Have just sat and read all 13 pages and all the views. Personally, my view is that he was found guilty, lost his appeal and is now in the position, lucky for him, of having his review of the case fast-tracked.
I disagree about the length of the sentence - we are far too lenient on crimes against the person than I think any civilised society should be. I also disagree about only serving half your sentence, when you have shown no remorse for the crime you have committed. I understand people saying that he won't show remorse when he feels he did not commit the crime but, in my opinion, he should therefore have remained in prison while his case was reviewed.
He, his family, that of his girlfriend and their friends/supporters have treated the victim with complete disdain and in a way which is absolutely disgusting. I would hope that anyone posting comments about her are also pursued by the police, in the same way that they are rightly pursuing those who put out vile trash about Jessica Ennis Hill, Ms Webster, Dave Berry and anyone else.
Whether he likes it, or whether any of us like it, he is in a position of influence to supporters of his club of any age and of each gender. That's shown clearly in some of the trash they have put out backing him. I was speaking with a fan of theirs, who is one of my clients and was shocked at her unequivocal backing for him. This is a middle-aged woman, with a young family, who wouldn't hear a word said against him.
Evans has been shown not to be the brightest spark and had too much time and money to know what to do, other than be a delinquent and, as the conviction still stands, then a serious criminal.
I agree that people leaving prison should be given a chance to rehabilitate themselves. I don't think that means they should become a privileged member of that society though and, yes that does mean that I feel it is wrong that someone can come out and walk into a £20k a week contract. I think the same goes for others such as Hughes, McCormack, King, Grant and that's just a few from football.
I think Sheffield United are wrong to even consider giving him that position of privilege. Sadly, I am sure someone will.
Maybe one day, people will rediscover their moral compass. I really don't think that will be any time soon unfortunately.
Thanks for this. Not the kind of early evening reading I want to get in the habit of.
So he booked the hotel room but not in his name which is clearly not the same thing. Point taken there.
Points 17 and 18 are key for me. The Expert says she shouldn't have suffered memory loss. Judgement has to take place from the jury as to whether the complainant is telling the truth or not. Going on what people have said on here, it would suggest she was unconscious when they had sex. It would appear from this document that she was not (the night porter heard 'them' having sex - does that suggest 'noises' from both complainent and Evans then?)
This whole case eventually hinged on sections 17 and 18 which, in essence, is a 'who do the jury think is telling the truth?' Defendent or complainent?
Personally I expected that a read of this link would clarify exactly why he was guilty hook line and sinker.
It has actually thrown up more doubt than clarity for me.
Despite all the 'hard facts' quoted here, the transcript seems to hinge substantially on one word v another.
With that being the case, I can't see him ever admitting guilt if he insists his word is true.
Likewise I can't see him ever appealing successfully as I struggle to see how any other evidence can come to light that gets around the on word versus another conundrum.
The difference between mcormack and evans is huge, the death of two kids is the worse ending result of an action that could ever happen
Luke mcormack made a decision to drink then drive, and kids died
In would want to kill him with my bare hands
But greenie Jr if you imagine that your son made an error of judgement with regards drink driving
Would you forgive him even if the result ended the same way
It was an error of judgement
Now raping someone is not an error of judgement, it's not a mistake it's a calculated decision a choice
Now I reckon there is every chance that you or I could have found ourselves in luke mcormacks position but zero chance you or I could end up like Ched evans
I understand what you're saying and agree with it but in his mind, he done nothing wrong.
What I don't understand is that, if I'm correct, her argument was that she was too drink to consent. How did she consent with the other guy then? IMO there's too many holes in the case to fully say he's guilty.
Why would his father in law defend him? There must be something that the public don't know.
Although I do think that if after the appeal he's still found guilty then he's scum and doesn't deserve anything good in life. There is just something telling me that he's not guilty.
She went to the room with the other bloke, Ched had to break in.
What part of the evidence said he broke the door down / broke in? The people on this site from both sides of the argument making up their own evidence is laughable here.
Charlton Life has more wannabe Ally Mcbeals than the Old Bailey.
When did I say he broke a door down? Who's inventing stuff here.
Evans had to lie to obtain a key to the room, I'd call that breaking in.
I am actually being serious when I say I would like to see a transcript of the evidence as I am interested to see this.
I wasnt aware he lied to get the key.
According to the link I have, Evans booked the hotel room!
So if I had booked a hotel room in someone else's name that gives me the right to obtain a key and burst in on them and subsequently rape one if them. Right oh.
Thanks for this. Not the kind of early evening reading I want to get in the habit of.
So he booked the hotel room but not in his name which is clearly not the same thing. Point taken there.
Points 17 and 18 are key for me. The Expert says she shouldn't have suffered memory loss. Judgement has to take place from the jury as to whether the complainant is telling the truth or not. Going on what people have said on here, it would suggest she was unconscious when they had sex. It would appear from this document that she was not (the night porter heard 'them' having sex - does that suggest 'noises' from both complainent and Evans then?)
This whole case eventually hinged on sections 17 and 18 which, in essence, is a 'who do the jury think is telling the truth?' Defendent or complainent?
Personally I expected that a read of this link would clarify exactly why he was guilty hook line and sinker.
It has actually thrown up more doubt than clarity for me.
Despite all the 'hard facts' quoted here, the transcript seems to hinge substantially on one word v another.
With that being the case, I can't see him ever admitting guilt if he insists his word is true.
Likewise I can't see him ever appealing successfully as I struggle to see how any other evidence can come to light that gets around the on word versus another conundrum.
At the end of the day a jury of your peers decided that there was enough evidence that he committed rape beyond reasonable doubt. Just accept it, he's a dirty, scumbag rapist.
The difference between mcormack and evans is huge, the death of two kids is the worse ending result of an action that could ever happen
Luke mcormack made a decision to drink then drive, and kids died
In would want to kill him with my bare hands
But greenie Jr if you imagine that your son made an error of judgement with regards drink driving
Would you forgive him even if the result ended the same way
It was an error of judgement
Now raping someone is not an error of judgement, it's not a mistake it's a calculated decision a choice
Now I reckon there is every chance that you or I could have found ourselves in luke mcormacks position but zero chance you or I could end up like Ched evans
I understand what you're saying and agree with it but in his mind, he done nothing wrong.
