Being drunk and unable to remember does not prove a lack of consent. The jury guessed what happened that night and none of us will ever truly know what happened that evening in terms of whether consent was provided or not.

He may have been guilty, he may not have been - the worrying thing about this case is that the Jury guessed.
True but if that night the lassy had turned round and said no, do you think Evans and his mate would have turned round and said oh ok, not tonight?

Fair play theres nothing that says she said no but from the links posted it appeared she was under the impression of going to the hotel with just the other guy.

One female and several men, you don't know if she was put in a position to say no or if they went ahead anyway. My instinct tells me the latter and that in my books would count as rape.

For what it's worth I feel so strongly about this that if I had a brother/ nephew or uncle in this position I would feel quite sick that they thought going round the hotel after their mate got a drunk lassy there was an ok thing to do.

If I was the lassy in question, and I'd woken up in that position and it was their words against mine it would be a horrible position to be in. In a roundabout way your being accused of being a liar ahead of two men with a public reputation, and that is a key thing that keeps victims quiet in similar scenarios.

[jacomo]

As you said you are no lawyer. The issue centres on misdirection and misrepresentation. Read Blackpool Hibs's comments he sums things up perfectly.

Why? Is he a lawyer?

[Kato]

You are saying very little about Angela Wylie.


The Pat McGinlay thing?

Did that ever even make it to court?

[McIntosh]

Why? Is he a lawyer? something more wonderful than that - he is a sage!!!

[McIntosh]

The Pat McGinlay thing? Did that ever even make it to court? I really like your persistence. It was eventually dismissed after great personal distress to Pat and Margaret. The point here is that Pat was cleared of any wrong doing but the stain is there. A salutary lesson when complainants are treated as victims. The real victim was Pat and his family.

[Sergey]

As you said you are no lawyer. The issue centres on misdirection and misrepresentation. Read Blackpool Hibs's comments he sums things up perfectly.

Roger me with a bearded tranny - I never thought I'd ever see the bit in bold posted on a forum that wasn't XXX rated.

[LaMotta]

True but if that night the lassy had turned round and said no, do you think Evans and his mate would have turned round and said oh ok, not tonight?

Fair play theres nothing that says she said no but from the links posted it appeared she was under the impression of going to the hotel with just the other guy.

One female and several men, you don't know if she was put in a position to say no or if they went ahead anyway. My instinct tells me the latter and that in my books would count as rape.

What you are admitting here is that you would have found Evans guilty on "instinct" rather than facts - which is what the Jury did, and that is why the conviction has so much doubt surrounding it. You also say "they" so would you have found them both guilty, because the differing verdicts for both men make no sense.

For what it's worth I feel so strongly about this that if I had a brother/ nephew or uncle in this position I would feel quite sick that they thought going round the hotel after their mate got a drunk lassy there was an ok thing to do.

Definitely agree with this - certainly not OK morally, but perhaps not illegal.

If I was the lassy in question, and I'd woken up in that position and it was their words against mine it would be a horrible position to be in. In a roundabout way your being accused of being a liar ahead of two men with a public reputation, and that is a key thing that keeps victims quiet in similar scenarios.


The Girl in question didn't actually accuse anyone of rape. She went to the police claiming she thought her drink may have been spiked due to her remembering nothing about the evening. The police were the ones that brought about the rape charge - so it was really a case of Evans' and McDonald's words against no-one.

[McIntosh]

Roger me with a bearded tranny - I never thought I'd ever see the bit in bold posted on a forum that wasn't XXX rated.

Your comments really did make me laugh out loud!!!!! I call him a sage later on.

[blackpoolhibs]

Roger me with a bearded tranny - I never thought I'd ever see the bit in bold posted on a forum that wasn't XXX rated.

:faf:

[Hannah_hfc]

The Girl in question didn't actually accuse anyone of rape. She went to the police claiming she thought her drink may have been spiked due to her remembering nothing about the evening. The police were the ones that brought about the rape charge - so it was really a case of Evans' and McDonald's words against no-one.
That doesn't mean to say she wasn't taken advantage of and didn't have a say in what went on. You take a drugged up girl who is completely out of it and queue up to have sex with her, while taking videos through the windows (allegedly) then, like it or not, it is rape

[LaMotta]

That doesn't mean to say she wasn't taken advantage of and didn't have a say in what went on. You take a drugged up girl who is completely out of it and queue up to have sex with her, while taking videos through the windows (allegedly) then, like it or not, it is rape

If the bit in bold was fact then you would be correct - but the bit in bold is not fact. No evidence of being drugged up and no evidence of her being completely out of it.

