Ched Evans wins appeal

[Childrenofthestones]

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

Thick, arrogant, entitled, predatory. Yeah, that's just my type. Same for any 'girl', right?

You do have to marvel at the level of delusion his girlfriend must be under and what kind of lessons about relationships she must have learned in her own life, to stand by such a specimen. A huge dose of 'shes just a slag, I'm the one wearing the ring' I guess.

Apparently the text reads, 'I've got a bird' but I wonder if even that's sanitised.

I apologise in advance, I don't know the history of this case in the way that some of you do but could someone explain how it can have been found that one raped her but the other didn't? Is it something to do with her going to the hotel voluntarily with one of them? But wasn't she incapacitated before she got to the hotel? I don't get why only was found guilty.

On that Wales Online key points from today page, there are quite a few witnesses who have corroborated that she was very drunk. They saw her falling about everywhere, having a vacant expression, not responding to questions of whether she was OK, seeming "out of it" etc.

Pleeeeeease God let the jury listen to these witnesses, given the poor girl can't speak for herself.

I almost think it sounds worse for him this time?

A defence for rape is if the man reasonably believed he had consent. No one knows why the jury decided how they did but most assume that they thought there was reasonable doubt that Macdonald believed he had consent as she went in a taxi to the hotel with him.

ObscureThing I'm guessing here, but chances are he thinks that because some women flirt etc with him means that all women want him and basically men like him couldn't possibly be rapists because he can have any woman they want and they should be lucky he's deemed them worth enough to have sex with rape

There was a rape case last year (or there abouts) where a soldier was finally convicted of rape (after four unconnected women had come forward to say he'd raped them) who had similar excuses/dillusions.

Felas - thank you. But that doesn't make sense does it? As I understand it there was no dispute about where she got completely off her face on alcohol (and/or whatever may/may not have been added to it 'spiked') IE it was BEFORE she got to the hotel NOT after. Therefore if consent couldn't be given to sex AT the hotel then surely consent could not have been given even to the journey TO the hotel? If defence rests on what the accused 'believed' then surely Evans could have 'believed' as much as 'McDonald' believed? I'm not advocating McDonald should have been found guilty, I just don't see the difference. Obviously I'm not getting something.

This defence that if a man is 'popular' he can't be a rapist is becoming increasingly ridiculous, after so many high profile cases have shown that men with 'power' and 'popularity' actually enjoy debasing their victims.

But it's up to the jury in Cardiff.

Isitjustme you'd have to ask the previous jury; and they're not allowed to say.

Found it. another predatory man with dillusions of his attractiveness outweighing actual consent

Brian Witty had said: " I don't believe this, I'm an a good looking bloke". This was after one of his victims turned him down but then proceeded to rape her.

It does make you wonder if these men were assessed would they be found to be Narcissists as well as scumbags

Sorry if this is abit of a derailment I just found similarities in both cases in regards to the men viewing themselves as somewhat of a catch and possibly in their mind therefore incapable of rape iykwim?

Is it's really hard to get a rape conviction, especially when the victim doesn't remember anything and so it's not even a "his word against hers" situation, but a "his word is the only version of events".

However, what Evans did is certainly different to what McD did. Because he effectively broke into her hotel room and immediately started having sex with her. He not only hadn't spent enough time with her to know anything, but clearly didn't give a fuck who she was, whether she wanted him in the room, or wanted to have sex with a complete stranger who had just entered the hotel room. He then snuck out the fire escape (hardly the actions of an innocent man).

CMcD didn't have all those elements so one could imagine the jury considered that he may have had reason to believe she consented even though she didn't, whereas Evans had no reason to think that, and didn't care.

There's such a double standard surrounding the whole digging through her sexual past thing. I don't suppose they have done any digging surrounding his sexual past? It seems that it's still more socially acceptable for men to sleep around than it is for women.

Why is it non of the supporters seem to care that Evans cheated on his girlfriend/fiancé with her, yet they're happy to brand the victim a slag for ending up in this situation. How can anyone not see how badly he's come across in this case? He's a truly vile man.

God I fear for my daughters as they get older if attitudes haven't improved by then.

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.

I'm being very dim but what does this mean? Is it Saying that CE believed she would consent because of her sexual history with other men??

I wouldn't want my daughter or my son within a million miles of CE or his girlfriend or her family or his.

No, Jen. As I said above, it was a cynical 'oh I see' moment after the previous post.

Oh honestly don't mind if speculation has to be deleted. The jury aren't reading it anyway.

What will happen will happen, with this verdict.

CE believed she would consent because of her sexual history with other men

I'm not sure how he could claim this... he didn't know her, did he? So he won't have known her sexual history at the time.

If the judge has allowed sexual history to be raised then it is because the defence has convinced them that it is relevant. The defence are probably planning to say that if she consented to sex with other men in similar circumstances in the past, this is evidence that she is likely to have consented this time too. It's bollocks, obviously.

True Liney.

TBH I very much doubt that anyone on that jury isn't already very aware of the case and has their mind made up already.

So the verdict is probably already a forgone conclusion. Whichever way it goes.

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

Indeed. It could be interpreted as him assuming automatic consent from all women.

A decent prosecuting barrister should be able to cut through all his contradictions.

'You knew she'd be "up for it"?'

Yes.

'But you told the police you didn't know her.'

Oh.

I can't believe his girlfriend has stayed with him through all this. Even if he didn't rape the victim, he was still unfaithful to her, and probably not for the first time either. Her father has been paying his fees etc (apparently?), and now they have a child together.

What on earth is wrong with that family?? I feel sorry for the child being brought up around it all. It's so fucked up.

It could be interpreted as him assuming automatic consent from all women

Like what he said about how much 'girls' love having two footballers there - obviously it's unthinkable that any woman would turn down that opportunity, so yep, automatic universal consent. Cos footballers.

CE had never spoken to the woman before he entered the hotel room and penetrated her.

Numerous witnesses attest to the fact that she was intoxicated.

Even if he came into the room and CM said to her 'can my mate have a go?' and she somehow appeared to say yes, no reasonable person could think this wasn't rape.

CE brought 2 mates along to watch from outside the hotel window.

He went there with the full intention to have sex, regardless of the woman's 'response'.

When the woman called the police the next day it was to report the loss of her handbag - she had no idea that she had spent the night with 2 men. The idea that she planned the whole thing to make money from CE
is outrageous considering what she has been though since.

There's nothing new here yet, the defence are just setting a scene. It saddens me that the defence believes this tack will work with the jury. That's why arguing on rape threads are so important - you're talking to potential future jurors.

There'll be something else coming up on which they based the argument for a re-trial.