Ched Evans (1 Viewer)

Specs WT-R75 · Oct 10, 2015

ccfc92 said:
Agreed.

The article even says she didn't claim she was raped. I don't understand how he can be convicted of that if she says she wasn't?

Also, that McDonald didn't get charged as well? All very odd, and they need to do a fresh trial, with all the evidence to hand.

It's not about rape in the way that we are thinking, its about being able to give consent which then constitutes rape on something of a technicality... I don't want to get drawn into the "some types of rape are different" debate but as an example if I am drunk and have consenting sex but then cannot remember have I been raped? Only if someone admits that they had sex with me when I couldn't actually remember...

I am pretty sure that the laws of consent were not designed to cover this type of activity - it was designed to stop date-rape and taking advantage of someone who is passed out etc - but as always the lawyers can only interpret the laws that are passed down from government.

I would imagine in some years from now that this law will be different...

Bottom line though in-spite of all this Ched is a pretty scummy person...

Otis · Oct 10, 2015

Specs WT-R75 said:
It's not about rape in the way that we are thinking, its about being able to give consent which then constitutes rape on something of a technicality... I don't want to get drawn into the "some types of rape are different" debate but as an example if I am drunk and have consenting sex but then cannot remember have I been raped? Only if someone admits that they had sex with me when I couldn't actually remember...

I am pretty sure that the laws of consent were not designed to cover this type of activity - it was designed to stop date-rape and taking advantage of someone who is passed out etc - but as always the lawyers can only interpret the laws that are passed down from government.

I would imagine in some years from now that this law will be different...

Bottom line though in-spite of all this Ched is a pretty scummy person...

Yep, can't argue with that.

SkyBlue_Bear83 · Oct 10, 2015

Otis said:
Of course, on the other hand, if the conviction does prove to be safe, that's an awful lot more mud raking and despair for the girl to endure.

It should have been completely water-tight first time. Every single witness statement taken and every bit of available footage shown in court.

Maybe I'm wrong but I get the feeling from the article that a lot of the 'witnesses' mentioned aren't actually witnesses to the events/night but more character witnesses to attack her with. Example

The new witnesses have spoken of meeting the victim – who was 19 at the time of the 2011 rape at the Premier Inn, near Rhyl – on nights out in bars and at house parties.

Some are men who had relationships with her.

If these people haven't been present on the night or don't have other evidence relevant to the night which it doesn't seem as if they do then I don't see what relevance they haveto the case?

Nick · Oct 10, 2015

But an adult who has sex with an eleven year old didn't get prison? How does it work out??

Otis · Oct 10, 2015

Nick said:
But an adult who has sex with an eleven year old didn't get prison? How does it work out??

As I said before, Nick, had that been a bloke with a girl, rather than a woman with a boy, it would have been a completely different outcome.

ccfc92 · Oct 10, 2015

Specs WT-R75 said:
It's not about rape in the way that we are thinking, its about being able to give consent which then constitutes rape on something of a technicality... I don't want to get drawn into the "some types of rape are different" debate but as an example if I am drunk and have consenting sex but then cannot remember have I been raped? Only if someone admits that they had sex with me when I couldn't actually remember...

I am pretty sure that the laws of consent were not designed to cover this type of activity - it was designed to stop date-rape and taking advantage of someone who is passed out etc - but as always the lawyers can only interpret the laws that are passed down from government.

I would imagine in some years from now that this law will be different...

Bottom line though in-spite of all this Ched is a pretty scummy person...

No I completely understand what you're saying, without comparing/prioritising rape cases. That does make sense what you have replied with.

Regards this though, whilst I agree, however if he IS innocent, would you not agree he has every right to clear his name if so?

Obviously, if he is guilty, he should just let it go and accept his sentence.

SkyBlue_Bear83 · Oct 10, 2015

ccfc92 said:
So basically, if they said neither of them slept with her, there would be no case?

That makes sense re McDonald. If she went back with him. But Evans went to the room later.

That is exactly right, there was no DNA evidence that sex had taken place so if they had both lied and said it didn't happen there would be no case.

