Ched Evans

[Hamilton]

As you implied previously, too many people are making emotional rather than subjective comments.

With regard to one of your comments, I wasn't aware that the girl supposedly knew McDonald. As he was friends with Evans who was from that area, is it possible, or even probably, that she knew Evans as well? The other thing is what happened between 2005 with the 'drunken consent' case and the Evans case that made the judges in the latter not rule on the same basis?

Blimey, you really are working on the case for the defence aren't you. You're not by chance on Evan's legal team are you?

A lot of the emotion on this thread is down to people taking entrenched positions, as you and I know to our cost.

I'm still unconvinced that the trial judge has messed up. Having read the courtroom accounts to my mind it appears that he does cover the issue of 'drunk consent is still consent' even if he didn't use those words. But as Scunner makes clear, he didn't use those words and sadly that is an issue.

 

[symyjym]

Was it Evans that filmed her?

What difference does it make if he was filming her or was with the person who was filming her. The boundaries were broken and he was party to it.

 

[Yoda]

Was it Evans that filmed her?

No, it was Evans' other mate's who were in his taxi. They went around back and tried to film. It was proved in court that you couldn't make anything out.

 

[drew]

Give it a rest Drew, if you didn't know that she knew McDonald you clearly haven't taken the time to even read the case and timeline of the event.

And what has knowing someone got to do with being entitled to have sex with them?

Well pardon me for not know every single detail of the case. I hadn't seen 'the friendship' mentioned before on this thread and not seen it in any of the public documents for which links have been given.

 

[drew]

What difference does it make if he was filming her or was with the person who was filming her. The boundaries were broken and he was party to it.

Where is the evidence or even the suggestion that he was party to it? Are you suggesting he said to them ' look, I'm going to rape her, see what you can get on film through the window'! Gosh, it all makes sense now.

 

[symyjym]

Well pardon me for not know every single detail of the case. I hadn't seen 'the friendship' mentioned before on this thread and not seen it in any of the public documents for which links have been given.

Hillian posted this link 3 days ago, and suggested that you to have a look. If you are going to argue about something at least be courteous and view the case details that were provided on this thread.

https://www.crimeline.info/uploads/cases/2012ewcacrim2559.rtf

Just in case anyone wants to know the courts ruling and why.

Argue against this if you want, but as stated before I'll go with our legal system.

Did I spell everything correctly Drew?

I know how much that means to you

Point 4) Top of second page:

4) The facts are these. The complainant, who was 19 years old, worked as a waitress in a restaurant attached to a hotel in Ruddlan, North Wales. The applicant and McDonald were close friends.

 

[drew]

Hillian posted this link 3 days ago, and suggested that you to have a look. If you are going to argue about something at least be courteous and view the case details that were provided on this thread.



Point 4) Top of second page:

4) The facts are these. The complainant, who was 19 years old, worked as a waitress in a restaurant attached to a hotel in Ruddlan, North Wales. The applicant and McDonald were close friends.

I had read it but missed that point. My sincere apologies.

 

[portlock seagull]

I'd just like to remind everyone before we get to 70 pages that the court of appeal is NOT looking to canvass NSC's opinion.

Now please continue.

 

[nwgull]

Hillian posted this link 3 days ago, and suggested that you to have a look. If you are going to argue about something at least be courteous and view the case details that were provided on this thread.



Point 4) Top of second page:

4) The facts are these. The complainant, who was 19 years old, worked as a waitress in a restaurant attached to a hotel in Ruddlan, North Wales. The applicant and McDonald were close friends.

This says that Evans and McDonald were good friends. Nothing about the victim.

 

[symyjym]

This says that Evans and McDonald were good friends. Nothing about the victim.

My bad

 

[drew]

Hillian posted this link 3 days ago, and suggested that you to have a look. If you are going to argue about something at least be courteous and view the case details that were provided on this thread.



Point 4) Top of second page:

4) The facts are these. The complainant, who was 19 years old, worked as a waitress in a restaurant attached to a hotel in Ruddlan, North Wales. The applicant and McDonald were close friends.

