|
By:
Some of the "she was asking for it" responses here are ridiculous. If he'd taken her home, like the other guy did and was acquitted, then fair enough I'd have more of an understanding of your stance. But he purposely blagged his way into the room to take advantage and then escaped out a fire escape, scum of the highest order.
And for the "he's served his sentence/done his time", he hasn't. He's served half of his sentence. |
|
By:
he could easily go back to prison and serve the rest if he violates the terms of his license, so agreed he hasn't done his time. I can't believe people can't see that.
|
|
By:
There are a lot of people on this thread who are not aware of the facts or the findings of the court. To summarise:-
1. The court found that intercourse + lack of consent does not of itself ensure a conviction - McDonald's case is proof of that, the court found that the girl at no stage had capacity to consent to either man. They had intercourse, she didn't consent and McDonald was acquitted. 2. The reason McDonald was acquitted and Evans convicted was that McDonald had interactions with the girl for a relatively long time beforehand and the court found that he had reasonable grounds for believing that she had capacity to consent and had consented. The court found that reasonable grounds for believing she had consented are enough in the absence of actual consent in a rape case. 3. Evans had no such grounds, he blagged his way into the room and the first interaction he had with her she was in the bed with McDonald, naked and drunk. The court found that upon entering the room and encountering her in those circumstances there is no way he could have reasonably thought that she could consent. That is the distinction between the two cases. 4. Evans arrived at the hotel with 2 others who tried to film it from outside the window. I think you can take it from that that Evans had his mind made up before he even entered the hotel. He also left via the fire escape when he was finished. None of that is proof of anything of itself, but it doesn't need to be. I think a lot of people who blame the victim ignore this evidence of Evans' intentions on the night. 'She was asking for it' - a woman (or a man) should be able to go out and get as drunk as they please without being raped. 5. He has not served his sentence. He got 5 years from April 2012. He was released on licence for the last 2.5 years approx. His sentence is not due to finish until April 2017 although he might get some remission. They need to introduce a blanket restriction on earning anything over and above a capped/normal wage for any prisoner released on licence. That would be a restriction on the right to earn a living but could be justified on public policy grounds and would be allowed if applied across the board in a non-discriminatory way. That is not the case in the UK and it probably should be. The prison service could still impose a condition restricting him from working as a footballer but they would leave themselves open to being sued for loss of earnings by Evans, as that would be clear discrimination against him purely on the basis of profession. I don't think it is ever the case that release on licence is meant to be the same as an absolute release, so I don't have a problem with the notion that he shouldn't work as a footballer until he has completed his sentence. But any such restriction has to be legally imposed and it hasn't been. |
|
By:
excellent post lurka
|
|
By:
Bergkamp93
This is getting way too much Spotlight ffs ...Let the man get on with his life he has done his sentence, Even that filthy vile coont saville did not get as much Spotlight as this !! Agreed. As someone else commented becoming a witch hunt now. |
|
By:
your making lot of assumptions there but fair enough,have another go,
if when she 1st walked into the pub stone cold sober and someone had said to her your going to bed tonight with a pro footballer, what do you think she,d have done, called her family get me out of here called the police,bar manager left the pub,i,m not up for this tell her mates yes ive scored just another asumption will do |
|
By:
who is making assumptions? what assumptions?
|
|
By:
his mates tried to film it so we no what he had in mind
|
|
By:
BTW lurka the his entering and leaving surreptitiously could be interpreted as the actions of the famous rather than the guilty so proves or indicates nothing.
|
|
By:
didnt she also leave a bit on the quiet side
|
|
By:
1st time poster
his mates tried to film it so we no what he had in mind Read the transcript of the case. He got a phone call which he responded to and we knew then what was in his mind. Doesn't prove him guilty of rape though does it. |
|
By:
i was refering to lurka,s assumptions not mine
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
Well for a start lurka you say you know what he had on his mind because of the way he entered the hotel.
that's an assumption surely. |
|
By:
I didn't say I knew what was on his mind. There is only one person (or perhaps 3) who know that. I gave my opinion ('I think...'), that's all it is.
