Ched Evans wins appeal

[Childrenofthestones]

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

Maybe it would redress the balance if there were more civil suits brought by victims, malice. Because the current interpretation of "reasonable doubt" and the adversarial trial process allowing the defence to drag up women's sexual history to play on commonly held rape myths means rapey men can basically rape with impunity as long as they prey on drunk women or women they know.

Misogyny is absolutely nothing new but dear lord, between this absolute travesty and the non-stop filth from Donald Trump (and his supporters), this feels like the darkest week ever. I'm beyond horrified.

It would change the whole tone of public debate if he was found innocent in criminal court but culpable in a civil context. People couldn't just argue he'd done nothing wrong and was as pure as the driven snow just because of a not guilty verdict.

It's not a case of being as purse as the driven snow though is it? Shit sticks, he will never get over this. My initial opinion (and it was just that) was that he was guilty of being a scuzzy bastard.

We can't moralise. These scenarios play out up and down the country each and every weekend. Let's not forget, that lower standard/burden to which he would be held, would apply to the complainant also.

As for the jury reaching different conclusions......it was binary.

OMG read tot he end of this in the Guardian

www.theguardian.com/football/2016/oct/14/footballer-ched-evans-cleared-of-in-retrial?CMP=share_btn_tw

The fact that similar scenarios often happen is a major problem not a justification.

Malice - wealthy people are already vulnerable to being sued for all kinds of things. Nothing is going to change there, and rape is no different to anything else someone could be sued for - people aren't more likely to faslely allege rape than any other offence.

My priority is to help rape victims access some form of justice/closure, even if our criminal system fails them.

the answer isn't (in my opinion) to seek a lower burden of proof. It would leave wealthy men rapists in particular vulnerable.

Rapists is who would be most affected. Not men, rapists. Unless you genuinely think there are hordes of women going around falsely claiming rape for money. If you do, you're way wrong.

What Valanice said.

Have i missed something? When did she consent??

Basically, a woman that once consents to sex cannot be raped by anybody else subsequently because she's just fair game for any other man that wants... what were the words our hero used ... a bit of that? This is the mindset of extremely misogynistic societies, whose victims come to the west to claim asylum

What a sad day for justice. This is the society our daughters are growing up in

Let's not forget, that lower standard/burden to which he would be held, would apply to the complainant also.

Even on the balance of probabilities, there is no evidence that she's made a false accusation. It wasn't her that brought the case. She never accused them of anything.

The appeal court judges, whose decision can be reported for the first time, expressed “a considerable degree of hesitation” before allowing in the new evidence of the former partners because it resulted in the complainant’s sexual behaviour being subject to forensic scrutiny – which is almost always banned.

This is what surprised me. I thought that the complainant's sexual history was generally considered irrelevant in cases like this.

Yes and again I accept that, but at its core our Anglo Saxon legal philosophy is predicated on principles of harm and loss. This woman was harmed, and yet the man responsible for that harm walks free. Forgive me for trying to find ways to limit the possibility for such to occur again in future.

I'm not even advocating for new laws, civil courts also exist and it perfectly in the victims right to pursue that route. Me proposing a charity that seeks to offer legal aid to women making that choice is also perfectly reasonable in our society. You don't happen to agree? That's fine and your prerogative, don't donate.

I reckon however there is enough goodwill towards rape survivors, and disgust at how easy you can get away with rape that a charity could work...

No woman I don't think that there are, but its not beyond the realms of possibility that there might be an uptick in the no. of complaints if it were possible to bring a civil suit.

I disagree, this would affect men and alleged rapists

The answer is to fix the criminal system.

Venus It is a major problem, I agree. It's not for me, or anyone else, to moralise on though.

Might be able to get compensation for loss of earnings but missing out on an international place seems unlike to cut it for compensation.
It's unlikely he would have made it anyway. His carrer was decling. Only one or two of euro 2016 welsh squard even played in the championship and Sheffield United had been relegated to league one.

Generally it cannot be admitted unless the judge grants a specific order.

That doesn't mean it's never used though.

And why can't I "moralise" about rapists raping and getting away with it exactly? And more to the point, why are you reluctant to?

I don't think that there are, but its not beyond the realms of possibility that there might be an uptick in the no. of complaints if it were possible to bring a civil suit.

Wtf are you talking about? It's already possible to bring a civil suit!

Can you point to any cases of this happening?

By 'this' I mean a false accusation taken through the civil courts for money.

The answer is to fix the criminal system.

If only feminists had though of trying that yeas ago....

My only point is a civil case has to be funded by the victim, a legal aid charity would take care of that.

I do agree that the solution ultimately lies in the criminal courts, I just happen to see this idea as a stepping stone, rather than to sit here with my thumb up my arse.

Rape is a moral issue. Bizarre to suggest it isn't.

It's about men's sense of entitlement to stick their dicks into women. You don't get much more fucking moral than that.

Even on the balance of probabilities, there is no evidence that she's made a false accusation. It wasn't her that brought the case. She never accused them of anything.

That wasn't the point I was making. It's irrelevant as to whether or not she was the complainant. In this instance her evidence would have been subject to that lower test.

I'm not an expert on criminal law. I just don't happen to believe that the correct way to deal with this problem is to encourage action through the civil courts.

I believe that in a balance of probabilities case the court would have found in her favour.

He's not a rapist though is he?

I was saying about moralising on the casual sex that goes on up and down the country each and every night.

Ok Malice I hear you loud and clear, duly noted. I happen to disagree, but I am keen to hear any practical steps we could to resolve the problem.

If I was his fiancee I would be very scared right now. I mean shes obviously had sex so therefore by his standards every other man has the right to put his penis in her vagina.

Malice, I firmly believe that he raped her. A court has found him not guilty in a rape trial. That's not in any way the same thing as him not being a rapist. Any such similar scenario would also therefore be a case or rape, whether reported or not.