Ched Evans verdict

Because grate his prior activities and history that demonstrates a pattern of illegal, careless and damaging behaviour that causes other people harm isn't in anyway relevant, duh!

It's how the victim of a sudden attack by an unexpected stranger behaves prior to the incident that matters when considering the attacker's intentions.

It's important to be very fair to the men, you see, and not take give the jury any additional reason to doubt the man is innocent.

The Professional Footballers’ Association’s lawyers handled the settling of a personal injury claim filed on behalf of the son, who was left with a pellet lodged into his groin after the incident.

He really isn't a nasty little bastard. He deliberately shot at that boy's genitals.

www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/news-and-comment/ched-evans-special-report-the-rattlesnake-the-tarantula-and-the-day-evans-took-revenge-on-a-team-9822204.html

How can his in laws honestly believe he is not capable of sex without consent when they know full well he shot his host family's son with an air rifle. Surely that is all the proof you need that he is out of control and has no understanding of appropriate behaviour.

Rapist to me is a disgusting word,” he says, “Before this happened, I think a rapist is a man who attacks a girl, hurts women, quite a horrific crime… a lot of pain."

I genuinely think they believe a rape is literally "stranger in an alley with a knife to your throat and obvious bruising (because If you didn't try to fight back then you wanted it really)"

There are men and women on MN who will merrily point out that some women just deserve to be raped. Not in so many words of course, but that's what they mean when they spout off their rape myths.

Mumsnet has a strong We Believe You campaign, and will zap posts if they're victim-blaming or rape-myth-y. And that's why rapists hate Mumsnet. It's always worth a Report.

No need that's a very good point you make on a reporting ban on her sex life. Simply because she had already been victimised and threatened on social murder. The only reason sexual history should be used is if the witness claims she, for example, she doesn't do one night stands but there is substantiated evidence that she does.
That wasn't the case here.

Argh posting disaster. The first part was me saying how I hated that men can buy their way out of these things.

posted too soon. I think dominique Strauss Kahn (the former head of the imf who was accused of raping a hotel maid) paid off his victim but made her sign a non-disclosure agreement as part of the settlement I think. She was treated horrifically in the press too.

That's fantastic flippinada
Also on some of these threads PP have been writing to their MP about the use of this evidence.
It's a good direct route to bringing public opinion to MoJ attention- and also reminding our MPs that the voting public have views on this issue, which is all to the good. my MP used to be a lawyer so I am hoping that they will want to be active on this.

Thank you DateLoaf, I've signed the petition and shared it on my social media.

Lass well, quite. Not to be snobby, I know there are some very bright people who don't have a formal education/qualifications. Don't think CE is one of them though.

The treatment of the victim has been despicable from all sides. CE treated her appallingly. He didn't even speak to her at the time, and in his statement following the re-trial he showed no compassion for her persecution on social media, despite the fact that she had never accused him of anything.

But the thing I find most objectionable is the treatment she received in the court room. Rather than protecting the victim, the Law has inflicted further humiliation on her. Why on earth was the 'new evidence', even if it was justifiable in the case, made public? At the very least the court could have put a reporting ban on the details, instead of exposing her sex life to public scrutiny. Everyone seems to have let this woman down, even those who were presumably trying to achieve justice.

just bumping the petition link (against the future use of this kind of evidence in court)- petition at 14,000+ sigs now petition.parliament.uk/petitions/169433

I don't understand the role of Massey's father in all this. Why is he so invested in ensuring his daughter stays with a man like this? What father - even accepting as we must that legally speaking Evans is not guilty of rape - is so happy that this is the man his daughter wants to be with that he invests hundreds of thousands of pounds in his appeal? And why did he have control over who was present at the interview?

Secondly, this bit of the interview made me shudder: “Rapist to me is a disgusting word,” he says, “Before this happened, I think a rapist is a man who attacks a girl, hurts women, quite a horrific crime… a lot of pain."

Which of those does he not think he is guilty of?

Loving the idea that Ched ( one gsc in PE) Evans thinks he can speak more authoritatively on criminal law than Vera Baird.

It makes me sick.

If a woman gets drunk, the only thing she "deserves" is a hangover. No one deserves a violent crime.

Absolutely Xeno, there was a poster on one of these threads the other day saying more or less that. That, the fact she'd supposedly had sex a couple of weeks later and "willingly" gone to the the hotel, meant it was likely she'd consented.

Massey isn't alone in thinking that there's a distinction between raperape and the kind of thing her oh so fragrant BF did. There are men and women on MN who will merrily point out that some women just deserve to be raped. Not in so many words of course, but that's what they mean when they spout off their rape myths.

That poor young woman never stood a chance against his friends and family and all their money and influence.

*has not as

Put it this way, if Massey had walked away from him when he was first charged i think public opinion of him would have been very different now.

I agree, her standing by him, having a child and getting engaged to him as somehow vindicated his behaviour not only to CE himself but also his supporters.

It's all very dark and calculated.

“If it’s a rape where some man’s just jumped on a woman in the street you’re not going to mention her sexual history because it’s got nothing to do with it. But in a case like Ched’s it did matter because it was to do with consent.”

FFS. He was a hair's breadth from being the man that jumps on a woman in the street. Just because he managed to get into a hotel room, by lying to Reception, doesn't make it any different.

I've always been extremely doubtful about the whole "we asked if he could join in, she said yes" defence - because CM & CE's stories differed when they first interviewed by police.

Let's face it - the victim has no memory - they can say what they like. And the witnesses in this case were......CE, CE's brother, CE friends. Even the so-called new witnesses brought forth by the promise of £50k were linked with CE/his brother.

It stinks.

Put it this way, if Massey had walked away from him when he was first charged i think public opinion of him would have been very different now.

It does sound ridiculous but from what I've seen of these two I genuinely think it's what has happened. They've been together a long time, 8 years. 4 years before he went to prison (long enough to know whether you want to marry someone) but on his release they get engaged and a few months later She is pregnant and baby born just in time for the appeal being heard at the court of appeal. I am cynical admittedly but I also know how fucking naive people are and open to persuasion that they don't even know is happening. Massey standing by him, agreeing to marry him and have his child is all a great show to prove how much of a decent man he is and how he couldn't possibly be a rapist because why would any woman marry and have a rapists child? Those jurors are members of the public and will have read newspapers/ followed the story before they were called for jury duty. I really have no doubt that every thing that family has done since the day he was arrested was deliberately to improve his chances of getting off. For some reason her family have invested massively in this man. I really don't see that having his baby was beyond them as a deliberate attempt to manipulate opinion.

Pre-emotive yes I agree with you. Which is why she can't view him as a rapist. Why can't people see that sneaking in that room without knocking, showed extreme predatory behaviour at the very least.

Just confirms what I always thought about this: they just don't think of rape as anything but dark-alley-stranger stuff.