Footballer Ched Evans has had his rape conviction referred to the Court of Appeal by the Criminal Cases Review Commission. The CCRC said it made the decision because of new information that could have helped 26-year-old Evans' defence if it had been raised during his trial. The former Sheffield United striker was convicted of raping a 19-year-old woman and jailed for five years in 2012. After his release from prison in 2014, a return to Sheffield and possible moves to Hartlepool and Oldham Athletic broke down amid protests from high-profile supporters and sponsors. Richard Foster, chair of the Criminal Cases Review Commission, said: "The decision of the Commission is not a judgment on guilt of innocence in relation to Ched Evans, nor is it a judgment about the honesty or integrity of the victim or any other person involved in the case. "Our role is to consider applications to see if, in our judgment, there is any basis on which to ask the court to hear a fresh appeal - that is our statutory responsibility. "In this case we have identified new material which was not considered by the jury at trial and which in our view might have assisted the defence. "In those circumstances, it is right and proper for the matter to be before the Court so that they can decide whether or not the new information should affect the verdict in this case." A statement on the website backing Evans' bid to overturn his conviction said the forward was thankful for support from football fans, in particular those from Sheffield United. The statement said: "Ched and those who closely support him, have always maintained that he was wrongly convicted and using new information that was not presented at his trial, we expect that in time his conviction will be quashed."
I posted on his last thread that I thought the cctv evidence contradicted some of her evidence and I was surprised at the verdict. However, at least a review may put the issue to rest one way or the other
I hope he gets off … in fact 9/10 times a thing goes to appeal it really means they got it wrong in the first place I suggest a climb down and credit for the Evans lot not giving up to clear their names If he is let off then Chuck the oither party in jail for the same duration for a start Bloke is a good footballer nothing more nothing less
I felt this wasn't a very secure conviction as well. If he is found to be wrongfully convicted I'll bet a pound to a penny that non of the people calling for his head will apologise though.
Such a difficult subject really considering such a low amount of rapes get reported and the low rate of convictions, hardly likely to convince women to come forward. However going back to my college days a mate of mine got accused by a one night stand he didn't want to see again, the main reason it was dropped was because HER mates grassed her up because she had boasted to them about what she was doing. She got a caution and carried on her life, not liked by many at my college however, strangely got sympathy from some, my mate lasted about another month at college before he felt he had to leave, a lot of people still treated him differently, with suspicion (especially the women) even though he had done nothing wrong a really sad case, lost contact with him over time but he had become somewhat reclusive and this 'incident' pretty much ruined a decent lads life!
I read the Ched Evans website and I agree the cctv seemed contrary to what was said about the victim. If his conviction is over turned, I do hope he gets a club to give him a chance. Somewhat hippocritically, I also hope it's not us! Can't be bothered with the controversy.
It was an absolutely scandalous conviction in the first place and it should never have got to court. Any moron can be in a jury which is a ridiculous way to run a modern judicial system. How much has he lost out on in wages? A few million comfortably.
This was always a surprising conviction given the facts. I hope the likes of Jessica Ennis who were quick to condemn and vilify this man have the decency to just as publicly recognise they were wrong (assuming his conviction is overturned) as also should the, holier than thou, gutter press. Wasn't too many years ago the Sun boosted its sales with barely-clad 16 year olds on page 3.
The version of the story I read a while ago suggested that if he and his mate had stonewalled and 'no comment'-ed the police interviews there would have been no conviction.
