Manwell Pablo Posted 8 October 2015 Share Posted 8 October 2015 Here we go again If he gets off we will see how many of the "he was found guilty in a court by a jury" clan stick to their faith in the British justice system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alf Bentley Posted 8 October 2015 Share Posted 8 October 2015 Here we go again If he gets off we will see how many of the "he was found guilty in a court by a jury" clan stick to their faith in the British justice system. Well, it's only going to appeal because of new evidence, apparently, so will be interesting to hear what that is. It's quite possible for the initial decision to have been correct based on the evidence presented - and for the appeal to correctly overturn that verdict based on new evidence. I read somewhere that only a tiny minority of reviews like this lead to appeal hearings, but that of those that do, about 70% are successful.....so his odds sound pretty good, now, depending what the new evidence is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manwell Pablo Posted 8 October 2015 Share Posted 8 October 2015 Well, it's only going to appeal because of new evidence, apparently, so will be interesting to hear what that is. It's quite possible for the initial decision to have been correct based on the evidence presented - and for the appeal to correctly overturn that verdict based on new evidence. I read somewhere that only a tiny minority of reviews like this lead to appeal hearings, but that of those that do, about 70% are successful.....so his odds sound pretty good, now, depending what the new evidence is. Oh I am utterly convinced he will be found not guilty. And the fall out is going to be highly amusing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alf Bentley Posted 8 October 2015 Share Posted 8 October 2015 Oh I am utterly convinced he will be found not guilty. And the fall out is going to be highly amusing. At the risk of being sanctimonious, I don't see how it could be "highly amusing" for anyone. A sordid, depressing incident that showed everyone involved in a bad light, regardless of the legal verdict - and one that has damaged everyone involved. If you mean that it will be "highly amusing" for you, saying "told you so" to those who supported the original guilty verdict, I don't see that either. Evans has only got his appeal hearing because of new evidence, so any new verdict will be based, at least partly, on different grounds. If the balance of evidence now (but not before) leads to a "not guilty" verdict, that's justice....or as close to it as fallible human society is capable of. It will certainly be interesting to know what the new evidence is, though - and why it has only just materialised. Anyway, I said that I wouldn't get dragged into lengthy dialogues about all this again, so will butt out now.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manwell Pablo Posted 8 October 2015 Share Posted 8 October 2015 At the risk of being sanctimonious, I don't see how it could be "highly amusing" for anyone. A sordid, depressing incident that showed everyone involved in a bad light, regardless of the legal verdict - and one that has damaged everyone involved. If you mean that it will be "highly amusing" for you, saying "told you so" to those who supported the original guilty verdict, I don't see that either. Evans has only got his appeal hearing because of new evidence, so any new verdict will be based, at least partly, on different grounds. If the balance of evidence now (but not before) leads to a "not guilty" verdict, that's justice....or as close to it as fallible human society is capable of. It will certainly be interesting to know what the new evidence is, though - and why it has only just materialised. Anyway, I said that I wouldn't get dragged into lengthy dialogues about all this again, so will butt out now.... Neither really, more the reactions of those who have made the feelings quite clear as there are bound to be some people making some rather drastic U turns in terms of the morality which I will find quite funny. Of course obviously there will be every football club outside of the Championship tripping over themselves trying to sign him as well which will also be funny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 8 October 2015 Share Posted 8 October 2015 The problem really for the ones who were convinced he was guilty is going to be that the new evidence was already well known and in the public domain. They just couldn't use it in court. And as MP says, you get the feeling the U turn will see some bizarre chances in morality stance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain... Posted 8 October 2015 Share Posted 8 October 2015 I'm not going to end up in endless debate about this again.....not least as the appeal is going to be heard because of "new evidence", which might change things. However, the key distinction that the court saw between Evans and his mate was whether each could reasonably, if mistakenly, have believed that the girl was able to consent: - McDonald got talking to the girl in the street and she got in a taxi with him (confirmed by witnesses), she was talking to him OK in the taxi (confirmed by taxi driver) and she walked into the hotel with him (confirmed by CCTV). - Evans' only previous meeting with her was when she fell over in a kebab shop and he stepped over her; he then received a text from McDonald saying he'd "got a bird", made his way uninvited to the hotel, conned a room key from the receptionist and let himself in. Only Evans and McDonald say she consented - and in their evidence they gave different accounts as to which of them had asked for consent for Evans. The 2 blokes said that they had sex with her (she didn't remember) and the court clearly felt that she was too drunk to consent to EITHER of them. The jury clearly took the view that McDonald might reasonably have thought he had consent, based on the witness accounts described above, but that Evans could not have reasonably