I had read it but missed that point. My sincere apologies.

In my haste to apologise, I misread it and thanks to nwgull for pointing out your error! I'm sure you appreciate the applicant was Ched Evans!

So perhaps you could trawl through all the info again and let me know where it shows that she was known to McDonald?

 

[drew]

I'd just like to remind everyone before we get to 70 pages that the court of appeal is NOT looking to canvass NSC's opinion.

Now please continue.

For heaven's sake, we aren't even half way there yet. We've got the decision of the CCRC to look forward to and then potential the Court of Appeal. This thread has a long way to go!!!

 

[symyjym]

In my haste to apologise, I misread it and thanks to nwgull for pointing out your error! I'm sure you appreciate the applicant was Ched Evans!

So perhaps you could trawl through all the info again and let me know where it shows that she was known to McDonald?

I misread it too when looking back at the case notes because I thought that was where I had seen it. But it was mentioned on the thread here and maybe in earlier posts, not in the document.

Emotionally I think we could all agree with that...however, she was a friend of Macdonald prior to the night concerned, a 'good friend' apparently. So this raises other questions, some of which may invalidate the totally disassociated conclusions you come to above. And may yet in the future......

 

[Steve.S]

So, just to boil your argument down, you are suggesting that a civilian convicted of any crime which he honestly believes to be unjust, should admit guilt to serve the purpose of his wider profession, a profession not implicated in any way by way of that individual's conduct? This is truly nuts.

Firstly: No,at the moment he has been found guilty by 12 of his peers, so he is not innocent in the eyes of the law and at this present time has to sign the sex offenders register, like it or not the jury has decided.

Secondly: you may want to brush over of some of the sordid events, but as you ask. Perhaps you think it's alright for someone one in a relationship to cheat on his girlfriend, yes or no has he nothing there to apologise for? Then he responded to a text from a friend offering sex with a girl on a plate and he was around there like a shot, again is that the right message to send out to young people. Then he finds the girl in a drunken state and out of it, let's face she could not remember much. Is it ok to take advantage of that situation and have sex with her. At best she was used like a piece of meat and at worst she was raped, I bet his parents are proud of him. Take aside the rape, as I have said that's for his conscience, but is that really a way to treat a women sharing her with a mate. If he could not give his girlfriend a second thought as he was having sex, do you think he put any thought into the victim. I do not think anyone on here really thinks,even if he eventually gets of the rape charge that on that night he didn't act in a despicable way with no regard to a young girl,
You and he just do not seem to get public opinion, he is being steered in the wrong direction on this.

Just to add to your point about his profession, yes I do think they need to act on his guilty verdict, he has to sign the sex offenders register which would preclude him from working with children and vulnerable people. I am sure in most football clubs you have youngsters under the age of 18 in Development squads etc, So yes clubs and the FA can take a moral stance on this, nothing in law that says a clubs has to give him a job.

 

[BensGrandad]

The One Show while trying to appear neutral tended to side with the anti Evans brigade

 

[nwgull]

Firstly: No,at the moment he has been found guilty by 12 of his peers, so he is not innocent in the eyes of the law and at this present time has to sign the sex offenders register, like it or not the jury has decided.

Secondly: you may want to brush over of some of the sordid events, but as you ask. Perhaps you think it's alright for someone one in a relationship to cheat on his girlfriend, yes or no has he nothing there to apologise for? Then he responded to a text from a friend offering sex with a girl on a plate and he was around there like a shot, again is that the right message to send out to young people. Then he finds the girl in a drunken state and out of it, let's face she could not remember much. Is it ok to take advantage of that situation and have sex with her. At best she was used like a piece of meat and at worst she was raped, I bet his parents are proud of him. Take aside the rape, as I have said that's for his conscience, but is that really a way to treat a women sharing her with a mate. If he could not give his girlfriend a second thought as he was having sex, do you think he put any thought into the victim. I do not think anyone on here really thinks,even if he eventually gets of the rape charge that on that night he didn't act in a despicable way with no regard to a young girl,
You and he just do not seem to get public opinion, he is being steered in the wrong direction on this.

