Ched Evans Wins Appeal But Faces Retrial

[Guest MattP]

http://chedevans.com/

An interesting read here, I remember at the time thinking it looked a dodgy conviction and some of the evidence on there is very worrying.

Looks like another bloke sent down seeing the giant female paw rock the balance of the scales of justice, won't be the first and won't be the last.

[Tielemans63]

http://chedevans.com/

An interesting read here, I remember at the time thinking it looked a dodgy conviction and some of the evidence on there is very worrying.

Looks like another bloke sent down seeing the giant female paw rock the balance of the scales of justice, won't be the first and won't be the last.

That is truly shocking.....

His full name is Chedwyn....unbelievable.

[Strokes]

Hang on. If I did that, do you think my work would let me just stroll back in? Not a chance.

Don't get caught then.

[Steve_Walsh5]

I didn't think he was guilty at the time, I've saw how desperate girls look on a Saturday night hanging off footballers in nightclubs. It wouldn't surprise me if she was acting the same, went back and did something she regretted in the morning.

How many people have had a one night stand after a night out, I certainly have. But how many people have stopped and asked for confirmation that they are consenting? I doubt not many have.

Johnny Evans had something similar accused against him a few years ago.

[leicsmac]

I didn't think he was guilty at the time, I've saw how desperate girls look on a Saturday night hanging off footballers in nightclubs. It wouldn't surprise me if she was acting the same, went back and did something she regretted in the morning.

How many people have had a one night stand after a night out, I certainly have. But how many people have stopped and asked for confirmation that they are consenting? I doubt not many have.

Johnny Evans had something similar accused against him a few years ago.

 

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.

 

http://chedevans.com/

An interesting read here, I remember at the time thinking it looked a dodgy conviction and some of the evidence on there is very worrying.

Looks like another bloke sent down seeing the giant female paw rock the balance of the scales of justice, won't be the first and won't be the last.

 

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.

[Jordan]

http://chedevans.com/

An interesting read here, I remember at the time thinking it looked a dodgy conviction and some of the evidence on there is very worrying.

Looks like another bloke sent down seeing the giant female paw rock the balance of the scales of justice, won't be the first and won't be the last.

 

When interviewed by the Police following his arrest, Ched had stated that, as a well known footballer, if he wanted to have sex with a girl, there were plenty of opportunities for him to do so. This comment was not a boastful claim but merely an observation on the society we live in.  Anyone who knows Ched would confirm that he is neither arrogant nor boastful.

There you have it, folks. 

[Captain...]

There you have it, folks. 

 

Ched is clearly a bit of a tit, but the details of the case seem very inconsistent, if she was classed as too drunk to give valid to consent to Ched, why was she not too drunk to give valid consent to McDonald?

 

Secondly I feel very uncomfortable with the a law that states a woman's consent may not be valid, because she is drunk. Being drunk is not an exact measurable and it is difficult to know what is too drunk to give valid consent especially if the man is drunk as well.

 

Reading the facts of the case she chose to get drunk, she wasn't plied with drinks by anyone, and then she consented to sex. I don't see how that is a crime.

 

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

 

Look at the video, she is clearly not paralytic, and walking around steadily.

 

They also clearly didn't think they did anything wrong, as they both admitted to having sex with her, I know ignorance of the law is no defence, but they obviously didn't feel like they had taken advantage of her.

 

The whole thing just feels wrong when I read the facts, and makes me wonder how many young lads could have their lives ruined by having consensual sex after a few drinks.

[leicsmac]

Ched is clearly a bit of a tit, but the details of the case seem very inconsistent, if she was classed as too drunk to give valid to consent to Ched, why was she not too drunk to give valid consent to McDonald?

 

Secondly I feel very uncomfortable with the a law that states a woman's consent may not be valid, because she is drunk. Being drunk is not an exact measurable and it is difficult to know what is too drunk to give valid consent especially if the man is drunk as well.

 

Reading the facts of the case she chose to get drunk, she wasn't plied with drinks by anyone, and then she consented to sex. I don't see how that is a crime.

 

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

 

Look at the video, she is clearly not paralytic, and walking around steadily.

