Miss Saint Posted January 10, 2015 Report Share Posted January 10, 2015 What a lot of sanctimonious pish I'm reading on here. From some I certainly expect better of. WHAT HAPPENED TO "LET HE HATH NO SIN?" I open this rant with an unequivocal condemnation of the act the man has been accused and convicted of and would be less than enthusiastic about Evans joining Saints but the witch-hunt and death threats from certain sections of the public are, frankly, disgusting. My take on this situation in general is, and I know I won't be in the majority, that the guy did his time and, as such, is entitled to a fresh start. The fact he hasn't shown contrition is a complete red herring. He can't admit to anything as he is in the process of appealing his conviction and just may think himself innocent. I have taken the time to read the details of his trial and I was surprised that it appears that two incidents were alleged to have taken place during the period but only Evans' was deemed guilty. I find this strange and am not surprised he's appealing. In saying that, he was found guilty and that will remain the case unless or until he wins this appeal. This aside. No sane person thinks football players are true role models for living life. From the earliest who attained "superstar status" we've had Best through Gascoigne right up to the aforementioned Suarez with many in between. Freck. There was even a guy jailed for homicide allowed back onto the professional field of play. There is no excuse for not taking no for an answer. Whether it be from a young lass to someone saying can you drive after all that alcohol. Surely the law states that you are allowed to get on with your chosen path after serving your time? I accept there are certain professions where it is totally unrealistic and unacceptable for a person convicted of certain acts due to there involvement with certain sectors but, footballers? 1st bit - according to law yes but that doesn't mean that people will just forget it, there are numerous types of crimes for exp stealing money from a company you were working for - aye you could come out from that and folk would think oh he's a bad yin but he has done his time. Rape is a totally different case, it is a highly emotional crime. How would you feel if a convicted rapist started working beside a female family member or close friend? 2nd - why not footballers - football clubs may want to sign him but ultimately if the fans protest enough it isn't going to happen. We, as fans have a right to say no we aren't happy with that, we don't want a convicted rapist involved in our club. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
northendsaint Posted January 10, 2015 Report Share Posted January 10, 2015 1st bit - according to law yes but that doesn't mean that people will just forget it, there are numerous types of crimes for exp stealing money from a company you were working for - aye you could come out from that and folk would think oh he's a bad yin but he has done his time. Rape is a totally different case, it is a highly emotional crime. How would you feel if a convicted rapist started working beside a female family member or close friend? 2nd - why not footballers - football clubs may want to sign him but ultimately if the fans protest enough it isn't going to happen. We, as fans have a right to say no we aren't happy with that, we don't want a convicted rapist involved in our club. Its a real difficult one Sharon.Today we may see Goodwillie play against us.Now the taxi driver in his case said that the girl was so out of it there was no way she could have consented to sex.That in my book is rape.The fact the young woman comes across as extremely balanced and continues to fight through the civil courts for justice points toward her feelings that she was wronged and wont let it go.On the other hand Ched Evans continues to plead his innocence and the woman in questions version of accounts are not what i would call creditable.I dont know if this guys guilty or not but he just might have been convicted and served the time for a crime he did not commit.Only 2 people know the truth unfortunately and maybe a lie detector test would be welcomed in this case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted January 10, 2015 Report Share Posted January 10, 2015 Its a real difficult one Sharon.Today we may see Goodwillie play against us.Now the taxi driver in his case said that the girl was so out of it there was no way she could have consented to sex.That in my book is rape.The fact the young woman comes across as extremely balanced and continues to fight through the civil courts for justice points toward her feelings that she was wronged and wont let it go.On the other hand Ched Evans continues to plead his innocence and the woman in questions version of accounts are not what i would call creditable.I dont know if this guys guilty or not but he just might have been convicted and served the time for a crime he did not commit.Only 2 people know the truth unfortunately and maybe a lie detector test would be welcomed in this case. FFS. Now you are comparing a convicted rapist with a man who is not a convicted rapist and saying they're the same thing? As for the rest of your ramblings? WTF do you know about any of this that you haven't picked up from Ched's own website? A website BTW that he is now using to harass his victim via his devoted followers posting shite like