Ashtonboy Posted January 4, 2015 Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 Watch any Mike Tyson fights or films he's cameod in? The fact that some unscrupulous individuals will "cash in" on an individuals high profile for a specific project (ie film) does not make it right, and NO I have not seen anything by Tyson since he so sportingly demonstrated his taste of human flesh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aizoon Posted January 4, 2015 Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 Well you can quote me and say that sure, but why? I dont feel any differently on the matter then you. It could happen to anybody's sister or daughter etc. What I was merely pointing out was that people would be alot safer if they didnt feel the need to get so ridiculously intoxicated when going out. The state of some people in town is an embarrassment. I've been mugged twice, once when totally ratted, and once when sober. Guess which one I resent more? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esmond Million's Bung Posted January 4, 2015 Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 If I believed I was innocent and if I believed that girl had mugged me off for various reasons (perhaps compensation, I'm not sure), then I sure as hell would not apologise. Admittedly, it's still pretty grim of him to do what he didv even if she did consent (i.e. walk into a room where 2 people are doing it and waiting his turn) but in that case it's not an offence.en if she did consent (i.e. walk into a room where 2 people are doing it and waiting his turn) but in that case it's not an offence. Totally ignoring the conflict in Mcdonalds and Evans account regarding 'consent'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AshtonGreat Posted January 4, 2015 Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 I understand all of that, but I would have thought the major part of re-habilitation was recognising your offence and of that there is certainly no evidence of that whatsoever. As for the preventing of him from working, the hypocrisy here is mind blowing, people are saying I don't mind him playing football, but I wouldn't want him at my club. He is paying the price for his own arrogance, he could and should have just apologised to the girl and not just to his girlfriend and then he could have held the moral high ground over the furore about him playing again. At this moment in time he is a convicted rapist and IMHO I do not expect that to change in the future and neither do I expect Evans to suddenly 'get it'. I very much doubt that apologising would change anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashtonboy Posted January 4, 2015 Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 And you seem quite incapable of answering his question. Try keeping up old boy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Rizzle Posted January 4, 2015 Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 Anyone got a link to said website? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esmond Million's Bung Posted January 4, 2015 Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 I very much doubt that apologising would change anything. Not now it wouldn't that's for sure. I suspect that Sheff Utd probably expected some form of acknowledgement of what he was convicted of and not some pathetic apology to his girlfriend and that is almost certainly why he is in the position he finds himself in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 4, 2015 Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 The fact that some unscrupulous individuals will "cash in" on an individuals high profile for a specific project (ie film) does not make it right, and NO I have not seen anything by Tyson since he so sportingly demonstrated his taste of human flesh. The reason I mentioned Tyson is because in 1991 - a long time before the Holyfield fight, he was convicted of rape. Still after his incarceration he went on to become one of the biggest grossing sports stars ever, and for a long time one of the highest paid boxers and highest pay per views sold. I'm not necessarily directing it at you, it's just I do wonder how many who find it abhorrent Evans returning bought Tyson's fight, bought his book, laughed at him in The Hangover etc etc etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nebristolred Posted January 4, 2015 Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 Would you have a website created to attack her ? Would you have your "supporters" hound the girl making her life a misery ? Or would you hold your hands up and say "I shouldn't have put myself in that position and I'm sorry for the distress caused" whilst still maintaining innocence through the justice system ? I suspect the latter. God your agenda shines through here. Website to attack her? No, a website to defend myself though, yes. Show me where he has rounded up his supporters to incite hatred against her? Or are you making that up? Shock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fordy62 Posted January 4, 2015 Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 And yet if a person commits a crime whilst intoxicated it's no defence in the eyes of the law. Who said the "the law is as ass?" Actually thats not true. Being drunk is a defence to crimes of specific intent, for example wounding with intent, you can be too drunk to form the mens rea to commit the offence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esmond Million's Bung Posted January 4, 2015 Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 God your agenda shines through here. Website to attack her? No, a website to defend myself though, yes. Show me where he has rounded up his supporters to incite hatred against her? Or are you making that up? Shock. Agenda?, an illegally gained video, put up without permission. She has been outed by supporters of his 5 times and had to move and change her identity on those 5 times, how many times has St Ched come out and said, "stop this, it is not right and will only harm my appeal".................................. of course perhaps it's ok to hound her but not Saint Ched. