Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
GingerrrFox

Ched Evans Wins Appeal But Faces Retrial

Recommended Posts

The fact is seems to borderline and down to individual interpretation is why I think he shouldn't be rejected from football. It seems harsh to throw him in with people who have done much worse and been much more calculated in their intentions. 

 

I think it'd do him good to be seen doing positive work in the community in some way. Helping out a charity or something to show he wants to make amends. Joe public loves a good headline, negative or positive, to base their opinions on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's still a bit raw at the minute so no great shock. You don't want to lose Jennis from your side so it was a no brainer really. I'm sure he'll pick up a league one club at the end of the season and slip back in.

 

I bet that's what his Mrs is worried about aswell!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure it's even about that, she's never said whether she did or didn't give consent as she can't remember. It's more about her condition at the time and whether she was in a state to actually give consent.

I wouldn't have fancied being on the jury for this one as you are basically having a guess as to what her condition was.

I was told earlier that there is footage of clayton mcdonald and get getting out a taxi. Now in this footage.. she remembers her handbag/purse which is in the taxi. Walks ok in heels. Puts down a pizza walks into the hotel only to come out and pick the pizza back up? I myself haven't seen this video and didn't know it existed but again babs I wouldn't have liked to be the jury on this

Edit: http://chedevans.com/judge-for-yourself

Ched turns up later on and walks in on mcdonalds and the girl have sex..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure it's even about that, she's never said whether she did or didn't give consent as she can't remember. It's more about her condition at the time and whether she was in a state to actually give consent.

 

I wouldn't have fancied being on the jury for this one as you are basically having a guess as to what her condition was.

 

That's what gets it for me though, it's too hard to be 100% certain to convict in my eyes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Courts get things wrong, although if he's found guilty again it will look a bit conclusive.

Courts find far more guilty people innocent than innocent people guilty and there is a full case review going on. Anyone who didn't sit through or at least read through the whole case is just speculating

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As mentioned previously, the police are often put under pressure to prosecute in areas that are high profile in the press.

As an example, if a person was to walk into a police station and say they were fiddled with 20 years ago, the police will pull out all stops possible to put a case to the CPS at the moment. They will do anything they possibly can to get it through. Also these days, due historical cases of child abuse not going to court, the CPS will push through as much as possible, so they can be seen to be trying to prosecute.

It is not a case of the police just doing their job, it's a case of trying every angle to create a case for prosecution.

I know a solicitor, and he said it is a very dangerous time when there is high press coverage, as the police need to be seen to prosecute.

He gave me details about a celebrity case that he said was unbelievable. There was absolutely no way the celebrity was guilty, but the police tried every angle to get a prosecution as the press were highlighting these celebrity cases. Luckily enough for this guy he was proved innocent. However, the police did get a case together, very high profile and it could have gone horribly wrong, but luckily the jury found the correct decision.

The CE case is a similar situation. The police were desperate to prosecute footballers, due to the papers making them out to be rapists etc, who spit roasted victims every weekend.

This girl never said she was raped initially. She went to the police for a lost handbag. Then somehow, a rape case was created.

The question is - if this would have happened two years earlier before press coverage, would the police have put a rape case together? Would the girl have gone through with the case too?

There are obvious benefits for both parties. Benefits financially for the girl, and benefits for the police getting a prosecution in an area that needs prosecutions.

This is fact, I have spoken also to a high ranking officer, who confirmed that all stops are pulled out to get a case together, if the subject of prosecution is high profile.

So for CE, the timing was critical. Even though the girl didn't go to the police station to say she was raped, a rape case was brought.

With regards the evidence, I just can't believe he was convicted. As mentioned, she clearly could make decisions on the night, she ordered food, she clearly made decisions on what to eat, she got money out of her purse, she decided to go back and have sex with a guy. That is all clear and confirmed.

She actually never remembers anything, so she didn't say he forced himself upon her, she does not then know if she was raped or not, but somehow a clever policeman has looked at the circumstances and created a case that says she never consented. Then you are in the hands of a jury, a jury that have all these images in their minds every weekend of spit roasting goings on in hotels after they have read the papers.

