samo II Posted January 9, 2015 Report Share Posted January 9, 2015 If they'd made the decision purely on the toxicology report, I'd share your concern. Given that there's no evidence that they made the decision based on the toxicology report alone, I'm not really sure where you've plucked this out from. As you say she "could" have done all number of things. But I still find it interesting how people feel the need to conjecture reasons why women who accuse men of rape might be wrong or mistaken, far more so than they would if someone reported a burglary or a physical assault. Yeah; far too many come over as far too desperate to 'normalise' his behaviour. Nothing about the available information about his approach to the situation makes me think HE'S not lying. He was willing to cheat on his girlfriend; how many on here think he'd have told her if he hadn't been caught? He's not someone, via this action alone, I'd class as a reliable, yet everyone seems to take as given that he obtained consent to sleep with the victim. Perhaps he's not considered that being an unfaithful scumbag might mean people also see you as a dishonest scumbag? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonBristolian Posted January 9, 2015 Report Share Posted January 9, 2015 Yeah; far too many come over as far too desperate to 'normalise' his behaviour. Nothing about the available information about his approach to the situation makes me think HE'S not lying. He was willing to cheat on his girlfriend; how many on here think he'd have told her if he hadn't been caught? He's not someone, via this action alone, I'd class as a reliable, yet everyone seems to take as given that he obtained consent to sleep with the victim. Perhaps he's not considered that being an unfaithful scumbag might mean people also see you as a dishonest scumbag? To be honest, even if he's telling the truth, his account still sounds like he might well have raped her but simply not understand what the definition of rape is. It sounds quite a lot like he took it for granted she's consent 'cos, hey, he's Ched Evans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonBristolian Posted January 9, 2015 Report Share Posted January 9, 2015 Probably worded badly, I'm trying to say that the jury have decided she was too drunk based on how much alcohol was in her system, short snippets of CCTV and her lack of memory. The point is the haven't said she didn't consent, they have simply taken the power to make that decision away from her based on how drunk she was (rightly or wrongly). I would suggest you need to know someone on a personal level to know how they handle their drink (and drugs). You can also argue that some nights it's possible to drink a substantial amount and feel fine, remember everything, do nothing stupid and yet other nights drink considerably less yet react worse to it. As for the rest of your point, I can't comment on that because i don't really make a habit of questioning any particular type of crime - if I had an opinion I would base it on each individual situation. Sure - but the victim (who presumably does know herself on personal level and knows how she handles her drink and drugs) said afterwards she does not think she was in a state to consent. They've not taken the power to make the decision away from her - they've agreed with her analysis of the state she was in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AshtonGreat Posted January 9, 2015 Report Share Posted January 9, 2015 Sure - but the victim (who presumably does know herself on personal level and knows how she handles her drink and drugs) said afterwards she does not think she was in a state to consent. They've not taken the power to make the decision away from her - they've agreed with her analysis of the state she was in. I thought I read that she told police she was tipsy but not out of control? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samo II Posted January 9, 2015 Report Share Posted January 9, 2015 To be honest, even if he's telling the truth, his account still sounds like he might well have raped her but simply not understand what the definition of rape is. It sounds quite a lot like he took it for granted she's consent 'cos, hey, he's Ched Evans. Yep. Though the fact he's Ched Evans: football player seems enough for strangers to defend him, so go figure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samo II Posted January 9, 2015 Report Share Posted January 9, 2015 I thought I read that she told police she was tipsy but not out of control? Whatever she said, the judge and jury will have heard it, along with any resulting argument from the two sides in the court case. And after that, and all the other evidence, and the arguments from the defence that I imagine were as expensive a legal team as the very wealthy Mr Evans could afford, he was found guilty, beyond reasonable doubt, as is the standard. It's not like she just told a copper something so they slung Evans in jail, is it? Not directed at you personally, but so much of the 'counter argument' for all this comes over like people think it's a schoolyard where one kid is saying the other bit him to a teacher who has to make their mind up then and there. It's a process, and it only gets to that process once the cops put together a case the crown believe will succeed (and they are mighty picky about that). