should Chad Evans be allowed back in football

This was always my concern, that she could walk so well as seen in the video footage, and yet not remember a thing, what we do now is she consented to go to the hotel room to have sex, yet cannot remember saying yes? it's all very questionable, and if I had been on that Jury he would not have been convicted either, both would have walked away innocent as she was well up for a shag in my view!...............

 

....said transcript would include what was said at the original trial of course, Swamp. The C of A would only be looking at an overall picture of whether anything they read in the papers rendered the conviction unsafe/ unsatisfactory. They clearly felt nothing did. Btw, those judges are very, very bright individuals.

 

Some are corrupt too

Not saying this one was though lol before anyone suggests I am

 

I'm not getting involved

 

View attachment 33876

 

Jean Hatchet has got a petition going online against Sheffield United, to stop Ched Evans from taking up his football career again, the link is below for those that think he should not be back in the game. I for one will not sign it, as she paints Evans as some sort of predator, and comes across to me as a man hater, there is no concept with these women of taking responsibility for their own promiscuous actions.



Link:http://www.change.org/p/kevin-mccab...te-ched-evans-as-a-player-at-sheffield-united



Evans has always maintained his innocence and legal representatives for the striker are preparing a submission to the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) aimed at quashing his conviction.

The CCRC is an independent public body set up to review possible miscarriages of justice in the criminal courts and refer appropriate cases to the appeal court.

The player's girlfriend, Natasha Massey, 24, has also publicly stated that Evans should be allowed back to his former club despite his conviction for rape.

Link: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/29541498

 

Hatchet?

 

http://www.chedevans.com/


read that and make what you want of it.... i still believe ched is innocent and should be allowed to do his job, if he was a builder would anyone here be complaining about letting him go back to a building site?

 

I would just like to add something that is very material to why I have sympathy with Ched evans, and not his victim, and the reason is in the quote below:

Try this Link lads for other issues on this case!................



Link: http://www.corestore.org/lc.htm

 

So every man who has a one night stand with someone who is drunk is a rapist?

I don't like your world, it stinks of political sexism.

 

Yes ominous aye!.....................

 

He clearly is living up to his name. A monk and a hero

 

Are we allowed to name the victim/'victim'?

Edit: The quote in Phil's post.

 

How much did this cost?



Link: http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/ched-evans-rape-victim-relocated-2013409

 

I think there is no issue for debating purposes, though some got into trouble on twitter for abuse as well as naming her due to being friends and family of Evans, but for safety reasons I have not named her on here, but merely put up a link and quote on the issue, though since her name appeared on twitter, the police have now given her a new identity?..............

 

I remember the Twitter storm surrounding this, that's why I asked the question.

 

I'm not sure she has a new identity, an American whose interest in the case highlighted her previous Twitter account and a new Twitter account where she uses the same forename/surname. He also was suprised that the UK police claimed her Twitter posts for winning big, new matching pink minis for friends, holidays for mates and making another friends dreams come true were denied to exist... He found those tweets still in the text only cache on Google for the French Twitter servers which hadn't flushed them after she deleted her original Twitter account.

Its easy to find on google using corestore.org and ched Evans as the search term.

 

Terrible Precedent in Footballer Ched Evans Case

by W.F. Price on May 23, 2012


Ched Evans is a 23-year-old British footballer who played for Sheffield, and was just starting to make an impact as a talented striker. Last month, he was convicted of rape over an incident last May in which he slept with a woman who had been drinking. The sex was apparently consensual, but the judge found that the girl’s intoxication, indicated by CCTV footage of her with Evans’ friend before the incident, invalidated any consent.

Both Evans and his friend, co-defendant Clayton McDonald, slept with the girl that night, but only Evans was convicted. Since the conviction, a further 13 people have been arrested for allegedly releasing the woman’s identity through Twitter, so that makes 15 arrests so far over one case of drunken sex.

Although there are a lot of problems with tying consent to sobriety, the biggest is the assumption that consent is presumed to be absent, i.e. those charged with rape must provide an affirmative defense, which sets the bar far too low for the prosecution in rape cases. What I’m getting at is that the idea is that when a woman is intoxicated, we can’t know for certain whether she would have consented or not otherwise. So, the court has decided that the default is nonconsent. If this applies in drunken sex, it applies elsewhere where consent is unclear. This means that unless a man can prove in court – while facing a determined prosecutor – that a woman intended to have sex with him, he can be convicted of rape.

Under the old standard, the default assumption was that sex acts are consensual, barring proof, such as coercion and/or assault, that they were not. This put the burden of proof on the prosecution. For example, if a woman went out drinking and then went to a hotel room with a couple athletes and had sex with them, the assumption would be that that was what she intended to do, and a prosecutor would have to come up with evidence that she had somehow been forced into the situation against her will.

Now, however, it has been turned around. We start from the assumption that women do not intend to have sex, even if they drink and enter hotel rooms alone with athletes, and then must establish through some process of investigation that they did, in fact, intend to have sex, to determine that rape did not occur. And if they were drinking, defense is automatically invalidated.

Taken to its logical conclusion, this would result in the imprisonment of perhaps hundreds of thousands of young men every year if it were the law of the land in the United States. Every college party in the US would result in a dozen or so arrests and lengthy prison sentences. It would put more young American men out of commission than WWII. But perhaps that’s the idea.

 

Link: http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/ched-evans-rape-victim-relocated-2013409

 

Yep read that, but it is the same police force that said her tweets about gloating of buying her friends expensive gifts didn't exist when in fact they were found to exist afterall.