To ask you all to sign petition regarding Oldham and Ched Evans

[floatyflo]

Actually I don't believe I am being unreasonable. But wanted to bring it to attention.

MN seems to be a quiet on this today but I think the fight should still go on. I can't link to it as I am so not tech savvy enough but it is on change.org. (Same person whk set up the Sheffield Weds one so of you sogned that one it is pretty easy to locate).Already has over 9000 signatures so please please please continue to sign and share!

The Victim Must ALways Be Remembered First Good blogpost in the Guardian - to quote some of it:

" While the debate rages, including another petition against him being re-employed rapidly gaining thousands of signatories, the young woman has been unable to proceed with her life. The most recent reports are that she has had to change her identity five times to avoid the internet haters.

Her father told the Daily Mirror that she did not go to her family home for Christmas and she is “living her life on the run”. He said he has complained to the attorney general about aspects of the Evans website which he argues further victimise her.

Evans has the legal right to take his arguments that the trial was unfair – the website pleads repeatedly that footballers are victimised by the media – to the Criminal Cases Review Commission, which he has.

The website, though, is unrelentingly hostile to the girl who is established in law to have been his victim. It sullies her in several different, pernicious and manipulative ways.

You wonder how many people at clubs have read it, when weighing Evans’ desirability with their core priorities: goals and points. They should, because it lends a different perspective to the arguments about whether he is a fit and proper person to run out for a heritage, community club, to be a role model – which his own supporters’ website holds him up to be, complete with homely pictures of him with babies and a dog.This website is still up; his review is not concluded and his victim is living life on the run. "

Oldham are desperate and know their biggest sponsor will back them through this. But losing lots of other sponsors will hurt them

I am another one not signing. The court has dealt with him by imprisonment and he is now on licence. Any further punishment would be unfair in my opinion.
He was an idiot who did a horrible thing but I feel we need to draw a line under it somewhere as it's becoming a bit of a witch hunt.

Garza beat his wife to a pulp, for years....which in MY view is a LOT worse and never got hounded out of football like this.

GAZZA** bloody auto correct !

I couldn't say whether what Gazza did was "better" or "worse" - I don't think the cases are comparable though.

I hate the fact that the drunk driver that killed the 2 boys still plays football though. I'd gladly sign a petition against him too.

Having said that though, sex offending is a special case, even in football. From the article I linked to above:

It is an anomaly that the game does not seem to be addressing that sex offenders are deemed not “fit and proper” people under the Football League and Premier League owners and directors test, so Evans could not be a director of any club.

Tbh lucie that only goes to show how much things have changed. People have more ways of expressing their views on that sort of thing quickly (social media, online petitions). Having said that I don't know how Gascogne responded - did he show remorse? Though I was a child when Gascogne was playing but even I can remember the chants at him when he played after that.

BBC just saying that Oldham now reconsidering.

You don't have to believe me pan, that is fine. Those facts I gave are correct though.

That's what the Telegraph article linked last night said as well.

(And is part of the reason why I think the public weren't meant to know until the deal was done. There is no way the club can say 'we thought it would be OK' - especially the given the number of those signing the petition who say they are OA fans (some specifying season ticket holders) who are ready to turn their backs on the club).

Gazza was different (in my eyes) because he was never convicted of an offence carrying a custodial sentence. He wasn't sectioned until several years after his playing career had ended.

Having read the thread a couple of things leap out, many of these posts are surprisingly venomous to posters asking questions. I cannot speak for all and I most certainly won't for mm1(!!) yuk, but I managed to not read, avoid or just not notice most of the trial. I wasn't interested. I therefore know extremely little about the circs, the details or the facts.

The aftermath is more interesting. So I'm playing catch up. Maybe more people than you all realise really didn't give a flying fart in the wind at the time about the shenanigans of some two bit footballer. As far as I know there are 52 mill in the country so it's a safe bet to assume most men and women don't. So, I applaud those that do know but would like to suggest that this might be taken into account as I'm guessing many people assume this to be a 'kiss n tell' that went wrong. Not actually what is detailed here.

I know nothing about how he's handled the trial, rehab or anything else. By that stage I just thought Pratt and turned the page. So I do have questions around him returning to work and how, that's an interesting discussion imo.

I'm off to check that link out, trial notes I think. No doubt be back. Please be kind.

Oh and yes I had just on the little I did know, thought I'd sign, nothing's suggested here that's not backing that up.

I haven't read the whole thread, just first and last pages so apologies if I am repeating.

I'm on the fence about this and won't sign at the moment. My understanding is that chef Evans case is awaiting appeal to have his conviction overturned. I would like to see the outcome of the appeal before I sign anything (I also think clubs should wait for the outcome before offering him a contract).
I also think that as long as there are no rules regarding convictions and the job role that people should be allowed to return to work and paying taxes once their sentence has been served and an employer is prepared to employ them. Punishment also had to come with rehabilitation and part of that rehabilitation is a return to employment.
Do we want the govt to fund every convicted sex offender on a life of benefits once they have served their sentences?
The media needs to stop fuelling this case, moreso for the victim than anything.