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashtonboy Posted January 4, 2015 Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 The reason I mentioned Tyson is because in 1991 - a long time before the Holyfield fight, he was convicted of rape. Still after his incarceration he went on to become one of the biggest grossing sports stars ever, and for a long time one of the highest paid boxers and highest pay per views sold. I'm not necessarily directing it at you, it's just I do wonder how many who find it abhorrent Evans returning bought Tyson's fight, bought his book, laughed at him in The Hangover etc etc etc. I fully understand your thread, but the fact that you can quote the case of, continued success, of a convicted rapist in his chosen profession, does not make it right, or a reason to commit the same mistake again in the case of Evans. Do you not agree? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marina's Rolls Royce Posted January 4, 2015 Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 I've been mugged twice, once when totally ratted, and once when sober. Guess which one I resent more? The one when you had just been to the cash point and were wearing your Rolex? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aizoon Posted January 4, 2015 Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 Actually thats not true. Being drunk is a defence to crimes of specific intent, for example wounding with intent, you can be too drunk to form the mens rea to commit the offence. Which doesn't allow you to get drunk in order to use that as a defence, as the mens rea is deemed to exist at the time of getting drunk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aizoon Posted January 4, 2015 Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 The one when you had just been to the cash point and were wearing your Rolex? Never worn a Rolex - Timex, yes... No, I reckoned I was bloody daft to get p1ssed and wander about with a full wallet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fordy62 Posted January 4, 2015 Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 Which doesn't allow you to get drunk in order to use that as a defence, as the mens rea is deemed to exist at the time of getting drunk. Not necessarily. I'm not saying its a good defence but it is a defence written into law none the less. Essentially if I cave someone's head in so badly that they're close to death, I could well use drunkeness as a defence to attemoted murder or indeed wounding with intent as I was too drunk to form the required intent to kill/do grievous bodily harm. Like I said, not a good defence, but it's there. I'm pretty sure it's also a defence to affray and violent disorder but that's shut away in the deepest depths if my brain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 4, 2015 Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 I fully understand your thread, but the fact that you can quote the case of, continued success, of a convicted rapist in his chosen profession, does not make it right, or a reason to commit the same mistake again in the case of Evans. Do you not agree? Sorry but I don't think I do. I must admit I am conflicted, very much so and perhaps most so because of his stance since leaving : but then if he truly believes his innocence I can forgive his stance, although he could and should have handled this better. Where I am on overall balance I believe he should be free to do whatever job provided he is not restricted to by law. To say otherwise brings the whole point, purpose and existence of the penal system in to question. I also struggle massively with the premise he's okay to be a bin man and work alongside those fine and hardworking individuals but not a footballer. Smacks of elitism. Frankly if someone offers him an in that's their call. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 4, 2015 Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 Not necessarily. I'm not saying its a good defence but it is a defence written into law none the less. Essentially if I cave someone's head in so badly that they're close to death, I could well use drunkeness as a defence to attemoted murder or indeed wounding with intent as I was too drunk to form the required intent to kill/do grievous bodily harm. Like I said, not a good defence, but it's there. I'm pretty sure it's also a defence to affray and violent disorder but that's shut away in the deepest depths if my brain. Deleted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aizoon Posted January 4, 2015 Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 Not necessarily. I'm not saying its a good defence but it is a defence written into law none the less. Essentially if I cave someone's head in so badly that they're close to death, I could well use drunkeness as a defence to attemoted murder or indeed wounding with intent as I was too drunk to form the required intent to kill/do grievous bodily harm. Like I said, not a good defence, but it's there. I'm pretty sure it's also a defence to affray and violent disorder but that's shut away in the deepest depths if my brain. Sorry, my point was that you can't form the intent to kill and then get drunk to use it as a defence when you commit the act. The mens rea already exists. Pretty obscure, I admit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fordy62 Posted January 4, 2015 Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 Don't think it does. Been years and years since I looked at crim but I think voluntary intoxication is no defence where you can form the men's rea recklessly. I'm pretty sure it is. But herein lies the end of my argument. You can be so intoxicated, even voluntarily so, to be unable to form the required intent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fordy62 Posted January 4, 2015 Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 Sorry, my point was that you can't form the intent to kill and then get drunk to use it as a defence when you commit the act. The mens rea already exists. Pretty obscure, I admit. Ahhh. Yes. That's on the obscure side. Although according to law murder is a whole different kettle of fish! