Hartlepool and the Rapist Ched Evans :(

[WeirdCatLady]

Oh dear. Please no.

Apologies for a DM link

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2881937/Hartlepool-reveal-want-sign-convicted-rapist-Ched-Evans-despite-national-outcry-return-football.html

Andrewfog NoMama He should not be harassed and he is not being harassed.

There is no law that forbids clubs from refusing to sign this apology for a man. Nor should there be.

...that was the gist of my post, or my intent, reading it back the dry sneer on my face did not appear in print!

He is abhorrent, given his apparent lack of understanding, the crime is abhorrent and human nature might want there to be a law to allow him to be hounded, but that is not allowed and nor should it be.

Weren't 2 arrested and only him convicted? I think he should be able to work again as he has served his time and that is what our legal system advocates otherwise we are extending his sentence by public pressure. But the girl in question has had her life turned upside down and to see him go back to a career of money and privilege and arguably one that fostered the environment where this sort of thing happens (and is even facilitated) is another story. It would be a hard thing to swallow for her to see him in that position but tbh he would probably not last long back on the pitch as his skin would have to be mighty thick to withstand the fans and their chants etc.

The other bloke persuaded the jury that there was reasonable doubt as to whether he reasonably believed in her consent; I wasn't at the trial but there it is, that's the view they took. I imagine CE tried the same line and they did not buy it.

This seems to have been a careful jury. If they were misogynist they would have acquitted them both; if misandrist they would have convicted them both; if celebrity-dazzled or racist they might have been expected to acquit the better known white defendant and convict the less well-known black defendant.

So all things considered I think we have to accept that there was enough doubt to acquit CM, but CE's case left little scope for doubt.

Sorry Nomama it's not always possible to read sarcasm between the lines of a screen!

S'OK. I was too annoyed to proof read before I pressed 'Post'. I accept my admonishment

I was surprised at the jury decision, it did seem very measured, responsive to the law, judge's summing up etc. I admit I half expected a weird half way house, star spangled result.

Isn't the appeal based on the fact that he thinks drugs and alcohol put him outside the boundaries of responsibility rather than that he didn't do it?

Has an appeal been lodged then? I thought he had just requested an appeal to be considered and they'd fast-tracked that request.

Noddy, does that mean that if he was proven to have been drunk/on drugs, then the issue of her consent (or lack of it) doesn't matter?

I am not sure It sounds like he is saying not "I didn't do it' but "I cant be held responsible' I am not sure where the law stands on this.

Ah, so if a person takes a lot of drink/drugs and does something illegal, it's okay because they can't be held responsible? Who poured the drink down their throat? The Tooth Fairy?

i don't think noddy is saying that - she is saying that he may be saying that

Noddy, that's not his defence. His defence is that he had her consent and that she had capacity to give that consent.

I don't think he has ever claimed lack of recollection etc.

So, if that was his defence before, and the jury discounted it, I wonder what he's come up with now?

He isn't saying he can't recollect more that he can't be held responsible as the cocktail of drink and drugs rendered him outside criminal responsibility?

Noddy, where is that from? I've never seen that.

I read that in the paper at the time I am sure thats what they implied.

Noddy, Chunderella's link above is a good neutral summary.

But if that was his defence, it wouldn't be much of a defence, just as being drunk/high and stealing something wouldn't be a defence.

If anyone is being harassed and prevented from rebuilding their lives and moving on it's his victim.
I feel awful for her, every time she tries to move on one of CE family or supporters out her, then she'll have all this stuff playing out on the news whenever it looks likes he's gonna be signed. He's served a few years, that poor woman sounds like she has a life sentence.
I also don't understand how some people can say he's not guilty, when he himself is the one who said what had happened that night, he knows he didn't have consent but still fucked her anyway. Our law says thats rape, there's no grey lines or inconsistent accounts. It's his own evidence that got him convicted.
I hope that the people who don't think that's rape are the minority. I truly hope that his victim finds peace and rebuilds her life in the future.

He was convicted by his own words and so he is trying to over turn something that is defined in law? I am just looking for the article I read re criminal responsibility and drugs etc in reference to him and can't find it! What he described was deemed rape in a court of law and he was sentenced accordingly Now its all about his career and whether he should return to his club or indeed that level of football at all.

Looks like he may be moving overseas:

BBC article on offer of 6 month contract in Malta

I thought that he couldn't go to an overseas contract because he is on licence and would have to attend parole meetings etc. (or doesn't it work like that?)

Malta is the last place I would have expected a convicted rapist to be offered a football contract.