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.

So they may, but I didn't read it that way in the article I read! More like a footballer's entitlement.

I don't disagree with you Vevvie for a minute on this - though I can seem confrontational sometimes, I don't mean it against you .

Harvest time? Fuck.

I've been turning round in my head whether the Rapist Ched Evans and his innocent friend Clayton MacDonald and their supporters think what Evans did that night was rape.

I've tried and tried but find I cannot fit into minds that tiny.

I've been having an entertaining time on another discussion group where one deluded type insists that the only piece of what he describes as real evidence was those few seconds of video on CE's website. When it was pointed out that the jury had also seen CCTV footage of the victim staggering along the road, he hotly denied that it could possibly exist because, wait for it, he couldn't view it on Youtube!

It is actually worrying that people like that could serve on juries.

Somehow, the way CE bleats on about being "innocent of this crime," sounds as if it was something like mistaken identity, and that really, he was at home with a mug of hot chocolate with his girlfriend.
The reality of the whole setup, and his and his friends' behaviour, is just vile. There is no positive slant to put on it at all. And the fact that it was so quickly and easily done (one text, one direction to the taxi driver, get a key and wham!), and there's no WAY it hadn't been done before. In my opinion.

It is actually worrying that people like that could serve on juries

One of the things I'm really cheered about in this case Icimoi is the jury.

This was Caernarfon Crown Court. I live in London and we're all so sophisticated

Yet people faced with a big fish in a small pool - or a big turd in a small bowl - decided to believe the woman.

That makes me think that they carefully considered the issues and it also makes me smile.

Yes. ^^

To add, there have been a lot of comments on here (and elsewhere) about how terrifying to think that some of the people who spout such nonsense might one day serve on a jury.

I am fairly confident that the process is robust enough to, if not ensure, then at least maximise the chances that any given jury will return the correct verdict based on the level of reasonable doubt. Even if a jury has a proportion of people who still subscribe to rape myths, and who struggle to get their heads around the concept of consent (it really is rocket science, right? ), the process the jury goes through to reach a verdict does seem to educate them.

Of course, it is much easier to plant doubt in a rape case (see: Clayton McDonald), but the fact that this jury convicted Ched Evans is encouraging.

Actually, I'm more or less saying exactly the same thing as you, immediately after you Limited - apologies!

It is something I'd been increasingly thinking, the more discussion I see around this topic.

No need to apologise JapaneseMargaret and I hope you didn't take it the wrong way Icimoi.

I really hope that Joan Smith article in the Guardian about tides turning is true.

I don't think it is, but I hope.

I agree; the fact that they returned two different verdicts makes me very confident that they were careful, thorough and thoughtful about both.

No problem, limited, of course I'm not offended. Perhaps you're right - maybe it really would be a very good exercise for idiots like the one I referred to to sit in a court room with 11 conscientious jurors and listen to all the evidence and arguments and be forced to think things through properly; and, of course, to learn that there really is much more to a court case than they read about in the papers or on websites run by aggrieved convicted rapists.