[Ricky Bobby]

The whole case centred around whether the young woman was in a condition to provide consent. The jury obviously did not think she was, and given the evidence you can see why they came to that descision. It could be argued that it would have been just as easy to find him not guilty. However the actions of Evans and his friends throughout the whole episode were nothing short of disgusting and they must have known that they were putting themselves in a potentially prosecutable position by taking advantage of what was an easy target given her condition, and if they did not know they should have.
He could have come out of prison and admitted he made a error of judgement in his actions and apologised to the woman, and this would not have predjudiced any appeal or review, but he has not done this. To be forgiven for a mistake you must first admit any mistake, therefore if i were an employer in any business i would not touch him with a barge pole.

[Dashing Bob S]

Evans is ****, and a sickeningly awful role model for young fans, as some of the misguided and misogynistic clowns who support him testify.

But he's served his sentence.

Can football employment really be treated differently from any other employment by the authorities?

As individual fans its a different matter. I would be disgusted if Hibs signed him, but I'd still watch them and support them. I wouldn't let a board or manager's folly in signing a rapist deter my enjoyment of watching my team play.

What I'd do/feel when he scored for us is something I'd rather not have to think about.

[LaMotta]

The whole case centred around whether the young woman was in a condition to provide consent. The jury obviously did not think she was, and given the evidence you can see why they came to that descision. It could be argued that it would have been just as easy to find him not guilty. However the actions of Evans and his friends throughout the whole episode were nothing short of disgusting and they must have known that they were putting themselves in a potentially prosecutable position by taking advantage of what was an easy target given her condition, and if they did not know they should have.
He could have come out of prison and admitted he made a error of judgement in his actions and apologised to the woman, and this would not have predjudiced any appeal or review, but he has not done this. To be forgiven for a mistake you must first admit any mistake, therefore if i were an employer in any business i would not touch him with a barge pole.


Had the case taken place under Scots Law then there is no doubt that the Scottish "not proven" verdict would have been delivered - an a (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acquittal)cquittal used when the judge or jury does not have enough e (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_(law))vidence to c (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conviction)onvict but is not sufficiently convinced of the accused person's innocence to bring in a "not guilty" verdict.

[Ricky Bobby]

Evans is ****, and a sickeningly awful role model for young fans, as some of the misguided and misogynistic clowns who support him testify.

But he's served his sentence.

Can football employment really be treated differently from any other employment by the authorities?

As individual fans its a different matter. I would be disgusted if Hibs signed him, but I'd still watch them and support them. I wouldn't let a board or manager's folly in signing a rapist deter my enjoyment of watching my team play.

What I'd do/feel when he scored for us is something I'd rather not have to think about.


There are plenty of professions where you can refuse to employ someone with a criminal record, never mind one for a sexual offence.

[Ricky Bobby]

Had the case taken place under Scots Law then there is no doubt that the Scottish "not proven" verdict would have been delivered - an a (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acquittal)cquittal used when the judge or jury does not have enough e (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_(law))vidence to c (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conviction)onvict but is not sufficiently convinced of the accused person's innocence to bring in a "not guilty" verdict.

I did say in my post that the case could have went either way, but due to his actions he put himself in a position for a prosecution to take place.
But guilty or not guilty or not proven, his and his friends actions were disgraceful and he obviously has no respect for women. also the lack of humility in this case is sickening.

[Speedy]

Had the case taken place under Scots Law then there is no doubt that the Scottish "not proven" verdict would have been delivered - an a (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acquittal)cquittal used when the judge or jury does not have enough e (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_(law))vidence to c (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conviction)onvict but is not sufficiently convinced of the accused person's innocence to bring in a "not guilty" verdict.

Agreed.

[HibernianJK]

Well done Oldham, I'd have him at Hibs FWIW

[Ricky Bobby]

Well done Oldham, I'd have him at Hibs FWIW


Really????
You are aware the type of person he must be to have taken part in this? At the very least a sexual predator.
Just what we need at a family club.

