finneyb
Established Member
What’s the difference between Ched Evans and a caveman?
A caveman has a club !!!
A caveman has a club !!!
Ched Evans
- Thread starter finneyb
- Start date
Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:
Don't think for a moment that I am saying **** is OK, as I am not, but in this very particular situation, which was nothing more than a mutually drink fuelled one night stand, and the other guy who she "entertained" got off, I think something is wrong. Many people here have no doubt been in a similar situation ( perhaps not a threesome though) I know I have, where the previous night was a bit of blur and you realised you had probably done something with someone you might not otherwise have done, had you not both been drunk....She woke up the next day, felt dirty and shamed with herself and it's the easiest thing in the world to say you were *****....Maybe he was not as nice to her as she would have liked the next day, something like that, Even my wife says she has been in a similar situation at least a couple of times in her student days, and there was no way she would class it as ****....just bad judgement. These girls are all over professional footballers like a rash when they meet them in clubs etc, it's almost the holy grail of clubbing to go out and pull a footballer. It's not like he followed her home and attacked her.......
That notwithstanding, he has served his time, I think he should be allowed to pursue his career. How long must he pay for a a very small and very grey area lack of judgement?
That notwithstanding, he has served his time, I think he should be allowed to pursue his career. How long must he pay for a a very small and very grey area lack of judgement?
Phil Pascoe
Established Member
My thoughts exactly, though I wasn't on the jury. I wonder sometimes, though, if sometimes the courts make "politically correct" decisions as they are unwilling to say wake up you daft tart, if you weren't so quick to hop in bed with someone you'd just met, it wouldn't have happened.
As far as threesomes are concerned their conspicuous absence in my long and varied life hasn't been for want of trying.
As far as threesomes are concerned their conspicuous absence in my long and varied life hasn't been for want of trying.
finneyb
Established Member
I think real issue is the trolls attacking the girl.
Do they support Evans? or are they just loud-mouthed cowards using the internet as a vehicle for bullying?
Take them out of the equation and I suspect all the heat goes out of the situation.
Brian
Do they support Evans? or are they just loud-mouthed cowards using the internet as a vehicle for bullying?
Take them out of the equation and I suspect all the heat goes out of the situation.
Brian
+1. Annoys the **** out of me that all these numptys are jumping on the outrage bus over this.
Hardly anyone batted an eyelid when that premier league goalie returned to football after being released for killing those 2 kids in a drink-drive crash on the M40 a few years ago. I know which of the two I'd rather see getting treated like this.
Hardly anyone batted an eyelid when that premier league goalie returned to football after being released for killing those 2 kids in a drink-drive crash on the M40 a few years ago. I know which of the two I'd rather see getting treated like this.
monkeybiter
Established Member
markturner":1n1civn9 said:
Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't he still on parole [under license] having been released early?
My opinion is that regardless of the reason for conviction, once time is served, there is no basis for discrimination against someone in a job as trivial as sportsman. Once the original sentence has passed he should be able to sue for discrimination. However until such a time as that sentence has passed he should just be happy with his freedom.
I've read a reasonable amount about this case and if the important points have been reported correctly there is something rather odd about the conviction.
As far as I'm aware the verdict hinged on her inability to give consent, due to being 'extremely drunk'. In court she stated that she had zero recollection of events.
In his summing up the judge indicated that CCTV evidence clearly showed that she was extremely drunk and that Ched Evans should surely have realised that.
Now for the contradiction. The CCTV evidence is from a Takeaway shop. The girl in question came out of that shop and met Evan's friend in a taxi rank (Evans was not present). The girl went to the hotel with the friend and Evans appeared sometime later.
Why was she too drunk and unable to give consent to Evans but perfectly fine to give consent to his friend? Remember that his friend was found not Guilty. It doesn't seem logical at all. Either both should be found Guilty or both innocent.
As far as I'm aware the verdict hinged on her inability to give consent, due to being 'extremely drunk'. In court she stated that she had zero recollection of events.
In his summing up the judge indicated that CCTV evidence clearly showed that she was extremely drunk and that Ched Evans should surely have realised that.
Now for the contradiction. The CCTV evidence is from a Takeaway shop. The girl in question came out of that shop and met Evan's friend in a taxi rank (Evans was not present). The girl went to the hotel with the friend and Evans appeared sometime later.
