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!

For answering my Q

Eggman, I'm not engaging with you further, but as you've quoted me - thank you for the information but that woman did not actually make masses of money, as she was convicted.

I would like to apologise as I've inadvertently caused this derail!

Signed thanks for posting

Oh FFS. She did make masses of money to begin with. She sold her story to the papers for a fortune. The Hamiltons got a freezing injunction against her in respect of the money. IIRC she was represented by Max Clifford (somewhat ironically, it transpires). Her claim was subsequently found to be untrue, the Hamiltons were awarded large damages and the end result was that she did not make any money at all and was convicted of a criminal offence. The point is, she made an allegation of rape against people that was false. She did so with a motive of profit. She secured a profit. She was was shown later to have lied and lost that profit and more.

There was also another case I recall where a victim of rape pursued her attacker in the courts for damages after he subsequently won the lottery. I can't remember the outcome of that case, but of course if she did receive a damages award, that was a just outcome. A damages award in those circumstances does not represent a profit. It is compensation. Just to be clear.

The problem with this argument is that many very sensible people refuse to accept even very sensible counterarguments to some of the points they make. To accept these counterargument is not to be an apologist for rapists. It is not to be a victim blamer. It is not to disbelieve victims. To deny these valid counter arguments does no credit to the core principle that Ched Evans is a rapist who should not play professional football in this country at present.

This superb article in the Independent should save many posters here some time - just link to it and save your head from that brick wall!

Misconceptions about the convicted rapist footballer

Thanks LeBear.

That is a handy précis in the article.

In terms of setting out to make money, isn't it the case that Evans' victim didn't make the rape allegation herself anyway; she went to the police because she didn't know why she'd woken up in the condition she had. The police then made enquiries and judged it to be a rape case. Hardly the strategy of someone trying to make money out of a false allegation.

She. Didn't. Set. Out. To. Make. Money.

No one has suggested that she did.

Someone suggested that there were no known cases of women making masses of money out of rape allegations, false or otherwise.

I pointed out that this was not strictly true. I pointed out that there is a very small, perhaps insignificant, number of unusual cases where this has been shown to have happened, and that it was unhelpful to be seen to be stating that false allegations of rape with a financial motive were never made.

I got flamed and the person who said the original comments flounced.

How is it a counterargument to what to talk about a completely different case where no-one was found guilty?

The woman in this case didn't lie about rape to try and make money. So her case has fuck all to do with the woman who accused the Hamiltons. It also has fuck all to do with George Michael.

I wonder what other random cases that have fuck all to do with this one will be raised in an attempt to prove god-only knows what about nothing.

Maybe I should state that my friend's brother was convicted for shoplifting in 1986 and so surely that goes to show that women who say they have been raped are almost always telling the truth...

who flounced?

Not me!

I give up. The standard of logical debate on this thread is depressing.

I would just like to reiterate that I think Chad Evans is a rapist and a shitbag. And that he should not be allowed to play professional football in this country for some time.

Please tell me that there is someone out there who has read my comments and thinks that I'm not talking complete shite.

eggman is tilting at windmills. I wonder why?

And eggman, I actually think it is a pretty key distinction that in the case you cited, the allegations were proven to be false and the accuser convicted. That case would therefore seem more of a deterrent to false accusations for money than the reverse, in that the accuser didn't end up making lots of money.

It's possible you got my pedantry up by being pedantic with others on the thread, including me.

Egg you're not talking shite. Just with about three conversations going on around your posts it's hard going following them all! Take heart. Continue.

I think the 'flounced' allegation is pathetic.

Signed. And bump.

Your point remains though - cases of rape victims getting compensation that are anything other than token amounts are very, very rare indeed. And it is not the norm for victims to pursue civil claims unless it really is their only option.

Probably because most of the rapists are not good for substantial sums of money. A judgment for damages against a man with nothing is just a piece of paper with the court seal on it.

If the rapist Ched Evans himself acknowledges that playing professional football is a privilege and honour, and one that he understands that many might feel he no longer deserves, why does anyone else doubt it ?

For me, this case just demonstrates the extent of the rape culture that we've gotten used to. Ched Evans thinks he can get any woman he wants just because of his status as a professional footballer - that is exactly why he should be denied status as a professional footballer.

I can't get my head around why his brother and friend were filming - how did they know there was anything to film ? They either assumed that CM's text of 'I've got a bird' automatically meant that sexual activity was taking place, or that they anticipated the rapist CE was going to have sexual intercourse or the rapist CE implied that that was what going to happen.

A night porter listens at a hotel door when he knew a young, drunken girl, who was not booked in as a guest, was in that room. Why did he assume that sex was taking place ?

All these men and all assuming that there was sexual activity - why ? Unless they all just buy into the belief that women's bodies are there for the taking. There was clearly a belief long before the victim was assaulted that she would be having sex. She appears to be the only one who didn't know it.

Rape culture in action.

Andrew, I have recently been told that any civil case in the High Court against an alleged offender has to be for financial damages. Even if what is sought is a public apology, without a financial claim the civil case cannot proceed.

I don't know if anyone here has any legal knowledge on this?

Signed