| Ched Evans to Oldham Athletic 12:17 - Jan 4 with 55757 views | exiledclaseboy |
Apparently. Cue a few days of outraged reaction until Oldham change their mind. |  |
| |  |
| Ched Evans to Oldham Athletic on 20:26 - Jan 9 with 1746 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Ched Evans to Oldham Athletic on 19:33 - Jan 9 by onetimejack |
Jesus where do you find the time? |
it takes about 2 seconds to copy and paste.
Anyway, I've said all I'm going to. At least I've spent time arguing after reading up about it - some others appear not to have bothered.
And as for why I spent time doing that. It's because I wanted to see for myself what I thought after reading the facts. I wanted to know partly because I wanted to assess in my mind what I would think if he was ever selected for Wales. And because this is a serious matter I wanted to do so objectively rather than by looking at social media or papers. |  | | |
| Ched Evans to Oldham Athletic on 20:28 - Jan 9 with 1740 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Ched Evans to Oldham Athletic on 19:34 - Jan 9 by trampie |
You don't know what the jury thought !!! and you are admitting you are not dealing in facts now as well. [Post edited 9 Jan 2015 19:37]
|
they explained and it's always to a level beyond reasonable doubt rather than 100% you know.
You are twisting stuff in much the same way as Parlay was now so I'm out. | | | |
| Ched Evans to Oldham Athletic on 21:36 - Jan 9 with 1713 views | SkewenJack |
but there clearly is reasonable doubt. nobody else was there and she has no idea. | | | |
| Ched Evans to Oldham Athletic on 21:37 - Jan 9 with 1710 views | trampie |
| Ched Evans to Oldham Athletic on 20:28 - Jan 9 by londonlisa2001 |
they explained and it's always to a level beyond reasonable doubt rather than 100% you know.
You are twisting stuff in much the same way as Parlay was now so I'm out. |
On the contrary you are the one that twists things. |  |
| |
| Ched Evans to Oldham Athletic on 21:40 - Jan 9 with 1703 views | trampie |
| Ched Evans to Oldham Athletic on 21:36 - Jan 9 by SkewenJack |
but there clearly is reasonable doubt. nobody else was there and she has no idea. |
Exactly, its a concern for many people. | |
| |
| Ched Evans to Oldham Athletic on 23:40 - Jan 9 with 1662 views | Nookiejack |
| Ched Evans to Oldham Athletic on 18:54 - Jan 9 by londonlisa2001 |
you're right about the last bit in some ways.
But don't you agree that in the first trial it's the other way round. Since he was innocent until proved guilty, the onus was on the prosecution to prove beyond any reasonable doubt that he did it.
In other words it is harder to prove guilt than to just prove that there was a good chance he did it but they did just that.
There are 2 requirements for them to find him guilty of rape. First is that sex occurred and second is that there was no consent.
The first of these things is without question.
When it comes to consent, there are again 2 parts to it. One did the girl consent (or actually the way that it works for juries in these cases is often whether the man reasonably thought that consent had been given, hence the acquittal for the first bloke). The second part is whether consent was capable of being given
Now it's that second part which is relevant in all sorts of scenarios - for example, it is the case that minors are always adjudged to be incapable of giving consent.There are also certain cases of mentally handicapped people being judged incapable of consent as well.
Relevant to this case is the following piece of law:
"Lack of consent may be demonstrated by:
- The complainant's assertion of force or threats;
- Evidence that by reason of drink, drugs, sleep, age or mental disability the complainant was unaware of what was occurring and/ or incapable of giving valid consent;"
This was the crucial bit of the trial.
In other words, even if the girl replied 'yeah' to a question of whether Ched Evans could join in (which is a matter of debate anyway given the conflicting testimony of the 2 men) the jury found that the complainant was not sufficiently aware of what was happening and / or incapable of giving valid consent.
This point is not the same as 'drunken consent' which the court specifically stated in summing up and direction of the jury is valid consent.
So the jury found that the girl was actually incapable of giving consent, not drunk, incapable.
The did this based on quite a lot of evidence:
- medical evidence (toxicology reports showing blood alcohol levels and a mixture of drugs)
- CCTV footage (several pieces including one that apparently shows her lying face down motionless for some time, on the floor)
- the evidence of witnesses including the night clerk who stated that he was worried enough about her state that he went to check up on her
- evidence of the men themselves - for example, one of them, actually asked the night clerk to keep an eye on her and stated that she was ill when he left the hotel
- evidence of the girl in question who stated categorically that she had no memory of the night at all (which is, at least to some extent born out by her initial reports to the police before she (a) knew anything of the rape and (b) before she knew who the men involved were. Under extensive and fairly hostile cross examination, the court believed her (and, in fact, even Evans' own medical expert said that it was possible that she had genuinely no memory at all of events)
Now all of this was put together with a general feeling in the court that Evans was lying. Why? Well because his testimony was inconsistent with the other bloke, he lied to the desk clerk to get a key to the room, he left through a fire escape and so on.
