| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! 11:12 - Jan 8 with 26931 views | ApeShit |
According to SSN. |  | | |  |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 15:21 - Jan 8 with 1881 views | Parlay |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 15:19 - Jan 8 by londonlisa2001 |
yes - I will not respond any more as I think you are correct. |
Another conveniently timed cut and run.
How predictable. |  |
| |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 15:23 - Jan 8 with 1868 views | Shaky |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 15:11 - Jan 8 by Parlay |
What an absolutely terrifying thought process. Proving innocence should never have to be done - ever. Proving no guilt however is done by simply stating there is no evidence.
Otherwise i accuse anybody of age that they killed Kennedy, i have no evidence other than my assumption you can not prove you didn't. Life imprisonment please.
All I have asked for is the proof that categorically states that Ched raped the girl, in a situation where no person accused the other of rape who where present and nobody denies that permission was granted.
Simple question - yet obviously, a difficult answer.
That is why this case is not like others. [Post edited 8 Jan 2015 15:13]
|
Quite right, Parley, the very notion of requiring people to prove their innocence is an affront to basic human rights, but is nevertheless worryingly symptomatic of the strong totalitarian strands running through this aherm "debate". [Post edited 8 Jan 2015 15:37]
|  |
| |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 15:25 - Jan 8 with 1862 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 15:23 - Jan 8 by Shaky |
Quite right, Parley, the very notion of requiring people to prove their innocence is an affront to basic human rights, but is nevertheless worryingly symptomatic of the strong totalitarian strands running through this aherm "debate". [Post edited 8 Jan 2015 15:37]
|
that's what we could do with at the Liberty. Some strong totalitarian stands. Hopefully with some strong totalitarian hospitality boxes as well. |  | | |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 15:37 - Jan 8 with 1826 views | reddythered |
So basically Ched shouldn't have to prove his innocence some enlightened people say.
I'd humbly suggests that logic would indicate, having appealed against being found guilty, that's precisely what should happen.7 | |
| |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 15:40 - Jan 8 with 1835 views | Shaky |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 15:25 - Jan 8 by londonlisa2001 |
that's what we could do with at the Liberty. Some strong totalitarian stands. Hopefully with some strong totalitarian hospitality boxes as well. |
So what's your view on the Barrow wife battery case, Lisa?
Certainly not a mild case in my view, but what do you think? Should he be allowed to play for the club?
Anybody else? Anybody? | |
| |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 15:43 - Jan 8 with 1830 views | Parlay |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 15:37 - Jan 8 by reddythered |
So basically Ched shouldn't have to prove his innocence some enlightened people say.
I'd humbly suggests that logic would indicate, having appealed against being found guilty, that's precisely what should happen.7 |
So by that theory we take it that in the notes somewhere proves his guilt?
Can you tell us which part please? | |
| |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 15:43 - Jan 8 with 1830 views | SkipTheJack |
People like to jump on bandwagons.
I'm not for or against Ched Evans being given another chance in football, but I just feel that there are a lot of people who join any campaign being whipped up by the press, without giving the matter any thought.
He may as well give up trying to get a contract now because the protests are going to follow him to whichever club he speaks with.
Meanwhile the Plymouth goalkeeper (who's name I forget) continues to earn a living in the game because the press haven't instructed the brainwashed masses to get outraged over his crime. |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 15:48 - Jan 8 with 1816 views | controversial_jack |
Mob rule wins the day again! Where's my pitchfork? | | | |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 15:50 - Jan 8 with 1807 views | ItchySphincter |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 13:39 - Jan 8 by Parlay |
No, again don't stoop to embellishment.
Mild is a term as to what warrants the sentence not that rape is mild. Nobody used the word mild to suggest it was ok, or wasnt much or wasnt bad. Again its a cheap way out of actually addressing the valid point of the opposing view without actually having to give valid reasoning yourself.
A line Ched chucked out too? There is no "too". There was a quote of what ched said and an explanation of what he clearly meant. To then attribute that opinion to the poster explaining it is an abhorrent tactic to again discredit the opposing view without having to tackle it.