What I don't understand is that, if I'm correct, her argument was that she was too drink to consent. How did she consent with the other guy then? IMO there's too many holes in the case to fully say he's guilty.
Why would his father in law defend him? There must be something that the public don't know.
Although I do think that if after the appeal he's still found guilty then he's scum and doesn't deserve anything good in life. There is just something telling me that he's not guilty.
She went to the room with the other bloke, Ched had to break in.
What part of the evidence said he broke the door down / broke in? The people on this site from both sides of the argument making up their own evidence is laughable here.
Charlton Life has more wannabe Ally Mcbeals than the Old Bailey.
When did I say he broke a door down? Who's inventing stuff here.
Evans had to lie to obtain a key to the room, I'd call that breaking in.
I am actually being serious when I say I would like to see a transcript of the evidence as I am interested to see this.
I wasnt aware he lied to get the key.
According to the link I have, Evans booked the hotel room!
So if I had booked a hotel room in someone else's name that gives me the right to obtain a key and burst in on them and subsequently rape one if them. Right oh.
Didn't say that did I? No need to accuse me of condoning rape.
As for the jury of peers comment, like many here I have been on jury service.
And like any walk of life it was made up of decent honest people.
And some of the dodgiest chavs I have ever met.
I personally would be happier if a jury were made up of people selected from a permanent panel that were properly vetted and given an element of legal training.
I felt woefully under prepared and it scared me that I was responsible for somebody's future.
I am allowed to read the case notes and have some questions in my mind without being a sympathiser to a rapist.
Having doubts doesn't mean I think he is innocent.
The difference between mcormack and evans is huge, the death of two kids is the worse ending result of an action that could ever happen
Luke mcormack made a decision to drink then drive, and kids died
In would want to kill him with my bare hands
But greenie Jr if you imagine that your son made an error of judgement with regards drink driving
Would you forgive him even if the result ended the same way
It was an error of judgement
Now raping someone is not an error of judgement, it's not a mistake it's a calculated decision a choice
Now I reckon there is every chance that you or I could have found ourselves in luke mcormacks position but zero chance you or I could end up like Ched evans
I understand what you're saying and agree with it but in his mind, he done nothing wrong.
What I don't understand is that, if I'm correct, her argument was that she was too drink to consent. How did she consent with the other guy then? IMO there's too many holes in the case to fully say he's guilty.
Why would his father in law defend him? There must be something that the public don't know.
Although I do think that if after the appeal he's still found guilty then he's scum and doesn't deserve anything good in life. There is just something telling me that he's not guilty.
She went to the room with the other bloke, Ched had to break in.
What part of the evidence said he broke the door down / broke in? The people on this site from both sides of the argument making up their own evidence is laughable here.
Charlton Life has more wannabe Ally Mcbeals than the Old Bailey.
Like I already said. Read Grapevine49. She was not capable of giving consent. It was therefore rape.
How did she go from walking into the room to passing out stone cold? Were they drinking in the room?
And is there a transcript and full record of the evidence because so many people are quoting what happened and I don't know where it is coming from.
Quite recently I finished a night's drinking, got on the tube for a few stops, got off, walked half an hour home, then got into my flat and passed out on the floor I didn't have a drink on the way home. Alcohol affects different people at different times and you can't predict how someone will act on it. Someone remembering to grab pizza out of their car is hardly evidence they weren't raped
The difference between mcormack and evans is huge, the death of two kids is the worse ending result of an action that could ever happen
Luke mcormack made a decision to drink then drive, and kids died
In would want to kill him with my bare hands
But greenie Jr if you imagine that your son made an error of judgement with regards drink driving
Would you forgive him even if the result ended the same way
It was an error of judgement
Now raping someone is not an error of judgement, it's not a mistake it's a calculated decision a choice
Now I reckon there is every chance that you or I could have found ourselves in luke mcormacks position but zero chance you or I could end up like Ched evans
I understand what you're saying and agree with it but in his mind, he done nothing wrong.
What I don't understand is that, if I'm correct, her argument was that she was too drink to consent. How did she consent with the other guy then? IMO there's too many holes in the case to fully say he's guilty.
Why would his father in law defend him? There must be something that the public don't know.
Although I do think that if after the appeal he's still found guilty then he's scum and doesn't deserve anything good in life. There is just something telling me that he's not guilty.
She went to the room with the other bloke, Ched had to break in.
What part of the evidence said he broke the door down / broke in? The people on this site from both sides of the argument making up their own evidence is laughable here.
Charlton Life has more wannabe Ally Mcbeals than the Old Bailey.
Like I already said. Read Grapevine49. She was not capable of giving consent. It was therefore rape.
How did she go from walking into the room to passing out stone cold? Were they drinking in the room?
And is there a transcript and full record of the evidence because so many people are quoting what happened and I don't know where it is coming from.
Quite recently I finished a night's drinking, got on the tube for a few stops, got off, walked half an hour home, then got into my flat and passed out on the floor I didn't have a drink on the way home. Alcohol affects different people at different times and you can't predict how someone will act on it. Someone remembering to grab pizza out of their car is hardly evidence they weren't raped
Of course it's not evidence they were not raped.
But likewise, it appears from reading the case notes that we are not talking somebody who was passed out on the floor and as such the case hinged on clarity of mind rather than out and out consciousness so its not relevant anyhow.
I also don't drink so can't even speak from experience.
I think all of us have to be very careful about conclusions from court reports, other than a complete transcript of the hearing and evidence. My own experience is as a juror, I was on a case, which was reported in the press. Reading the report did not match the facts of the case. In addition, there are nuances of the law that we do not understand or are aware of. In a separate case, my inclination as a juror was to find the co defendant not guilty, however the letter of the law was that although he did not commit the specific crime, because he was there and associated with the crime he was guilty.
Taking conclusions without full knowledge of the case and evdence as presented minute by minute second by second is very dangerous.
The difference between mcormack and evans is huge, the death of two kids is the worse ending result of an action that could ever happen
Luke mcormack made a decision to drink then drive, and kids died
In would want to kill him with my bare hands
But greenie Jr if you imagine that your son made an error of judgement with regards drink driving
Would you forgive him even if the result ended the same way
It was an error of judgement
Now raping someone is not an error of judgement, it's not a mistake it's a calculated decision a choice
Now I reckon there is every chance that you or I could have found ourselves in luke mcormacks position but zero chance you or I could end up like Ched evans
I understand what you're saying and agree with it but in his mind, he done nothing wrong.
