Ched Evans wins appeal

[Childrenofthestones]

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

True, Liney. If I see that "she didn't go back to their hotel room to play scrabble" line again I might scream.

I met her dad once. Absolute tosser.

Don't get me started on the Facebook comments on articles relating to this case.

I've had to ban myself from reading them, it's both infuriating and terrifying at the same time.

My gut feeling is that he'll get off though. And then that'll leave all the wankers free to post her name all over the fucking Internet. Again.

If anyone does this, they can be prosecuted. Victims of sexual offences have anonymity for life - even if their attacker is found not guilty. It won't suddenly become legal to publish her name online if he gets off.

Thank goodness.

Doesn't stop them doing it though WWA. She's already had to change her identity and location several times IIRC.

I think the 1999 law stopping courts from questioning victims about their past sexual history was recently overturned. Another sign of how women's rights are going backwards if I'm right.

This isn't the case. However, sexual history can be brought up in court if the judge grants permission. In order for the judge to allow the defence to raise it, the defence must demonstrate that it is relevant to the case in some concrete way. (Personally I don't think they should ever be permitted to discuss it, but there you go.)

The law that banned the defence from raising sexual history has always allowed the judge to overrule it by granting an order giving permission, so it hasn't changed.

I know Aye, it's horrific. But at least a number of them were actually prosecuted. Personally I think the police should be far more active in prosecuting that sort of thing than they are.

The sexual history stuff is probably the 'new evidence'.

Because in the first trial CE's defence weren't given permission to raise it, to my knowledge.

Ok, that makes sense. The ruling is that the jury are entitled hear that the defence case is that the alleged victim was someone that CE believed to be lacking in the capacity / morality to refuse him.

Still makes someone like that a rapist in law, though.

Normally they need something more concrete than that in order to be granted permission... I don't know what justification they will have provided.

But I agree - it's utterly irrelevant in this case and I've never heard a credible account of what happened which didn't lead me to conclude that he's a rapist.

The ruling is that the jury are entitled hear that the defence case is that the alleged victim was someone that CE believed to be lacking in the capacity / morality to refuse him.

That's so grim.

I can't believe that this would be a justifiable line of defence.

I'm just so angry at this whole case for so, so many reasons.

I agree aye

is that seriously the case? In 2016?

Fucking disgusting

Why is having previously consensual sex with other people in any way a moral issue?

No I'm cynically speculating based on posts online like WomanWithAltitude's on here, as to what the hell the 'new evidence' could possibly be.

All the supporters online seem to be smugly suggesting it's all about the alleged victim being Not Morally Perfect ffs. Makes so fucking despairing for justice for women.

Why should she be whiter than white? He's certainly not! And oh my god, the sheer arrogance of "I could have any girl in there..."

I wonder if that 'I could have any girl' line will come back to bite him.

And oh my god, the sheer arrogance of "I could have any girl in there..."

Well, I suppose he could 'have anyone'; by raping them...

Since it doesn't sound like she had much choice in the matter, what with him letting himself into the hotel room when she was already naked and so drunk she was ill enough for CM to tell the night porter that she was "very sick" when he was leaving.

Has he said the "any girl" line this time round too?

Where are you all getting the updates from?

I'm looking at the Guardian online.

Today I was on this site
www.walesonline.co.uk/news/ched-evans-rape-trial-alleged-11985150

I really fucking hope that isn't the "new evidence". Because that gives free rein to any man to rape someone so drunk they don't know what's going on. She can't remember anything.

This from today's Guardian online:

"The footballer Ched Evans told detectives interviewing him over the suspected rape of a 19-year-old waitress that he could have had his pick of any woman in the club he had been in that night. Evans told officers: “We could have had any girl we wanted. When we go out it’s not uncommon to pick up girls. We’re footballers. Footballers are rich and they have money. That is what girls like.” "

Thanks both.

Although I'll just get even more enraged reading them I'm sure!

Bloody brilliant, so if a woman consents to have sex with one man then it's a green light, get stuck in lads for the rest of whoever fancies a go, consent for one is consent for all?

How much more are they going to put her through or is that the point, to break her so she relents to the defence and agrees to anything just to make it stop.

“No. We could have had any girl we wanted. Footballers are rich, they’ve got money, that’s what girls like.”

Urgh. How the fuck could anyone defend him? How could his girlfriend put up with this?

Get this part of his statement to the Police, as reported in the Welsh press:

"He told police he did not use a condom. Evans said he had a girlfriend at the time and did not want to stay in case his girlfriend rang him. He added the woman fell asleep as he left. He then met up with Mr McDonald outside."

"My girlfriend hates me going out because the girls do throw themselves at you. That’s just part and parcel of being a footballer.”
From Wales Online

Right. Except that we know that didn't happen did it? Because he didn't take anyone to the hotel, his mate did.