Ched Evans Wins Appeal But Faces Retrial

[David Guiza]

Ok now you're just being a moron

 

How is telling a young woman not to get so drunk that she isn't in control of her own actions (which you are saying that woman is) comparable to telling her not to where a short skirt, you idiot. 

 

You think it's fine to teach someone it's fine to do something which could lead to them doing something they heavily regret or even worse could lead to them being seriously hurt, and you question my morals. Pratt.

I'm not saying that you shouldn't teach somebody to not get heavily drunk, i'm saying that to do it in place of the stigma with rape culture is highly debatable in my opinion. My point is that regardless of how drunk somebody is, having sex with them without their consent is unacceptable and illegal. I barely, if at all, drink anymore, the affects of alcohol is something that should be taught from a young age and can have awful affects - that's a given. But to allude to the fact that she, or any other female, should think twice about getting very drunk in case she gets raped seems like a very backward view to me. 

 

That's really not what i'm saying, either you are being deliberatley argumentative, or you're just completley missing my point. I'm saying that BOTH drinking and rape culture are aspects that should be taught to young folk, not one or the other. If I missinterpreted your point I appologise, but to me it read as though you were saying that if a girl was to go out and get very drunk and then have unconsented sex, you wouldn't think that was a crime - which is wrong.

Thanks for the moron, pratt and idiot remarks too. I can see how a debate about two people you have never met on an internet football forum called for that . 

 

It really, really isn't.

To me it is, but each to their own. I don't agree with anyone getting out of their mind on anyting to the point that they're not in control of their actions, but if they do, that doesn't give anyone the right to have sex with them; and it's illegal. As I have said above though, maybe I just missinterpreted what Manwell was saying.

[Manwell Pablo]

I'm not saying that you shouldn't teach somebody to not get heavily drunk, i'm saying that to do it in place of the stigma with rape culture is highly debatable in my opinion. My point is that regardless of how drunk somebody is, having sex with them without their consent is unacceptable and illegal. I barely, if at all drink anymore, the affects of alcohol is something that should be taught from a young age and can have awful affects - that's a given. But to allude to the fact that she, or any other female, should think twice about getting very drunk in case she gets raped seems like a very backward view to me. 

That's really not what i'm saying, either you are being deliberatley argumentative, or you're just completley missing my point. I'm saying that BOTH drinking and rape culture are aspects that should be taught to young folk, not one or the other. If I missinterpreted your point I appologise, but to me it read as though you were saying that if a girl was to go out and get very drunk and then have unconsented sex, you wouldn't think that was a crime - which is wrong.

Thanks for the moron, pratt and idiot remarks too. I can see how a debate about two people you have never met on an internet football forum called for that . 

 

To me it is, but each to their own. I don't agree with anyone getting out of the fact to the point that they're not in control of their actions, but if they do, that doesn't give anyone the right to have sex with them and it's illegal. As I have said above though, maybe I just missinterpreted what Manwell was saying.

 

Well you pretty much did and called me ignorant for doing so.

 

There are plenty of reasons why any young girl should not drink to the point where not longer in control of their own actions and that is of course one, and there is nothing backwards about it, your are showing extreme naivety if you think otherwise. It might be wrong to rape drunk girls and it might be a crime punishable by prison but I'm afraid, like all other crimes, some people aren't going to care and they are going to do it given the opportunity, and to say young girls should be able to drink themselves into a stooper in a nightclub and be totally free of risk of being raped is akin to me saying I should be able to walk down Mossside wearing a YSL shirt and a pair of D&G sunglasses waving my wallet in the air and be under no threat of getting mugged. We don't live in a Utopia, it's naivety personified.

