Ched Evans

[spring hall convert]

Bloody good article from Paul Hayward in the Telegraph here.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...d-idiotic-clubs-all-disgraced-themselves.html

 

[Triggaaar]

If he wins the appeal and that doesn't change the majority's perception of him, ie a rapist, then that is a sad indictment of our society!

You doubt his current conviction, why would it be a sad indictment if people don't believe in a future appeal acquittal? They'd be in the same position you are in now - arguing against a court decision.

If drew doubts the conviction, that's not the same as writing he's innocent in capital letters. If Evans got and won an appeal, many people would still think he might have been guilty, and could still question the decision, but do you think the majority of people would still be writing he's guilty in capital letters? No, don't be silly.

 

[Lower West Stander]

So the first doesn't include 'my behaviour', but if not for his behaviour, what is he apologising for?

Wow, that's amazing. So, hypothetically, if you were falsely convicted of rape, and you had the chance to clear your name, you'd say 'nah, I'll just apologise for the crime I didn't commit.' Just wow.

He hasn't even got an appeal, but if he gets one, and if he wins, then of course it will change people perception.

I don't think she did, but victims often do withhold evidence for a variety of reasons, like being scared, feeling guilt or shame etc.

No - its not "just amazing". You are taking my whole quote completely out of context. The point I was making was ultimately whether Evans would be viewed differently by the public at large whether or not he has been found guilty. He has already been punished and gone to prison. It could very well be his lack of ability to make public statements as a result of his appeal could do more harm than good to his ability to play football professionally again. Is this worth it to him? I simply do not know the answer to this question - it was a general observation.

Please stop taking peoples quotes out of context and manipulating them to suit your own argument.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Regarding Oldham….

Do people seriously believe they pulled out of the Evan's deal because of a petition and some threats, or because all their sponsors were going to walk?

These vile threats are disgusting, but also convenient for their chairman to blame it on. Greater Manchester Police said no threats are being investigated because no complaints have been made. Yes, I can be cynical.

There is no MOB RULE here. Oldham backed out because their sponsors threatened to walk. MONEY is the rule here, not the mob.

 

[Triggaaar]

Bloody good article from Paul Hayward in the Telegraph here.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...d-idiotic-clubs-all-disgraced-themselves.html

Not so sure about that:
"At least three football clubs ignored the nuances of his case and tried to present it purely as a rehabilitation of offenders issue." Where's his evidence that they ignored the nuances of the case?
"By a remarkable coincidence, many of those who believe he was wrongly convicted happen to be associated with clubs who wanted to sign him" - Where's his evidence for that?
"The PFA, who are failing in their duty to educate young players, placed all their bets on Evans’ “right” to return to the game, when a more responsible policy would have been to tell him to wait until his final appeal had been heard." - they couldn't legally tell him to wait. They could have talked to him about how this might unfold, but so could his lawyers.
"Gordon Taylor’s organisation wasted an opportunity to send a potentially life-shaping message to all rich young athletes: the law applies to you as well." - what? The law is being applied to him as well. What is he talking about?
"all because Ched Evans walked out of prison thinking he just needed a good PR campaign to get back on the pitch" - well, he can read Ched's mind, so that's something at least.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Bloody good article from Paul Hayward in the Telegraph here.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...d-idiotic-clubs-all-disgraced-themselves.html

Well, I couldn't be in much more agreement with him, and have been banging on about the FA and PFA for a couple of days.

It's nice to see Paul in the family stand regularly. I don't know him to talk to, but often see him at the games.

 

[BensGrandad]

Didnt his father in law say he would guarantee any shortfall from the sponsors.

 

[Driver8]

Regarding Oldham….

Do people seriously believe they pulled out of the Evan's deal because of a petition and some threats, or because all their sponsors were going to walk?

These vile threats are disgusting, but also convenient for their chairman to blame it on. Greater Manchester Police said no threats are being investigated because no complaints have been made. Yes, I can be cynical.

There is no MOB RULE here. Oldham backed out because their sponsors threatened to walk. MONEY is the rule here, not the mob.

I think Nandos was the clincher.

 

[Triggaaar]

I am starting to wonder whether Evans determination to get the verdict overturned is doing more harm than good for him.
I think he's restricted by what he can say because of this, but he's served his time and been released. If he'd offered an unreserved apology and got on with his life, I think there is a greater possibility that he would be playing again by now.