Ive not seen one person say that the girl engineered the situation.
"The nature of the crime is that only the participants know for sure"
Very interesting line that. Both men say consent was given and the woman says she cant remember if she granted it or not.
Does that sound like beyond reasonable doubt to you?
Me neither. |
Reaching. |  |
| |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 15:54 - Jan 8 with 1786 views | ItchySphincter |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 14:11 - Jan 8 by Starsky |
"You're" |
Dimi and Shaky's lack of debating skills and massively inflated egos always leave them with the 'you're too stupid to understand' excuse when they've got nothing left.
I wouldn't bother if I was you Starsks. [Post edited 8 Jan 2015 15:55]
| |
| |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 16:03 - Jan 8 with 1755 views | ItchySphincter |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 14:17 - Jan 8 by Parlay |
Oh no, not spellcheck posts already?!
that can only mean one thing...
Isn't it funny that over 18 pages of this outrage at anyone suggesting the case sounds weak not one person has had the ability to state why.
Would be easy id have thought. |
That's another line of bullsh!t from you unfortunately - amazing that you have such strong opinions on a case you claim to have taken little interest in. 18 pages was mostly you arguing with all and sundry and generally nailing your colours to the 'she's a bit of slag' mast with nothing but your opinion to back it up.
My point was that he's a convicted rapist until proven otherwise so I think it's you that has trouble grasping simple concept.
Don't even bother coming back with a load of waffle about how there's no proof only circumstantial evidence, etc as we've already done that and if you do you are clearly missing the very simple point, again. | |
| |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 16:05 - Jan 8 with 1742 views | Parlay |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 15:50 - Jan 8 by ItchySphincter |
Reaching. |
A one word cut and run, how novel. | |
| |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 16:06 - Jan 8 with 1741 views | ItchySphincter |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 15:21 - Jan 8 by Darran |
I'm 100% correct he's renowned for doing it. |
I think he actually believes on this occassion that he is vastly intellectually superior to everyone else Shaky's not far behind - cut from the same cloth they.
I feel sorry for their families. | |
| |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 16:08 - Jan 8 with 1734 views | Parlay |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 16:03 - Jan 8 by ItchySphincter |
That's another line of bullsh!t from you unfortunately - amazing that you have such strong opinions on a case you claim to have taken little interest in. 18 pages was mostly you arguing with all and sundry and generally nailing your colours to the 'she's a bit of slag' mast with nothing but your opinion to back it up.
My point was that he's a convicted rapist until proven otherwise so I think it's you that has trouble grasping simple concept.
Don't even bother coming back with a load of waffle about how there's no proof only circumstantial evidence, etc as we've already done that and if you do you are clearly missing the very simple point, again. |
What a load of tosh!
"She is a bit of a slag"?! What in the world are you talking about. If you cannot respond to my point, that is one things, to completely lie is another. For shame.
We havent done anything to death, in fact we have barely scratched the surface. The debate is ready to start as soon as someone tells us why he clearly raped the girl.
As of yet we have nothing but defensive murmurings and excuses as to why you cant give an answer.
Now take a breath, and try and put something constructive together as to why Ched Evans is guily and then the next part as to why he should break the mould and not be allowed back in his profession that required no CRB.
Ta. | |
| |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 16:10 - Jan 8 with 1729 views | reddythered |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 15:43 - Jan 8 by Parlay |
So by that theory we take it that in the notes somewhere proves his guilt?
Can you tell us which part please? |
Read all the court transcripts for yourself.
After all, I wouldn't want to confuse your trolling by only citing partial evidence as you did with the tweets. | |
| |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 16:14 - Jan 8 with 1707 views | reddythered |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 16:08 - Jan 8 by Parlay |
What a load of tosh!
"She is a bit of a slag"?! What in the world are you talking about. If you cannot respond to my point, that is one things, to completely lie is another. For shame.