The law sees him as guilty of rape; you are correct about that. And, as such, has been punished as the law sees fit.

However, as for you second point, when did you become our moral guardian? What gives you the right to say what how he should conduct his relationship with his girlfriend or sex life (other than it should be lawful).

 

[Steve.S]

I get Chad Evans, let's face it all the time he maintains his innocence, he has hope of getting his old life back and probably keeping his girlfriend and the rich father in law, the moment he admits to it, his life is over and he will be forever called a rapist, so it's in his interest to fight this all his life.

What I do not get on here is people defending him, yes there are miscarriages of justice. But a jury found him guilty and since two judges have also looked at the evidence and found the conviction safe. If you are asking the question do I need to listen to some posters on here, who haven't the first clue about the judicial process,or a couple of judges with years of experience, I know who I would side with. And if you add the trial judge, then that 3 judges, are we expected to believe that they are incompetent. He was guilty then and he is guilty now and will be guilty in the future. It would be better for him to man up and admit some responsibility.

 

[Acker79]

Which forms part of what I read. And this summing up begs the question: how can it be interpreted fairly when applied to both defendants? I don't think it can.

This is an issue that has been covered many times in this thread, the only difference is that the post above yours that copied some of a summary of the case glosses over a key aspect: it wasn't simply whether she consented, or her intent or ability to consent, it was also Mcdonald's and Evans's belief about whether or not she consented.

This paragraph

The complainant, who was 19 years old, worked as a waitress in a restaurant attached to a hotel. The applicant and McDonald were close friends. There was no doubt that McDonald had sexual intercourse with the girl on the night of 29/30 May 2011. Equally, there was no doubt that the applicant also had sexual intercourse with her. The issues for the jury were: whether she may have consented, although she had consumed a large quantity of alcohol; and if she did not consent, whether the applicant (and McDonald in his case) may reasonably have believed that she had consented to the sexual activity which took place between her and McDonald and between her and the applicant. The complainant stated that she had no memory of any sexual activity with either of the two men.​

This aspect of it is glossed over further down

He went on to explain: "A woman clearly does not have the capacity to make a choice if she is completely unconscious through the effects of drink and drugs, but there are various stages of consciousness, from being wide awake to dim awareness of reality. In a state of dim and drunken awareness you may, or may not, be in a condition to make choices. 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? If you are sure that she was not, then she did not consent. If, on the other hand, you conclude that she chose to agree to sexual intercourse, or may have done, then you must find the defendants not guilty."

He went on to direct the jury about the requirement relating to the individual defendant's belief about whether or not the complainant was consenting. He gave clear directions to the jury about how they should approach that issue in the context of the alcohol which had been consumed by the complainant.​

While the jury may have felt she was in no condition to consent, no condition to agree to go to the hotel with McDonald alone, they appear to have come to the conclusion that McDonald believed he had consent because she went along with him, that her getting into a taxi and going to a hotel alone with him was a circumstance that either made it reasonable for McDonald to assume consent, or that it was such a circumstance that they couldn't say beyond reasonable doubt that he was aware he didn't have it.

Evans sneaked into hotel room and had sex with a drunk woman who apparently went there without knowing Evans would be there. His friends watched and filmed it through a window until the curtains were closed.

 

[Bevendean Hillbilly]

Ask yourself this. If you were out with your mates and you came across a clearly pissed young woman falling down drunk in a kebab shop what would you do?

A. Put her in a taxi and make she got home safely
B. see her as an opportunity for group sex in a premier lodge whilst your mates filmed you through the window.

If you answered A then you are normal and decent. If you answered B you are Ched Evans.

 

[Steve.S]

The law sees him as guilty of rape; you are correct about that. And, as such, has been punished as the law sees fit.

However, as for you second point, when did you become our moral guardian? What gives you the right to say what how he should conduct his relationship with his girlfriend or sex life (other than it should be lawful).

What gives me the right, everything as we are entitled to opinion and like it or not, we are all judged on our behaviour.

Sorry but he was found guilty of rape, is that not a judgement on how he conducts his sex life?