Search results

I can understand that viewpoint, I'm sure you wouldn't be alone. There might be some employment law issues about refusing to hire a 'free man' with legally no stain on his reputation if he was cleared on appeal, but we're a long way from that yet. Certainly going to be huge interest in those...

Obviously this is all hypothetical, but I don't know how you (not just you, anyone) could say that it made no difference whether he was or wasn't a convicted rapist. It is pretty fundamental.

You're right in the sense that he was and still is a convicted rapist at the time - so there wouldn't be any comeback on libel/defamation grounds or anything like that. But not sure you can really claim it wouldn't affect all that has gone before. There has been more written about this, and...

That's a very big bit of news today. Can you imagine the fallout if he gets cleared on Appeal. Everything that has been said. All the campaigns to effectively make it impossible for him to work/play elsewhere...

If he isn't going to be working anyway (and it looks like he isn't) wouldn't he better off just doing some voluntary work? Not sure what would be most appropriate, maybe some physical trainer work with former offenders or something. Maybe as a sex offender he isn't even allowed to do that, not...

In the vast majority of murder cases, pre-meditation or intent is involved. In a very few situations, it isn't. And 'spontaneous murder' as you call it would normally be manslaughter. Pre-meditated murder sounds like an American term to me, where it is different.

Quite right. You would probably get away with calling them a 'killer' if you wanted to as that is factually accurate, but murder means it was pre-meditated, and it wasn't. Highly libellous. The chances of Lee Hughes doing anything about some idiot on a message board are almost zero, but mods...

Jesus, now the Oldham chairman's quit. The casualties are stacking up...

To be fair to Evans (and as accurately speculated on by many on here) I think that is about as far as the lawyers will let him go without destroying his own attempts to get the verdict overturned. Though why he couldn't have said this when he got out is another matter.

Sounds like he's about to apologise via the PFA imminently. Just doesn't mean much now, only that he sees that as only way back in... PFA statement incl first apology of any sort to victim http://www.thepfa.com/news/2015/1/8/pfa-statement-ched-evans

Seriously, Oldham - what utter tw&ts. Could they have made a worse job of this? They get involved trying to sign a convicted rapist, then pretend to be all shocked when the whirlwind of criticism strikes, then push ahead and try and do it anyway annoying everyone except Gordon Taylor, then lose...

Sorry, you've lost me. Didn't I just say above (and several times previously, actually) that I DID understand why he wouldn't apologise, certainly at the moment, if he believes himself to be wrongly convicted? But IF he runs out of options to challenge the verdict, that is a question he has to...

Good summary. I think one of the big problems he has is that while I understand the logic of not being publicly remorseful while challenging the verdict, if it IS upheld and he remains a convicted rapist then an apology at that stage will seem too late, and not have anything like the impact...

'Advantage' in the loosest possible sense...

He just isn't going to do that though while he is still trying to get the conviction overturned through official channels. Whatever you think about it, that is just a fact. Until such time he remains a convicted rapist and we now face the Groundhog Day sequence of outrage from supporters...

Has everyone seen this? 'Keep your knickers on'. Surprised he's still got his job, that's much worse than what happened on the Albion phone-in. http://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/nov/19/bbc-knickers-on-nick-conrad-rapist-ched-evans

Agree with that. In fact, though for a different crime and in different circumstances, this is very much the situation snooker fixer Stephen Lee has wrestled with - so far unsuccessfully. He has never admitted his guilt after being handed a long ban, even though privately his main beef seems...

Some good ideas, but even in there you concede that the FA can't retrospectively go back and change it for the Evans case. Even if they changed the rules now about image of the game etc, it wouldn't legally be able to apply to him.

In fairness, that is twisting the facts and what has been said. He is not saying rape as a crime 'isn't wrong'. He is claiming it wasn't rape at all as it was consensual. Quite a difference, especially given you parole comment. Obviously he remains a convicted rapist until such time as he gets...

To be fair, the same arguments have been going for 34 pages. *Edit* Make that 35 and counting.