Why was she too drunk and unable to give consent to Evans but perfectly fine to give consent to his friend? Remember that his friend was found not Guilty. It doesn't seem logical at all. Either both should be found Guilty or both innocent.
finneyb
Established Member
monkeybiter":1517po9t said:
I'm no expert, but what about spent convictions? Convictions even after the sentence has passed must still be declared on any employment form until they are spent. The time by which a conviction becomes spent depends upon the length of sentence mainly - sentences over 48 months are never spent so as I read it he will always have to declare the conviction on his employment form. I would be going for a case review in that case, its worth the effort - there is more to this sentencing than at first meets the eye, its not just a matter of a number of years. https://nationalcareersservice.direct.g ... tions.aspx
Brian
blackrodd
Established Member
I agree with the above, not what I, personally would call a "safe" conviction.
But it has to be said, when there is good evidence that a **** has been commited, then the court and judge should be with out any mercy in their conviction.
Regards Rodders
But it has to be said, when there is good evidence that a **** has been commited, then the court and judge should be with out any mercy in their conviction.
Regards Rodders
DiscoStu
Established Member
My view is that you have to have faith in the legal system and he was found guilty of ****.
I do agree that once released people should be able to return to work etc. However I'm with the PM on this. He has shown no signs of remorse (until he didn't get the contract) and as a footballer he is a role model to young people. Maybe a little more remorse and some humility and people might accept him more. Saying that the other guy got off and therefore Ched must be innocent is a silly statement IMHO. It could easily mean that the other guy should have been found guilty. All I know is that I wasn't on the jury and didn't hear the evidence and therefore I have to believe in the verdict.
I do agree that once released people should be able to return to work etc. However I'm with the PM on this. He has shown no signs of remorse (until he didn't get the contract) and as a footballer he is a role model to young people. Maybe a little more remorse and some humility and people might accept him more. Saying that the other guy got off and therefore Ched must be innocent is a silly statement IMHO. It could easily mean that the other guy should have been found guilty. All I know is that I wasn't on the jury and didn't hear the evidence and therefore I have to believe in the verdict.
DiscoStu":1dfhkdtv said:
Hope that's not directed at my post because that is certainly not what I stated. I pointed out the contradiction in the two verdicts. I've not read anything that explains the contradiction.
Spot-on Ray. Keyboard warriors, most of whom in real life probably wouldn't have the stones to say boo to a budgie.Slinger":yypf3gwq said:
Can't understand why Oldham took any of these throbbers seriously.
RobinBHM
Established Member
The most objective information on this case Ive read is here http://footylaw.co.uk/2015/01/06/ched-e ... m-fiction/
It seems the case hinged on whether the *** was consensual. Since Ched Evans arrived at the hotel room uninvited by her or Clayton, and she cant remember, the jury decided it was not. Technically **** as the law stands. She obviously had drunk a lot, couldnt remember anything and was collected by her mother in the morning, which might have had a bearing on why the police got involved.
I dont find Ched Evans to be a likeable or humble person, seems a bit of an arrogant person to me, although thats only a fleeting impression not based on any knowledge. He has served 2 1/2 years though so should have an opportunity to play football now.
The reality is that its all about business, no sponsor could afford to be seen to condone **** and so they have to pull out. If he was signed by any club, any continuing sponsors would face permanent criticism -it just wouldnt be worth it.
It seems the case hinged on whether the *** was consensual. Since Ched Evans arrived at the hotel room uninvited by her or Clayton, and she cant remember, the jury decided it was not. Technically **** as the law stands. She obviously had drunk a lot, couldnt remember anything and was collected by her mother in the morning, which might have had a bearing on why the police got involved.
I dont find Ched Evans to be a likeable or humble person, seems a bit of an arrogant person to me, although thats only a fleeting impression not based on any knowledge. He has served 2 1/2 years though so should have an opportunity to play football now.
The reality is that its all about business, no sponsor could afford to be seen to condone **** and so they have to pull out. If he was signed by any club, any continuing sponsors would face permanent criticism -it just wouldnt be worth it.
Phil Pascoe
Established Member
As a few columnists have pointed out - there's something ridiculous about expecting someone who professes their innocence to apologise.
RobinBHM
Established Member
phil.p":m2vm4q0i said:
Absolutely
finneyb
Established Member
RobinBHM thanks for the footylaw ref - it explains why one got off and Evans was convicted.
Evans will profess innocence if he is going for a case review - a sentence over 4 years is never 'spent' and needs to be declared in an employment application, without a time limit. If by chance a case review shows the conviction to be unsafe then I assume he no longer has to declare the conviction in an employment application - that's surely worth going for.
Never thought all this would come from my two line joke.
A very good discussion.
Brian
Evans will profess innocence if he is going for a case review - a sentence over 4 years is never 'spent' and needs to be declared in an employment application, without a time limit. If by chance a case review shows the conviction to be unsafe then I assume he no longer has to declare the conviction in an employment application - that's surely worth going for.
Never thought all this would come from my two line joke.
A very good discussion.
Brian
