Ched Evans verdict

Yes, it is a crime to film someone having sex without their knowledge and permission. I guess they didn't bother pursuing this.

Why isnt there a criminal record? The man admitted in court to videoing a couple having sex through a hotel window without permission. That must be illegal surely?

Yes Jen, he did say the "shhh" thing

Countess, given that he has no criminal record is there much that can happen? I would have serious questions about safeguarding issues with someone who is willing to stand up in court and say he was able to gauge whether a woman was consenting to sex by looking through a window into a darkened room.

The brother really shouldn't be teaching. I wouldn't want someone like that teaching my daughters and I wouldn't like them teaching my sons.

This story has upset me so much. I can't say why, I have had no experience of sexual violence myself. I can't imagine how hard it must be for those who have when big cases like this are in the news.

Ever since I heard the verdict I find my mind wondering to it and getting upset. Does anyone else feel like this? Or do I just need to get a grip?

It's like all the other horrible sexist stories around at the moment. Or the hushing up of child abuse.

I thought I was walking around in one world, and now I find I'm actually in a much darker, scarier place than i thought.

Am I right in remembering that CE brother said that once inside the room CE came to the window, put his finger to his lips to indicate "be quiet" and then closed the curtains?

I think there wasn't much visible or audible on the mobile phone video, as the room was dark and they were outside the window. But the friend and brother filming could be heard saying "who is it?" "Some fat bird"

I'd imagine that even if the footage was deleted that the police would have the technology available to recover it like they do with computer hard drives and such.

I'm not sure if the footage was used in court, it might have been too dark to pick up anything noteworthy although wasn't one of the men outside the window heard referring to her as 'some fat bird' at some point? Could have gotten that wrong.

I have a question. His friends or brother or something were filming it through the window, right? Was that recording ever recovered? I assume they deleted it, because if she'd been enthusiastically consenting in it they'd have used it. Which implies it was clear she was pretty much unconscious, hence why they deleted it.

Valanice, I think the jury knew about the reward offers on the website, but not that potential witnesses were being approached individually, repeatedly, and offered money individually. From the guardian:

Evans’s girlfriend, Massey, was accused in legal argument during the second trial of offering an “inducement” to a key witness. The prosecution said this had “the flavour of a bribe”. The trial judge disagreed.

So the judge thought the jury didn't need to know this.

Thanks for answering, Marble. I'm glad the jury were at least told about the £50k offer. I just feel sad that a rape conviction can be quashed on the basis of two men reporting that the complainant had said the same thing as one of the defendants claimed. Not only is it not a particularly uncommon phrase, but it was widely reported in the media during the first trial, FFS!

Apparently the jury concluded that they weren't motivated to lie in court by the chance of £50,000. The prosecution tried to argue that there were shades of bribing witnesses but the defence argued, and the judge decided, that there were not.

The witnesses were asked if they were doing it for the money but said they were not, had no reason to lie

Yes they did, the 50k was for evidence that cleared CE. It wouldn't have cleared him if they admitted they were testifying for money would it?
I don't believe he's going to receive any money, but maybe he did when he testified.

Any as many ppl have said he should never have been a witness in first place.

I've looked on the Daily Mail site. Initially the comments are depressing until you arrange them in the highest rated order.

cad the reason why this is so fucking depressing is because allowing evidence like this means there doesn't even have to have been any collusion. Rapists commonly say 'she wanted it rough, she wanted me to fuck her hard' (convenient excuse for injuries) boyfriends often coerce girlfriends into saying things like 'fuck me harder'. No collusion required just a culture where men act like entitled shits and get reinforcement of their behaviour from each other and wider media

Admissing this as evidence is saying rape culture is OK. I am so so so angry about that and I couldn't give a shit whether you think this evidence is truthful or not that's not the point I'm trying to make

I was talking about this case to a make friend of mine today. Perfectly reasonable bloke. Understood the wrongs of the case etc etc but at the end of the conversation still said that a lot of women make up rape. I'm very sad about this. I have two boys. Today, according to the law it is ok to have sex with a very drunk woman, not speak to her, not show her any curtesy, film it, call her a fat bird, etc etc. Young men will see this as OK. It frightens and saddens me. Equality - Sod off, I had more equality 30 years ago.

Cadno appears to hang around the feminism board solely to post in support of rapists. Odd hobby but I suppose it keeps him off the streets.

They did know that the offers were about. I don't think they knew (or if we will know) the extent to which individuals were contacted repeatedly and offered money for evidence. The hotel receptionist was, for example, contacted but ignored the offers. The prosecution said this amounted to bribery, the judge decided it was just a desperate girlfriend.

The witnesses were asked if they were doing it for the money but said they were not, had no reason to lie. But at least one witness said he was doing it because he "thought she was lying". I'm not sure what evidence of her lying there is, given that she has been consistent, and what they claim she did is consistent with her account as well.

Can't imagine I would ever say this but The Sun and The Daily Mail headlines have brought tears to my eyes. It's the only positive thing in the whole appalling case.

Were the jury told that a £50k reward had been offered? I would be feeling very uneasy right now if I were one of the jurors and I hadn't known about that.

If the first trial had never happened, and he had never been found guilty in the first place, this story wouldn't make me quite as angry. It just seems that the basis for quashing the original conviction was so flimsy. I posted on another thread that when it was first announced that Evans was being given a retrial, I expected that some fairly convincing evidence must have been newly uncovered. I was under the impression that winning an appeal was quite difficult.

Hmm 'truthful evidence' eh?

2 witnesses, with links to CE, whose 1st statements did not contain the similar fact details that were subsequently added to match details which were widely reported at the time of the 1st trial so in the public domain, who were both induced to provide evidence with offers of a £50k reward, with NM having been shown to have approached an entirely independent witness with the same inducement - all of this adds up to 'truthful evidence' does it?

I'm not a lawyer but I do investigate civil stuff before litigation so interview witnesses & review statements as well as research backgrounds. If I had a case where the facts of what happened were in dispute & 3/4 years later I was presented with 'witnesses' like those presented by CE's defence, I'd challenged their reliability & credibility strongly rip their 'evidence' to shreds. I've had better evidence chucked out for far less than the multitude of reasons that undermine those so-called witnesses.

CE has been able to buy himself a not guilty verdict by virtue of the £5M spent trawling through a victim's life to find the flimsiest of evidence on which to add enough 'reasonable doubt'. Only I strongly feeling it's unreasonable doubt here as the evidence of those 2 men is such a fucking outrageous stretch of constitutes 'truthful evidence' it's sickening.

I don't believe a fucking word of those 2 'witnesses' and I'm astounded that the jury believed either of them.

Can we just press the reset button and start 2016 again from the beginning?

YY AyeAmarok. Why are you so convinced CE is telling the truth, cadno?

Brokestein is still at it. His latest despicable comment is that rape convictions are low because too many women lie.