To be worried about the Ched Evans threads on here

[corkysgran]

Sorry but this does seem like a witchunt to me. Many of the posters (who have signed the petition) obviously have little knowledge of the case. At one point a poster said Sports Direct would withdraw sponsorship if Evans was NOT signed and immediately others were vowing to boycott. Laughable and shows the level of thought before clicking. Online justice and the court of public opinion, not for me. As for expecting football, an industry corrupt from the very top (Sepp Blatter) and inherently sexist, to show any moral stance, get real.

Oh dear...!

deary me

That's an unfortunate one.

SabrinaMulhollandJjones

Yes, in the early days there was a tweet from his girlfriend and her friend replied with, "keep preying" - I didn't respond, they would not have understood.

David

If you are walking down a hotel corridor, the people who may or may not be behind the locked doors have not consented to have sex with you, just to clarify.

I think that's too vague Sashh

There's lots of "I believe him" on that FB page as well, as well as a fair bit of misogynistic language about women.

In what universe is it ok to (near enough) break into a hotel room and just start 'having a go' on the occupant? Just because CE booked the room, he gets to trick the room key out of the night porter, and just have sex with whoever is in there? Just because she was having sex with his friend (and that was pretty dubious, considering how drunk she was), doesn't mean she consented to sex with any of his friends who just appear in the room (without even knocking).

Chillingly, I suspect that this was an MO for a night out for these footballing pals. It was all too smooth, all too expected - the text, the hotel room (which neither of them ended up staying in, just abandoned the victim there, with no bag, no phone, naked and sick). CM showing no apparent surprise when CE appeared in the hotel room, and standing aside for CE to 'have a go'

I can't believe anyone doubts the jury's verdict - but to hear some people talk, you'd think this was the biggest miscarriage of justice since the Guildford Four.

Poor old David.
There's just no disguising the thick sometimes.

arf at Sashh

'Prey for Ched'

OMG!

See, this is the level of intellect we are up against here.

There is a particular guy on twitter who is very voiciferous in defending Evans (I won't name him but im sure some of you guys will have come across him) - if there was a prize for the stupidest person on the whole of twitter I honestly think he would be in with a shot.

There is also another guy who tweets Kylie Evans and Helen Roberts with links to a hypnotherapist who he thinks can regress Ched into rememberin exactly what happened and that this evidence could be used in court. He is as mad as a box of frogs!

As well as Katie Hopkins, Nicola McClean, Helen Wood (some absolutely vile previous Big Brother winner) and Steve Brookstein - these are the people he has on his side: it says it all really doesn't it?

As an aside, Steve Brookstein has revelaed himself to be a complete misogynistic bellend. I know he is a nobody, but accordingly his twitter he is still promoting a book and his music, don't you think one of his people would have a word and tell him to rein it in a bit?!

I actually feel sorry for the guy and agree this is a witch hunt.
I can't understand how she had teh capacity to consent to CM and then a few minutes later lacked capacity.They are either both guilty or neither
We are talking about a woman who fell out of a kebab shop, urinated in a doorway , immediately agreed to go back to a strangers hotel room (which less face it meant one thing) The idea of her saying 'no' to footballer no 2 is very unlikely.
She can't even say she was traumatised-she can't even remember having sex with either of them!

choc, you disgust me

I am sure then this kind of treatment would be ok meted out on your own daughter or son then ?

and you would be happy for any male family member of yours to penetrate any woman they like because she just had sex with another man and is too drunk to know any different

congratulations. ..you just won rape apologist of the hour

I can't understand how she had teh capacity to consent to CM and then a few minutes later lacked capacity.

CHocLover are you seriously that ignorant?

If you want to TRY to understand, then start with reading the court report (link above) or even better inform yourself about what consent means. You could start by reading this thread.

But I think you really don't want to understand - scary!

choclover

You are mistaken about the laws about rape.

She offered no evidence on whether she consented to either.

CM (it appears) used the defence that he thought she had consented because of her actions (eg he spent some time with her, she went to the room with him). CE (whose only previous interaction was stepping over her in a drunken heap in a kebab shop) entered the room by deception and began intercourse immediately and the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that there was no way he could have secured her consent in those circumstances.

(You do have a point that perhaps both should have been found guilty, but the judge was clear that the verdicts should be individual, so reasonable doubt could be found for either based on their actions).

congratulations. ..you just won rape apologist of the hour

Only of the hour, mind you. No doubt there will be some competition for rape apologist of the day.

Choc many people have struggled with the dual consent aspect. Many people, me included, believe CM was extremely lucky to get off with a rape conviction too.

And just supposing she did consent.... imagine you are drunk, vulnerable, naked, having sex and another big fit (as in strong) man arrives in your room - without your invitation, mind you - with two of his pals outside the window baying... how likely are you to say no? Thing is though, not saying no in that situation doesn't actually = consent freely given. Consent under coercion is no consent.

However, that's academic. The jury believed going back to the hotel with CM was enough to give reasonable doubt of consent (I would perhaps disagree, but I wasn't on the jury). They thankfully didn't believe turning up, managing to persuade a receptionist to give you a key then having sex with an incapacitated woman was consent. Because it wasn't. It was rape.

and let's not forget CE's actions on the night are known because of his OWN testimony!!

Yes, what CE confessed to was rape. It's just that in CE's world going into a hotel room in the early hours of the morning and having sex with a completely drunk and semi-conscious stranger isn't rape.

Thankfully the law has a different view.

I can't understand how she had teh capacity to consent to CM and then a few minutes later lacked capacity.

Hmmmm, well um yes, the reason you can't understand this is because the judge and jury came to the conclusion that she didnt consent to either of them, so that answers your question there.

The jury (it is assumed) came to the conclusion that, given that CM met the girl in a public place, chatted with her and she went in a taxi with him to his hotel room, CM may have had reasonable belief in her consent.

CE had none of those things so the jury (again it is assumed) concluded that there was no way he could have had reasonable belief in her consent.

You're welcome

I have read the court report, thanks, and this is my considered opinion.

If that's your considered opinion it disgusts me as well.

ChocLover2015, could you therefore explain why that is your opinion and why the judges were wrong? And, if you've read the footylaw link posted above, could you also explain precisely why you think that's wrong also?

It does bemuse me why so many Evans supporters cling desperately to that "how could she give consent one minute and not the next" mantra no matter how many times it is pointed out in the clearest possible terms that the jury must have decided that she was unable to give consent throughout but that the issue was whether either man might reasonably have believed she was consenting. The way they block out a perfectly logical explanation of the verdict might almost lead you to believe that they were holding their fingers in their ears and loudly singing "la la la" to block out anything which might weaken their preconceived opinions.

The jury (it is assumed) came to the conclusion that, given that CM met the girl in a public place, chatted with her and she went in a taxi with him to his hotel room, CM may have had reasonable belief in her consent.

Is that the benchmark now?

There are many things about this case that make me uncomfortable (from both sides). I'm not convinced that his appeal won't eventually succeed. I'm surprised that Paddy Power didn't step in to sponsor Oldham - and at the same time generate more publicity than they could dream of and offer odds on an eventaul acquital.

Add message | Report | Message poster ChocLover2015 Tue 13-Jan-15 10:05:31
I have read the court report, thanks, and this is my considered opinion.

So you disagree that she didn't have the capacity to consent?

On what basis?