What I don't understand is that, if I'm correct, her argument was that she was too drink to consent. How did she consent with the other guy then? IMO there's too many holes in the case to fully say he's guilty.
Why would his father in law defend him? There must be something that the public don't know.
Although I do think that if after the appeal he's still found guilty then he's scum and doesn't deserve anything good in life. There is just something telling me that he's not guilty.
Using your approach to truth finding, we can confirm that the Roswell incident definitely did occur, and Magneto probably was somehow involved in the JFK assassination.
The difference between mcormack and evans is huge, the death of two kids is the worse ending result of an action that could ever happen
Luke mcormack made a decision to drink then drive, and kids died
In would want to kill him with my bare hands
But greenie Jr if you imagine that your son made an error of judgement with regards drink driving
Would you forgive him even if the result ended the same way
It was an error of judgement
Now raping someone is not an error of judgement, it's not a mistake it's a calculated decision a choice
Now I reckon there is every chance that you or I could have found ourselves in luke mcormacks position but zero chance you or I could end up like Ched evans
I understand what you're saying and agree with it but in his mind, he done nothing wrong.
What I don't understand is that, if I'm correct, her argument was that she was too drink to consent. How did she consent with the other guy then? IMO there's too many holes in the case to fully say he's guilty.
Why would his father in law defend him? There must be something that the public don't know.
Although I do think that if after the appeal he's still found guilty then he's scum and doesn't deserve anything good in life. There is just something telling me that he's not guilty.
She went to the room with the other bloke, Ched had to break in.
What part of the evidence said he broke the door down / broke in? The people on this site from both sides of the argument making up their own evidence is laughable here.
Charlton Life has more wannabe Ally Mcbeals than the Old Bailey.
When did I say he broke a door down? Who's inventing stuff here.
Evans had to lie to obtain a key to the room, I'd call that breaking in.
I am actually being serious when I say I would like to see a transcript of the evidence as I am interested to see this.
I wasnt aware he lied to get the key.
According to the link I have, Evans booked the hotel room!
And yet you blithely continue to insinuate that the conviction is unsafe and the victim potentially fully responsible for the incident. There's probably a f***ton of information you're not aware of, unless you were on the jury, which is why these posts, above all others, strike me as irresponsible, and make me feel very, very sad for the girl at the heart of the case
The difference between mcormack and evans is huge, the death of two kids is the worse ending result of an action that could ever happen
Luke mcormack made a decision to drink then drive, and kids died
In would want to kill him with my bare hands
But greenie Jr if you imagine that your son made an error of judgement with regards drink driving
Would you forgive him even if the result ended the same way
It was an error of judgement
Now raping someone is not an error of judgement, it's not a mistake it's a calculated decision a choice
Now I reckon there is every chance that you or I could have found ourselves in luke mcormacks position but zero chance you or I could end up like Ched evans
I understand what you're saying and agree with it but in his mind, he done nothing wrong.
What I don't understand is that, if I'm correct, her argument was that she was too drink to consent. How did she consent with the other guy then? IMO there's too many holes in the case to fully say he's guilty.
Why would his father in law defend him? There must be something that the public don't know.
Although I do think that if after the appeal he's still found guilty then he's scum and doesn't deserve anything good in life. There is just something telling me that he's not guilty.
Agree with this 100 percent. If he is still found guilty after the appeal then there has to be a line drawn but something doesn't add up here.
So even if a conviction does not pass your certainty test, did the first, failed appeal not qualify for this? Did you really accuse everyone else of being Ally McBeal? Maybe you should've watched more Columbo!?
Jesus chair some people seem to be looking for something to be offended over.
I'm not condoning rape. If I had my way and If he's guilty as I've said before, he'd have the death penalty.
But something just doesn't add up
He is guilty. He has been arrested, charged and convicted in a court of law, then had an appeal turned down! It's surely not that difficult to understand?
The difference between mcormack and evans is huge, the death of two kids is the worse ending result of an action that could ever happen
Luke mcormack made a decision to drink then drive, and kids died
In would want to kill him with my bare hands
But greenie Jr if you imagine that your son made an error of judgement with regards drink driving
Would you forgive him even if the result ended the same way
It was an error of judgement
Now raping someone is not an error of judgement, it's not a mistake it's a calculated decision a choice
Now I reckon there is every chance that you or I could have found ourselves in luke mcormacks position but zero chance you or I could end up like Ched evans
I understand what you're saying and agree with it but in his mind, he done nothing wrong.
What I don't understand is that, if I'm correct, her argument was that she was too drink to consent. How did she consent with the other guy then? IMO there's too many holes in the case to fully say he's guilty.
Why would his father in law defend him? There must be something that the public don't know.
Although I do think that if after the appeal he's still found guilty then he's scum and doesn't deserve anything good in life. There is just something telling me that he's not guilty.
She went to the room with the other bloke, Ched had to break in.
What part of the evidence said he broke the door down / broke in? The people on this site from both sides of the argument making up their own evidence is laughable here.
Charlton Life has more wannabe Ally Mcbeals than the Old Bailey.
When did I say he broke a door down? Who's inventing stuff here.
Evans had to lie to obtain a key to the room, I'd call that breaking in.
I am actually being serious when I say I would like to see a transcript of the evidence as I am interested to see this.
I wasnt aware he lied to get the key.
According to the link I have, Evans booked the hotel room!
And yet you blithely continue to insinuate that the conviction is unsafe and the victim potentially fully responsible for the incident. There's probably a f***ton of information you're not aware of, unless you were on the jury, which is why these posts, above all others, strike me as irresponsible, and make me feel very, very sad for the girl at the heart of the case
The difference between mcormack and evans is huge, the death of two kids is the worse ending result of an action that could ever happen
Luke mcormack made a decision to drink then drive, and kids died
In would want to kill him with my bare hands
But greenie Jr if you imagine that your son made an error of judgement with regards drink driving
Would you forgive him even if the result ended the same way
It was an error of judgement
Now raping someone is not an error of judgement, it's not a mistake it's a calculated decision a choice
Now I reckon there is every chance that you or I could have found ourselves in luke mcormacks position but zero chance you or I could end up like Ched evans
I understand what you're saying and agree with it but in his mind, he done nothing wrong.