 

There is nothing right with unconsented sex I am not saying that at all, but by all accounts she did verbally consent and it was on the basis that she was too drunk to give that consent that Evans was convicted, and I think that is a very dangerous road to take and if people are to be convicted on those grounds then there should be some sort of definition of what is "too drunk" so everyone knows where they stand. To be fair when I first posted I thought he'd had a few himself the fact that he was stone cold sober does not show him up in the best light. I for one would be worried that you could be convicted if you were as plastered as the "victim" in question, she is absloved of being able to make rational decisions yet you are still expected to do so? Doesn't sit well with me. 

 

You called me ignorant and questioned my moral values in the raising of my daughter and then proceeded to back that up with one of the worst analogies the internet has ever seen so you are more than welcome. 

[Guest MattP]

To me it is, but each to their own. I don't agree with anyone getting out of their mind on anyting to the point that they're not in control of their actions, but if they do, that doesn't give anyone the right to have sex with them; and it's illegal. As I have said above though, maybe I just missinterpreted what Manwell was saying.

 

I just thought what you saying smacked of someone who doesn't really live in a real World, of course we should warn our daughters (and sons) of the dangers they will face and the consequences of what can happen, I'd certainly be warning my daughter of exactly what blokes are like when they see a girl who has had far too many, they are no more than a piece of meat to a lot, it's isn't wrong to warn people if they play near a cliff edge they might end up getting hurt.

 

We're even in a era now where people have to warn their children about the dangers of grooming gangs when they are 12 years old and haven't touched a drop, let alone being 18 and being pounced on by sickos like me trying to fulfil their perverted desires.

 

You usually come across as quite sensible so I don't want to have a go too much, but the first time in this thread you managed to come across as the avatar you have, the naive Che Guevara student type who hasn't really experienced any harsh reality in life yet thinking it's a perfect World.

[David Guiza]

Well you pretty much did and called me ignorant for doing so.

 

There are plenty of reasons why any young girl should not drink to the point where not longer in control of their own actions and that is of course one, and there is nothing backwards about it, your are showing extreme naivety if you think otherwise. It might be wrong to rape drunk girls and it might be a crime punishable by prison but I'm afraid, like all other crimes, some people aren't going to care and they are going to do it given the opportunity, and to say young girls she be able to drink themselves into a stooper in a nightclub and be totally free of risk of being raped is akin to me saying I should be able to walk down Mossside wearing a YSL shirt and a pair of D&G sunglasses waving my wallet in the air and be under no threat of getting mugged. We don't live in a Utopia, it's naivety personified.

 

There is nothing right with unconsented sex I am not saying that at all, but by all accounts she did verbally consent and it was on the basis that she was too drunk to give that consent that Evans was convicted, and I think that is a very dangerous road to take and if people are to be convicted on those grounds then there should be some sort of definition of what is "too drunk" so everyone knows where they stand. To be fair when I first posted I thought he'd had a few himself the fact that he was stone cold sober does not show him up in the best light. I for one would be worried that you could be convicted if you were as plastered as the "victim" in question, she is absloved of being able to make rational decisions yet you are still expected to do so? Doesn't sit well with me. 

 

You called me ignorant and questioned my moral values in the raising of my daughter and then proceeded to back that up with one of the worst analogies the internet has ever seen so you are more than welcome. 

I agree with what you're saying and of course i'm looking at it naively, but the point still stands. Anybody should be able to go out and do whatever they want, within the law, without getting raped - anyone with a brain can see that and you agree. The point i'm making is that we and the law should do everything in our power to stop events like that from happening, and one way of doing so is to not condone the likes of this example in any way whatsoever.

 

It's not a very dangerous road to go down in my opinion, I have managed to go almost 23 years of my life without doing anything like what Evans did and i'm sure you have too. It's clearly not as cut and dry as what most people would give as their definition of rape, but it's still exactly that and always will be (I hope). We do live in a mysoginistic world, and that favours men almost entirely, but it also means that we are considered to be predators when the vast majority are not, and part of that tag means that in situations like what you mention regarding drunken consent, men are always going to come off worse. But I don't think it should or would be any different if the gender roles were reversed.

