Funny how people bring morals into this. Many of those from and age where racism was acceptable, beating you wife for daring to question you was the norm and women were treated like dogs was the way of the world not that long ago.
that doesn't really matter does it... she was doing what she was doing... in walks evans having lined it up with this guy who told her nothing of it. she was plastered "apparently" ok, that please you... he still is not absolved of his repsonsibility which is to have lined up a party for himself and she was plastered.... yes to one guy.. .then another comes in... thats the inconsistency. if she was plastered enough to not be able to consent and took no drinks at hotel then the first guy should be done also. then thats where i can only see an issue. The court said he should have known she couldn't consent due to the filthy rotten state she was in (why anyone'd touch such i dunno) as he went ahead knowing she was out of it then he's at fault. Isn't all law somewhere base din some moral code however? isn't this why its called rape just like some guy holding a knife at a girls throat in a dark alley... someone got together and decided it so if you don't agree well... you have to live with it.
Wasn't suggesting it about anyone on here. Just that many of those using the moral argument come from a time when women were treated far worse than they are in todays society.
thought you were on about the old lads..... my argument earlier was the same arguments could be heard in india and other countires today.
I'd go further than that tbh. Even being smashed doesn't mean you didn't consent, and the person you're having sex with might be just as smashed as you are, in that scenario if you both don't remember, who's the rapist? This case has highlighted the rape laws in this country and the shift in definitions in recent years after numerous cases have stretched the definition of rape. Not that long ago, No means No, was all you needed to know There's now 'Conditional consent' wtf is that? I will allow you to have sex with me, with caveats, transgress them and I can call foul. Rape? really? IMO this case has been stage managed by the Police and CPS throughout, and the split verdict that ensued was a total nonsense. I doubt that given the social media outcry that the appeal will strive too hard to find a legal flaw in the process or that any new evidence is 'significant' enough to warrant putting back in front of a jury..........lift the rug......and sweep.
MITO what i think many confuse here is the seedyness of the event with there actually being a crime. It was all pretty seedy, how the lads operated, but it takes two to tango or in this case three. The seedyness of this is used to paint Evans as a rapist and the jury bought it. They had the consent thing removed from deliberations.. which is ****ing insane. if the girl was unconscious and literally dragged to the hotel and then they did what they did then.. fair enough, that would be rape. but she was lucid, well as far as it suited her to be for the CPS and police, as soon as Evans was in that hotel room, she apparently was no longer lucid and responsible for her own choices. This is a ****ing stitch up all day long and anyone thinking otherwise is sadly infected with femtard mentality. What is ultimately tragic is there are thousands of women out there who have been violently raped and no one was brought to justice and they see this ****ing joke of a case where no one was raped and see a conviction. The femtards, and you can spot them a mile away, will not accept any mitigation arguments for a man in a case like this, as soon as you try explain, they go nuclear
Exactly, which is why you need clear definition of what the law actually is and where the boundaries are. Who knew before this case, that "Sorry I forgot if I said yes or not" constitutes enough for a bloke to do a 5 stretch?
the thing in boys and girls the evidence that was on offer was enough to show she was plastered totally and falling about the place. perhaps you should be asking is if a hotel had night security or a porter or whatever why the f were they allowed up cos he clearly didn't pay for the room per person and why was no charges brought about giving out key card to evans which should never happen. my only question from reading the stuff you've posted is why was the first guy not done rather than why was evans guilty.