What I don't understand is that, if I'm correct, her argument was that she was too drink to consent. How did she consent with the other guy then? IMO there's too many holes in the case to fully say he's guilty.
Why would his father in law defend him? There must be something that the public don't know.
Although I do think that if after the appeal he's still found guilty then he's scum and doesn't deserve anything good in life. There is just something telling me that he's not guilty.
Agree with this 100 percent. If he is still found guilty after the appeal then there has to be a line drawn but something doesn't add up here.
So even if a conviction does not pass your certainty test, did the first, failed appeal not qualify for this? Did you really accuse everyone else of being Ally McBeal? Maybe you should've watched more Columbo!?
EDIT: I guess you didn't read the flag rules.
Yes I read the flag rules. Everything you said was fair enough. Except the following:
"and the victim potentially fully responsible for the incident."
I never said that a rape victim was responsible. That is an accusation that I wanted to check through as it is potentially an attack on a victim of crime and if I accused her then I could be in all kinds of trouble. I got my wife to read my posts to double check I am not missing anything as well and she is insisting her husband is not a rape sympathiser.
I genuinely apologise if I have given that impression. I have just read the details of the case and have highlighted areas which which I thought we're hard to read.
The difference between mcormack and evans is huge, the death of two kids is the worse ending result of an action that could ever happen
Luke mcormack made a decision to drink then drive, and kids died
In would want to kill him with my bare hands
But greenie Jr if you imagine that your son made an error of judgement with regards drink driving
Would you forgive him even if the result ended the same way
It was an error of judgement
Now raping someone is not an error of judgement, it's not a mistake it's a calculated decision a choice
Now I reckon there is every chance that you or I could have found ourselves in luke mcormacks position but zero chance you or I could end up like Ched evans
I understand what you're saying and agree with it but in his mind, he done nothing wrong.
What I don't understand is that, if I'm correct, her argument was that she was too drink to consent. How did she consent with the other guy then? IMO there's too many holes in the case to fully say he's guilty.
Why would his father in law defend him? There must be something that the public don't know.
Although I do think that if after the appeal he's still found guilty then he's scum and doesn't deserve anything good in life. There is just something telling me that he's not guilty.
She went to the room with the other bloke, Ched had to break in.
What part of the evidence said he broke the door down / broke in? The people on this site from both sides of the argument making up their own evidence is laughable here.
Charlton Life has more wannabe Ally Mcbeals than the Old Bailey.
When did I say he broke a door down? Who's inventing stuff here.
Evans had to lie to obtain a key to the room, I'd call that breaking in.
I am actually being serious when I say I would like to see a transcript of the evidence as I am interested to see this.
I wasnt aware he lied to get the key.
According to the link I have, Evans booked the hotel room!
And yet you blithely continue to insinuate that the conviction is unsafe and the victim potentially fully responsible for the incident. There's probably a f***ton of information you're not aware of, unless you were on the jury, which is why these posts, above all others, strike me as irresponsible, and make me feel very, very sad for the girl at the heart of the case
The difference between mcormack and evans is huge, the death of two kids is the worse ending result of an action that could ever happen
Luke mcormack made a decision to drink then drive, and kids died
In would want to kill him with my bare hands
But greenie Jr if you imagine that your son made an error of judgement with regards drink driving
Would you forgive him even if the result ended the same way
It was an error of judgement
Now raping someone is not an error of judgement, it's not a mistake it's a calculated decision a choice
Now I reckon there is every chance that you or I could have found ourselves in luke mcormacks position but zero chance you or I could end up like Ched evans
I understand what you're saying and agree with it but in his mind, he done nothing wrong.
What I don't understand is that, if I'm correct, her argument was that she was too drink to consent. How did she consent with the other guy then? IMO there's too many holes in the case to fully say he's guilty.
Why would his father in law defend him? There must be something that the public don't know.
Although I do think that if after the appeal he's still found guilty then he's scum and doesn't deserve anything good in life. There is just something telling me that he's not guilty.
Agree with this 100 percent. If he is still found guilty after the appeal then there has to be a line drawn but something doesn't add up here.
So even if a conviction does not pass your certainty test, did the first, failed appeal not qualify for this? Did you really accuse everyone else of being Ally McBeal? Maybe you should've watched more Columbo!?
EDIT: I guess you didn't read the flag rules.
Yes I read the flag rules. Everything you said was fair enough. Except the following:
"and the victim potentially fully responsible for the incident."
I never said that a rape victim was responsible. That is an accusation that I wanted to check through as it is potentially an attack on a victim of crime and if I accused her then I could be in all kinds of trouble. I got my wife to read my posts to double check I am not missing anything as well and she is insisting her husband is not a rape sympathiser.
I genuinely apologise if I have given that impression. I have just read the details of the case and have highlighted areas which which I thought we're hard to read.
You haven't given that impression, it's making a discussion and you airing your opinion. Unfortunately people like jimmy aren't content unless they find something to dig people out over. In no way did you give the impression you was a rape sympathiser.
It's a shame cos it has been quite a good and controlled discussion on what is a very sensitive subject
When you consider quote 1 and compare it with the definition in 2, I find the definition of Evans as a 'rapist' uneasing:
1. "From the evidence of [the complainant] she appears to have suffered anterior-grade amnesia as a result of the high dose of alcohol which she consumed, and in particular that she consumed a substantial dose of alcohol during the last hour or so prior to leaving the nightclub. It appears from the evidence that her short-term memory was functioning at the time around the incident, but that the long-term record of that memory has been ablated by the high concentration of alcohol. There is, therefore, no memory record of those events and attempts to jog the memory may lead to confabulation. The fact that she has no memory of events does not mean that she was not able to participate in a meaningful way in events at that time, and I am quite clear that this includes the ability to make informed decisions in relation to consent. Acute alcohol intoxication may lead to substantial disinhibition and that may in itself lead to unwise judgments being made. But the fact that she does no longer remember having made a decision is a failure of the memory process and not of the decision-making process. Evidence of memory loss as a result of anterior-grade amnesia does not in itself prove that she lacked the capacity to consent."
2. Rape, noun 1. the unlawful compelling of a person through physical force or duress to have sexual intercourse. 2. any act of sexual intercourse that is forced upon a person.