No - its not "just amazing". You are taking my whole quote completely out of context. The point I was making was ultimately whether Evans would be viewed differently by the public at large whether or not he has been found guilty.

Of course he'd be viewed differently if he'd apologised for raping her etc. He could have come up with an almighty apology about how he'd harmed her life because of a terrible misjudgment etc. But if he is actually innocent, how could he possibly do that?

It could very well be his lack of ability to make public statements as a result of his appeal could do more harm than good to his ability to play football professionally again. Is this worth it to him?

If he's innocent, then I'd suggest it is worth it, yes. He'll get a decision one way or the other in the next few years.

Please stop taking peoples quotes out of context and manipulating them to suit your own argument.

Oh get over yourself, I did no such thing.

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

Not so sure about that:
"At least three football clubs ignored the nuances of his case and tried to present it purely as a rehabilitation of offenders issue." Where's his evidence that they ignored the nuances of the case?
"By a remarkable coincidence, many of those who believe he was wrongly convicted happen to be associated with clubs who wanted to sign him" - Where's his evidence for that?
"The PFA, who are failing in their duty to educate young players, placed all their bets on Evans’ “right” to return to the game, when a more responsible policy would have been to tell him to wait until his final appeal had been heard." - they couldn't legally tell him to wait. They could have talked to him about how this might unfold, but so could his lawyers.
"Gordon Taylor’s organisation wasted an opportunity to send a potentially life-shaping message to all rich young athletes: the law applies to you as well." - what? The law is being applied to him as well. What is he talking about?
"all because Ched Evans walked out of prison thinking he just needed a good PR campaign to get back on the pitch" - well, he can read Ched's mind, so that's something at least.

Why not comment on the article directly, or ask the author to clarify your points ?

 

[Bold Seagull]

Why not comment on the article directly, or ask the author to clarify your points ?

I thought that. Poor old spring, he's on the email to Paul Hayward trying to get some answers!

 

[Acker79]

I thought Evans' statement was a good start, and might have done enough to soften views if he kept a low profile.

Now he has either amended the statement or released a second that ruins any goodwill he built with the first with a statement that uses this silly 'mob rule' argument to minimise the seriousness of people's issue with an unapologetic convicted rapist taking up a high profile public eye, role model job, then refers to the threat to other people's livelihoods, trying to paint himself as a hero for walking away.

But it also contradicts Oldham, and now the PFA are doing that.

Oldham talked of the PFA driving the deal, even though they claimed it was something they wanted to do, because it's the right thing to do, because they are steadfast in their desire to sign him. They claim they pulled out despite this steadfast desire to sign him that would not be shaken because of the threat of sponsors with drawing their support, the reaction of fans, the moral disagreement of so many people and the threats we've received threats that were so serious they reversed this absolute steadfast desire to sign him, but haven't bothered to report it to the police. Now Evans is claiming he pulled out because he's a hero, or words to that effect.

It makes it hard to believe anyone.

http://www1.skysports.com/football/...blames-mob-rule-over-collapsed-move-to-oldham

 

[Guerrero]

Just something that bothers me.
If the girl in question was too drunk to consent to sex with Evans,after she had sex with McDonald,who presumably booked the hotel room knowing what a state she was in.How was she not too drunk to consent to sex with McDonald?
If she had sex with Evans after McDonald,it would mean that her last drink would have been longer ago and she would have taken part in physical activity and burned off some alcohol.Thus meaning that she would have been more sober with Evans than with McDonald.
Have I missed something?

 

[Bold Seagull]

Just something that bothers me.
If the girl in question was too drunk to consent to sex with Evans,after she had sex with McDonald,who presumably booked the hotel room knowing what a state she was in.How was she not too drunk to consent to sex with McDonald?
If she had sex with Evans after McDonald,it would mean that her last drink would have been longer ago and she would have taken part in physical activity and burned off some alcohol.Thus meaning that she would have been more sober with Evans than with McDonald.
Have I missed something?

Yes, 2000 previous posts!!

 

[Lower West Stander]

I am starting to wonder whether Evans determination to get the verdict overturned is doing more harm than good for him.
I think he's restricted by what he can say because of this, but he's served his time and been released. If he'd offered an unreserved apology and got on with his life, I think there is a greater possibility that he would be playing again by now.
Of course he'd be viewed differently if he'd apologised for raping her etc. He could have come up with an almighty apology about how he'd harmed her life because of a terrible misjudgment etc. But if he is actually innocent, how could he possibly do that?

