Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

to post a link to an Oldham sponsor that will continue to support them even with Ched Evans?

955 replies

mrleebob · 05/01/2015 15:59

If it would be, please ignore this.

If not, here it is. www.cmsolicitors.co.uk

Plenty of contact details too. :-)

OP posts:
Thread gallery
5
AuntieStella · 07/01/2015 16:55

Thanks for posting that letter.

No employing a rapist is entirely within the laws of the land. It's a total misrepresentation to suggest otherwise.

He can apply for as many jobs as he likes. No-one was suggesting he should be treated differently to any other ex-con. Employers can and do refuse to employ people who have a criminal record. It is a huge pity that he appears to have secured special treatment.

But OA are acting in full knowledge of what people think of their decision. It was their decision to take. I hoped they would do the right thing. But it was their choice not to.

PortofinoVino · 07/01/2015 16:59

Why would he be on benefits though Porto? He has been offered a job in his millionaire prospective FiL's business. That apparently wasn't good enough for him.

Perhaps he wouldn't be good at it? Perhaps he wants to retrain if he can't be a footballer. Just because the FIL is a millionaire (and what has THAT got to do with it?) doesn't mean he wants to work with him, does it.

It doesn't matter what he does, he will be hounded by the mob, just as he is now. And that I abhor.

BOFster · 07/01/2015 17:02

"So, do you propose that he spends the rest of his life on benefits BOF? Do you think that will humble him into being repentant?"

Where did I suggest that? Confused

I daresay he could get a different job. His FIL has offered him one in his company if nobody signs him. Not bad going- lots of ex-cons aren't so fortunate.

ilovesooty · 07/01/2015 17:02

People convicted of sexual offences are not considered fit to serve on the boards of football clubs. I find myself wondering why different standards apply to players.

Icimoi · 07/01/2015 17:02

No, Malice, he really doesn't have an appeal in progress unless and until he formally enters an application with the court for permission to appeal ^and is given permission".

There seems to be a lot of misunderstanding around that the CCRC has some sort of judicial standing. It doesn't. It's an independent public body whose purpose is to review possible miscarriages of justice in the criminal courts and refer appropriate cases to the appeal courts. And, by the way, the fact that they are looking at any individual case emphatically does not mean that they consider it to be a miscarriage of justice - obviously they cannot decide that until they have carried out the review.

Their stats to November 2014 put all this into perspective. Of 17, 183 cases in which they had completed consideration, only 558 were actually referred to the courts: that's 3.3%. And of cases that had been to the Court of Appeal and dealt with (543), 153 were upheld. Very crudely, that means Evans has a chance of around 3 in 100 that the CCRC will refer his case, and less than a 1:100 chance that his appeal will be upheld. Even if his appeal were upheld, it may then be remitted for rehearing which could result in him being convicted again.

Any convicted person is entitled to maintain their innocence. However, it is reasonable to view that as seriously problematic when, even on their own version of events, the case against them really does demonstrate them to be guilty beyond reasonable doubt. Can Evans seriously contend that he is innocent when the jury accepted on the facts that she was too drunk to consent, and when, on his own evidence, he entered his victim within such a short time of first meeting her that he realistically had no chance whatsoever of assessing whether she was in any fit state to make a decision on what she was doing? Bear in mind that the court cannot overturn the jury on findings of fact.

Ohfourfoxache · 07/01/2015 17:02

But why does the case have to be essentially closed, Usually? And by describing this thread as people "banging on", isn't there the implication that nothing can be done?

Why can't continued pressure as a result of this case be used to try to change the law? Because you can be damned sure that, if/when publicity surrounding CE dies down, there will be no pressure for change. Until the next time. Then the time after that. And he time after that. All the while the precedent to "do nothing and carry on as normal" is strengthened.

YonicSleighdriver · 07/01/2015 17:04

He does not have an appeal in progress. That is simply wrong. He is hoping that the CCRC review results in permission to appeal. Only around 10% if CCRC reviews do result in an appeal.

It is legal to boycott nestle, and to tell them that you are doing so, and why, and sign petitions re their actions on baby milk in the developing world. That's not hounding. It's consumer action.

PfVino, his victim was hounded. Not him.

BOFster · 07/01/2015 17:05

The only hounding I can see is of his victim, by his family and supporters, which he refuses to condemn. A bit of perspective please.

JohnFarleysRuskin · 07/01/2015 17:06

Really do people think there is no area between professional footballer and benefits?

No wonder so many kids want to become footballers then...

Jux · 07/01/2015 17:06

I don't think any child is going to grow up thinking "I want to be just like RCE and fuck whoever I want". What is far more likely is that teens will think that having sex with a girl who is very drunk and vulnerable (because your mate has said you can) must be OK because RCE did. They won't be thinking "I must make sure that she consents to sex with me, otherwise I'll end up like the rapist Ched Evans, who had everything but lost it."

