Ched Evans Cleared of Rape

[Since90+2]

Evans has just been cleared of the rape charge from back in 2012.

[Thecat23]

Delighted for him.

[Andy74]

I'm sure the public apologies will be flooding in...

[SON OF PADDY]

Hopefully the guy can now be left to get on with his life.

[HIBERNIAN-0762]

Delighted for him.

[Thecat23]

I'm sure the public apologies will be flooding in...

Should be left alone and I really hope he gets a club. Boy was slaughtered and when you looked at it the girl was a known liar.

[Andy74]

Should be left alone and I really hope he gets a club. Boy was slaughtered and when you looked at it the girl was a known liar.

He has been playing for Chesterfield. 4 goals in 7 games or something like that.

[J-C]

Glad he's been found not guilty purely as it's seen to be getting the right decision after the 1st trial, you have to wonder why all the evidence was not used during his 1st trial, as it looks like he was telling the truth all along.

[Allant1981]

Hopefully the guy can get on with his life now without any hassle, he needs to start by being faithful to his mrs

[Michael]

Will he get paid for missed earnings?

[R'Albin]

He has been playing for Chesterfield. 4 goals in 7 games or something like that.

Could well be getting called up for Wales with form like that.

[J-C]

Will he get paid for missed earnings?


Probably not as it wasn't a mis trial, they brought in fresh evidence that was proof he was innocent, which in turn triggered a re trial.

[Thecat23]

He has been playing for Chesterfield. 4 goals in 7 games or something like that.

Think a few clubs will be in for him now he's cleared.

[jacomo]

I'm sure the public apologies will be flooding in...

Who should be apologising and for what?

This case makes me very uneasy if I am honest (not the first time I have been involved in a discussion about it :wink:) but, regardless of my personal opinion, Ched Evans is now entitled to be treated as an innocent man.

I think there are lots of questions about our legal system, but he does not need to worry about that and can get on with the rest of his life.

[Billy Whizz]

Think a few clubs will be in for him now he's cleared.

Hope he shows a bit of loyalty to Chesterfield, who gave him a chance when many others didn't

[ancient hibee]

Probably not as it wasn't a mis trial, they brought in fresh evidence that was proof he was innocent, which in turn triggered a re trial.

To me offering fifty grand for new evidence makes the whole thing stink.

[BoomtownHibees]

Who should be apologising and for what?

The woman for ruining his life??

[Andy74]

Who should be apologising and for what?

This case makes me very uneasy if I am honest (not the first time I have been involved in a discussion about it :wink:) but, regardless of my personal opinion, Ched Evans is now entitled to be treated as an innocent man.

I think there are lots of questions about our legal system, but he does not need to worry about that and can get on with the rest of his life.

There were a number of high profile people who chose to get involved and made it very difficult for him to gain employment when he was entitled to do so - even more so now that he has been cleared completely.

[Blaster]

The woman for ruining his life??

To be fair she never ever said she was raped. She said she couldn't remember anything

Therefore how someone could then be charged and convicted of rape us unbelievable

[jacomo]

There were a number of high profile people who chose to get involved and made it very difficult for him to gain employment when he was entitled to do so - even more so now that he has been cleared completely.

If someone is convicted of a serious offence, people are entitled to refer to them as guilty, and treat him as such.

Just as Ched Evans is now entitled to be treated as an innocent man.

As has been shown, football is a mercenary business - if a club feels he can do a job for them, they will offer him a contract.

[Andy74]

If someone is convicted of a serious offence, people are entitled to refer to them as guilty, and treat him as such.

Just as Ched Evans is now entitled to be treated as an innocent man.

As has been shown, football is a mercenary business - if a club feels he can do a job for them, they will offer him a contract.

Once he had served his time there was no need for people to interfere further and try and ensure he could not continue in football. They didn't have to get involved and chose to.

[jacomo]

Once he had served his time there was no need for people to interfere further and try and ensure he could not continue in football. They didn't have to get involved and chose to.

I disagree, as I have said before.

People are absolutely entitled to express their view on whether or not they want a particular individual to represent their club. We do it all the time.

There are lots of players I would never want to represent Hibs, for all sorts of reasons.

[Pete]

Ched Evans. He used to be a Jambo but he's alright now.

[HH81]

Despiciable in what way?

[flash]

Just gonna leave it as this might not be the best place.

[cabbageandribs1875]

Hope he shows a bit of loyalty to Chesterfield, who gave him a chance when many others didn't



hope he starts showing some loyalty to his woman as well

[McIntosh]

Who should be apologising and for what?

This case makes me very uneasy if I am honest (not the first time I have been involved in a discussion about it :wink:) but, regardless of my personal opinion, Ched Evans is now entitled to be treated as an innocent man.

I think there are lots of questions about our legal system, but he does not need to worry about that and can get on with the rest of his life.

Justice was done today but unfortunately you were part of a lynch mob with a lynch mob mentality but you were in good company, Charlie Webster, Jessica Ennis and all. You have nothing to apologise for but a lot to reflect upon.

[Brightside]

Glad he's been found not guilty purely as it's seen to be getting the right decision after the 1st trial, you have to wonder why all the evidence was not used during his 1st trial, as it looks like he was telling the truth all along.

He was found not guilty based on her having a sexual past, and there being no proof that he "raped" her. Anyone applauding his actions needs to have a long look in the mirror.

[Brightside]

To be fair she never ever said she was raped. She said she couldn't remember anything

Therefore how someone could then be charged and convicted of rape us unbelievable

RAPE is when someone does not give consent. Someone being unable to give consent is Rape. You need to be very clear on that.

[heretoday]

hope he starts showing some loyalty to his woman as well

She's certainly stuck by him despite his dalliance, hasn't she? He must be a great guy underneath it all.

[McIntosh]

RAPE is when someone does not give consent. Someone being unable to give consent is Rape. You need to be very clear on that. I have just read your posts, I am sure you are delighted that an innocent man has been cleared. I am equally sure that you have great sympathy for him considering that he has seen his reputation tarnished, his life virtually destroyed and his loved ones greatly distressed on the basis of a false accusation.

[Thecat23]

RAPE is when someone does not give consent. Someone being unable to give consent is Rape. You need to be very clear on that.

If she can't remember who's to say she didn't agree to sex at the time though.

[Pretty Boy]

Isn't it funny that people that were so certain the jury got it wrong last time are equally certain they have it spot on this time?

I'm as guilty of it as anyone, albeit the other way round. Suppose it's just what happens when you get the result you 'want'.

[jacomo]

Justice was done today but unfortunately you were part of a lynch mob with a lynch mob mentality but you were in good company, Charlie Webster, Jessica Ennis and all. You have nothing to apologise for but a lot to reflect upon.

Lynch mob, lol. You are ridiculous.

[Treadstone]

Receive text. About turn in the wee hours of the morning. Lie to get a key to get into room. Get your mates to watch through window. Leave through fire exit. Keep head down away from CCTV. Don't get taxi ( avoid as much contact as possible). Offer reward for new information. Put alleged victims (she never cried rape, all about fit state for consent) sexual history on trial.

Lovely guy.

[Blaster]

RAPE is when someone does not give consent. Someone being unable to give consent is Rape. You need to be very clear on that.

Clear now thanks 😕.

[Scouse Hibee]

Guess we'll never actually know the truth,as with his guilt some will believe he is innocent other won't. Innocent in the eyes of the law is all that really matters to him though.

[RyeSloan]

Isn't it funny that people that were so certain the jury got it wrong last time are equally certain they have it spot on this time?

I'm as guilty of it as anyone, albeit the other way round. Suppose it's just what happens when you get the result you 'want'.

Not necessarily so...there was plenty of coverage of the case and the 'facts' that had been used to support the conviction.

A lot of people found it hard to understand how a jury reached a verdict beyond reasonable doubt considering even the alleged victim could not recall the events and any other witness did not support the charge.

For a re-trial to be held and the evidence supporting the charge, including new evidence, to be considered worthy of a not guilty verdict merely supports those peoples afore mentioned concerns.

Nothing to do with wanting a certain verdict or something being right or wrong but about a verdict confirming what people already thought based on their understanding of the case...there was little or no way of proving beyond reasonable doubt that consent had not been given. If the alleged victim couldn't then how on earth could a jury?

[Pretty Boy]

Not necessarily so...there was plenty of coverage of the case and the 'facts' that had been used to support the conviction.

A lot of people found it hard to understand how a jury reached a verdict beyond reasonable doubt considering even the alleged victim could not recall the events and any other witness did not support the charge.

For a re-trial to be held and the evidence supporting the charge, including new evidence, to be considered worthy of a not guilty verdict merely supports those peoples afore mentioned concerns.

