Jump to content

Ched Evans


Batman

Recommended Posts

So is Steve Bruce a rape apologist now?

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/30742947

 

So does Bruce know that it did go at appeal and that appeal was not upheld? The current review process is not an appeal. They talked about this on Talksport tonight. Most managers had the sense to dodge the question (Wenger didn't see it) but Bruce has put his size 9s right in it.

 

He might not be a rape apologist but he is certainly guilty of making himself look a total ***t.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Being a role model is very subjective though

Luke McCormick has turned it around brilliantly as he was given a second chance

 

Is it? If loads of kids have your name on the back of their shirts or prentend to be you in the playground that kind of means that you are held is some kind of esteem, no?

 

As for McCormick, perhaps Evans could have taken a leaf out of his book when he came out of the nick? He has only just started to make the right noises (and only because he has finally realised that his attitude is working against him). He and his mates have caused the victim even more grief and he has only just said that he regrets what she has gone through. The bloke is a total @rse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it? If loads of kids have your name on the back of their shirts or prentend to be you in the playground that kind of means that you are held is some kind of esteem, no?

 

As for McCormick, perhaps Evans could have taken a leaf out of his book when he came out of the nick? He has only just started to make the right noises (and only because he has finally realised that his attitude is working against him). He and his mates have caused the victim even more grief and he has only just said that he regrets what she has gone through. The bloke is a total @rse.

 

So, if evens said sorry you would let him play, like

McCormick?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, if evens said sorry you would let him play, like

McCormick?

 

He has but way too late. Still we have done this to the nth degree. Completely different circumstances. If McCormick had had the same accident but without drink involved would you still think he should be treated the same as Evans? There are people who cause death by dangerous driving every day who havent touched drink or drugs - in fact tiredness causes poor reactions in the same way that alcohol does. McCormick will have to live with these deaths on his conscience for the rest of his life. Evans still thinks he did nothing wrong so only probably is worried about not making a mint kicking a ball about again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what role are you saying he should be allowed to do then? And just him, or anyone else?

No, not just him. In my view anyone who is released 'on Licence', should have to do 'Community-Type work' until their full term is up.

 

After that, I would suggest it would seem sensible that they have to re-apply for membership of their Union, [ in this case the PFA], and then it would be up to the Union to decide.....maybe even by a members vote, as to whether or not they should be allowed to re-join.

 

It would still need a club to offer him a contract etc, but at least some sort of proper process would have been adhered to, and a proper period of time passed.

 

I am well aware that a Football's career has a limited time span, but offenders should consider that before offending !!

 

And therefore take steps to avoid landing themselves in compromising situations.

 

Just my view.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So does Bruce know that it did go at appeal and that appeal was not upheld? The current review process is not an appeal. They talked about this on Talksport tonight. Most managers had the sense to dodge the question (Wenger didn't see it) but Bruce has put his size 9s right in it.

 

He might not be a rape apologist but he is certainly guilty of making himself look a total ***t.

 

He was refused leave to appeal because there is no new evidence to bring to the table, our appeal process holds a jury verdict sacrosanct unless new evidence is presented. There is no new evidence in this case the defendant simply believes the jury got it wrong when convicting him.

 

The current review is the only form of 'appeal' available in the circumstances. It is an interesting case I suggest anyone who is curios reads the transcript and then sees if they could have found him guilty 'beyond reasonable doubt' as that is the measure required.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He was refused leave to appeal because there is no new evidence to bring to the table, our appeal process holds a jury verdict sacrosanct unless new evidence is presented. There is no new evidence in this case the defendant simply believes the jury got it wrong when convicting him.

 

The current review is the only form of 'appeal' available in the circumstances. It is an interesting case I suggest anyone who is curios reads the transcript and then sees if they could have found him guilty 'beyond reasonable doubt' as that is the measure required.

That's partly true, but it's not the whole story. Appeal is also possible on points of law, if the law was interpreted or applied in the wrong way.

 

According to the CCRC "New legal argument is usually some significant new point of law that has not been made before, such as a complaint that the judge’s summing-up was faulty, or that the prosecution applied the law incorrectly." I would guess that's where Evans' lawyers are focussed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is an interesting case I suggest anyone who is curios reads the transcript and then sees if they could have found him guilty 'beyond reasonable doubt' as that is the measure required.

 

Anyone who has sat through trials will know that the words in the evidence only tell part of the story. The jury get to see the mannerisms and body language of the witnesses and form an opinion of them. Essentially, their job is to asess the evidence based on what they have seen and heard in the witness box - a transcript is not the same.

