| Ched again on 11:04 - Nov 20 with 1342 views | controversial_jack |
| Ched again on 10:31 - Nov 20 by icecoldjack |
I think we have one of the best justice systems in the world myself, but even then they get it wrong, no system is perfect and this was probably a very close call.
Somebody above mentioned video evidence? If that was used and seen by a jury then maybe there is a whole other context that we arnt privvy too ?
Anyway, ched is a scum bag IMO so fook him. |
We have an adversarial system in this country.The prosecution are under no obligation to reveal any evidence that may help your defence |  | |  |
| Ched again on 13:00 - Nov 20 with 1288 views | somersetsimon |
| Ched again on 11:08 - Nov 19 by LeonisGod |
Yes, that's because there are laws/rules that do not allow convicted sex offenders to work with children, etc. There are no rules/laws that prevent convicted sex offenders to work as footballers. This is just NIMBYism. All of those making a stand at SUFC have said that he has a right to return to work, but they just don't want him to work at their club. He's perfectly entitled in the eyes of the law to return to his work. |
Absolutely. He is perfectly entitled to apply for any job that he isn't barred from. Of course, no employer is obliged to take him.
I don't really understand Sheffield Utd's stance on this. Whatever their views on the case, they must know that the negative publicity is going to cost them. |  | | |
| Ched again on 13:48 - Nov 20 with 1248 views | JJJack |
| Ched again on 10:56 - Nov 20 by Shaky |
There seems to be a great deal of confusion regarding the concept of legal appeals.
In the absence of dramatic new evidence, appeals are largely technical affairs regarding points of law. In this way the applications already made for leave to appeal have also been turned down narrowly on the points of law raised.
That is to say the appeals process has not reviewed the entire case and is not required to say for example while this objection isn't a flyer, you should instead look at points of law xyz.
I think I have an idea of the technical point of law that Evans' defence team is now pursuing. Will it change my view of his guilt or innocence? Certainly not. How could an arcane technical point of law ever do that?
There are only 3 people who could possibly know whether Evans is guilty and one of those doesn't remember a thing. That's the whole bloody point! The truly alarming thing is he was convicted beyond any reasonable doubt in the first place. |
I think we probably share a similar viewpoint on the dodginess of this conviction and perhaps therefore Evans' guilt/innocence. I believe you have some sort of legal background so I'll leave it to you to "plead the case" on here as you'll do it with more knowledge. But your description of the failure of his initial appeal is excellent. We have learned nothing from cases such as Hillsborough, the Guildford 4 and however many others ....i.e..... that it's monumentally difficult to overturn an original conviction even when the CPS concede that "new evidence" may make a difference unless it's dramatic then they won't commission a new trial.
Your last sentence above is getting roundly ignored by the morally-outraged Ched-haters on here. I know it's in South Africa but Pistorius got a similar 5yrs sentence for culpable homicide and could be out in 10mths . Amazing. |  | | |
| Ched again on 13:50 - Nov 20 with 1244 views | NOTRAC |
Look at the thread in non football matters regarding West Midlands police and child abuse.
It puts this matter into perspective! | |
| |
| Ched again on 14:55 - Nov 20 with 1204 views | skippyjack |
The facts of it..
Ched was a stupid tw*t... if she apparently give him oral sex.. it's unlikely that he raped her.. it's actually highly unlikely any girl would give you oral sex.. brute force wasn't used.. I think Ched has been a bit unfortunate.. but he's been convicted..
The Girl has been treated the worst though.. changed identity.. moved home.. been given a lot of stick.. for not remembering what happened the night before..
But it all boils down to alcohol... if you drink high amounts... especially in a short space of time.. you're unlikely to remember what the f*ck you did.. the best possible solution would've been old school.. Cheds mother and father.. that girls mother and father.. should've had a conversation in a room together.. giving these two an absolute ear bashing... it would've saved a lot of time.. the girls father should've give her an earful for finishing work.. getting absolutely plastered.. and going off with some tw*t in a hotel room.. Cheds father should've given him a earful.. why the f*ck are you going out 'pissed' and getting into 3 sums with your knuckle head of a mate.. the media has a lot of the blame on this case.
The whole case is very kid like.. blown way out of proportion. |  |
| The awkward moment when a Welsh Club become the Champions of England.. shh
The Swansea Way.. To upset the odds. | | Poll: | Best Swans Player |
| |
| Ched again on 14:58 - Nov 20 with 1197 views | LeonisGod |
| Ched again on 14:55 - Nov 20 by skippyjack |
The facts of it..
Ched was a stupid tw*t... if she apparently give him oral sex.. it's unlikely that he raped her.. it's actually highly unlikely any girl would give you oral sex.. brute force wasn't used.. I think Ched has been a bit unfortunate.. but he's been convicted..
The Girl has been treated the worst though.. changed identity.. moved home.. been given a lot of stick.. for not remembering what happened the night before..