[JJP]

Reading up on this case reminds me how scary our legal system is. Conviction purely on guess work. I don't know if he is guilty or not as I was not there. Those in the room are the only ones who really do. You can argue he acted immorally regardless if he is guilty of rape or not but that doesn't warrant 2 and a half years in prison. I wouldn't be surprised to see this conviction overturned during an appeal based on what I've read though.

[Dashing Bob S]

There are plenty of professions where you can refuse to employ someone with a criminal record, never mind one for a sexual offence.

Yes. I'm too ignorant about the details of employment law to specifically know what they are, outside of commonsense ones such as teaching, social work etc. There probably is a good case for football to be treated the same way, especially if there's a youth coaching/playing element. If I remember correctly, this was aired in the case of Rix of at Hearts. As far as I'm aware, though, football doesn't have that status currently.

[Ricky Bobby]

Reading up on this case reminds me how scary our legal system is. Conviction purely on guess work. I don't know if he is guilty or not as I was not there. Those in the room are the only ones who really do. You can argue he acted immorally regardless if he is guilty of rape or not but that doesn't warrant 2 and a half years in prison. I wouldn't be surprised to see this conviction overturned during an appeal based on what I've read though.


There is no appeal, it was not granted. There is a review of the case but i would be very surprised if the original judgement was overturned.
He was not convicted on guess work, he was convicted on jurys interpretation of the facts. Just like every other trial.

[Ricky Bobby]

Yes. I'm too ignorant about the details of employment law to specifically know what they are, outside of commonsense ones such as teaching, social work etc. There probably is a good case for football to be treated the same way, especially if there's a youth coaching/playing element. If I remember correctly, this was aired in the case of Rix of at Hearts. As far as I'm aware, though, football doesn't have that status currently.

I am also not sure about the exact legalities of employing someone in football with a previous sexual offence, but i think you would be able to argue that a player would potentially come in contact with vulnerable people.

[LaMotta]

There is no appeal, it was not granted. There is a review of the case but i would be very surprised if the original judgement was overturned.
He was not convicted on guess work, he was convicted on jurys interpretation of the facts. Just like every other trial.

It was guess work and not every trial is as you describe. Some people are convicted because of concrete evidence that can not be disputed.

[JJP]

There is no appeal, it was not granted. There is a review of the case but i would be very surprised if the original judgement was overturned.
He was not convicted on guess work, he was convicted on jurys interpretation of the facts. Just like every other trial.

Well it seems a flimsy conviction to me. I don't know how drunk the girl was. The quantity she had to drink wouldn't leave me in a state unable to remember anything about the night before. The cctv I saw looked inconclusive regarding how drunk she was also. She was certainly walking unaided. And if she was too mortal to consent to Evans, how could she consent to the other guy who was found not guilty? Or is it okay to sleep with a girl who is too drunk to consent as your mate doesn't join in?

[Ricky Bobby]

It was guess work and not every trial is as you describe. Some people are convicted because of concrete evidence that can not be disputed.

The woman WAS very drunk, A fact that was substantiated by eyewitness accounts, CCTV and blood alchohol tests. They quite obviously took advantage of this fact and the Jury made a judgement that she was in no position to consent. No guessing involved. Sorry.

[Ricky Bobby]

Well it seems a flimsy conviction to me. I don't know how drunk the girl was. The quantity she had to drink wouldn't leave me in a state unable to remember anything about the night before. The cctv I saw looked inconclusive regarding how drunk she was also. She was certainly walking unaided. And if she was too mortal to consent to Evans, how could she consent to the other guy who was found not guilty? Or is it okay to sleep with a girl who is too drunk to consent as your mate doesn't join in?


It may well be a flimsy conviction. But the facts remain that she was very drunk and these guys should have known better than to take advantage of that fact.
As for his mate that picked her up and was admonished of any offence, that is the judgement the jury made. It's how our legal system works. It is equally as reasonable to argue that he is as guilty as Evans, as it is that Evans is innocent.

[H18Y GW]

Could not agree more! A disgusting individual who abused his privileged status and caused harm to another human being who will suffer for the remainder of their life as well as having to watch this cretin achieve hero status again! I can't understand how anyone after looking at the evidence, could either excuse him or even employ him. I know survivors of rape and it's heartbreaking to see them try to lead a 'normal' life while attempting to start new relationships. Try working with or volunteering with woman's aid and you experience a different world. It makes me so angry to read the excuses and apologists come out in support!