We havent done anything to death, in fact we have barely scratched the surface. The debate is ready to start as soon as someone tells us why he clearly raped the girl.
As of yet we have nothing but defensive murmurings and excuses as to why you cant give an answer.
Now take a breath, and try and put something constructive together as to why Ched Evans is guily and then the next part as to why he should break the mould and not be allowed back in his profession that required no CRB.
Ta. |
Evans may or may not need a CRB check.
http://www.thefa.com/news/governance/safeguarding/2011/jun/crbfaq230709
As he'd be working in a football league club, the advice was "Contact the Child Protection Officer or contact 0845 210 8080 or e-mail FAChecks@TheFA.com for advice ". | |
| |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 16:15 - Jan 8 with 1701 views | Parlay |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 16:10 - Jan 8 by reddythered |
Read all the court transcripts for yourself.
After all, I wouldn't want to confuse your trolling by only citing partial evidence as you did with the tweets. |
Ah great so trolling is now wanting to have proof to be convicted. Britain, the troll nation. Interesting concept.
Isn't it funny that nobody can give any information at all, apart from the "read it yourself" cheap escape.
I am asking for your opinion. Assuming you have read the notes, what proof suggests Ched certainly raped the woman.
Now you cant get out of it by saying that i should read them because even if i did i wouldn't know your opinion on which part suggests he certainly did it.
Do your best. | |
| |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 16:21 - Jan 8 with 1672 views | reddythered |
So you don't want to read them and make the effort to educate yourself over a superficial view.
That's entirely your privilege; people can decide from themselves how valid that makes your opinion.
After all, your opinion is based on either of two scenarios :-
1) "I'm convinced I'm right and don't need to educate myself on the case"
or
2) "I'm awaiting people to convince me by giving me a few selective elements"
EDIT:
Now you can't wriggle out of it.
You're claiming the evidence didn't support a conviction, a view undermined by both the original jury and an appeal.
To proclaim a contrary view, the onus is thus on you to provide the evidence Ched is in fact innocent. After all, that's what his new appeal would seek to do so it should be relative easy for you to educate us all given the "flimsy evidence". [Post edited 8 Jan 2015 16:24]
| |
| |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 16:26 - Jan 8 with 1656 views | Parlay |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 16:21 - Jan 8 by reddythered |
So you don't want to read them and make the effort to educate yourself over a superficial view.
That's entirely your privilege; people can decide from themselves how valid that makes your opinion.
After all, your opinion is based on either of two scenarios :-
1) "I'm convinced I'm right and don't need to educate myself on the case"
or
2) "I'm awaiting people to convince me by giving me a few selective elements"
EDIT:
Now you can't wriggle out of it.
You're claiming the evidence didn't support a conviction, a view undermined by both the original jury and an appeal.
To proclaim a contrary view, the onus is thus on you to provide the evidence Ched is in fact innocent. After all, that's what his new appeal would seek to do so it should be relative easy for you to educate us all given the "flimsy evidence". [Post edited 8 Jan 2015 16:24]
|
I see you have completely ignored me asking for your view on what evidence proves he certainly did it. Wonder why....
My view point has been clear from post one. I am not overly familiar with the case, i have not read every single detail (simply because I don't like reading) but from what I do know, the case looks majorly weak. I have been told about the case now by people claiming to have read it, and it looks even more weak.
So there is no right or wrong. There is simply a case of "from what I know" the case looks weak, and nobody upon nobody has even attempted to say why this isnt the case.
Now I ask again (and expect it to be overlooked again) - what, in your opinion, is the compelling evidence that shows Evans clearly raped the girl. You know, the one that didnt accuse him of raping her.
Now an answer would be nice.
Ta | |
| |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 16:27 - Jan 8 with 1655 views | dameedna |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 16:06 - Jan 8 by ItchySphincter |
I think he actually believes on this occassion that he is vastly intellectually superior to everyone else Shaky's not far behind - cut from the same cloth they.
