I think you're possibly reading too much into the reaction of many people on here to this particular case and their opinion on rape generally ( from OLM ) The concern i have, and a few others have posted the same thoughts is this from my post 240 There must be millions of case's where a drunk guy meets a drunk girl and end up in bed. What happens in the morning ? the guy is a bit of a hunk and they agree to see each other again. Or the guy is a bit of a dork, the girl is a bit embarassed at what happened, maybe getting teased by her mates. So she calls rape and it takes 12 good men ( or women ) to decide WHAT REALLY HAPPENED. Again not defending rapists, but there is a large gray area. and i have daughters by the way.
I don't believe the Blunts had made any decision on Evans when they invited him to train with them. The PFA asked the Blunts to let him get back to fitness with them, so he was in a position to resume his career and I think that suited them. They no doubt wanted to find out how much grief it would cause them and I suspect they got more grief than they expected.
So what should be done then? I posted about the 1 in 5 women stat earlier (that you didn't like), something is not working and women are not reporting sexual offences against them because they won't be believed. According to the same stats (that you didn't like), men who are sexually assaulted seem to have a much higher chance of getting a conviction even though the numbers assaulted are significantly lower than women. Not saying that your scenario doesn't/won't ever happen but the numbers must be quite small, so what is to be done?
Kick it out should really take a look around Australia if they want to see what racism is, 200+ years of proven genocide that hasn't really stopped at all. As to Ched Evans, Why didn't the other guy who had sex with her get let off, for me it all sounds a bit Mike Tyson, he went down because Kennedy got let off.
Two of the three people in in the room heard a clear yes of consent and the other could not recall having sex, but she did believe she had been given a date drug (wrong though). The decision then is that there was no consent. When he arrived at the room it was immediately apparent to him that McDonald and the complainant were engaged in enthusiastic consensual sex. When she was asked if the applicant could join in, the complainant clearly replied "Yes". McDonald stopped. The complainant asked the applicant to perform oral sex on her. He did so and then they had sexual intercourse. Throughout all the activities with him she was enthusiastic, wide awake and she consented to everything that happened. He agreed that he had left the hotel using the fire exit. 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. Why does it appear that evidence is only acceptable if it fits the police view of events?
This is a lot more direct from McDonald, so why, as he was acquitted, is his evidence not acceptable proof that there was consent? This whole process bloody stinks. http:// http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/clayton-mcdonald-midland-footballer-speaks-6788373
Football star Clayton McDonald has spoken for the first time of his horror at being wrongly accused of rape. The former Walsall FC defender has exclusively revealed his “year of hell” before he was cleared in May 2012. He spoke out after seeing fellow footballer Nile Ranger, who plays for Swindon Town, also cleared of rape last week. Midland football star McDonald was accused of raping a 19-year-old woman at a Premier Inn in Rhyl, in May 2011, along with fellow footballer and close friend Ched Evans. Ex-Welsh international and Sheffield United striker Evans was convicted at Caernarfon Crown Court in April 2012 and was sentenced to five years. He is due for release in October and has continually denied the offence. And McDonald is supporting Evans’ bid to clear his name. Both players admitted having consensual sex with the woman, but she told the jury she had no memory of the events. The prosecution case alleged that she was ‘too drunk’ to consent to sex. McDonald, aged 25, said: “It was a year of hell for me. I had never been in trouble with the police before. I couldn’t understand why this woman was saying all these things. I felt numb.” McDonald and Evans, also 25, have been pals for years. They both played for Manchester City, had holidays together, and even shared a house near the Etihad Stadium. Then Evans was loaned out to Norwich City and was later transferred to Sheffield United for £3 million. He became United’s top scorer and a Welsh international. Maenwhile, Man City loaned McDonald out to Walsall. He later left the Midland club as a free agent and joined Port Vale, where the giant 6ft 6ins defender helped them win promotion last season from League Two to League One. “Port Vale manager Micky Adams and the club were great whilst all this was going on,” Clayton said. “At times, though, it was very difficult to concentrate. They gave me support and encouragement. “I was trying to rebuild my life there before, during and after this court case. “As a pro you have to try to cope – but it’s so hard when you’re accused of something you haven’t done. “I wasn’t guilty of anything but had to prove it. “Ched, too, is innocent and I can’t understand why he was found guilty. We were both there. “The woman agreed to sex with both of us. I know he is an innocent man and will do anything to help him.” McDonald, who now plays for promotion-chasing Grimsby Town in the Skrill Premier League, and could face a play-off final at Wembley, outlined the events from his traumatic ordeal. “I had never met this woman before. When I came outside from a kebab shop something was kicking off, and when I went towards a taxi this woman bumped into me,” he said. “She asked me where I was going, and when. I said I was going back to my hotel; she said she was coming with me. “She agreed to have consensual sex. I texted Ched and told him where I was. “He came down and asked if he could join in. The woman agreed and I left.” A few days later, while McDonald was visiting his mother’s house in Crewe, Evans arrived, followed closely by two plain clothes police officers from North Wales. “They wanted us to go back with them to Rhyl on suspicion of rape,” he said. “I can’t remember everything now because it was all a blur. “I had never been in trouble with the police before, and I couldn’t believe it. “They seemed friendly and chatty, and said it would all be sorted out. “We weren’t cautioned and we went back to Wales in the same car as them. They asked us about what had gone off, and we explained. “At the police station, however, it became hostile. I barely knew what was going on. “I’ve never been picked up before and they just left us for hours on end. We were kept apart and even had to spend the night in the cells. “I called my solicitor but Ched’s was away. When I was told what it was about I just couldn’t believe it. They said the woman couldn’t