 

I know that you're not condoning unconsented sex for one moment, as I have said, I am being naive, but the point still stands. Saying things like 'it happens, it's the world we live in' etc is part of the problem.

 

I just thought what you saying smacked of someone who doesn't really live in a real World, of course we should warn our daughters (and sons) of the dangers they will face and the consequences of what can happen, I'd certainly be warning my daughter of exactly what blokes are like when they see a girl who has had far too many, they are no more than a piece of meat to a lot, it's isn't wrong to warn people if they play near a cliff edge they might end up getting hurt.

 

We're even in a era now where people have to warn their children about the dangers of grooming gangs when they are 12 years old and haven't touched a drop, let alone being 18 and being pounced on by sickos like me trying to fulfil their perverted desires.

 

You usually come across as quite sensible so I don't want to have a go too much, but the first time in this thread you managed to come across as the avatar you have, the naive Che Guevara student type who hasn't really experienced any harsh reality in life yet thinking it's a perfect World.

I understand that, as i've said above. I know you can't wrap your sons and daughters in cotton wool and expect them to get through life without any issues, but it's something that need addressing; ie geting back to the point, allowing Evans to come back into football is not addressing the issue.

Haha, I am more than aware of the harsh reality of the real world. But I'm also not just going to accept that rape culture, theft, etc are just part and parcel of life either (not that you do).

[Manwell Pablo]

I agree with what you're saying and of course i'm looking at it naively, but the point still stands. Anybody should be able to go out and do whatever they want, within the law, without getting raped - anyone with a brain can see that and you agree. The point i'm making is that we and the law should do everything in our power to stop events like that from happening, and one way of doing so is to not condone the likes of this example in any way whatsoever.

 

It's not a very dangerous road to go down in my opinion, I have managed to go almost 23 years of my life without doing anything like what Evans did and i'm sure you have too. It's clearly not as cut and dry as what most people would give as their definition of rape, but it's still exactly that and always will be (I hope). We do live in a mysoginistic world, and that favours men almost entirely, but it also means that we are considered to be predators when the vast majority are not, and part of that tag means that in situations like what you mention regarding drunken consent, men are always going to come off worse. But I don't think it should or would be any different if the gender roles were reversed.

 

I know that you're not condoning unconsented sex for one moment, as I have said, I am being naive, but the point still stands. Saying things like 'it happens, it's the world we live in' etc is part of the problem.

 

I understand that, as i've said above. I know you can't wrap your sons and daughters in cotton wool and expect them to get through life without any issues, but it's something that need addressing; ie geting back to the point, allowing Evans to come back into football is not addressing the issue.

Haha, I am more than aware of the harsh reality of the real world. But I'm also not just going to accept that rape culture, theft, etc are just part and parcel of life either (not that you do).

 

Pie in the sky that, and that is not the point you were making at all, you may be making that point now, but you previously suggesting that I was ignorant for holding the opinion that a young woman (or anyone, for that matter) should be taught not to get plastered to the point where they aren't in control. You suggested it was like telling young girls they can't wear short skirts. 

 

I haven't but that's besides the point I'd imagine Matt is not far off with his 25% of men having encounters like that comment, people may bring the fact that these cases don't involve a video camera and people watching in order to add weight to their argument. Forgetting that in the case of whether she consented or was sober enough to consent all external factors like that are totally irrelevant. 

 

there is a difference between immoral sexual attitudes and rapist, and this case in particular is full of holes, you seem to continually avoid the fact that she was conversing with them and that for me is a sign of being sober enough to know what your doing. I for one am certainly not comfortable viewing him as guilty beyond reasonable doubt, people will no doubt say I shouldn't hold this opinion as he's been convicted, but I will be interested if people in this thread who've dragged his name through the mud would apologies if his conviction is over turned? I somewhat doubt it. The story, the conviction in which he continues to fight for his sentence to be overturned despite having served his time, and the actions of the girl in question shortly after his conviction suggest just raise my suspicions. I am not condoning his actions (even he is innocent of rape it's still immoral) I am just not sure what he has done warrants a rape conviction (criminal record, sex offenders register, years in prison) you can't convict every single man who "takes advantage" or a girl, do you start convicting people of rape if they take advantage of girls in extremely emotional states as well? Where is the line drawn?