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AshtonGreat Posted January 9, 2015 Report Share Posted January 9, 2015 Whatever she said, the judge and jury will have heard it, along with any resulting argument from the two sides in the court case. And after that, and all the other evidence, and the arguments from the defence that I imagine were as expensive a legal team as the very wealthy Mr Evans could afford, he was found guilty, beyond reasonable doubt, as is the standard. It's not like she just told a copper something so they slung Evans in jail, is it? Not directed at you personally, but so much of the 'counter argument' for all this comes over like people think it's a schoolyard where one kid is saying the other bit him to a teacher who has to make their mind up then and there. It's a process, and it only gets to that process once the cops put together a case the crown believe will succeed (and they are mighty picky about that). Again, I don't take it personally. And believe me, I consider rape to be one of the most heinous crimes possible. I believe anyone who deliberately has sex with a woman without her consent should be hung by their whatsits, never mind getting a five-year sentence. But there are elements about this case that leave me uncertain (I stress 'uncertain' - ie I am not saying Ched Evans is innocent), which is why I'm uncomfortable with the subsequent hysteria. I appreciate that I wasn't on the jury, therefore my opinion is basically worthless. But hey, we're all entitled to an opinion right? :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 9, 2015 Report Share Posted January 9, 2015 To be honest, even if he's telling the truth, his account still sounds like he might well have raped her but simply not understand what the definition of rape is. It sounds quite a lot like he took it for granted she's consent 'cos, hey, he's Ched Evans. He should be asking himself this: Do I understand why I was convicted? To put it another way: He should put himself in this woman's shoes. She's woken up in the morning and has that sick feeling in her stomach that she's done, or had something done to her but she can't remember - she hope it's nothing. She retraces her steps in the hope that it's nothing. And then she finds out, like some badge of honour, two fellas have taken advantage of her. This is all supposition and I can't possibly know that this was the case, however Ched has now gone from using a shovel for digging his hole to using a JCB. This was not a swingers party where everyone goes to a place knowing full well what is about to take place. It appears that Ched, and bear in mind he was supposed to have had mates trying to video this at the window, which to a certain extent demonstrates his intent to have sex (it would appear that he's already assumed that she's up for it) with this woman, and no matter how he wraps this up, it appears that he has taken advantage of this woman because she was pissed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
054123 Posted January 9, 2015 Report Share Posted January 9, 2015 This Ched Evans needs to be punished in some way seen appropriate by all those who live in this country and abide by its laws rather thsn succumbing to mob rule. I would propose that he stand trial in a court of law and be tried by a judge and a jury of his peers. If he's found guilty he will be punished in accordance with the laws of this land and then once served we can all get on with our lives, haply that a process that we all live by, has been followed.. When will the powers that be see sense and follow this corner stone of our justice system?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
054123 Posted January 9, 2015 Report Share Posted January 9, 2015 He should be asking himself this: Do I understand why I was convicted? To put it another way: He should put himself in this woman's shoes. She's woken up in the morning and has that sick feeling in her stomach that she's done, or had something done to her but she can't remember - she hope it's nothing. She retraces her steps in the hope that it's nothing. And then she finds out, like some badge of honour, two fellas have taken advantage of her. This is all supposition and I can't possibly know that this was the case, however Ched has now gone from using a shovel for digging his hole to using a JCB. This was not a swingers party where everyone goes to a place knowing full well what is about to take place. It appears that Ched, and bear in mind he was supposed to have had mates trying to video this at the window, which to a certain extent demonstrates his intent to have sex (it would appear that he's already assumed that she's up for it) with this woman, and no matter how he wraps this up, it appears that he has taken advantage of this woman because she was pissed. Given your assessment of the situation and the fact that he was tried, convicted and a custodial sentence served in accordance with a justice system we live by, do you think he should be allowed to continue with his job and moreover is he not allowed to believe himsrlf innocent? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bowie Posted January 9, 2015 Report Share Posted January 9, 2015 It is the most crass statement possible. Frankly, just anybody in a serious position of some authority, just take some professional advice before opening your gob on such a toxic subject. This could cost him his job in my view. looking at the headline and then reading his actual comments, "He wouldn't have been the first person to be found guilty, maintained their innocence and been proved right. We know what happened with Hillsborough," Taylor told BBC Sport. done himself no favours with the final word and that's what the media will jump on, however in the context of what he's said he's got a point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sodburyred Posted January 9, 2015 Report Share Posted January 9, 2015 To be honest, even if he's telling the truth, his account still sounds like he might well have raped her but simply not understand what the definition of rape is. It sounds quite a lot like he took it for granted she's consent 'cos, hey, he's Ched Evans. This. I'm certain in his mind what he did was fine. But it has been proven in court that it was not. This is the main problem, he has not learnt his lesson as he thinks he's done nothing wrong. Which surely puts others at risk when he's next out on the prowl in a town centre. