This is not a reaction against what you said, Hornette! I saw Eric Hall, self-publicising football agent, touting for business on the telly yesterday, repeatedly saying that Evans' maintaining of his innocence and the fact he was appealing against his conviction should have some bearing on his recruitment by a club. Rubbish. Neither have any bearing on guilt. And unless his conviction is successfully appealed he is guilty.
My final words on the subject. If Evans had shown some kind of contrition and sympathy for the victim, even with maintaining his innocence, I believe he would have received a more sympathetic hearing. But he and his supporters (heavily funded by his future father in law) have harrassed and further victimised the victim, so for me he deserves little sympathy. But I accept he should be able to pick up his life again and as his career is a professional footballer, then carry on with that. But I would not want my club to be associated with him or anyone else who behaves in such a continually provocative manner. Do we really have a society that cannot allow a women to go out and have a few drinks or wear a short skirt without the fear of being labelled as "asking for it" or "she gets what she deserves"?
None of us know what really happened in this case - at best we can read court documents etc but these are all only versions of events provided by people involved. We really need to try to make our arguments applicable to the generality rather than the specific. I know a lot of people who will disagree with me but I believe there are degrees of seriousness of rape. Just as all murders are not the same neither are rapes. A young lady walking along a public street who finds herself attacked, dragged somewhere quiet and then raped will suffer far more long term psychological harm than a lady who has gone to a hotel room to have sex with one man and then finds she is forced into sex with a second. The first will have feared for her life and may be forever unable to walk home alone. The second will be able to avoid going to a hotel room with a stranger. The punishment must be suitably different. I am content to allow the courts to make that decision as that is the purpose of the justice system. As such then I accept the sentence handed down and the parole system which allows a person to leave prison midway through their sentence. If the rapist then shows genuine contrition, perhaps voluntarily undertakes "good" works and generally tries to atone for his crime then society should help him. On a different crime that is how Deeney dealt with his "mistake" and we all applaud him for it and are pleased he has returned to the fold of decent young men. A difficulty does arise in the nature of a crime and whether a person can be trusted if put in a similar environment - as others have said, how many of us would allow a *****phile to work in a school or a fraudulent banker to work in a bank? Some crimes prevent you forever going back into your chosen profession. It may be unfortunate but it is a fact of life. I am not sure that a "hotel" rapist in football fits this category - except to the extent that people try to call footballers "role models" which in my opinion few are. They are simply people working in a job they are good at. If you treat him purely as a footballer a rapist, or drunk driver who killed will forever be just a footballer who did something very wrong in the past. I do not consider many footballers as very savoury characters. An extra dimension arises when the rapist believes his conviction was incorrect. Justice can go wrong - you would hope that in cases of murder where there is capital punishment there would never be an error made - but people have been hanged and later pardoned. If you want to clear your name then you cannot apologise or admit guilt. In those circumstance you are in limbo. Does a person have to lose his livelihood because he wants to fight for what he believes to be justice? It is a shame our courts take so long to go through their processes - did someone on here say it could be 35 months - if so that does not permit him to wait until his name is cleared and still resume a career. In this case I have to say I think Ched Evans could do much more to present his case. If he were to publicly state that he considers what he was found guilty of to be an abhorrent crime, that he personally respects women and that the events on that night have been misrepresented and he did not behave like that then at least he would be stating that if guilty his punishment were just - he then has to prove himself not guilty - something he seems to have failed on twice. I have no idea any more than anybody else writing here whether he is or is not guilty in fact -but I do know he is guilty in law and I support the laws of this country so until he proves otherwise he is a rapist. You have to think that if he actually knows he is guilty then he is pursuing a completely stupid line. If he knows he is guilty then he would be better to do as I said at the beginning and admit guilt,apologise do good public works and throw himself on the forgiving nature of the general public in an attempt to be rehabilitated. Maybe that is the trouble - maybe he IS stupid
I think I take that view. Thanks from some really good posts on this folks. And agree with the points of W_Y and Leo and others ........ very difficult one. I have a 19 year old who is 'out there' every week-end myself....... very worrying ... I have seen the state she and others get into......
I think a major point about this case is the assumption Evans made that he had an entitlement to have sex with the victim probably because she had agreed to have sex with his friend. The evidence is she did not consent to sex with him and therefore he raped her. I find it astonishing that she gets labelled a tart and the like because she consented to sex with one of the two but no the other. On that basis many many women each Friday and Saturday night could be similarly labelled. Clearly that's not the case. Women should be allowed to chose sexual partners and chose who isn't a sexual partner. The fact that this woman agreed to have sex with one person and not another doesn't make her a tart. The courts found Evan guilty after a process that involved investigation, consideration of the evidence, a jury and a judge. It may not be a water tight process but it is the best we have and generally it works. In my career I have worked with hundreds of convicted criminals and the vast majority claim innocence or at least partial innocence. However, most eventually agree to their guilt and are prepared to work with agencies such as the Prison and Probation services to address the issues. Once they have done so they are offered opportunities to rehabilitate. It seems to me Evans has not agreed to his innocence yet and therefore I agree it is too early for him to return to such a high profile job. The issue with the sentence is an interesting point. The sentences handed down by judges are controlled by both the law and the government. The reason why there aren't 10 year sentences are because clever barristers and solicitors have time and again appealed sentences to get them reduced for their 'clients' and politicians have failed to stand up to them. In addition Evans was released by a Prison Governor guided no doubt by the Parole Board (more solicitors and judges) at the earliest opportunity. He could have been asked to serve longer inside but the Governor will be worried about numbers in his/her prison and the parole board chair about meeting government targets. Not exactly victim conscious. I am surprised the release came about so early as in most cases the board would want to know what work he had done to address his offending - but in this case they seem to have ignored any recommendations for him to carry on inside - not really surprising given the weight of those pushing for his release. Overall I agree he should get a chance once he has accepted his guilt - but he shouldn't be back to Oldham at this time - there are more important things for him to address first - namely what he has done to this poor young woman.