yours all over the internet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Callum Gilhooley Posted January 10, 2015 Report Share Posted January 10, 2015 FFS. Now you are comparing a convicted rapist with a man who is not a convicted rapist and saying they're the same thing? As for the rest of your ramblings? WTF do you know about any of this that you haven't picked up from Ched's own website? A website BTW that he is now using to harass his victim via his devoted followers posting shite like yours all over the internet. Really ? You sure about that strong & unsubstantiated claim ?!? As far as i am aware , he has publicly condemned those "abusers" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ALBIONSAINT Posted January 10, 2015 Report Share Posted January 10, 2015 I've read the transcript. To what the girl said happened what Evans said happened And what judge said. In other evidence like CCTV. It's based on a technicality that she was in no fit state to agree to having sex. But. To be honest I can't remember once when anyone has. Verbally agreed to have sex with me Does anyone. Actualy ask. Can I have sex with you Really, wait till you have been married 15 years , it's more of a plead than a request ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
class of 76-77 Posted January 10, 2015 Report Share Posted January 10, 2015 At a subsequent hearing in front of three appeal court judges, including the appropriately named Lord Judge and the Lord chief justice for England and Wales. They upheld the original conviction saying " we can see no possible basis which would justify us to interfere with the verdict of the jury. This jury heard all the evidence in the appeal and rejected on it following a careful summing up by the judge. Something to ponder for the apologists. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Callum Gilhooley Posted January 10, 2015 Report Share Posted January 10, 2015 Is this OK to read Oaksoft ? http://www.spectator.co.uk/columnists/rod-liddle/9410182/the-utterly-ludicrous-and-petty-campaign-against-ched-evans/ Or is this guy a pure mad apologist for rapists also ? Btw , any chance you could supply us mere mortals a list of approved reading material for future reference? So as not to show ourselves up for the uneducated morons with limited capacity to think for ourselves you obviously have us marked as ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted January 10, 2015 Report Share Posted January 10, 2015 Really, wait till you have been married 15 years , it's more of a plead than a request ;) To be honest I can't quite get my head around the fact that he thinks it's a technicality that she was in no state to give consent. The lack of sexual education in this country is shocking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted January 10, 2015 Report Share Posted January 10, 2015 Is this OK to read Oaksoft ? http://www.spectator.co.uk/columnists/rod-liddle/9410182/the-utterly-ludicrous-and-petty-campaign-against-ched-evans/ Or is this guy a pure mad apologist for rapists also ? Btw , any chance you could supply us mere mortals a list of approved reading material for future reference? So as not to show ourselves up for the uneducated morons with limited capacity to think for ourselves you obviously have us marked as ? My advice to you and all the other "uneducated morons", is to accept the rule of law and stop reading the internet for your information. It is not possible to form opinions about this case without having been in the courtroom jury which found him guilty. That's why appeal courts are only comissioned when a legal error was made in the original trial or new evidence comes to light. You can't appeal just because you don't like the decision of the jury and fancy your chances with another 12 people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Callum Gilhooley Posted January 10, 2015 Report Share Posted January 10, 2015 My advice to you and all the other "uneducated morons", is to accept the rule of law and stop reading the internet for your information. It is not possible to form opinions about this case without having been in the courtroom jury which found him guilty. That's why appeal courts are only comissioned when a legal error was made in the original trial or new evidence comes to light. You can't appeal just because you don't like the decision of the jury and fancy your chances with another 12 people. Wow ! Brilliant So now it`s not possible to have an opinion unless you were actually AT the event concerned ! Div , shut the forum down now. The oracle has spoken ..... no-ones entitled to form an opinion . Oh Dear . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted January 10, 2015 Report Share Posted January 10, 2015 (edited) Wow ! Brilliant So now it`s not possible to have an opinion unless you were actually AT the event concerned ! Div , shut the forum down now. The oracle has spoken ..... no-ones entitled to form an opinion . Oh Dear . On a rape trial where the man was convicted and then for weeks his slavish apologists are all over cheds personal website absorbing everything the great man tells them and then trawling the internet and this forum trying to discredit the jury and the victim - all because the guy can score goals in football matches? Yeah I'd say you needed to have been in court for the full trial to claim his conviction was unsafe. You think that's unreasonable of me and that's freedom of speech for you. I think you are an uneducated moron. Edited January 10, 2015 by oaksoft Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluto Posted January 10, 2015 Report Share Posted January 10, 2015 (edited) Wow ! Brilliant So now it`s not possible to have an opinion unless you were actually AT the event concerned ! Div , shut the forum down now. The oracle has spoken ..... no-ones entitled to form an opinion . Oh Dear . I was going to point that idiocy out, but I feel I have been trying to help him out far too often and should lighten up. Edited January 10, 2015 by bluto Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluto Posted January 10, 2015 Report Share Posted January 10, 2015 (edited) On a rape trial where the man was convicted and then for weeks his slavish apologists are all over cheds personal website absorbing everything the great man tells them and then trawling the internet and this forum trying to discredit the jury and the victim - all because the guy can score goals in football matches? Yeah I'd say you needed to have been in court for the full trial to claim his conviction was unsafe. You think that's unreasonable of me and that's freedom of speech for you. I think you are an uneducated moron. And so, like the voters of Nairn, Inverness, Orkney and other places you despise, poor Calum Gilhooley is not allowed to have "an opinion". Sigh.... ETA: BTW, the final two lines in that quote was not something I added in. Oxster obviously had it in there, or is in the process of adding it.... eta again... Just checked the quote, and aye, it still shows...? Strange one... Edited January 10, 2015 by bluto Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted January 10, 2015 Report Share Posted January 10, 2015 And so, like the voters of Nairn, Inverness, Orkney and other places you despise, poor Calum Gilhooley is not allowed to have "an opinion". Sigh.... Of course he's allowed an opinion. And I'm entitled to call him an uneducated moron for expressing that particular and spectacularly stupid one. You managed to get the independence vote into a rape thread????? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RickMcD Posted January 10, 2015 Report Share Posted January 10, 2015 Its a real difficult one Sharon.Today we may see Goodwillie play against us.Now the taxi driver in his case said that the girl was so out of it there was no way she could have consented to sex.That in my book is rape.The fact the young woman comes across as extremely balanced and continues to fight through the civil courts for justice points toward her feelings that she was wronged and wont let it go.On the other hand Ched Evans continues to plead his innocence and the woman in questions version of accounts are not what i would call creditable.I dont know if this guys guilty or not but he just might have been convicted and served the time for a crime he did not commit.Only 2 people know the truth unfortunately and maybe a lie detector test would be welcomed in this case. I share some of your discomfort about this case, northendsaint. I don't normally read Oaky's verbal diarrhoea but caught his reply to you on my phone by accident. It's not worth the effort replying to him. The poor deluded soul doesn't realise there is a mountain of stuff to read about the case other than on Ched Evans's website. Your point about only two people knowing the truth is correct but there are a lot of inconsistencies connected with this case. Like you I haven't of course heard or read everything that went on in court but neither have most of the folk on here who, ignoring whether Evans is guilty or not (he is at the moment), wish to deny him the right to resume his career which in a lot of ways takes courage. It won't be an easy road for him if he gets his wish. The lie detector test would be interesting but of course it won't be accepted legally. I wonder who would refuse first. Evans or the young lady. Do you remember the case a few years back when a bloke was pardoned for a murder after spending I think it was twenty nine years in jail? Wish I could remember his name. I think he had learning difficulties but in any event after forteen or fifteen years he was told by parole officers and even the warders who looked after him that he could get out if he would only admit he did it and say sorry. He'd been through every kind of appeal and the learned judges pontificated and declared that nothing had changed and he should stay in jail. The bloke refused to admit his guilt but then something changed. DNA had arrived and it was proved quite conclusively he did not do the crime. The law can get it wrong. I'm not convinced about Evans being innocent but I'm also far from convinced about his guilt. I always thought decisions should be made only if they were beyond reasonable doubt. Was this one? I doubt it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Callum Gilhooley Posted January 10, 2015 Report Share Posted January 10, 2015 I share some of your discomfort about this case, northendsaint. I don't normally read Oaky's verbal diarrhoea but caught his reply to you on my phone by accident. It's not worth the effort replying to him. The poor deluded soul doesn't realise there is a mountain of stuff to read about the case other than on Ched Evans's website. Your point about only two people knowing the truth is correct but there are a lot of inconsistencies