Ched Evans wins appeal

[Childrenofthestones]

Sorry I can't link but it's on the BBC site.

The defence in this case can be summed up as simply a concerted attempt at character assassination.

This is why women don't report rape, because we know the truth about how we'll be treated in the unlikely event that it gets as far as court (most don't even get that far).

"What the defendant's barrister is telling the jury, is what her client says happened." Except they didn't (well they may have done - I'm not following the trial other than through here). What they also added was their opinion that oral sex was given for pleasure.

This came up in active and I thought he had been found not guilty. Fingers crossed this isn't the case.

Rape myths. Defence barristers love them.

we think it is time to dispel the myth, memory blackout does not equal lack of consent

I agree it's time to dispel some myths, mostly the one about consenting to one equalling consenting to all.

He didn't even speak to her. He cannot have obtained active consent.

Judge explaining the law now.

The prosecution aren't claiming lack of consent because she can't remember. They're claiming lack of consent because the people who saw her says she was totally out of it, uncomprehending, vacant etc...

The defence barrister came out with the cracker that 'Drunk consent is still consent'.

It's not though, is it, if the person is at the stage of falling down, urinating on the bed, losing their possessions.

FROM WALES ONLINE
Mrs Justice Nicola Davies is now giving the jury some more directions about the law.
They have been told Evans has no criminal convictions, but one caution dating to July 2010 for false representation, relating to an insurance claim for a mobile phone.
The judge said it is agreed he should be regarded as a person of previous good character.
She said: “That does not mean he could not have committed the offence with which he is charged.
“You should take the fact that he is a person of previous good character in his favour.”
The judge said the jury must consider three questions when reaching their verdict:

1. Are you sure that when the defendant intentionally penetrated the vagina of the complainant she did not consent?
2. Are you sure the defendant did not genuinely believe that the complainant consented?
3. Are you sure that the defendant’s belief in the complainant’s consent was reasonable?

She told the jury to “take it step by step”.

Ms Khan reminded the jury Evans said in evidence : “I would never hurt a girl. I would never take advantage of a girl who was not consenting.”

Evans doesn't seem to understand what consenting is, though...

“[The complainant] liked to engage in sex at that time. She did so two days before, she did so two weeks after.
“It was consensual two days before, it was consensual two weeks after and it was consensual on the night in question.”

WTAF?!

For clarification i am reading back on the earlier days of the trial and the victim gave evidence from behind a screen but was in the court. She wouldn't have been able to see the gallery

It's so much like the Brock Turner case, "he's able to write the script because she has no memory"

Macdonald and Evans looks quite different you have to be quite drunk to get them confused even in poor light

It wasn't poor light - the room was in darkness! & if she was in as bad a way as it sounds she probably had her eyes closed. And as he didn't speak she wouldn't have know who was doing it!

& we only have his word about what she actually said. If anything

How long do you think it might be (those in the know) for the jury to come to a decision? Could it happen today or tomorrow, or more likely next week?

Oh god this is shocking. I hope the jury have seen that 'cup if tea' cartoon thing. That she has had sex on a couple of other occasions really is the new evidence isn't.

They are posting updates as spoken every few minutes you can follow the summing up at
www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/ched-evans-rape-trial-defence-12017591

No chance today. Judge will still be summing up till tomorrow morning. Decent chance tomorrow as they have 2-3 hours deliberation time after she has completed her summing up, otherwise Monday or if its a long deliberation Tuesday

Thanks!

It doesn't say in that report of the summing up that the Receptionist testified that CM told him about the 'sick' girl?

Was the room completely dark then when Evans walked in? There were no lights on?

Trial adjourned for the day. Summing up reached the victim's mother. So about 46 minutes worth of summing up to do tomorrow at 10am. So Jury will be out deliberating by say 11.30. Reasonable change they have a verdict tomorrow by 4pm- being about 3.30 of deliberations but i dont now the average length for a trial of this nature.

No i dont think he did say it this time. He did say he spoke to him after clayton left the room but didnt say what he said.

Unbelievable as well that the jury have been told 'not to judge morals' in this case, when her past sex life has been allowed as 'fresh 'evidence' in this trial.

No i dont think he did say it this time. He did say he spoke to him after clayton left the room but didnt say what he said.

Oh I thought someone else had said he had said it in this trial. Is there a reason he wouldnt have said it this time? It seems to be kind of key?

I thought it was said, but maybe it wasn't allowable, given that CM's evidence wasn't being used? I find the whole thing weird.

Like I said though - criminal trials have very little to do with truth or justice ime. If this was all about getting to the truth (rather than a competition between two sides, in which the judge decides what they are allowed to show the jury), CM's testimony would have been essential.

This is why I favour inquisitorial systems rather than adversarial, particularly when it comes to rape cases.