So they reckon he wasn't quite as guilty as the judge says? If they wanted him out of prison to enable him to help his appeal, there's a separate process. A reduction in the sentence HAS to be acceptance of the verdict.
She claimed she was incapable of consent and couldn't remember anything, the expert said she hadn't drunk enough to be that far gone and the judge told the jury that possibly the drugs from two days earlier contributed to her state of mind that night. They didn't, it was two days previous and the judge obviously has no idea about the effects of the drugs she'd taken or he wouldn't have said it. If you're going to sentence someone to five years in prison, you need to be absolutely sure that they're guilty and the more I read about this case, the less convinced I am, particularly as I know she offered to drop the whole thing for some cash. As Chazz says, it stinks.
Wrong again. It is simply a standard challenge to an awarded sentence which can vary through legal judgment. There is another process to appeal the validity of the sentence and that was taking place in parallel this application. There can be no question that once the sentence is passed it has to be accepted, but, as is the case here, there are then forms of redress to challenge it. None of this implies that the accused or their counsel must accept their guilt, only the sentence while it is legally upheld.
Do you have a link to the judge saying that in his summing up? It doesn't say it in the review application. Also, I'm not sure she's claimed anything other than having her bag stolen and a fear of being drugged. It was the Police/CPS that pushed the rape charges. As far as I know, she's never claimed rape has she?
So you reckon accepting a sentence, albeit reduced, is not an acceptance of the guilty verdict? Isn't your version saying I'm innocent, so don't lock me up for as long? What's the legal purpose in that?
Funny that wasn't mentioned in the application for the right to appeal. She bought the pizza at 3:00am and went to the hotel an hour later. According to the transcript the video shows her falling over both inside the kebab shop and outside.
Who takes over an hour to eat a pizza? So many unanswered questions in this case, did anyone challenge her on why she didn't order a kebab, everyone knows pissed people order a kebab?
As a postgraduate student I attended a sponsored function at the Cafe Royal in London where after the main presentation the drinks were free at the bar for an hour. I drank whisky,rum,gin, vodka,brandy and beer and can only remember leaving. According to fellow students I then kicked in a window of a shop, spewed all over a taxi,was taken back to my student hostel, undressed and put into bed where I woke several hours later with no recollection of events after leaving the Cafe Royal. In my experience heavy drinking does cause amnesia.
Here's the quote from the PFA on Marlon King: http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/11661/5670210/pfa-clarifies-king-support The Sheffield United Community Foundation website mentions social exclusion but not rehabilitation of offenders. Its not evidence they don't help offenders, just, if they do, they don't mention it. Its important to me because you said I made it up.
Canât help but feel that in cases like this (not specifically solely directed at this case), thereâs always an underlying, implicit belief that somehow itâs actually the womanâs fault and that somehow the man is the real victim. That, for me, stinks more than anything.
Somebody so pissed they forgot they'd bought it. Just like she forgot she'd left her bag in the kebab shop rather then the front seat of the taxi. The only question the jury had to consider was whether she was so pissed she couldn't give consent when Evans walked into the room. On the evidence they saw they decided she was. The fact she couldn't remember was neither here nor there according to the three judges who considered his second application for leave to appeal. The video evidence taken just before they closed the curtains would be a better indication of her state then her walking into the hotel. Although the footage I watched on the website was a bit jerky. That maybe my computer.
Ched Evans had sex with her and believes she has black outs. He introduced expert witness to say it was irrelevant as to consent and produced a witness that said she'd had them before. "This isn't some innocent little girl" sounds like the 1970s all over again. She doesn't have to be an "innocent little girl" but she does have to consent. The burden of proof is with Evans to show consent and he failed to convince the jury.
What happened to innocent til proven guilty? Surely the burden of proof is for the cheating whore young slapper to prove she didn't give consent?
I believe that someone can maintain their innocence (denying their guilt) even though the justice system leaves them with no option but to accept the found verdict and their sentence, as decided by the judge. If that sentence has a range of award then I cannot see how challenging the award to be lowered in any way would be an indication that the accused has forfeited their belief and maintained statement of their innocence; they are simply challenging the judgment in determining the length of imprisonment.
I, and I'm sure a hell of a lot of men, have had sex with perfectly consenting girls when we were both a bit worse for wear from alcohol and it makes me nervous to think this could've easily been me. On other occasions I've woke up in the morning next to a woman and thought 'did we have sex last night?' and not been even 50% sure. I'm not saying anything about this case here, I'm commenting on if this is the generally accepted criteria then I could've been in a lot of trouble.