Nothing to do with wanting a certain verdict or something being right or wrong but about a verdict confirming what people already thought based on their understanding of the case...there was little or no way of proving beyond reasonable doubt that consent had not been given. If the alleged victim couldn't then how on earth could a jury?
It's a particularly tricky case. I think the convictions rates for rape show that it's an allegation which is often difficult to prove.

I don't know anymore than anyone else, with the exception of a few people, whether a rape happened. I have a gut instinct but ultimately that's no more valid than that of anyone else, the whole area of 'drunken consent' makes a complex case even more so.

For qualification my comment wasn't aimed at those who questioned the original verdict, I can see and accept why there would be cause for a belief in reasonable doubt. My post was targetted at one person in particular who was so incensed by the original verdict he ranted about 'kangaroo courts' and called trial by jury 'a circus that should be abolished'. It would be interesting to know if those views have changed now.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

[Brightside]

Different evidence came to light when a 50,000 reward was put up in order to help clear his name.

[McIntosh]

Lynch mob, lol. You are ridiculous. but not wrong

[lord bunberry]

The guy is a ****ing idiot, but on what I saw from cctv and the evidence at the time, I've never been convinced he was guilty of being a rapist. The girl in question didn't ever accuse him of rape and I've no idea why the police tried to make a rape charge stick.
Every time one of these verdicts is overturned or thrown out of court it makes it harder for real victims of rape to get the justice they deserve.
The police in this case have potentially ruined this guys career for nothing.

[lord bunberry]

Different evidence came to light when a 50,000 reward was put up in order to help clear his name.
Are you suggesting that people lied in order to cash in? Would you say the same if someone came forward with new evidence in the case of a murder? Rewards are put up all the time and for the simple reason that some people don't want the hassle of giving evidence unless there's something in it for them. It's sad but true.

[Dashing Bob S]

This guy is the **** of the Earth and his apologists not much better.

[Allant1981]

This guy is the **** of the Earth and his apologists not much better.

Just been saying that to the mrs, how his other half stuck by him ill never know

[SlatefordHibby]

This guy is the **** of the Earth and his apologists not much better.

I don't know if you've just woken up but he's been found not guilty.

[flash]

Are you suggesting that people lied in order to cash in? Would you say the same if someone came forward with new evidence in the case of a murder? Rewards are put up all the time and for the simple reason that some people don't want the hassle of giving evidence unless there's something in it for them. It's sad but true.
They changed their statements after the reward was set up.

[Allant1981]

I don't know if you've just woken up but he's been found not guilty.

Doesnt mean he isnt a nice guy

[beensaidbefore]

I'm sure the public apologies will be flooding in...

And compensation for loss of earnings and defamation of character?

Must have lost a few quid through loss of sponsors alone.

[Andy74]

Doesnt mean he isnt a nice guy

Not really relevant is it?

[Dinkydoo]

I haven't read much into the details of this case but if the girl was so drunk that she can't remember a single thing about it, and he was sober, then I think by the definition of the law that rape in some degree has indeed happened here.

Maybe there should be another classification that we could use in future to more accurately describe such a scenario, which perhaps carries less punishment than your typical 'rape' offence.

If the girl is just saying she can't remember to save embarrassment or whatever then that's pretty poor behaviour as well though.

[Allant1981]

Not really relevant is it?

Well its someones opinion of him and if thats what he wants to post then thats up to him

[leither17]

Acted like a proper Jeremy Hunt but there was never the evidence there to convict him for rape because it never happened

[lord bunberry]

They changed their statements after the reward was set up.
Did they lie though? I hate these cases, if you don't think the man wasn't guilty you are accused of condoning rape. In this case I don't think he was guilty, it doesn't mean I approve of what he did or that I like the guy in any way.

[beensaidbefore]

I haven't read much into the details of this case but if the girl was so drunk that she can't remember a single thing about it, and he was sober, then I think by the definition of the law that rape in some degree has indeed happened here.

Maybe there should be another classification that we could use in future to more accurately describe such a scenario, which perhaps carries less punishment than your typical 'rape' offence.

If the girl is just saying she can't remember to save embarrassment or whatever then that's pretty poor behaviour as well though.


The thing is, if both parties are so drunk they can't really remember what happened when they sober up, should it be the man who is accused of rape. Could a drunk man accuse a woman of rape if he can't remember doing the deed or even leaving the club/pub?

Not saying this is the case here, but you make an interesting point about sober/not sober. I'm pretty sure most folk on here will have met someone on a night out after a few and woke up thinking wtf have I done. Maybe just me!😀

[Bostonhibby]

Feels like the right outcome now the evidence is out there but maybe a lesson learned? Nae judgement and maybe a defective moral compass around where to be and where to avoid? Dunno.

Sent from my HTC One mini 2 using Tapatalk

[seanoheimhin]

Some pretty disturbing comments on here, with spatterings of sense.

Yes he's been cleared and as such should be viewed as innocent of the charges and left alone to get on with his life.

No, that doesn't mean it definitely did or didn't happen.

No, that doesn't mean the girl lied.

No, that doesn't mean he did nothing wrong. It seems fairly evident he engaged in a lot of pretty nasty behaviour.

No, just because she has a sexual history does not invalidate her claims.

The case has brought to light what are generally acknowledged as serious failings of our judicial system in sexual assault cases. So leave him be, leave the alleged victim alone too and stop painting the case as so bloody black and white.

[Pretty Boy]

Some pretty disturbing comments on here, with spatterings of sense.

Yes he's been cleared and as such should be viewed as innocent of the charges and left alone to get on with his life.

No, that doesn't mean it definitely did or didn't happen.

No, that doesn't mean the girl lied.

No, that doesn't mean he did nothing wrong. It seems fairly evident he engaged in a lot of pretty nasty behaviour.

No, just because she has a sexual history does not invalidate her claims.

The case has brought to light what are generally acknowledged as serious failings of our judicial system in sexual assault cases. So leave him be, leave the alleged victim alone too and stop painting the case as so bloody black and white.

Nailed it.

A lot of grey areas in a case that has to be, legally speaking, viewed as black and white.

[Andy74]

Some pretty disturbing comments on here, with spatterings of sense.

Yes he's been cleared and as such should be viewed as innocent of the charges and left alone to get on with his life.

No, that doesn't mean it definitely did or didn't happen.

No, that doesn't mean the girl lied.

No, that doesn't mean he did nothing wrong. It seems fairly evident he engaged in a lot of pretty nasty behaviour.

No, just because she has a sexual history does not invalidate her claims.

The case has brought to light what are generally acknowledged as serious failings of our judicial system in sexual assault cases. So leave him be, leave the alleged victim alone too and stop painting the case as so bloody black and white.

The point is he has been found innocent and as such he is entitled to the grey areas not to matter.

[Bostonhibby]

Nailed it.

A lot of grey areas in a case that has to be, legally speaking, viewed as black and white.
Indeed. 100% proof by the prosecution is required otherwise he's innocent of the criminal charges. Dubiety in prosecution evidence here may well have made a conviction unsound hence he walks.

Sent from my HTC One mini 2 using Tapatalk

[lord bunberry]

Nailed it.

A lot of grey areas in a case that has to be, legally speaking, viewed as black and white.

Any allegation of rape surely involves an element of 'grey area' it seems to me that people have made up their minds one way or another based on what they think happened.

[Velma Dinkley]

To be fair she never ever said she was raped. She said she couldn't remember anything

Therefore how someone could then be charged and convicted of rape us unbelievable

She claimed to have had her drink spiked with a 'date rape' drug, which is why the police were involved. A blood test found that not to be true. It's been a very strange case.

[jacomo]

but not wrong

Oh yes, that too.

Your triumphalist tone is nauseating but so predictable.

[Dinkydoo]

The thing is, if both parties are so drunk they can't really remember what happened when they sober up, should it be the man who is accused of rape. Could a drunk man accuse a woman of rape if he can't remember doing the deed or even leaving the club/pub?

Not saying this is the case here, but you make an interesting point about sober/not sober. I'm pretty sure most folk on here will have met someone on a night out after a few and woke up thinking wtf have I done. Maybe just me!😀

I think the sober/not sober bit is key
- and I'm not talking about being a little tipsy either, I'm talking about when one person is utterly ****faced and the other is not.

I've definitely woken up before and regretted a one nighter and/or not really remembered the dirty deed. Total blackout - losing hours of my life - drunk is different though.

Anyway, enough about me, I'm getting the fear about nights out of past now!

[beensaidbefore]

I think the sober/not sober bit is key
- and I'm not talking about being a little tipsy either, I'm talking about when one person is utterly ****faced and the other is not.

I've definitely woken up before and regretted a one nighter and/or not really remembered the dirty deed. Total blackout - losing hours of my life - drunk is different though.

