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

Ched Evans



spring hall convert

Well-known member
Nov 3, 2009
9,608
Brighton
Assuming the legal process has been satisfied,.... surely with him suitably rehabilitated,... he is entitled to seek and attain employment, just like every other ex-con......?

PS: I havnt read the 122 pages that preceded my post.

Yes he is. Doesn't mean someone HAS to employ him though.
 




Mellotron

I've asked for soup
Jul 2, 2008
31,914
Brighton
Yes he is. Doesn't mean someone HAS to employ him though.

Of course not. But nor should a criminal record once fully served prejudice someone against getting future employment. Otherwise we are saying we don't accept how the legal and judicial system in this country works.
 


Stat Brother

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jul 11, 2003
73,870
West west west Sussex
I keep meaning to ask, but bottle out as I don't want to be misconstrued.
But it's an itch that won't go away.

For what reason are people actually upset:-

- The crime.
- The sentence.
- The time served.
- The lack of remorse.
- All of the above.

A genuine question, that is meant in no way to belittle such an abhorrent crime.
But would the uproar be so loud if Ched had served 6 of 8 years and apologised for his actions?
 


symyjym

Banned
Nov 2, 2009
13,138
Brighton / Hove actually
What's interesting with this case is it appears that the legal definition rape is slowly being redefined before our eyes. Whilst this will be a GOOD thing in many cases, if taken too far it could pretty much mean that all drunken sex could be seen as rape, or at least worthy of an allegation. And that is VERY dangerous.

NB: None of the above means that I am a "rape apologist" nor that I am undermining the very serious crime of rape.

I think it helps define the legal definition of rape. McDonald was found not guilty but Evans was. I think the line could be drawn when one drunken sexual encounter turns into two on the night.
 


spring hall convert

Well-known member
Nov 3, 2009
9,608
Brighton
Of course not. But nor should a criminal record once fully served prejudice someone against getting future employment. Otherwise we are saying we don't accept how the legal and judicial system in this country works.

Being a footballer is not an ordinary job, it is subject to a degree of public scrutiny that is not present in other jobs. It is my view that it is a cynical and desperate club that employs an unrepentant convicted rapist. They're not doing it out of some desire to be seen as socially progressive justice advocates, they're not doing it because they believe he's been rehabilitated as he has done NOTHING to suggest he has been rehabilitated since his release. Indeed he still denies wrongdoing. Do you genuinely think if it were you or I we'd waltz back into our previous employment like nothing happened?

They're doing it because they think he'll score a few goals and they can make a quick buck off him. It's a hideously cynical decision made for all the wrong reasons.

With that I'm taking a break from this thread, it's exhausting.
 




Bold Seagull

strong and stable with me, or...
Mar 18, 2010
29,841
Hove
What's interesting with this case is it appears that the legal definition rape is slowly being redefined before our eyes. Whilst this will be a GOOD thing in many cases, if taken too far it could pretty much mean that all drunken sex could be seen as rape, or at least worthy of an allegation. And that is VERY dangerous.

NB: None of the above means that I am a "rape apologist" nor that I am undermining the very serious crime of rape.

MacDonald was acquitted in this very case. So not sure how that impacts on what you're saying, because the court accepted drunken consent despite that still be suspicious given the state we are led the victim to have been in.
 








Mellotron

I've asked for soup
Jul 2, 2008
31,914
Brighton
MacDonald was acquitted in this very case. So not sure how that impacts on what you're saying, because the court accepted drunken consent despite that still be suspicious given the state we are led the victim to have been in.

I guess my point is that this case - as is made clear by Macdonald's acquittal - is RIGHT down the line of what is rape and what isn't, thus why there has been such debate and why it isn't such a black or white, open and shut case.

I actually think Evans is probably guilty, on the balance of things. However, I think it's poor that any kind of balanced conversation is shouted down with accusations of "rape apologist". I think that really doesn't help.
 


Mellotron

I've asked for soup
Jul 2, 2008
31,914
Brighton
I think it helps define the legal definition of rape. McDonald was found not guilty but Evans was. I think the line could be drawn when one drunken sexual encounter turns into two on the night.

Quite possibly. Thank you for entering into a mature, sensible discussion with me. Very hard to find on this thread.
 