No I think he is awaiting the decision about whether he can appeal. Precious applications have been rejected

It's worth reading the full thread regarding why he might not be suitable for a return to football currently

I'm not signing. He committed a crime and has done his time.

His life has been effectively ruined already. I have no interest in prolonging his punishment or ruining his career anymore than it already has been.

"His life has been effectively ruined already. "

What makes you think that?

Should that not read "He has ruined his own life by his choices and decisions", Tryharder?

Inthedark, Ched Evans has already had two requests to appeal turned down. He has requested the CCRC to review a third request. I don't have the numbers to hand but something like 90% of these requests are turned down ie not granted leave to appeal. I personally consider it unlikely he will be granted leave this time but we will see.

greywackejones

Have a look at the type of responses given to granniejones who asked for information and got it.

Posters asking for info are not getting a hard time. Goady posters, OTOH, do find that responses are robust and comments beyond the pale are deleted.

And Inthedardkaboutfashion posters are not saying he should not work. It is a simple case that some levels of offending are incompatible with some lines of work. This is already what happens. In some it is a formal bar. In others (especially performers) it's a case of acceptability. And just as convicted sex offenders no longer appear on our screens and stages, they are not wanted on the pitches either. I don't want my DC cheering a sex offender, or having team line up pix on his bedroom wall.

His life has not been ruined - he's engaged to his WAG, and has a job offer on the table from his future FIL. He is surrounded by supportive friends and family - certainly more than can be said for his victim who is still being hounded by his supporters.

The only thing he has not been allowed to do, so far, is return to a very privileged career in football.

I don't want my DC cheering a sex offender, or having team line up pix on his bedroom wall.

But they don't need to do that. You are within your rights to not let your children support a team he plays for or display his posters. The best way for people to show their discontent about him being signed is to boycott that club, not attend the games and not buy the shirts.

Whilst convicted sex offenders might not be on stage or screen there are many people on our stages and screens who have been accused of sex crimes but accusations have later been withdrawn under speculation of money changing hands or other underhand means. A conviction is not the only thing I make my mind up on. I don't support ched Evans but I won't sign the petition either at this stage because I have too many questions about his conviction, particularly why both Jen were not convicted. I also won't single him out as there are many convicted offenders playing football. The media should tell us about all of them with the same enthusiasm.

more than can be said for his victim who is still being hounded by his supporters.

Isn't he being "hounded" by her supporters, as evidenced by the very public campaigns to prevent him playing football?

I am not making any judgements or "taking sides" here.

My personal belief is that what he has done is abhorrent. Any individual who could "use" someone else as an object in this way, and continue to protest his innocence, has a seriously fucked up attitude. I believe that he should be behind bars until he truly accepts that what he did was wrong - if that is for life then so be it. Fully accept that I'll be flamed for having this view, but that's my opinion.

I do wonder though whether he is being used as an "example". I don't think that his attitude is that unusual (and although footballers may well generally be a lovely bunch of blokes on the whole, I think there is a proportion who would behave in a similar way. As would a proportion of the rest of the population).

What he did is "unfortunate" at best - but perhaps the trial and sentence and subsequent backlash has been strong enough that it has made another man stop and think and question his behaviour. What Evans did was wrong, and if it means that even one less person is attacked as a result of the backlash then I'll happily keep signing petitions.

inthedark, it's been explained up thread why both men weren't convicted. In brief, the jury had to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt both that the victim did not consent and that they did not reasonably believe that she consented. In the case of the other man, it appears that they weren't satisfied of that beyond reasonable doubt, probably because the victim went back to the hotel room with him. However, in the case of Evans they were: probably because he knew nothing of the girl, lied to get a key to the room, and was penetrating her within moments of getting there - he can't have had a reasonable belief that she was consenting to anything.

Any individual who could "use" someone else as an object in this way, and continue to protest his innocence, has a seriously fucked up attitude. I believe that he should be behind bars until he truly accepts that what he did was wrong - if that is for life then so be it

The problem I have with this attitude is the cases of miscarriages of justice (and I'm not saying that happened here). Should someone who is innocent stop protesting that innocence and apologise for what they didn't do?

Again, I am not saying this has been a miscarriage of justice, it is more hypothetical. Release should not be dependent on admitting guilt for a crime.

The difference in terms of hounding is that the victim is simply trying to get on with her life and has done nothing to attract anyone's attention. Evans could equally have avoided attention by doing the same - he could have taken up the offer of employment that is open to him, and either told his friends and family to withdraw the website or made a public announcement that he totally dissociated himself from it. But he has chosen instead to allow his supporters to continue to vilify his victim, and to keep trying to get into a major league football club in a position where he is a potential role model.

I wonder whether those supporting his return would like it if, say, he got a sports teaching job in their daughter's school?