I feel sorry for their families. |
There are a number of contributions here that indicate there is another side to the story. Hounding the 2 who can be bothered to hold a line of reasoning in front pf the pitchfork brigade is of little benefit. He is a convicted rapist but what is the real difference between this crime and other crimes? Public outrage? It is an intellectual subject and not one to belittle or start playground tactics such as quips (not you) about playing ball with the dim witted big boys. |  | | |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 16:29 - Jan 8 with 1647 views | reddythered |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 16:26 - Jan 8 by Parlay |
I see you have completely ignored me asking for your view on what evidence proves he certainly did it. Wonder why....
My view point has been clear from post one. I am not overly familiar with the case, i have not read every single detail (simply because I don't like reading) but from what I do know, the case looks majorly weak. I have been told about the case now by people claiming to have read it, and it looks even more weak.
So there is no right or wrong. There is simply a case of "from what I know" the case looks weak, and nobody upon nobody has even attempted to say why this isnt the case.
Now I ask again (and expect it to be overlooked again) - what, in your opinion, is the compelling evidence that shows Evans clearly raped the girl. You know, the one that didnt accuse him of raping her.
Now an answer would be nice.
Ta |
"From what I know", which by your own admittance is incredibly weak.
Your inability to want to read is entirely up to you; relying on other people's cliff notes is silly because then you're accepting people's subjective biases.
Do your own research, read the transcripts then you can read all of the privided evidence and make your own mind up without having been swayed by anybody ese.
Do your best.
KK.
Thx.
Bai. | |
| |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 16:33 - Jan 8 with 1638 views | Parlay |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 16:27 - Jan 8 by dameedna |
There are a number of contributions here that indicate there is another side to the story. Hounding the 2 who can be bothered to hold a line of reasoning in front pf the pitchfork brigade is of little benefit. He is a convicted rapist but what is the real difference between this crime and other crimes? Public outrage? It is an intellectual subject and not one to belittle or start playground tactics such as quips (not you) about playing ball with the dim witted big boys. |
Hats off to that man.
Its a little odd that only one side of the fence is willing to put forward a constructed view. The other seems to be hiding behind "a jury said he was guilty" and "read it yourself" and "hes a convicted rapist".
Basically any soundbite that gets them out of posting an answer to the direct and challenging question - where is the proof showing that he certainly raped her.
This is a case where the woman has not accused Ched of rape, nobody who was physically there has said anybody raped anybody, everybody who was there (that can remember) says consent was given and NOBODY who was there says consent wasn't given.
So we are left with a case where someone who wasn't there, decides to contradict every single person who was there and convict a man on this basis.
I think it is more than fair to ask for the evidence which led to this.
Don't you? | |
| |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 16:35 - Jan 8 with 1629 views | Le_Swans |
He went out with the sole purpose to cheat on his girlfriend, otherwise why would his mate have text him "got a bird" and Ched then taking this as a sign to falsely gain entry into the hotel? He was going there for one thing and one thing only, even arranging for his mates to go to the window and try to film it, any reason they sneaked out the fire exit and not the front door? guilt perhaps? Wasn't the cheating as he stated that they often pick up girls. | | | |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 16:35 - Jan 8 with 1627 views | Shaky |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 16:29 - Jan 8 by reddythered |
"From what I know", which by your own admittance is incredibly weak.
Your inability to want to read is entirely up to you; relying on other people's cliff notes is silly because then you're accepting people's subjective biases.
Do your own research, read the transcripts then you can read all of the privided evidence and make your own mind up without having been swayed by anybody ese.
Do your best.
KK.
Thx.
Bai. |
I have read the case notes. At least twice.
There is no smoking gun, no coup de grace piece of damning evidence that automatically convicts Evans beyond any reasonable doubt.
Instead you are just making one of a long string of excuses for your inability to come up with any substantive arguments, typos excluded obviously.
If and when Parley reads the notes for himself and uncovers nothing whatsoever incriminating beyond what he knows of the facts already, you'll just move on to some other lame arsed excuse.
It's f*cking pathetic. [Post edited 8 Jan 2015 16:37]
| |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
