I hadn't realised the victim had not claimed she was raped. She originally claimed her drinks had been spiked. Interestingly, so did another lass who had been in the same venue. The police never checked out that, never called in CCTV, in order to see if that had been happening. Also there was no DNA evidence which may have indicated an assault had taken place. Rum do...
Nothing showed up on her drugs screen either, from memory. Apart from cocaine and cannabis which she denied she'd used. O/T but this drink spiking is not happening constantly, usually used as an. Excuse by pissed up lasses
I went to a themed party last weekend where all the glasses were in the shape of First World War German Officers helmets. My drink was spiked.
If you have sex with a prostitute, and then don't pay her, is it rape or theft? What of you only pay a fraction of the 'agreed' price? Likewise, if you spin some yarn about your life to make yourself look good to bed her rather than pretending to be a specific individual, and the female falls for it, is that rape or fraud?
A former solicitor general has said she is concerned the Ched Evans rape case could discourage victims of sexual offences from coming forward. The 27-year-old footballer was cleared on Friday of raping a 19-year-old woman in a hotel room. Vera Baird told the BBC that details of the woman's sexual past should not have been heard in court. Mr Evans was found guilty of rape in 2012, but that conviction was quashed in April. The Chesterfield striker was accused of attacking the woman at a Premier Inn in Rhuddlan, Denbighshire, on 30 May 2011. The original conviction was referred to the Court of Appeal following a 10-month investigation by the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC), which found new information not raised at the original trial. The evidence concerned two other men who claimed they had sex with the woman around the same time of the alleged offence and who described their encounters with her in highly specific terms that were similar to Mr Evans's own account of what had happened. Since 1999, defence lawyers have been banned from cross-examining alleged rape victims in court about their sexual behaviour or history but the Court of Appeal said Mr Evans' case was exceptional. Lady Justice Hallett ruled that these events were so similar to what Mr Evans had described that a jury had to hear about them before deciding whether the woman had been incapable of giving her consent. Northumbria police and crime commissioner Ms Baird, who was instrumental in bringing about the change in law, told the BBC's Today programme: "The only difference between a clear conviction of Mr Evans in 2012 and the absolute refusal of him having any leave to appeal at that time, and his acquittal now, is that he has called some men to throw discredit on [the woman's] sexual reputation. "That, I think, is pouring prejudice in, which is exactly what used to happen before the law in 1999 stopped the admission of previous sexual history in order to show consent. "We've gone back, I'm afraid, probably about 30 years." http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-37666228 Perhaps the appeal should never have been allowed.
One of these new witnesses had sex with the alleged victim only a few days after the incident with Evans, they met in a bar, she got drunk and took him home. Personally I think Evan's lawyers have every right to use that as part of their defense, it is not the behavior of someone that was raped a few days earlier. Some of the other stuff is a little more debatable, I don't think her past partners (before Evans) or her sexual preferences should have been brought into it as that does set a dangerous precedent.
I don't understand how everyone is buying that she blacked out and doesn't remember anything. She wasn't spiked and the drinks she listed added up to about 10 units of alcohol, plus she stopped drinking hours before the alleged assault. Even a light weight that doesn't drink often would struggle to be black-out drunk with the amount she said she drank.
Her sexual preferences are relevant if they show she acted the same with Evans as she did with others whilst claiming she was so out of it she claims she was drugged didn't know hat was happening. The number of partners is not relevant, it harks back to any bloke who puts it about is a real good lad whilst any lass who does similar is a slag. I knew a lass who was raped over 40 years ago,and despite evidence which should have convicted him,due to police and prosecution incompetence him he was found not guilty. She was cross examined about her previous sex life in a way you wouldn't believe. Retribution was eventually handed out to the bloke.
I suppose it is a bit of a grey area and whilst it was relevant in this case and will be in some others we have to be careful not to set a precedent were immoral defense lawyers can use sexual histories to discredit genuine victims. Sorry to hear that about your friend, I'm glad the bloke was finally brought to justice.
They arent using her sexual history against her, but using her M.O during consenting sex to tally in with what Evans suggested happened. It was proven that she acted with Evans in a way consistent with having consenting and willing sex due to her highly particular sexual behaviour and mannerisms. How anyone can ignore this and still believe he is guilty just because they believed that 3 years ago is blinkered and stubborn.
