Ched Evans verdict

[FreshwaterSelkie]

to continue the discussion as the previous thread closed.

The accused on the other hand is protected. 'Bad character' evidence can be used in some cases, but generally the accused's life is off limits. (As is seen in the CE trial - it was her life that was scrutinised, not his.)

Merrymouse - I thought the same. He is deluded if he thinks any of that will do him good

Just to add - CE's defence tried every angle they could think of. They tried to suggest X already had prior history of sleeping with strangers - only they then had to drop that as 1 witness conceded they did not have sex the 1st time they met (I can imagine he gave the impression she did ).

They tried to undermine X's claim she had no memory - the vitriol against X about her being a liar & somehow having the power to acquit CE if only she'd admit to remembering what happened IMO stemmed from the desperate attempts of CE's defence to suggest that was a possibility with absolutely no evidence of that claim whatsoever. Even the other witness was motivated by that belief, even stating so in court.

All the independent evidence about how X appeared i.e. drunk, from the kebab shop CCTV, hotel CCTV, taxi driver & hotel receptionist all confirm she was pretty wasted - and still that fucking website tried to suggest all that evidence was some kind of fabrication/misrepresentation.

And of course, that mythical social media crap too - where the fuck was that in the defence?

An accused rapist has the right to defend himself against that accusation but it's absolutely galling to see every rape defence lawyer work through a tick box list of rape myths as they try to build up that so-called defence. And in doing so, create a narrative about a victim that comes no where near reality - its then just tough luck if the fall out means some fuckwits believe the shit thrown at rape victims by defence lawyers.

That's what angers me so much - defence lawyers can accuse/throw mud to get a reaction/response they think might prove that point & even when it's refuted (as X did re that 'striking phrase' 2 low life scum bags claimed she said) it's still taken as some sort of irrefutable fact instead of fed/widely available information 'bought' with £50k.

Im getting angrier and angrier the more I talk about this. It's fucking outrageous what has been allowed to take place.

To be fair - the girls sexual history was only brought up because it was considered relevant - not with regard to number of partners, history etc but because it was claimed by witnesses that she had had consensual sex with other men and forgotten it the day after. Thus having a direct influence on this case too. (Consensual in terms of, she never considered it rape.)

You know what? I hope he does sue & then someone else with deep pockets & the right resources (his previous employers & previous solicitors) do some digging to defend against the brass neck CE would need to even go there & that will unravel the whole house of cards that odious fucker has built in 'buying' so-called justice. Now that would be justice.

Ninja, nice post.

If her sexual history was considered relevant then certainly his should have been as well. Poor prosecution lawyer? Or lack of funds to pursue?

And the film taken by two men wasn't shown either (which might have proved something) and no action was taken against them for filming.

Can't help thinking it might be better to stop using the word 'rape', sexual assault perhaps, GBH or assault against a person.

If it's quite clear that she did not report him for rape – he said so himself and again in today's Sunday Times – why is she described as the complainant? Don't understand that bit.

His sexual history wasn't relevant though and neither was here's -apart from the fact she had had sex and then forgotten on other occasions.

What I don't get, is if she didn't complain or consider it rape herself, how it got as far as it did in the first place?

The police interviewed him and CM, looked at their behaviour and other evidence (cctv and independent witnesses) and concluded that it was rape. So did the CPS.

It is a myth that a victim has to 'press charges' for a rapist to be prosecuted.

She didn't claim she'd been raped because she had no idea what had happened.

I imagine that, once she found out what had happened to her, she very much considered it rape. But it wasn't her that called it that - it was the police.

This whole case is just hideous.

One of the (very) many things that troubles me deeply about this case is the lengths gone to by CE's fiance and her father to defend him. Why?

I could perhaps understand a bit more (but not condone) if she was from a poor background and CE's money supported her family but they are wealthy themselves.

I keep coming back to that, because I can't understand it at all..to me is one of the most disturbing aspects of the case

flippinada

I can only assume, as hard as you find it to understand, that she believed he was innocent of the charge and loved him enough to forgive the infidelity. As you point out yourself she certainly didn't stick with him for the money.

Even if you think it wasn't 'rape', what he did was worse than just 'infidelity'. It was predatory and despicable, the actions of a scumbag, even if you believe CE's pack of lies account of events.

I couldn't stay with a man who behaved like that.

"because it was claimed by witnesses that she had had consensual sex with other men and forgotten it the day after."

Shame she didn't lose her handbag those times too, really.

Because the only thing that is a pattern of, is a pattern of her being taken advantage of by predatory males.

I can well understand claiming compensation if you want to set yourself up for a life of raping with impunity because women know they haven't got a cat in hells chance against you.

Just saying.

Exactly Beyond. Exceptional circumstances my arse. Her sexual history should never have been allowed to be used as evidence in court.

It's a total disgrace and I'm glad some of the main tabloid newspapers have picked up on it too.

It's not just about forgiving infidelity though. It's not like he had a one night stand or an affair and got found out. He's been found not guilty (such doesn't mean innocent) but by his own account he behaved in a completely despicable way.

Maybe she does love him - but that doesn't account for why her father defended him so enthusiastically either, does it?

If you're too drunk to remember it the next day - I'm going to come out with it and say to my mind that's rape.

It's hardly a shining example of consent.

I can only assume, as hard as you find it to understand, that she believed he was innocent of the charge and loved him enough to forgive the infidelity.

But it's not just infidelity - it's all the actions surrounding what he did, the complete lack of respect for the victim - pretty much treating her like a piece of meat - the men filming outside the window - even details like completely abandoning the victim. You can take away the rape conviction and he is still somebody who did something that was completely despicable - and that's before even thinking about what was going on with the friend who assaulted the woman earlier in the evening.

And then, if this was just another night out with the lads, and Ched Evans tells the police that footballers can sleep with anyone, how many more times has this happened?

*which, not such

Because the only thing that is a pattern of, is a pattern of her being taken advantage of by predatory males

Exactly. She's nineteen FFS. Nineteen. Barely an adult and yet she's being used and abused like this by men. But apparently that's not evidence of vulnerability it's evidence of easy consent. Ridiculous.

*was 19. Obviously not anymore!

I'd suggest that could be money based, as she's a wag with a rich daddy. She views herself as 'above' the women Chedwyn finds on a night out.

Pure speculation, but

I don't think she cares much about his contempt for women. Hers appears at least the same level. I could not go out with a misogynist but there is no accounting for taste.

The way Massey's father has backed CE and put so much money into getting him acquitted is bizarre.

When talking about this with dp I asked him how he would feel if any future partners of our own dd's did what CE had done and he said rape or no rape he wouldn't want him to have anything more to do with our girls and the rest of our family and there there would be zero chance of him helping him get the result he wanted in court. A pretty normal reaction for most fathers/parents, I'd like to think anyway.