Ched Evans

[Goldstone1976]

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 their nerve and pull out not for any moral or principled reasons that they realised it was the wrong move, but because they have been threatened. That is appalling (if it's true, it does make a handy excuse to back out) but it doesn't spare Oldham.

They have ended up tarring their own name possibly forever AND despite that not getting the player anyway through not holding their nerve. Brilliant job.

Quite. Puts not having enough Harvey's at a game into perspective. BHAFC is capable of some screw ups, but all the time we have the current regime I doubt we'd ever cock up quite as badly as Oldham have managed.

They really have managed to engineer a PR disaster in a very short space of time. It's quite likely to be a financial disaster too - they're obviously not going to get the top up from Ched's girlfriend's father any longer, and the sponsors they've lost may not want to get involved again (or, if they do, not for a while and at a lower financial contribution for the same benefits they were getting prior to all the Ched stuff).

"Oldham - how to mess up big time in only a week".

 

[jimbob5]

The moral seems to be 'be very careful with who you try and have rumpy pumpy with'

 

[Triggaaar]

Her memory of events has no bearing on the case had no bearing on consent as far as I'm aware.

I personally believe her, that she couldn't remember. I expect the Jury believed her too. And I expect that their belief that she was so drunk that she couldn't remember anything, had a bearing on their opinion on her ability to give consent.

But you're right - as someone who suffers from this memory failure, I can well imagine giving consent, meaning to give consent and then subsequently forgetting it. Someone in your position would find that very hard to believe, I reckon you'd be inclined to think if I couldn't remember I'd be in no position to give consent.

No, I wouldn't think that, as I know we're all very different. For me personally, regardless of memory, there's no way I could have the ability to walk, and not have the ability to give consent. That's just how my body is. While I do realise that other people are different, that would affect my judgement if I had been on the jury, as surely all of us are affected by our personal experiences.

 

[Triggaaar]

Have you read the crimeline summary of the case? https://www.crimeline.info/case/r-v-ched-evans-chedwyn-evans

Yes, and more. why?

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

Apparently Evans has turned up for training today despite Oldham's decision. Not the first time he's thought No means Yes.

Brilliant!

 

[Wozza]

Apparently Evans has turned up for training today despite Oldham's decision. Not the first time he's thought No means Yes.

Not the first time that this joke has been done in this thread either.

 

[spring hall convert]

Some will say it is totally irrelevant because they only see one side of the story.

What are you on about? If this is true it's utterly disgraceful and the perprators need to be tracked down and met with the full force of the law.

Is anyone on here saying different?

 

[Triggaaar]

Brilliant!

Don't encourage him. It's not the first time we've had a no means yes joke on this thread.

 

[Bombadier Botty]

Just doing my bit to try and push this thread towards the 130 page mark.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

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 their nerve and pull out not for any moral or principled reasons that they realised it was the wrong move, but because they have been threatened. That is appalling (if it's true, it does make a handy excuse to back out) but it doesn't spare Oldham.

They have ended up tarring their own name possibly forever AND despite that not getting the player anyway through not holding their nerve. Brilliant job.

This was the club that signed an unrepentant Lee Hughes, so they've been there before.

 

[spring hall convert]

I personally believe her, that she couldn't remember. I expect the Jury believed her too. And I expect that their belief that she was so drunk that she couldn't remember anything, had a bearing on their opinion on her ability to give consent.

I could be wrong here but I'm sure I read somewhere that they were specifically instructed not to link the memory loss and consent - that they were two separate issues.

And on this you are right, it may well have affected the jury. It shouldn't have but it might have done.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Yes, and more. why?

Well, you said 'how the **** are they supposed to do that", and within that summary it has the directions the jury was given by the judge, and why the appeal judges didn't grant an appeal on the basis that in their opinion the jury had been properly directed and reached a sound decision. One would presume they made their judgements on the evidence presented. Obviously some people like yourself don't understand how that is possible from what you have read of the case, but in real terms your opinion would have been represented on that jury and through deliberation they returned a unanimous verdict.

 

[Triggaaar]

What are you on about? If this is true it's utterly disgraceful and the perprators need to be tracked down and met with the full force of the law.

Is anyone on here saying different?

I'm sure no one is saying different. Personally, I think the people are disgusting and should be prosecuted, as you say. Just as with the vile people that made threats against Jessica Ennis. Many here think it's bad that Ched hasn't condemned the threats against Jessica, because they were made by his 'supporters'. Do those same people now think the girl in the case should condemn the threats against the board members of Oldham? Or perhaps Ched should, since these threats wouldn't have been made if it wasn't for his actions.

Personally I think all of those making threats are sick, and responsible for their own actions.

 

[vegster]

That's not likely to be remotely true if you think about it.

I'm just reporting the alleged news from Oldham Athletic on the issue which appears to be " don't employ the rapist Ched Evens or we will rape your daughter " It's probably not going to happen but why would a director say that unless it is true ?

 

[Tooting Gull]

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

 

[wellquickwoody]

I've yet to see anyone in favour of 'mob rule' myself.

All those who have petitioned against his re-employment are partaking in mob rule in my book.

 

[spring hall convert]

All those who have petitioned against his re-employment are partaking in mob rule in my book.

Including fans of those clubs Evans has been alleged to be signing for?

 

[aolstudios]

All those who have petitioned against his re-employment are partaking in mob rule in my book.

or legitimate protest, of course...

 

[Triggaaar]

I could be wrong here but I'm sure I read somewhere that they were specifically instructed not to link the memory loss and consent - that they were two separate issues.

And on this you are right, it may well have affected the jury. It shouldn't have but it might have done.

It's not as clear cut as that. Someone might be able to give consent, and still not remember, but the memory loss is still a message to the jury that she was very drunk, just as was her urinating in the street, and being unsteady on her feet etc.

Well, you said 'how the **** are they supposed to do that", and within that summary it has the directions the jury was given by the judge, and why the appeal judges didn't grant an appeal on the basis that in their opinion the jury had been properly directed and reached a sound decision.

I don't think the appeal judges have said it was a sound decision. More like that the jury were told what they had to do, and they did it. It's not for the appeal judges to question the decision of the jury. We of course, are allowed to question it. I didn't witness the trial, so I don't know what influenced their decision, but I do find it hard to see how they could be sure she was too drunk to give consent.

One would presume they made their judgements on the evidence presented. Obviously some people like yourself don't understand how that is possible from what you have read of the case, but in real terms your opinion would have been represented on that jury and through deliberation they returned a unanimous verdict.

Well no, my opinion would not necessarily have been represented on that jury. We don't know who the jury members were or what they thought. Not that my opinion is fully formed - maybe if I was on the jury I'd have voted the same as they did. I know what the judges directions were, concluding with "So you will need to consider the evidence of the complainant's state and decide these two questions: was she in a condition in which she was capable of making any choice one way or another?..." and I am saying that must be very tough, maybe impossible, for a jury to accurately decide.

 

[Triggaaar]

All those who have petitioned against his re-employment are partaking in mob rule in my book.

Some people have made threats to the members of the Oldham board. That's the big problem here. That is not the same as an Oldham fan saying that they don't want to sit with their family and celebrate a goal scored by a convicted rapist. You may or may not agree with them, but that view alone is not in itself mob rule, IMO.

Those who aren't Oldham fans who are signing the petition will have widely varying reasons, some of which will be a lot more sensible than others.