Otis · Oct 10, 2015

CCFC said:
Maybe I'm wrong but I get the feeling from the article that a lot of the 'witnesses' mentioned aren't actually witnesses to the events/night but more character witnesses to attack her with. Example

The new witnesses have spoken of meeting the victim – who was 19 at the time of the 2011 rape at the Premier Inn, near Rhyl – on nights out in bars and at house parties.

Some are men who had relationships with her.

If these people haven't been present on the night or don't have other evidence relevant to the night which it doesn't seem as if they do then I don't see what relevance they haveto the case?

Yeah, but in a trial don't you have the right to try and prove whether someone is a relaible and credible witness or not?

ccfc92 · Oct 10, 2015

Otis said:
As I said before, Nick, had that been a bloke with a girl, rather than a woman with a boy, it would have been a completely different outcome.

I have to say, this is 100% correct.

It should be treated the same, but it isn't when an older woman sleeps with a young boy.

covcity4life · Oct 10, 2015

Nick why are you replying to this thread yet not moving it???? It's nothing to do with cov city f.c

2 drunk chavs have sex. Fuck off now and let me read cov news

ccfc92 · Oct 10, 2015

CCFC said:
That is exactly right, there was no DNA evidence that sex had taken place so if they had both lied and said it didn't happen there would be no case.

It is odd that there was no DNA evidence. Unless it was a few days after that night she went to the police?

ccfc92 · Oct 10, 2015

covcity4life said:
Nick why are you replying to this thread yet not moving it???? It's nothing to do with cov city f.c

2 drunk chavs have sex. Fuck off now and let me read cov news

Do you have to click on this thread to read the comments or...?

Otis · Oct 10, 2015

Guilty or not, there are some things that don't sit right with this case.

SkyBlue_Bear83 · Oct 10, 2015

Specs WT-R75 said:
It's not about rape in the way that we are thinking, its about being able to give consent which then constitutes rape on something of a technicality... I don't want to get drawn into the "some types of rape are different" debate but as an example if I am drunk and have consenting sex but then cannot remember have I been raped? Only if someone admits that they had sex with me when I couldn't actually remember...

I am pretty sure that the laws of consent were not designed to cover this type of activity - it was designed to stop date-rape and taking advantage of someone who is passed out etc - but as always the lawyers can only interpret the laws that are passed down from government.

I would imagine in some years from now that this law will be different...

Bottom line though in-spite of all this Ched is a pretty scummy person...

I think you have a decent point about the law, I don't think it was designed with this sort of case i mind. As for your question if that person can demonstrate they genuinely believed they had your consent then as far as I understand then no they wouldn't be guilty.

Otis · Oct 10, 2015

ccfc92 said:
Do you have to click on this thread to read the comments or...?

Was hoping the clue was in the title 'Ched Evans.' As he doesn't play for Coventry City, you would possibly have come to the conclusion that this thread now has nothing to do with Coventry City Football Club and therefore you would choose simply to not click on the thread.

ccfc92 · Oct 10, 2015

Otis said:
Guilty or not, there are some things that don't sit right with this case.

That is 100% certain

SkyBlue_Bear83 · Oct 10, 2015

ccfc92 said:
It is odd that there was no DNA evidence. Unless it was a few days after that night she went to the police?

Well neither ejaculated so there was no semen, I'm not really sure what other ways they have obtaining dna in rape cases. It was the next day she went to the police (but remember she never claimed rape so they wouldn't have been looking for DNA straight away) I'm not sure how long it took for them to track down and question Macdonald and Evans.

Otis · Oct 10, 2015

I'm getting forgetful in my old age, but if she wasn't claiming rape, why was it that she went to the police again?

ccfc92 · Oct 10, 2015

CCFC said:
Well neither ejaculated so there was no semen, I'm not really sure what other ways they have obtaining dna in rape cases. It was the next day she went to the police (but remember she never claimed rape so they wouldn't have been looking for DNA straight away) I'm not sure how long it took for them to track down and question Macdonald and Evans.

Thanks for that CSI CCFC :laugh:

Surely there would still be DNA though, hair, saliva etc?

Also regarding her going to the police, why did she go if she didn't go to say she'd been raped?

