alexukhc Posted November 20, 2014 Report Share Posted November 20, 2014 I don't agree with what he did, I also believe someone like him shouldn't be in the game, but there are other criminals in the game who have killed and shouldn't be playing, Sheffield United did the right thing, I'm very sure he will find a club and sadly in a couple years this will all be forgotten. Whoever mentioned Blackpool is probs right, just look at what Karl Oyston's dad has done in his life and how long he's spent behind bars, saying he was innocent too and all set up, very very sad man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AshtonGreat Posted November 20, 2014 Report Share Posted November 20, 2014 Well a rapist is pretty much that. There's a marked difference between what he did and what someone who drags a random woman into a bush does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admin phantom Posted November 20, 2014 Admin Report Share Posted November 20, 2014 There's a marked difference between what he did and what someone who drags a random woman into a bush does. Without wanting to sound like Judy Finnigan, surely rape is rape? Have no sympathy at all, there are many of us that would not be re-employed for lesser things! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dollymarie Posted November 20, 2014 Report Share Posted November 20, 2014 There's a marked difference between what he did and what someone who drags a random woman into a bush does. No there isn't. As Phantom said, rape is rape. Evans victim was as unable to consent to sex as a random woman dragged into a bush would be. The courts decided that. We're going round in circles here. He's been found guilty, still guilty after 2 appeals and he and anyone even slightly defending him for any reason needs to accept that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dezgimed Posted November 20, 2014 Report Share Posted November 20, 2014 No there isn't. As Phantom said, rape is rape. You don't believe in the difference between manslaughter and murder then I take it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dollymarie Posted November 20, 2014 Report Share Posted November 20, 2014 You don't believe in the difference between manslaughter and murder then I take it? They're two different crimes, so you can't make the comparison. He didn't go into the hotel room for tea and cakes, he went in there for sex, his victim was unable to give consent to that act, therefore he was found guilty of the crime he was convicted of. Again, going round in circles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AshtonGreat Posted November 20, 2014 Report Share Posted November 20, 2014 No there isn't. As Phantom said, rape is rape. Evans victim was as unable to consent to sex as a random woman dragged into a bush would be. The courts decided that. We're going round in circles here. He's been found guilty, still guilty after 2 appeals and he and anyone even slightly defending him for any reason needs to accept that. No mate, his crime really does not even compare to someone who drags a random woman into a bush. That's absurd. It's easy to get carried away by media sensationalism but believe me, cases like this happen up and down the country every single weekend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dezgimed Posted November 20, 2014 Report Share Posted November 20, 2014 They're two different crimes, so you can't make the comparison. He didn't go into the hotel room for tea and cakes, he went in there for sex, his victim was unable to give consent to that act, therefore he was found guilty of the crime he was convicted of. Again, going round in circles. Sorry I don't agree. He is clearly a dumbass but he wouldn't go and rape a woman on purpose. He BELIEVED he had consent. It is nothing like him deciding to go forcefully rape someone in a side street or a park etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dollymarie Posted November 20, 2014 Report Share Posted November 20, 2014 No mate, his crime really does not even compare to someone who drags a random woman into a bush. That's absurd. It's easy to get carried away by media sensationalism but believe me, cases like this happen up and down the country every single weekend. I'm not your mate. Rape is rape, and the one thing this case will have hopefully highlighted to people is the fact that consent to sex CANNOT be given if the other person is not in a fit state to do so, in the same way that a girl under the age of 16 might willingly want to sleep with her boyfriend but in the eyes of the law, she is unable to give consent and therefore IT IS RAPE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dollymarie Posted November 20, 2014 Report Share Posted November 20, 2014 Sorry I don't agree. He is clearly a dumbass but he wouldn't go and rape a woman on purpose. He BELIEVED he had consent. It is nothing like him deciding to go forcefully rape someone in a side street or a park etc. You can't accidentally rape someone. It's rape, that's the conviction he got. There aren't varying degrees of it, just rape. