Ched Evans Wins Appeal But Faces Retrial

[Captain...]

Does anyone else find the headlines and news about Ched a bit over the top, every BBC headline and news piece prefixes his name with rapist and the recent one I saw condemning him for not apologising for his actions without ever explaining why he has appealed and refuses to accept guilt. If you just watched the BBC you would think he was a rapist (and yes I know he has been convicted of rape) in the standard definition of the word. As in he has violently forced himself upon someone against their will, and not that he had drunken sex with someone too drunk.

 

I do think there should be some distinction between the 2 because what he did should not be classed as the same as someone who preys on vulnerable women, and violently abuses them.

 

How long before this becomes a soap story, probably in Hollyoakes seems like their kind of thing, the story has everything, drunkenness, rape, footballers, sexual and moral ambiguity, twitter and the great pay off of one being innocent and one being guilty, there has to be a Hollyoakes late week long special in there somewhere.

[Babylon]

A personal story from my own sordid youth to disprove your "clearly not paralytic" claim (in bold). In my 20s, I often drank myself into oblivion and had "black-outs" (i.e. periods of time when I was doing things but had no memory of them, even though I carried on functioning - often erratically - as far as others were concerned). One night, I'd been boozing heavily at a mate's house in Notting Hill. I got up to leave. The next thing I knew was waking up in a police cell with no recollection of how I'd got there. I found out that I was charged with Breach of the Peace, but still had no idea what had happened.

The problem is, every person is different.

 

I have black outs from drinking all the time, that's usually when I've had a fair amount but no more than any of my friends. When we talk about the nights events I usually have no memory at all other than the odd flash from about the 5th pint onwards. That doesn't mean I'm out of it at the time though, in fact I'm usually told that I didn't seem 'drunk' and was still the most sensible of the bunch by my mates and the mrs says the same when I get home. None of them understand how I can seem to sober and not remember.

 

Not being able to remember certainly doesn't mean you weren't in the state at the time to give a reasoned answer.

[ozleicester]

He was found guilty of rape, therefore he is a rapist.

 

He has served his time and by being released the law has decreed he has been rehabilitated, therefore he is no longer an assumed risk to the public and now should have the right to work and become a functioning member of society.

[MPH]

I agree. I think a lot of people seem to think because it's well paid.

There are plenty of other people that aren't professional sportsman that get paid more a year than Ched Evans would. Would people kick up this much of a fuss if say a partner from a top accountancy firm raped someone then went back into work after serving their time? Doubtful. In fact I doubt anyone would know that an event had happened.

It's not Evans' fault of the profession he's in.

 

 

oh come off it. bad comparison. Ched evans was paid to be watched by thousands of people every week. Their money can be directly linked to the wages he received. his games were played in public and reported by newspapers and tv  and radio to the public . A huge difference. Its also a bad twist on it to say its Not Evans' fault that he's in the trade that hes in - He was hardly dragged intoi it kicking and screaming - he CHOSE this profession knowing full well the pitfalls and the 'fame' that goes with it - that part ( i have been told by a former youth p[layer ) is explained in detail to all youth players.

 

 

The crime is his fault and the publicity that comes with it is part and parcel of the the game of football.

[Alf Bentley]

The problem is, every person is different.

 

I have black outs from drinking all the time, that's usually when I've had a fair amount but no more than any of my friends. When we talk about the nights events I usually have no memory at all other than the odd flash from about the 5th pint onwards. That doesn't mean I'm out of it at the time though, in fact I'm usually told that I didn't seem 'drunk' and was still the most sensible of the bunch by my mates and the mrs says the same when I get home. None of them understand how I can seem to sober and not remember.

 

Not being able to remember certainly doesn't mean you weren't in the state at the time to give a reasoned answer.

 

Point taken, Babylon. I used to get in those states myself - no memory of last hour in pub or going home, but seeming quite sober to others. I sometimes went a step further and woke up imagining that I'd behaved outrageously when I hadn't. I once dreamed that I'd subjected a new friend to disgusting verbal abuse in front of his mates. When I went and apologised, he was mystified and said that I'd seemed sober and had been good company (and he wasn't just being kind to me). Then, other times, like the arrest that I quoted, I'd appear sober but do something completely irrational and not remember it. I suppose that it's just a grey area - and juries have to assess the evidence/witnesses and judge to the best of their ability. 

 

The whole night is disgusting and sordid but I still can't get my around him being found guilty and his mate not when the cps charged both of them with rape. How can a jury decide she's lying about one but not the other.