Without being silly, that's like me falling over drunk, hitting my head or bruising my body, then going to the police saying I must have been attacked, but I can't remember?

wingy · Oct 10, 2015

CCFC said:
Well neither ejaculated so there was no semen, I'm not really sure what other ways they have obtaining dna in rape cases. It was the next day she went to the police (but remember she never claimed rape so they wouldn't have been looking for DNA straight away) I'm not sure how long it took for them to track down and question Macdonald and Evans.

Haha Is that right
Headline Chef Evans fires blanks.

ccfc92 · Oct 10, 2015

Otis said:
I'm getting forgetful in my old age, but if she wasn't claiming rape, why was it that she went to the police again?

Exactly my question.

SkyBlue_Bear83 · Oct 10, 2015

Otis said:
I'm getting forgetful in my old age, but if she wasn't claiming rape, why was it that she went to the police again?

She thought her drink may have been spiked as she couldn't remember how she got to the hotel room.

Specs WT-R75 · Oct 10, 2015

ccfc92 said:
No I completely understand what you're saying, without comparing/prioritising rape cases. That does make sense what you have replied with.

Regards this though, whilst I agree, however if he IS innocent, would you not agree he has every right to clear his name if so?

Obviously, if he is guilty, he should just let it go and accept his sentence.

Sure of course he has every right to use whatever legal recourse is available to him.

The reality is, even if she was too drunk to officially consent, in his own mind he clearly feels he had consenting sex and does not feel that he has raped her and hence why he won't admit to something in his own mind was not rape...even if the law technically says that he has and the victim doesn't have the scars that a violent rape causes... infact I would go as far as saying that the aftermath of this case has caused more harm than the actual events of the night - so much for protecting the victim!

Specs WT-R75 · Oct 10, 2015

CCFC said:
Well neither ejaculated so there was no semen, I'm not really sure what other ways they have obtaining dna in rape cases. It was the next day she went to the police (but remember she never claimed rape so they wouldn't have been looking for DNA straight away) I'm not sure how long it took for them to track down and question Macdonald and Evans.

Or maybe they just used condoms...

SkyBlue_Bear83 · Oct 10, 2015

ccfc92 said:
Thanks for that CSI CCFC :laugh:

Surely there would still be DNA though, hair, saliva etc?

Also regarding her going to the police, why did she go if she didn't go to say she'd been raped?

Without being silly, that's like me falling over drunk, hitting my head or bruising my body, then going to the police saying I must have been attacked, but I can't remember?

You could be right I don't really know, maybe they just thought there was no further need to look for DNA as they admitted having sex

ccfc92 · Oct 10, 2015

CCFC said:
You could be right I don't really know, maybe they just thought there was no further need to look for DNA as they admitted having sex

Also makes sense, agreed.

stupot07 · Oct 10, 2015

Other than the character witnesses, which IMO are irrelevant, I don't see anything in that article other than a defence team doing its job and trying not to discredit the witness and investing by mud slinging.

And I agree with NW, this has likely been deliberately leaked to try and influence the trial and media.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

SkyBlue_Bear83 · Oct 10, 2015

Specs WT-R75 said:
Or maybe they just used condoms...

It was said neither ejaculated I believe, Evans claimed he pulled out and stopped as he was afraid he was girlfriend would ring him

SkyBlue_Bear83 · Oct 10, 2015

Otis said:
Yeah, but in a trial don't you have the right to try and prove whether someone is a relaible and credible witness or not?

The thing is, the only major thing I see is if they could prove she was lying about her memory loss. So unless she's admitted to one of the witnesses that she remembers or slipped up and implies she remember I don't see the point, that's why I said it could be interesting to see what was said in the taxi journey.

What relevance are statements from previous sexual partners?

ccfc92 · Oct 10, 2015

CCFC said:
The thing is, the only major thing I see is if they could prove she was lying about her memory loss. So unless she's admitted to one of the witnesses that she remembers or slipped up and implies she remember I don't see the point, that's why I said it could be interesting to see what was said in the taxi journey.

What relevance are statements from previous sexual partners?

