drew
Drew
Reading your previous post, you state, 'tells you about his mindset' which, anyone who has been following this thread/story, will almost certainly assume you are referring to Evans.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Ched Evans
- Thread starter Brighton TID
- Start date
Reading your previous post, you state, 'tells you about his mindset' which, anyone who has been following this thread/story, will almost certainly assume you are referring to Evans.
drew
Drew
It is an excellent article, assuming of course that he did actually rape her!
Also, perhaps he should turn his attention to his own fraternity in the media where papers print semi nude pictures of girls. In other cases, when women are added to a cabinet, the debate is about what they wear rather than what their abilities are.
Winter is of the view it wasn't mob rule but others, not just Evans, are.
Its written in the context that Evans has been tried, and found guilty by his peers, of rape.
It's not "bird" or "girl" that's the big difference, it's "I'm with" vs "I've got". "I'm with a bird" is nicer than "I've got a girl".
nwgull
Well-known member
I don't see how this can be defined as anything but mob rule. Whether you agree with it or not, the current UK law, and rules of the governing body of his profession - the FA - allow him to continue being paid as a professional footballer, subject to a club wanting to employ him. If a club is dissuaded from doing this by death threats to the directors and the club's sponsors, then that is mob rule.
Anyone would think that he'd been let off by being out on licence after 2.5 years. Thankfully I don't have any experience of prison, but from what I hear, it is a nasty scary place, particularly for non 'career criminals'. 2.5 years inside would have been absolute hell.
Anyone would think that he'd been let off by being out on licence after 2.5 years. Thankfully I don't have any experience of prison, but from what I hear, it is a nasty scary place, particularly for non 'career criminals'. 2.5 years inside would have been absolute hell.
spring hall convert
Well-known member
Anyone watch with Julia Hartley-Brewer making a horrible pigs ear of this subject on Question Time last night?
She said that she had read extensively on the case and didn't see how one man could be found guilty and the other aquitted, which anyone with even a cursory knowledge of the chronology of the case would be able to understand. I'm suprised she hasn't copped much grief about it today.
She said that she had read extensively on the case and didn't see how one man could be found guilty and the other aquitted, which anyone with even a cursory knowledge of the chronology of the case would be able to understand. I'm suprised she hasn't copped much grief about it today.
An easy article.
He says 'Taylor’s support for Evans is deeply misguided. The fact remains that Evans has not done “his time”, that he is currently out on licence.' The player's counsel may well have said some unkind things in court about the victim, in order to sway the jury, but he / she is doing their job in representing their client. Is it not Taylor's job to represent the player? If not, then I take it back, I just thought it was his job to go with the rules in place (ie, that however much we dislike them, the current FA rules are that criminals can return to football) and represent the players.
The article says 'It was not “mob rule” that ended Evans’s proposed move to Oldham Athletic as the player naively suggested in his statement yesterday. It was people’s disgust that a convicted rapist felt he could swan back into a high-profile job after revealing no remorse for a crime that would preclude re-employment for many.'
Firstly, it's really stupid of Evans to state that it was mob rule, because it's just going to turn people against him. But that doesn't mean he was wrong. Henry Winter says it was 'people's disgust' at Evans that ended his move, but did the threats on the members of the Oldham board not have something to do with it?
I certainly agree with this though:
"Law schools and colleges offering PR courses will surely stage Ched Evans seminars in the future, focusing on “how not to conduct a campaign for your client”, using all the myriad mistakes by Evans’s ‘people’."
Evans is being incredibly stupid, he must be getting very poor advice. If he was getting good advice, he'd be making very humble, sensitive and apologetic statements - and I'd largely ignore them, because I'd know they're from his lawyers. As it is, he's making all the wrong statements, which I largely put down to him being an idiot and getting very poor advice. I'm not going to read too much into them at this stage.
aolstudios
Well-known member
spring hall convert
Well-known member
Yup.
But there's also a half way house. His behaviour demonstrated a disgusting attitude towards women (which I'd imagine is prevalent in football.) If he were correctly advised he would have made some statement on contrition surrounding this on his release and also apologised for the behaviour of his fans in revealing the woman's identity. I would also have advised him to get the website down, any use it may have had has now been served.
Rape or no rape, he made mistakes and should have acknowledged them up front. I suspect he would have found finding a club much easier had he done that. Instead he's only made a statement after failing to get employed 3 times, the website is still up.
Whether it was his intention or not, his behaviour has seen him become the poster boy for frustrated mysognyists and in football's new all encompassing inclusive world that is not commensurate with him resuming his career.
nwgull
Well-known member
No one ever claimed he did or that she ever said no. What the prosecution claimed is that she was too drunk to have been able to make a conscious decision on consent (even if it may have be regretful when sobriety returned), in which case they both should've gone to prison.
I suppose I should be glad that I'm not very good looking, boring and get brewers droop. That covers most angles.
mejonaNO12 aka riskit
Well-known member
And this is where I've always struggled with trials.
Look, let me make this clear firstly. I HAVE to take the trials verdict as just. If not then literally the whole legal system goes out the window. That's not my issue.
However, I struggle, as a person, to be able to CALL someone a murderer, rapist etc whenever I personally feel ANY doubt whatsoever from the trial in my own mind, no matter how little evidence I've seen.
To say that is not a criticism of anyone in ANY WAY who are comfortable calling him "a rapist". That is what he has been found guilty of, by a jury of people who have seen FAR more evidence than I have.
However, on a personal front, I've always struggled with it. I suppose the only way I can clarify it in my mind is, if someone is found not guilty on a re-trial, I have been calling them something they were not as fact. That's why I'll always stick to "convicted murderer" as my description.
Maybe I'm just weak
You say weak, I say righteous.Maybe I'm just weak
TWOCHOICEStom
Well-known member
And this is where I've always struggled with trials.
Look, let me make this clear firstly. I HAVE to take the trials verdict as just. If not then literally the whole legal system goes out the window. That's not my issue.
However, I struggle, as a person, to be able to CALL someone a murderer, rapist etc whenever I personally feel ANY doubt whatsoever from the trial in my own mind, no matter how little evidence I've seen.
To say that is not a criticism of anyone in ANY WAY who are comfortable calling him "a rapist". That is what he has been found guilty of, by a jury of people who have seen FAR more evidence than I have.
However, on a personal front, I've always struggled with it. I suppose the only way I can clarify it in my mind is, if someone is found not guilty on a re-trial, I have been calling them something they were not as fact. That's why I'll always stick to "convicted murderer" as my description.
Maybe I'm just weak
Very good post.
aolstudios
Well-known member
A unanimous jury & two judges seem to have been convinced. Maybe they had more evidence than you
are you sure?
Withdean11
Well-known member
Really? So by that basis, if you have a night out consume plenty of alcohol, wake up in bed with someone and have no memory of going there, they have raped you?
Hmm;how do you view,'I've pulled a bird/girl? Or just,'I've pulled.'An expression often used in my younger days.