Actually it does.
The purpose of the police interview is not as a neutral arbritation to establish the truth. Sadly ( and this where the system needs root and branch reform ), it is to build a case against the accused. Tapes of interviews are gone over with a fine toothcomb in order to see if...
No he couldn't.
Without considering anything else, 23 goals in 99 Championship appearances ( and 1 goal in 26 PL appearances ) is not the record of a striker that we should be looking to sign.
Of course, this ruling mob is a fantasy, and nowhere to be seen in reality ( unless you hold the view that, by definition, all petitions are some sort of 'mob rule').
Sadly this thread should run out of steam pretty soon, as it's just going around in circles now.
The one on the Oldham board is only running at about 1000 posts more than this one.
It'll take another side to try and sign Evans to get many more postings on this thread, until his case review...
No never. But, surely it seems a more sensible approach to ask the author directly than to get posters on here to guess his evidence, meaning, or thought processes ?
The author now has no means of reply to your slant on his article.
You keep missing my point entirely which was that you cannot say that those who oppose Ched Evans' signing at Oldham, approve of someone else being raped. It simply is not true.
That's all good, but my post was specifically referencing your words 'So the objectors are against rape but only in certain cases.', which, as I say, really cannot be claimed in all seriousness.
Thankfully our supporters weren't put in this position.
The latest is that it seems Oldham have pulled back from the abyss. Sensible rethink in my opinion.