Ched Evans found guilty

[21st Century Fox]

but I have not yet read or had explained to me anything which would excuse her from being partially responsible (and I am talking in my lifetime rather than just this thread).

I assumed by that you meant in the context of a court case, as I can't see a scenario when it would ever really be brought up otherwise.

I usually agree with the large majority of your posts but while I partially agree with the principle of this and the culpability of your own actions, I still don't really see the value in degrees of fault falling that way in a rape case.

[21st Century Fox]

You should also be able to get drunk and have consensual sex with a woman without being accused of being a rapist because there is no evidence of her consent.

This is not in relation to this case but more the dangerous precedent it could set.

I go out get drunk, a pretty lady comes up to me we have a few drinks together we have consensual sex, then she wakes up and accuses me of rape, she doesn't have to do anything other than say she doesn't remember aything and I'm fvcked.

There are people sick enough in this world to try and exploit that, a quick bit of financial compensation and it will all go away, otherwise I'm looking at 5 years in jail and being branded a rapist for the rest of my life.

Now I am not saying this happened in this case, I am sure she genuinely doesn't remember anything, but as I said when I first commented on this sometimes I drink what would be a normal amount for me and because I am tired my memory just stops using energy to record, but I am still able to make rational conscious decisions. I can send text messages in perfect english, cycle home, cook food, and I mean actually make proper food not just heat up a pizza and never lose my keys, wallet or anything. But I just don't remember it, doesn't mean I wasn't able to make a sound judgement at the time, it is just the way I sometimes react to alcohol.

I see your point and agree with you in that scenario. But this scenario doesn't seem anything like that. The predatory nature of it, the friends filming it etc, I don't think there's enough for us to go on from the few paragraphs we've got in a paper. And I'd assume in McDonald's and Evan's case that consent is measured in degrees with regard to hailing a cab, kissing etc to consenting to sex with a man that appears in your room. I assume its alot to do with the belief of consent on McDonald's part and how much more difficult it is to prove otherwise.

[Daggers]

I can't see a scenario when it would ever really be brought up otherwise.

Because it has been a topic I've debated before.

I really still don't really see the value in degrees of fault falling that way in a rape case.

Because I think there is merit to Ken Clarke's viewpoint that there are different types of rape.

I had an accident where I was knocked off my bicycle - the settlement was adjusted by thirty percent due to the fact that they believed that the way I was riding contributed partially to the event.

In situations like this there exists a level of culpability which doesn't feature in other forms of rape.

If this woman had suddenly lurched out into the path of a vehicle the driver would have been held totally responsible and yet it was her actions which would have created the environment for an accident to occur.

[Captain...]

Because it has been a topic I've debated before.

Because I think there is merit to Ken Clarke's viewpoint that there are different types of rape.

I had an accident where I was knocked off my bicycle - the settlement was adjusted by thirty percent due to the fact that they believed that the way I was riding contributed partially to the event.

In situations like this there exists a level of culpability which doesn't feature in other forms of rape.

If this woman had suddenly lurched out into the path of a vehicle the driver would have been held totally responsible and yet it was her actions which would have created the environment for an accident to occur.

I guess that is taken into account in the sentencing, Evans got a very lenient sentence for rape, probably due to her drunkenness and the lack of actual evidence.

[21st Century Fox]

Because it has been a topic I've debated before.

Because I think there is merit to Ken Clarke's viewpoint that there are different types of rape.

I had an accident where I was knocked off my bicycle - the settlement was adjusted by thirty percent due to the fact that they believed that the way I was riding contributed partially to the event.

In situations like this there exists a level of culpability which doesn't feature in other forms of rape.

If this woman had suddenly lurched out into the path of a vehicle the driver would have been held totally responsible and yet it was her actions which would have created the environment for an accident to occur.

But I'd assume it's the predatory nature of that sort of rape that makes it different. If he'd been drunk also, I can't imagine he'd have got that sort of sentence.

[The People's Hero]

Ched is a bit of a rapey name.

[21st Century Fox]

Ched is a bit of a rapey name.

/case

[The People's Hero]

I'd like to think the jury or whoever had this exact conversation.

[The People's Hero]

A drunk girl accused one of my mates of rape once. It was absolutely ridiculous.

He overpowered her fair and square.

[Captain...]

I see your point and agree with you in that scenario. But this scenario doesn't seem anything like that. The predatory nature of it, the friends filming it etc, I don't think there's enough for us to go on from the few paragraphs we've got in a paper. And I'd assume in McDonald's and Evan's case that consent is measured in degrees with regard to hailing a cab, kissing etc to consenting to sex with a man that appears in your room. I assume its alot to do with the belief of consent on McDonald's part and how much more difficult it is to prove otherwise.

