There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 130 comments are related to the topic:
Ched Evans New club Confirmed
Ched Evans New club Confirmed
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 130
|
By:
An almost impossible task in the current climate Racing. Too many people only too willing to hold a burning torch. Politicians fearful of their positions therefore disabling them from voicing their TRUE feelings and opinions. Guilty first and innocent only by sheer good fortune. In this country your are GUILTY UNTIL PROVED INNOCENT. Chances of the latter becoming more and more remote. I would hate to have my DNA stored in a databank. Imagine disposing of a **** tip near the scene of a crime? The cops would fit you up irrespective of any other evidence.
|
|
By:
Cigarette tip!
|
|
By:
What a bloody world we live in!! Can't say f a g tip now!!!!!!
|
|
By:
The "Ken Barlow" case sums it up,Roy.
The complinant claimed being raped by the accused. Amazingly,she went back two weeks later for another "portion". Quite how the case came to Court beggars belief  |
|
By:
Exactly Racing. Raped, returned for more!!!! She should have been jailed!
|
|
By:
Alongside the CPS cretin that allowed the case to go to Court,Roy
|
|
By:
Now that I would applaud!
|
|
By:
Good call Oldham its a sad state of affairs when a person is trying to earn a living after being in prison having served his time,be a lot more people on the dole now if it happened to all.
|
|
By:
I'm all for the rehabilitation of offenders. Surely he could get a job shelf-stacking at Asda or Tesco. Most CONVICTED rapists would happily settle for that I imagine.
|
|
By:
Most convicted rapists wouldn't be able to get any job at all if they had to disclose it, why should a footballer have the divine right to return to his "trade"?
|
|
By:
Just because someone is convicted of a crime it doesn't mean they are guilty!
|
|
By:
As for the shelf stacking comment? The flaming torch bearers would find fault in that. They just want blood!! Sad bstds.
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
I'm sorry to say that the likes of racing star and evil Roy slade would never believe a woman could possibly not deserving of rape, borderline psychopatfs
|
|
By:
Psychopaths *
|
|
By:
why should he be allowed to stack shelves if playing football is too good for him
I for one would not like to work next to him. if he wants to work again perhaps he should start by calling off his utterly disgusting acolytes "the ched evans supporters group" |
|
By:
I'm sorry if I offended any shelfstackers
 |
|
By:
I'd promised myself I wouldnt get involved in any posts/threads regarding this odious waste of skin, but I genuinely cant believe the amount of Evans apologists/defenders on this site, especially the attackers of the female as if we all had first-hand knowledge of her character flaws.
She may well have the morals of an alley cat, I really wouldnt know but it still doesnt give people the right to rape her. I've been blind drunk several times in my life but it doesnt mean everyone has carte-blanche to @rser@pe me surely? EvilRoy is normally the voice of reason and his assertion that everyone convicted is not necessarily guilty is correct, however enough of them are to make the system robust enough for me. Evans has a right to earn a living, no-one is stopping him but I wouldnt be able to return to my current employment should I be convicted of rape and rightly so. Let him disappear and do something else. There are some crimes the public will never forgive/forget and sex offences are some of them. Stuart Hall - fckd Gary Glitter - fckd Max Clifford - fckd Rolf Harris - fckd Jonathan King - fckd John Leslie - fckd ( wasnt even charged!) Bill Cosby - prob 1.01 to be fckd ( not charged yet ) Prince Andrew - prob 1.01 not to be charged but reputation fckd. Act like an animal and reap the consequences I'm afraid. |
|
By:
Captain Christy and drlovepants - you have pretty much stole my thunder on this. The level of ignorance and misogyny exhibited on this thread by the Ched Evans apologists is staggering.I would suggest they actually read the case and understand the legal arguments but I suspect reading, spelling, writing or any kind of intellectual thought may prove difficult for them. Honestly I have rarely come across such a load of ill-informed bollocks.