So why wasn't the other bloke convicted? Well this comes down to the first part of what I said (in my view) about consent and also the reasonable expectation of consent. Although the court didn't believe (and the police didn't hence the charge) that she consented while in the hotel (because she couldn't at that stage), the jury believed there to be some doubt as she had specifically agreed to go back to the hotel with the first man.
Now there would be a number of women that would violently disagree with me on this, and a woman has the right to say no until the last moment etc, but I think that if a woman has agreed to go back to a hotel with a man she has just met, there would at least in my mind, be a reasonable expectation that she had agreed to have sex, and as such, consent in the hotel (even if by that point she wasn't in a fit state to give it so by itself it wouldn't count) could be assumed to at least a reasonable doubt level.
That is not the case with Evans though. She hadn't agreed anything with him beforehand and that was what made it so different.
Edited to add the following explanation from the CPS - apologies for the length, but it's nothing compared to the length of this discussion:
In R v Bree [2007] EWCA 256, the Court of Appeal explored the issue of capacity and consent, stating that, if, through drink, or for any other reason, a complainant had temporarily lost her capacity to choose whether to have sexual intercourse, she was not consenting, and subject to the defendant's state of mind, if intercourse took place, that would be rape. However, where a complainant had voluntarily consumed substantial quantities of alcohol, but nevertheless remained capable of choosing whether to have intercourse, and agreed to do so, that would not be rape. Further, they identified that capacity to consent may evaporate well before a complainant becomes unconscious. Whether this is so or not, however, depends on the facts of the case.
In cases similar to Bree, prosecutors should carefully consider whether the complainant has the capacity to consent, and ensure that the instructed advocate presents the Crown's case on this basis and, if necessary, reminds the trial judge of the need to assist the jury with the meaning of capacity.
Prosecutors and investigators should consider whether supporting evidence is available to demonstrate that the complainant was so intoxicated that he/she had lost their capacity to consent. For example, evidence from friends, taxi drivers and forensic physicians describing the complainant's intoxicated state may support the prosecution case. In addition, it may be possible to obtain expert evidence in respect of the effects of alcohol/drugs and the effects if they are taken together. Consideration should be given to obtaining an expert's back calculation or the opinion of an expert in human pharmacology in relation to the complainant's level of alcohol/ drugs at the time of the incident.
[Post edited 9 Jan 2015 18:57]
|
Thank you LondonLisa2001 - I now understand why Evans was found guilty and the time you took to post this is much appreciated by me.
She was drunk - she may or may not have consented to have sex with Donaldson (Donaldson gets off because of reasonable doubt). Evans appears out of nowhere by lying about the key to the room. Evans finds her asleep/incapacitated (jury finds this beyond reasonable doubt) - but still decides to have sex with her. Even if she had agreed to a three-way before hand (no evidence to suggest that she had) - Evans would still have been found guilty of rape - because all the evidence (beyond reasonable doubt) led to the jury to conclude that she was incapacitated/asleep at the time - so under the law she could not give consent.
I now understand why the lady on Question Time last night was wrong. She had a problem with convicting 'drunk men, having drunken sex with drunken women'. However the jury concluded that it was not beyond reasonable doubt whether Donaldson had raped her - hence Donaldson/her could fall into the category of the drunk man, having drunken sex with a drunk woman.
However with Evans - given he appeared out of nowhere (getting into the room with key - which he had lied about to obtain from the hotel desk) he is not going to fall into this category (drunk man, having drunken sex with drunken woman) - because she is not even aware of his presence (as jury determine beyond reasonable doubt that she is incapacitated/asleep). Also not sure whether Evans was actually drunk at the time.
PS Strange that Evans girlfriend sticks by him - after admitting he was on for a three way guilty or not. Each to their own. | | | |
| Ched Evans to Oldham Athletic on 23:45 - Jan 9 with 1655 views | Nookiejack |
| Ched Evans to Oldham Athletic on 23:40 - Jan 9 by Nookiejack |
Thank you LondonLisa2001 - I now understand why Evans was found guilty and the time you took to post this is much appreciated by me.
She was drunk - she may or may not have consented to have sex with Donaldson (Donaldson gets off because of reasonable doubt). Evans appears out of nowhere by lying about the key to the room. Evans finds her asleep/incapacitated (jury finds this beyond reasonable doubt) - but still decides to have sex with her. Even if she had agreed to a three-way before hand (no evidence to suggest that she had) - Evans would still have been found guilty of rape - because all the evidence (beyond reasonable doubt) led to the jury to conclude that she was incapacitated/asleep at the time - so under the law she could not give consent.
I now understand why the lady on Question Time last night was wrong. She had a problem with convicting 'drunk men, having drunken sex with drunken women'. However the jury concluded that it was not beyond reasonable doubt whether Donaldson had raped her - hence Donaldson/her could fall into the category of the drunk man, having drunken sex with a drunk woman.