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ten minutes of rough Posted November 20, 2014 Report Share Posted November 20, 2014 There's a marked difference between what he did and what someone who drags a random woman into a bush does. There is a difference in circumstance, but the end result is rape, please put a sock in it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dezgimed Posted November 20, 2014 Report Share Posted November 20, 2014 You can't accidentally rape someone. It's rape, that's the conviction he got. There aren't varying degrees of it, just rape. Dolly if I pull a girl in town, go back to her house, both drunk, we have sex, then the next morning she cries rape as she was drunk. That is very much an accident I assure you. I expect it happens alot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ten minutes of rough Posted November 20, 2014 Report Share Posted November 20, 2014 Sorry I don't agree. He is clearly a dumbass but he wouldn't go and rape a woman on purpose. He BELIEVED he had consent. It is nothing like him deciding to go forcefully rape someone in a side street or a park etc. Are you for real? You are speaking of him as you know he is telling the truth as in..''He Believed he had consent he is just a dumbass, and wouldn't rape a woman on purpose'' However a Jury did not believe him and he is now a convicted rapist, sorry if that is the inconvenient truth for you and AG but get over it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AshtonGreat Posted November 20, 2014 Report Share Posted November 20, 2014 Sorry I don't agree. He is clearly a dumbass but he wouldn't go and rape a woman on purpose. He BELIEVED he had consent. It is nothing like him deciding to go forcefully rape someone in a side street or a park etc. Yep Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dollymarie Posted November 20, 2014 Report Share Posted November 20, 2014 Dolly if I pull a girl in town, go back to her house, both drunk, we have sex, then the next morning she cries rape as she was drunk. That is very much an accident I assure you. I expect it happens alot. But that's my point. If she is unable to give consent due to the influence of drugs and/or alcohol then you have by the letter of the law raped her, and that's what you and many others it seems need to wake up and realise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dezgimed Posted November 20, 2014 Report Share Posted November 20, 2014 Are you for real? You are speaking of him as you know he is telling the truth as in..''He Believed he had consent he is just a dumbass, and wouldn't rape a woman on purpose'' However a Jury did not believe him and he is now a convicted rapist, sorry if that is the inconvenient truth for you and AG but get over it. Ironic stance given your username! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ten minutes of rough Posted November 20, 2014 Report Share Posted November 20, 2014 Dolly if I pull a girl in town, go back to her house, both drunk, we have sex, then the next morning she cries rape as she was drunk. That is very much an accident I assure you. I expect it happens alot. Come off it are you telling us you were so drunk and yet you could perform sex and not able to consider the girl was consenting, BS and you know it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dezgimed Posted November 20, 2014 Report Share Posted November 20, 2014 But that's my point. If she is unable to give consent due to the influence of drugs and/or alcohol then you have by the letter of the law raped her, and that's what you and many others it seems need to wake up and realise. But neither of us know what happened in that room? She may have just got on with it and then decided in the morning she didnt approve. We dont know, and neither does the jury I'm afraid. It's just siding on the side of the woman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dezgimed Posted November 20, 2014 Report Share Posted November 20, 2014 Come off it are you telling us you were so drunk and yet you could perform sex and not able to consider the girl was consenting, BS and you know it. It was a hypothetical scenario. I can't even understand what you're trying to say. You'll have to rephrase. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AshtonGreat Posted November 20, 2014 Report Share Posted November 20, 2014 But that's my point. If she is unable to give consent due to the influence of drugs and/or alcohol then you have by the letter of the law raped her, and that's what you and many others it seems need to wake up and realise. That's assuming he knew how inebriated she was? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dollymarie Posted November 20, 2014 Report Share Posted November 20, 2014 But neither of us know what happened in that room? She may have just got on with it and then decided in the morning she didnt approve. We dont know, and neither does the jury I'm afraid. It's just siding on the side of the woman. That's up to the courts to decide when they hear all the evidence. In this case it meant a guilty verdict. It's not siding with the woman. It's sticking to what the law says about ability to consent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ten minutes of rough Posted November 20, 2014 Report Share Posted November 20, 2014 Ironic stance given your username Got nothing to do with Avatar, but if you were a bit clued up you would know it was an old east tend shout out .Just think of your foolish statements regarding the rape of a woman, and please don't think that your pissed up condition would make it OK and just a mistake. You might want to reconsider and grow up a bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dezgimed Posted November 20, 2014 Report Share Posted November 20, 2014 Got nothing to do with Avatar, but if you were a bit clued up you would know it was an old east tend shout out .Just think of your foolish statements regarding the rape of a woman, and please don't think that your pissed up condition would make it OK and just a mistake. You might want to reconsider and grow up a bit. Sorry I am not clued up about the old East End shout out, please accept my apologies. Didn't mention your avatar. Learn to read. Please do not patronise me, thousands of young folk will do as I described every single weekend (you might have but I get the impression you are a bit too nerdy), and 99% of them arent rapists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AshtonGreat Posted November 20, 2014 Report Share Posted November 20, 2014 That's