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.

He hasn't done his time.

There would be no so-called 'witch-hunt', if he wasn't insisting on returning to his lucrative football career, where he will be in a role model position to young people.

Try as you might OP, you're just not going to get the majority of us to feel sorry for the poor little rapist.

No one who has criticised Ched evans and his employment has had criminal proceedings against them

A number of CE's supporters have been found in contempt of court throigh leaking his victim's name. They are the ones undertaking a witchhunt

I'm worry about the fact that there has been so much publicity about this case so much of people stating the facts time and time again and yet people are still coming out with bollocks like 'he's appealing'. If you're going to object to something make sure you know the actual facts. Take a minute to look at them, and think first.

excited/interested/invested? because there is a chance that my voice might be a tiny tiny part of a contribution to a change in society - to prevent a harm to society, which I think is really important, yeah I'm guilty of all that and it's good to know that others are of a similar mind.
Public opinion does matter and can change things. That's democracy - not a thing to be worried about. Decision makers in this country need to know what people think. Decision makers need to be held to account.
To be cynical and defeatist, and stand back and dismiss it all - that won't change anything for the good.

I'll go with the Collins definition 'Witchunt:An attempt to find and punish a particular group of people who are being blamed for something'. In the UK punishment is the responsibility of the justice system not anonymous posters who are willing to boycott companies without even checking the facts.

I think all the CE threads have been a useful tool to show what utter tools some people are and who to avoid in future on here.

These threads are mere words on a screen to quote SM.

It worries me more that some people are a) really fucking dense and b) happy to defend a convicted rapist.

I mean ffs even if you did agree he was innocent/conviction was unsafe a more intelligent person would just stfu and say nowt imo.

somebody, I disagree

What do you think his supporters are doing to the victim then?

op. Most of mumsnet wouldn't bother if he weren't a footballer! Football has never been popular here.

Nor have rapists, funnily enough.

But yes, the football. It'll be the football that's the problem.

So I'm not allowed to boycott a company whose behaviour I dislike? Is that what you are saying op?

If I don't like Starbucks for not paying tax or tescos for their meat, I must not do anything about it - to do so would be a witch hunt?

How very bizarre.

I think this has indeed become the make up any old bollocks you like about it thread. The sad thing about that is it concerns a real young woman who was raped, filmed and has been consistently harassed by CE supporters since she spoke out.

In the uk, consumer choice is free. I can boycott companies for any reason I like - because they promote baby milk in Africa or have tony Blair on the board. That's not a witch hunt.

It's a free country, people can boycott whatever they like. They can't, however, rape whoever they like.

Spot the difference?

Witchunt:An attempt to find and punish a particular group of people who are being blamed for something

To me that means a witchunt is persecuting someone who is being unjustly blamed. That's not the case here. He's a convicted rapist.

John Farley I am saying if you want to boycott Starbucks for not paying tax you should first check the facts. In the example I gave posters said they would boycott Sports Direct on the information given by a previous poster which was not true.

It's not the court of public opinion. He's been convicted in a court of law

Corkysgran, your assumption that people supporting these threads know little about the case is incredibly patronising and unfounded. If you read them properly you will discover that the greatest level of ignorance is in fact demonstrated by those who support OA - witness, for example, the repeated suggestions that CE is appealing or that he has done his time. Have you actually checked the facts yourself and, if you have, why do you think CE should be permitted to walk back into a well paid role model position without any level of protest?

Suppose there were proposals for Rolf Harris to front major TV programme on his release. Should we all keep quiet about that for fear of colluding in a "witch hunt"?

Eh, but someone already explained that it was a hypothetical situation and that you were the one who didn't realise that.

I agree that boycotting companies on entirely false information would be worrying but I really don't see the relevance here.

we really do need a sticky with the actual facts. The conviction is not being appealed - in fact he's already been refused leave to appeal at least once. The Criminal Cases Review Commission has the case, and at some point will investigate and decide whether the Court of Appeal ought to look at it again. The odds of a successful appeal at this stage are approx 1 in 1,000 IIRC.

Not least since he was convicted not on the basis of the victim's allegation, but on HIS OWN WORDS.

Yes

Anyone who hasn't signed already, please consider signing Jean Hatchet's petitions. They are quoted in every newspaper article. They matter. They are having influence. We need more signatories. www.change.org/p/simon-corney-chairman-of-oldham-athletic-fc-refuse-to-sign-ched-evans?just_created=true (Thank you Jean Hatchet)

I haven't commented on a single one of the bajillion threads there has been about this until now. I can't see what anyone has left to say TBH.

A CE topic seems to be in order.

Corky, I think you are conflating a tiny element of one thread, i.e. a short term misunderstanding about Sports Direct's position which was quickly corrected, with the separate issue of the fact that SD are continuing to sponsor OA and have said they will do so if they sign CE. It is that decision for which most people are planning to boycott SD. I take it you accept they are justified in doing so?

Most people art boycotting SD because they continue to sponsor OA since the CE signing. Nnot for the reason th op statea

John Farley it was not me who didn't realise it was a hypothetical situation on the original thread it was the posters who immediately said they would boycott the thread. You have taken the word of a poster on this thread as to what happened rather than reading it yourself. Worrying?

I think it's a witch hunt against one particular player. When other convicted criminals have played for other clr clubs. Everyone knows football is corrupt from the top to the bottom.Expecting them to take a moral stance is risible. People should be petitioning the professional body to amend it's rules as to who can or can't play for a club. What a about murderers given new identities and allowed to take their place in society without hardly a word said from the general public.

No I understood what happened - as happens on all discussion threads on various topics.
I can understand your fears of people reacting on wrong information. I still fail to see the relevance of it to this case and why you insist on labelling this a witch hunt.