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cityloyal473 Posted January 9, 2015 Report Share Posted January 9, 2015 looking at the headline and then reading his actual comments, "He wouldn't have been the first person to be found guilty, maintained their innocence and been proved right. We know what happened with Hillsborough," Taylor told BBC Sport. done himself no favours with the final word and that's what the media will jump on, however in the context of what he's said he's got a point. My bold. The two cases are not comparable IMO. Hillsborough is an establishment/police cover up. The Evans case is not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 9, 2015 Report Share Posted January 9, 2015 For info I believe the twitter info wasn't included in the trial because it was deleted. The defence weren't aware of it until a later date.It was uncovered by a New York firefighter who did some digging after hearing about the people who got ordered to pay compensation for revealing the victims names. He found the tweets on some French archiveHowever that info came from the Ched Evans website, so make of it what you will. It wasn't considered in the appeal process because it was impossible to prove for certain what the victim was referring to.It is slightly stupid to tweet about "big wins" and luxury holidays whilst embroiled in a rape trial against a footballer regardless of what they referred to.I don't understand how she was going to 'win big' anyway, can someone explain that bit to me..? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Markman Posted January 9, 2015 Report Share Posted January 9, 2015 After Oldham's experience, I don't foresee that happening anytime soon, but agree; despite having nothing to do with Bristol City, feel this will haunt this forum for a while. True enough - and most of it is people arguing with each other about the interpretation of law and what constitutes rape - maybe move the whole thread to the non football forum - people have their views (mine is not with Mr Evans) but I would be happy for this to leave the football chat forum - not because it is not important but I kind a like reading about us and our form and team selections on here and nearly every day Ched is top of the list? Debate will not be lost if it jumps forums Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonBristolian Posted January 9, 2015 Report Share Posted January 9, 2015 Given your assessment of the situation and the fact that he was tried, convicted and a custodial sentence served in accordance with a justice system we live by, do you think he should be allowed to continue with his job and moreover is he not allowed to believe himsrlf innocent? The thing is, of course, he's still half-way through serving the custodial sentence. Yes, he's released on license but any hypothetical club that did sign him would be taking a risk as he could be recalled at any time. In terms of whether he should be able to continue with his job, I'd say his highly unusual that a sex offender be released from a prison and go straight into the job and environment he was in when he committed the crime in the first place. Yes, it's usually down to the employer but I think someone pointed out early on in the thread there is evidence that sex offenders who come out of prison straight back into their old jobs, particularly ones that have not admitted guilt or responsibility, are the ones who are most likely to reoffend. I think people confuse rehabilitation with continuation - Evans should be rehabilitated into the community but that doesn't necessarily mean he has a right to do the exact same work he did before as though nothing happened and it certainly doesn't mean that supporters of a football club have no right to protest over the PR implications of signing a convicted sex offender. He's allowed to believe himself innocent, as is anyone else who is convicted of a crime, but ultimately he'd need to prove that in an appeals court in order for society as a whole to believe him to be innocent. Furthermore nothing I've read on the case suggests any reason for people to consider him any more innocent than anyone else convicted of a crime they pleaded not guilty to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fordy62 Posted January 9, 2015 Report Share Posted January 9, 2015 Just had a little read on the subject... The jury retired and returned on the same day. Their decision was unanimous, suggesting that the people with all of the evidence presented to them were absolutely sure. It's not as if the judge said he'd take a majority decision, which he could have had they taken longer. When McDonald was acquitted, both men celebrated. Then Evans was told he was guilty. Pure comedy. The two men gave contradictory evidence about the key issue of consent. One of them must have not been telling the truth. I've explained further up. But this case isn't just about the consent of the victim. It's about the reasonably held belief by the defendant that he had consent. If the victim doesn't give consent, for arguments sake let's say she's shouting "no, no, help!", if I reasonably believe that I do consent (I appreciate given the previous circs that is unlikely) then I do not commit rape. That's the difference between McDonald and Evans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 9, 2015 Report Share Posted January 9, 2015 Given your assessment of the situation and the fact that he was tried, convicted and a custodial sentence served in accordance with a justice system we live by, do you think he should be allowed to continue with his job and moreover is he not allowed to believe himsrlf innocent? I've made it clear before that I think Ched should be allowed to continue. This is despite my view that his continued protestations of innocence are bang out of order (when you've done something wrong and can't accept that it's wrong, it says a lot about your character). He has now painted himself into a corner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonBristolian Posted January 9, 2015 Report Share Posted January 9, 2015 Clearly this all needs to come down to a close soon but I think this article says much of what needs to be said on the subject... http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/oldham-athletic/11334487/Ched-Evans-mob-rule-card-is-a-cheap-trick-by-an-unrepentant-rapist.