Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
billymehmet1

Ched Evans

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, rabuddies said:

(Faraway, you're far away. Today's press have roasted him for his treatment of women even going as far as to call him a "scumball". The court is also coming under severe scrutiny for allowing the girl's sex life to be discussed in open court. I take you don't have a daughter.

I do have a daughter, what is that to do with this case?

FFS.

Have I said this guy is an angel?

All I am saying that he's been proved innocent (or not guilty) in this case and, if you looked into this in detail, you will find both parties, him and the "girl", leave a lot to be desired as humans.

Now, if people had him guilty all along, and the press are now all over it, that's their prerogative but it's always funny that the press who, as a whole, are seen as lowlife, then seem to be taken as the holders of morality.

 

Edited by faraway saint

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, zurich_allan said:

There are one or two very minor details that I'd personally edit or express a little differently, but this does a pretty good job of explaining the truth of the matter.

https://thesecretbarrister.com/2016/10/14/10-myths-busted-about-the-ched-evans-case/

Very interesting a enlightening.

I like the "secret barristers" view on the point below................

A special mention goes to comments this evening from End Violence Against Women: “We are very concerned at the precedent which might have been set in this case for allowing sexual history of complainants to be admissible evidence.” Allow me to help: The precedent that has been set is none. The Court of Appeal decision sets down no new application of law or principle, and section 41 continues to operate exactly as it did before, excluding the vast, vast majority of questions about previous sexual behaviour. But good job on needlessly terrifying the women you claim to support. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great news for Ched , justice at last. Shame on all the public figures who condemned him over the years without considering what really could have happened. They should all be made to queue up and kiss his feet , Ennis-Hall included !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, rabuddies said:

Faraway, you're far away. Today's press have roasted him for his treatment of women even going as far as to call him a "scumball". The court is also coming under severe scrutiny for allowing the girl's sex life to be discussed in open court. I take you don't have a daughter.

Rabuddies.... You're better than that!

The Press should NEVER be used  to support better treatment of women and/or punishment of male transgressors.  Very few newspapers are responsible about depiction of women and girls and they don't encourage healthy respect for them either.  

Even the right-wing, trashy publications (and their websites) publish lewd or raunchy images of women, and it's ALWAYS schoolgirls celebrating exam results NEVER boys that we see.  Daily mail and express websites all have exploitative images and links.

they create illusory scenarios that creeps like Evans think allows them to treat other humans as sex objects.

Desmond, publisher of the Mail has links to his porn kingdom.  What Evans did, is probably a regular plot line in the poison Desmond publishes.  Porn normalises such scum actions.

iirc - it was never initially the girl alleging rape.  It was a misconceived prosecution by the authorities.  The girl's rep has been trashed by people who perhaps should have known better.

it has shown no one in a good light.  It has titillated a willing public.

 

eta just read ZA's useful link.  Ta. :)

the writer does the nail-on-head thing

(and reminded me of the case background... That I'd prefer to forget....)

Edited by antrin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Unfortunately for you the court came to the conclusion he was innocent.

Are you saying he isn't and what are you basing your view that this has set back women's rights in rape cases decades?

I love when people just simply, apt in this case, won't accept the final decision.

A bit like the referendum.
 

 


It's not unfortunate for me and they didn't find him innocent, they found him not guilty. It's a classic 'not proven' and as others have alluded to based on a 50k reward to new witnesses.

There is currently a 3% conviction rate for rape. The decision by the judge to allow previous partners who she had consensual sex with to give evidence is very worrying and isn't going to encourage women who are already unlikely to report.
It also appears to have been based on her using the term 'f**k me harder' with previous partners.


You seem to have the view that a decision is only final when it is one that you agree with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, rabuddies said:

Faraway, you're far away. Today's press have roasted him for his treatment of women even going as far as to call him a "scumball". The court is also coming under severe scrutiny for allowing the girl's sex life to be discussed in open court. I take you don't have a daughter.

And what paragons of virtue they are.:rolleyes:

It's not as if they've ever hounded anyone that's been proven not guilty..........................

He may well not be a very nice person, but he's been found not guilty by a court of law and should not have been in jail.

 

Edited by FTOF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Really?