 

12 jurors assessed the evidence in this case and arrived at the conclusion that Evans account left them with no reasonable doubt that he was guilty. Reading the evidence will not give the same insight into the evidence as the jurors had.

 

I've not looked into the powers of this "review" thingy but if they have the jurisdiction to order a retrial then Evans will probably be acquitted one way or another. He can't possibly get a fair trial. If I were at the cps I'd probably pull the case in that situation citing rather than allowing him to think he's been exonerated by a jury or the court of appeal. If a retrial is an option for the review thingy then this media circus may well aid Evans and it could be that he is being better advised than it first appears.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure how you can reach the conclusion that Evans will "probably" be aquitted and why should the CPS "pull" the case? They had a successful prosecution.Their job is to get the case to court and to get a conviction which they have done. Anything else is up to the courts and legal process.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure how you can reach the conclusion that Evans will "probably" be aquitted and why should the CPS "pull" the case? They had a successful prosecution.Their job is to get the case to court and to get a conviction which they have done. Anything else is up to the courts and legal process.

 

and if the evidence was so conclusive last time and the witness perfromances so strong why would a new jury return a different verdict? Seems like someone doesn't think the conviction is as secure as it should be, I still find the whole case rather puzzling not that I think he was inocent I've seen nothing conclusive either way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure how you can reach the conclusion that Evans will "probably" be aquitted and why should the CPS "pull" the case? They had a successful prosecution.Their job is to get the case to court and to get a conviction which they have done. Anything else is up to the courts and legal process.

 

I explained why in my post. He was convicted before this media circus and before "evidence" was put into the public arena. If the review can and does lead to a retrial then the bloke will struggle to have a fair trial. If that's the case, and he's convicted, then an appeal would be in the offing.

 

The way I see it is that any retrial would not lead to a safe conviction. Faced with that possibility the crown could well pull it - far better to do that and explain why rather than have the bloke "proved innocent" in the court.

 

If the review leaves things be then that's the end of it. If it leads to a retrial then my gut feel is that Evans will get a result. Let's see what happens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After reading a bit more I can't understand how one was acquitted and the other was convicted, but I suppose this is where we have to leave it up to the judge and jury.

 

Because the jury did not believe that Evans could have believed that the girl consented. They believed that the other fella could have believed that she consented. That's not surprising given that she went back to the hotel with the other fella whereas Evans just rocked up and had a go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I explained why in my post. He was convicted before this media circus and before "evidence" was put into the public arena. If the review can and does lead to a retrial then the bloke will struggle to have a fair trial. If that's the case, and he's convicted, then an appeal would be in the offing.

 

The way I see it is that any retrial would not lead to a safe conviction. Faced with that possibility the crown could well pull it - far better to do that and explain why rather than have the bloke "proved innocent" in the court.

 

If the review leaves things be then that's the end of it. If it leads to a retrial then my gut feel is that Evans will get a result. Let's see what happens.

 

Sorry but I dont agree. He was only convicted after the jury had the case presented to them. If they had made up their minds beforehand (and how can you when you havent heard and seen the evidence?) how come they aquitted his mate?

 

Why also would the CPS "pull" the case? They already have a successful prosecution. If a retrial was ordered why would they not go ahead when they have already considered the evidence and felt that they have enough to prosecute and been proved right to do so? The Review Commission will need to decide if the case has been tried properly and unless they find that the judge is at fault at some point it is hard to see that it hasnt been. Don't forget that it has ben up for appeal before and got nowhere. The only question I can see as things stand is why his buddy got off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After reading a bit more I can't understand how one was acquitted and the other was convicted, but I suppose this is where we have to leave it up to the judge and jury.

 

I suppose it would make sense to leave it to the people who have actually seen/heard all the evidence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So after every verdict should they say - We find the defendent guilty m'lud but remember that juries are not infalible so many people will still see the defendent as innocent?

 

I think the fallibility of the justice system should always be taken into account. Many lives have been ruined due to wrongful convictions and then the attitude of "he has been found guilty so is subhuman scum" by those in the media (again, not saying this is the case here.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the fallibility of the justice system should always be taken into account. Many lives have been ruined due to wrongful convictions and then the attitude of "he has been found guilty so is subhuman scum" by those in the media (again, not saying this is the case here.)

 

I agree and that is why we have an appeal system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because the jury did not believe that Evans could have believed that the girl consented. They believed that the other fella could have believed that she consented. That's not surprising given that she went back to the hotel with the other fella whereas Evans just rocked up and had a go.