But friends filming and having a threesome/orgy/sloppy seconds is not illegal, and this is my worry Ched Evans was treated more harshly than McDonald, because what he did seems more perverse and sordid than what McDonald did, but no less legal if consent was given. That and the fact he is a footballer.

She decided to get in a taxi and go back to McDonald's hotel after meeting him on the street, she made a very quick decision to consent to sex, from the accounts I've read she initiated it with McDonald, if she was sober enough to consent to go back to a hotel room (for sex), then surely she was in the same intoxicated state later on and, in the account given by Evans and McDonald, she consented to Evan's joining in, then he didn't do anything, then she asked him to perform a sexual act, so that is 2 indications of consent in a longer space of time than which she needed to agree to go back to McDonald's hotel.

Obviously she can't defend any of this because she doesn't remember it, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen and a young man's life is ruined on what seems like no evidence of rape, and the burden of proof being on the defence and not the prosecution. In any other crime the burden of proof is on the proecution to prove without any reasonable doubt that the defendent committed the crime. I agree that in cases when a woman says she was raped and says she said no and says she was forced upon she should be given more benefit of the doubt. But when she says she doesn't remember consenting and he says she did, and she was judged to have consented to sex with another man on the same night under the same level of intoxication, and there is another witness that agrees with the defendent's account, I just don't see how there is enough evidence there to convict someone.

(I have read every account and report on this case on the BBC website and a few articles on other websites, I obviously wasn't there and I don' know all the evidence but the journalist's whose accounts I have read were, and nothing was reported which has shown any actual evidence that she did not consent).

[21st Century Fox]

But friends filming and having a threesome/orgy/sloppy seconds is not illegal, and this is my worry Ched Evans was treated more harshly than McDonald, because what he did seems more perverse and sordid than what McDonald did, but no less legal if consent was given. That and the fact he is a footballer.

She decided to get in a taxi and go back to McDonald's hotel after meeting him on the street, she made a very quick decision to consent to sex, from the accounts I've read she initiated it with McDonald, if she was sober enough to consent to go back to a hotel room (for sex), then surely she was in the same intoxicated state later on and, in the account given by Evans and McDonald, she consented to Evan's joining in, then he didn't do anything, then she asked him to perform a sexual act, so that is 2 indications of consent in a longer space of time than which she needed to agree to go back to McDonald's hotel.

Obviously she can't defend any of this because she doesn't remember it, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen and a young man's life is ruined on what seems like no evidence of rape, and the burden of proof being on the defence and not the prosecution. In any other crime the burden of proof is on the proecution to prove without any reasonable doubt that the defendent committed the crime. I agree that in cases when a woman says she was raped and says she said no and says she was forced upon she should be given more benefit of the doubt. But when she says she doesn't remember consenting and he says she did, and she was judged to have consented to sex with another man on the same night under the same level of intoxication, and there is another witness that agrees with the defendent's account, I just don't see how there is enough evidence there to convict someone.

(I have read every account and report on this case on the BBC website and a few articles on other websites, I obviously wasn't there and I don' know all the evidence but the journalist's whose accounts I have read were, and nothing was reported which has shown any actual evidence that she did not consent).

For the record you're another person that 9 times out of 10, I agree usually with.

It's not illegal but it may show intent either way. I'm still fairly sure there's more to this than maybe the media are reporting at the moment.

In that case you've obviously read more than I have because I haven't seen anything about her asking him to perform a sex act. I have seen an awful lot of contradictions on Evan's part, which can't have helped his case.

McDonald claimed that Evans asked if he could get involved, while Evans claimed it was McDonald who asked him if he wanted to have sex with the woman.

Things like that and his description of her state as "not that drunk", whilst video and eye witnesses show otherwise, seem stranger to me than the split verdict.

[The People's Hero]

Landmark case.

There are going to be a lot of ugly teenage boys suddenly realising that they will now never have sex.

Our only plan. Foiled.

[Captain...]

For the record you're another person that 9 times out of 10, I agree usually with.

It's not illegal but it may show intent either way. I'm still fairly sure there's more to this than maybe the media are reporting at the moment.

In that case you've obviously read more than I have because I haven't seen anything about her asking him to perform a sex act. I have seen an awful lot of contradictions on Evan's part, which can't have helped his case.

Things like that and his description of her state as "not that drunk", whilst video and eye witnesses show otherwise, seem stranger to me than the split verdict.

I know what you are saying, but the issue doesn;t seem to be that he forced himself on her, or even that she didn't give consent, but that her consent was not valid because she was drunk. That is what scares me. He could have video footage of her saying I agree to have sex with you, but if she is deemed too drunk in that footage then he is a rapist.