Anyway, enough about me, I'm getting the fear about nights out of past now!

Thank god its not just me then.😁

[flash]

The point is he has been found innocent and as such he is entitled to the grey areas not to matter.

Its one all in best of three.

[lord bunberry]

I think the sober/not sober bit is key
- and I'm not talking about being a little tipsy either, I'm talking about when one person is utterly ****faced and the other is not.

I've definitely woken up before and regretted a one nighter and/or not really remembered the dirty deed. Total blackout - losing hours of my life - drunk is different though.

Anyway, enough about me, I'm getting the fear about nights out of past now!
I've taken drunk women home who have been very demanding at the time. If in the morning they can't remember it am I a rapist?

[Pretty Boy]

Any allegation of rape surely involves an element of 'grey area' it seems to me that people have made up their minds one way or another based on what they think happened.
Absolutely.

Legally though the ultimate verdict is a black or white. The discussion revolves around the grey area.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

[blackpoolhibs]

I never thought he was guilty from the start, when i saw the video of her entering the building in my opinion she was not drunk out her skull, and again to me looked as if she knew what she was doing.

Reading the evidence, again to me it was clear Evans was a prick and she was a bit of a slapper. Why this case was even brought to court should be looked at by the authorities.

Funny though that some of the folk here seem to have a worse opinion of Gordon Strachan than they do of Evans, who although innocent now, is a dick for what he let himself get involved in.

[Dinkydoo]

I've taken drunk women home who have been very demanding at the time. If in the morning they can't remember it am I a rapist?

If you were stone cold sober and they were so smashed they can't remember a single thing then I'd say that 'some degree of rape' probably occurred then - by the definition of being so drunk that consent can't be given.

I'd say this translates to (the hypothetical) you being a bit of a creep, but probably not worth 15 years in jail for.

The point of my post was to also criticise the "blackout drunk" claims that seem to be fired about far too often. There's having a hazy memory in the morning and then there's not remembering a thing, they are different things.

[lord bunberry]

For **** sake.

If you were stone cold sober and they were so smashed they can't remember a single thing then I'd say that 'some degree of rape' probably occurred then - by the definition of being so drunk that consent can't be given.

I'd say this translates to (the hypothetical) you being a bit of a creep, but probably not worth 15 years in jail for.

The point of my post was to also criticise the "blackout drunk" claims that seem to be fired about far too often. There's having a hazy memory in the morning and then there's not remembering a thing, they are different things.
You misinterpreted my post mate, I was actually agreeing with what you were saying, albeit not very eloquently. My point was more to do with the drunken condition of the woman in this case. Just because she was absolutely pissed, it doesn't mean she wasn't consensual or even more than consensual. That's always been my problem with this case. People seem to presume that if she was to drunk to remember, she was to drunk to give consent. Does it matter if Evans was sober? If Evans had been pissed there probably wouldn't have been a trial. There's far to much presumption going on in this case for my liking.

[Gordy M]

She claimed to have had her drink spiked with a 'date rape' drug, which is why the police were involved. A blood test found that not to be true. It's been a very strange case.

I think the issue was that Evans basically said he had never spoke to the girl before during or after the act...and it was after he said this that the prosecution decided on a charge of rape. This was in a police interview im sure.

The girl stated that she couldnt remember anything and he stated that he hadnt spoken to her, but she hadnt said 'no'. He basically self incrimiated himself during the interview. I dont think they had any option but to charge him.

[Dinkydoo]

You misinterpreted my post mate, I was actually agreeing with what you were saying, albeit not very eloquently. My point was more to do with the drunken condition of the woman in this case. Just because she was absolutely pissed, it doesn't mean she wasn't consensual or even more than consensual. That's always been my problem with this case. People seem to presume that if she was to drunk to remember, she was to drunk to give consent. Does it matter if Evans was sober? If Evans had been pissed there probably wouldn't have been a trial. There's far to much presumption going on in this case for my liking.

Ah right, I get you now! I'm probably not being terribly coherent myself.

I agree entirely. Being drunk doesn't automatically downgrade anyone's consent imo, it's the being so drunk that there is virtually no memory of the end of the night bit that bothers me - knowing fine well how completely soiled I need to be to reach that stage. I doubt that this was the case though, the cctv would surely indicate a massive disparity in intoxication levels.

In the event that someone REALLY was that pissed, then I do think we're entering sexual assualt/being taken advantage of territory, but only where one person is much more sober - if both parties are that wrecked then there is no issue.

[beensaidbefore]

I've taken drunk women home who have been very demanding at the time. If in the morning they can't remember it am I a rapist?

I have woken up and have no recollection of leaving the club, meeting the girl or doing the deed. It did happen though. Could I have been raped?😉

[lord bunberry]

I have woken up and have no recollection of leaving the club, meeting the girl or doing the deed. It did happen though. Could I have been raped?😉
Mate, I'm in a long term relationship as a result of what you describe :greengrin

[Pete]

I've taken drunk women home who have been very demanding at the time. If in the morning they can't remember it am I a rapist?

Nowadays a demanding woman is one that tells me to do things like tidy the garage and put my beer cans away. :-(

[lord bunberry]

Ah right, I get you now! I'm probably not being terribly coherent myself.

I agree entirely. Being drunk doesn't automatically downgrade anyone's consent imo, it's the being so drunk that there is virtually no memory of the end of the night bit that bothers me - knowing fine well how completely soiled I need to be to reach that stage. I doubt that this was the case though, the cctv would surely indicate a massive disparity in intoxication levels.

In the event that someone REALLY was that pissed, then I do think we're entering sexual assualt/being taken advantage of territory, but only where one person is much more sober - if both parties are that wrecked then there is no issue.
I think that's where the grey area arises. I like a drink, but frequently I can't remember what happened the night before. I've seen times where I've just been having a few drinks in the house and I can't remember going to bed. What I'm basically saying is that I'm a lightweight :greengrin. This case seems to revolve around how much this girl has had to drink and her state of mind at that point and her willingness to consent.
Drinking too much doesn't give someone else the right to rape you, but it does make it more difficult to prove. In an ideal world we would all be able to do as we liked without fear of thus sort thing, sadly we don't live in that sort of world.

[lord bunberry]

Nowadays a demanding woman is one that tells me to do things like tidy the garage and put my beer cans away. :-(
Sadly I'm much the same brother :greengrin

[Billy Whizz]

Is he due a compensation payment from her majesty, for being jailed wrongly?

[Dinkydoo]

I think that's where the grey area arises. I like a drink, but frequently I can't remember what happened the night before. I've seen times where I've just been having a few drinks in the house and I can't remember going to bed. What I'm basically saying is that I'm a lightweight :greengrin. This case seems to revolve around how much this girl has had to drink and her state of mind at that point and her willingness to consent.
Drinking too much doesn't give someone else the right to rape you, but it does make it more difficult to prove. In an ideal world we would all be able to do as we liked without fear of thus sort thing, sadly we don't live in that sort of world.

I'm the same, plenty of evenings where my memory is hazy at best, although I don't lose hours of my life unless I'm ruined - that's the drunk state I'm referring to as being taken advantage of. I've taken people home and not remembered sleeping with them, but I do remember aiming for that end goal and they were pished too, so it's all good ;)

The problem is that

1) Nasty pieces of **** rape people

2) People exaggerate how much they "can't remember" after doing something they're not proud of on a night out.

It would be great if the only byproduct of this was a bunch of people badly explaining their interpretation of things on the internet!

[lord bunberry]

I'm the same, plenty of evenings where my memory is hazy at best, although I don't lose hours of my life unless I'm ruined - that's the drunk state I'm referring to as being taken advantage of. I've taken people home and not remembered sleeping with them, but I do remember aiming for that end goal and they were pished too, so it's all good ;)

The problem is that

1) Nasty pieces of **** rape people

2) People exaggerate how much they "can't remember" after doing something they're not proud of on a night out.

It would be great if the only byproduct of this was a bunch of people badly explaining their interpretation of things on the internet!
Again we're in agreement. My issue is at what point in the above scenarios does a rape charge come in? The whole sorry story sums up today's society, for good or bad.

[Dinkydoo]

Again we're in agreement. My issue is at what point in the above scenarios does a rape charge come in? The whole sorry story sums up today's society, for good or bad.
It can't really, unless one person is clearly not in a fit state to be able to look after themselves and/or is passed out and has no real idea what's going on.

I've had a think about it more and what I was initially saying about not remembering was too black and white. There needs to be evidence that you were not well enough to say "Aye, let's go for it" .... not remembering alone isn't good enough to warrant a rape charge.