But it all boils down to alcohol... if you drink high amounts... especially in a short space of time.. you're unlikely to remember what the f*ck you did.. the best possible solution would've been old school.. Cheds mother and father.. that girls mother and father.. should've had a conversation in a room together.. giving these two an absolute ear bashing... it would've saved a lot of time.. the girls father should've give her an earful for finishing work.. getting absolutely plastered.. and going off with some tw*t in a hotel room.. Cheds father should've given him a earful.. why the f*ck are you going out 'pissed' and getting into 3 sums with your knuckle head of a mate.. the media has a lot of the blame on this case.
The whole case is very kid like.. blown way out of proportion. |
They are not the facts though. |  | | |
| Ched again on 15:34 - Nov 20 with 1171 views | Starsky |
| Ched again on 14:55 - Nov 20 by skippyjack |
The facts of it..
Ched was a stupid tw*t... if she apparently give him oral sex.. it's unlikely that he raped her.. it's actually highly unlikely any girl would give you oral sex.. brute force wasn't used.. I think Ched has been a bit unfortunate.. but he's been convicted..
The Girl has been treated the worst though.. changed identity.. moved home.. been given a lot of stick.. for not remembering what happened the night before..
But it all boils down to alcohol... if you drink high amounts... especially in a short space of time.. you're unlikely to remember what the f*ck you did.. the best possible solution would've been old school.. Cheds mother and father.. that girls mother and father.. should've had a conversation in a room together.. giving these two an absolute ear bashing... it would've saved a lot of time.. the girls father should've give her an earful for finishing work.. getting absolutely plastered.. and going off with some tw*t in a hotel room.. Cheds father should've given him a earful.. why the f*ck are you going out 'pissed' and getting into 3 sums with your knuckle head of a mate.. the media has a lot of the blame on this case.
The whole case is very kid like.. blown way out of proportion. |
Facts?
Where has it ever been stated that "she apparently gave him oral sex"
You're waffling again. |  |
| It's just the internet, init. |
| |
| Ched again on 16:20 - Nov 20 with 1143 views | skippyjack |
| Ched again on 15:34 - Nov 20 by Starsky |
Facts?
Where has it ever been stated that "she apparently gave him oral sex"
You're waffling again. |
I heard she gave him oral sex.. you're very rude.. attack the post not the poster.. what do you mean waffling again?.. Parlay was trying to look all clever.. when it was straightforward. [Post edited 20 Nov 2014 16:23]
| |
| The awkward moment when a Welsh Club become the Champions of England.. shh
The Swansea Way.. To upset the odds. | | Poll: | Best Swans Player |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Ched again on 17:47 - Nov 20 with 1101 views | Chief |
| Ched again on 15:34 - Nov 20 by Starsky |
Facts?
Where has it ever been stated that "she apparently gave him oral sex"
You're waffling again. |
Its been claimed that he actually performed oral sex on her, which makes a mockery of this rape conviction |  |
| |
| Ched again on 20:15 - Nov 20 with 1055 views | Darran |
Sheffield United have dumped Ched.  |  |
| |
| Ched again on 20:45 - Nov 20 with 1034 views | acejack3065 |
| Ched again on 20:15 - Nov 20 by Darran |
Sheffield United have dumped Ched. |
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/30054475
"The club said reaction to their initial decision "has been at an intensity that could not have been anticipated".
What kind of country do we live in when a convicted rapist is treated like a convicted rapist? |  | | |
| Ched again on 21:50 - Nov 20 with 991 views | Starsky |
| Ched again on 17:47 - Nov 20 by Chief |
Its been claimed that he actually performed oral sex on her, which makes a mockery of this rape conviction |
That's the complete opposite of what Skippy said.
Also, I don't see how what you've written makes any difference.
ALSO... Do you think he'd have done that just after his mate had been there?
I don't think so. | |
| It's just the internet, init. |
| |
| Ched again on 22:01 - Nov 20 with 981 views | ScoobyWho |
| Ched again on 17:47 - Nov 20 by Chief |
Its been claimed that he actually performed oral sex on her, which makes a mockery of this rape conviction |
Indeed, thats actually sexual assault on top, lucky he didn't get two charges. |  |
| |
| Ched again on 22:13 - Nov 20 with 955 views | LeonisGod |
| Ched again on 17:47 - Nov 20 by Chief |
Its been claimed that he actually performed oral sex on her, which makes a mockery of this rape conviction |
It's been claimed that she asked him to too. Now I'd say that certainly makes a mockery of the conviction IF true. It's a big 'if' though and one we'll never know the answer to. [Post edited 20 Nov 2014 22:13]
| | | |
| Ched again on 22:30 - Nov 20 with 926 views | jackonicko |
| Ched again on 11:04 - Nov 20 by controversial_jack |
We have an adversarial system in this country.The prosecution are under no obligation to reveal any evidence that may help your defence |
Not true. In fact, fundamentally the opposite.