What was on his mind is irrelevant anyway, the fact is that the jury found that she couldn't have consented at any stage and that Evans had no previous interaction with her and therefore couldn't have had any grounds for believing she consented when he encountered her for the first time in that state. The only reason I mentioned this was because there are some people on the thread from the 'she was asking for it' camp. There is no evidence in the case which suggests that she was asking for it or was looking to have sex with a footballer. There is some evidence as to Evans intentions on the night. I was merely pointing out that people in the 'she was asking for it' camp are ignoring this evidence and making an assumption that 'she was asking for it' based on little or no evidence (from the court case). She is alleged to have tweeted 'when i win big', but that was after the trial and therefore there is no evidence under oath in relation to this. The jury found that she could not have legally consented at any stage. Even if Evans entered the room (hypothetically with a key card if you want) he did not/would not have had reasonable grounds for believing she was in a position to consent in that state. In response to your hypothetical set of circumstances where she walks into the pub stone cold sober, I would answer: a) How the hell do I know, I don't know the girl at all? AND b) how is it relevant what she would have done in completely different circumstances, where we have no evidence as to what she would have done, not that such evidence would be at all relevant? I ask you :- 1. Do you think the jury made the right decision in accordance with current UK rape law? and 2. Do you have an issue with current UK rape law as set out in R v Evans and McDonald? |
|
By:
If we can accept rehabilitation of murderers and paedophiles we have to allow rehabilitation of people who still believe they were unfairly convicted of rape. The IRA bombers were found to be innocent after protesting their innocence but getting judged guilty in court. A vigilante hate mob is NOT justice.
|
|
By:
to clarify, my point about Evans' intentions on the night - everyone has their own opinion as to what his intentions were, but they base that on evidence under oath which is not disputed (blagging, friends filming, leaving by fire exit etc).
the 'she was asking for it' camp, base it on...... what? 'when i win big'? Deleting facebook messages the next day (when we don't even know what they were about?). Which is more rational? that was my point, the only reason i mentioned it, it is irrelevant to the outcome of the case, however. |
|
By:
if you are going to infer that 'she was asking for it' with little or no evidence then based on that approach you should infer that Evans had the intention to have sex regardless of consent when he arrived at the hotel with his friends. There is more evidence of Evans' intention than hers. I am not saying that my opinion of Evans' intention is correct, just that there is no basis for making ANY assumptions about the victim's intent if you are going to completely ignore the evidence, under oath and undisputed, about Evans' intent.
|
|
By:
not that that evidence has any conclusive probative value either way. But as I said above it doesn't need to
|
|
By:
Assumptions were made about the girls ability to say yes or no.
|
|
By:
not assumptions. Findings of fact. Irrelevant as to whether they were right or wrong, they certainly were not assumptions
|
|
By:
do you honestly think a person can be convicted beyond a reasonable doubt on the basis of an assumption?
|
|
By:
What would peoples views be if evans played for Oldham & donated his wages for say the first year to an appropriate charity.
|
|
By:
lurka
do you honestly think a person can be convicted beyond a reasonable doubt on the basis of an assumption? Well it happened in this case. |
|
By:
lurka seems to have weighed the situation up well to me. IMHO, the sentence passed down was not severe for a rape case and seems about right to me, albeit that Evans has the morals of an alley cat.
Evans should be allowed to work if someone is willing to give him a second chance, but while he remains 'on licence', allowing him to 'just start again as if nothing had happened' with the vast rewards available to professional footballers just seems wrong and distasteful. I can certainly understand the antipathy towards him from supporters of any club that he is linked with. |
|
By:
When Mr Evans is cleared on appeal it is only to hoped that many posters have a good lawyer...
There is no way that the objectionable young man will not be pardoned... If I was him the BBC would be the first port of call... Every post starts off with the "Convicted Rapist Ched Evans".. Those "Bloggers" or are they on the staff would be the first targets... No need to play football again... Left wing scum and they will get what they deserve.... |
|
By:
It it helps, after considering the evidence, Evans was found to be guilty 'beyond all reasonable doubt' by the jury in this case.
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
Have any of you been on a jury...
They are the ones that cannot get out of service.... Ched has to be a 4/9 chance to get off on appeal.. |
|
By:
|
|
By:
I have been drunk in my time, I have been very drunk in my time but I've always known what I was doing.
I simply do not believe anyone when they say they were too drunk to know what they were doing. |
|
By:
I have been drunk and not had a clue what was going on literally hundreds of times.
|
|
By:
but i would like to think that if there were a gay man hovering around me at the time I'd cop on. But I can't honestly say that. As i said earlier: any person, even the sexiest woman on the planet, should be able to strip naked on the high street, get as drunk as possible and STILL expect to wake up the next day in an unraped state. 'She was asking for it'. Those types are more of a worry than Evans.
|
|
By:
drink affects differently, not a crime to get shítfaced. you can only speak for yourself.
|
|
By:
drink affects different people differently i meant
|
|
By:
aka
|
|
By:
I'm not saying that. I'm saying that no one knew her state of mind and that's what he was convicted on.
Another jury may have found him not guilty. BTW I'm not saying his behaviour was anything other than vile but I'm still not convinced he raped her or thought he was raping her. |
|
By:
Agree with you there Lurka, some of the attitudes being exposed here are the real cause for concern.
|