Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Ched Evans



Stato

Well-known member
Dec 21, 2011
6,611
From whatever I have read, from whatever opinion I have heard. It is obvious Ched Evans will never play football in this country again unless a club take a punt, the media (including mob social) can't be arsed about him, something worse takes the limelight (or after his judicial restrictions are eventually lifted and he plays abroad), or he wins a new appeal. So something has changed here. Our courts are no longer the last voice in punishment. A new era dawns, or has indeed spawned, over time.

All footballers are in the entertainment industry which relies on pulling punters through the door. Convicted rapists out on license don't tend to pull the crowds.

I don't see anyone arguing that Jonathan King or Gary Glitter are being punished twice because nobody has given them a record deal.
 




The Rivet

Well-known member
Aug 9, 2011
4,514
All footballers are in the entertainment industry which relies on pulling punters through the door. Convicted rapists out on license don't tend to pull the crowds.

I don't see anyone arguing that Jonathan King or Gary Glitter are being punished twice because nobody has given them a record deal.

Am I arguing at all? Nope just the statement that's all.
 


Stato

Well-known member
Dec 21, 2011
6,611
Am I arguing at all? Nope just the statement that's all.

'The statement' implies that Evans is being punished by public opinion over and above the court sentence and that this is new. However, societal disapproval of sex criminals is not a new thing. It is a fact of life which has had to be faced by all released offenders. Those who want to reform have to swallow this, take the knocks and do what they can to convince others that they have learned a lesson.
 


The Rivet

Well-known member
Aug 9, 2011
4,514
'The statement' implies that Evans is being punished by public opinion over and above the court sentence and that this is new. However, societal disapproval of sex criminals is not a new thing. It is a fact of life which has had to be faced by all released offenders. Those who want to reform have to swallow this, take the knocks and do what they can to convince others that they have learned a lesson.

Take it how you like, expand it or demean it how you like. Doesn't bother me. I don't intend a debate, everyone views things as they choose.
 














symyjym

Banned
Nov 2, 2009
13,138
Brighton / Hove actually


dazzer6666

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Mar 27, 2013
52,746
Burgess Hill
Evans should have kept a low profile and appealed his conviction in court, not in the public domain. He has probably ruined any chance of reversing his conviction because of it, so he is his own worst enemy.

...or he's badly advised, or both. But I agree. Hasn't helped himself much.
 






symyjym

Banned
Nov 2, 2009
13,138
Brighton / Hove actually
...or he's badly advised, or both. But I agree. Hasn't helped himself much.

Yep, and his legal team and advisors have also probably made hundreds of thousands from it.

I could maybe understand, out of desperateness, if they created the website and did stupid things if his future appeal failed, but they turned it into a freak show prematurely.
 


rippleman

Well-known member
Oct 18, 2011
4,596
So never question anything ever or hold your own view on anything? Got it.

Oh Husty!

We have a jury system where 12 of our peers, selected at random, decide on the guilt or innocence of those appearing in court. They make their decision based on the evidence that is placed before them.

If you don't trust the jury's decision then what are you left with? A judicial system where an elderly, public school educated, multi-millionaire judge, with no experience or knowledge of the real world is left to decide guilt or innocence.

I know which I prefer!
 






Triggaaar

Well-known member
Oct 24, 2005
50,227
Goldstone
Oh Husty!

We have a jury system where 12 of our peers, selected at random, decide on the guilt or innocence of those appearing in court. They make their decision based on the evidence that is placed before them.

If you don't trust the jury's decision then what are you left with? A judicial system where an elderly, public school educated, multi-millionaire judge, with no experience or knowledge of the real world is left to decide guilt or innocence.

I know which I prefer!
But he's not saying never trust the jury. He's saying that the jury is made up of people, and people do make mistakes. Some people are questioning whether it's possible a mistake was made in this case. That doesn't mean we should not use a jury all of a sudden, it means people are free to discuss the possibility of a mistake.
 


dazzer6666

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Mar 27, 2013
52,746
Burgess Hill
But he's not saying never trust the jury. He's saying that the jury is made up of people, and people do make mistakes. Some people are questioning whether it's possible a mistake was made in this case. That doesn't mean we should not use a jury all of a sudden, it means people are free to discuss the possibility of a mistake.

Not very often (as the stats show) - presumably why it's 12, not say 3 or 4, or just a decrepit judge
 


Triggaaar

Well-known member
Oct 24, 2005
50,227
Goldstone
Not very often (as the stats show) - presumably why it's 12, not say 3 or 4, or just a decrepit judge
Indeed, not very often. The jury system is a good one.
 


Husty

Mooderator
Oct 18, 2008
11,996
Oh Husty!

We have a jury system where 12 of our peers, selected at random, decide on the guilt or innocence of those appearing in court. They make their decision based on the evidence that is placed before them.

If you don't trust the jury's decision then what are you left with? A judicial system where an elderly, public school educated, multi-millionaire judge, with no experience or knowledge of the real world is left to decide guilt or innocence.

I know which I prefer!

And no Jury ever has ever got anything wrong is what YOU are saying. :facepalm:
 




drew

Drew
Oct 3, 2006
23,081
Burgess Hill
Oh Husty!

We have a jury system where 12 of our peers, selected at random, decide on the guilt or innocence of those appearing in court. They make their decision based on the evidence that is placed before them.

If you don't trust the jury's decision then what are you left with? A judicial system where an elderly, public school educated, multi-millionaire judge, with no experience or knowledge of the real world is left to decide guilt or innocence.

I know which I prefer!

You are aware that our legal system has a system of appeals because based on your comments above, that would suggest not. Even after appeals fail, you are aware, well you should be if you have been following this case, that even after appeals there is the CCRC?

I would suggest we have one of, if not the, best judicial systems which has been the model for many other countries. That said, it is not perfect hence the various appeals processes available.


With regard to the website being referred to the CPS, wasn't this following a complaint from the girl's father that the video from the hotel foyer could identify the girl! Having seen the video, I struggle to see that is the case as it seems no different to when other parts of the media distort part of an image to prevent identification. Does seem a bit late bearing in mind the site has seemingly been up and running at least since March 2013 although, obviously, it isn't clear when certain items have been added! Will be interesting to see what the CPS think and whether they take it further.
 




Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here