Ched Evans

[Steve.S]

If she has withdrawn her consent then from that point forward it's rape.

Actually the point was aimed at the 'degrees' of rape apologists, "he didn't punch her, so it's not so bad" types, however no consent, withdrawn consent or incapable of consent = rape.

Just a question, if both parties are incapable, who gets charged?

 

[The Large One]

Paul Heaton has now resigned from the Sheffield United Foundation.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Just a question, if both parties are incapable, who gets charged?

Have you not answered your own question there?

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Paul Heaton has now resigned from the Sheffield United Foundation.

At what point do the "club" start questioning themselves?

 

[The Merry Prankster]

Just a question, if both parties are incapable, who gets charged?

The bloke, I would imagine, as being drunk is no defence against a criminal charge. You can't murder someone and claim it's okay because you were pissed.*



* I am not a lawyer and therefore you have not been charged extortionately for this opinion.

 

[dazzer6666]

This thread also demonstrates to me that whilst we've come a long way, we really need to educate people better on issues of consent.

Some men clearly think it is their god given right to tread a very fine line around consent, acting in a very predatory way towards vulnrable women, only to susequently fall back on the slut-shaming short skirt/ she was drunk argument. This is playing with fire.

We are all responsible for our own behaviour and we all know when we are skating on thin ice. Women rarely act in this predatory way so I really don't see why men need to.

Serious question now. Does anyone remember consent being covered in a satisfactory fashion at school? I'm early 30's and I don't.

It's very complicated - as well as straightforward consent, cases also get into the realms of ability to consent (for example when an individual has such a degree of intimidation/control/influence over another that the latter does not have the capacity to give consent). As far as I understand it consent has to be positive - by word or action or both. I am also sure the jury (and multiple judges) in the Evans case will have seen overwhelming evidence nit all of which is in the public domain.

I am also firmly in the 'rape is rape' camp - sometimes those involving psychological issues can be at least as damaging for the victim as those involving violence.

 

[symyjym]

Looks like he will land on his feet anyway.........

Millionaire father of Ched Evans's fiancee set to give rapist footballer a job if his attempt to play again fails

"The millionaire father of Evans' fiancee Natasha Massey will offer him a role at his empire, which includes high-end jewellers and a staff rewards *business.................story

So if this is the worst it will get for him there is no reason why anyone should argue that losing his football career is too harsh a price to pay.

 

[Mackenzie]

I'm sure someone will sign him, that's how football works. Morals? forget it!

 

[Beach Seagull]

Paul Heaton has now resigned from the Sheffield United Foundation.

You'd have thought that if he felt that strongly about it he wouldve resigned when they signed Marlon King.

 

[portlock seagull]

I'm sure someone will sign him, that's how football works. Morals? forget it!

Precisely. Lee Hughes killed someone and went on to play for several more clubs. Football is like a tortued soul constantly trying to walk the wire of role modelling. Something that's hard to do with FIFA in charge! Better just forget trying to pretend. Causes all of this and contradictions are only a short pass away!

 

[Acker79]

Okay, I'll bite.

You say that like I'm fishing, as if my explanation as to why I don't think the video is reliable proof of how the alcohol affects her mind is some how an attempt to antagonise a response.

I referred to the video but it is just one bit of evidence which, despite repeated requests, Hillian took an age to admit to seeing and then, rather than commenting on what he saw tried to suggest it was about reading her mind!!!
Take the video, which I stated wasn't great, in conjunction with other evidence, ie that she was two and half times the legal drink drive limit, which others suggest is about a bottle of wine, the expert who stated that she even though she may not remember the next morning that wouldn't mean should couldn't have made a reasonable decision to consent. The toxicology report that suggested she had consumed cocaine a few days before which, admittedly, doesn't affect the events of that night but may, in the mind of some, suggest she was the pure and innocent victim that some seem to paint her as.

An expert arranged by the defence estimated her Blood alcohol level at 2.5 times the legal drink drive limit. They are hardly likely to get someone in who is going to confirm she was absolutely blathered, are they? There was the BBC programme a while back showing the way alcohol affects different people differently. This thread contains anecdotal evidence of the different affects alcohol can have dependant on type of alcohol, mood, tolerance, etc.

So what if she has cocaine in her blood. That doesn't mean she can't be or that she deserves to be raped. Rape is a crime whether you're a regular at your local church or have a criminal record a mile long. The only relevance that having cocain and cannabis in her blood is that it will also affect her to some degree.

I love it how on here all the bar room barristers come out passing judgement on a person when they know absolutely nothing whatsoever about the case apart from what we have been fed by hacks trying to make up a story to fill their sheets.

NSC at its finest!

This seems very much like a post from someone who hasn't actually bothered to read the thread. Which person is being judged based on hacks filling their pages? The one who was convicted in a court of law, who has created a website putting all his evidence into the public domain, and the various court papers that are part of the public record that have been linked on here, or the woman (for whom the discussions use the same source materials)?

One thing that gets my goat is the use of 'convicted rapist' repetitively on the BBC or you on this thread.

As well as other responses to this point, I think there is a degree of if he gets his conviction overturned people who called him a rapist may be embarrassed by it, whereas 'convicted rapist' somehow gives them wiggle room.

Also, whether there are different degrees to the crime, being convicted of any degree of rape makes you a rapist.

This thread also demonstrates to me that whilst we've come a long way, we really need to educate people better on issues of consent.
...
Serious question now. Does anyone remember consent being covered in a satisfactory fashion at school? I'm early 30's and I don't.

There's a petition to get improve this here: https://www.change.org/p/david-came...ips-gender-stereotypes-and-online-pornography

Yes of course, shortly before ejaculation the male might find it nearly impossible to withdraw, I suspect you knew what I meant.