remember anything when she woke up. There was talk of spiked drinks. “We were kept there for ages. We didn’t know what was going on.” At the trial both footballers were very nervous and confused. McDonald, whose dad Rod also played for Walsall, said Evans found the ordeal of appearing in court very stressful. And although McDonald was found not guilty, he was concerned for his friend. “On the stand Ched was very nervous,” he recalled. “He didn’t come across very well. He wasn’t used to this sort of pressure. He didn’t appear confident. Being in the dock was an ordeal. “When the jury returned it was a bittersweet moment for me. The court was in chaos. “When they said I was not guilty I was happy, but the gallery was in uproar. My family and supporters were shouting and cheering with delight. The judge, however, cleared the court and I was ushered out. “Ched was left alone and, unbelievably, the jury returned a guilty verdict. “They told me the decision and it was crazy. The noise was incredible and Ched collapsed. He was struggling to breathe and couldn’t understand the verdict. “I know Ched and I know he is innocent. The woman agreed to consensual sex.” Evans’ legal team hopes to appeal against his conviction. His supporters say they have found fresh evidence that points to their client being innocent and claim that the police inquiry was flawed. His case is due to be considered by the Birmingham-based Criminal Cases Review Commission, and McDonald has agreed to be a key witness. He also offered his sympathy to Ranger following his acquittal. McDonald said: “I am so happy for Nile. I have been in that exact same situation and know what it’s like. “To be falsely accused of rape is terrible. “Your whole life is put on hold while you try to defend yourself. “I had such a difficult time in trying to concentrate on playing football whilst all this was going on.
Is the club discussing Evans playing for them the same as considering it? Have you really asked me that? Why?
If his evidence is acceptable then one of them lied about who asked if Evans to join in as they both gave different answers. The woman may well have said yes, the issue was if she was too drunk to understand what she was saying then it isn't consent. MacDonald was innocent because her behaviour up to Evans coming into the room implied consent and she cannot remember saying no to MacDonald. There is no evidence at all that she was aware that Evans was going to join in. He lied to get a key to his own room and walked straight in.
"What should be done then" I don't know, not having the answer doesn't stop me raising the question. It's not my field of expertise. Its not only your statistics i don't like. Generally those using them are doing so to promote their side of the disscusion. 9 out of 10 cats prefer whiskers. Said whiskers trying to sell their own cat food. See also Mr Allam's poll re. the name change.
Because the club were approached by the PFA to offer training, that is all we know. When this happened there was an interview with Clough who said that he was not aware of contract talk and that it was not within his remit. Henry Winter wrote a long article stating his own opinion, but also that he thought Clough should be involved. As Clough states, in a subsequent interview, the club instigated a process of consultation throughout the club (I would think sponsors and patrons too), but that this was about the training offer. Of course it is reasonable to believe that the elephant of employment would have been discussed, but it would appear, if Clough is to be believed, that it was dismissed and given no consideration. My point is that it is perfectly plausible to discuss a point without giving it's implementation serious consideration. We have been told the conversations and consideratio were about a training offer and that is what has had to be withdrawn. Sponsors and Ennis-Hill did not make the withdrawal of the training offer a condition of their patronage, did they? The only reason the club were forced to withdraw their offer of training was the lynch-mob frenzy of social media, were so many jerk their knees to wrong information or make their own when none other is available to suit their mind set. So what was wrong with the training offer?
With respect, cat food and the name of a football club are not the same as sexual assault. What is so wrong with promoting the victims of sexual assaults side of the discussion?
Don't try to make out I was comparing cat food and the name of a football club to sexual assault. I think you know that statistics can be used to show whatever you want, and gave two examples in case you weren't sure. I posted a link to another survey which showed 1 in 40 were victims of sexual assault and that included verbal attacks as well. There is nothing wrong with promoting the vicims of sexual assault and nowhere have i said it is.
Nigel Clough was asked whether Evans would play for Sheffield United and he said it was being discussed, the decision wasn't his and it'll be made in good time. Perfectly clear to me. "Playing for" is different from "training with". As I said earlier, if the Sheffield United fans want to have a convicted rapist training with them fine, but many of them don't. My view is they have a right to express their opinions. A football club represents a community and that community has a right to their say.
I don't believe Clough realised he had to be so specific, but he was later, they discussed training at the request of the PFA. Your assumption that this was a mechanism to gauge public reaction (rather than a secondary opportunity that all clubs could follow) is just that, an assumption; the facts as detailed by the club and the PFA show the instigation and reason for the discussions was the PFA request. I have come across plenty of support for him being allowed to train, as well as many who believe he should be allowed to be 're-employed. Of course, there are those who would demand he bear another level of punishment by having one or both options withdrawn. I read somewhere a statement by one of the SU board that it was one of the key SU Supporters Group Chairman who approach the club in support of employing Evans.
Clough was asked if he would play for Sheffield United again and said it wasn't his decision and it was being discussed. This was before news of his training with the squad came out. It was a specific question and Clough gave a specific answer. There will be fans who support him training and playing for Sheffield United, just as they'll be Hull City fans that would support us offering him training facilities now that Sheffield United have withdrawn their offer. It is up to the Sheffield United to decide which views they listen to, those that support the decision or those that don't. They made their choice and withdrew the facilities. As I said I think it is reasonable for the fans of a football club to have a say in whether a convicted rapist should play for their team.