 

They also clearly didn't think they did anything wrong, as they both admitted to having sex with her, I know ignorance of the law is no defence, but they obviously didn't feel like they had taken advantage of her.

 

The whole thing just feels wrong when I read the facts, and makes me wonder how many young lads could have their lives ruined by having consensual sex after a few drinks.

 

Dubious consent is such a tough issue, especially with cases like this - again I think that for your own sake you've got to seek enthusiastic consent before anything goes on. This doesn't really help with the idea of consent when drunk, but the clarification might help a little. In the cases where a "Yes" while drunk turned into a "No" the morning after...well, I'm not sure how there is a solution to that one because it comes down to word-against-word.

 

But I do think that women (and men too, rape is not just a one-way thing in the least) have enough of a stigma attached that stops them from reporting rapes without the idea that they might be making it all up being consistently used as the rule rather than the exception.

 

Oh, and one more thing - what's the fun in having sex when totally blotto (as opposed to a little merry) anyway? You don't know what the fvck you're doing and you're not going to remember much of it - doing it when you can actually fully enjoy it sounds like more fun to me.

[Captain...]

Dubious consent is such a tough issue, especially with cases like this - again I think that for your own sake you've got to seek enthusiastic consent before anything goes on. This doesn't really help with the idea of consent when drunk, but the clarification might help a little. In the cases where a "Yes" while drunk turned into a "No" the morning after...well, I'm not sure how there is a solution to that one because it comes down to word-against-word.

 

But I do think that women (and men too, rape is not just a one-way thing in the least) have enough of a stigma attached that stops them from reporting rapes without the idea that they might be making it all up being consistently used as the rule rather than the exception.

 

Oh, and one more thing - what's the fun in having sex when totally blotto (as opposed to a little merry) anyway? You don't know what the fvck you're doing and you're not going to remember much of it - doing it when you can actually fully enjoy it sounds like more fun to me.

 

Some of my best sex is drunk sex (me not her) I actually last long enough to her to start to enjoy it...

 

The weird thing in this case is she didn't actually accuse them of rape:

 

 

• According to her evidence, the complainant awoke on Monday **th ***** 201* in the Premier Inn totally unaware as to how she had got there. Having searched for her bag and mobile phone she then proceeded to Reception. Her mother picked her up and took her to her friend’s house. Later that day she returned to work. At the end of her shift at 11pm she went to the reception of the Premier Inn and requested to see CCTV footage to see, she claimed, if she could find out how she got there earlier that morning. She did not get to see the CCTV footage but was told by the receptionist that the room had been booked and was occupied by footballers.

• Later that evening the complainant contacted North Wales Police claiming her drink had been spiked and that she had lost her bag and mobile phone. The police launched their investigation.

• Through CCTV and the booking references for Room 14 the police easily established that the complainant had arrived with Clayton and that Ched had paid for the room. They arrested both of them. 

• When questioned in the police station it should be noted that neither of the accused had ejaculated during sex as a result of which the police had no forensic evidence to link either man to the sexual act, nor did the police have a complaint of rape.  Regardless of this, both men gave a full account of their actions to the police.  On 26th July 2011 the police charged both Clayton and Ched with rape.

 

She didn't even know she had had sex, if she hadn't lost her bag and phone, there is a chance she would have just got on with her life and thought nothing more of it.

[Finnegan]

Ched Evans admits to conning a key off the hotel, sneaking in to a room he knew his mate had a drunk girl in, shagging her and leaving her to bunk out the fire escape and people are still eager to blame the girl?

Ugh.

In fact, **** it, I'm not arguing this for the millionth time. Think what you want but a jury of his peers - a lot more informed than all of you - found him guilty.

[filbertway]

Ched Evans admits to conning a key off the hotel, sneaking in to a room he knew his mate had a drunk girl in, shagging her and leaving her to bunk out the fire escape and people are still eager to blame the girl?

Ugh.

In fact, **** it, I'm not arguing this for the millionth time. Think what you want but a jury of his peers - a lot more informed than all of you - found him guilty.