However with Evans - given he appeared out of nowhere (getting into the room with key - which he had lied about to obtain from the hotel desk) he is not going to fall into this category (drunk man, having drunken sex with drunken woman) - because she is not even aware of his presence (as jury determine beyond reasonable doubt that she is incapacitated/asleep). Also not sure whether Evans was actually drunk at the time.
PS Strange that Evans girlfriend sticks by him - after admitting he was on for a three way guilty or not. Each to their own. |
Apologies 'McDonald' not 'Donaldson' | | | |
| Ched Evans to Oldham Athletic on 23:55 - Jan 9 with 1639 views | perchrockjack |
So clearly Evans is a victim for dome on here.
No need for a trial then if it's only a woman involved..
It's getting worse on here
utter filth utter sexism, truly worrying we still have these attitudes | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Ched Evans to Oldham Athletic on 00:09 - Jan 10 with 1631 views | WarwickHunt |
| Ched Evans to Oldham Athletic on 23:55 - Jan 9 by perchrockjack |
So clearly Evans is a victim for dome on here.
No need for a trial then if it's only a woman involved..
It's getting worse on here
utter filth utter sexism, truly worrying we still have these attitudes |
You appear to be confusing sexism with proof beyond reasonable doubt. |  | | |
| Ched Evans to Oldham Athletic on 00:16 - Jan 10 with 1619 views | perchrockjack |
No Phil. That s your impression.
You re not always right, I'm not.
My references are in regard to the defences put up by people who have no knowledge of the case apart from what they believe to be true.
If you follow the drift, you ll see much your wife would recoil at.
Men as trustworthy as women.?look around you .
Im glad I'm decided to try to rid myself of this fetid poison masquerading as debate .its been sinking fast really.
I'm almost there and a few more threads will do the trick.
And a happy new year | |
| |
| Ched Evans to Oldham Athletic on 00:22 - Jan 10 with 1609 views | BobJack |
| Ched Evans to Oldham Athletic on 00:16 - Jan 10 by perchrockjack |
No Phil. That s your impression.
You re not always right, I'm not.
My references are in regard to the defences put up by people who have no knowledge of the case apart from what they believe to be true.
If you follow the drift, you ll see much your wife would recoil at.
Men as trustworthy as women.?look around you .
Im glad I'm decided to try to rid myself of this fetid poison masquerading as debate .its been sinking fast really.
I'm almost there and a few more threads will do the trick.
And a happy new year |
You have mentioned his wife, when someone mentioned your wife a few weeks back you took great offence.
whats the difference? Why make it personal ? | |
| |
| Ched Evans to Oldham Athletic on 00:28 - Jan 10 with 1598 views | WarwickHunt |
| Ched Evans to Oldham Athletic on 00:16 - Jan 10 by perchrockjack |
No Phil. That s your impression.
You re not always right, I'm not.
My references are in regard to the defences put up by people who have no knowledge of the case apart from what they believe to be true.
If you follow the drift, you ll see much your wife would recoil at.
Men as trustworthy as women.?look around you .
Im glad I'm decided to try to rid myself of this fetid poison masquerading as debate .its been sinking fast really.
I'm almost there and a few more threads will do the trick.
And a happy new year |
If you read the judge's summary dispassionately, it's pretty difficult not to see reasonable doubt.
Leave morals and stereotypes out of it and look at what's in the public domain. You may be privy to other information but from what I've read it seems far from conclusive. | | | |
| Ched Evans to Oldham Athletic on 00:38 - Jan 10 with 1591 views | SkewenJack |
Perchrockjack has been absolutely abhorrent in his contribution to this thread, and the other one and am glad he has decided to stop posting on it.
As for the poster above, absolutely. I'm amazed at the amount of people here who see this as a straight forward case, I fear that it is down to bigotry and media hype and almost a case of wanting it to be true rather than looking at the case itself. | | | |
| Ched Evans to Oldham Athletic on 08:45 - Jan 10 with 1535 views | trampie |
| Ched Evans to Oldham Athletic on 00:38 - Jan 10 by SkewenJack |
Perchrockjack has been absolutely abhorrent in his contribution to this thread, and the other one and am glad he has decided to stop posting on it.
As for the poster above, absolutely. I'm amazed at the amount of people here who see this as a straight forward case, I fear that it is down to bigotry and media hype and almost a case of wanting it to be true rather than looking at the case itself. |
Im glad also 'Perchrockjack' has stopped posting on this subject as he go's off topic making abhorrent contributions like you point out, apart from his experience of the justice system getting it wrong (on another thread on the topic) that is. | |
| |
| Ched Evans to Oldham Athletic on 09:08 - Jan 10 with 1526 views | trampie |
| Ched Evans to Oldham Athletic on 08:45 - Jan 10 by trampie |
Im glad also 'Perchrockjack' has stopped posting on this subject as he go's off topic making abhorrent contributions like you point out, apart from his experience of the justice system getting it wrong (on another thread on the topic) that is. |
Looks like Harry Redknapp and Steve Bruce have had some say on the subject and its interesting what they have to say. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
