Will Rollason Posted April 23, 2012 Report Share Posted April 23, 2012 Two things. She said she was too drunk to consent and remembers nothing. Why is one found guilty and the other not? They seem to have colluded throughout. Answer, jury trial.. go figure. they may have just not liked Evans. other thing- you cant just appeal a jury trail, there needs to be some problem with procedure or new evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chipdawg Posted April 24, 2012 Report Share Posted April 24, 2012 Two things. She said she was too drunk to consent and remembers nothing. Why is one found guilty and the other not? They seem to have colluded throughout. Answer, jury trial.. go figure. they may have just not liked Evans. other thing- you cant just appeal a jury trail, there needs to be some problem with procedure or new evidence. That's not true; you can appeal any Crown Court decision within 28 days of conviction as long as you have a certificate of leave to do so from either the trial judge or (if he refuses) the Court of Appeal itself. There would need to be some kind of reason, i.e. Irrefutable DNA evidence, for an appeal not to be granted but as the question here was consent not the act itself, I doubt that would exist. From there only a procedural or evedential issue can lead to a retrial/quashing. I bet there will at least be an appeal against the sentence Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CotswoldRed Posted April 24, 2012 Report Share Posted April 24, 2012 Let him without sin cast the first stone,has every girl that you have had sex with said yes and been sober ? Oh dear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ciderincornwall Posted April 24, 2012 Report Share Posted April 24, 2012 Let him without sin cast the first stone,has every girl that you have had sex with said yes and been sober ? Are you for real? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan Tansley Posted April 24, 2012 Report Share Posted April 24, 2012 Going by this thread, I think I've been the victim of rape. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CotswoldRed Posted April 24, 2012 Report Share Posted April 24, 2012 Going by this thread, I think I've been the victim of rape. If I went to the police my missus would be in a spot of bother too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red-Robbo Posted April 24, 2012 Report Share Posted April 24, 2012 Two things. She said she was too drunk to consent and remembers nothing. Why is one found guilty and the other not? They seem to have colluded throughout. Answer, jury trial.. go figure. they may have just not liked Evans. other thing- you cant just appeal a jury trail, there needs to be some problem with procedure or new evidence. I think the reasoning is she went willingly into the room with McDonald. Obviously compos mentis enough to put one foot in front of another. Evans came into the sordid little scene when she was sparko on the bed. Both are obviously vile - as are the other blokes who were watching from outside - but the jury must've thought the fact she went there seemingly of her own free will with McDonald casts doubts as to whether she consented or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foghornred Posted April 24, 2012 Report Share Posted April 24, 2012 If she was not able to to give consent how come his mate was acquitted ? Have none of you had a one night stand with someone you met on a night who had had a drink ? I know that I have slept with a few that I would not have sober,so have I been raped ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dollymarie Posted April 24, 2012 Report Share Posted April 24, 2012 If she was not able to to give consent how come his mate was acquitted ? Have none of you had a one night stand with Read the post above your one by red-robbo, thats more than likely the reason why. And as for the jokes about "maybe you've been raped", just leave it. Rape against anyone, man or woman is just never funny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esmond Million's Bung Posted April 24, 2012 Report Share Posted April 24, 2012 Apart from the blokeish 'there but for the for the grace of god'/'she was asking for it', what I also love about this thread is that somehow a jury of 12 people have got it wrong are these the same people that will be up in arms if jury trials are abolished in favour of trial by judges?. Bearing in mind that at the moment most suppressed evidence is prosecution evidence, because it maybe prejudicial to the defendant, in a case with only judges there will no evidence suppressed the judges will see it all and also be aware of the defendants criminal past. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redcliffe 78 Posted April 25, 2012 Report Share Posted April 25, 2012 Been confirmed that he has appealed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chivs Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 I'd appreciate it if people could sign the following petition that asks the PFA to remove his name from their list of "football team of the year". It's simply staggering that the PFA can't see how wrong this is. http://www.change.org/petitions/professional-footballers-association-drop-ched-evans-from-the-league-one-team-of-the-year-honours-list Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dollymarie Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 Done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will Rollason Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 That's not true; you can appeal any Crown Court decision within 28 days of conviction as long as you have a certificate of leave to do so from either the trial judge or (if he refuses) the Court of Appeal itself. There would need to be some kind of reason, i.e. Irrefutable DNA evidence, for an appeal not to be granted but as the question here was consent not the act itself, I doubt that would exist. From there only a procedural or evedential issue can lead to a retrial/quashing. I bet there will at least be an appeal against the sentence Sure but that does not mean his appeal will be granted. As i said there needs to be some kind of reason that the court of appeal would consider valid i.e new evidence or a procedural problem or something in the summing up etc. What i meant to say is that he cant just ask for an appeal because he doesn't like the outcome, thats the way our system of jury trials works if you elect to be judged by your peers you have to put up with it. Saying that there will probably be grounds for an appeal, .... but it does seem very odd that both of them were not convicted, again the vagaries of our jury system, and thats not just my opinion but that of a criminal defence solicitor of over 25 yrs standing who shall remain nameless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red-Robbo Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 , .... but it does seem very odd that both of them were not convicted, again the vagaries of our jury system, and thats not just my opinion but that of a criminal defence solicitor of over 25 yrs standing who shall remain nameless. As I said earlier, in one case she went (apparently) willingly with the Port Vale bloke into a bedroom, in the second man's (Evans) case, he turned up when she was sparko. