That's odd because there were quite a few articles around the Ched Evans case at the time with similar views. Imagine what your response would have been had someone cited an article and then called the verdict strange because of it.
In fact here is one of my posts at the time and one you'd do well to remember considering you were one of the ones going round labelling everyone as a rape apologist. Just as a reminder, questioning a verdict is fine but being inconsistent based on the identity of the person on trial is not:
Some people read up on the details of the case and came to the conclusion that there appeared to be some inconsistencies about this particular case. When this was pointed out they were accused of being rape apologists both on here and in the media.
If an appeal is now successful then hopefully those people will reflect on jumping on the bandwagon so soon and labelling people simply for questioning the judgement of the court (which everyone agrees is not infallible.)