connected with this case. Like you I haven't of course heard or read everything that went on in court but neither have most of the folk on here who, ignoring whether Evans is guilty or not (he is at the moment), wish to deny him the right to resume his career which in a lot of ways takes courage. It won't be an easy road for him if he gets his wish. The lie detector test would be interesting but of course it won't be accepted legally. I wonder who would refuse first. Evans or the young lady. Do you remember the case a few years back when a bloke was pardoned for a murder after spending I think it was twenty nine years in jail? Wish I could remember his name. I think he had learning difficulties but in any event after forteen or fifteen years he was told by parole officers and even the warders who looked after him that he could get out if he would only admit he did it and say sorry. He'd been through every kind of appeal and the learned judges pontificated and declared that nothing had changed and he should stay in jail. The bloke refused to admit his guilt but then something changed. DNA had arrived and it was proved quite conclusively he did not do the crime. The law can get it wrong. I'm not convinced about Evans being innocent but I'm also far from convinced about his guilt. I always thought decisions should be made only if they were beyond reasonable doubt. Was this one? I doubt it. I have to point out that under the new forum rules issued by the great dictator ,you are a Moron. Welcome to the club. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Callum Gilhooley Posted January 10, 2015 Report Share Posted January 10, 2015 On a rape trial where the man was convicted and then for weeks his slavish apologists are all over cheds personal website absorbing everything the great man tells them and then trawling the internet and this forum trying to discredit the jury and the victim - all because the guy can score goals in football matches? Yeah I'd say you needed to have been in court for the full trial to claim his conviction was unsafe. You think that's unreasonable of me and that's freedom of speech for you. I think you are an uneducated moron. Gee thanks Bud Thats a step up for little ol` me ! fwiw, i dont really want to get into a slagging match . There are some on this forum who would call you silly names like prick , tosser, high & mighty wankpot .......... you get the idea. However , i shall refrain because i`m not allowed an opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RickMcD Posted January 10, 2015 Report Share Posted January 10, 2015 I have to point out that under the new forum rules issued by the great dictator ,you are a Moron. Welcome to the club. Thanks, Callum. I like being in clubs. To be fair to Oaky, he has consistently demonstrated why he should be such an expert in moronic attitude. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
northendsaint Posted January 10, 2015 Report Share Posted January 10, 2015 FFS. Now you are comparing a convicted rapist with a man who is not a convicted rapist and saying they're the same thing? As for the rest of your ramblings? WTF do you know about any of this that you haven't picked up from Ched's own website? A website BTW that he is now using to harass his victim via his devoted followers posting shite like yours all over the internet. I apologise for having an opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Pityme Posted January 10, 2015 Report Share Posted January 10, 2015 My acid test remains! Would you want to see him run out for us holding the hand of a young female mascot, especially if she were related to you..? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aldo_j Posted January 10, 2015 Report Share Posted January 10, 2015 My acid test remains! Would you want to see him run out for us holding the hand of a young female mascot, especially if she were related to you..? Don't see many 18 year old, or older, female mascots at a game. So probably not the best 'acid test', eh? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddy Posted January 10, 2015 Report Share Posted January 10, 2015 Interesting read here on the Footy Law site.... http://footylaw.co.uk/2015/01/06/ched-evans-sifting-facts-from-fiction/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Pityme Posted January 10, 2015 Report Share Posted January 10, 2015 Don't see many 18 year old, or older, female mascots at a game. So probably not the best 'acid test', eh? Its a good test for me as any player that pulls on a saints shirt i only want to be thinking of the game rather than cringing as they hold a mascots hand. None of us are angels, but surely we all want whats best for our community based club? For me that means not employing anyone on the sex offenders register as i don't want kids to be put off in any way playing for or watching the saints. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magic Monkey Posted January 10, 2015 Report Share Posted January 10, 2015 Don't see many 18 year old, or older, female mascots at a game. So probably not the best 'acid test', eh? That's not really the point. He may not be a paedophile, but I wouldn't want my daughter holding the hand of a convicted rapist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ged62 Posted January 10, 2015 Report Share Posted January 10, 2015 Can I say oak soft is just a wank?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.