 

It is not part of the problem, it is being realistic, things like that do happen. That is not saying they are ok, it is the knowledge that the threat is out there and there is need to take caution. I'm afraid crime is a part of life, and more than likely always will be.

[Captain...]

A few comments on here relating to what he did before he had sex with her, but that is irrelevant, if she consents he could have stolen a car, broken in the window, stolen all her money and took a dump on the floor, if she says yes he is not a rapist. All this other stuff, the hotel room, the filming, the fact he has a girlfriend and sneaked out the fire escape afterwards makes him a scumbag, but not a rapist.

 

From what I have read I believe she consented, she doesn't remember and the courts have taken that consent away from her, but from what I have read I believe she consented, if I didn't I would say fvck him, hope he rots.

 

He committed a normal, if slightly deviant sex act on her, his actions were not criminal her state of inebriation made it a crime, I just don't see how that can be proved, and how he can be held accountable for judging her to be sober, because 12 people that weren't there judged her to not be (but sober enough to consent to McDonald) that doesn't sit well with me. If anyone can proved a clear cut definition of too drunk, then fair enough.

 

As Matt says a lot of men could be prosecuted in that way, possibly even me, depends on how you define too drunk to consent, is it the same as too drunk to drive? Because that is only 1 pint these days. I have had a few drunken one night stands, I have never thought that any girl I've been with was too drunk, nor that I was in anyway taking advantage of her. Although there have been a few awkward mornings, one particularly horrendous one which I might share one time, but probably not on this thread.

 

It just horrifies me to think that it could happen to me, that what was at the time an act willingly entered into by me and another person could turn into something like, because I could never prove my innocence, even if I know I wasn't taking advantage of her.

[David Guiza]

Pie in the sky that, and that is not the point you were making at all, you may be making that point now, but you previously suggesting that I was ignorant for holding the opinion that a young woman (or anyone, for that matter) should be taught not to get plastered to the point where they aren't in control. You suggested it was like telling young girls they can't wear short skirts.

I haven't but that's besides the point I'd imagine Matt is not far off with his 25% of men having encounters like that comment, people may bring the fact that these cases don't involve a video camera and people watching in order to add weight to their argument. Forgetting that in the case of whether she consented or was sober enough to consent all external factors like that are totally irrelevant.

there is a difference between immoral sexual attitudes and rapist, and this case in particular is full of holes, you seem to continually avoid the fact that she was conversing with them and that for me is a sign of being sober enough to know what your doing. I for one am certainly not comfortable viewing him as guilty beyond reasonable doubt, people will no doubt say I shouldn't hold this opinion as he's been convicted, but I will be interested if people in this thread who've dragged his name through the mud would apologies if his conviction is over turned? I somewhat doubt it. The story, the conviction in which he continues to fight for his sentence to be overturned despite having served his time, and the actions of the girl in question shortly after his conviction suggest just raise my suspicions. I am not condoning his actions (even he is innocent of rape it's still immoral) I am just not sure what he has done warrants a rape conviction (criminal record, sex offenders register, years in prison) you can't convict every single man who "takes advantage" or a girl, do you start convicting people of rape if they take advantage of girls in extremely emotional states as well? Where is the line drawn?

It is not part of the problem, it is being realistic, things like that do happen. That is not saying they are ok, it is the knowledge that the threat is out there and there is need to take caution. I'm afraid crime is a part of life, and more than likely always will be.