This bit is the bit that scares me the most:

Sheffield United and Wales footballer Ched Evans has been jailed for five years for raping a teenager who was 'too drunk to consent' to sex

'CCTV footage shows, in my view, the extent of her intoxication when she stumbled into your friend.

'As the jury have found, she was in no condition to have sexual intercourse.

'When you arrived at the hotel, you must have realised that.'

He told Evans that he might have been used to receiving attention from women in the past due to his success as a footballer, but this case was 'very different'.

He said the sentence took into account that there had been no force involved and the complainant received no injuries.

He also said the complainant was not 'targeted' and the attack had not been 'premeditated'.

Either she was staggering around all over the place unable to stand up being practically carried to the room by McDonald, in which case she was in no state to consent to sex, in which case McDonald also raped, or she was sober enough to consent to McDonald, then surely she must also have been sober enough to consent to Evans. Now I am not saying she did consent to Evans, but the conviction seems to be based on her being too drunk to consent and not that she didn't consent.

I can think of times in my life when I have had sex with girls who were drunk, not as drunk as me, but that wouldn't be taken into account, but at the time they were willing sexual partners, but when I think what he must be going through if she consented and he knows that, but is now a convicted rapist because she was too drunk to remember what happened that must be horrible.

[The Year Of The Fox]

On the surface this whole thing is bollocks. If I committed a crime whilst absolutely hammered and genuinely couldn't remember anything about it when questioned, would that really stand up as a defence in court? No. Equally, why should someone be able to use the excuse of being that hammered that she remembered nothing at all as proof that she did not give consent?

It certainly seems like the woman was treated like a piece of meat (Evans watching, as well as his brother and another bloke from the window) which is pretty disgusting, but it doesn't mean either of them raped her!

[rico]

[Guest ttfn]

Although this is clearly a very sad case, I have to say I've enjoyed reading about it.

Daggers, 21st Century Fox and Captain Shrapnel have made some really interesting and eloquent points.

[THEBIGJOHNSTEADER;]

There is no 362 in this hotel, sometimes the complaints will be false

[EcclesallOwl]

On the surface this whole thing is bollocks. If I committed a crime whilst absolutely hammered and genuinely couldn't remember anything about it when questioned, would that really stand up as a defence in court? No. Equally, why should someone be able to use the excuse of being that hammered that she remembered nothing at all as proof that she did not give consent?

It certainly seems like the woman was treated like a piece of meat (Evans watching, as well as his brother and another bloke from the window) which is pretty disgusting, but it doesn't mean either of them raped her!

Not all of the evidence was shown to public. In fact barely any of it was.

There will have been police interviews, CCTV footage, witnesses etc.

No way has Ched gone down on the basis that she just claimed to have been raped.

[Haydos]

Just a thought for those saying "If she was sober enough to consent to McDonald she must have been sober enough to consent to Evans"...People can and do get worse even after they've stopped drinking. As in, she might have started to 'pass out' (for want of a better phrase) after having sex with McDonald.

[Master Fox]

I know what you are saying, but the issue doesn;t seem to be that he forced himself on her, or even that she didn't give consent, but that her consent was not valid because she was drunk. That is what scares me. He could have video footage of her saying I agree to have sex with you, but if she is deemed too drunk in that footage then he is a rapist.

This bit is the bit that scares me the most:

Either she was staggering around all over the place unable to stand up being practically carried to the room by McDonald, in which case she was in no state to consent to sex, in which case McDonald also raped, or she was sober enough to consent to McDonald, then surely she must also have been sober enough to consent to Evans. Now I am not saying she did consent to Evans, but the conviction seems to be based on her being too drunk to consent and not that she didn't consent.

I can think of times in my life when I have had sex with girls who were drunk, not as drunk as me, but that wouldn't be taken into account, but at the time they were willing sexual partners, but when I think what he must be going through if she consented and he knows that, but is now a convicted rapist because she was too drunk to remember what happened that must be horrible.

You kind of sound like a rapist.

[Captain...]

Just a thought for those saying "If she was sober enough to consent to McDonald she must have been sober enough to consent to Evans"...People can and do get worse even after they've stopped drinking. As in, she might have started to 'pass out' (for want of a better phrase) after having sex with McDonald.

But there is no evidence of how drunk she was when she slept with Evans, the only evidence is from people who saw her with McDonald and deemed her too drunk to consent to sex. Which makes it even more baffling, we don't know what the time frame is between her being seen drunk and when Evans had sex with her, she could have got worse, ot she could have sobered up after sleeping with McDonald, but there is no evidence either way.

You kind of sound like a rapist.

Not really, I am sure that everybody on here has had sex with a girl after they (both parties) had been drinking, maybe it sounded worse than I meant it, but I can't be the only person to have met a girl in a bar have a few drinks and hook-up.