Perhaps a better term to use than 'role model' would be 'example', as in setting an example. We increasingly expect anyone in the public eye to demonstrate decent behaviour, why not footballers?

Icimoi · 07/01/2015 17:06

It doesn't matter what he does, he will be hounded by the mob, just as he is now. And that I abhor.

There is no indication that he will be hounded if he takes a job outside the public eye. Indeed, I suspect that he would be commended for doing so in the same way that, for instance, John Profumo was. And, of course, he would improve his chances if he were prepared to acknowledge his guilt.

I hope, Portofino, that you also abhor the way his victim has been hounded? After all, at least Evans hasn't had to change his address five times. And I hope you also consider that maybe Evans ought to make it very clear to his supporters that he does not support the way his victim has been treated?

PortofinoVino · 07/01/2015 17:06

I would like to think he could retrain as whatever he wanted - but, as soon as anyone found out what he was doing he would be hounded out of that job as well. Wouldn't he?

So if he worked for British Gas as a gas engineer, would you all switch to electricity, or would you all quite happily let him come into your home and mend your boiler?

Where does it end?

PortofinoVino · 07/01/2015 17:07

I hope, Portofino, that you also abhor the way his victim has been hounded

But we are not discussing his victim, are we Ici?

Both lots of mob rule are as bad as each other.

PuffinsAreFictitious · 07/01/2015 17:13

Porto...

He wouldn't be able to work fro British Gas as a gas engineer, they are subject to a DBS check.

Oldham Athletic are not prevented by law from signing whichever convicted criminals they so choose. Likewise, we are not prevented by any law from protesting loudly against that. The people harassing and stalking CE's victim are breaking the law.

There is a difference between lawful protest, which has until today been successful and the illegal harassment of a rape victim by the perpetrator's fanbase.

UsuallyLurking1 · 07/01/2015 17:14

Not sure you are reading my post right Fox.

As far as I'm concerned the case is closed and he's guilty.
The question about the law is that he isn't prevented by law from working in a high profile public role. Owners of clubs are barred from ownership if they are sex offenders (although fat use that is given the likes of Oyston just pass it onto their son)
In the US players that are accused of domestic violence are suspended from playing even before the court case.

My point was people would be better protesting to the FA / Football league to change those rules or to MPs to make it actual law. Rather than pointless boycotts.

The comment about banging on about the case is the 'is it rape or not' debate, which is pointless. It was, the jury said so. This is a debate about whether he should be able to return to a high profile job.

I can't believe I'm calling playing for Oldham high profile.....!

Willferrellisactuallykindahot · 07/01/2015 17:15

Both lots of mob rule are as bad as each other.

Huh?!

I don't think Ched Evans has had to change his identity five fucking times and counting.

BOFster · 07/01/2015 17:16

Can I just point out that Portofinovino is NOT the same poster as Portofino, the long-term MNer. I'm not sure she posts any more, but I have her on my Facebook and know she shared the petition on this subject, so I suspect she'd be quite upset to have the reputation she'd built up on mumsnet compromised by people thinking she'd condone rape apologism/support for Ched Evans.

PortofinoVino · 07/01/2015 17:17

Oh, I DO stand corrected Puffins (I was just using it as an example). So.........straight away there are lots of jobs he can't do, yes? But no-one answered my question as to whether he would be allowed to come into your home? Why?

If his victim is being 'illegally harrassed' (I presume on the internet) why haven't those people been arrested?

PortofinoVino · 07/01/2015 17:18

Can I just point out that Portofinovino is NOT the same poster as Portofino, the long-term MNer

Never heard of her!

BOFster · 07/01/2015 17:19

They were arrested, afaik. And had to pay the victim £624 compensation. Which probably didn't cheer her up much.

SabrinaMulhollandJjones · 07/01/2015 17:27

Can I just point out that Portofinovino is NOT the same poster as Portofino, the long-term MNer.

Glad you said that, BOF. I was thinking it was the portofino, and I was a bit Shock

PuffinsAreFictitious · 07/01/2015 17:28

Porto...

They have. Iirc, 10 of them have been taken to court and found guilty of harassing her.

Can I just point out that Portofinovino is NOT the same poster as Portofino, the long-term MNer

Oh, thank the gods!

SabrinaMulhollandJjones · 07/01/2015 17:29

There is a difference between lawful protest, which has until today been successful and the illegal harassment of a rape victim by the perpetrator's fanbase.

^ This. With bells on.

PortofinoVino · 07/01/2015 17:30

THIS Portofino does not go along with mob rule. She has her own opinions.

But she HAS learned that if you don't agree with the mob's opinions you will be called nasty names and vilified.

UsuallyLurking1 · 07/01/2015 17:31

The hounding of the victim is much more abhorrent than that of Evans potential lawyers. But in the spirit of MN pedantry she has had to change her name once. Nowhere has it been reported that she changed identity five times.