It's really not. I speak from experience (not from consent being withdrawn, but the realisation that we had gotten carried away and forgotten protection - lucky escape, probably)

But date rape would be a calculated deliberate vile act that had been calculated over a long period of time. Trust me I agree rape is rape and it's a sick disgusting crime.

Point of pedantry: Date Rape is an umbrella term for a range of rape scenarios, plenty of which do not include pre-planning from the rapist. Not all date rape involves needing to prepare with drugs and target someone who leaves their drink unguarded.

 

[Steve.S]

The bloke, I would imagine, as being drunk is no defence against a criminal charge. You can't murder someone and claim it's okay because you were pissed.*



* I am not a lawyer and therefore you have not been charged extortionately for this opinion.

But did not case not establish that she was drunk therefore could not consent. Surely if a couple have sex and they are both drunk, why would the man get charged, are you saying that in law men have to take full responsibility and women do not? Why would that be.

 

[Publius Ovidius]

I bet Acker is a right laugh at a party

 

[drew]

You say that like I'm fishing, as if my explanation as to why I don't think the video is reliable proof of how the alcohol affects her mind is some how an attempt to antagonise a response.


An expert arranged by the defence estimated her Blood alcohol level at 2.5 times the legal drink drive limit. They are hardly likely to get someone in who is going to confirm she was absolutely blathered, are they? There was the BBC programme a while back showing the way alcohol affects different people differently. This thread contains anecdotal evidence of the different affects alcohol can have dependant on type of alcohol, mood, tolerance, etc. As far as I can remember, whilst it was understandably brought up by the defence, there doesn't seem to be any dispute or challenge to that evidence from the prosecution. If the basis of the prosecution was that she was too intoxicated to give consent then surely they would have had rebuttal evidence to demonstrate that. I know that we haven't seen all the evidence but surely the decision of the three appeal judges would have made reference to it!

So what if she has cocaine in her blood. That doesn't mean she can't be or that she deserves to be raped. Rape is a crime whether you're a regular at your local church or have a criminal record a mile long. The only relevance that having cocain and cannabis in her blood is that it will also affect her to some degree.

The reason I made reference to the cocaine was because certain posters were painting a picture that this girl, that none of us actually know, was a sweet little innocent teenager. She may well be but equally she might not. And before anyone jumps on that statement, no, not being sweet and innocent doesn't excuse rape. However, Hillian alluded to a sad case involving a woman who made unfounded allegations. I'm not saying the girl in this case has but would it affect people's perception if it transpired she had made numerous unfounded allegations in the past?




This seems very much like a post from someone who hasn't actually bothered to read the thread. Which person is being judged based on hacks filling their pages? The one who was convicted in a court of law, who has created a website putting all his evidence into the public domain, and the various court papers that are part of the public record that have been linked on here, or the woman (for whom the discussions use the same source materials)?




As well as other responses to this point, I think there is a degree of if he gets his conviction overturned people who called him a rapist may be embarrassed by it, whereas 'convicted rapist' somehow gives them wiggle room.

Also, whether there are different degrees to the crime, being convicted of any degree of rape makes you a rapist.

You are right, rape is rape but as someone else mentioned, the courts recognise there are different circumstances that warrant different punishments. For example do you consider a scenario where a women, well within her rights, decides to withdraw consent at the last moment and the man doesn't stop to be equal to a predatory rapist who picks on children. Both are rapists but do you think one is worse than the other?

 

[Hillian1]

You are right, rape is rape but as someone else mentioned, the courts recognise there are different circumstances that warrant different punishments. For example do you consider a scenario where a women, well within her rights, decides to withdraw consent at the last moment and the man doesn't stop to be equal to a predatory rapist who picks on children. Both are rapists but do you think one is worse than the other?

You're a very odd person Drew, Very Odd indeed.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

You are right, rape is rape but as someone else mentioned, the courts recognise there are different circumstances that warrant different punishments. For example do you consider a scenario where a women, well within her rights, decides to withdraw consent at the last moment and the man doesn't stop to be equal to a predatory rapist who picks on children. Both are rapists but do you think one is worse than the other?

To me both are rapists. This is all I really need to know.

 

[Sheebo]

You are right, rape is rape but as someone else mentioned, the courts recognise there are different circumstances that warrant different punishments. For example do you consider a scenario where a women, well within her rights, decides to withdraw consent at the last moment and the man doesn't stop to be equal to a predatory rapist who picks on children. Both are rapists but do you think one is worse than the other?

Is exactly the point I was making. Just the use of the term for someone like Ched evans to some ****er who's battered someone over the head then raped them didn't sit easy with me.

Of course the very fact that the sentance for the crime of rape varies so much between cases has to be honest proved ME right and bat other poster wrong but hey it's all about opinions - either way it's a sad case this...

 

[drew]

You're a very odd person Drew, Very Odd indeed.

Perhaps you could answer the question then. Do you think the two cases are equal or not. If you think they are equal then fair enough that is your opinion. There will be some that agree and probably just as many that don't.

 

[Sheebo]

To me both are rapists. This is all I really need to know.

I completely get what you're saying and don't want to come across as one of these (trendy word it seems!) 'rape apologists' BUT if your best mate got charged with rape would you not want to know the facts from him or her before judging? I know I would...

 

[Hillian1]

I completely get what you're saying and don't want to come across as one of these (trendy word it seems!) 'rape apologists' BUT if your best mate got charged with rape would you not want to know the facts from him or her before judging? I know I would...

12 random people, Two indepedant Judges have heard the evidence and decided that evans is a Rapist.

I'm really not sure what more you want.