 

But, from what I read in a weekend paper, the other fella texted Evans and told him to come and help himself too. There were also the other two that videoed the whole thing through the window, or something. Then the two footballers left the girl to herself in the small hours and told the doorman to watch out for her. Or have I misread all this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having had pretty much nothing to do at work over the xmas period I read the case notes, wouldn't be at all surprised if the rape charge is over-turned.

 

He'll play again

 

If so, how come his appeals failed? I wouldnt be so sure. And you may have read the notes from court but not the case notes. These are retained by the CPS and not released to the public.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But, from what I read in a weekend paper, the other fella texted Evans and told him to come and help himself too. There were also the other two that videoed the whole thing through the window, or something. Then the two footballers left the girl to herself in the small hours and told the doorman to watch out for her. Or have I misread all this?

 

He texted Evans on his way to the hotel and said that he had a bird. Apparently the two mates outside the window tried to video the action but failed for some reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Missed this in the news and sorry if it is common knowledge but was told last night that Evans's future father-in-law offered Oldham £2m to sign Evans. Even if his father-in-law is that convinced of Evans innocence, why would you want a scumb@g like that in the family? Is he that desparate for his daughetr to become a WAG?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Missed this in the news and sorry if it is common knowledge but was told last night that Evans's future father-in-law offered Oldham £2m to sign Evans. Even if his father-in-law is that convinced of Evans innocence, why would you want a scumb@g like that in the family? Is he that desparate for his daughetr to become a WAG?

 

Its a guarantee to offset any sponsorship losses they incur. I doubt its £2m.

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/transfers/ched-evans-to-oldham-athletic-family-will-pay-up-to-pave-the-way-for-deal-with-league-one-club-9961432.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 8 months later...

Referred for appeal so a real possibility the conviction could be quashed (according to the analyst on radio 2 anyway.) Big if but if it were to happen I wonder if people's opinions would change? Certainly some people in the media and some of the mentalists shouting 'rape apologist' will look a little silly. Just underlines the point that the jury system is certainly not infallible regardless of the verdict being quashed.

Edited by hypochondriac
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Referred for appeal so a real possibility the conviction could be quashed (according to the analyst on radio 2 anyway.) Big if but if it were to happen I wonder if people's opinions would change? Certainly some people in the media and some of the mentalists shouting 'rape apologist' will look a little silly. Just underlines the point that the jury system is certainly not infallible regardless of the verdict being quashed.

...and of course nor is the appeals system...!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Referred for appeal so a real possibility the conviction could be quashed (according to the analyst on radio 2 anyway.) Big if but if it were to happen I wonder if people's opinions would change? Certainly some people in the media and some of the mentalists shouting 'rape apologist' will look a little silly. Just underlines the point that the jury system is certainly not infallible regardless of the verdict being quashed.

 

but the jury have not been proven wrong yet

 

and didnt this get referred due to new evidence coming forward? bit tough for a jury to consider and, possibly, reach a different conclucion based on evidence they didnt see

Link to comment
Share on other sites

but the jury have not been proven wrong yet

 

and didnt this get referred due to new evidence coming forward? bit tough for a jury to consider and, possibly, reach a different conclucion based on evidence they didnt see

 

Of course but it's a bit rich from certain people screaming rape apologist at those who simply pointed out that there appeared to be more to this case than met the eye.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not really, he's still a convicted rapist at the moment.

 

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.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.)

 

Reading bits of information online and making conclusions is never clever. If new evidence has come to light since and the judges clear him then fair enough but until then you have to accept the verdict unless you have been in the courtroom and seen all the evidence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.)

 

So just to be clear you've never judged anyone found guilty in a court of law? I guess that Peter Sutcliffe was just an enthusiastic DIYer?

 

At the end of the day if someone is convicted in a court of law, like Ched, that's good enough for me. Yes there are miscarriages of justice but they are few and far between so I'll apologise to Ches, when I see him, if it turns out he is a victim of a terrible miscarriage.....

 

....or actually I probably won't because he will still be an unpleasant little **** who took advantage of a young lady who was clearly to drunk to now what she was doing. Have you got any daughters hypo? How would you feel if a couple of blokes took advantage of her when she was to drunk to look after herself?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So is his defence, a rape took place while he was also having sex with her, but he had been given the okay before she passed out, whereas his mate, who he allowed to join in, hadn't been granted permission?

If that's the case, maybe he can walk free with his reputation intact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So is his defence, a rape took place while he was also having sex with her, but he had been given the okay before she passed out, whereas his mate, who he allowed to join in, hadn't been granted permission?

If that's the case, maybe he can walk free with his reputation intact.

 

He's a scumbag whichever way you look at it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

View Terms of service (Terms of Use) and Privacy Policy (Privacy Policy) and Forum Guidelines ({Guidelines})