Im not supporting him,merely stating the facts,this "survivor of rape" has never accused anyone of rape,without appearing to be Blase,this form of" rape" both male and female abounds most sunday mornings after night clubs and parties the length and breadth of the country.

Im certain if it was Joe Bloggs,the police would have left it

[H18Y GW]

It may well be a flimsy conviction. But the facts remain that she was very drunk and these guys should have known better than to take advantage of that fact.
As for his mate that picked her up and was admonished of any offence, that is the judgement the jury made. It's how our legal system works. It is equally as reasonable to argue that he is as guilty as Evans, as it is that Evans is innocent.


Either both guilty or both innocent for me.

[jacomo]

Either both guilty or both innocent for me.

Fine, have an opinion - but again, this was covered at length at the trial itself and subsequently.

[heretoday]

Ryan Giggs OBE went to enormous lengths to try and keep out of the public domain the fact that he had been humping his sister in law for years, making her pregnant in the process. Betrayal could be his middle name yet he is held as a hero. Role models in football? Pull the other one!

[jacomo]

Had the case taken place under Scots Law then there is no doubt that the Scottish "not proven" verdict would have been delivered - an a (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acquittal)cquittal used when the judge or jury does not have enough e (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_(law))vidence to c (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conviction)onvict but is not sufficiently convinced of the accused person's innocence to bring in a "not guilty" verdict.

Maybe. Not a certainty though.

The case clearly relied heavily in Evans own evidence in court. None of us were there. It is clear that the jury did not believe him and found him guilty. A Scottish jury might have reached the same conclusion.

[LaMotta]

The woman WAS very drunk, A fact that was substantiated by eyewitness accounts, CCTV and blood alchohol tests. They quite obviously took advantage of this fact and the Jury made a judgement that she was in no position to consent. No guessing involved. Sorry.

The jury made a judgement......in other words they guessed. Sorry.

Very drunk people have sex across Britain every weekend. If as you say they obviously both took advantage of her and she was in no position to consent then they both should have been found guilty.

[Pretty Boy]

The jury made a judgement......in other words they guessed. Sorry.

Very drunk people have sex across Britain every weekend. If as you say they obviously both took advantage of her and she was in no position to consent then they both should have been found guilty.

I don't see how you can make that last statement.

Guy and girl are in club. Guy says to girl 'fancy going back to my hotel in a bit for you know what?' 'Yes'. Few more drinks and off they go. They get to room, he texts his mate then guy A and girl have sex, mate turns up and joins in having had no knowledge of earlier conversation, girl is far more intoxicated at this point and never clearly ecpressed consent for 2nd guys involvement.

I'm not saying thats exactly how things played out in the Evans case but in that hypothetical scenario I can see how it could be judged that one is a rapist whilst the other isn't.

[LaMotta]

I don't see how you can make that last statement.

Guy and girl are in club. Guy says to girl 'fancy going back to my hotel in a bit for you know what?' 'Yes'. Few more drinks and off they go. They get to room, he texts his mate then guy A and girl have sex, mate turns up and joins in having had no knowledge of earlier conversation, girl is far more intoxicated at this point and never clearly ecpressed consent for 2nd guys involvement.

I'm not saying thats exactly how things played out in the Evans case but in that hypothetical scenario I can see how it could be judged that one is a rapist whilst the other isn't.

Because I was replying to the post by RB which said they both obviously took advantage of her. Im not saying they both did or didnt!

[H18Y GW]

I don't see how you can make that last statement.

Guy and girl are in club. Guy says to girl 'fancy going back to my hotel in a bit for you know what?' 'Yes'. Few more drinks and off they go. They get to room, he texts his mate then guy A and girl have sex, mate turns up and joins in having had no knowledge of earlier conversation, girl is far more intoxicated at this point and never clearly ecpressed consent for 2nd guys involvement.

I'm not saying thats exactly how things played out in the Evans case but in that hypothetical scenario I can see how it could be judged that one is a rapist whilst the other isn't.

Again it was guys taking advantage of the situation for sure,but he stated he asked, she said Yes,im certain if they thought this was rape or was going to end up in court,the guys looking through windows wouldnt have happened,it was hardly a kidnapping and was played out in front of CCTV,Taxis,Hotel receptionists and friends...