Not at all, of course you should tell anyone who will listen that getting plastered to the point of not knowing what you're doing is wrong. But I took that as you saying you're reasoning behind doing so was that if said person was to get immortal they deserve what's coming to them to an extent - which is why I likended it to the ridiculous point of girls going out in next to nothing are asking for it. But if that's not what you meant then I apologise, as I've said.

Of course it's not ideal, but if you're acting immorally you're fully aware that there could be consequences (even if those consequences are not to the extreme nature of a custodial sentence). Those 25% of people could also punch a drunken person leading to far more serious injuries than it would have done if they were sober. Of course punching itself is illegal in almost all instances and sex isn't, but that's the risk that you take when you engage in either.

The problem with the law adding more clarification as you mentioned is that the law is meant to be flexible and the more definition that is added, the more rigid law becomes. Clearly it needs to be looked at, but everything that I've read in this case suggests to me that he should have been convicted.

Obviously we're not going to agree as we're looking at it from completely different perspectives, I accept your points but I can't see myself agreeing with your side on this any time soon and visa versa i'm sure haha.

[Ashley]

Just read the women's police interview started with 'licking out' dear god tell me this isn't true.

[MPH]

Bottom line is that its not our club and it isnt our player. Sheff united  , no matter what argument the rest of the footballing world will make will come to the decision themselves - wether its from their own fans protest, or by losing sponsors as now seems likely.

[ADK]

I guess we'll see breathalyser kits being sold alongside condoms in the gents now... 

[fleckneymike]

Well you pretty much did and called me ignorant for doing so.

 

There are plenty of reasons why any young girl should not drink to the point where not longer in control of their own actions and that is of course one, and there is nothing backwards about it, your are showing extreme naivety if you think otherwise. It might be wrong to rape drunk girls and it might be a crime punishable by prison but I'm afraid, like all other crimes, some people aren't going to care and they are going to do it given the opportunity, and to say young girls should be able to drink themselves into a stooper in a nightclub and be totally free of risk of being raped is akin to me saying I should be able to walk down Mossside wearing a YSL shirt and a pair of D&G sunglasses waving my wallet in the air and be under no threat of getting mugged. We don't live in a Utopia, it's naivety personified.

 

There is nothing right with unconsented sex I am not saying that at all, but by all accounts she did verbally consent and it was on the basis that she was too drunk to give that consent that Evans was convicted, and I think that is a very dangerous road to take and if people are to be convicted on those grounds then there should be some sort of definition of what is "too drunk" so everyone knows where they stand. To be fair when I first posted I thought he'd had a few himself the fact that he was stone cold sober does not show him up in the best light. I for one would be worried that you could be convicted if you were as plastered as the "victim" in question, she is absloved of being able to make rational decisions yet you are still expected to do so? Doesn't sit well with me. 

 

You called me ignorant and questioned my moral values in the raising of my daughter and then proceeded to back that up with one of the worst analogies the internet has ever seen so you are more than welcome. 

 

I can scarcely credit what I am reading. I sincerely hope the use of the phrase 'it might be wrong to rape drunk girls' was a mistake and not a genuinely held belief.

 

A woman or man should be free to get a drunk as they jolly well wish and not have to worry that someone will sexually assault them. It nothing 'akin' to anything. The law (and one would hope morality) is very clear that being intoxicated does not imply consent.

[ADK]

I can scarcely credit what I am reading. I sincerely hope the use of the phrase 'it might be wrong to rape drunk girls' was a mistake and not a genuinely held belief.

 

A woman or man should be free to get a drunk as they jolly well wish and not have to worry that someone will sexually assault them. It nothing 'akin' to anything. The law (and one would hope morality) is very clear that being intoxicated does not imply consent.

 

If you understood how to read English you would be able to answer your own question.

[fleckneymike]

If you understood how to read English you would be able to answer your own question.

 

'might' is a tentative statement and part of a conditional sentence.