Last edited:


drew

Drew
Oct 3, 2006
23,090
Burgess Hill
I keep meaning to ask, but bottle out as I don't want to be misconstrued.
But it's an itch that won't go away.

For what reason are people actually upset:-

- The crime.
- The sentence.
- The time served.
- The lack of remorse
- All of the above.

A genuine question, that is meant in no way to belittle such an abhorrent crime.
But would the uproar be so loud if Ched had served 6 of 8 years and apologised for his actions?

It's a reasonable question. From my point of view, I wouldn't say I'm upset about it, but I am uncomfortable about the verdict based on the evidence that is in the public domain. That's not to say I know he innocent, I don't know and have never claimed that, just that I don't see that a jury could be convinced beyond reasonably doubt. No doubt there will be the usual crowd stating that I wasn't at court and the jury heard all the evidence however, did they? Was all the evidence available admissible? It would be interesting if a transcript of the trial was available online.

However, that aside I would comment as follows :- If he is guilty then obviously the problem is that the sentence is far too short for rape and the lack of remorse exacerbates that. If he shouldn't have been convicted then the lack of remorse purely in respect of rape is understandably and you wouldn't necessarily expect him to feel sympathetic to a willing sexual partner whose apparent memory loss has cost him a lucrative career and his liberty for two and half years.

With regard to playing now, i think he should wait until the CCRC have at least finished their review and, if it goes to appeal, when the appeal is over. However, I do think there is a large element of mob rule in the way these petitions are done and, as one journalist put it, 'clicktivism'.
 




brakespear

Doctor Worm
Feb 24, 2009
12,326
Sleeping on the roof
I think you'll find, that if he hadn't raped the girl in the first place then Ennis would not have been threatened, so it has got everything to do with him.
exactly. surely wouldn't have hurt whatever future appeal he or his legal team think he might get just to say that although he maintains his innocence wishes to disassociate himself from any of the actions carried
out by those who claim to 'support' him through such actions.
 
Last edited:




somerset

New member
Jul 14, 2003
6,600
Yatton, North Somerset
Legal process hasn't been satisified he is on the sex offenders register and still has the other half of his sentence to serve if hes a naughty boy
Of course its been satisfied......
 






Bold Seagull

strong and stable with me, or...
Mar 18, 2010
29,841
Hove
I guess my point is that this case - as is made clear by Macdonald's acquittal - is RIGHT down the line of what is rape and what isn't, thus why there has been such debate and why it isn't such a black or white, open and shut case.

I actually think Evans is probably guilty, on the balance of things. However, I think it's poor that any kind of balanced conversation is shouted down with accusations of "rape apologist". I think that really doesn't help.

It isn't really different to how many rape cases have been for many many years. The majority of rape cases are not necessarily physically violent or involve assault, they involve 2 people who often already know each other, and might already be in a sexual relationship. The issue of consent is the reason there is such a low conviction rate in rape cases. The benefit of doubt is with the defendant not the victim.

A jury decided that as the girl got in a cab with MacDonald knowing she was going back to a hotel with him, the likelihood was that he may have had at the very least an implied consent. The jury decided that Evans, who never met the girl, who surreptitiously gained entry to the room, who left by a back exit promptly afterward, did not.

People seem keen to suggest Evans might have had consent, but less keen to suggest it is actually MacDonald who has the miscarriage of justice of being acquitted.

I don't think this case does go right down the line of what rape is at all. I think it is reasonably straight forward decision on whether or not Evans had consent. There are far more significant cases like the wife who asked her husband to stop half way through intercourse who was subject to a controlling brutal relationship, or the boyfriend who tricked his girlfriend into having sex with him after she broke up by sending a fake text blackmailing her into it. They are defining the issue of consent because in both of those consent was initially given even if for very different reasons, and in both cases the accused were convicted.
 


seagullsovergrimsby

#cpfctinpotclub
Aug 21, 2005
43,691
Crap Town
Sky Sports News HQ ‏@SkySportsNewsHQ 20s21 seconds ago

Another development on the Ched Evans story. Club partner Nando's have ended their arrangement with Oldham. #SSNHQ

Getting serious now.
 










Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here