Ched Evans to sign for Chesterfield

[Veggie Legs]

What a shocker how this turned out... Unanimous jury verdict. Surprise surprise.

/sarcasm.

I doubt the judge would have accepted anything less than a unanimous verdict in this case.

 

[Ian_Wrexham]

Just following the case this week, it was clear that his case this time was much stronger and I expected him to be cleared. Having served on a jury in a trial that had us talking for almost two days, to be cleared in two hours suggests the crown's case was much weaker.

Seems weird that our legal system allows the defendant's family to message witnesses "literally begging" them for new evidence.
Seems very off that they can offer those witnesses £50k inducements to testify.
Seems concerning that the contents of these messages could not be put before the jury.

Evans' acquittal hinged on the testimony of these two men's encounters with the woman word-for-word corroborating Evans' testimony, and any evidence that the defence team had access to them, had coached them or had offered them bribes should have been put to the jury. It was not.

The men were asked in court about the rewards and denied it being any motivation - they said they came forward because they thought Ched Evans was innocent. They were not asked about the text messages begging them to testify offering them the reward.

Ched Evans had sex with a barely conscious teenager who he hadn't spoken to. His name has been cleared based on the testimony of two men who stood to receive £50k should their testimony clear him. This is dodgy as fuck, even in the context of a legal system that systematically fails rape victims and protects rapists.

 

[pontoonlew]

Speak for yourself. Personally though I don't go around shagging unconscious women.

Oh sorry where you there?! It's just that a court of law have found him not guilty, therefore judging that was not the case.

 

[SkyBlueElephant]

The whole, this could have happened to anyone or this sort of thing happens every night in nightclubs is not quite right I believe.

If a person goes to a hotel room with the intention of having sex with a drunk girl hes never met or spoken to before then he's definitely on dodgy grounds and at the very least was worth investigating further.

The verdict has been given now but everyone will still have their own opinions on whether the verdict is correct or not.

 

[TomPNE94]

Excellent article on this here

https://thesecretbarrister.com/2016/10/14/10-myths-busted-about-the-ched-evans-case/

 

[Agombar stool]

Nobody apart from the 3 people who were there knows the true story. We rely on this countries judicial system to decide this, it's never going to be perfect but we have to move on and accept the verdict.

Personally I don't believe a word Ched Evans says, however I don't know the girl/woman in question so it would be unfair to judge her character, and on that basis unfair to judge Ched Evans also which makes my judgement of him hypocritical.

Both of their lives have changed due to this one night of madness, and not for the better, poor Ched has to play for Chesterfield and the girl has to tolerate absolutely vile abuse from 'lads'. Imagine thousands of tweets telling you to kill yourself etc.

Society should be ashamed of itself.

 

[Craig]

Oh sorry where you there?! It's just that a court of law have found him not guilty, therefore judging that was not the case.

I hate repeating myself but unfortunately it's necessary when in the presence of idiots. A court of law found him guilty in 2012.

 

[Harrier94]

Not read enough into the case to have an opinion but what I do like is the hypocrisy of the sun on their front page.

 

[Laker]

This bbc article is quite good, this lawyer is spot on.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-37666228

"Ms Baird, who was instrumental in bringing about the change in law, added: "The only difference between a clear conviction of Mr Evans in 2012 and the absolute refusal of him having any leave to appeal at that time, and his acquittal now, is that he has called some men to throw discredit on [the woman's] sexual reputation.

"That, I think, is pouring prejudice in, which is exactly what used to happen before the law in 1999 stopped the admission of previous sexual history in order to show consent.

"We've gone back, I'm afraid, probably about 30 years."

The fact these two new witnesses had a financial incentive to give evidence that supported Evans and were likely fed the information to make the stories match is the worrying part. In theory this "new evidence" is the only difference in the two trials..... It's dodgy at best and a miscarriage of justice at worst.

 

[pontoonlew]

I hate repeating myself but unfortunately it's necessary when in the presence of idiots. A court of law found him guilty in 2012.