thought the same, based on the evidence described above. Anyone can dispute the jury's interpretation - though it takes breath-taking arrogance to do so, based on a few newspaper reports, when the jury presumably spent several days examining the actual evidence, including witnesses. It beggars belief, though, that anyone cannot see how a jury might have given 2 different verdicts. It seems blindingly obvious to me: a girl chatting to you in the street, getting into a taxi with you and walking into your hotel room with you, all in front of witnesses v. a stranger lying in your mate's hotel room, which you enter uninvited after conning a key, are 2 very different scenarios. Of course, if new evidence has emerged that exonerates Evans, then he is entitled to have his name cleared. I wonder what the new evidence is? I understand the verdict, I just find it difficult that Evans says she gave consent, and 12 people that weren't there decided that he didn't believe he had consent.Incidentally if this new evidence was footage of her consenting, despite being just as drunk, change things? This is possible as his mates were filming it through the window. His defence is she consented, the prosecution say he couldn't reasonably have believed that consent, if it can be proved she did consent, would that make Evans less guilty? If they evidence is that she tweeted about getting money out of him, then it shouldn't change things, her acting like a dick after the event is as equally irrelevant as him acting like a scumbag before the event. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ttfn Posted 9 October 2015 Share Posted 9 October 2015 If they evidence is that she tweeted about getting money out of him, then it shouldn't change things, her acting like a dick after the event is as equally irrelevant as him acting like a scumbag before the event. My thoughts exactly. I don't see how (if this is what the new evidence is) this is going to help him at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alf Bentley Posted 9 October 2015 Share Posted 9 October 2015 I understand the verdict, I just find it difficult that Evans says she gave consent, and 12 people that weren't there decided that he didn't believe he had consent. Incidentally if this new evidence was footage of her consenting, despite being just as drunk, change things? This is possible as his mates were filming it through the window. His defence is she consented, the prosecution say he couldn't reasonably have believed that consent, if it can be proved she did consent, would that make Evans less guilty? If they evidence is that she tweeted about getting money out of him, then it shouldn't change things, her acting like a dick after the event is as equally irrelevant as him acting like a scumbag before the event. Nobody else knows what the jury's thought process was, but the evidence/judge seemed to suggest that she was too drunk to consent to either man. So, I assume the jury accepted that and footage of her saying "yes" (or inviting him to join her at the hotel) would be irrelevant re. consent, though maybe Evans could use it to claim he reasonably assumed consent? Unlikely, though, as the filming was known about and revealed nothing - unless new technology has allowed more to be revealed. I agree that her tweets after the event seem irrelevant. They were known about and dismissed as bravado. Surely, at most that might make her guilty of some offence, but wouldn't affect his guilt or innocence. She didn't even go to the police about the alleged rape, it was the police who instigated the rape case, so even if she really was money-grabbing, that wouldn't affect his guilt/innocence....unless it predated the incident, which again seems unlikely. My guess is that the new evidence might be something more obscure: how the police conducted the investigation, how the judge directed the jury, the victim's previous conduct or new expert research into the effects of excess booze. Cue another massive furore and media frenzy, whatever happens at the appeal.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LanguedocFox Posted 9 October 2015 Share Posted 9 October 2015 I've read a fair amount about this, including the Evans' website and the one started on behalf of the victim. The only thing that can be said with any degree of certainty is that no-one comes out of it with any credit. I'm too old for that kind of thing anyway, but even in my misspent youth, I was never inclined to have sex with a drunken woman. Apart from it being, I should think, a fairly unpleasant experience (you need some reaction, surely), it's also unfair on the woman. That may sound sanctimonious and mealy mouthed, but I don't particularly care. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davieG Posted 21 April 2016 Share Posted 21 April 2016 Ched Evans wins rape conviction appeal Footballer Ched Evans has won his appeal against a conviction for rape, but will face a new trial. The ex-Wales international was jailed in 2012 for raping a 19-year-old at a hotel near Rhyl, Denbighshire. The former Sheffield United, Manchester City and Norwich player was released from jail in 2014 after serving half of his five-year term. He has not been signed by a new club since his release from prison. This breaking news story is being updated and more details will be published shortly. Please refresh the page for the fullest version. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-36099522 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain... Posted 21 April 2016 Share Posted 21 April 2016 Ched Evans wins rape conviction appeal http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-36099522 But not been cleared of charges, looks like he will face a new trial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 21 April 2016 Share Posted 21 April 2016 Full expect him to be cleared in the new trial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkon84 Posted 21 April 2016 Share Posted 21 April 2016 But not been cleared of charges, looks like he will face a new trial. Well it does say that in the very first sentence of the article Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain... Posted 21 April 2016 Share Posted 21 April 2016 Well it does say that in the very first sentence of the article Which DavieG hadn't quoted when he first posted. Full expect him to be cleared in the new trial. Have seen anywhere what this new evidence was? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 21 April 2016 Share Posted 21 April 2016 Have seen anywhere what this new evidence was? Surely it's going to be all those Tweets etc where the rape "victim" is telling her mates how much money/holidays etc she'll get out the case? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain... Posted 21 April 2016 Share Posted 21 April 2016 Surely it's going to be all those Tweets etc where the rape "victim" is telling her mates how much money/holidays etc she'll get out the case? Could be, but then that isn't really evidence that he didn't rape her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 21 April 2016 Share Posted 21 April 2016 Could be, but then that isn't really evidence that he didn't rape her. Surely it would call into account the credibility of her as a witness though if she was claiming her life had been destroyed by the incident etc? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LanguedocFox Posted 21 April 2016 Share Posted 21 April 2016 Have seen anywhere what this new evidence was? According to a report in The Guardian, "Details can not be reported for legal reasons." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Guiza Posted 21 April 2016 Share Posted 21 April 2016 Surely it would call into account the credibility of her as a witness though if she was claiming her life had been destroyed by the incident etc? She didn't make the complaint herself, did she? If I remember currently she went the police for different reasons and then it unfolded from there following discussions with employees there. I suspect he will be charged with something else when it comes to the re-trial. It's definitely not black and white, that's for sure, but his actions were immoral and taking advantage at best and sexual assault at worst. In a world of victim shaming and high profile sexual assault trials, I think the wrong message would be sent to be given a full acquittal; in my opinion anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain... Posted 21 April 2016 Share Posted 21 April 2016 Surely it would call into account the credibility of her as a witness though if she was claiming her life had been destroyed by the incident etc? Undoubtedly, but her evidence was pretty sparse anyway, she got drunk, she woke up, what happened in between she doesn't remember, it's not like she said anything incriminating that could be called into question by her character. She didn't make the complaint herself, did she? If I remember currently she went the police for different reasons and then it unfolded from there following discussions with employees there. I suspect he will be charged with something else when it comes to the re-trial. It's definitely not black and white, that's for sure, but his actions were immoral and taking advantage at best and sexual assault at worst. In a world of victim shaming and high profile sexual assault trials, I think the wrong message would be sent to be given a full acquittal; in my opinion anyway. I don't think they can try him for a lesser offence now. I guess the new evidence will come out in the re-trial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterborofox Posted 21 April 2016 Share Posted 21 April 2016 Surely will win the new trial. Otherwise this one is quashed then for him to lose new one anyway? Can't see it happening like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 21 April 2016 Share Posted 21 April 2016 She didn't make the complaint herself, did she? If I remember currently she went the police for different reasons and then it unfolded from there following discussions with employees there. I suspect he will be charged with something else when it comes to the re-trial. It's definitely not black and white, that's for sure, but his actions were immoral and taking advantage at best and sexual assault at worst. In a world of victim shaming and high profile sexual assault trials, I think the wrong message would be sent to be given a full acquittal; in my opinion anyway. No I don't think she ever remembered the event until she had further discussions with people. I couldn't disagree with your last line more, I don't really care about what message is, the important thing for me is that the jury gets the correct verdict, people shouldn't be found guilty of things if they aren't just because we are worried about potential victim shaming. Justice is sacrosanct. I don't think anyone is denying Evans is a sleazy scumbag, the real question is whether he's a rapist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClaphamFox Posted 21 April 2016 Share Posted 21 April 2016 She didn't make the complaint herself, did she? If I remember currently she went the police for different reasons and then it unfolded from there following discussions with employees there. I suspect he will be charged with something else when it comes to the re-trial. It's definitely not black and white, that's for sure, but his actions were immoral and taking advantage at best and sexual assault at worst. In a world of victim shaming and high profile sexual assault trials, I think the wrong message would be sent to be given a full acquittal; in my opinion anyway. What an astonishing thing to say. So the fact that he might be innocent doesn't come into it? He shouldn't be acquitted because it might send 'the wrong message'? Are you actually serious?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finnegan Posted 21 April 2016 Share Posted 21 April 2016 Cool, so it's not rape if the victim is a twat. I learn so much on foxestalk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.