Ched Evans verdict

I can't speak for anyone else Gh05, but I suspect it's because you are a GOADY FUCKER

Andrew..sorry..what are you telling me to fuck off for again? Really does undermine any supposed intelligence when all people can do is swear.

venusinscorpio I don't think we disagree. I am only saying that it is up to each individual victim, which I cannot imagine anyone will disagree with. I see no "complete dismissal" in my posts and if there is one I apologise. And mean it.

The rest of my long post was to point out - with regret, but accurately - what a rough ride it will be for any victim who sues.

Lorelei76...

I can't say i have been following every detail of the case although i do remember thinking how strange his conviction was years ago. Anything which happened in this hearing i'm sure was above board or the judge would have said otherwise.

I don't understand the issue of looling into sexual history..surely it is pretty relevant in determing the character of the person, their sexual practices, looking for commonalities etc

Offering money for people to come forward...well ... You could argue that if Evans was poor then he wouldn't be able to do this but the actual offer of money is only for someone to provide evidence. That evidence still has to be considered and checked. It's not like the judge or jury are being bribed here.

This may or may bot be correct but i read something today about this girl having sex with a guy only around a fortnight later and partying with her mates etc. That doesn't sound like a traumatised rape victim to me.

I'll give a donation to Rape Crisis too. They need it more than I do.

Yes Andrew, being a man is relevant to whether you understand what it feels like for many female rape victims not to have any chance of justice, particularly when they get dragged through the mill like this. As pp said, you're entitled to your opinion, which is an informed, even expert legal one, and it's fine to have different perspectives. But you're not best placed to decide for rape victims (the vast majority being female) that a civil suit is largely pointless. That's up to them. Whether they think its worth it for the closure and knowledge that some small justice has been done and that someone believed them, is their business. Your complete dismissal of that is quite typical of men, I'm afraid.

Gh05 Please fuck off. And stay fucked off.

Lorelei76 I haven't practised in crime in years and I only know what the media choose to report of the new (or indeed of the old) evidence - which will be the salacious bits. I just don't know. The (mixed-gender) CoA thought it admissible in law and the (majority-female) jury were left in enough doubt to acquit. I will rad the full judgment of the CoA when it appears online with great interest - that will be the nearest thing we get to a detailed analysis of it which is not designed to sell newspapers by titillating the readers.

No, he was found not guilty beyond reasonable doubt.

Ched is proven innocent. Can't we just leave it at that?

Well clearly you can't read then Gh05.

Gh there's a few threads going and I'm not sure if you are on the right one because many of us are saying

what happens if you can offer money for people to come forward with information

what happens if accounts of people who were not present on the night in question are considered by courts to be evidence

why is that exemption allowing the alleged victim's sexual history to be looked at but the jury would not be informed if the accused had previous convictions

all these questions impact on the practice of law in general and they are being widely discussed - unless I've got my CE threads in a muddle.

if you want anything more than that, I don't have a law degree I'm afraid.

Has it occurred to you that perhaps they have a point then? Because I haven't seen much rational so far. Just swear words and defamation.

batches? That would be errr interesting! I'm sure you can guess what word it was supposed to be!

So we've had 'rational' & 'logical'. Perhaps 'intelligent' next?

What would make it an MRA bingo? Calling us emotional or hysterical perhaps. Mad? Stupid? Crazy? Or just simply batches.

We've heard it all mate. Now toddle on.

Gh05 there's been a massive amount of intelligent discussion about this and the previous trial, alongside in depth analysis of the finer points of law around rape. Are you new?

Perhaps have a little read around the previous threads about rape trials on here if you need any pointers on how not to be a rapist. I wouldn't follow the CE example, myself.

Sorry but have any of you actually got something constructive or logical to say?

You are setting yourselves up to be sued by calling a man who has been cleared of rape by a jury a rapist. That is very wrong of you and I don't care how you try to spin it.

At least criticism of what has happened in the trial has made the news. The headline on BBC news focused on lawyers complaining about decision.
Chesterfield FC said they were delighted by the news. Who is delighted after a rape trial.

Yeah you are coming across as dead rational Gh05. Voice of reason and all.

Do fuck off you sad little troll.

I agree Firstshiny. That's why this verdict is so utterly demoralising. I've convinced people to think more about rape and consent and had some success in challenging rape myths on the back of this case. It felt like a small victory for the rights of rape victims (of which I am one) and women generally when he was found guilty. And I think it changed a few opinions. But today it feels like that has been set back massively and the ignorant victim blaming misogynists have been vindicated, and the message it sends to women is appalling . It's really upset me on quite a visceral level, although none of it is surprising.

Gh05 are you breathing a sigh of relief today?

Not an 'mra' ..not a 'rape apologist'. Just a normal guy who was curious as to how self described feminists reacted to this verdict and sadly I can't say I'm surprised by the enbarassing posts i've read.

And what are some of you clicking report for exactly? Because you want to defame and be able to call a man who is not guilty of anything a rapist without any repurcussions? Shame on you. If you can't discuss something rationally then maybe you are the problem.

Andrew, as a lawyer, what's your view on the allowing of this new evidence?

I am not a fan of our current system of jury selection either. I would honestly prefer professional jurors with knowledge of the law, but I'd be interested to know if you think I've misunderstood anything here.

She just wasn't a 'white' enough victim.

Another rape trial where the victims actions were deemed more important than the perpetrators. That's the shift that's got to be made. What the victim does never constitutes rape. It's the actions of the perpetrators. And CE didn't give a shit about who she was or what she thought. He just wanted someone to fuck. He didn't care whether she consented.

Fuck! No words really. What's the point in even fighting when a clear rapist who admitted to not gaining consent, breaking into a hotel and raping a woman can buy his way to freedom. Where does that leave us, women who have been dealt a clear hand by society and law that men can abuse and take at will?