In a strange way, if the events had played out to consensual sex,id never have apoligised or pleaded guilty either..

[H18Y GW]

Fine, have an opinion - but again, this was covered at length at the trial itself and subsequently.


Judged wrongly.....I agree:wink:

[MrSmith]

Again it was guys taking advantage of the situation for sure,but he stated he asked, she said Yes,im certain if they thought this was rape or was going to end up in court,the guys looking through windows wouldnt have happened,it was hardly a kidnapping and was played out in front of CCTV,Taxis,Hotel receptionists and friends...

In a strange way, if the events had played out to consensual sex,id never have apoligised or pleaded guilty either..

Thing is with consensual sex is, is the person saying yes capable of making that decision when inebriated? Seriously would expect any decent bloke with half a brain to realise when a woman is far to drunk to say yes and mean it! Both took advantage of this situation and what the heck were the two idiots doing outside and what was the plan re the recording of the intercourse? Very strange but certainly appears construed to me!

[Pretty Boy]

Again it was guys taking advantage of the situation for sure,but he stated he asked, she said Yes,im certain if they thought this was rape or was going to end up in court,the guys looking through windows wouldnt have happened,it was hardly a kidnapping and was played out in front of CCTV,Taxis,Hotel receptionists and friends...

In a strange way, if the events had played out to consensual sex,id never have apoligised or pleaded guilty either..

And the issue of drunken consent has long been a legal grey area. Evans took a risk, a crazy risk considering he was/is in a relationship and given his profession must have had no shortage of opportunities, and he suffered the consequences of that risk.

Another jury and another review may have interpreted the evidence differently but thus far it has been decided twice that he had sex with the victime without consent, he raped her.

[Kato]

Thing is with consensual sex is, is the person saying yes capable of making that decision when inebriated? Seriously would expect any decent bloke with half a brain to realise when a woman is far to drunk to say yes and mean it! Both took advantage of this situation and what the heck were the two idiots doing outside and what was the plan re the recording of the intercourse? Very strange but certainly appears construed to me!

Doesn't seem to be many decent blokes involved. In fact none at all.

[Pete]

I don't see how you can make that last statement.

Guy and girl are in club. Guy says to girl 'fancy going back to my hotel in a bit for you know what?' 'Yes'. Few more drinks and off they go. They get to room, he texts his mate then guy A and girl have sex, mate turns up and joins in having had no knowledge of earlier conversation, girl is far more intoxicated at this point and never clearly ecpressed consent for 2nd guys involvement.

I'm not saying thats exactly how things played out in the Evans case but in that hypothetical scenario I can see how it could be judged that one is a rapist whilst the other isn't.

What you have described is indeed a hypothetical scenario. The conversation about going back to the flat might have happened but who's to say it wasn't for a line of charlie?

Far too many ifs and buts.

[Ricky Bobby]

Anyone who feels they have to get a woman so drunk that she is sick and pishes the bed in order to get a quick jump has serious issues in my opinion. He is a convicted rapist but even if his case rview overturns the descision, it still makes him a sexual predator. Individual clubs need to decide whether he is the type of person they want in their organisation.

[CropleyWasGod]

Thing is with consensual sex is, is the person saying yes capable of making that decision when inebriated? Seriously would expect any decent bloke with half a brain to realise when a woman is far to drunk to say yes and mean it! Both took advantage of this situation and what the heck were the two idiots doing outside and what was the plan re the recording of the intercourse? Very strange but certainly appears construed to me!

The law in Scotland says they aren't; not sure about England.

[Ricky Bobby]

Anyone who feels they have to get a woman so drunk that she is sick and pishes the bed in order to get a quick jump has serious issues in my opinion. He is a convicted rapist but even if his case rview overturns the descision, it still makes him a sexual predator. Individual clubs need to decide whether he is the type of person they want in their organisation.

[Pretty Boy]

What you have described is indeed a hypothetical scenario. The conversation about going back to the flat might have happened but who's to say it wasn't for a line of charlie?

Far too many ifs and buts.

I agree and acknowledges it was very much a made up scenario in my post.

The point I was making is that with a bit imagination it's not impossible to see how one could be guilty and the other not. The idea that one being guilty and the other innocent makes the conviction fundementally unsound is a flawed one yet seems to form the key defence of Evans both on here and his own website.

