Paxton Dazo
Up The Spurs.
- Mar 11, 2007
- 9,719
Absolute joke the girl should stay unnamed. She's made his life hell, and very nearly ruined his career.
Not right at all.
Not right at all.
Absolute joke the girl should stay unnamed. She's made his life hell, and very nearly ruined his career.
Not right at all.
I don't think [MENTION=31]El Presidente[/MENTION]'s printer could cope.
Absolute joke the girl should stay unnamed. She's made his life hell, and very nearly ruined his career.
Not right at all.
Absolute joke the girl should stay unnamed. She's made his life hell, and very nearly ruined his career.
Not right at all.
Very interesting read (nothing libellous or defamatory - Just a straight forward explanation of how the verdict was reached):
https://thesecretbarrister.com/2016/10/14/10-myths-busted-about-the-ched-evans-case/
10. What does this whole affair say about our society?
Christ knows. Nothing good.
Absolute joke of an article. Tarring the whole of football with the actions of a minority. That coming from someone who's colleagues paid to hack the phone of a dead girl. Perhaps we should think of all journalists as lowlife like that. As for the comment about the PFA teams he wasn't convicted until 20th April that is certainly long after ballot papers were returned (the ceremony was only 2 days later). The vote is not by the PFA but by fellow professionals!
I'm actually starting to get sick of reading reports like this, by women, that don't know how the law operates in cases/trials like this.
Blimey. You are angry!
It's not a joke, it's important that women feel able to report rape, and anonymity is crucial to that.Absolute joke the girl should stay unnamed.
I'm not too convinced by her actions, but I question the ability of the first jury more. I'm well aware they didn't have the extra witnesses, but that didn't change much.She's made his life hell, and very nearly ruined his career.
Yeah, but she basically had to agree. For example, had she said that she does get forgetful after getting drunk, and it was possible that she hadn't been raped, and that yes, '**** me harder' does sound a bit like me, it would never have gone to court. But then she wouldn't have won big would she.Don't forget, it wasn't her who accused Evans of rape, it was the Police/CPS.
Yeah, but she basically had to agree. For example, had she said that she does get forgetful after getting drunk, and it was possible that she hadn't been raped, and that yes, '**** me harder' does sound a bit like me, it would never have gone to court. But then she wouldn't have won big would she.
Yeah, but she basically had to agree. For example, had she said that she does get forgetful after getting drunk, and it was possible that she hadn't been raped, and that yes, '**** me harder' does sound a bit like me, it would never have gone to court. But then she wouldn't have won big would she.
It's a tweet she made at the time of the first trial.She has won big? How?
It's just unbelievable. I'd understand if it was a red top, but the independent are publishing that shit.Yet another poor article which is quite selective.
Yet another poor article which is quite selective. Ignore all the crap about twitter. You have to accept that morons will post shit because they think they are anonymous. The journalist seems to think that justice wasn't served here. I don't see anywhere that anyone is suggesting that the previous sexual activities of a complainant will preclude her from being raped or from making a complaint. This case was about a woman who couldn't remember what happened and the Police/CPS surmising from that that she was raped. I don't believe anyone can deny that new evidence shouldn't have been heard when you consider that, as I understand it, it suggested that the same words, same positions and same amnesia had occurred several times before (and in one case, even though she didn't remember what happened, she still had several other encounters with the same person).
The point is the new evidence doesn't prove he did not rape her (nobody will know that other than at least two of the people in the room, possibly all three) but it introduces a much greater element of doubt. I would suggest the journalist isn't interested in justice but is just taking a very one sided view of the whole affair.
I can't comment on the trend, as I don't follow other cases, but that does seem to be the reaction of many regarding this case. Just because there wasn't sufficient (or indeed any) evidence in this case doesn't mean anything about other cases, it doesn't mean drunk women are fair game. It's just one case, with a unique set of circumstances.There seems to be a trend that if a rape conviction is overturned or an alleged rapist is acquitted, that it will deter women from reporting their own experience. It's a form of 'crusade'.