The rules on disclosure are very clear. They are detailed but the "golden rule" is that full disclosure is made of all material held by the prosecution that weakens its case or strengthens that of the defence.
http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/a_to_c/attorney_generals_guidelines_on_disclosure/ |  | | |
| Ched again on 08:52 - Nov 21 with 856 views | monmouth |
| Ched again on 22:13 - Nov 20 by LeonisGod |
It's been claimed that she asked him to too. Now I'd say that certainly makes a mockery of the conviction IF true. It's a big 'if' though and one we'll never know the answer to. [Post edited 20 Nov 2014 22:13]
|
Claimed by the convicted rapist ched evans? Really? Well I never. |  |
| |
| Ched again on 12:08 - Nov 21 with 814 views | jackonicko |
| Ched again on 08:52 - Nov 21 by monmouth |
Claimed by the convicted rapist ched evans? Really? Well I never. |
It's astonishing that Ched never thought to mention that at trial! | | | |
| Ched again on 12:45 - Nov 21 with 788 views | dobjack2 |
The jury would have had to decide beyond reasonable doubt that the complainant did not consent (ie did not give a valid consent) to the sexual act and that the defendant did not reasonably believe the complainant consented.
drink/drugs can mean that a person is incapable of giving valid consent. | | | |
| Ched again on 13:05 - Nov 21 with 771 views | ItchySphincter |
| Ched again on 12:45 - Nov 21 by dobjack2 |
The jury would have had to decide beyond reasonable doubt that the complainant did not consent (ie did not give a valid consent) to the sexual act and that the defendant did not reasonably believe the complainant consented.
drink/drugs can mean that a person is incapable of giving valid consent. |
Tell it to the imbeciles on here that are too busy w@nking over what he did to that girl rather than accept the fact that a jury in a court of law convicted him. |  |
| |
| Ched again on 13:22 - Nov 21 with 758 views | controversial_jack |
I should have worded it differently. Anything you say to the police or prosecution will be used against you. They will not use anything in your defence. Any criminal lawyer will tell you this | | | |
| Ched again on 13:25 - Nov 21 with 752 views | londonlisa2001 |
Thankfully been away for most of this discussion this week !
One observation though - it seems we could save an awful lot of time and money if we just do away with proper legal process, trials, judges, juries and the appeals system in this country and just have a defendant put up a web site with their side of the story on it. They could make sure that they contain all the 'facts' that they want people to know and leave out anything that doesn't suit them. Can't imagine why no one thought of it sooner really since that's seemingly all you need to make a balanced, non biased, and completely fair assessment of what actually happened!
The only thing they've so far forgotten to post up, is the video that his brother took from outside the window. Bizarre omission that really, since it presumably supports absolutely everything that Ched says about it all, and is in the possession of his brother and mates. Perhaps they've lost it? | | | |
| Ched again on 13:26 - Nov 21 with 750 views | controversial_jack |
| Ched again on 13:05 - Nov 21 by ItchySphincter |
Tell it to the imbeciles on here that are too busy w@nking over what he did to that girl rather than accept the fact that a jury in a court of law convicted him. |
To be intoxicated is no excuse under the law. Many are convicted of offences while under the influence. Seems this case is simply one persons word against anothers | | | |
| Ched again on 13:30 - Nov 21 with 743 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Ched again on 13:26 - Nov 21 by controversial_jack |
To be intoxicated is no excuse under the law. Many are convicted of offences while under the influence. Seems this case is simply one persons word against anothers |
It's not the person accused (and found guilty) that is being talked about as intoxicated. It's the person that was or wasn't able to give consent. An important distinction really since she's not been accused of anything at all (not that one would know that from reading this board).
If intoxication is not able to affect the giving of consent then it makes you wonder why people bother with date rape drugs doesn't it? | | | |
| Ched again on 13:52 - Nov 21 with 720 views | controversial_jack |
| Ched again on 13:30 - Nov 21 by londonlisa2001 |
It's not the person accused (and found guilty) that is being talked about as intoxicated. It's the person that was or wasn't able to give consent. An important distinction really since she's not been accused of anything at all (not that one would know that from reading this board).
If intoxication is not able to affect the giving of consent then it makes you wonder why people bother with date rape drugs doesn't it? |
I don't think she was forced to become intoxicated, so it's not the same as being drugged. She hasn't been accused of anything, but she has accused someone else.
My point is many are convicted on the word of one person against anothers.It happened to a good friend of the family, but thankfully the case against him was unsound, not until he had spent 2 years in prison , lost his job and reputation based upon the word of one person of proven low character against his.
This really is how it happens in our courts. Proven beyond reasonable doubt, indeed! | | | |
| Ched again on 14:07 - Nov 21 with 698 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Ched again on 13:52 - Nov 21 by controversial_jack |
I don't think she was forced to become intoxicated, so it's not the same as being drugged. She hasn't been accused of anything, but she has accused someone else.
My point is many are convicted on the word of one person against anothers.It happened to a good friend of the family, but thankfully the case against him was unsound, not until he had spent 2 years in prison , lost his job and reputation based upon the word of one person of proven low character against his.
This really is how it happens in our courts. Proven beyond reasonable doubt, indeed! |
she hasn't accused anyone actually,nor was it her word against anyone else's - she said all along she had no memory, but don't let the facts get in the way. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