So much has been written about this that I don't think there is much more to be said. It IS a difficult problem, as evident from the extent and thoughtfulness of the contributions. However, one aspect that bothers me is the 'role model' idea. When I watch footballers on the pitch, ALL OF THEM, they do things that I would find appalling in the street or in business - basically dishonest things, like appealing for corners, throw ins, when they know they touched it last, taking throw ins as far up the pitch as they can get away with, arguing aggressively with the ref if they think he's made a mistake. (I've never yet seen a player apologise to a ref when he's right and they are wrong.) In extreme cases, scoring goals that weren't and saying nothing. I cannot think of a modern footballer who doesn't try to get any advantage he can, however unfair. Their only excuse (s) , 1 ) it's up to the ref 2) All the opposition are doing it. Well thanks, I don't see any role model example there. In the furore, it seems to me that Evans could do himself and his future a lot of good by adopting a 'role model' approach e.g. community work coaching, giving his salary to appropriate charities. He might also think about consulting Deeney, whose crime was pretty awful, but has shown on and off the pitch how to respond and earn a second chance - esp. after he was given it. Almost a 'role model!'. Not sure if I've moved things along or set them back.
Good points yello. Rape is having sex with someone who has not consented. It does not matter who else she has agreed to have sex with. A tart is simply a prostitute and who is suggesting she is that? Evans had no right to assume she wanted sex with him. I also was puzzled by the early release - I did think you had to admit guilt in order to get parole - apparently not. That is what has caused this current problem. Were he still in prison he could not play football anyway. Thing is though yello - if somehow he is not truly guilty (by that I mean in actual fact and not by court judgement)then he cannot accept his guilt and has done nothing to "this poor woman". She could be lying - how do we know? Burden is on him though to prove the courts were wrong.
I think he has already had the chance to prove the 'Court' wrong Leo - that's why there was a trial - but he was found guilty. There is of course a chance that there has been a mis-carriage of justice as in any case - but such mis-carriages are rare and as he has been found guilty his guilt has to be assumed. If subsequently an appeal finds him innocent then the pieces need to be picked up from that point. But until then he is guilty, she is no 'tart' and he should be working to make it better for his victim not on getting back to football.
I agree that he has been found guilty and lost an appeal but he apparently is still able to make one more challenge. That is his right under our law and I can only hope if he loses that too he will finally accept his fate. There is guilt as found by law and true guilt which none of us are party to who were not there. Mis-carriages of justice I suspect are not all that rare. I suspect there have been two high profile ones in South Africa recently- but in the words of Don Maclean "And you won your case most easily and soon you will be free. But there will be a million more who lose their liberty. Not because of what they did, but what they did not do: They did not pay a lawyer or a judge to see them through. Why, they had no friends to call on and they could not raise their bail. Well if winning is what matters, I respect the ones who fail"
Oldham have decided NOT to sign him. Oldham Athletic have decided against signing convicted rapist Ched Evans following threats to the club's "staff and their families". A club director told BBC sports editor Dan Roan that a staff member was told a named relative would be raped if the deal went ahead. Let us hope whoever made that threat themselves sees a long jail sentence as that is a pre-meditated threat. So now we are in a world where bully boys and public harrassment can stop a club from carrying out its wishes - which were legal whatever the morality involved.
I agree, Leo, Malicious Comms and Harassment are very serious crimes. Let's hope the perp is caught and heavily punished. But the crime of Rape deserves "a long prison sentence" too. Much longer.
The cynic in me says he has at last apologised because he could see he would not be signed without an apology! As for decrying his supporters for attacking the victim via social media, excuse me, but two of those attackers were his girlfriend and himself! As for those threatening rape and death to members of the club and its sponsors, they are no better, probably even worse than Evans himself!
He would be a PR disaster as Oldham have proved. Now anyone they might have who commits a lesser crime will expect full backing and support. Thank goodness we didn't have all this with Deeney - guess he was "sorry" and his crime was a lot less high profile. I would agree he has done time but then against feel he should wait till the appeal. I agree with the view many people have probably jumped on the bandwagon because it was such a serious crime.
I have been following this thread without comment because I know none of the facts. The one thought that I have had, that no one has mentioned, is the effect Evans signing would have had on the other Oldham players. I have worked with people who have served sentences for 'while collar' crimes without problem, but I don't think I could work happily with someone convicted of rape. I'm sure some of the Oldham staff must feel the same way despite what their Chairman says.
Go Good point NZ. I have also wondered what the reaction of parents would be to him being in the club shop for a signing session.
Yes imagine being a player and expected to introduce your wife or daughters to him at a club social. Not a pretty thought.
Leaving aside the morality arguments and whether he is or isn't guilty etc (and there's been some excellent posts about all apsects of this situation by the way) I find it astonishing that any club would even consider signing him. It's commercial and PR suicide - especially for the size of the clubs that have attempted it as one would ahve thought taht they simply canot afford to lose any sponsorship deals or ticket money.
Sorry, could not resist it...So Steve Bruce is now qualified enough to review complex evidence and legal arguments to declare the Evans conviction as being questionable. I would suggest that he sticks to trying to manage his football team which he seems to be struggling with...but I suppose if he feels that strongly that Evans should be allowed to play, he should sign him!