Sorry what? That's a bit like calling the Birmingham 6 murderers because they were originally guilty.

His conviction has been overturned based on new evidence, which means he wouldn't have been convicted in 2012 had this new evidence been included.

I know how desperate you are for him to be guilty of this crime but as it stands Ched Evans has been cleared of any wrong doing, despite being questionable morally, he didn't deserve to be sat in jail for almost 3 years.

You may think differently to the court, unfortunately for you, you were not in the court hearing all the evidence. Nor where you in the hotel room.

 

[Stevencc]

Sorry what? That's a bit like calling the Birmingham 6 murderers because they were originally guilty.

His conviction has been overturned based on new evidence, which means he wouldn't have been convicted in 2012 had this new evidence been included.

I know how desperate you are for him to be guilty of this crime but as it stands Ched Evans has been cleared of any wrong doing, despite being questionable morally, he didn't deserve to be sat in jail for almost 3 years.

You may think differently to the court, unfortunately for you, you were not in the court hearing all the evidence. Nor where you in the hotel room.

What a strange thing to say.

 

[Bobbin']

Sorry what? That's a bit like calling the Birmingham 6 murderers because they were originally guilty.

His conviction has been overturned based on new evidence, which means he wouldn't have been convicted in 2012 had this new evidence been included.

I know how desperate you are for him to be guilty of this crime but as it stands Ched Evans has been cleared of any wrong doing, despite being questionable morally, he didn't deserve to be sat in jail for almost 3 years.

You may think differently to the court, unfortunately for you, you were not in the court hearing all the evidence. Nor where you in the hotel room.

Wish I was though, sounds fun.

 

[Craig]

What a strange thing to say.

Almost as strange as comparing an overturned rape conviction based on dodgy 'new evidence' and defamation of character to a miscarriage of justice at the height of the IRA's terror campaign on British soil.

 

[Aaron-Bcfc]

He's not been proven innocent. He's been proven not guilty.

There's a difference.

?

 

[Stagat]

It's a fair point, for all I know they had a game of monopoly.

More like polygamy!!!

 

[Sheffsteel]

This is a really complicated case with multiple strands.

Law is generally based on the common morality of the day.

The problem is sexual morals have degraded over recent decades. Rape can mean different things to different people and have different affects on that person.

I believe the defense are trying to say this woman goes out every weekend. Gets drunk and has 1 night stands where she can't remember anything the following day. So is she technically being raped every week? But as already been mentioned bringing up sexual history is dangerous territory. It's like saying a girl with a sluttish past is fair game to be raped because it wouldn't mean anything to her.

Also some men making comments lack experience. There are women that are sexual predators and love the idea of casual threesomes.

When the effects of alcohol come into the equation it muddies the waters. Also lets not forget the only witness that said sex took place was from Ched himself. The women doesn't know if she was raped or agreed to sex. She didn't even report any rape.

 

[Hurrikeen]

?

If it needs explaining, then I'll leave you to it.

 

[Aber gas]

Sorry what? That's a bit like calling the Birmingham 6 murderers because they were originally guilty.

His conviction has been overturned based on new evidence, which means he wouldn't have been convicted in 2012 had this new evidence been included.

I know how desperate you are for him to be guilty of this crime but as it stands Ched Evans has been cleared of any wrong doing, despite being questionable morally, he didn't deserve to be sat in jail for almost 3 years.

You may think differently to the court, unfortunately for you, you were not in the court hearing all the evidence. Nor where you in the hotel room.

You also think that there are no racist police shootings. So we should probably discount your opinion immediately.

 

[Pleg]

haha ha yes!!

fianally women are found guilty of being dirty "slag s" in a court

i agree with therest of the
ched-heads

i hate women to

!

 

[Stevencc]

https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...ns-calls-for-education-on-alcohol-and-consent

Perhaps he could run his own course?

Close the door.

Quick, close the door.

Right, lads. This is how you get away with it...

 

[Strawberry_Jam]

The modern culture of 'banter' is something that needs to be eradicated (especially within the football world) if people are to move on to become civilised