 

Throw in a few salad's, mush's and various other Flairisms and that could easily pass for a Flair tale.

[Finnegan]

Think that's distinctly unfair on Flair, to be honest.

[filbertway]

Think that's distinctly unfair on Flair, to be honest.

 

Haha good point! I wasn't implying you're a mental rapist Flair!

 

More the act of duping a hotel key out of some salad to get into a room,

[David Guiza]

Ched Evans admits to conning a key off the hotel, sneaking in to a room he knew his mate had a drunk girl in, shagging her and leaving her to bunk out the fire escape and people are still eager to blame the girl?

Ugh.

In fact, **** it, I'm not arguing this for the millionth time. Think what you want but a jury of his peers - a lot more informed than all of you - found him guilty.

Completely agree. The amount of people in this country who seem to think that the legal system is 'corrupt' really need to take a look at the legal systems and judiciaries around the world. A brief look over the case facts and judge's comments tell their own story. I wouldn't like to compare it to McCormack or Hughes etc, in my eyes all 3 of them shouldn't be near professional football and I would hate it if we were to sign anyone of that nature. Any other profession and that would haunt you for the rest of your life, football however you seem to be able to walk straight back into the changing rooms and get on with it how you left off.

Even after studying and working in law for a few years, I still don't completely agree with trial by jury however. I'll leave that for another day.

[Guest MattP]

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.

 

Just because a conviction rate for something is low doesn't mean you start throwing innocent blokes into prison, this is peoples lives you are playing with and ruining here, it's not a game to balance to books. Fcuk me.

 

When a man is sent to prison for years for having consensual sex with a girl of course the scales are weighted towards them, can a bloke came rape if we don't remember having sex the next morning as we were too drunk? If the scales are even point me to a case where it has.

 

The law is a complete ass and militant feminism is as least partly to blame for it. Any tart can now get a bit tipsy, decide that instead of coming clean to the boyfriend or living with the guilt you can use the fact you were 'too pissed' to consent to get a rape charge (and of course make a few quid in the process). It's ****ing beyond belief in a civilised society.

 

If you are seriously going to lock people up for taking drunk birds back to hotel rooms to shag then half the male population is going down.

 

There you have it, folks. 

 

Brilliant comeback.

 

Ched is clearly a bit of a tit, but the details of the case seem very inconsistent, if she was classed as too drunk to give valid to consent to Ched, why was she not too drunk to give valid consent to McDonald?

 

Secondly I feel very uncomfortable with the a law that states a woman's consent may not be valid, because she is drunk. Being drunk is not an exact measurable and it is difficult to know what is too drunk to give valid consent especially if the man is drunk as well.

 

Reading the facts of the case she chose to get drunk, she wasn't plied with drinks by anyone, and then she consented to sex. I don't see how that is a crime.

 

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

 

Look at the video, she is clearly not paralytic, and walking around steadily.

 

They also clearly didn't think they did anything wrong, as they both admitted to having sex with her, I know ignorance of the law is no defence, but they obviously didn't feel like they had taken advantage of her.

 

The whole thing just feels wrong when I read the facts, and makes me wonder how many young lads could have their lives ruined by having consensual sex after a few drinks.

 

Good post Captain, it does feel weird agreeing with everything you write

 

It's clear she consented and knew what she was doing, what her motives were for getting him sent down no one will know.

 

Oh, and one more thing - what's the fun in having sex when totally blotto (as opposed to a little merry) anyway? You don't know what the fvck you're doing and you're not going to remember much of it - doing it when you can actually fully enjoy it sounds like more fun to me.

 

:nigel:

 

In fact, **** it, I'm not arguing this for the millionth time. Think what you want but a jury of his peers - a lot more informed than all of you - found him guilty.

 

I think it's debatable to say the jurors are more imformed than us given the amount of evidence that has now came out after the trial, the "hit the big time" tweets are unbelievable, it's pretty obvious she knew what she was doing here.

 

Although one day doing jury service is enough to put you off them for life, the average juror is a sun reading dipshit, I'd much rather have my case heard by a judge than 90% of the people I know who have served on juries.

 

Often boils down to who has the better defence team.