[green day]

I agree and acknowledges it was very much a made up scenario in my post.

The point I was making is that with a bit imagination it's not impossible to see how one could be guilty and the other not. The idea that one being guilty and the other innocent makes the conviction fundementally unsound is a flawed one.

Agreed.

And IIRC the girl never said she didn't consent with the first guy. It was Evans turning up unannounced that sparked all this off.

The guys involved are much bigger, stronger and outnumber her. Evans went there for a ride. How he got it, we don't know, but he comes out of this looking like a dangerous predator - very very dodgy.

If it was my club I would be outraged that we even considered signing him.

[MrRobot]

Could not agree more! A disgusting individual who abused his privileged status and caused harm to another human being who will suffer for the remainder of their life as well as having to watch this cretin achieve hero status again! I can't understand how anyone after looking at the evidence, could either excuse him or even employ him. I know survivors of rape and it's heartbreaking to see them try to lead a 'normal' life while attempting to start new relationships. Try working with or volunteering with woman's aid and you experience a different world. It makes me so angry to read the excuses and apologists come out in support!

The thing is though, if it turns out there was consent given and the girl has no memory or is simply ashamed of her actions, then Evans is a survivor of being a falsely accused rapist and is therefore now trying to rebuild his life and go on, something of which he is being almost prevented from doing.

That's simply me flipping your argument though, that doesn't mean to say that I am in support of him or against him being a rapist and/or returning to football, simply just highlighting the male spectrum of victimisation.

Whether he is guilty or not, his morales must be questioned as it is pretty low thing to do, however many people do have drunken threesomes etc

All I know about the case is I would hate to be in the jury as you hear many cases of somebody crying rape against a high profile person due to want of money/being ashamed of their actions/simply being a twisted person. However, this case does not seem to be quite so black and white as to who is guilty. Morally, he is wrong. Rapist? I really don't know. I'm glad I didn't have to be the one making the decision.

Whether he should return to football, that is up the signing club to decide. If Hibs signed him and he scored the winning goal in the Scottish Cup Final, would you celebrate and go to the parade knowing a convicted rapist(if his appeal was thrown out) had scored the winner?

[Pete]

And IIRC the girl never said she didn't consent with the first guy.

She never said she didn't consent with the second guy either.

[jacomo]

She never said she didn't consent with the second guy either.

What you and others keep missing is that the jury heard from Evans directly in court. They clearly didn't believe him, and were able to judge him as guilty based on his own evidence.

None of us were there that day in court, and so much of this speculation or opinion based on the reported facts of the case is ill-founded.

[Andy74]

What you and others keep missing is that the jury heard from Evans directly in court. They clearly didn't believe him, and were able to judge him as guilty based on his own evidence.

None of us were there that day in court, and so much of this speculation or opinion based on the reported facts of the case is ill-founded.

None of which really matters though, he was sentenced, he is now free to work.

[J-C]

I think it's poor people discussing whether this girl said yes or no, she said NO and Evans was convicted in a court of law of rape and until any appeal is completed, it's what he is. He's not been released and totally free but is released under license, any wrong doing and he serves the rest of his sentence.

Legally there's nothing to stop Oldham signing Evans but this is more a case for morality, is it right that a footballer who is in the media spotlight just saunters back into his profession as if nothing had happened, in my opinion no.

If Evans was in another career dealing with children or women, a teacher for instance then he wouldn't be allowed back and would have to be re trained, so why at the age of 26 can he not be re trained in another profession?

[jacomo]

None of which really matters though, he was sentenced, he is now free to work.

In your opinion. You're repeating yourself.

[Pete]

What you and others keep missing is that the jury heard from Evans directly in court. They clearly didn't believe him, and were able to judge him as guilty based on his own evidence.

None of us were there that day in court, and so much of this speculation or opinion based on the reported facts of the case is ill-founded.

The fact that you keep missing is that the jury had very little in the way of incriminating evidence to consider. None of us were there to see the Birmingham six convicted yet using your logic those who thought something was wrong with the verdict would have been peddling ill founded speculation.

There is enough information in the public domain to suggest this is a strange set of verdicts and a miscarriage of justice.

Like I said before, too many grey areas to look at this in terms of either black or white.