Ched Evans allowed back

[juliascurr]

www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/football-league/ched-evans-sheffield-united-striker-to-return-to-club-after-rape-sentence-despite-petition-garnering-60000-signatures-against-him-9666380.html

really bad news

X post Venus, exactly.

Fatbloke, are you actually arguing that if CE did not ask the complainant directly if he could "have a go" but asked another person in the room who had absolutely no authority to speak for her, then that counts as consent?

Even CE's lawyers didn't think that would fly, which presumably explained the difference between the Court evidence and the police statement.

There is an old saying - "there's none so blind as them as won't see"

I appreciate that trying to argue the cause of reason on this group, is akin to trying to reason with a group of ISIS fighters. But there are surely limits even here, as to what constitutes reasonable behaviour. To those that responded to my recent post with these comments;

"He's trying to justify rape. Because he has behaved like that before. That is the only conclusion I can come to after reading his posts."

"Fatbloke....have you ever raped anyone ? I have a feeling you have"

"How many of the men out there, who are so desperate to plead the case for his innocence, are doing it because they don't want to think about their own behaviour?"

"I would think all men who justify what Ched Evans has done would do well to examine their own sexual behaviour"

"After having many many men tell me that what those men did to that young woman wasn't rape, that she was a slut and loved it blah blah blah, yeah, I agree, my first thought is that they have done similar and are trying to justify themselves and their rapist pasts."

etc etc

Well your logic simply beggars belief.

NONE of you have ever met me!
NONE of you know anything about me!
NONE of you even know my real name.

But just because I'm prepared to stand up in this forum and put forward a structured, reasoned argument, which is referenced to the available evidence including the relevant case law - YOU, that's right YOU, feel free to brand me as a rapist.

If you consider yourself "feminists" then you are doing yourself and real feminists no favours at all!

House!

Ah, I was so close, puffins. If only he'd said "dungarees"

What do you think sex is Fatbloke?

Yeah, Eve the thought had crossed my mind too.

Same old crap.

Won't listen, not interested in anything but the same old crap.

Still sounds like a rapist.

Did you see that he's stalking a completely unrelated woman and her son, because he in his deluded rapey mind has decided that she's behind Jean Hatchet?

Hypothetical situation ahoy...

"Your honour, it's our case that my client had a reasonable belief in consent"

"I see. And how did he come to form that belief?"

"Well, he asked someone else if he could have a go."

"Hmm, unconventional. Did he have a reasonable belief that this someone else knew the complainant and her likely wishes well?"

"No, he knew that the someone else - a man, by the way- had known the complainant for, ooh, no more than two hours, if that."

" Right. So what is the case for reasonable belief then?"

"Ummm..."

fatbloke your argument was neither robust nor structured. As the LCJ said in refusing leave to appeal, this is a class case for determination by the jury.

Your argument is not structured because you can't distinguish between matters of fact and matters of law. It's not robust at all. You can't even seem to get the very basic principle that matters of fact must be decided by a jury, hearing admissible evidence and being directed by a judge as to the legal standards the prosecution has to prove and what defences are legally acceptable as well as an explanation of what might constitute reasonable doubt.

And to top it all, we're like ISIS now are we? Yes of course, dear- ISIS and feminism have loads in common.

Oh, and just so you know, Ciaran, real feminists do not indulge in a load of rape apologist crap online.

More than one unfortunately Puffins, but his accounts are being suspended a bit quicker now - prob why he's turned up on MN.

"If fatbloke's correct about how events unfolded, i.e. CE obtains access to the room by deception, asks CM if he "can have a go", an exchange the entirely lucid woman hears and says "yep, jump on big boy"… wouldn't CE and CM have thought mentioning this to their defence team would be a sensible notion? CE was convicted on his own testimony of what happened, after all."

"Ooooh, fatbloke, maybe CE forgot she said yes when he gave his account? Hmmmm? Did anyone subject him to a cognitive reasoning test at the time, eh? Eh? Suspicious, that. Isn't it."

Funny that!

I wondered that too!

So that’s why I checked out the press reports from the trial. They're open to everybody you know!

The Daily Mirror reported Clayton McDonald’s evidence on 17th April 2012,
Giving evidence in, court, McDonald said that he heard giggling outside the window and realised it was Jack Higgins and Ched Evans’ brother;

"So I went to close the curtains and then I noticed that Ched had come into the room."

He said the woman also saw Evans, who then asked to "join in".

"I asked her 'Can he join in?' and she said 'Yes'," he said.

Then on 18th April 2012, the Mirror reported on Ched Evan’s evidence. Describing what happened after he entered the room;

Evans told the court he watched them having sex for about "10/20 seconds" and then McDonald "asked" if his mate could "get involved".

"Then she looked at me and said yes," Evans said."

It really would be a good idea if you are going to make this sort of statement, if you were to check the facts first!

Your observations are pointless if the jury decided that, on the evidence shown in court, that she was too drunk to consent. CE and CM's accounts of who ask who what in the hotel room differed - it's possible the jury didn't believe that consent was asked at all. Rapists are known to lie you know - the biggest excuse in the Handy Book of Tips for Rapists is "but she consented your honour!"

Or perhaps they just decided that this "extremely drunk" and then "sick" woman, who "should be kept an eye on" according to CM, was incapacitated, and that CE could not reasonably believe she could consent in that state.

Yeah, Ciaran would say that too.

Although he did use to liken feminists to ISIS as well, and I'm don't think fat like has....oh...wait.

In fact, I wouldn't be in the least surprised if it wasn't, in part, CM's testimony that caused CE to be found guilty. Certainly the "keep an eye on the girl in rm14, because she's sick."

In what universe is it ok to just jump on a very drunk woman, that you've just tricked your way into a hotel room with, that you've never met before, and is "sick" according to testimony of your mate?? She was judged unable to consent by the jury, and, that's a crime- he was rightly convicted.

CM was given 'reasonable doubt' - he had an independent witness show that she went willingly with him to the room - but he was on very dicey ground having sex with a woman who was so drunk.

Ok then fatbloke, do you think CE's website made the right call in eventually distancing themselves from ciaran goggins?

Ew, just glanced at Ciaran Goggin's blog. Now why did I do that?

Be back after a long bubble bath and getting the kids to bed

Ciaran, if you're reading - there's a typo on your blog. You appear to have double tapped the '3' on your figure for false rape accusations - you've put 33% - it's actually around 3%.

You're welcome!

My name is NOT Cieran Goggins!

No one said you were, or did you think we would not notice your misspelling Ciaran?

What do you understand sex to be, Fatbloke?