up to the courts to decide when they hear all the evidence. In this case it meant a guilty verdict. It's not siding with the woman. It's sticking to what the law says about ability to consent. If someone deliberately takes advantage of an inebriated girl and has sex with her, that's disgusting and I do not condone that in any way. If that's indeed what happened in this case, then he deserves what he got. But I believe that society is on very thin ice if every time a woman gets drunk and a man has sex with her (when he might well be pretty inebriated himself), his whole life should be destroyed because he is now a 'sex beast' and can never work again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ten minutes of rough Posted November 20, 2014 Report Share Posted November 20, 2014 Sorry I am not clued up about the old East End shout out, please accept my apologies. Didn't mention your avatar. Learn to read. Please do not patronise me, thousands of young folk will do as I described every single weekend (you might have but I get the impression you are a bit too nerdy), and 99% of them arent rapists. Nerdy me? Do me a favour, I have been in more scrapes then I care to mention and been in similar predicaments but I can tell you one thing that if you can have sex with a woman then you will know if she has made consent, so don't give me the old flannel, and putting the blame on the female. The Avatar and sig is much the same thing when describing it, don't have to be a nerd to understand that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dezgimed Posted November 20, 2014 Report Share Posted November 20, 2014 Nerdy me? Do me a favour, I have been in more scrapes then I care to mention and been in similar predicaments but I can tell you one thing that if you can have sex with a woman then you will know if she has made consent, so don't give me the old flannel, and putting the blame on the female. The Avatar and sig is much the same thing when describing it, don't have to be a nerd to understand that. But I'm talkin about you going back with a girl after a night out as an example, I'm not referring to the Evans case. You got me wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ten minutes of rough Posted November 20, 2014 Report Share Posted November 20, 2014 If someone deliberately takes advantage of an inebriated girl and has sex with her, that's disgusting and I do not condone that in any way. If that's indeed what happened in this case, then he deserves what he got. But I believe that society is on very thin ice if every time a woman gets drunk and a man has sex with her (when he might well be pretty inebriated himself), his whole life should be destroyed because he is now a 'sex beast' and can never work again. Well at least you toned it down a bit....but as I said without putting too finer point on it a man has to perform a woman can be drunk and not really understand the consequences, and therefore it is not consent. Many men I fear take advantage of this, as perfectly illustrated on here. It is Rape in the eyes of the law, beware. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ten minutes of rough Posted November 20, 2014 Report Share Posted November 20, 2014 But I'm talkin about you going back with a girl after a night out as an example, I'm not referring to the Evans case. You got me wrong. You said that she may have just got on with it a decided in the morning it was rape. Where did I get it wrong to challenge you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dezgimed Posted November 20, 2014 Report Share Posted November 20, 2014 You said that she may have just got on with it a decided in the morning it was rape. Where did I get it wrong to challenge you? She may have...no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarcusX Posted November 20, 2014 Report Share Posted November 20, 2014 What is the objection to football fans voicing an opinion that they don't want sex-offenders in football? It's not a question I thought I'd ever need to ask, but I obviously do. How the verdict overcame the 'one word against another' problem in this case was the witnesses and CCTV which all confirm that the girl was extremely drunk, unstable and falling all over the place - or 'absolutely cnuted' using my terminology. In reality, she was only 2 1/2 times over the drink driving limit so, again in my terminology, must be a 'bit of a lightweight'. She wakes up naked in a pool of her own piss (how common is that for people being able to make consent the night before?), in an unfamiliar hotel, claiming no recollection of the previous nights events and makes a report to the police. The difference, I'm guessing, between Evans an matey from Port Vale are in her actions. She voluntarily got in a taxi back to a hotel, it was a sequential process. Rent-a-shag, hearing the good news, makes haste and is brought before her as a favour from a mate. I guess to try and summarise this is that there can't be one word against another as one has no recollection of what happened and by the same issue, rape is the verdict. Must say, there does seem grey area between her memory an her ability to make a decision at the time - but to black out from booze and have no recollection of what you have done is not uncommon, especially when you are 19 The judge ruled though, that he must have known she was too pissed to give consent. The hardest part about discussing these subjects is some people are so opinionated yet either don't actually know what happened (I appreciate none of us know everything the jury does, but at least familiarise yourself with the facts that are in the public domain first) or chose to exaggerate to gain effect. Iv quoted yours, as there's a few points you got wrong, but there are so many throughout this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.