sadoldgit

Not serious. T*tty w@nks on the other hand are a grey area. No penetration but you would have to say it was more than holding hands.

Professional sports people are a privileged breed. They get paid (often very well) for doing something most of them love and most of us would do for free. I wouldnt fill shelves at Tescos for nothing but would have happily played for SFC fr nowt if I had been good enough (subsidising my wages by filling shelves at Tescos of course). The more I think about a code of conduct the more think it is a good idea. It would stop all the nonsense we have had about Evans, McCormack etc and people would know where they stood.

Defense lawyers are also paid to defend their clients but many will advise their clients to please guilty if they think they are and will get convicted. Defending a rapist is defending the indefensible. He could argue that Evans has paid his debt and deserves to be able to play football again - but he might have been better off advising Evans to apologise and show some remorse (which has only just happened, long over due) and to get his buddies to take that offensive website down.

The police and CPS felt there was enough evidence to charge both with rape. He was charged and found not guilty. The "falsely" can only come after the verdict. Frankly I think he was lucky he didnt end up sharing a cell with his buddy.

Anyone would think that the "Devil Woman" had never been written!

Sun

If you had lost your handbag (according to the Telegraph columist) I think we can assume you were raped

Couldnt agree more. On th one hand we say rape is a serious crime and then he gets a relatively short sentence. I know that 5 years isnt short but he was never go to do the full stretch. Perhaps there should be a minimum sentence for rape and a minimum time served? Mind you, if he doesnt get to play professional football again you could argue that he is being punished twice and maybe their is some kind of justice in that?

Or a sh@g for a sh@g.

Perhaps professional sportsmen/women should sign up to a code of conduct when they sign a contract that says that if they commit rape, serious sexual assault, causing death by drink driving etc and they forfiet the right to continue as a professional sports person? That way the debate about them being role models or not is moot - we accept that as professionals they are role models and need to behave in a certain manner in order to continue to enjoy their status. On a separate note I see Arry has his finger on the nations pulse. What if the local guy filling shelves is a rapist? Not quite the same Arry is it?

Just saw in a newspaper that one of the Oldham directors had a rape threat posted against his daughter if Evans had been signed. On what effin planet do these people live on? I dont want Evans playing for your club because he is a rapist therefore I shall rape your daughter if you sign him???

That is a shame. I would rather see them go through the process and end up rotting in jail somewhere. Still, I hope they aren't too dispappointed if the vigin's promised aren't to their taste.

She said she thought her drink might have been spiked but I dont think she was drining with these two so it would have had to happen earlier in the evening, presumably by someone else.

If they both stagger off then the sober people are in Ched Evans territory. If two drunk people have sex (might not be so easy for the guy) then I guess it depends on what they feel about it hen they sober up. If either one didnt want it to happen but was too drunk to prevent it then rape occurred.

Serious sexual assualt is when there is penetratio involved. Touching is not serious but can see seen as such if children are involved. There are grey areas depending on circumstances.

I dont think she did make rape accusations though Bearsy. All along she has said she had no recollection of what happened. The police found out who took her to the hotel and they both admitted having sex with her. The rape stuff stemmed from the fact that she says she didnt know what went on that night.

Man is prone to superstition and tribalism, put them both together and you have religion - one of the biggest causes of conflict on this planet since the beginning of time. The idiot in the black and white stripes is reacting to his tribalist (Newcasle United clan) instincts and given that a lot of football supporters build "shrines" in their homes (team pictures, colours etc) you could argue that it is also a quasi religion for them too. As long as no one gets hurt it is harmless enough (not very pleasant in the 70s though). The problem with football hooliganism as it is with Islam is that it is not the game of the religion itself that is the problem, it is the relatively few psychos who attach themselves to either group and use it to justify their psycotic behaviour. I know some Muslims and they are decent, peaceful people who are just as applaed as the Paris massacre and the beheadings as I am. You only have to look at the atrocities carried out during the "Troubles" (and to some extent still going on) to see that some Christians are not better. Religious extremist are not religious people. If they were they would be leading peaceful lives. They use Religion to justify their need to kill and maime. Drop the Religious and there you have it. They are Extremists and this is only relevant to Islam in that they chose to mitigate their atrocities by using that as a cover.

Once upon a time an alleged rapist would say it wasnt him. With DNA they cant do that so easily so the arguement usually comes down to consent which as UJ says is difficult to prove or disprove. The law needs to protect people from the affects of booze and drugs (the fact that one drug is called a date rape drug says it all) but proving intent/none consent comes down to how successfully the case is put and what the jury thinks. It is a huge step forward that police are putting more of these cases forward but the CPS still have a difficult job in deciding what to charge as the case neds to have a reasonable chance of sucess in court. Cases are still being dropped although the CPS believe the victim on the basis that there is no reasonable chance of conviction. The good thing about the high profile Evans case is that, hopefully, it will make people think twice about what they do with someone who is not in control of themselves. Not only do the CPS use specialist teams for rape cases, but they also use specialist counsel to prosecute them. Murder cases don't even get that level of specialist prosecution.

Good point. If she had assaulted a police officer she could have been done for being drunk and disorderly so that she woud be held responsible. Same as if you rape somewhen when drunk, that is no defence. I guess it is about the exent to which you impose your will/actions on someone else and to what extent you take advantage of someone who is not in control or able to make reasoned decisions.

The important thing here is tha the police and CPS thought there was enough here to take the case to court where a jury found Evans guilty. Everything else is just a lot of hot air. You can make your own mind up but that does not stop him being a convicted rapist.

Agreed!

Taylor seems to spend most of his time defending the indefensible. Ok, he is a union rep, but perhaps if he had trod a harder line from his early days the footballers of today wouldn't think that they are something special and in some cases, above the law.

I thought it as the other way around?

My bad, typo. Should have been wasnt.

But this is the problem, laying it all at the door of Islam. The problem is religion driven fundermantalist full stop.