Surely it has something to do with this. Otherwise, like you say, it would be pointless.

dutchman · Oct 10, 2015

Otis said:
The whole thing appears to be a bit of a pig's ear

Can we please leave David Cameron's sex life out of this?

Otis · Oct 11, 2015

CCFC said:
The thing is, the only major thing I see is if they could prove she was lying about her memory loss. So unless she's admitted to one of the witnesses that she remembers or slipped up and implies she remember I don't see the point, that's why I said it could be interesting to see what was said in the taxi journey.

What relevance are statements from previous sexual partners?

Yes agree and I assume that might well form part of his defence. Agree on the last point too. I can't see it being relevant at all unless she has previously made false rape allegations, but if so, then the police would obviously have had record of it.

Grendel · Oct 11, 2015

This pseudo defence of Evans has to stop. The questions and innuendo raised of here about the "new evidence" by posters with zero knowledge of what this might be, or the law, is exactly what he and his appalling clan of followers want.

Looking at the behaviour and approach they take it's fairly clear that this is an approach their team want to take. It's not inconceivable that some of the remarks on here would be posted on Evans site to create the suggestion "she may have made false allegations before"

It's clear what Evans and his team are doing here. They welcomed on their site one notorious Twitter user showing his picture with an Evans is innocent T Shirt. This charming individual is known for the harassment of feminists and freely posted a link from the site which exposed the raped girls identity. He constantly has argued against anonymity for those who go to court having made allegations of rape.

Evans whole stance shows arrogance at best but male dominance and mysoginy seeps through the whole unsavoury campaign.

Consider this charming tweet - "she is stupid c**t - I hope Ched rapes her" this charming note was aimed at Jessicca Ennis - no doubt a successful female star doesn't sit well with the mantra followed by a large element of his followers.

The only facts we should be interested in are that Evans raped a 19 year old and was convicted,

His subsequent vile campaign has ruined the victims life forever and his lack of humility and acceptance has whipped up such fervour that women who are raped will never step forward.

That's his true crime and it's a crime he should hang his head in shame for but shame and Ched Evans are, I suspect, not natural bedfellows.

Otis · Oct 11, 2015

Grendel said:
This pseudo defence of Evans has to stop. The questions and innuendo raised of here about the "new evidence" by posters with zero knowledge of what this might be, or the law, is exactly what he and his appalling clan of followers want.

Looking at the behaviour and approach they take it's fairly clear that this is an approach their team want to take. It's not inconceivable that some of the remarks on here would be posted on Evans site to create the suggestion "she may have made false allegations before"

It's clear what Evans and his team are doing here. They welcomed on their site one notorious Twitter user showing his picture with an Evans is innocent T Shirt. This charming individual is known for the harassment of feminists and freely posted a link from the site which exposed the raped girls identity. He constantly has argued against anonymity for those who go to court having made allegations of rape.

Evans whole stance shows arrogance at best but male dominance and mysoginy seeps through the whole unsavoury campaign.

Consider this charming tweet - "she is stupid c**t - I hope Ched rapes her" this charming note was aimed at Jessicca Ennis - no doubt a successful female star doesn't sit well with the mantra followed by a large element of his followers.

The only facts we should be interested in are that Evans raped a 19 year old and was convicted,

His subsequent vile campaign has ruined the victims life forever and his lack of humility and acceptance has whipped up such fervour that women who are raped will never step forward.

That's his true crime and it's a crime he should hang his head in shame for but shame and Ched Evans are, I suspect, not natural bedfellows.

Thing is Grendel. it is irrelevant what Evans' clan want. You would surely have confidence in the legal appeal process to be conducted correctly and properly. What Evans' followers want is totally irrelevant. As long as the appeal is done all above board then justice will prevail.

It's all guesswork anyway. There is no meat on the bones here, just them saying there are witnesses.

None of what we are hearing now in the papers should be aired in public though and Evans' team should be warned of any further 'leaks.'
'

Sick Boy · Oct 11, 2015

Will the victim be offered compensation if, in the likely event, Evans remains guilty? No doubt there will be little consideraton given to her once again.

Hardly surprising that so many rapes aren't reported.

#pray4ched

Ched Evans (1 Viewer)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Super Moderator

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency