Ched Evans wins appeal

[Childrenofthestones]

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

It's like two different stories - how is it acceptable for the jury to make a decision without ALL of the information. New information is fine as long as it is relevant (questionable) but allowing new yet omitting old is surely wrong as it weakens the prosecution case?

I know it is most likely illegal but I hope they managed to get hold of CMs statement somehow.

I'm also concerned that he seems so repentant for his actions now, and will be judged on that, after 5 years..with 5 years media training or at least a change in personality, which is natural? Whereas he should be judged on the person he was then, because that's the person who allegedly committed the crime. He might cringe now, but he still said it? He still did it? His brother might cringe too but he's still guilty of filming someone without their consent - doesn't change anything for the victim.

The evidence the jury at this trial heard was that nothing was said by CE, that the victim asked CM to do something and CE did it and therefore she may well have been unaware he was even in the room.

That is the part that makes me think we could still get a guilty verdict in this case. No evidence has been given that she consented in any way shape or form to CE. The evidence shows to me that she wasn't even aware he was there so she couldn't consent and if she did indeed say things then she was saying them to CM not to CE so what he did is still rape.

Exactly - the only evidence that she consented is (a) CE's word and (b) the word of his mates at the window, who have admitted that it was too dark to see.

The testimony of every single independent witness who actually saw the victim on that night and in the morning indicate that this was rape.

I wonder whether CM is now a "hostile witness" - it seems astonishing that he has not been called. I have a horrible feeling CE will be acquitted after all this inflated "new evidence". It feels like I have woken up in 1983 and Judge Pickles is back from the dead.

I think the prosecution barrister summed it all up well when he used that quote from Wilde - everything in life is about sex, except sex itself, which is about power (obviously I am paraphrasing horribly).

That poor woman.

The Jury have retired to consider a verdict. Decent chance of one today as they will have from 11.40 ish to 1. Then an hour lunch break then a further two hours of deliberation.

I feel very nervous about this verdict.

Im not. Im resigned to a not guilty verdict. It seems unlikely a jury will do the correct decision and convict.

That poor girl.

I'm hoping enough of them are smart enough to work out that CE & his pals would say ANYTHING to make him look better, & that it's the testimony of all the unbiased witnesses that should carry most weight.

(Also that what he says now contradicts everything he did then)

I think it will be not guilty as well. Which will mean young women will not be able to have sex when they want to - it's a normal activity for humans in adulthood. How awful in this day and age that women are still held up as the ones who hold the morals and men are the ones who breech this. Shouldn't we all, all of us, be respectful of each other when it comes to sexual relationships?

Why should women have the default when it comes to consent? It should be men.

Is this standard for a rape trial? That the conviction would be so easily quashed and a retrial granted on such flimsy 'evidence'. I know rape convictions are like hens teeth so we have so little to go on but is it just that he is famous and has money to throw at it that this happened? If other convicted rapists had the same money to pay for appeals and retrials would we be seeing this played out over and over (because that is how the CPS thinks) or is this just a really odd turn of events?

independent witnesses as vacant, uncomprehending, unable to see or respond to those around her etc.

Not quite so, when the taxi driver told her, that he didn't want her to eat in the back of the cab and asked if she'd move to the front seat, she (a) comprehended and (b) responded to his request.

So.

I don't understand how 'raped woman had sex before and after rape......and enjoys sex'
Is new evidence?
It's evidence of nothing.

Btw I agree with the comments regarding her non reaction to stranger entering the room showing how out of it she was.

Without wishing to detail my sexual history I've been in similar situations and i know I would have freaked out at hearing the door lock turning. The door opening would have had me stopping the sex and saying/screaming something like "fuck, someone's in the room!" Having realised it was his mate and asking to join in I would have been both terrified and furious that they had planned it. I hope I would have found the words to say "no thanks" and leave but I honestly am not sure I would have been brave enough to risk angering two strange men who were standing over a naked me and expecting sex. Perhaps now I would but at 19?

Of course what I think I might do has no relevance at all to this case but I just cannot imagine that this woman had no reaction at all to this happening without being almost near unconsciousness. The only other way I could imagine it happening like that was if CM had said to her beforehand that his friend might join them and would that be ok. But of course you would mention a thing like that if you were CM on trial for rape wouldn't you?

So? Women often respond to such requests. I bet the taxi driver would have not have said that to a man.

It also demonstrates that she is very compliant.

Jen - it wasn't the CPS that overturned the conviction. It was the appeal court. It isn't normal, but then he has thrown much more money at it than others have. I think the flimsiest of the evidence used to do it highlights the inherent misogyny in the system.

The CPS clearly believe that there is a reasonable prospect of conviction, hence them pursuing a retrial.

Cadno - True, the receptionist was very clear that she was out of it though. We will have to see what the jury make of it all, and juries can make bizarre decisions in all directions.

Ahh ok thanks woman, so the CPS pushed for retrial because they think the evidence would see him reconvicted? Is that right?

My opinion is that CE did not get consent..
However if I were a jury member I don't know whether I would feel the facts were such that I could say that this was the case beyond all reasonable doubt and I think that is the problem so often with rape cases.The jury think they are probably guilty but there is just not enough evidence :-(
,

Yes Jen - the CPS want him convicted.

Whether a retrial was in the interests of the victim, I don't know. It may have been what she wanted, it may not.

Cadno - True, the receptionist was very clear that she was out of it though. We will have to see what the jury make of it all, and juries can make bizarre decisions in all directions

Yes, not long to go now.

Are you going to be happy that CE is exonerated cad ?

Jury have broken for lunch. They asked some legal questions and see some evidence again. Resume at 2. Doesn't sound if there have had much deliberation in the room yet. Still think there might a verdict today but its good they looking at the evidence fully

Apparently the jury have come back in and asked to see the CCTV from the kebab shop again but have been told they have already seen it. They also asked for footage of the complainants first interview. Break for lunch

Wales online is good for updates.

Oh x post there.

'I feel very nervous about this verdict'

Same here AF. I don't want to even think about the crowing from certain sections of the media if he is found not guilty

It has been a rancid, sickening case from start to finish and I hope that poor woman is hanging on in there