If he's innocent, then I'd suggest it is worth it, yes. He'll get a decision one way or the other in the next few years.

Oh get over yourself, I did no such thing.

I note you've left out my comments about this being a general observation - just about the only part of my last comment you omitted. I am not stating facts here merely making observations about how the situation may be perceived by others and whether he could have handled it better. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but that's all it is - an opinion.

 

[symyjym]

I thought Evans' statement was a good start, and might have done enough to soften views if he kept a low profile.

Now he has either amended the statement or released a second that ruins any goodwill he built with the first with a statement that uses this silly 'mob rule' argument...........

So he thinks he can take the moral high ground with a mob rule claim when he has acted like a pack animal.

 

[Guerrero]

Yes, 2000 previous posts!!

Wow!

Nearly as many Misses as Jimmy Saville.

 

[Creaky]

Wow, that's amazing. So, hypothetically, if you were falsely convicted of rape, and you had the chance to clear your name, you'd say 'nah, I'll just apologise for the crime I didn't commit.' Just wow.

This case is very different than most where the defendant claims their innocence following conviction.

Normally in such cases it's a matter of whether or not a particular act was carried out by an individual - not so in the case of Ched Evans. The whole question of guilt or innocence revolves not around how Evans behaved but whether or not the girl was so drunk that she was not in a position to give consent or whether she was just very drunk but still was able to grant that consent. None of that changes in any way the actions of Ched Evans.

As the girl can't remember what happened that night any decision of guilt or innocence in legal terms was bound to be contentious and lay at the door of twelve people to decide having heard the evidence presented in court.

None of that however changes one iota the way Evans behaved and he either feels that the way he behaved is something he should apologise for or not. Had he apologised from day one it would not have had any affect on the legal decision on the state the girl was in but would have demonstrated that he recognised that how he did behave is not acceptable to the majority of people. All his refusal, up until now, to apologise has done is to reinforce the perception that he saw nothing wrong in what he did. Just because particular behaviour may be legal, (as it would have been in this instance had the verdict been different), doesn't make it right nor something that shouldn't be apologised for.

I fully support Evans's right to follow all legal paths to prove his innocence in law and have many doubts in my mind as to whether or not the guilty verdict is sound and how it was possible for the jury to come to that conclusion beyond a reasonable doubt. I do however firmly believe that the way he behaved was something he should be ashamed of and for which he should apologise for unreservedly.

 

[Creaky]

Just something that bothers me.
If the girl in question was too drunk to consent to sex with Evans,after she had sex with McDonald,who presumably booked the hotel room knowing what a state she was in.How was she not too drunk to consent to sex with McDonald?
If she had sex with Evans after McDonald,it would mean that her last drink would have been longer ago and she would have taken part in physical activity and burned off some alcohol.Thus meaning that she would have been more sober with Evans than with McDonald.
Have I missed something?

Yes - and been answered a number of times on this thread.

There are two defences to this type of rape charge - the first is that the alleged victim was able to give consent and the second that any 'reasonable' person would believe that the alleged victim had consented.

In the case of McDonald the jury decided that he had a reasonable belief the girl consented whether or not that was the case - in the case of Evans they decided that there wasn't such a reasonable belief and that the girl was too drunk to consent.

Oh and it was Evans who booked the room.

 

[Triggaaar]

I note you've left out my comments about this being a general observation - just about the only part of my last comment you omitted.

When I quote people, I often don't include the whole quote because I want it to be clear which part I'm replying to. Your post started with a paragraph that said "I am starting to wonder whether Evans determination to get the verdict overturned is doing more harm than good for him." That's what I was disagreeing with, so I don't see how quoting it is out of context.
You went further and said that "If he'd offered an unreserved apology and got on with his life, I think there is a greater possibility that he would be playing again by now." - I'm sure you're right, but this is a small point in the big scheme of things. If he does that, he will spend the rest of his long life as a convicted rapist. If he knows that he is innocent, and has the chance to clear his name, of course he will take it, even if it means he's less likely to return to football for a bit longer.

I am not stating facts here merely making observations about how the situation may be perceived by others and whether he could have handled it better. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but that's all it is - an opinion.

Yes, fair enough. I think it's fairly obvious he could have handled it better, which I imagine is the fault of his advisers. But I don't think any of us would just apologise for raping someone, and try to move on, if we knew we were innocent (of course he may know he's guilty, which makes this long drawn out denial even worse, I'm just saying it's possible he's not).