|
|
By:
Captain Christy! Would you bet your life on him being guilty? As for you? Just a complete no mark who would have hung Stefan Kiszko just because a jury found him guilty. Me, psychopath? I think you and certain others on here fit that billing far better than I. Lynch mob morons.
|
|
By:
evil........she did lie in her testimony so i agree guilt not a certainty
|
|
By:
William Roache, acquitted, Michael le Vell, acquitted. Those of you that believe Ched Evans is guilty must also believe beyond doubt that the aforementioned were innocent because a jury made your minds up for you. They may well be but I prefer to make my own mind up on such matters. Having to have someone make your minds up for you just shows the depth of your ability to reason independently.
|
|
By:
If banging some steamed up bird who was bang up for it until remembering what she did a day later is a crime, I would imagine plenty on this forum are guilty.
|
|
By:
So if I mounted a campaign on behalf of Rolf Harris I presume some of you gentlemen would support me. Do you want him back on Childrens' TV when he is released ?
|
|
By:
Exactly Cardiff. There are too many on here who scream guilty simply because it suits them. I have seen far too many miscarriages of justice to get swept in by the mob. Navel Gazer is someone on here that knows my background regarding such matters. I therefore speak from experience and not from some overriding sense of misplaced righteousness.
|
|
By:
Salmon. His guilt is not in question.
|
|
By:
Why not ? I don't think he ever admitted it. I specifically didn't say Hall as he pleaded guilty. I think in the Harris case it was largely his victim's word against his.
|
|
By:
Bad comparison Salmon
|
|
By:
Harris was found guilty on twelve counts. Pretty overwhelming evidence. Ched Evans? One female drunk. I can see the problems there.
|
|
By:
Marcus Cicero has called some of the posts on this fred spot on. He used the phrase "ill-informed b*ollocks" and that hits the nail on the head. The verdict and conviction were completely sound. He should have served longer. Not only that but he has showed no remorse for his actions, and the behaviour of him and his "supporters" is disgusting - lower than low.
Horrible tw@t and no mistake. |
|
By:
Oh dear. Verdict was completely UNSOUND. REASONABLE DOUBT was there aplenty.
|
|
By:
As for remorse? Would you show remorse if you were not guilty???? Is it not possible he may actually be innocent? Hang everybody!!! Proven guilty in this country means nothing! Far too many serving time for crimes they did not commit. SHOULD THEY SHOW REMORSE???? Too many law enforcers only too willing to balance their books at ANY cost!
|
|
By:
"Getting a result" is all the Police have ever cared about.
Whether somebody is innocent is of no consequence to them as has been shown on numerous occasions. |
|
By:
oldham choked under threats to family and staff
hilarious, not only are they making up the rules themselves but those crying foul are even using threats and blackmail to do it. Saying that the clip of him leaving his house with his latest sort didn't show him in much of a light tbh. She caring large handbag and pulling luggage while he doesn't assist, small things tell you a great deal |
|
By:
racingstar 07 Jan 15 21:18 Joined: 22 Oct 08 | Topic/replies: 8,063 | Blogger: racingstar's blog
Roy, You are correct. Just how would anybody defend themselves of an "historical rape claim" made against them? This post sums it up perfectly. Before anything else you would be considered guilty. You would have little chance of clearing your name in today's hang first society. |
|
By:
If you understood the case you would see that the verdict WAS sound. Just because you have no understanding of the law, doesn't mean the judge and jury does.
|
|
By:
Utter tripe.
|
|
By:
You just said the judge and jury have no understanding of the law!!
|
|
By:
Your posts betray both your lack of understanding and your lack of desire to treat the case objectively. The result is that you come across as one of those irritating drunken gobsh1tes in the pub that thinks he kinows everything but that everyone laughs at behind his back.
|
|
By:
Oh, and your 12.22 post also demonstrates that you are not capable of reading even the most basic sentences, which is presumably why you haven't even bothered moving on to more complex legal concepts.
|