 

It might rain tomorrow is entirely different from saying it will rain tomorrow. Saying it might be wrong to rape drunk girls implies that the writer is not convinced that it is and that it is still an area for debate.

[C-man]

'might' is a tentative statement and part of a conditional sentence.

It might rain tomorrow is entirely different from saying it will rain tomorrow. Saying it might be wrong to rape drunk girls implies that the writer is not convinced that it is and that it is still an area for debate.

Oh FFS, come off it If Pablo had written 'it might be wrong to shoplift but I'm afraid some people aren't going to care and if there's no security cameras, people are going to do it given the opportunity' you would never picked up on the use of English and claimed that the author thought it MIGHT be an 'area for debate'. It's a common sentence structure and quite frankly I can't believe you've managed to twist it to question someone's morals. Unbelievable.

As for Evans, this is an impossible situation for Sheffield United and their fans. As much as I believe he has a right to work in whatever field will take him (as a convicted rapist who has served his time) as part of his rehabilitation and reintroduction to society, I wouldn't want him at City. Same as I wouldn't want him working in a school or even with me in an office. But he has served his time and whether that was long enough or not was a matter for the courts and should therefore be able to work. Whether that is as a professional footballer or not is irrelevant should someone wish to employ him - i.e. consider the benefits (goals/promotion) to outweigh the cons (negative publicity/withdrawal of small sponsors).

Marlon King and Lee Hughes - two further bilious creatures that were given the chance to rehabilitate themselves in the game and have done so. Wasn't Troy Deeney banged up for something too yet he's been able to move on with his life in football.

This shouldn't be about football - if he winds up playing Sunday League are there going to witchhunts at the local reccy? The area I believe we should be addressing here is whether we as a society believe that the punishment for rape is strong enough. Unfortunately if we genuinely believe in rehabilitation then we'll have to suck these situations up occasionally.

[leicsmac]

Oh FFS, come off it If Pablo had written 'it might be wrong to shoplift but I'm afraid some people aren't going to care and if there's no security cameras, people are going to do it given the opportunity' you would never picked up on the use of English and claimed that the author thought it MIGHT be an 'area for debate'. It's a common sentence structure and quite frankly I can't believe you've managed to twist it to question someone's morals. Unbelievable.

As for Evans, this is an impossible situation for Sheffield United and their fans. As much as I believe he has a right to work in whatever field will take him (as a convicted rapist who has served his time) as part of his rehabilitation and reintroduction to society, I wouldn't want him at City. Same as I wouldn't want him working in a school or even with me in an office. But he has served his time and whether that was long enough or not was a matter for the courts and should therefore be able to work. Whether that is as a professional footballer or not is irrelevant should someone wish to employ him - i.e. consider the benefits (goals/promotion) to outweigh the cons (negative publicity/withdrawal of small sponsors).

Marlon King and Lee Hughes - two further bilious creatures that were given the chance to rehabilitate themselves in the game and have done so. Wasn't Troy Deeney banged up for something too yet he's been able to move on with his life in football.

This shouldn't be about football - if he winds up playing Sunday League are there going to witchhunts at the local reccy? The area I believe we should be addressing here is whether we as a society believe that the punishment for rape is strong enough. Unfortunately if we genuinely believe in rehabilitation then we'll have to suck these situations up occasionally.

 

Agreed, and it's not. More to the point, the arrest and conviction rate for it isn't nearly on a par with other violent crimes either. I wonder why?

[Strokes]

Agreed, and it's not. More to the point, the arrest and conviction rate for it isn't nearly on a par with other violent crimes either. I wonder why?

It's much harder to prove than other violent crimes, if you get beaten up, there is not generally a question over consent.

[Guest MattP]

Agreed, and it's not. More to the point, the arrest and conviction rate for it isn't nearly on a par with other violent crimes either. I wonder why?