I think the video footage that his friends have on their phones probably could have cleared their pal, but I would have also thought it be key to convict him of rape
The difference between mcormack and evans is huge, the death of two kids is the worse ending result of an action that could ever happen
Luke mcormack made a decision to drink then drive, and kids died
In would want to kill him with my bare hands
But greenie Jr if you imagine that your son made an error of judgement with regards drink driving
Would you forgive him even if the result ended the same way
It was an error of judgement
Now raping someone is not an error of judgement, it's not a mistake it's a calculated decision a choice
Now I reckon there is every chance that you or I could have found ourselves in luke mcormacks position but zero chance you or I could end up like Ched evans
I understand what you're saying and agree with it but in his mind, he done nothing wrong.
What I don't understand is that, if I'm correct, her argument was that she was too drink to consent. How did she consent with the other guy then? IMO there's too many holes in the case to fully say he's guilty.
Why would his father in law defend him? There must be something that the public don't know.
Although I do think that if after the appeal he's still found guilty then he's scum and doesn't deserve anything good in life. There is just something telling me that he's not guilty.
She went to the room with the other bloke, Ched had to break in.
What part of the evidence said he broke the door down / broke in? The people on this site from both sides of the argument making up their own evidence is laughable here.
Charlton Life has more wannabe Ally Mcbeals than the Old Bailey.
When did I say he broke a door down? Who's inventing stuff here.
Evans had to lie to obtain a key to the room, I'd call that breaking in.
I am actually being serious when I say I would like to see a transcript of the evidence as I am interested to see this.
I wasnt aware he lied to get the key.
According to the link I have, Evans booked the hotel room!
And yet you blithely continue to insinuate that the conviction is unsafe and the victim potentially fully responsible for the incident. There's probably a f***ton of information you're not aware of, unless you were on the jury, which is why these posts, above all others, strike me as irresponsible, and make me feel very, very sad for the girl at the heart of the case
The difference between mcormack and evans is huge, the death of two kids is the worse ending result of an action that could ever happen
Luke mcormack made a decision to drink then drive, and kids died
In would want to kill him with my bare hands
But greenie Jr if you imagine that your son made an error of judgement with regards drink driving
Would you forgive him even if the result ended the same way
It was an error of judgement
Now raping someone is not an error of judgement, it's not a mistake it's a calculated decision a choice
Now I reckon there is every chance that you or I could have found ourselves in luke mcormacks position but zero chance you or I could end up like Ched evans
I understand what you're saying and agree with it but in his mind, he done nothing wrong.
What I don't understand is that, if I'm correct, her argument was that she was too drink to consent. How did she consent with the other guy then? IMO there's too many holes in the case to fully say he's guilty.
Why would his father in law defend him? There must be something that the public don't know.
Although I do think that if after the appeal he's still found guilty then he's scum and doesn't deserve anything good in life. There is just something telling me that he's not guilty.
Agree with this 100 percent. If he is still found guilty after the appeal then there has to be a line drawn but something doesn't add up here.
So even if a conviction does not pass your certainty test, did the first, failed appeal not qualify for this? Did you really accuse everyone else of being Ally McBeal? Maybe you should've watched more Columbo!?
EDIT: I guess you didn't read the flag rules.
Yes I read the flag rules. Everything you said was fair enough. Except the following:
"and the victim potentially fully responsible for the incident."
I never said that a rape victim was responsible. That is an accusation that I wanted to check through as it is potentially an attack on a victim of crime and if I accused her then I could be in all kinds of trouble. I got my wife to read my posts to double check I am not missing anything as well and she is insisting her husband is not a rape sympathiser.
I genuinely apologise if I have given that impression. I have just read the details of the case and have highlighted areas which which I thought we're hard to read.
That wasn't a reference to you saying she 'deserved it' or anything as abhorrent, but that she was sober enough to be deemed responsible for her actions - You referred to her ability to walk in stilettos and carry pizza. I'm not sure what else you were implying with that kind of post.
2. Rape, noun 1. the unlawful compelling of a person through physical force or duress to have sexual intercourse. 2. any act of sexual intercourse that is forced upon a person.
I suspect a lot of the argument hinged on section 7: "People who have consumed alcohol may reach such a level of drunkenness that they no longer have the capacity to give consent. The courts recognise that this stage may be reached well before they become unconscious"
The difference between mcormack and evans is huge, the death of two kids is the worse ending result of an action that could ever happen
Luke mcormack made a decision to drink then drive, and kids died
In would want to kill him with my bare hands
But greenie Jr if you imagine that your son made an error of judgement with regards drink driving
Would you forgive him even if the result ended the same way
It was an error of judgement
Now raping someone is not an error of judgement, it's not a mistake it's a calculated decision a choice
Now I reckon there is every chance that you or I could have found ourselves in luke mcormacks position but zero chance you or I could end up like Ched evans
I understand what you're saying and agree with it but in his mind, he done nothing wrong.
What I don't understand is that, if I'm correct, her argument was that she was too drink to consent. How did she consent with the other guy then? IMO there's too many holes in the case to fully say he's guilty.
Why would his father in law defend him? There must be something that the public don't know.
Although I do think that if after the appeal he's still found guilty then he's scum and doesn't deserve anything good in life. There is just something telling me that he's not guilty.
She went to the room with the other bloke, Ched had to break in.
What part of the evidence said he broke the door down / broke in? The people on this site from both sides of the argument making up their own evidence is laughable here.
Charlton Life has more wannabe Ally Mcbeals than the Old Bailey.
Like I already said. Read Grapevine49. She was not capable of giving consent. It was therefore rape.
How did she go from walking into the room to passing out stone cold? Were they drinking in the room?
And is there a transcript and full record of the evidence because so many people are quoting what happened and I don't know where it is coming from.
Quite recently I finished a night's drinking, got on the tube for a few stops, got off, walked half an hour home, then got into my flat and passed out on the floor I didn't have a drink on the way home. Alcohol affects different people at different times and you can't predict how someone will act on it. Someone remembering to grab pizza out of their car is hardly evidence they weren't raped
Of course it's not evidence they were not raped.
But likewise, it appears from reading the case notes that we are not talking somebody who was passed out on the floor and as such the case hinged on clarity of mind rather than out and out consciousness so its not relevant anyhow.
I also don't drink so can't even speak from experience.