[snooky]

If she can't remember what happened, who's to say she didn't give consent?
While I sympathise 100% with rape victims, women AND men should be responsible for their own conduct.
Too many horible deeds have been done under the banner of "Och, I was drunk".
If that's how you behave when you're drunk then don't drink. Simples.
BTW, that's the same lesson that took me a while to learn :wink:

[McIntosh]

Oh yes, that too.

Your triumphalist tone is nauseating but so predictable. Possibly but your previous self-righteousness seems very hollow now.

[ancient hibee]

The point is he has been found innocent and as such he is entitled to the grey areas not to matter.

It might be more exact to say that he's been found not guilty rather than innocent.After all the law is that he has to be found guilty beyond reasonable doubt.

[jacomo]

Possibly but your previous self-righteousness seems very hollow now.

Please stop projecting your own weaknesses onto me. It's very boring.

What you seem to conventiently and callously forget is that, at the centre of this case is what can only be described as a very distressed young woman.

Ched Evans has now been found to be innocent of the charges in a court of law. Neither you nor I were there, so it's correct that we accept the courts verdict - as I said above.

But your attitude still stinks. Back when the first verdict was discussed on here, you were making out like you were some kind of expert criminal barrister, when you are nothing of the sort.

You are simply an amateur observer of this case, like the rest of us.

[silverhibee]

Nowadays a demanding woman is one that tells me to do things like tidy the garage and put my beer cans away. :-(

You have it very easy then Pete. :greengrin

[McIntosh]

Please stop projecting your own weaknesses onto me. It's very boring.

What you seem to conventiently and callously forget is that, at the centre of this case is what can only be described as a very distressed young woman.

Ched Evans has now been found to be innocent of the charges in a court of law. Neither you nor I were there, so it's correct that we accept the courts verdict - as I said above.

But your attitude still stinks. Back when the first verdict was discussed on here, you were making out like you were some kind of expert criminal barrister, when you are nothing of the sort.

You are simply an amateur observer of this case, like the rest of us.

A bit touchy I see but that notwithstanding I have not forgotten the young woman. However, the difference between you and I, is that I am more relieved that an innocent human being has been cleared. You apparently have no sympathy for Evans considering that he has seen his reputation tarnished, his life virtually destroyed and his loved ones greatly distressed on the basis of an accusation which had been exposed in court to be without foundation.

I will make an admission to you and explain something quite personal. I was accused of sexual assault and have very first hand experience of the English legal system. I can assure you that to be accused of something when you are completely innocent is far from a pleasant experience. I can tell you something for nothing - the emotional distress it has on your family is beyond incredible. In my own case I saw my terminally ill father take this to the grave while I was completely cleared, in the words of the judge "of any wrong-doing" this was a hollow victory when the cost to my family was so devasting.

What you do not realise like Prettyboy is this, that a complainant does not a victim make. As for being an amateur, I wish I was. Earlier, I asked you to reflect but you really do not have this capacity when it comes to this subject. Remember, it is easy to pretend to insight when you are entirely ignorant.

[Dashing Bob S]

A bit touchy I see but that notwithstanding I have not forgotten the young woman. However, the difference between you and I, is that I am more relieved that an innocent human being has been cleared. You apparently have no sympathy for Evans considering that he has seen his reputation tarnished, his life virtually destroyed and his loved ones greatly distressed on the basis of an accusation which had been exposed in court to be without foundation.

I will make an admission to you and explain something quite personal. I was accused of sexual assault and have very first hand experience of the English legal system. I can assure you that to be accused of something when you are completely innocent is far from a pleasant experience. I can tell you something for nothing - the emotional distress it has on your family is beyond incredible. In my own case I saw my terminally ill father take this to the grave while I was completely cleared, in the words of the judge "of any wrong-doing" this was a hollow victory when the cost to my family was so devasting.

What you do not realise like Prettyboy is this, that a complainant does not a victim make. As for being an amateur, I wish I was. Earlier, I asked you to reflect but you really do not have this capacity when it comes to this subject. Remember, it is easy to pretend to insight when you are entirely ignorant.



So by that logic, every sexual abuse case where the person has been found guilty, then, after spending loads of money and effectively putting the victim on trial for her sexual behaviour before being redesignated as not proven of rape, is exactly like yours? Nonsense.

[500miles]

The CCTV footage from the hotel certainly didn't appear to show someone who was blind drunk. Indeed, the fact his mate got off straight away suggests she had the capacity for choice after arriving there. Evans acting shady proves nothing other than what we already know for certain - he isn't a nice guy, certainly to his girlfriend. He doesn't have the healthiest opinion on young women given what he said to police, although I could understand that his experience and circles he moves in gives him that idea. Neither of these amount to conviction though.

As for the woman, we can't start prosecuting every failed accuser due to the difficult nature of rape cases. We can't automatically believe every accusation, because that's essentially witch trials and total madness. In this case, it appears that it was the police who pushed for charges, in a crusade which, looking at the public evidence, seemed ill considered. If there was evidence that this was a lie, then perhaps there's a case for her prosecution, but that's even harder to prove than rape. The justice system is imperfect, but it should always be about evidence and facts, the alternative is unthinkable. I also understand the distaste for involving the complainant's previous sex life, but I am curious as to what was said to sway the jury, who would most likely have the same misgivings.

The bottom line for me is that the girl will fall back into anonymity after a few months, with the support of those around her, whereas what appears to be an innocent man spent years as a pariah and will never recover in the eyes of some, with his name slandered on the terraces and in the public domain weekly and daily.

[McIntosh]

So by that logic, every sexual abuse case where the person has been found guilty, then, after spending loads of money and effectively putting the victim on trial for her sexual behaviour before being redesignated as not proven of rape, is exactly like yours? Nonsense.
I cannot understand this statement - have you missed a word somewhere? However you use the Scots verdict "not proven", in England we have a guilty and not guilty verdicts. It is by construction a binary system, no gray areas.

In the Evans case there was no victim, for a victim you must have a conviction. There was a complainant, a complainant who after a rigorous cross examination was found to be unreliable and contradictory.

[Pete]

A bit touchy I see but that notwithstanding I have not forgotten the young woman. However, the difference between you and I, is that I am more relieved that an innocent human being has been cleared. You apparently have no sympathy for Evans considering that he has seen his reputation tarnished, his life virtually destroyed and his loved ones greatly distressed on the basis of an accusation which had been exposed in court to be without foundation.

I will make an admission to you and explain something quite personal. I was accused of sexual assault and have very first hand experience of the English legal system. I can assure you that to be accused of something when you are completely innocent is far from a pleasant experience. I can tell you something for nothing - the emotional distress it has on your family is beyond incredible. In my own case I saw my terminally ill father take this to the grave while I was completely cleared, in the words of the judge "of any wrong-doing" this was a hollow victory when the cost to my family was so devasting.

What you do not realise like Prettyboy is this, that a complainant does not a victim make. As for being an amateur, I wish I was. Earlier, I asked you to reflect but you really do not have this capacity when it comes to this subject. Remember, it is easy to pretend to insight when you are entirely ignorant.



I don't really know what to say about that. It must have been a brutal experience, what with your father going without closure and all.

I was going to say that this now explains your position but it's probably more appropriate to say that an experience like that would open your mind when it came to such cases.

[The Falcon]

I dont know what happened but there are no winners here.

Also I cant really fathom in these situations why the/a girls sexual past is brought up (which appears to have been key here) when, hypothetically, a persons previous convictions for sexual offences (not Ched Evans) are not allowed to mentioned as it might influence the jury? In the interests of justice each case on its own merits and all that.

Had it been me that had double teamed a young girl who was drunk I am pretty sure neither my partner would be standing by me nor would her parents be offering financial inducements for people to come forward with evidence that might clear me. Hiring hit men would be the more likely scenario.

I understand that the girl has had to move home as a result of this.

Lastly if the guy is reasonably sober and the girl is so slaughtered that she barely knows what day of the week it is, there is something decidely troubling about a guy who makes the decisions that Ched did whether she was apparently willing or not.

A number of lives are seriously tainted by this episode and that saddens me most.

[Pete]

It's becoming a bit holygroundish, if it wasn't already before.

[blackpoolhibs]

The CCTV footage from the hotel certainly didn't appear to show someone who was blind drunk. Indeed, the fact his mate got off straight away suggests she had the capacity for choice after arriving there. Evans acting shady proves nothing other than what we already know for certain - he isn't a nice guy, certainly to his girlfriend. He doesn't have the healthiest opinion on young women given what he said to police, although I could understand that his experience and circles he moves in gives him that idea. Neither of these amount to conviction though.

