Ched Evans accepted she suffered from memory loss. It formed part of his appeal as you know from reading the report.
Nah, neither do I now. I'm tired and I'd make a dogs dinner of trying to explain something that doesn't seem to fit any of the facts in this case anyway.
So am I. That it's from me tonight. He could be guilty or he could be innocent, and I happen to think he might be innocent. You lot can argue the toss all night if you want.
I'm not getting into whether he's guilty or not. But there does does seem to be a lot holea in both sides of the story. But I hate this 'oh he's a role model' bollocks whenever a football does something wrong. Rock stars have done far worse things and are idolized for having a 'rock star lifestyles'. Keith Richard once lamped a stage intruder with a guitar. Eden Hazard tapped a ball boy to get the ball boy who acted like he'd been booted in the head and got a three match ban and a red card.
Wasn't actually talking about Evans. I probably should made that clear. I was talking in the way some people villifie footballers for doing something a rockstar is idolized for. If a footballer goes out and has a fight he's the scum of the earth. A rock star does it and he's almost celebrated for it. Ian Brown spent four months in prison. No one ever said he should never work in the music industry again.
Yes because it would make perfect sense to ruin your daughters life further by getting sent down for 5 years for GBH.
There isn't, mainly because everyone's tolerances are different just in that case her argument was that she was over the limit so couldn't have reasonably given consent
By saying 'over the limit' you are implying there is a limit. You can't by definition be over the limit if there isn't one.
It wasn't me who made the argument for her! She argued she was over the limit and couldn't control herself the defence did contest this saying that her behaviour of the night indicated otherwise. There isn't a set "limit" in these sort of cases they just tend to use that term a lot however from personal experience
Just seems like a bit of a misleading term that's all, using the word limit suggests there is a definitive level, when actually its entirely subjective.
She made no argument, she said she couldn't remember what happened after being in the kebab shop. The evidence presented by the prosecution and defence was all about whether she consented to sexual intercourse. The jury concluded she consented to having sex with McDonald but she didn't with Evans. Perhaps the film by Evans' mates persuaded the jury together with how much she'd had to drink.
Gawd, now people are getting confused between different cases. This thread just found a new way to rumble on...
How about we let the numerous people who have seen all of the evidence make the judgements? Rather than hearsay in the media, just a thought.
The expert called by the defence calculated that the complainant's likely blood-alcohol level at about 4am would have approximated to something like 2½ times the legal driving limit. He gave evidence that she would have suffered from slurred speech and unsteadiness of gait, but he would not have expected any memory loss. It was an essential part of his expert evidence that there were significant doubts about the claim made by the complainant that she had suffered a memory loss. In effect, it was suggested that her assertion was false. 2.5 times the drink drive limit is around 3 large glasses of wine, if this is too drunk to consent then I've been raped a good few times I'm not saying he didn't but this case is a little dubious, I wouldn't be surprised if this got overturned