Well no, it is relevant because you implied in your post that it was suspicious that the girl could go from walking into the room to being too drunk to consent. What I'm trying to tell you is that it is very easy to go from being lucid to away with the fairies a good while after having your last drink so her conduct before she made it into the room is not relevant.
The difference between mcormack and evans is huge, the death of two kids is the worse ending result of an action that could ever happen
Luke mcormack made a decision to drink then drive, and kids died
In would want to kill him with my bare hands
But greenie Jr if you imagine that your son made an error of judgement with regards drink driving
Would you forgive him even if the result ended the same way
It was an error of judgement
Now raping someone is not an error of judgement, it's not a mistake it's a calculated decision a choice
Now I reckon there is every chance that you or I could have found ourselves in luke mcormacks position but zero chance you or I could end up like Ched evans
I understand what you're saying and agree with it but in his mind, he done nothing wrong.
What I don't understand is that, if I'm correct, her argument was that she was too drink to consent. How did she consent with the other guy then? IMO there's too many holes in the case to fully say he's guilty.
Why would his father in law defend him? There must be something that the public don't know.
Although I do think that if after the appeal he's still found guilty then he's scum and doesn't deserve anything good in life. There is just something telling me that he's not guilty.
She went to the room with the other bloke, Ched had to break in.
What part of the evidence said he broke the door down / broke in? The people on this site from both sides of the argument making up their own evidence is laughable here.
Charlton Life has more wannabe Ally Mcbeals than the Old Bailey.
When did I say he broke a door down? Who's inventing stuff here.
Evans had to lie to obtain a key to the room, I'd call that breaking in.
I am actually being serious when I say I would like to see a transcript of the evidence as I am interested to see this.
I wasnt aware he lied to get the key.
According to the link I have, Evans booked the hotel room!
And yet you blithely continue to insinuate that the conviction is unsafe and the victim potentially fully responsible for the incident. There's probably a f***ton of information you're not aware of, unless you were on the jury, which is why these posts, above all others, strike me as irresponsible, and make me feel very, very sad for the girl at the heart of the case
The difference between mcormack and evans is huge, the death of two kids is the worse ending result of an action that could ever happen
Luke mcormack made a decision to drink then drive, and kids died
In would want to kill him with my bare hands
But greenie Jr if you imagine that your son made an error of judgement with regards drink driving
Would you forgive him even if the result ended the same way
It was an error of judgement
Now raping someone is not an error of judgement, it's not a mistake it's a calculated decision a choice
Now I reckon there is every chance that you or I could have found ourselves in luke mcormacks position but zero chance you or I could end up like Ched evans
I understand what you're saying and agree with it but in his mind, he done nothing wrong.
What I don't understand is that, if I'm correct, her argument was that she was too drink to consent. How did she consent with the other guy then? IMO there's too many holes in the case to fully say he's guilty.
Why would his father in law defend him? There must be something that the public don't know.
Although I do think that if after the appeal he's still found guilty then he's scum and doesn't deserve anything good in life. There is just something telling me that he's not guilty.
Agree with this 100 percent. If he is still found guilty after the appeal then there has to be a line drawn but something doesn't add up here.
So even if a conviction does not pass your certainty test, did the first, failed appeal not qualify for this? Did you really accuse everyone else of being Ally McBeal? Maybe you should've watched more Columbo!?
EDIT: I guess you didn't read the flag rules.
Yes I read the flag rules. Everything you said was fair enough. Except the following:
"and the victim potentially fully responsible for the incident."
I never said that a rape victim was responsible. That is an accusation that I wanted to check through as it is potentially an attack on a victim of crime and if I accused her then I could be in all kinds of trouble. I got my wife to read my posts to double check I am not missing anything as well and she is insisting her husband is not a rape sympathiser.
I genuinely apologise if I have given that impression. I have just read the details of the case and have highlighted areas which which I thought we're hard to read.
That wasn't a reference to you saying she 'deserved it' or anything as abhorrent, but that she was sober enough to be deemed responsible for her actions - You referred to her ability to walk in stilettos and carry pizza. I'm not sure what else you were implying with that kind of post.
I was examining whether she was unconscious or not (and how drink she may have been) which is key to the case.
So the uncertainty around how drunk she was doesn't mean I am suggesting that "the victim was potentially fully responsible".
Maybe she was actually 100pc clear of mind........but Evans used an act of force for instance.
It goes back to the point that I 100pc did not shift blame to her which was the accusation I was uncomfortable with.
Examining what happened between getting out of a cab and heading to the hotel doesn't mean she has caused it herself.
Greenie Junior had probably highlighted an interesting point more eloquently. In that CM was innocent of rape and so she consented. And so the influence by drink would have had to shift enough from the time he slept with her to Evans arriving. Ie she went from being able to consent to not being able to in that short time.
It is possible but just shows the finite details involved in the case.
I think the video footage that his friends have on their phones probably could have cleared their pal, but I would have also thought it be key to convict him of rape
Very good point. I can't remember how long the case went on. Conclusive footage either way would surely have helped a relatively swift and simple conclusion. If the case was drawn out I would guess it was inconclusive?
Ultimately, I don't think you should be 'examining' what state she was in.
I didn't mean to imply you said she was responsible for getting herself raped, that was bad phrasing on my part - however you have implied that she was sober enough to make her own decisions, despite the court deciding otherwise. I think Henry put is succinctly on the last page, but I don't think it makes any difference to the, as you say, would-be Ally McBeals.
Ultimately, I don't think you should be 'examining' what state she was in.
I didn't mean to imply you said she was responsible for getting herself raped, that was bad phrasing on my part - however you have implied that she was sober enough to make her own decisions, despite the court deciding otherwise. I think Henry put is succinctly on the last page, but I don't think it makes any difference to the, as you say, would-be Ally McBeals.
As I said, what if she was more sober than you thought.
BUT Evans was more forceful as well? Arguably makes it an even more violent crime despite 'questioning' how drunk the defendant was.
And yes - I am aware that I have gone more Ally Mcbeal than anyone tonight after all this.