 

I assume the jury decided (a) that she was in no fit state to consent; (b) that there was, at least, reasonable doubt that McDonald might reasonably have thought she'd consented, but not Evans. I'm not saying the jury was right or wrong (maybe both should have been convicted or both acquitted), but they examined all the evidence - and I find it easy to imagine why they made the call that they did. Unless there's a successful appeal, I see no reason to disrespect that decision.

 

A rough summary:

- Girl on CCTV clearly paralytic (fell over in kebab shop, left handbag in street, urinated in street)

- McDonald may or may not have seen her in kebab shop; girl on CCTV approaching him in street, talking, then getting into cab with him; taxi driver said they were talking normally & eating pizza, she was disheveled but able to do up buttons; CCTV at hotel showed her walk in OK with him; night porter said she seemed very drunk; they went up to room and shagged; McDonald claimed Evans asked to join in & she agreed; McDonald left by main entrance, asking porter to keep an eye on girl as she was "ill".

- Evans stepped over girl as she lay drunk on kebab shop floor; he then had to go to the cop shop as a witness to another incident; didn't see girl again until he got a text from McDonald to say he's "got a bird"; comes to hotel uninvited with brother and mate; cons a key pass from night porter; enters room to find a shagging scene; he claims that McDonald asked girl if he (Evans) could join in & she agreed; shags her while brother & mate giggle/film on fire escape; Evans leaves via fire escape.

 

Given the very different ways in which the 2 blokes ended up with the girl - and the disparity in their stories as to who asked for Evans' "consent" - the jury's split decision sounds quite understandable to me.

 

If you just watched the BBC you would think he was a rapist (and yes I know he has been convicted of rape) in the standard definition of the word. As in he has violently forced himself upon someone against their will, and not that he had drunken sex with someone too drunk.

 

I do think there should be some distinction between the 2 because what he did should not be classed as the same as someone who preys on vulnerable women, and violently abuses them.

 

 

Take your point about the 2 types of rape. Maybe it should be "aggravated rape" and "statutory rape" or something - after all, Evans' case has a lot in common with a man who has consensual sex with a 15-year-old. Neither case involves violence, but both involve someone deemed by the law to be incapable of giving consent. Mind you, I don't think the repulsiveness of Evans' conduct should be diminished, which your dismissal of it as "drunken sex with someone too drunk" risks doing. Try imagining your partner/mother/sister/daughter getting paralytic (or maybe they never do?) - and someone treating her like that. Yes, in practical terms, someone is taking a stupid risk if they get in that state but most of us have done it some time or other - and that shouldn't allow some opportunistic lowlife with zero morals to take advantage and commit an abuse that is likely to cause long-term psychological damage.

 

How are people ever supposed to rebuild their lives if they're not given the chance to do so?

This isn't me saying what he did was right (FYI can only go on what was found in the courts of law) but as the judicial system goes he's served the full sentence before being eligible for parole and should be given the chance to sort his life out.

 

People should be able to rebuild their lives after serving their sentence. It should probably be legal for Evans to return to football. But, unless he is successful at appeal (refused so far), then football clubs and football fans shouldn't want him back. Someone found guilty of rape should not be representing his city and seeking public acclaim - and the public shouldn't want to give acclaim to someone like that. There are plenty of other jobs that he could do, with a lower profile; lower wages, of course, but he forfeited his right to high wages for a high-profile role when he did what he did. There are already plenty of situations in which that applies: politicians jailed for corruption don't return to parliament; accountants jailed for fraud don't return to accountancy; convicted paedophiles are not allowed to work with children again.....but they are all allowed to fill other roles.

 

Some might disagree with that and feel quite happy cheering a Ched Evans goal in an LCFC shirt, but if so, surely you'd draw a line somewhere else instead? When he's released, would you want Pistorius waving to the LCFC crowd at half-time....or this released police killer Harry Roberts? He's served his time and has the right to rebuild his life, too, but maybe we should want society not to show too much approval to people who've committed such offences?

[David Guiza]

People should be able to rebuild their lives after serving their sentence. It should probably be legal for Evans to return to football. But, unless he is successful at appeal (refused so far), then football clubs and football fans shouldn't want him back. Someone found guilty of rape should not be representing his city and seeking public acclaim - and the public shouldn't want to give acclaim to someone like that. There are plenty of other jobs that he could do, with a lower profile; lower wages, of course, but he forfeited his right to high wages for a high-profile role when he did what he did. There are already plenty of situations in which that applies: politicians jailed for corruption don't return to parliament; accountants jailed for fraud don't return to accountancy; convicted paedophiles are not allowed to work with children again.....but they are all allowed to fill other roles.