She wasn't raped. 

I've no concerns about woman's rights as I do believe the jury, which the majority was female came to the correct decision. 

It's more concerning that this type of sexual behaviour is considered pretty normal to the youth of today. 


What type of sexual behaviour do you mean?
The woman in this case, went back to a hotel room with 1 man. Another man obtained keys to enter the room and 2 more men attempted to film what was happening.
She claims she didn't give consent.

BTW, anecdotal evidence shows that female jury members are harder to convince in cases of sexual assault.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And what paragons of virtue they are.:rolleyes:

It's not as if they've ever hounded anyone that's been proven not guilty..........................

He may well not be a very nice person, but he's been proven not guilty by a court of law and should not have been in jail.

 




He wasnt "proven not guilty" as that is impossible under the circumstances.

He was found not guilty.

Language is important in a case like this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I read the girl in question didn't claim she was raped - she said that she couldn't remember. The CPS thought this was enough to proceed with.

The Secret Barrister article was very good and looking back at some of the acts we studied when i did my law degree the section 41 exceptions are pretty standard across various types of legislation (i.e along the lines of where actions or information normally excluded will be allowed as they are key to the case and so similar/relevant as to be beyond coincidental). So the hysteria about a 'precedent' being set is legally incorrect as a precedent is a NEW and binding legal position (for inferior courts in similar cases) set by a judge in his/her ruling - and NOT the standard application of an established point of law as per this case. Due the importance of the situations where real precedents are being set this is a very unfortunate and misleading media outburst.

BTW - I'm NOT claiming to be a lawyer or an expert - I just find the law interesting.

Also BTW - rapists are scum and should be left to rot in jail - but only after the completion of the full legal process - which in theory is meant to protect everyone - accused and accuser alike. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Think the whole thing looks questionable at least. Evans defence and PR campaign funded by girlfriend's millionaire family.  Witnesses suddenly come up with more detailed evidence that corroborates what Evans said, https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/oct/14/campaigners-fear-evans-case-will-stop-women-reporting

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, tony soprano said:


It's not unfortunate for me and they didn't find him innocent, they found him not guilty. It's a classic 'not proven' and as others have alluded to based on a 50k reward to new witnesses.

There is currently a 3% conviction rate for rape. The decision by the judge to allow previous partners who she had consensual sex with to give evidence is very worrying and isn't going to encourage women who are already unlikely to report.
It also appears to have been based on her using the term 'f**k me harder' with previous partners.


You seem to have the view that a decision is only final when it is one that you agree with.

He was found not guilty which is not the same as not proven and the jury given the task of coming to a decision took less than 3 hours to do so .

 

Screenshot_20161015-140730.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, tony soprano said:


It's not unfortunate for me and they didn't find him innocent, they found him not guilty. It's a classic 'not proven' and as others have alluded to based on a 50k reward to new witnesses.

There is currently a 3% conviction rate for rape. The decision by the judge to allow previous partners who she had consensual sex with to give evidence is very worrying and isn't going to encourage women who are already unlikely to report.
It also appears to have been based on her using the term 'f**k me harder' with previous partners.


You seem to have the view that a decision is only final when it is one that you agree with.

Not proven.................sorry, missed that. :1eye

On the contrary, I accept a courts decision as I don't think I know better, seemingly you do. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He was found not guilty which is not the same as not proven and the jury given the task of coming to a decision took less than 3 hours to do so .

 

Screenshot_20161015-140730.png


My point being there wasn't enough evidence to prove, esp given there was Evans and 3 of his mates against one woman.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, tony soprano said:


My point being there wasn't enough evidence to prove, esp given there was Evans and 3 of his mates against one woman.

Before you shoot me done with my next comment i agree that in genuine rape cases there is not enough done to protect the victim be it male or female. A jury of our peers took less than 3 hours to come to their decision which would have had a mix of male and female jurors who would have been privvy to the initial trial information. The guy (WHO I neither like or dislike) has always maintained his innocence and on the face of it he has got some sort of morality back given the vilification and condemnation from the previous trial and decision but for me on the other foot there are then many people that are dragged through hell whem someone feigns rape and makes false accusations thus dragging innocent families through hell 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...