The difference between mcormack and evans is huge, the death of two kids is the worse ending result of an action that could ever happen
Luke mcormack made a decision to drink then drive, and kids died
In would want to kill him with my bare hands
But greenie Jr if you imagine that your son made an error of judgement with regards drink driving
Would you forgive him even if the result ended the same way
It was an error of judgement
Now raping someone is not an error of judgement, it's not a mistake it's a calculated decision a choice
Now I reckon there is every chance that you or I could have found ourselves in luke mcormacks position but zero chance you or I could end up like Ched evans
I understand what you're saying and agree with it but in his mind, he done nothing wrong.
What I don't understand is that, if I'm correct, her argument was that she was too drink to consent. How did she consent with the other guy then? IMO there's too many holes in the case to fully say he's guilty.
Why would his father in law defend him? There must be something that the public don't know.
Although I do think that if after the appeal he's still found guilty then he's scum and doesn't deserve anything good in life. There is just something telling me that he's not guilty.
She went to the room with the other bloke, Ched had to break in.
What part of the evidence said he broke the door down / broke in? The people on this site from both sides of the argument making up their own evidence is laughable here.
Charlton Life has more wannabe Ally Mcbeals than the Old Bailey.
When did I say he broke a door down? Who's inventing stuff here.
Evans had to lie to obtain a key to the room, I'd call that breaking in.
I am actually being serious when I say I would like to see a transcript of the evidence as I am interested to see this.
I wasnt aware he lied to get the key.
According to the link I have, Evans booked the hotel room!
And yet you blithely continue to insinuate that the conviction is unsafe and the victim potentially fully responsible for the incident. There's probably a f***ton of information you're not aware of, unless you were on the jury, which is why these posts, above all others, strike me as irresponsible, and make me feel very, very sad for the girl at the heart of the case
The difference between mcormack and evans is huge, the death of two kids is the worse ending result of an action that could ever happen
Luke mcormack made a decision to drink then drive, and kids died
In would want to kill him with my bare hands
But greenie Jr if you imagine that your son made an error of judgement with regards drink driving
Would you forgive him even if the result ended the same way
It was an error of judgement
Now raping someone is not an error of judgement, it's not a mistake it's a calculated decision a choice
Now I reckon there is every chance that you or I could have found ourselves in luke mcormacks position but zero chance you or I could end up like Ched evans
I understand what you're saying and agree with it but in his mind, he done nothing wrong.
What I don't understand is that, if I'm correct, her argument was that she was too drink to consent. How did she consent with the other guy then? IMO there's too many holes in the case to fully say he's guilty.
Why would his father in law defend him? There must be something that the public don't know.
Although I do think that if after the appeal he's still found guilty then he's scum and doesn't deserve anything good in life. There is just something telling me that he's not guilty.
Agree with this 100 percent. If he is still found guilty after the appeal then there has to be a line drawn but something doesn't add up here.
So even if a conviction does not pass your certainty test, did the first, failed appeal not qualify for this? Did you really accuse everyone else of being Ally McBeal? Maybe you should've watched more Columbo!?
EDIT: I guess you didn't read the flag rules.
Yes I read the flag rules. Everything you said was fair enough. Except the following:
"and the victim potentially fully responsible for the incident."
I never said that a rape victim was responsible. That is an accusation that I wanted to check through as it is potentially an attack on a victim of crime and if I accused her then I could be in all kinds of trouble. I got my wife to read my posts to double check I am not missing anything as well and she is insisting her husband is not a rape sympathiser.
I genuinely apologise if I have given that impression. I have just read the details of the case and have highlighted areas which which I thought we're hard to read.
That wasn't a reference to you saying she 'deserved it' or anything as abhorrent, but that she was sober enough to be deemed responsible for her actions - You referred to her ability to walk in stilettos and carry pizza. I'm not sure what else you were implying with that kind of post.
I was examining whether she was unconscious or not (and how drink she may have been) which is key to the case.
So the uncertainty around how drunk she was doesn't mean I am suggesting that "the victim was potentially fully responsible".
Maybe she was actually 100pc clear of mind........but Evans used an act of force for instance.
It goes back to the point that I 100pc did not shift blame to her which was the accusation I was uncomfortable with.
Examining what happened between getting out of a cab and heading to the hotel doesn't mean she has caused it herself.
Greenie Junior had probably highlighted an interesting point more eloquently. In that CM was innocent of rape and so she consented. And so the influence by drink would have had to shift enough from the time he slept with her to Evans arriving. Ie she went from being able to consent to not being able to in that short time.
It is possible but just shows the finite details involved in the case.
The difference between McDonald and Evans, in the juries eyes, was that in McDonald's case their was reasonable doubt.
Oh, and I'd say again, what his family and his girlfriends family have done since towards the victim is totally abhorant and for that alone he shouldn't return to football.
Comments
I disagree about the length of the sentence - we are far too lenient on crimes against the person than I think any civilised society should be. I also disagree about only serving half your sentence, when you have shown no remorse for the crime you have committed. I understand people saying that he won't show remorse when he feels he did not commit the crime but, in my opinion, he should therefore have remained in prison while his case was reviewed.
He, his family, that of his girlfriend and their friends/supporters have treated the victim with complete disdain and in a way which is absolutely disgusting. I would hope that anyone posting comments about her are also pursued by the police, in the same way that they are rightly pursuing those who put out vile trash about Jessica Ennis Hill, Ms Webster, Dave Berry and anyone else.
Whether he likes it, or whether any of us like it, he is in a position of influence to supporters of his club of any age and of each gender. That's shown clearly in some of the trash they have put out backing him. I was speaking with a fan of theirs, who is one of my clients and was shocked at her unequivocal backing for him. This is a middle-aged woman, with a young family, who wouldn't hear a word said against him.
Evans has been shown not to be the brightest spark and had too much time and money to know what to do, other than be a delinquent and, as the conviction still stands, then a serious criminal.
I agree that people leaving prison should be given a chance to rehabilitate themselves. I don't think that means they should become a privileged member of that society though and, yes that does mean that I feel it is wrong that someone can come out and walk into a £20k a week contract. I think the same goes for others such as Hughes, McCormack, King, Grant and that's just a few from football.
I think Sheffield United are wrong to even consider giving him that position of privilege. Sadly, I am sure someone will.
Maybe one day, people will rediscover their moral compass. I really don't think that will be any time soon unfortunately.
Transcript of Evans' unsuccessful appeal (setting out the facts of the case):
https://www.crimeline.info/uploads/cases/2012ewcacrim2559.pdf
Thanks for this. Not the kind of early evening reading I want to get in the habit of.
