Ched Evans

[Blue Valkyrie]

I can't read 105 pages and I may not beware of all the facts but....

Milliband and the Chief inspector ( and I assume many of us) are against him returning o football not because of the crime (rehabilitated) but because he shows no remorse.

Now correct me if I'm wrong but I thought that he was still maintaining his innocence. Surely that's not the same as showing no remorse is it? SDhowing no remorse means saying 'I'm not sorry it happened' whereas is he not saying "I'm innocent of the crime'?

We have all come across travesties of justice haven't we and although he is now seen as guilty in the eyes of the law he does have the right to maintain his innocence doesn't he?

As I said, please correct me if my facts are wrong.

We have also all(?) met people who have clearly done something, who continually protest their 'innocence'.

It could just be what he feels he has to do to keep his girlfriend and her family onside.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_x6QmuJdms

 

[Mattywerewolf]

I can't read 105 pages and I may not beware of all the facts but....

Milliband and the Chief inspector ( and I assume many of us) are against him returning o football not because of the crime (rehabilitated) but because he shows no remorse.

Now correct me if I'm wrong but I thought that he was still maintaining his innocence. Surely that's not the same as showing no remorse is it? SDhowing no remorse means saying 'I'm not sorry it happened' whereas is he not saying "I'm innocent of the crime'?

We have all come across travesties of justice haven't we and although he is now seen as guilty in the eyes of the law he does have the right to maintain his innocence doesn't he?

As I said, please correct me if my facts are wrong.

Dictionary definition of remorse...'deep regret or guilt for a wrong committed'. He doesn't feel he has committed a wrong so clearly doesn't feel he needs show remorse. Bandwagon Milliband should understand that.

 

[Stato]

Have to say I disagree with your last paragraph. He does have a right to pursue a career in the profession for which clearly has a skill for. However, I would clarify that in that it doesn't mean that clubs have a duty to employ him. His father in law could employ him and I believe I read somewhere that he had offered him a job. That may well be what eventually happens if he can't get a contract now or at some future date after due process is completed.

On a general point I would also add that I don't think the word 'privilege' is appropriate. Clubs basically employ players on the basis of what they can do on the pitch, provided there is no devastating 'baggage' that comes with them. Look at the likes of George Best and more recently, Suarez, Terry, Adams and no doubt there are plenty more. There is an element of luck in getting there and you hope they appreciate the position they get to. Many do, some don't.

I chose the word 'privilege' advisedly. Being paid to be a league footballer is something which is granted only to a very few. Those who, through the accident of birth, have the talent to be employed in this capacity, do have to work hard to succeed, but should understand that they have something that millions dream of. At present some seem to act with the same sense of entitlement assumed by some of those lucky enough to be born into wealth. Some seem to treat those without the same privileges as a lesser species, as people who don't matter. Regardless of the outcome of his appeal, it is this attitude which Evans has not shown remorse for. The continued campaign to undermine the victim in this case suggests that some of Evans' supporters are more concerned with his need to maintain his privileged lifestyle, than they are with her right to be treated as a human being of equal worth.

 

[SULLY COULDNT SHOOT]

We have also all(?) met people who have clearly done something, who continually protest their 'innocence'.

It could just be what he feels he has to do to keep his girlfriend and her family onside.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_x6QmuJdms

Yes it COULD be but in which case Im not sure the whole country should be getting involved... based on a 'could'... the theory is you do your time and then you are given the right to continue your life which this guy doesn't seem to be given a chance to do. if he says, 'yes, it happened but I feel no regret, she was gagging for it' for example then fine he deserves everything he gets. It seems to have gone way out of hand now. If I was him and truly felt I was innocent this hounding would have me thinking very seriously about my life( wouldn't be surprised if it made someone suicidal) and I wonder how we all would feel if he offs himself and then a year later it turns out he was innocent. This has become such a big thing in the press now and with everyone wading in from police commissioners to politicians that I can only feel this is going to end badly.

 

[Mattywerewolf]

Some seem to treat those without the same privileges as a lesser species, as people who don't matter. Regardless of the outcome of his appeal, it is this attitude which Evans has not shown remorse for.

IF he was genuinely not guilty (which he continues to argue) then I can't see why you feel he has treated her as a lesser species. In this case clearly both have shown little class but in a consenting way. IF he is genuinely guilty then clearly he should be showing remorse and your point is valid. The crux is that in his mind he has been punished for something wrongly and to expect him to show remorse is effectively asking him to admit guilt which makes no sense

 

[Triggaaar]

Ched Evans is only 26.

No rush for him.

Why not wait a few months for his case review, then either go forward and repent fully, or as an innocent.

It's not a few months. Isn't it 35 or so to see if he can have an appeal, and then a lengthy appeal after that?

By the way:
Ched has been found guilty of raping a girl, in the presence of his friend McDonald, who did nothing to help the girl. Should he not be charged with something like an accessory to commit rape?

 

[SULLY COULDNT SHOOT]

It's not a few months. Isn't it 35 or so to see if he can have an appeal, and then a lengthy appeal after that?