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashtonboy Posted January 4, 2015 Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 Sorry but I don't think I do. I must admit I am conflicted, very much so and perhaps most so because of his stance since leaving : but then if he truly believes his innocence I can forgive his stance, although he could and should have handled this better. Where I am on overall balance I believe he should be free to do whatever job provided he is not restricted to by law. To say otherwise brings the whole point, purpose and existence of the penal system in to question. I also struggle massively with the premise he's okay to be a bin man and work alongside those fine and hardworking individuals but not a footballer. Smacks of elitism. Frankly if someone offers him an in that's their call. I really don't think that because it is not restricted by law, then its ok. There are many things not written in law as "unlawful" that are deemed to be unacceptable to a rational and caring society.Generally, society adheres to these unwritten "laws", in the same way as we would not accept or expect the tv personalities currently serving sentences for sexual offences back onto our screens. Do you really think it would be acceptable for people like Saville ( had he lived) to serve a sentence and resume his tv career? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nebristolred Posted January 4, 2015 Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 Oh dear.Talk of making things up - where did I say he had incited hatred ? Would you have your "supporters" hound the girl making her life a misery ? Well played.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarcusX Posted January 4, 2015 Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 She went to the hotel room with the other person, Evans turned up later and had sex with her as well, when she was unconscious on the bed, the court therefore must have decided that as she had gone to the room with Evans mate, then they couldn't deftinitely say she hadn't consented, but as Evans turned up later, she had not consented to that. I'm not gonna get too involved this time round but please get facts right! She wasn't unconscious. I'm glad he isn't signing for us, we don't need the shit storm, however he should be allowed to continue his career. The same way Hughes and King have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nebristolred Posted January 4, 2015 Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 Agenda?, an illegally gained video, put up without permission. She has been outed by supporters of his 5 times and had to move and change her identity on those 5 times, how many times has St Ched come out and said, "stop this, it is not right and will only harm my appeal".................................. of course perhaps it's ok to hound her but not Saint Ched. Didn't know it was illegally gained (if it even was), but if that evidence was there and I was innocent I would use it. I agree Ched could have done more to stop this, but IF he is innocent then there is bound to be a huge amount of resentment. "Saint Ched".... It's you in literally every slightly controversial topic isn't it? Your close mindedness is mind-boggling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 4, 2015 Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 I really don't think that because it is not restricted by law, then its ok. There are many things not written in law as "unlawful" that are deemed to be unacceptable to a rational and caring society.Generally, society adheres to these unwritten "laws", in the same way as we would not accept or expect the tv personalities currently serving sentences for sexual offences back onto our screens. Do you really think it would be acceptable for people like Saville ( had he lived) to serve a sentence and resume his tv career? But the point is Mike Tyson is on our tv screens. Society didn't castigate him, society got him record pay per views. Also I'd stop far far back from mentioning Ched Evans in the same breath as a predatory, manipulative, conniving paedophile such as Jimmy Saville. That's not belittling Evans, but vilifying Saville. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nebristolred Posted January 4, 2015 Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 I'm out now anyway, I've made my view. I lose all faith in our society when the pitchfork mob come out and believe anything that they're spoonfed, and distort 'facts' to suit their argument. It's a very sketchy case, and as an open-minded person I am reserving judgement, particularly given a footballers' susceptibility to falling foul of a mentalist of a woman (I'm not insinuating that about her, I don't know anything about her). I also think to label him as a convicted rapist (which he technically is yes) and tarnish him with everything that comes with it is dangerous given that in my opinion 95% of rapists have actually committed far worse crimes than he did, even if he is genuinely guilty. I can understand why a business wouldn't want to employ him but he has every right to be a pro footballer again if a club wants to take him on, and rightly so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashtonboy Posted January 4, 2015 Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 I'm out now anyway, I've made my view. I lose all faith in our society when the pitchfork mob come out and believe anything that they're spoonfed, and distort 'facts' to suit their argument. It's a very sketchy case, and as an open-minded person I am reserving judgement, particularly given a footballers' susceptibility to falling foul of a mentalist of a woman (I'm not insinuating that about her, I don't know anything about her). I also think to label him as a convicted rapist (which he technically is yes) and tarnish him with everything that comes with it is dangerous given that in my opinion 95% of rapists have actually committed far worse crimes than he did, even if he is genuinely guilty. I can understand why a business wouldn't want to employ him but he has every right to be a pro footballer again if a club wants to take him on, and rightly so. Give me strength! Any ladies on here like to comment to the caveman? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dollymarie Posted January 4, 2015 Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 Give me strength! Any ladies on here like to comment to the caveman? I've decided it's just not worth it with some people's views. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Rizzle Posted January 4, 2015 Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 Give me strength! Any ladies on here like to comment to the caveman? I don't agree with everything he says but he has made some valid and good points too. Don't read what you want to read. Think about what he's saying and the point he's trying to make. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.