There are different sentences for murder/manslaughter too Along with burglery and other crimes Happy.
Yes mate, we know how it unfolded, the debate has moved on from the nitty gritty of the Evans case, to the broader issue the jury's conclusion raises. As in simple terms a man has been convicted of rape, without any accusation from anyone, but the Police and whether he was granted consent or not was decided by 12 randoms in a courtroom based on circumstancial evidence.
Thanks for stating the obvious. I was asking why? Surely different sentence lengths suggest different degrees of harm and impact, which is completely at odds with a number of statements on the harm and impact of in this case, rape. I think a lot of sentencing is too light btw, I just just wonder why if someone states they think something like this is a lesser rape than being dragged down an alley and raped at knife point people get all angry online, but nowts really done about sentencing, its just accepted. I find that strange.
When you murder someone they are dead. Yet there are different sentences. Same outcome though. That's all I meaning Happy.
It's the opposite of what our entire legal system is based on, so you're correct in saying that it is unacceptable.
Particularly when his 'victim' hadn't actually accused him of anything. How can a man be expected to prove that he had consent when the woman he had sex with didn't even contradict him when he said he did? "She said yes" "Did you say yes?" "No idea" "Guilty as charged, have 5 years"
I think one reason Bruce has made the comments he has may just have been revealed. Natasha Massey(girlfriend of Ched Evans) happens to be best mates with a certain Amy Bruce.
"They looked through the bedroom window and filmed what was taking place with a mobile telephone until the curtains to the bedroom were closed." Video evidence isn't circumstantial. If we are talking generally then are you saying using rohypnol to have sex isn't rape if the other person cannot remember what happened? Or even if he or she is too pissed to know what they are doing and cannot remember what happened? Or is even unconscious?
Because it's simply bollocks and anyone that says so is a buffoon. The case of Evans is a million miles away from, say, pinning someone down in the middle of a park at night wielding a knife.
1. Was that video evidence used? No 2. Any evidence of rohypnol in her system? No - there was no suggestion of this anyway and she went to the hotel willingly, she hardly needed convincing. 3. There's evidence she was an active participant both from the defendants testimony and from the night porter who claimed to have heard a couple having 'normal' sex. 4. If McDonald had consent and was innocent and as soon as he stops having sex with her - consenually - which must mean by definition, that she's conscious and willing ALL the way through - his mate then joins in. Is the suggestion that in the seconds between them stopping and Evans starting that she somehow became completely unaware of anything? The more you consider it, the more preposterous it becomes.
Thats a very scientific overview there. I suggest you maybe go and talk to some victims of 'good' rape and 'bad' rape young Andrew.
But many persist in claiming it's exactly the same.I wonder when those who made threats against Oldham will be charged.Good on yer man for speaking out.
Rohypnol is obviously different since its premeditated and the other person has gone out to rape someone with no inclination of getting consent, completely different than going out on a night out to try and get a shag. And she obviousley wasn't unconscious at the time he asked for consent so I don't know where you're getting this from?
The Police have said that no one from Oldham FC have issued a complaint of threats of rape being made against family members of the board.
Nice try to change the goal posts. You said we'd moved on from the Evans case and were considering rape generally. Didn't you write "How can a man be expected to prove that he had consent when the woman he had sex with didn't even contradict him when he said he did?"? In all the instances I quoted the woman wouldn't have contradicted the man because she wouldn't have remembered. The video evidence was referred to in the transcript of the hearing in considering whether to grant leave to appeal. So can you provide a link which says it wasn't used because that implied it was?