They needed a prosecution, they got one. Unlucky CE, wrong place wrong time. Convicted for rape, when a woman goes into a police station to report a lost handbag.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This girl never said she was raped initially. She went to the police for a lost handbag. Then somehow, a rape case was created.

The question is - if this would have happened two years earlier before press coverage, would the police have put a rape case together? Would the girl have gone through with the case too?

There are obvious benefits for both parties. Benefits financially for the girl, and benefits for the police getting a prosecution in an area that needs prosecutions.

This is fact, I have spoken also to a high ranking officer, who confirmed that all stops are pulled out to get a case together, if the subject of prosecution is high profile.

 

Don't disagree with much of what you say, but just to clarify the bit about the girl, in the UK she wouldn't benefit financially unless she went for a civil case against Evans, or sold her story to the press which is probably perjury of some sort.

 

She also cannot stop the police from prosecuting someone, and if she did resist and refuse to give evidence she would have been held in contempt of court.

 

I find the abuse she has received to be ridiculous when she has very little control over what happens and nothing to gain other than for it to be confirmed she has been raped. She probably wishes none of this happened.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't disagree with much of what you say, but just to clarify the bit about the girl, in the UK she wouldn't benefit financially unless she went for a civil case against Evans, or sold her story to the press which is probably perjury of some sort.

She also cannot stop the police from prosecuting someone, and if she did resist and refuse to give evidence she would have been held in contempt of court.

I find the abuse she has received to be ridiculous when she has very little control over what happens and nothing to gain other than for it to be confirmed she has been raped. She probably wishes none of this happened.

I was told that there is around £12000 for the victim if the accused is found guilty. This was from my solicitor friend. He says it does not sound a great deal, but for some, it is around a years wages, so incentive enough for some.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was told that there is around £12000 for the victim if the accused is found guilty. This was from my solicitor friend. He says it does not sound a great deal, but for some, it is around a years wages, so incentive enough for some.

 

It's not allocated automatically, as far as I'm aware, and the victim needs to apply for it separately, it is not awarded like damages are in a civil and is not a consequence or punishment for the defendant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then they're bloody stupid. Confirming enthusiastic consent is vital, if only to stop this kind of situation from occurring.

 

As for the case itself, the burden of proof must have been followed but of course you can never be 100% sure. I still wouldn't have him on my team though.

 

 

Don't make me laugh Matt. You know what percentage of rape cases actually get heard by the police, let alone get to court, let alone get a conviction in the first place?

 

Yeah, false rape calls are shite because they can wreck careers and lives of good men, but don't make out the whole system is in favour of women here in this regard.

 

Are you aware that in UK law only males can be charged with committing rape? it's defined as 'man intentionally penetrates the..'.

Women can only be charged as an accomplice, so yeah, in this regard it's in favour of women quite often.

 

The reason this case is so dubious is because Evans believed he was given consent, as their was no suggestion to say no consent was given.

 

 

He's done his time and it's obviously a sketchy case and the subject matter isn't light-hearted, but you have to believe in the British judicial system getting this right, and that Evans is now reformed and rehabilitated; doubt he'll be going out of his way at 4am after that sentence regardless of his claimed innocence.

 

He won't be getting many offers, but if Evans is fit and capable of handling fans both home and away, he should be given the opportunity. Otherwise we may as well have sentenced him to death.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you aware that in UK law only males can be charged with committing rape? it's defined as 'man intentionally penetrates the..'.

Women can only be charged as an accomplice, so yeah, in this regard it's in favour of women quite often.

 

The reason this case is so dubious is because Evans believed he was given consent, as their was no suggestion to say no consent was given.

 

 

He's done his time and it's obviously a sketchy case and the subject matter isn't light-hearted, but you have to believe in the British judicial system getting this right, and that Evans is now reformed and rehabilitated; doubt he'll be going out of his way at 4am after that sentence regardless of his claimed innocence.

 

He won't be getting many offers, but if Evans is fit and capable of handling fans both home and away, he should be given the opportunity. Otherwise we may as well have sentenced him to death.

 

As an interesting side note, if accomplice to rape is a crime and Evans raped this woman, then surely McDonald is an accomplice to rape?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Please tell me you have your name on the back and your surname is Evans!!!!?? That would be glorious.

lol no name on the back and my name isn't Evans. Already been challenged to get Evans on the back though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...