Off Topic Ched Evans Part 2

What you drinking? I've a nice Rioja open!!

 

Posh batard

 

Cabernet Sauvignon

 

Very nice!! cheers!!

 

As they say in Spain - Salud !

 

I'm slumming it with a Fosters. Sorry.

 

It's a difficult one for me with Evans. If he gets found not guilty in a re-trial I'd still not see him in a positive light from his behaviour. It wouldn't make him any worse than a lot of other high profile footballers with very questionable attitudes towards females (Ferdinand, Lampard,etc) but I dislike all those guys too. I don't think it's a valid criticism of Jessica Ennis for her actions, when she acted the guy was a convicted rapist wasn't he?
Another strange aspect of the debate is Kifflom asking Stumpy why he had to be quite so aggressive in his reply before following up with "These are legal realities, Dai no matter what you, Stumpy or any other idiot on here thinks"
Finally, if Evans gets a not guilty verdict in his re-trial, I don't think there's any question that clubs will look at him, I just wonder if he's any good now after so much time out of the game.

 

Jesssica Ennis and her ilk were not happy with Evans because he was a convicted rapist and I get that but they wanted the guy to lose his career after serving his time and paying his debt to society. Big difference. As for his behaviour, he shagged a girl who wanted to be shagged (according to him). If that turns out to be the truth then lock us all up. He was in a relationship so was playing away from home but he doesn't deserve to lose his career for infidelity.

As for my comments - chronology, Kwame, chronology. Look at the order of the posts. I think you already have so your intervention is curious.

I was perfectly polite towards Stumpy, simply saying that I didn't understand his post. I was met with "You're full of ****" coupled with the fact he called me a liar when I mentioned my legal career of which I'm very proud. As a working class guy whose Dad was a steelworker being called to the Bar was a massive achievement for me. Stumpy even posted a little 'test' on the Cab Rank Rule to see if I knew about it. He also used the word 'wikipaedo'. That post was completely undeserved and unwarranted.

It was AFTER that when I posted my 'any other idiot' comment which was actually quite a measured response in those circumstances.

If you're going to weigh in THINK first. If a poster lets off a salvo at another which is completely uncalled for he can expect a response. There's nothing 'strange' about that.

 

I'm no legal expert but unless the prosecution can discredit the new evidence I suspect he will be found not guilty and this is his aim to clear his name. As he has served half his sentence I suspect he will not be going back to jail even if found guilty and as he is on unsecured bail this points to that anyway. I must confess I've enjoyed the exchanges by you lot, better than some comedy shows on TV.

 

Yes it's entertaining NS, unless you're on the receiving end.

The retrial is just that - the prosecution starts its case afresh as if it never happened first time around. Witnesses will be prepared already for the difficult questions though the Defence can keep its powder dry on the new stuff to an extent. I really don't know the nature of the fresh evidence, perhaps somebody else does, but it sounds as though it was more than enough to cast huge doubt on this case, hence the conviction was quashed.

Retrial acquittals are difficult to pull off but who knows? At least the guy will have a better crack at it this time. As someone else pointed out, getting jurors that haven't already made up their mind may be difficult, and there us no jury selection process in the UK.

No Stumpy, I didn't have to look that up.

 

Hell this debate is hotting up, will be interesting how the retrial will go, can he now have a fair trial though?

The tart at the center of all this, was sober enough to walk on high heals to the hotel room, and even pick up a Pizza she had dropped without falling over, and looked quite able and capable on cctv footage, but was deemed far too trunk to give consent some considerable time later? I hope he gets found not guily, the tart must shoulder some responsibility for her own contribution in all this.

As for Dai, thick as a brick comes to mind........

 

Just to settle some points:

1. I do know Kiff outside of the forum through going to school with his son (known his son since I was 4) - I will be going to Bordeaux to watch Wales with some mates (including his son) in June and am going to be one of the groomsmen at his son's wedding. Kiff most certainly practiced law as a barrister. You don't have to believe it if you don't want, but you are turning down the truth if you do - pretty much like Dai does on a daily basis then.
2. Dai is definitely on the windup. He's doing it here (you have to be a complete airhead to not understand the basic law principles being offered), and he's doing it on the Junior Doctors thread too. Turning a blind eye to clear facts and coming back with poor-man nonsensical comebacks. I think he just enjoys it...pretty sad to be honest.
3. I also was skeptical about Ched's original conviction. I think his career is over through reputational damage anyway, but I'm certainly interested in the case again now that he's won his appeal and the right to a retrial. If the new evidence is conclusive enough to win his appeal and force the retrial, with a fair jury you would assume it would be very hard to prove him guilty from here. That's the issue with juries though, it's luck of the draw, and as mentioned, on a retrial of a famous case, you are hard pushed to find anybody impartial to the original *quashed* conviction.

 

BK. I know it's bloody childish but Stumpy really wound me up by saying I was talking bullshit. Thanks. Good post btw. I knew nothing about you going to the rugby but that's par for the course.

 

Sorry there is no smoke without fire and if he was convicted first time around then there is obviously a case to answer,,,,,,,This is not about trying to clear his name this is about him not being able to get a club to take him on as the fans wont wear it......If he had found a club we would not have heard a peep out of him......This is someone who was found guilty and rightly so clutching at straws......He was a high profile player playing with fire and cheating on his girlfriend and got caught and he has lost his earning power through it.......it is as plain and simple as that......by the way i don't blame him for trying as it means losing millions in revinue and i would try anything myself if i was in his position.....He is guilty as charged and i hope they find the same result in the re trial and made to pay compensation to the woman for making her live through the ordeal again......

 

"if he was convicted first time around then there is obviously a case to answer" WRONG

"This is not about trying to clear his name" WRONG

"If he had found a club we would not have heard a peep out of him" WRONG

"He is guilty as charged" WRONG

In fact, the only thing you're (sort of) right about is that he may well get convicted on a retrial. Actually hoping for it when the guy may be innocent is despicable though. Other than that you're WRONG WRONG WRONG (as usual) on everything else.

I'm beginning to wonder if you walk backwards and drive around roundabouts the wrong way. Honestly.

 

Your so gullible Aussie......he never spent time in jail then.....that was a myth was it

 

Dai is a first class troll, when he's on a WUM, he's also a first class nugget the remainder of the time..............

 

Gullible.....Read post #72 you ridiculous turnip. I swear you'd try to tell an electrician how to wire a bloody plug. The Guildford 4 and the Birmingham 6 were innocent and they served time. Penny dropping yet?

 

I have never doubted your statement that you were in the legal profession. I have spent years dealing with Solicitors in my profession as an Independent Financial Adviser, I used to supply Malcom Struel with morgage cases, when he was at Smith Llewelyn, not that he did conveyancing. In other words you fit my profile of a typical legal beagle,..........


I did a few years working with an old practice by the name of 'Collins Woods & Vaughan Jones' , one of the young partners was a lad by the name of Stuart Batcup, think he went on to be a Judge, also Tim Jones from Bishopston was an article clerk at the time, hell I' m going back a few years now.......

 

"Fit the profile" = an argumentative so and so who is like a dog with a bone.

Bloody hell, Collins Woods....that IS going back a bit! I knew Stuart Batcup when I was a Mags Court Clerk many years ago though I had limited dealings with Malcolm Struel. But I do know Peter Llewellyn who is now a judge. Graham Jones from Smith Llewellyn (also now a part time judge) who I knew when he used to get down and dirty doing criminal work sits behind me at the Liberty. Lovely bloke.

It's a small world, and Swansea is a collection of villages I always say.