Ched Evans

Bit O/T but why do you need a "reputable" person as a reference? Say for a passport?

 

I never realised what a totally random list that is!

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&s...ggbMAA&usg=AFQjCNGLsxyYzJh9UCpAcphK3aUVG9KWeA

 

So people with MBE's ObE's etc. Jimmy Savile could give you a reference but an honest labourer cant.

 

How many men did she have sex with who had sneaked into her room whilst she was shagging someone else?

 

Journalist, driving instructor, Christian Science practitioner.

It's a mixed bag alright.

 

We don't know, they only questioned relevant witnesses.

 

Vat registered company director opens it up to anyone really! Me included! I've signed loads.

 

Including you?

 

Regardless of your opinion, it is the extended process of law that has established innocence.

I have concerns of some element of the new evidence, although everything I have read makes it clear it is the defining behaviour of the alleged victim, during sex, rather than her list of escapades and partners that proved to be a determining factor in concluding innocence of the accused. I don't think it should be ignored, which some seem to do, that this crucial evidence then adds more credibilty to other evidence and statements - if that was required.

This has been an example of justice having to find a way of overcoming one flawed law by using the extraordinary, but allowable bypassing of another law.

One poorly conceived law needs to be reviewed to protect another sound, but vulnerable law.

The appeal court got it right for me and an innocent man finally was found to be just that, innocent in the full view of the law.

It should never of been subject to trial; doubt and lack of conclusive evidence, to force a conviction, was always the obvious and incredibly poor aspect of this whole sorry mess that just didn't match up to rational thought.

 

The debate can go on & on from both sides of the argument, in reality there are only 3 people who know exactly what happened that night, despite what the court cases have said!

 

At present Ched Evans is not a rapist, unless someone proves otherwise that's an indisputable fact.

Anyone that disagrees with that statement is undermining the entire principle of our criminal justice situation and the laws under which we live.

People are free to have opinions or theories about his innocence, but unless these are proven in a court of law in front of a jury of his peers they are nothing but speculation and do not represent the truth in any way.

 

She was obviously aware enough to be demanding it be done harder.
If that isnt giving consent then what is?

 

Journalist