As for the woman, we can't start prosecuting every failed accuser due to the difficult nature of rape cases. We can't automatically believe every accusation, because that's essentially witch trials and total madness. In this case, it appears that it was the police who pushed for charges, in a crusade which, looking at the public evidence, seemed ill considered. If there was evidence that this was a lie, then perhaps there's a case for her prosecution, but that's even harder to prove than rape. The justice system is imperfect, but it should always be about evidence and facts, the alternative is unthinkable. I also understand the distaste for involving the complainant's previous sex life, but I am curious as to what was said to sway the jury, who would most likely have the same misgivings.

The bottom line for me is that the girl will fall back into anonymity after a few months, with the support of those around her, whereas what appears to be an innocent man spent years as a pariah and will never recover in the eyes of some, with his name slandered on the terraces and in the public domain weekly and daily.

Saved me the bother. :top marks

[Beefster]

I find someone pished and comatose in a doorway. I take all their money whilst asking them if that's okay. The person sort of mumbles but it definitely doesn't sound like a no. In the morning, they can't remember where their money went but CCTV tells the police that I seem to have taken it. During an interview, I tell police that I had consent but no-one believes me. After I offer some cash to my mates, they then remember that the same guy gave them £10 in a bar a few weeks earlier. Based on the fact that the 'victim' had a history of helping folk out with some cash, there is reasonable doubt surrounding the issue.

Am I a filthy thieving barsteward?

[lord bunberry]

I find someone pished and comatose in a doorway. I take all their money whilst asking them if that's okay. The person sort of mumbles but it definitely doesn't sound like a no. In the morning, they can't remember where their money went but CCTV tells the police that I seem to have taken it. During an interview, I tell police that I had consent but no-one believes me. After I offer some cash to my mates, they then remember that the same guy gave them £10 in a bar a few weeks earlier. Based on the fact that the 'victim' had a history of helping folk out with some cash, there is reasonable doubt surrounding the issue.

Am I a filthy thieving barsteward?
You're using the absolute worse case scenario there. If that girl was in the state that you describe, then I would agree that he should have been convicted. There's no evidence that she was in that state and plenty evidence that she wasn't.

[Enough said]

Should be left alone and I really hope he gets a club. Boy was slaughtered and when you looked at it the girl was a known liar.

Delighted for him, as for your comments regarding the girl being a known liar as you put it, she actually never cried rape or even accused him of that. There was no evidence of this through the first trial as well. So as for your comments you pr way way of the mark please get the facts correct before you start slaugtering people.

[J-C]

Delighted for him, as for your comments regarding the girl being a known liar as you put it, she actually never cried rape or even accused him of that. There was no evidence of this through the first trial as well. So as for comments you way way of the mark please get the facts correct before you start slaugtering people.


This is the main thing that bothers me about this case, if she didn't cry rape or accuse him, who actually brought the case to trial? and who then accused him?

[marinello59]

Delighted for him, as for your comments regarding the girl being a known liar as you put it, she actually never cried rape or even accused him of that. There was no evidence of this through the first trial as well. So as for comments you way way of the mark please get the facts correct before you start slaugtering people.

Aye, this girl has done nothing wrong. Sadly some see Evan's acquittal as in some way being a guilty verdict against her. It's a sad reflection on their own mindset.

[Chip shop Joe]

Have to say I have no sympathy for Evans at all.

Whether you can tell how drunk she was from CCTV is at best debateable. The receptionist who one would hope was impartial thought she was drunk on the night in question and this was obviously crucial evidence.

you also have to ask why it was only Evans found guilty why not the other guy? There were obviously significant differences in their courses of action.

His conduct before and after the event are opportunistic at best. Why did he leave via the fire exit again?

He may have been drunk as we all have but he was clear enough of thought to seize the opportunity to get a taxi, ask for the room number, present his ID to get the room key and then leave by a very strange route.

I also agree that this new evidence being presented after money has been offered seems a bit distasteful.

He put himself in that position and only has himself to blame given that the girl hadn't even accused him. Prior to this new evidence the CPS (not the police) felt there was enough evidence to convict as did the jury. Now that he has been found not guilty he is entitled to get on with his life but has only himself to blame for putting himself in that position.

[500miles]

only himself to blame for putting himself in that position.

Sorry, I'm genuinely not sure if you're trying to be ironic?

[Andy74]

It might be more exact to say that he's been found not guilty rather than innocent.After all the law is that he has to be found guilty beyond reasonable doubt.

Not really. He started off being presumed innocent and is innocent now after the case.

[Chip shop Joe]

If only I was that clever:wink:

[jacomo]

This is the main thing that bothers me about this case, if she didn't cry rape or accuse him, who actually brought the case to trial? and who then accused him?

The Crown did. The CPS thought there was sufficient grounds to prosecute.

This is not unusual and shouldn't be cause for concern in itself.

[High-On-Hibs]

He may be cleared of this crime and that's obviously good if it's the correct decision. However, one things for sure, he's still a slime of a character.

[jdships]

He may be cleared of this crime and that's obviously good if it's the correct decision. However, one things for sure, he's still a slime of a character.


Take it you know the lad very well and meet up regularly ?
Danger here of people following " Political Lines" where you keep wanting votes/referendums until you get the answer YOU want
At this time " The due process of law has been served " therefore lets move on
In all probability it won't be the last case of its kind we hear of !! :wink::greengrin

[GreenNWhiteArmy]

This is a subject that's been discussed at length in my office. I've read the transcript of the original case.

To be honest it's something I'm uneasy with as it's difficult to say how you really feel about the case without appearing to be a rape sympathiser or hater.

My views are that whilst it's absolutely clear that what he done was morally wrong and I'd be inclined to stop associating with anybody in my social circle if they done something like this, does it make it illegal? Does it warrant someone having a title of "rapist" hanging over there head? I'm not sure it does.

His career and personality have been severely dented by this. Not to mention the impact on the girl who by all accounts has escaped a helluva lot more hassle by stating from the outset she can't remember anything. But again that backs up what I said above, doesn't mean he deserves the tag given.

Whether he gets a deal to sign for a better club or international recognition again is not something I particularly care about if I'm honest. Having said all of the above, I'd be against hibs signing someone with this sort of mindset

[greenginger]

https://johnjamessite.com/

JJ's take on the case.

Legal parasites lining their own pockets and police brass gaining promotion with a high profile scalp.

[High-On-Hibs]

[/U][/B]

Take it you know the lad very well and meet up regularly ?
Danger here of people following " Political Lines" where you keep wanting votes/referendums until you get the answer YOU want
At this time " The due process of law has been served " therefore lets move on
In all probability it won't be the last case of its kind we hear of !! :wink::greengrin

Cheated on his partner so he could get off with some cheap dirty. Seems like a real swell guy. No doubt a well informed brexiter as well. :wink:

[Chip shop Joe]

https://johnjamessite.com/

JJ's take on the case.

Legal parasites lining their own pockets and police brass gaining promotion with a high profile scalp.

Not quite sure how the police are to blame in this case. They gather and present the evidence the CPS decides to prosecute and the jury decide to convict.

You just have to read a paper every day to see how high profile the reporting and or conviction rates of sexual offences are. The police would appear to be damed if they do damned if they don't.

[Keith_M]

Some facts about the incident.


A young woman woke up naked in a hotel room with no recollection of how she got there. Given both facts she was concerned and contacted the police. The police established that two men, Evans and MacDonald, had sex with her (the two men themselves were the source of that evidence). Friends of the two men thought the incident so hilarious that they were trying to film the incident.

As the young woman was not conscious at the time of the incident, the question remains as to how she could have given her consent to sex. Evans admits to lying to Hotel staff to get the room key, using it to enter the room, having sex with the young woman then immediately leaving by a fire escape without speaking a single word.

The young woman at no point accused anyone of rape, but still insists that she has no recollection of any of the events of the evening, initially fearing that she had been drugged but it appears that she was, in fact, very drunk. She has been named online and is being regularly abused, despite being innocent in the matter and possibly having been used for non-consensual sex.

Evans has now been cleared on legal grounds, mainly due to his defence counsel being allowed to use the sexual history of the young woman to raise 'reasonable doubt' about the events of the evening.



If anyone thinks that Evans comes out of this with any dignity, then I question whether they have any sense of decency or compassion in them whatsoever.

[lord bunberry]

Some facts about the incident.


A young woman woke up naked in a hotel room with no recollection of how she got there. Given both facts she was concerned and contacted the police. The police established that two men, Evans and MacDonald, had sex with her (the two men themselves were the source of that evidence). Friends of the two men thought the incident so hilarious that they were trying to film the incident.

As the young woman was not conscious at the time of the incident, the question remains as to how she could have given her consent to sex. Evans admits to lying to Hotel staff to get the room key, using it to enter the room, having sex with the young woman then immediately leaving by a fire escape without speaking a single word.

