Why the fucking fuck is that rapist Ched Evans being released anyway?

[AskBasil]

I thought that in order to get parole, the minimum you had to do was admit that you are actually guilty of the crime for which you've been imprisoned?

But Evans the rapist hasn't admitted that he's a rapist. He keeps saying he's innocent.

So why is he being released?

Is this normal now?

Do all prisoners automatically get early release for good behaviour even if they keep saying they didn't actually do the crime, therefore proving that the one thing that used to be a necessity for early release - remorse - is definitely missing?

If a club is happy to have a convicted rapist as it's public face then so be it. If sponsors leave and people stop going they will soon get rid.

The CRB check idea is clutching at straws. If simply being watched playing sport means a CRB check is needed - then I need one to compete in amateur athletics as there are always children present. Anyone, playing any sport, anywhere with any children spectating would need one as well.

"If simply being watched playing sport means a CRB check is needed "

No one said this.

Henrietta said -

Yes - all footballers should be crb checked.

You say it would be easy enough to ensure he did work that didn't involve him in the community. Not so. As soon as he steps on the pitch he becomes part of the community: football is a community game, and he will be a role model, and children will look up to him, whether he likes it or not.

Which does imply the opinion that being watched needs a CRB check...

"If sponsors leave and people stop going they will soon get rid. "

Well I don't know about the sponsors but I very much doubt people will stop going.

Why is this rapist not to be subject to the same circumstances as other criminals? Unrepentant individuals are released from prison every day and resume employment if they are able. This character may be unsavoury and his crime repellent, but I do not see why he should be treated differently from others in a similar position.

I fear that a campaign against the standard practice of rehabilitation and employment may not advance the general cause.

No it doesn't, Damon.

All footballers should be CRB checked is an opinion about the profession.

Footballers are part of the community by virtue of being players watched by the community is an opinion about community cohesion.

Glove - there are many professions where this (and a range of other) crime would prevent someone from continuing to ply their previous trade. Whether football should be one if those professions is one of the points being debated. Whether people wish to continue supporting a team or sponsors who are involved with this criminal is their choice.

i don't think anyone has a problem with him being employed in general after release

it's being employed in this particular profession that people find problematic

I feel pretty certain, Bland, that there isn't really a spirit of debate.

The case against professions for a rapist would surely depend on situations where previous convictions would demonstrate an unsuitability for that situation - ie caring for vulnerable women. That isn't in the remit of a footballer is it? This isn't a debate, it's a kneejerk outrage that makes no sense in terms of the law. This is one of those 'hanging is too good for them' rants and not an intelligent debate.

Ah.... that explains some things.

lol

However.... in what way does having a conviction for violence against women, which is what rape is, qualify you to play football and, like it or not, set yourself up as a hero to young boys and girls?

This is not a knee jerk reaction at all. This is a considered debate about whether or not a man who has been convicted of rape, and who is out on licence should be signed back to a club, which has been the centre of a witch hunt for his victim without there being certain stipulations. No one has suggested he is hanged. This isn't the comments section for the Daily Mail. I am sorry you can't tell the difference.

Would be great if FIFA would ban him for bringing the game in to disrepute, but that's not going to happen. That's what would happen if someone was jailed for a racist attack, but crimes against women are just fine

As someone mentioned upthread, I can't see him being welcomed back to the club if he'd raped a man. Or a child.

Glovender would you maintain your view if this man had raped a 6 year old?

All footballers should be CRB checked is an opinion about the profession.

OK, fair enough. It'll never happen though.

I really don't agree with the way footballers seem to be above the law, but given the fact that they're allowed to go "back to work" after killing whole families on the roads let alone raping someone, what on earth makes you think the FA (or whoever) would buy into this?

How would that work with the Foreign players, some of whom are from countries that'll never give our authorities any information.

The whole game, infrastructure & a lot of the players are reprehensible TBH. Money talks though & they'll never abandon a player who'll net them millions, if not billions in revenue for the sake of a piece of paper and a "bit of a dodgy past"....

They're busy trying to lower/remove Suarez's ban for goodness sake, & he's taking chunks out of other million pound players......

The football world is amoral.

Absolutely - it's indicative of what happens when money becomes the driving force....

"This is one of those 'hanging is too good for them' rants and not an intelligent debate"

This is an incorrect representation of the thread.

Ooh, Glovender, is it me that's the DM hanging advocate? How exciting! I'm normally called a bit of a lefty feminist, so that does make a change!

Thank you, Courtesy and Chaos, for understanding what I am trying to say. I am pointing out that one doesn't have to be in 1:1 contact with someone to be an influence, a role model etc. And professional footballers at big clubs certainly qualify. And I don't feel that the perpetrator of violence against women should be in that position. What a terrible message to convey.

As Peter Parker said, 'with great power comes great responsibility'.

I'm also not saying that convicted rapists are beyond redemption. I am an advocate of prison reform in which rehabilitation forms a greater part and 'punishment', which in my opinion is so negative, a smaller one.

But that doesn't mean naively placing someone with a conviction of violence against women in a position where they can be adored by young people. Just as I wouldn't employ a convicted money launderer in a bank. It just doesn't make sense.

And no, I'm also not saying that all amateur footballers should be CRB checked. Professional sportspeople who inspire the younger generation should be expected to have behaviour worthy of inspiration: like Novak Djokovic for example.

Can you imagine a tennis player behaving in the way so many footballers do? Naomi Broady lost her funding for posting a picture of herself on facebook that was deemed slightly risque...She had to work twice as hard to get to Wimbledon and is a better player because of it. This type of accountability is no bad thing, but I see little of it in football, which is a shame. It's there - but it's not the norm.

Footballers going to do talks or coaching in schools wouldn't merit a DBS check. Since the rules changed you can legally only check people who will be left alone with children or vulnerable people - there are teachers there all the time.

Besides, all a DBS check tells you is whether someone has convictions. We all know Evans has.

It's beside the point. The question should be about the extent to which footballers are set up as role models to boys. This is why the prospect of him returning to top flight football (or Sheffield Utd at least) is so unsavoury.

It's not just boys I guess there it's men of all ages who might see him as a her or role model or someone to respect or aspire to iyswim.

The messages around this situation are just awful.

As a hero not as a her!