Would be because the vast majority of cases would come down to her word against his, unlike other violent crimes there would be little chance of witnesses or CCTV to back up the CPS ie hardcore evidence that often would convince a guilty verdict is appropriate.

I don't like the way a lot of people (especially feminists) seem to want to use the low conviction rate as an excuse to throw as many men in prison as possible whether innocent or guilty.

[Dr The Singh]

He was judged to be guilty, he has done his time/punishment, he should be allowed to continue in society like anyone else.........I can't see the fuss really, we all have to move forward!!!!  Unless he was still a risk to society, which I believe he is not!!

[leicsmac]

Would be because the vast majority of cases would come down to her word against his, unlike other violent crimes there would be little chance of witnesses or CCTV to back up the CPS ie hardcore evidence that often would convince a guilty verdict is appropriate.

I don't like the way a lot of people (especially feminists) seem to want to use the low conviction rate as an excuse to throw as many men in prison as possible whether innocent or guilty.

 

That's true, and in all cases I'm very much in favour of due process being followed and a guilty verdict only being reached when the evidence is beyond a reasonable doubt. As you say, rape cases can be difficult in that respect. If there is doubt, there should be an acquittal, no matter the alleged offence.

 

That being said, I'd also like to see more encouragement and support for rape victims to come forward and present evidence in order to secure convictions. Yes, there is cases of false claims, and when that occurs the accuser should be punished, but no other violent crime seems to carry the stigma of victim-blaming as much as rape, and I think that's another major factor in the lack of convictions. Many women (and men, too - in fact men especially) are too scared to speak about what's been done to them because of what they think people will say.

[ADK]

I don't think that is true about the stigma. I've never known a woman be ridiculed for being raped. Not in western culture anyway.

 

Also the concept of "victim blaming" isn't unique to rape at all. There's also the concept of making people victims when they don't need to be.

[Sir Fynwy]

He was judged to be guilty, he has done his time/punishment, he should be allowed to continue in society like anyone else.........I can't see the fuss really, we all have to move forward!!!! Unless he was still a risk to society, which I believe he is not!!

There are careers that you would be barred from with a rape conviction, anything working with children and lots of legal and medical careers would be a no go it's upto society to decide which jobs you can and can't do after certain types of conviction but he must be and is allowed to work.

[Dr The Singh]

There are careers that you would be barred from with a rape conviction, anything working with children and lots of legal and medical careers would be a no go it's upto society to decide which jobs you can and can't do after certain types of conviction but he must be and is allowed to work.

So, legally he is allowed to be working as a footballer???? If so, he should be able to continue, IF he can find an employer!!

[Sir Fynwy]

So, legally he is allowed to be working as a footballer???? If so, he should be able to continue, IF he can find an employer!!

That is the current state of play

[Manwell Pablo]

I can scarcely credit what I am reading. I sincerely hope the use of the phrase 'it might be wrong to rape drunk girls' was a mistake and not a genuinely held belief.

 

A woman or man should be free to get a drunk as they jolly well wish and not have to worry that someone will sexually assault them. It nothing 'akin' to anything. The law (and one would hope morality) is very clear that being intoxicated does not imply consent.

 

Oh **** off with that, the point I was illustrating was very clear. You've done well there haven't you. 

 

One would hope morality is very clear that being wealthy does not imply you can have things taken from you......    drinking to the point where you are no longer in control leaves you in danger from numerous sources. It might not be right (oh look I've done it again) but people out there will look to exploit people who are intoxicated so therefore it is good idea not to get that drunk in the first place. 

 

You can butt out of this anyway, if your going to butt into someone else's arguement you could at least take the time to read what is being discussed,  obviously you haven't and your missing the point, that was written in response to someone saying that trying to teach a young girl not to drink so much that she can't control herself is akin to telling her she can't wear a short skirt. I am illustrating why it is not.

[Grandad.]

For what it's worth I think the bird who he apparently raped is a dickhead and I haven't got an issue with Ched returning to football.