The young woman at no point accused anyone of rape, but still insists that she has no recollection of any of the events of the evening, initially fearing that she had been drugged but it appears that she was, in fact, very drunk. She has been named online and is being regularly abused, despite being innocent in the matter and possibly having been used for non-consensual sex.

Evans has now been cleared on legal grounds, mainly due to his defence counsel being allowed to use the sexual history of the young woman to raise 'reasonable doubt' about the events of the evening.



If anyone thinks that Evans comes out of this with any dignity, then I question whether they have any sense of decency or compassion in them whatsoever.

Are you sure she was unconscious during the incident? That's the first time I've heard that being suggested and if true changes everything for me.

[Dinkydoo]

Some facts about the incident.


A young woman woke up naked in a hotel room with no recollection of how she got there. Given both facts she was concerned and contacted the police. The police established that two men, Evans and MacDonald, had sex with her (the two men themselves were the source of that evidence). Friends of the two men thought the incident so hilarious that they were trying to film the incident.

As the young woman was not conscious at the time of the incident, the question remains as to how she could have given her consent to sex. Evans admits to lying to Hotel staff to get the room key, using it to enter the room, having sex with the young woman then immediately leaving by a fire escape without speaking a single word.

The young woman at no point accused anyone of rape, but still insists that she has no recollection of any of the events of the evening, initially fearing that she had been drugged but it appears that she was, in fact, very drunk. She has been named online and is being regularly abused, despite being innocent in the matter and possibly having been used for non-consensual sex.

Evans has now been cleared on legal grounds, mainly due to his defence counsel being allowed to use the sexual history of the young woman to raise 'reasonable doubt' about the events of the evening.



If anyone thinks that Evans comes out of this with any dignity, then I question whether they have any sense of decency or compassion in them whatsoever.
If those are indeed the facts then I'm astounded that he managed to get away without even a sexual assualt charge.

[Velma Dinkley]

Some facts about the incident.


A young woman woke up naked in a hotel room with no recollection of how she got there. Given both facts she was concerned and contacted the police. The police established that two men, Evans and MacDonald, had sex with her (the two men themselves were the source of that evidence). Friends of the two men thought the incident so hilarious that they were trying to film the incident.

As the young woman was not conscious at the time of the incident, the question remains as to how she could have given her consent to sex. Evans admits to lying to Hotel staff to get the room key, using it to enter the room, having sex with the young woman then immediately leaving by a fire escape without speaking a single word.

The young woman at no point accused anyone of rape, but still insists that she has no recollection of any of the events of the evening, initially fearing that she had been drugged but it appears that she was, in fact, very drunk. She has been named online and is being regularly abused, despite being innocent in the matter and possibly having been used for non-consensual sex.

Evans has now been cleared on legal grounds, mainly due to his defence counsel being allowed to use the sexual history of the young woman to raise 'reasonable doubt' about the events of the evening.



If anyone thinks that Evans comes out of this with any dignity, then I question whether they have any sense of decency or compassion in them whatsoever.

That she doesn't remember is not a fact. It's a claim. How that could be established as a fact I'm not sure.

[Keith_M]

Are you sure she was unconscious during the incident? That's the first time I've heard that being suggested and if true changes everything for me.


That was what was reported in court. However, the 'reasonable doubt' part is what appears to have secured the overturning of the conviction.

[Allant1981]

That was what was reported in court. However, the 'reasonable doubt' part is what appears to have secured the overturning of the conviction.

Are you sure this was mentioned as ive just finishing reading what was said in court and cant remember reading this

[Dashing Bob S]

I cannot understand this statement - have you missed a word somewhere? However you use the Scots verdict "not proven", in England we have a guilty and not guilty verdicts. It is by construction a binary system, no gray areas.

In the Evans case there was no victim, for a victim you must have a conviction. There was a complainant, a complainant who after a rigorous cross examination was found to be unreliable and contradictory.

There are no grey areas in respect of the legal verdict, but if there were none in respect of the process Evans would not have been convicted originally.

[McIntosh]

There are no grey areas in respect of the legal verdict, but if there were none in respect of the process Evans would not have been convicted originally. the original trial verdict was declared unsafe. Read into that what you will But it is a telling fact.

[lord bunberry]

That was what was reported in court. However, the 'reasonable doubt' part is what appears to have secured the overturning of the conviction.

If she was unconscious then he's a rapist and so is his mate.

[J-C]

If she was unconscious then he's a rapist and so is his mate.

Was she unconscious? And if so why was the other bloke not charged?

[lord bunberry]

Was she unconscious? And if so why was the other bloke not charged?

I don't know, it was suggested she was by another poster

[Beefster]

And if so why was the other bloke not charged?

He was. He was acquitted. She left a club and went to the room with McDonald so that may have made a difference.

[J-C]

He was. He was acquitted. She left a club and went to the room with McDonald so that may have made a difference.

Even if she left with him, if she has no recollection then by the Evans logic Mcdonald must've raped her also. All very strange and confusing, feels like something very fishy going on somewhere.

[Beefster]

Even if she left with him, if she has no recollection then by the Evans logic Mcdonald must've raped her also. All very strange and confusing, feels like something very fishy going on somewhere.

Confusing?

A girl and guy flirt, leave a club and end up in a hotel room.

A girl and guy don't meet or speak before the guy creeps into a hotel room where the girl already is.

Let's say in both cases, the guy then goes on to have sex with the girl without consent (i.e., rape her). Surely you can see that it's much easier to argue reasonable doubt in the first case of rape than the second?

[J-C]

Confusing?

A girl and guy flirt, leave a club and end up in a hotel room.

A girl and guy don't meet or speak before the guy creeps into a hotel room where the girl already is.

Let's say in both cases, the guy then goes on to have sex with the girl without consent (i.e., rape her). Surely you can see that it's much easier to argue reasonable doubt in the first case of rape than the second?

Confusing as she said she had no recollection of having sex with either men, surely that's important. You also have to think that Evans may have been acting dubious as he was a well known footballer and maybe the girl knew he'd be there also but had to be careful not one saw him.

[Beefster]

Confusing as she said she had no recollection of having sex with either men, surely that's important.

Well, yes, it's important. That's why the guy was also tried.

[Onceinawhile]

She was not unconscious. She has no memory of it. Big difference.

The reason her sexual past was brought up was to show she consented.

Evans stated that she asked him to use a specific position and to "go harder". Which he says meant she was consenting.

Two others said she said similar when they slept with her - with consent.

Her entire sexual history hasn't been dragged through court, only a small amount relevant to the question of consent.

[Hezbelle]

He appealed through social media and his website offering payment to anyone who could help him unearth elements of the girls sexual history that could help him get cleared.

No doubt his father in law bank rolled that as well.

Bunch of cretins.

Leaving the consent issue aside, the events are still awful. His mate pulls, ched sneaks into the hotel room and performs oral sex then penetrates the girl his mate has just ****ged whilst other pals are outside trying to film it. He doesn't converse with the girl and leaves via a fire exit. This is what he told the police.

Then his insipid fiancee stands by him and her father offers financial support. If anyone treated a daughter of mine like that they'd be for it. Rape or no rape he was unfaithful in the grubbiest of ways. His fiancee must have such low self esteem to stick with him, compounded by her father basically saying what he done was a-ok.

[ancient hibee]

Not really. He started off being presumed innocent and is innocent now after the case.

My point I think.He wasn't found innocent,his guilt wasn't proved.Just my point of view.

I know I'm getting old but does anyone remember the film High Society? Grace Kelly who had been drunk asked Frank Sinatra "whether any thing had happened".He replied that she had had a bit to drink and that "men had rules about that sort of thing".How times have changed.

[lord bunberry]

Confusing?

A girl and guy flirt, leave a club and end up in a hotel room.

A girl and guy don't meet or speak before the guy creeps into a hotel room where the girl already is.

Let's say in both cases, the guy then goes on to have sex with the girl without consent (i.e., rape her). Surely you can see that it's much easier to argue reasonable doubt in the first case of rape than the second?

He mat her in a kebab shop I think.

[Beefster]

He mat her in a kebab shop I think.

Fair enough. McDonald could have met her at the back of a bookies whilst she was chundering and having her hair held up by a tramp and the point would still stand.

[Andy74]

Some facts about the incident.


A young woman woke up naked in a hotel room with no recollection of how she got there. Given both facts she was concerned and contacted the police. The police established that two men, Evans and MacDonald, had sex with her (the two men themselves were the source of that evidence). Friends of the two men thought the incident so hilarious that they were trying to film the incident.

As the young woman was not conscious at the time of the incident, the question remains as to how she could have given her consent to sex. Evans admits to lying to Hotel staff to get the room key, using it to enter the room, having sex with the young woman then immediately leaving by a fire escape without speaking a single word.