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red-Robbo Posted January 9, 2015 Report Share Posted January 9, 2015 The two men gave contradictory evidence about the key issue of consent. One of them must have not been telling the truth. I've explained further up. But this case isn't just about the consent of the victim. It's about the reasonably held belief by the defendant that he had consent. If the victim doesn't give consent, for arguments sake let's say she's shouting "no, no, help!", if I reasonably believe that I do consent (I appreciate given the previous circs that is unlikely) then I do not commit rape. That's the difference between McDonald and Evans. So she said "no,no help"? I thought the jury had decided that when she had sex with Macdonald she was sober enough to know what she was doing, but when Evans arrived she was too drunk to give consent. As a juror I'd have had a very hard time retrospectively deciding exactly how drunk someone was at a specific time based on one person's word against another. If there was evidence of some resistance and vocal objection, that would put a different perspective on the matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AshtonGreat Posted January 9, 2015 Report Share Posted January 9, 2015 So she said "no,no help"? I thought the jury had decided that when she had sex with Macdonald she was sober enough to know what she was doing, but when Evans arrived she was too drunk to give consent. As a juror I'd have had a very hard time retrospectively deciding exactly how drunk someone was at a specific time based on one person's word against another. If there was evidence of some resistance and vocal objection, that would put a different perspective on the matter. This is where the confusion lies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AshtonGreat Posted January 9, 2015 Report Share Posted January 9, 2015 I've made it clear before that I think Ched should be allowed to continue. This is despite my view that his continued protestations of innocence are bang out of order (when you've done something wrong and can't accept that it's wrong, it says a lot about your character). He has now painted himself into a corner. He's in the process of appealing. I'm not sure that saying 'I'm guilty, I did it' is likely to help that cause. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonBristolian Posted January 9, 2015 Report Share Posted January 9, 2015 So she said "no,no help"? I thought the jury had decided that when she had sex with Macdonald she was sober enough to know what she was doing, but when Evans arrived she was too drunk to give consent. As a juror I'd have had a very hard time retrospectively deciding exactly how drunk someone was at a specific time based on one person's word against another. If there was evidence of some resistance and vocal objection, that would put a different perspective on the matter. The jury decided there was insufficient evidence to prove MacDonald had sex with her without consent. That doesn't necessarily mean they thought she was sober enough to know what she was doing. It merely meant the prosecution had not presented a compelling enough case to find MacDonald guilty beyond reasonable doubt. Any further thoughts on what the jury actually feel happened are mere speculation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted January 9, 2015 Report Share Posted January 9, 2015 I lot of this would of been avoided if he came out right away and said he regretted his actions, something similar to what he has said but right away when he was relieased, he didn't, as for doing his time....he hasn't done his time he's done 2 years of a 5 year sentance he is out on license, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esmond Million's Bung Posted January 9, 2015 Report Share Posted January 9, 2015 http://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/jan/08/gordon-taylor-ched-evans-hillsborough-pfa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fordy62 Posted January 9, 2015 Report Share Posted January 9, 2015 So she said "no,no help"? I thought the jury had decided that when she had sex with Macdonald she was sober enough to know what she was doing, but when Evans arrived she was too drunk to give consent. As a juror I'd have had a very hard time retrospectively deciding exactly how drunk someone was at a specific time based on one person's word against another. If there was evidence of some resistance and vocal objection, that would put a different perspective on the matter.. No! Mine was a hypothetical situation to help explain the issue of reasonable belief for consent. She was the same level of intoxication for both. It's my opinion that it's likely they reached the conclusion that McDonald had reasonable belief that she consented. Evans didn't. If you have reasonable belief that someone consents to sexual intercourse then it cannot be rape. What I'm trying to say is that McDonald was the one who pulled. And in going back to a hotel room probably gave him enough reasonable belief that she consented. Evans turned up as a third party. Did he reasonably believe that she consented? No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 9, 2015 Report Share Posted January 9, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esmond Million's Bung Posted January 9, 2015 Report Share Posted January 9, 2015 So she said "no,no help"? I thought the jury had decided that when she had sex with Macdonald she was sober enough to know what she was doing, but when Evans arrived she was too drunk to give consent.As a juror I'd have had a very hard time retrospectively deciding exactly how drunk someone was at a specific time based on one person's word against another. If there was evidence of some resistance and vocal objection, that would put a different perspective on the matter. 12 jurors who sat through every second of the trial disagreed with that assessment RR and had it been an issue they would have so directed by the trial judge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
... Posted January 9, 2015 Report Share Posted January 9, 2015 Are we re-running the trial here? 'Good effort'. I've always said: OTIB justice is the finest for 5 miles around. TFR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 9, 2015 Report Share Posted January 9, 2015 Are we re-running the trial here? 'Good effort'. I've always said: OTIB justice is the finest for 5 miles around. TFR Nahh, a crucifixion is taking place, I can't see the Ched for the nails. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.