The footballer gets arrested thread

[LWJ]

Odd that it's her history that comes to save Evans when it was previously the point of law (regarding her ability to consent in the state she was in) that got him convicted in the first place. I'm not sure how her past behaviour in bed really changes how capable, or not, she was of consenting.

I never felt particularly comfortable with the circumstances but I do wonder if some of those who hung him out to dry on his release will offer their apologies after this verdict.

From what I read about the trial and their part in it.

They have basically come forward and said they have had intercourse with her multiple times and she has used certain phrases. Which Evans had said she used whilst with him. Suggesting that she was acting normally and like she has done during sex when consenting before.

That's my take anyway

[Winston Smith]

Just got a full screen Santander add with Ennis in it

[Winston Smith]

A convicted rapist who had served his time, would be more accurate.

I am talking about at the time she criticised SUFC.

Can't see what Ennis has to apologise for, but lots of angry men on twitter are demanding she apologises none the less

[Avon Royal]

There are no winners in this situation, only losers.

The law in this area is an utter shambles and needs to be re-drafted pronto.

The moral of the story is don't shag drunk strangers, or get so drunk that you end up shagging a stranger.

[stealthpapes]

A convicted rapist who had served his time, would be more accurate.

I am talking about at the time she criticised SUFC.

So am I.

[Winston Smith]

Ah right, gotcha, understand.

Still can't see any reason for her to apologise.

[Sanguine]

The law in this area is an utter shambles and needs to be re-drafted pronto.

Agreed. Almost seems an impossibility though. Many rape cases are a situation of one person's word against another. Which essentially becomes one person's character and behaviours against the other's. Except I don't disagree with WAR that the submission of evidence of this woman's sexual practices (which defines her behaviours in this sense) has opened a huge can of worms.

[stealthpapes]

Ah right, gotcha, understand.

Still can't see any reason for her to apologise.

I can see why she did what she did but I was always very uneasy about the "Ched Evans can never play professional football again" part, a media omni-spazz that she directly contributed to. Given the retrial, her decision was always going to be a bit attract 'comment'.

[genome]

Paging Jessica Ennis

Twitter is full of this ^

I thought Ennis just got unhappy at SUFC as they were seen to be supporting a convicted r*pist, which is what he was?

I'm just jumping on the bandwagon mate.

[bobby1413]

Logged on to Twatter and saw that Glen Little tweeted:

"Well done to the police ruining someone's life. Need to make money of speed cameras to pay ched #disgrace"

What a dick

[Hoop Blah]

Odd that it's her history that comes to save Evans when it was previously the point of law (regarding her ability to consent in the state she was in) that got him convicted in the first place. I'm not sure how her past behaviour in bed really changes how capable, or not, she was of consenting.

I never felt particularly comfortable with the circumstances but I do wonder if some of those who hung him out to dry on his release will offer their apologies after this verdict.

From what I read about the trial and their part in it.

They have basically come forward and said they have had intercourse with her multiple times and she has used certain phrases. Which Evans had said she used whilst with him. Suggesting that she was acting normally and like she has done during sex when consenting before.

That's my take anyway

He was convicted on the basis that she was too drunk to have given consent though.

She never once argued that she didn't say yes he could join in, as far as I know anyway, so even if she was going along with it willingly surely she was still too drunk to have consented to Evans.

The whole thing rests uneasy with me from day 1.

[semtex1871]

I said at the time he wasn't guilty. Another old slag out for a free night with two footballers - got to pay for it somehow?!

I hope she gets locked up......

[Hoop Blah]

Ah right, gotcha, understand.

Still can't see any reason for her to apologise.

I can see why she did what she did but I was always very uneasy about the "Ched Evans can never play professional football again" part, a media omni-spazz that she directly contributed to. Given the retrial, her decision was always going to be a bit attract 'comment'.

The whole reaction to his conviction and attempts to get on with his life after release was inappropriate considering the actual details of the case.

At the time I had an argument with a couple of women at work who were going off on one about him being a rapist etc but they had no idea about what he'd actually done.

What he did was morally pretty indefensible but all too common. If shagging someone who is too pissed to remember it is worthy of a few years in prison and a lifetime of being labelled a violent rapist then we're going have to build a shit load more prisons.

[tmesis]

I said at the time he wasn't guilty. Another old slag out for a free night with two footballers - got to pay for it somehow?!

I hope she gets locked up......

Mind you, there's nothing come to light which indicates innocence either.

The jury can't convict of the basis that they thought that it was "probably" rape. They have to believe the case was proven beyond reasonable doubt, and it would be very difficult to do that, as there is a huge amount of doubt.

It's clear he had sex with a woman who was very drunk. Unfortunately there's only person who knows quite what a state she was in, and how aware of the situation she was.

[TFF]

The Secret Barrister's view on Ched

https://thesecretbarrister.com/2016/10/ ... vans-case/

I don't know what to think to be honest - but it's quite an interesting read

[stealthpapes]

The Secret Barrister's view on Ched

https://thesecretbarrister.com/2016/10/ ... vans-case/

I don't know what to think to be honest - but it's quite an interesting read

I like #10.

[Winston Smith]

If anyone's bored enough to want to read all the sordid details

https://www.crimeline.info/case/r-v-ched-evans-chedwyn-evans

Evans went down on her as soon as his mate finishing humping her ::vomit.gif

[Royal Rother]

Don't know whether I'm missing something here but the case seems to rest almost entirely on the fact that the girl had no memory of the events.

Forget the new evidence in the retrial I actually find it quite difficult to understand the reason for the original conviction when it seems evident that she couldn't remember whether she consented or not, and wasn't injured in the activities. It seems to be the assumption that because she couldn't remember anything she must have been too drunk to consent.

But the judge did not (in plain language) see fit to brief the jury that a drunken consent is still consent in the eyes of the law.

(If Evans' low life mates recorded the events on mobile phones presumably that indicated that she was at least participating and not unconscious.)

None of this means that I think she is a lying slag or that Evans is a good person, by the way.

[Winston Smith]

Don't know whether I'm missing something here but the case seems to rest almost entirely on the fact that the girl had no memory of the events.

Forget the new evidence in the retrial I actually find it quite difficult to understand the reason for the original conviction when it seems evident that she couldn't remember whether she consented or not, and wasn't injured in the activities. It seems to be the assumption that because she couldn't remember anything she must have been too drunk to consent.

I think Evans deciding to go along at 4:00am when not invited, then getting a keycard from reception and letting himself into the bedroom, then later leaving via a fire exit may have added to the situation

[Mr Optimist]

The Secret Barrister article is great and explains it very clearly. I guess if this had been a case in Scotland it would be treated as not proven?