The young woman at no point accused anyone of rape, but still insists that she has no recollection of any of the events of the evening, initially fearing that she had been drugged but it appears that she was, in fact, very drunk. She has been named online and is being regularly abused, despite being innocent in the matter and possibly having been used for non-consensual sex.

Evans has now been cleared on legal grounds, mainly due to his defence counsel being allowed to use the sexual history of the young woman to raise 'reasonable doubt' about the events of the evening.



If anyone thinks that Evans comes out of this with any dignity, then I question whether they have any sense of decency or compassion in them whatsoever.
Could have saved the hassle of both trials and just talked to you then.

[Andy74]

My point I think.He wasn't found innocent,his guilt wasn't proved.Just my point of view.

I know I'm getting old but does anyone remember the film High Society? Grace Kelly who had been drunk asked Frank Sinatra "whether any thing had happened".He replied that she had had a bit to drink and that "men had rules about that sort of thing".How times have changed.

He didn't need to prove his innocence though. He was and remains innocent until it's proven otherwise.

[Bristolhibby]

Just been saying that to the mrs, how his other half stuck by him ill never know

£££££££

[Allant1981]

£££££££

Sadly thats probably the reason

[LaMotta]

Sadly thats probably the reason

Its pretty unlikely given she comes from money.

[Allant1981]

Its pretty unlikely given she comes from money.

Cant say ive had a look at her personal/family life so didnt know that

[Jonnyboy]

Am really surprised this thread is still on the main MB. It's nothing at all to do with football

[Betty Boop]

https://www.crimeline.info/uploads/cases/2016/chedevansappealx.pdf

[Newry Hibs]

An interesting blog on this...

Evans is a class A tosser, but his morals weren't on trial.
https://thesecretbarrister.com/2016/10/14/10-myths-busted-about-the-ched-evans-case/

[Colr]

Was she unconscious? And if so why was the other bloke not charged?

And the one watching it through the window. Is that normal behaviour in Wales?

[Itsnoteasy]

Am really surprised this thread is still on the main MB. It's nothing at all to do with football

Spot on. Who cares.

[Hibrandenburg]

And the one watching it through the window. Is that normal behaviour in Wales?

No! Normally they peep through cracks in the barn door.

[cabbageandribs1875]

couldn't find the BBC article but the daily mail also had same story, an ex solicitor general thinks by allowing the girls past history to be disclosed has put the system back 30 years

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3839546/Ched-Evans-case-set-30-years-says-ex-solicitor-general-jury-told-details-rape-accuser-s-sexual-past.html


Ched Evans case 'has set us back 30 years' says ex-solicitor general after jury were told details of his rape accuser's sexual past

[J-C]

There's been a lot of things that have upset me when following this but what really shook me was the fact that they allowed the woman's sexual history to be brought up in court. I honestly cannot fathom why this was allowed and it really made me sick when I read it.

They brought up the fact that she'd told her previous sexual partners to "go harder" and argued that she'd said it to Evans as well. How this was allowed to be heard I don't know. A woman (or man, for that matter) might have asked a hundred previous partners to "go harder". She might have had really rough sex with them and enjoyed it. That shouldn't matter, because she consented. Why should that have any bearing when she then accuses somebody of rape? I'm not talking about this case specifically now, but as a woman it terrifies me to think that because I may have enjoyed rough sex or talked dirty to previous partners, I might not be believed in the future because my sexual history would be dragged out and put on examination. "Oh she said go harder, she must want it, she was asking for it." Maybe she was. With that person. Not every person. Not the person who raped her.

The other thing that distresses me is the abuse towards the woman since the not guilty verdict. Comments asking if she is going to apologise, that she should be put on trial now for lying and ruining his life. Aside from the fact that she never accused him of rape, this is also horrifying for rape victims who are already terrified enough to come forward to report what happened to them. Rape can be incredibly difficult to prove - even more so because most rapes are committed by somebody known to the victim. It's very difficult to prove spousal rape, for instance. But it happens. A not guilty verdict does not always mean it didn't happen. It doesn't always been the victim is lying. And we need to protect the victims in these cases so that more women are not afraid of coming forward.


couldn't find the BBC article but the daily mail also had same story, an ex solicitor general thinks by allowing the girls past history to be disclosed has put the system back 30 years

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3839546/Ched-Evans-case-set-30-years-says-ex-solicitor-general-jury-told-details-rape-accuser-s-sexual-past.html


Ched Evans case 'has set us back 30 years' says ex-solicitor general after jury were told details of his rape accuser's sexual past





They allowed her sexual history because what she likes and says during sex verified that what Evans told the police was exactly what she says to all of her sexual partners while having sex and thus proved she was a willing participant, plus the other witness verified that when she gets drunk she's compus mentus during sex but remembers nothing the day after.

[marinello59]

They allowed her sexual history because what she likes and says during sex verified that what Evans told the police was exactly what she says to all of her sexual partners while having sex and thus proved she was a willing participant, plus the other witness verified that when she gets drunk she's compus mentus during sex but remembers nothing the day after.

They put her on trial in place of Evans. All power was transferred back to the rich footballer and his mates when that decision was made. No wonder women's groups are horrifed. She was drunk and rapist or not, Evans and his **** bag pals took advantage. There are no winners here.

[J-C]

How does it verify anything? She might be the kind of girl who likes hard sex and often tells guys to go harder. Doesn't mean she did that time though? It didn't prove anything.

Again, I'm not saying she did or didn't say this to Evans. That's not what I'm getting at. I'm saying you can't use somebody's past history of liking or wanting something to try and infer they want it this time. Which is why I think it's disgusting that it was brought up. It implies that someone who likes rough or hard or frequent sex must want it with all her partners and therefore it can't be rape. "You told these guys to go harder and this guy claims you said go harder so you must have consented." It's not exactly an uncommon request in the bedroom, so why should it be used as evidence like that?


Evans statement to the police was she went doggie style and asked him to go deeper and harder, if she was unconscious how would he know she said this very regularly when having sex, it only means she was awake and taking full part in sex, she also has a history of drinking that much she has memory loss.

Not saying I agree with his morals but her sexual history had to be questioned as it gave credence to his story that she was willing and called out to him to go harder and deeper.

[Scouse Hibee]

They put her on trial in place of Evans. All power was transferred back to the rich footballer and his mates when that decision was made. No wonder women's groups are horrifed. She was drunk and rapist or not, Evans and his **** bag pals took advantage. There are no winners here.

Yep what next, imagine a girl raped in shop doorway,during the trial we here from a previous partner that she had sex in a shop doorway with him on several occasions, the rapist is obviously not guilty then eh!

[Andy74]

Yep what next, imagine a girl raped in shop doorway,during the trial we here from a previous partner that she had sex in a shop doorway with him on several occasions, the rapist is obviously not guilty then eh!

In the same way if it was an allegation of rape and the man charged made a statement to police that she had specifically asked to go to a shop doorway then yes it would be pretty relevant.

Its kind of how statements and evidence works. It doesn't mean he would be not guilty but would be relevant along with all other evidence to give a picture of what may have happened.

[Scouse Hibee]

In the same way if it was an allegation of rape and the man charged made a statement to police that she had specifically asked to go to a shop doorway then yes it would be pretty relevant.

Its kind of how statements and evidence works. It doesn't mean he would be not guilty but would be relevant along with all other evidence to give a picture of what may have happened.

That's the whole point by allowing her sexual preferences to be made public,women may now be afraid to report sexually related crimes due to their private life being dragged up,totally wrong and a major setback to the system of investigating such crimes. It's totally irrelevant that someone dragged off and raped has had sex in a similar location previously.

[J-C]

That's the whole point by allowing her sexual preferences to be made public,women may now be afraid to report sexually related crimes due to their private life being dragged up,totally wrong and a major setback to the system of investigating such crimes. It's totally irrelevant that someone dragged off and raped has had sex in a similar location previously.


They would only be afraid if they were lying about the rape, if it's non consensual then the rapist would not have any knowledge of the girls sexual preferences, knowing details like what she says and her preferred positions usually means consent was given.

I disagree with the sneaky way in which he had sex with her but it seems obvious that consent was given, I also find it strange that even till this day she has never accused anyone of raping her, the police and prosecutors took this matter up and went ahead with the case.

[Scouse Hibee]

They would only be afraid if they were lying about the rape, if it's non consensual then the rapist would not have any knowledge of the girls sexual preferences, knowing details like what she says and her preferred positions usually means consent was given.

I disagree with the sneaky way in which he had sex with her but it seems obvious that consent was given, I also find it strange that even till this day she has never accused anyone of raping her, the police and prosecutors took this matter up and went ahead with the case.