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simonwheeler Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 I'd appreciate it if people could sign the following petition that asks the PFA to remove his name from their list of "football team of the year". It's simply staggering that the PFA can't see how wrong this is. http://www.change.or...ar-honours-list Done here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_Bristol-City_ Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 Why is it wrong? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dollymarie Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 Why is it wrong? You have to ask? Because he's a convicted rapist? Dearie me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M_Porter Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 Done and shared Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M_Porter Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 Why is it wrong? I appreciate its Sat night but you cant get pissed enough not to be able to see that this is wrong how can you say its ok to have a RAPIST in the team of the year ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BITW Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 Yeah he's a rapist and that's why he's about to do a deserved stretch inside. Doesn't change the fact he's one of the best players in league one. What difference does it make if he's in the team of the year or not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tins Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 Yeah he's a rapist and that's why he's about to do a deserved stretch inside. Doesn't change the fact he's one of the best players in league one. What difference does it make if he's in the team of the year or not? +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wayne allisons tongues Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 Isn't he in the team of the year due to his performances on the pitch. Surely if you take people's backgrounds into account then there's endless players who wouldn't be in team of the year in all divisions over the years. What he did was wrong but voting was done end of January so no one knew what was going to happen to him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRL Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 Yeah he's a rapist and that's why he's about to do a deserved stretch inside. Doesn't change the fact he's one of the best players in league one. What difference does it make if he's in the team of the year or not? I think it is society that dictates that you should not reward people who do bad things. For some reason people will think he is a role model that youngsters may copy. For me, as he has now been convicted, that is it, he is a criminal, a rapist. That will be with him forever, I very much doubts he cares about this honour now. History will see him as a rapist, not in the team of the year for div 1 in 2012. You cannot expunge his goal scoring history from the record books, so he should stay in the team of the year. To be honest, i couldn't even tell you who was in the Div 1 team of the year last year! in 5 years, 10 year 15 years 20 years. Ched Evans will not be remembered for being a footballer, but for being a rapist footballer, he will be on the sex offenders register, that is pretty much his career and some extent his life over, he will be stigmatised for ever. Removing his award will not make one iota of difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BITW Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 I think it is society that dictates that you should not reward people who do bad things. For some reason people will think he is a role model that youngsters may copy. For me, as he has now been convicted, that is it, he is a criminal, a rapist. That will be with him forever, I very much doubts he cares about this honour now. History will see him as a rapist, not in the team of the year for div 1 in 2012. You cannot expunge his goal scoring history from the record books, so he should stay in the team of the year. To be honest, i couldn't even tell you who was in the Div 1 team of the year last year! in 5 years, 10 year 15 years 20 years. Ched Evans will not be remembered for being a footballer, but for being a rapist footballer, he will be on the sex offenders register, that is pretty much his career and some extent his life over, he will be stigmatised for ever. Removing his award will not make one iota of difference. Agreed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_Bristol-City_ Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 My post was totally justified, you're all forgetting that award is for what he does ON THE PITCH. Marlon King is a convicted rapist, if he was picked for team of the year we wouldn't be moaning. Ched Evans is scum, and deserves the two and a half years he'll serve. However he fully deserves his team of the year award. He's been brilliant all year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRL Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 My post was totally justified, you're all forgetting that award is for what he does ON THE PITCH. Marlon King is a convicted rapist, if he was picked for team of the year we wouldn't be moaning. Ched Evans is scum, and deserves the two and a half years he'll serve. However he fully deserves his team of the year award. He's been brilliant all year. Oh you can be sure we would all be moaning if King was in it. Most people hate that bloke Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adge's Cider Mug Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 You have to ask? Because he's a convicted rapist? Dearie me Let's not forget, he's a convicted rapist who may win an appeal and will not, therefore, be a rapist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRL Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 Let's not forget, he's a convicted rapist who may win an appeal and will not, therefore, be a rapist. I doubt he will win his appeal, evidence must be pretty damning, as rape convictions normally get thrown out. I will be interested on peoples opinions on him if found not guilty on appeal! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dollymarie Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 Marlon King is a convicted rapist, if he was picked for team of the year we wouldn't be moaning. I would, and have, everytime he's been at the Gate. Let's not forget, he's a convicted rapist who may win an appeal and will not, therefore, be a rapist. He's still a rapist at the moment. Where does the line get drawn? If he'd murdered someone should he win any award, how about if he abused a child. A conviction is a conviction, and for that he shouldn't have won a thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.