So he booked the hotel room but not in his name which is clearly not the same thing. Point taken there.
Points 17 and 18 are key for me. The Expert says she shouldn't have suffered memory loss. Judgement has to take place from the jury as to whether the complainant is telling the truth or not. Going on what people have said on here, it would suggest she was unconscious when they had sex. It would appear from this document that she was not (the night porter heard 'them' having sex - does that suggest 'noises' from both complainent and Evans then?)
This whole case eventually hinged on sections 17 and 18 which, in essence, is a 'who do the jury think is telling the truth?' Defendent or complainent?
Personally I expected that a read of this link would clarify exactly why he was guilty hook line and sinker.
It has actually thrown up more doubt than clarity for me.
Despite all the 'hard facts' quoted here, the transcript seems to hinge substantially on one word v another.
With that being the case, I can't see him ever admitting guilt if he insists his word is true.
Likewise I can't see him ever appealing successfully as I struggle to see how any other evidence can come to light that gets around the on word versus another conundrum.
https://www.crimeline.info/uploads/cases/2012ewcacrim2559.pdf
Thanks for this. Not the kind of early evening reading I want to get in the habit of.
So he booked the hotel room but not in his name which is clearly not the same thing. Point taken there.
Points 17 and 18 are key for me. The Expert says she shouldn't have suffered memory loss. Judgement has to take place from the jury as to whether the complainant is telling the truth or not. Going on what people have said on here, it would suggest she was unconscious when they had sex. It would appear from this document that she was not (the night porter heard 'them' having sex - does that suggest 'noises' from both complainent and Evans then?)
This whole case eventually hinged on sections 17 and 18 which, in essence, is a 'who do the jury think is telling the truth?' Defendent or complainent?
Personally I expected that a read of this link would clarify exactly why he was guilty hook line and sinker.
It has actually thrown up more doubt than clarity for me.
Despite all the 'hard facts' quoted here, the transcript seems to hinge substantially on one word v another.
With that being the case, I can't see him ever admitting guilt if he insists his word is true.
Likewise I can't see him ever appealing successfully as I struggle to see how any other evidence can come to light that gets around the on word versus another conundrum.
At the end of the day a jury of your peers decided that there was enough evidence that he committed rape beyond reasonable doubt. Just accept it, he's a dirty, scumbag rapist.
I'm not condoning rape. If I had my way and If he's guilty as I've said before, he'd have the death penalty.
But something just doesn't add up
And like any walk of life it was made up of decent honest people.
And some of the dodgiest chavs I have ever met.
I personally would be happier if a jury were made up of people selected from a permanent panel that were properly vetted and given an element of legal training.
I felt woefully under prepared and it scared me that I was responsible for somebody's future.
I am allowed to read the case notes and have some questions in my mind without being a sympathiser to a rapist.
Having doubts doesn't mean I think he is innocent.
But likewise, it appears from reading the case notes that we are not talking somebody who was passed out on the floor and as such the case hinged on clarity of mind rather than out and out consciousness so its not relevant anyhow.
I also don't drink so can't even speak from experience.
Taking conclusions without full knowledge of the case and evdence as presented minute by minute second by second is very dangerous.
EDIT: I guess you didn't read the flag rules.
"and the victim potentially fully responsible for the incident."
I never said that a rape victim was responsible. That is an accusation that I wanted to check through as it is potentially an attack on a victim of crime and if I accused her then I could be in all kinds of trouble. I got my wife to read my posts to double check I am not missing anything as well and she is insisting her husband is not a rape sympathiser.
I genuinely apologise if I have given that impression. I have just read the details of the case and have highlighted areas which which I thought we're hard to read.
It's a shame cos it has been quite a good and controlled discussion on what is a very sensitive subject
1. "From the evidence of [the complainant] she appears to have
suffered anterior-grade amnesia as a result of the high dose of
alcohol which she consumed, and in particular that she consumed
a substantial dose of alcohol during the last hour or so prior to
leaving the nightclub. It appears from the evidence that her
short-term memory was functioning at the time around the
incident, but that the long-term record of that memory has been
ablated by the high concentration of alcohol. There is, therefore,
no memory record of those events and attempts to jog the
memory may lead to confabulation. The fact that she has no
memory of events does not mean that she was not able to
participate in a meaningful way in events at that time, and I am
quite clear that this includes the ability to make informed
decisions in relation to consent. Acute alcohol intoxication may
lead to substantial disinhibition and that may in itself lead to
unwise judgments being made. But the fact that she does no
longer remember having made a decision is a failure of the
memory process and not of the decision-making process.
Evidence of memory loss as a result of anterior-grade amnesia
does not in itself prove that she lacked the capacity to consent."
2. Rape, noun
1.
the unlawful compelling of a person through physical force or duress to have sexual intercourse.
2.
any act of sexual intercourse that is forced upon a person.
http://www.cps.gov.uk/publications/prosecution/rape.html#_02
I suspect a lot of the argument hinged on section 7:
"People who have consumed alcohol may reach such a level of drunkenness that they no longer have the capacity to give consent. The courts recognise that this stage may be reached well before they become unconscious"
So the uncertainty around how drunk she was doesn't mean I am suggesting that "the victim was potentially fully responsible".
Maybe she was actually 100pc clear of mind........but Evans used an act of force for instance.
It goes back to the point that I 100pc did not shift blame to her which was the accusation I was uncomfortable with.
Examining what happened between getting out of a cab and heading to the hotel doesn't mean she has caused it herself.
Greenie Junior had probably highlighted an interesting point more eloquently. In that CM was innocent of rape and so she consented. And so the influence by drink would have had to shift enough from the time he slept with her to Evans arriving. Ie she went from being able to consent to not being able to in that short time.
It is possible but just shows the finite details involved in the case.
I didn't mean to imply you said she was responsible for getting herself raped, that was bad phrasing on my part - however you have implied that she was sober enough to make her own decisions, despite the court deciding otherwise. I think Henry put is succinctly on the last page, but I don't think it makes any difference to the, as you say, would-be Ally McBeals.
BUT Evans was more forceful as well? Arguably makes it an even more violent crime despite 'questioning' how drunk the defendant was.
And yes - I am aware that I have gone more Ally Mcbeal than anyone tonight after all this.
Might watch the shawshank redemption tomorrow.