 

Some might disagree with that and feel quite happy cheering a Ched Evans goal in an LCFC shirt, but if so, surely you'd draw a line somewhere else instead? When he's released, would you want Pistorius waving to the LCFC crowd at half-time....or this released police killer Harry Roberts? He's served his time and has the right to rebuild his life, too, but maybe we should want society not to show too much approval to people who've committed such offences?

Exactly my point, you can compare it to other jobs all you like, but football isn't like 99% of other jobs. You don't get 10,000+ people full of families, children, young women watching you and scrutinizing your every move (yes I know it's only League One).

As Alf said, there are so many jobs where you forfeit your career the moment you are convicted of such a heinous act; I couldn't walk back into the legal profession, for example, and wouldn't expect to either, teachers, politicians, police, social services etc. It's not as though it's football or the doll. 

As a sport we already let too much slide and football has became almost blameless to many extents, I personally believe this is one step too far. 

[Strokes]

How can people compare football to a job of responsibility, come on. I don't care one bit for Evans but I don't think he should be banned or forced to apologize.

[Bert]

oh come off it. bad comparison. Ched evans was paid to be watched by thousands of people every week. Their money can be directly linked to the wages he received. his games were played in public and reported by newspapers and tv and radio to the public . A huge difference. Its also a bad twist on it to say its Not Evans' fault that he's in the trade that hes in - He was hardly dragged intoi it kicking and screaming - he CHOSE this profession knowing full well the pitfalls and the 'fame' that goes with it - that part ( i have been told by a former youth p[layer ) is explained in detail to all youth players.

The crime is his fault and the publicity that comes with it is part and parcel of the the game of football.

Gone are the days when ticket money pays wages especially at one of the bigger English clubs.

[Jon the Hat]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/29980279 Shame on you Sheffield Utd.  Wankers.

[J.Lisemore]

Will get so much abuse its unreal. To think scvm like this will be earning considerably more than the average honest hard-working person is disgusting.

 

He doesn't deserve to live a privileged life but hey, as long as he's good at football..

[FrankieWorthoYaggedMyWife]

Will get so much abuse its unreal. To think scvm like this will be earning considerably more than the average honest hard-working person is disgusting.

 

He doesn't deserve to live a privileged life but hey, as long as he's good at football..

 

Done much research on the case?

 

You still going to stick to those labels when the case is over turned on appeal - which seems increasingly likely?

 

And even if its not, he is not working in a profession that requires a CRB check so basically you can stick your moral high ground up your 'arris. He is not the first convicted criminal to play football, nor will be be the last.

[David Guiza]

Done much research on the case?

 

You still going to stick to those labels when the case is over turned on appeal - which seems increasingly likely?

 

And even if its not, he is not working in a profession that requires a CRB check so basically you can stick your moral high ground up your 'arris. He is not the first convicted criminal to play football, nor will be be the last.

God forbid somebody having moral objections to a convicted racist returning to football. Do you also have no issues with the likes of Lee Hughes, Marlon King or Luke McCormack? As I, and others, have said repeatedly - I'm not against him returning to work, I just don't think it should be in football. Footballers are no longer role models, but I'm not comfortable with a convicted rapist representing a city and possibly country also.

[Manwell Pablo]

God forbid somebody having moral objections to a convicted racist returning to football. Do you also have no issues with the likes of Lee Hughes, Marlon King or Luke McCormack? As I, and others, have said repeatedly - I'm not against him returning to work, I just don't think it should be in football. Footballers are no longer role models, but I'm not comfortable with a convicted rapist representing a city and possibly country also.

 

Lee Hughes Marlon King and Luke McCormack were bang to rights. This case is full of holes and is set to go to appeal. 

[Leeds Fox]

If a club, and it's looking likely to be Sheff Utd, do give him a contract it's entirely their risk! Nobody has the right to deny him playing professional football other than the 92 clubs in PL/FL. If one gives him a chance, they're staff might be annoyed and they're income may be affected, only time will tell. Even if the verdict is overturned, many will still see him as a rapist through pure ignorance, and many will still taunt him from the stands. Regardless, I'm sure he's fully expecting it, and it's further punishment for his crime.

I am in no way condoning his actions, I'm just pointing out that it's hard to legally prevent a man from re-entering his profession after serving his time.

[David Guiza]

Lee Hughes Marlon King and Luke McCormack were bang to rights. This case is full of holes and is set to go to appeal. 

They still served their time with no legal barriers to prevent them from playing.