Not necessarily,scenario where girl tells guy she likes it in shop doorways only to tell him to stop once there and tben he rapes here. Comes out in court that she does regularly have sex in shop doorways so must have been consensual. This is the danger.

[J-C]

Not necessarily,scenario where girl tells guy she likes it in shop doorways only to tell him to stop once there and tben he rapes here. Comes out in court that she does regularly have sex in shop doorways so must have been consensual. This is the danger.


But this is so circumstantial. I'm sure many women have told previous partners at least once to go harder, or suggested doggy style as it's probably one of the better positions for women. And if a rapist was trying to say the sex was consensual, of course he's going to say something like "she told me she wanted it this way, to go harder etc". The rapist doesn't need knowledge of the girl's sexual preferences, he can just assume that she's probably had this kind of sex before and then claim it's the same here.

So in this scenario, a man can rape a woman doggy-style, tell the police she wanted it that way and asked him to go harder, and when it's discovered that the woman had doggy style with previous partners and asked them to go harder, it's somehow proof that it was consensual. That's why it's so damaging to bring up the victim's history.



I'm not saying I agree with any of it, I'm trying to understand what is and isn't acceptable both as evidence and the truth as there seems to be a lot of grey areas surrounding this case. The one thing that still I don't understand is the woman in question has never claimed or accused anyone of rape, the public prosecutor brought he charges not her.

[RyeSloan]

But this is so circumstantial. I'm sure many women have told previous partners at least once to go harder, or suggested doggy style as it's probably one of the better positions for women. And if a rapist was trying to say the sex was consensual, of course he's going to say something like "she told me she wanted it this way, to go harder etc". The rapist doesn't need knowledge of the girl's sexual preferences, he can just assume that she's probably had this kind of sex before and then claim it's the same here.

So in this scenario, a man can rape a woman doggy-style, tell the police she wanted it that way and asked him to go harder, and when it's discovered that the woman had doggy style with previous partners and asked them to go harder, it's somehow proof that it was consensual. That's why it's so damaging to bring up the victim's history.

Well that would be some coincidence then considering the accused would have no prior knowledge of those facts.

These facts were deemed relevant to the case by a senior (female) appeals court judge. I'm inclined to believe she thought they were relevant and material to the case in hand and thus allowed them to be heard in the retrial because they were urmm relevant and material to the case.

I'm all for protecting the alleged victim but there needs to be a proportional allowance for the accused to defend themselves...in this case as stated senior judges decided that the evidence was required for the accused to do so.

[easty]

Well that would be some coincidence then considering the accused would have no prior knowledge of those facts.

These facts were deemed relevant to the case by a senior (female) appeals court judge. I'm inclined to believe she thought they were relevant and material to the case in hand and thus allowed them to be heard in the retrial because they were urmm relevant and material to the case.

I'm all for protecting the alleged victim but there needs to be a proportional allowance for the accused to defend themselves...in this case as stated senior judges decided that the evidence was required for the accused to do so.

Is it relevant that the senior appeals court judge was female?

[silverhibee]

I'm not saying I agree with any of it, I'm trying to understand what is and isn't acceptable both as evidence and the truth as there seems to be a lot of grey areas surrounding this case. The one thing that still I don't understand is the woman in question has never claimed or accused anyone of rape, the public prosecutor brought he charges not her.

Victim doesn't have to make a complaint for someone to be charged with an offence.

[silverhibee]

Can the crown appeal this decision.

[hibsbollah]

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/oct/17/ched-evans-football-industry-harassment-respect-women

[RyeSloan]

Is it relevant that the senior appeals court judge was female?

In my personal opinion yes it is.

[LaMotta]

An interesting blog on this...

Evans is a class A tosser, but his morals weren't on trial.
https://thesecretbarrister.com/2016/10/14/10-myths-busted-about-the-ched-evans-case/

This article is the most sensible and balanced thing I have read on the case and highlights just how misleading a lot of the stuff being trotted out is. For example:

A special mention goes to the raft of claims in the press that this case sets a new, special precedent allowing the sexual history of complainants to be admitted in evidence in any future case, solely for the purpose of shaming the complainant in a dark return to the 1970s. Allow me to help: The precedent that has been set is none. The Court of Appeal decision sets down no new application of law or principle, and section 41 continues to operate exactly as it did before, excluding the vast, vast majority of questions about previous sexual behaviour. The newspapers, activists and charities propagating this false message are needlessly terrifying present and future victims, and will only risk deterring them from coming forward.

[J-C]

Victim doesn't have to make a complaint for someone to be charged with an offence.


I understand that SH, just seems very weird that the woman in questioned hasn't claimed anything untoward happened that night but they thought a case could be held against Evans and McDonald.

[LaMotta]

Can the crown appeal this decision.

No, case closed according to that Barrister article weblink .

[Killiehibbie]

An alleged victims past should be treated the same way as an accused persons previous convictions. The jury should only be deciding what happened on the night in question.

[Andy74]

An alleged victims past should be treated the same way as an accused persons previous convictions. The jury should only be deciding what happened on the night in question.

The jury need the relevant facts though and this was directly relevant as to why he thought she was consenting.

[RyeSloan]

The jury need the relevant facts though and this was directly relevant as to why he thought she was consenting.

Which is exactly why Lady Justice Hallet, one of the countries most senior judges, decided that it should be allowed.

And as the posting above states this was not setting any new precedent or changing the way every rape trial will be run but specific to this case.

I'm inclined to believe that such a senior judge is possibly more qualified than most to make this decision.

[Scouse Hibee]

Which is exactly why Lady Justice Hallet, one of the countries most senior judges, decided that it should be allowed.

And as the posting above states this was not setting any new precedent or changing the way every rape trial will be run but specific to this case.

I'm inclined to believe that such a senior judge is possibly more qualified than most to make this decision.

On this occasion you're probably right but judges are often so far away from reality and the current happenings it's unreal.

[lord bunberry]

On this occasion you're probably right but judges are often so far away from reality and the current happenings it's unreal.

And a fair few lack the common sense to see past the black and white nature of the law.

[RyeSloan]

On this occasion you're probably right but judges are often so far away from reality and the current happenings it's unreal.

Oh for sure but if we can't let a senior appeal judge make a decision on what is relevant to a case or not then I'm not sure where that leaves us..

[Betty Boop]

David Goodwillie being sued for 500,000 in a similar case.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/g-9074981

[J-C]

David Goodwillie being sued for 500,000 in a similar case.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/g-9074981


So the case was dropped and no charges brought but she is still suing him for half a million, so how can you sue someone who's never been charged or even brought to court?

[marinello59]

So the case was dropped and no charges brought but she is still suing him for half a million, so how can you sue someone who's never been charged or even brought to court?

The burden of proof is different in a civil case from a criminal case. It's a legitimate path to follow by those who may have been let down by the criminal system.

[Future17]

The burden of proof is different in a civil case from a criminal case. It's a legitimate path to follow by those who may have been let down by the criminal system.

Whilst that is true, the Goodwillie case raises some interesting questions about the concept of innocent until proven guilty and access to justice for the accused (as well as the alleged victim).

Despite having the financial resources to pay for the legal representation he chooses, Goodwillie has had this option removed as a significant proportion of those resources have been frozen to ensure there would be something for the alleged victim to be paid in the event her legal claim is successful.

Furthermore, despite the absence of any specific law preventing it, I understand the judge has stated he would not allow Goodwillie to question his accuser during the trial. As a result, he is essentially prevented from representing himself.

[easty]

Furthermore, despite the absence of any specific law preventing it, I understand the judge has stated he would not allow Goodwillie to question his accuser during the trial. As a result, he is essentially prevented from representing himself.

I don't know if there is a law preventing this or not, I'll take your word for it though. You surely don't think that someone up in court for rape should be allowed to question the person accusing him? That would be ridiculous.

[CropleyWasGod]

Whilst that is true, the Goodwillie case raises some interesting questions about the concept of innocent until proven guilty and access to justice for the accused (as well as the alleged victim).

Despite having the financial resources to pay for the legal representation he chooses, Goodwillie has had this option removed as a significant proportion of those resources have been frozen to ensure there would be something for the alleged victim to be paid in the event her legal claim is successful.

Furthermore, despite the absence of any specific law preventing it, I understand the judge has stated he would not allow Goodwillie to question his accuser during the trial. As a result, he is essentially prevented from representing himself.

I read it that the judge doesn't think that justice would be seen to be done if DG represents himself. In other words, that justice would be better served by having a professional doing it.

A jury may be swayed by DG's manner of examining of the woman, purely by his (lack of) experience.... that might go for him or against him. Again, rape being what it is, one can't always apply the same procedures in cases like this as in other types. (cf Evans, C)