By the way:
Ched has been found guilty of raping a girl, in the presence of his friend McDonald, who did nothing to help the girl. Should he not be charged with something like an accessory to commit rape?

Good point.... is it perhaps they don't have enough evidence? Or is it just a justice system turning a blind eye?

 

[Publius Ovidius]

Did I read somewhere that he was originally convicted by a jury of his peers and sentenced for 5 years, he was then given leave to appeal, which he took and failed in the appeal court. He was then eventually let out on license, so still in effect serving his sentence. Now his legal team are challenging the appeal court's ruling over a technicality that is nothing to do with the verdict.

Oh and also that the victim( he is not the victim here, although you would not know it) has had to move house 5 times as she has received death threats.

 

[Stato]

IF he was genuinely not guilty (which he continues to argue) then I can't see why you feel he has treated her as a lesser species. In this case clearly both have shown little class but in a consenting way. IF he is genuinely guilty then clearly he should be showing remorse and your point is valid. The crux is that in his mind he has been punished for something wrongly and to expect him to show remorse is effectively asking him to admit guilt which makes no sense

If he is found to be not guilty of rape on appeal, he remains guilty of receiving a text saying 'I've got a bird' and taking that as an invitation to turn up uninvited to a hotel room, trick his way in and grab an opportunity to have sex with a girl he had never met. Having used her, he snuck out of the fire escape and presumably wouldn't have given her another thought had the police not got involved. These are not the actions of someone who views women, or at least this woman, as his equal.

 

[Triggaaar]

Good point.... is it perhaps they don't have enough evidence? Or is it just a justice system turning a blind eye?

Well they must have enough evidence, as they know he was there, and they know Ched raped the girl. Not only was he there, witnessing it, it was him that called Ched over for the sex in the first place.

Ched claims the girl asked him to perform oral sex on her. For him to have raped her, I assume the jury didn't believe him (I'm sure someone will say if that assumption might be wrong). What's interesting, is that McDonald would have witnessed that, and should have been a witness for Ched, but I assume he couldn't be, as he was also being charged with rape.

So either McDonald knew that Ched was raping her, and therefore he too should be charged, or he witnesses the girl asking for sex, in which case there's been a miscarriage of justice.

 

[Mattywerewolf]

If he is found to be not guilty of rape on appeal, he remains guilty of receiving a text saying 'I've got a bird' and taking that as an invitation to turn up uninvited to a hotel room, trick his way in and grab an opportunity to have sex with a girl he had never met. Having used her, he snuck out of the fire escape and presumably wouldn't have given her another thought had the police not got involved. These are not the actions of someone who views women, or at least this woman, as his equal.

IF as i made clear in my message he was NOT GUILTY then they were both in agreement with having sex, and although not classy from either of them, an adult decision.

 

[SULLY COULDNT SHOOT]

Did I read somewhere that he was originally convicted by a jury of his peers and sentenced for 5 years, he was then given leave to appeal, which he took and failed in the appeal court. He was then eventually let out on license, so still in effect serving his sentence. Now his legal team are challenging the appeal court's ruling over a technicality that is nothing to do with the verdict.

Oh and also that the victim( he is not the victim here, although you would not know it) has had to move house 5 times as she has received death threats.

The whole thing is awful because its got out of hand. Dont think the death threats came from Evans himself did they? This is trial by press as well as by justice. In the eyes of the law he is guilty. I agree he is still on licence and that mitigated him from playing abroad. What I have problem with is the public hounding. Not sure I understand but are you saying once the sentence is completed the hounding will stop? I dont think so and he will still be barred from playing. Don't you?

If you want my honest opinion I suspect he is guilty but the simple thing would be for the Justice service to make clear to him that while he is still 'serving' he should refrain from trying to get a club and then when his service is complete he will be left alone.

idealistic non?

 

[Triggaaar]

the simple thing would be for the Justice service to make clear to him that while he is still 'serving' he should refrain from trying to get a club

Presumably that would be unlawful. People who are out of prison, even if on licence, are allowed to work.

 

[nwgull]

Well they must have enough evidence, as they know he was there, and they know Ched raped the girl. Not only was he there, witnessing it, it was him that called Ched over for the sex in the first place.

Ched claims the girl asked him to perform oral sex on her. For him to have raped her, I assume the jury didn't believe him (I'm sure someone will say if that assumption might be wrong). What's interesting, is that McDonald would have witnessed that, and should have been a witness for Ched, but I assume he couldn't be, as he was also being charged with rape.

So either McDonald knew that Ched was raping her, and therefore he too should be charged, or he witnesses the girl asking for sex, in which case there's been a miscarriage of justice.

Interesting point. Correct me if wrong, but wasn't Lewis Dunk charged with something similar in the Jury's Inn incident: being in the same room (and conscious) as an alleged sexual assault took place?

Facilitating a rape would actually seem a more serious offence.

 

[Creaky]

Ched Evans maintains his claim to innocence in regard to his conviction for rape - something he has every right to do and as such can obviously not acknowledge that what he did was a crime.