 

Throw in a few salad's, mush's and various other Flairisms and that could easily pass for a Flair tale.

 

[Bert]

He's done his time over the situation.

How else is the man supposed to rebuild his career/life?

I'm sure someone will take a punt on him. Probably Coventry.

[Captain...]

Ched Evans admits to conning a key off the hotel, sneaking in to a room he knew his mate had a drunk girl in, shagging her and leaving her to bunk out the fire escape and people are still eager to blame the girl?

Ugh.

In fact, **** it, I'm not arguing this for the millionth time. Think what you want but a jury of his peers - a lot more informed than all of you - found him guilty.

 

He is clearly a dick, but what he does before or after sleeping with her is irrelevant, he could have stolen a car and mugged a granny on the way over, and pissed in the lift on the way out, if she consented to sex, he isn't a rapist.

 

Also I am not blaming anything on the girl, she didn't even accuse them of rape.

 

What I have a problem with is the idea that someone can be too drunk to give consent, how do you measure that? and how do you prove that? In this case the video footage doesn't show someone clearly too drunk to think straight, but that isn't conclusive and this is my problem, proof.  

 

Finally if she was too drunk to give valid consent, why wasn't the other one convicted, they had sex with her at the same time, if her consent for Ched to stir McDonald's porridge wasn't valid then surely the consent for McDonald surely wasn't valid either. Unless the law is saying the fact he got her in a taxi and back to his room qualifies as implied consent, which is a very dangerous precedent.

[Finnegan]

Just because a conviction rate for something is low doesn't mean you start throwing innocent blokes into prison, this is peoples lives you are playing with and ruining here, it's not a game to balance to books. Fcuk me.

When a man is sent to prison for years for having consensual sex with a girl of course the scales are weighted towards them, can a bloke came rape if we don't remember having sex the next morning as we were too drunk? If the scales are even point me to a case where it has.

The law is a complete ass and militant feminism is as least partly to blame for it. Any tart can now get a bit tipsy, decide that instead of coming clean to the boyfriend or living with the guilt you can use the fact you were 'too pissed' to consent to get a rape charge (and of course make a few quid in the process). It's ****ing beyond belief in a civilised society.

If you are seriously going to lock people up for taking drunk birds back to hotel rooms to shag then half the male population is going down.

Brilliant comeback.

Good post Captain, it does feel weird agreeing with everything you write

It's clear she consented and knew what she was doing, what her motives were for getting him sent down no one will know.

:nigel:

I think it's debatable to say the jurors are more imformed than us given the amount of evidence that has now came out after the trial, the "hit the big time" tweets are unbelievable, it's pretty obvious she knew what she was doing here.

Although one day doing jury service is enough to put you off them for life, the average juror is a sun reading dipshit, I'd much rather have my case heard by a judge than 90% of the people I know who have served on juries.

Often boils down to who has the better defence team.

The tweets are irrelevant, out of context and after the fact.

They don't prove anything they just help th defence cast negative light on the complainant.

Unless there's one I didn't read, she doesn't cast doubt on that it happened she just alludes to making money off the fact it did.

If something horrific happened to you and you got compo out of it would you not be glad?

[Guest MattP]

The tweets are irrelevant, out of context and after the fact.

They don't prove anything they just help th defence cast negative light on the complainant.

Unless there's one I didn't read, she doesn't cast doubt on that it happened she just alludes to making money off the fact it did.

If something horrific happened to you and you got compo out of it would you not be glad?

 

Not really, the tweets clearly show she is looking to make financial gain out of the so called 'rape' - the one she didn't know happened and she didn't report.

 

I have no idea, if something truly horrific happened to me I doubt I'd be able to joke around about it a couple of months afterwards. Wouldn't know until the time though.

[David Guiza]

He's done his time over the situation.

How else is the man supposed to rebuild his career/life?

I'm sure someone will take a punt on him. Probably Coventry.

The same way any other man is supposed to rebuild his career/life after a similar offense. Plenty of players are forced to retire through injury, drug/drink problems and manage to rebuild a career outside of playing.

I completely agree that he has served his sentence and should be allowed to move on, just not in football/sport in my opinion.