I agree that the facts are not cut and dry by any means, but there's a reason he was found guilty in a court of law, barring in mind that the burden of proof for a criminal trial is 'beyond reasonable doubt', not a mere probabilities. There's always the chance that the original decision will be overturned, but from what i've read on the case i'd be very surprised - I can see why people think he should be allowed to play, but I will never buy into the 'he's not the only one' tripe. It just highlights the lack of morals that is all too evident in modern football in particular.  

[Jon the Hat]

Just a personal view, I would stop supporting City if they employed an unrepentant convicted rapist.

 

Oh god I wish I had not read to the top of this page.  If you think taking advantage of a seriously drunk girl is not rape then you really aren't paying attention.

[J.Lisemore]

Done much research on the case?

 

You still going to stick to those labels when the case is over turned on appeal - which seems increasingly likely?

 

And even if its not, he is not working in a profession that requires a CRB check so basically you can stick your moral high ground up your 'arris. He is not the first convicted criminal to play football, nor will be be the last.

 

Obviously not as much as you have, but I know he's a convicted rapist.

 

You might be dragged in by all these plea's of innocence but he clearly didn't fool the courts.

 

Ah well, as long as he's not the only one, that makes it alright then.

 

The bottom line is that only Ched 100% knows. It takes an evil man to act his innocence when deep down he knows he's done seriously wrong. Where even is his victim now? suffering in anonymity I should imagine.

[Jon the Hat]

Obviously not as much as you have, but I know he's a convicted rapist.

 

You might be dragged in by all these plea's of innocence but he clearly didn't fool the courts.

 

Ah well, as long as he's not the only one, that makes it alright then.

 

The bottom line is that only Ched 100% knows. It takes an evil man to act his innocence when deep down he knows he's done seriously wrong. Where even is his victim now? suffering in anonymity I should imagine.

 

He can be 100% convinced he did nothing wrong, but that could just be a warped set of values rather than evil.  I think if you are a footballer and women throw themsevles at you all the time it could be really easy to learn that women are worthless toys for your pleasure.  They aren't.

[FrankieWorthoYaggedMyWife]

Obviously not as much as you have, but I know he's a convicted rapist.

 

You might be dragged in by all these plea's of innocence but he clearly didn't fool the courts.

 

Ah well, as long as he's not the only one, that makes it alright then.

 

The bottom line is that only Ched 100% knows. It takes an evil man to act his innocence when deep down he knows he's done seriously wrong. Where even is his victim now? suffering in anonymity I should imagine.

 

she probably wants to get off twitter talking about whats he's going to buy when she wins big then - that's not very anonymous.

 

I'm not saying its alright at all, what I'm getting at is that there are certain professions that you are not allowed to work in if you have a conviction. Football is not one of them. He is not being paid to bring up the nations youth, just play football.

[FrankieWorthoYaggedMyWife]

Just a personal view, I would stop supporting City if they employed an unrepentant convicted rapist.

 

Oh god I wish I had not read to the top of this page.  If you think taking advantage of a seriously drunk girl is not rape then you really aren't paying attention.

 

As he is appealing he cant apologise as that's an admission of guilt.

[David Guiza]

He can be 100% convinced he did nothing wrong, but that could just be a warped set of values rather than evil.  I think if you are a footballer and women throw themsevles at you all the time it could be really easy to learn that women are worthless toys for your pleasure.  They aren't.

Away from the football side of things, I'm amazed his girlfriend is still with him. One to tell the future kids.

[Jon the Hat]

Away from the football side of things, I'm amazed his girlfriend is still with him. One to tell the future kids.

 

I dont know the woman, but I bet plenty of WAGs put up with kinds of shit to keep their lifestyle intact.  Its not like they are all there for love of their man in the first place now is it?

[David Guiza]

I dont know the woman, but I bet plenty of WAGs put up with kinds of shit to keep their lifestyle intact.  Its not like they are all there for love of their man in the first place now is it?

True; if the wage of a League 1 footballer is more important to her than the value of women and self dignity then all is good with her I guess!

[Jon the Hat]

As he is appealing he cant apologise as that's an admission of guilt.

 

I suspect he has not apologised becuase he doesn't believe he did anything wrong.  Maybe a shame that a jury and four appeal court judges couldn't convince him otherwise.

[Guest MattP]

I've done a bit of reading on this since my last comments and by the definition of the law he probably is guilty, the law really does seem an ass though and the feminist paw is really pushing down on the scales of justice with some of the cases you read.

 

I reckon 25%-30% of blokes would be inside if everytime this sort of thing happened it was reported.