However, and it is a big 'however', this is not a simple case of saying I didn't do it! He admits that he took advantage of a girl who was clearly drunk - the argument is only over whether or not she was so drunk that she couldn't consent to what happened.

Whether or not a crime was committed is surely irrelevant when it comes to expressing remorse - it would not hurt his appeal against conviction one iota if he apologised for his actions that night, called publicly for his 'supporters' to stop hounding the girl and accepted that his behaviour on that particular evening was not one that he is proud of. Even more so he should be calling on the others involved that evening to do the same.

The way his 'defence' has been presented so far suggests that he sees nothing wrong with the way he behaved and if the same 'opportunity' arose he would not behave any differently.

 

[Triggaaar]

Interesting point. Correct me if wrong, but wasn't Lewis Dunk charged with something similar in the Jury's Inn incident: being in the same room (and conscious) as an alleged sexual assault took place?

Don't get me started on that case. I read as much of it as was made public, and I couldn't understand why some of them were even charged. In both that case, and this, the victim didn't remember what had happened (just to be clear, I am not saying that no one should have been charged in this case). As far as I'm aware, Dunk was guilty of walking into a room, and going to sleep.

Facilitating a rape would actually seem a more serious offence.

I would think so.

 

[Triggaaar]

Whether or not a crime was committed is surely irrelevant when it comes to expressing remorse - it would not hurt his appeal against conviction one iota if he apologised for his actions that night, called publicly for his 'supporters' to stop hounding the girl and accepted that his behaviour on that particular evening was not one that he is proud of.

People in Ched's position don't usually come out and say what they think, they do what their legal team tell them to do, which makes me think his legal team may not have told him to do that.

Even more so he should be calling on the others involved that evening to do the same.

What others, and what have they said?

The way his 'defence' has been presented so far suggests that he sees nothing wrong with the way he behaved

Where have you read that? You can't be going on what counsel said, as it's obviously their job to defend him in court, and paint the picture that no wrong has been done.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Presumably that would be unlawful. People who are out of prison, even if on licence, are allowed to work.

There are many professionals that wouldn't be allowed to return to their previous professional status or rejoin their previous professional bodies. Not through the law or justice service, but through protection of that profession through the codes of conduct that each person agrees to abide by in being a professional person.

While they can't act retrospectively in this case, the PFA needs to review their own code for what is acceptable behaviour for the reputation of their profession from their members. They should not only be protecting their members, they should also be protecting the title 'Professional Footballer' and what that should represent.

For me, the best thing Evans could do is to take a job with a local council looking after local pitches, or some form of voluntary role while he is looking to return to the game. He has to accept that his behaviour was unacceptable to the majority of the public even if he believes he is innocent of the actual crime of rape. Instead of driving round in his Hummer just looking like the arrogant footballer I have little doubt he is, he could have spent the last 3 months rehabilitating his reputation and just getting down to a bit of hard graft. I suspect public opinion would soften and therefore clubs look more favourably at employing him if he was prepared to get his hands dirty.

 

[Stato]

IF as i made clear in my message he was NOT GUILTY then they were both in agreement with having sex, and although not classy from either of them, an adult decision.

As I understand it, Evans responded to a message saying 'I've got a bird,' by deciding not to return home, as he was in the process of doing, but by re-routing his taxi to the hotel. The message did not say 'I've got a bird, who is willing to have sex with both of us, if you can trick your way into the room.' I have seen no suggestion that the victim was told that any kind of invitation had been issued to Evans. As I understand it, her first knowledge of him was when he opened the door with the key he had gained under false pretences.

Regardless of what occurred after this point, Evans' actions up to this point suggest that he views women in a predatory way. His response to the text can be seen as 'My mate has a girl in a hotel room. That's an opportunity for me,' rather than simply sending back something saying 'Have a good night' and going home to bed.

His assumption that he could turn up uninvited and become intimately involved with a complete stranger suggest that he was not viewing this woman as a person, but as an object. Regardless of whether he considers himself guilty of a crime, he has shown no public sign of acknowledgement that this attitude to women is unacceptable. The fact that his girlfriend has accepted his infidelity and supports him suggests that he is capable of showing the kind of respect necessary to have a relationship with a woman, but that he has chose not to show it to this woman, because he did not deem her worthy of any respect. The fact that he didn't know who she was when he recieved the text would suggest that he would have treated any woman in exactly the same way in these circumstances. Ergo, whether guilty or not, he has shown absolutely no respect for women, but has not acknowledged this or apologised. This kind of mea culpa would be the absolute minimum expected if he wishes to be allowed to work again in an industry which is subject to intense public scrutiny.

I'm going to stop now because, as David Conn has rightly pointed out, the debate around this, has been far too focused on Evans' rights and very little on those of the victim.

 

[Mellotron]

The way his 'defence' has been presented so far suggests that he sees nothing wrong with the way he behaved and if the same 'opportunity' arose he would not behave any differently.

There is difference between what is right morally and legally. Understandably, his defence is focused 1000% on the legal side at the moment, I'm sure.