The problem is that alcohol impairs your judgement and in a drunken state I could think that the girl was more sober than she actually was, I am not saying it has happened, I am not saying I take advantage of drunk girls, I have had drunk girls throw themselves at me before and I have rejected them because they were clearly too drunk. But what if I was too drunk to make that call, then probably nothing would happen because I tend to fall asleep when drunk, but it just worries me that even if a girl gives consent, but doesn't remember it then somebody could be convicted as a rapist when all they did was sleep with a consenting adult.

Where exactly would you draw the line when judging if a girl is too drunk to give a valid consent, obviously if she is unable to walk then she is probably too drunk, and what if she has taken more than just alcohol, I don't know if a girl is in a sound enough state of mind to give consent after a tab of acid, or taking ketamine.

[MrSpaM]

Has to be more to this tbh, when was the last time anybody got sent down for somebody else thinking whoever they slept with was too drunk, and why has McDonald got away with it completely if he did the exact same thing with her?

[accessory]

I am sure that everybody on here has had sex with a girl

That's a VERY big assumption... lol

Seriously, though, it's not helpful to speculate about this case on the basis of media reports. The factors you mention will all have been considered in detail by several different bodies over the last few months - first of all by the police when the complaint was first made, then by the Crown Prosecution Service, and ultimately at a trial. The jury had the opportunity to see and hear witnesses, and having do so, unanimously agreed Evans was guilty.

Unless significant and compelling evidence emerges (and so far it hasn't done) to indicate they may have been mistaken, the case is closed. Instead, what we've seen over the weekend is a vile and pernicious witch-hunt against the victim. She has been named on both Twitter and Facebook and subjected to all kinds of despicable smears. It should not be acceptable for ANY victim of a serious crime to face such ongoing harassment and intimidation.

The laws of contempt of court and anonymity exist for a reason. Evans's family and Sheffield United fans alike would do well to respect them. But it looks as if their irresponsibility has already wrecked any prospects of his appeal ever being successful.

[Captain...]

That's a VERY big assumption... lol

Seriously, though, it's not helpful to speculate about this case on the basis of media reports. The factors you mention will all have been considered in detail by several different bodies over the last few months - first of all by the police when the complaint was first made, then by the Crown Prosecution Service, and ultimately at a trial. The jury had the opportunity to see and hear witnesses, and having do so, unanimously agreed Evans was guilty.

Unless significant and compelling evidence emerges (and so far it hasn't done) to indicate they may have been mistaken, the case is closed. Instead, what we've seen over the weekend is a vile and pernicious witch-hunt against the victim. She has been named on both Twitter and Facebook and subjected to all kinds of despicable smears. It should not be acceptable for ANY victim of a serious crime to face such ongoing harassment and intimidation.

The laws of contempt of court and anonymity exist for a reason. Evans's family and Sheffield United fans alike would do well to respect them. But it looks as if their irresponsibility has already wrecked any prospects of his appeal ever being successful.

I would agree with all of that in bold, but I think i is important to know what constitutes a girl being too drunk to give consent and how they reached that decision.

I have read all the reports on this case on the BBC, and they have a fairly detailed summary of the evidence given on each day, and it refers to direct evidence given by the pizza shop owner and the receptionists at the hotel, saying that she was really drunk, and was leaning on McDonald for support.

There hasn't been one mention of anything that alludes to her state of mind at the time Evans enters the room, which would prove she was in a significantly worse state than when she was seen by other witnesses.

I know I haven't read or seen all the evidence, but anything crucial like that would surely be included in the BBC reports.

I am not for one minute suggesting the victim was anyhing other than that, a victim, I just cannot find anything that makes Evans a rapist and McDonald not.

[accessory]

The issues surrounding and defining "consent" have featured regularly in trials for sex offences. The law was recently amended (in the 2003 Sexual Offences Act) to provide greater clarity.

No doubt both prosecution and defence barristers, as well as the judge, will have covered this area in great depth when issuing guidance to the jurors.

They looked at the evidence they saw and heard, in far more detailed format than can be covered in media reports, and reached the conclusions they did on the basis of that.

In their judgement, the victim may have given consent to McDonald (which is not to say she did, but merely that there were reasonable grounds for doubt about what happened) - hence the decision to acquit. The case against Evans was obviously deemed to be stronger and more clear-cut.

The verdict would have caused tensions at any time, but its timing has caused emotions to run particularly high, especially in Sheffield where it may tilt the balance of the promotion battle from United to Wednesday.

However, football should never be allowed to over-ride basic principles of justice. Some of the more mature elements of the blades fanbase are gradually beginning to accept that.