[Sir Fynwy]

He's done his time over the situation.

How else is the man supposed to rebuild his career/life?

I'm sure someone will take a punt on him. Probably Coventry.

The problem is that he refuses to accept that he did anything wrong in the first place and keeps trying to appeal, all of his attempts to appeal have been rejected since there aren't reasonable grounds.

For restitutional justice to work the guilty party has to admit, accept and move forward, Evans is still in denial and therefore shouldn't be back in society as normal.

[leicsmac]

Just because a conviction rate for something is low doesn't mean you start throwing innocent blokes into prison, this is peoples lives you are playing with and ruining here, it's not a game to balance to books. Fcuk me.

 

When a man is sent to prison for years for having consensual sex with a girl of course the scales are weighted towards them, can a bloke came rape if we don't remember having sex the next morning as we were too drunk? If the scales are even point me to a case where it has.

 

The law is a complete ass and militant feminism is as least partly to blame for it. Any tart can now get a bit tipsy, decide that instead of coming clean to the boyfriend or living with the guilt you can use the fact you were 'too pissed' to consent to get a rape charge (and of course make a few quid in the process). It's ****ing beyond belief in a civilised society.

 

If you are seriously going to lock people up for taking drunk birds back to hotel rooms to shag then half the male population is going down.

 

 

 

:nigel:

 

 

 

And the lives of people who are raped but can't or won't go to the police and get a conviction (and sometimes even if they do) aren't played with and ruined? 

 

I'm not saying that there should be a balancing of the scales in this way (and nor did I in the original post) - if a woman accuses someone of rape and then that accusation turns out to be false there should be severe punishment. My argument is that people use these handful of 'cry rape' cases to automatically discredit every other case of rape as it is reported - legitimate or not, and it causes people who are genuine victims of rape (men and women both) to not want to come forward for fear of the derision and people saying "making it up", and that's fvcked up.

 

No other violent crime has this ethos of victim-blaming that goes on in a variety of ways. Oh, she was "asking for it with what she was wearing", "she was drunk"...ad nauseam. Why is that? 

 

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/10/09/living/chris-brown-female-on-male-rape/

 

A case of female-on-male rape where the male was under the influence of alcohol that was claimed and proven beyond most doubt but never prosecuted for you.

 

And you seem awfully sure she consented. How can you be certain? The jury evidently weren't.

 

Honestly though, if I'm going to give a lady the best 30 seconds of her life I'd want to enjoy it, rather than being so blotto that I don't remember a fvcking thing. Note that I'm saying too blotto to know what's going on rather than just drunk, as that is where the consent issues like this come in.

[AdamN]

I'm not saying that there should be a balancing of the scales in this way (and nor did I in the original post) - if a woman accuses someone of rape and then that accusation turns out to be false there should be severe punishment. My argument is that people use these handful of 'cry rape' cases to automatically discredit every other case of rape as it is reported - legitimate or not, and it causes people who are genuine victims of rape (men and women both) to not want to come forward for fear of the derision and people saying "making it up", and that's fvcked up.

 

While I agree entirely with this, I think in fairness to MattP, he's referring to cases similar to this one, where the apparent victim has indeed given consent, but the line between 'a bit drunk' and 'too drunk to consent' is so blurred that it's impossible to prove either way whether the consent was 'valid'. 

[leicsmac]

While I agree entirely with this, I think in fairness to MattP, he's referring to cases similar to this one, where the apparent victim has indeed given consent, but the line between 'a bit drunk' and 'too drunk to consent' is so blurred that it's impossible to prove either way whether the consent was 'valid'. 

 

Fair enough - it just looked like a blanket generalisation to me.

 

I agree that cases like this are horrible when there was alcohol involved and it just boils down to he-said-she-said and a jury has to make sense of it all, but I really think that victim-blaming even in cases like these (except in cases where the claims have been conclusively proven to be false) really isn't a good thing as - like I said - it causes genuine rape victims to not come forward.

[ADK]

I don't understand why he was convicted and his mate wasn't.

 

If her consent is invalid due to her drunkenness then both are guilty.