It has already been clarified whether he raped her or not. He did.
But somehow, by your own admission, if his appeal is successful he did not rape her? The conviction, or lack thereof, somehow changes the actual event that occurred? Utterly bizarre!
Absolutely. It isn't that bizarre - the definition of a rapist is someone who has been convicted of rape, Evans has therefore he is.
If that changes in the future then of course so does his status.
I'm with SE9 here. He was convicted of rape so he is a rapist. If he is subsequently cleared then he isn't.
Really??? He either is a rapist or he isn't. He can't be both!!!!!
He currently is a convicted rapist.
What part of the justice system and appeal system do you find impossible to grasp? Why does everything in the world need to be black and white?
*Sigh*
The world is not as simple as saying "he was found guilty so he's a rapist but if he's now acquitted he's no longer a rapist".
If he's acquitted surely that means he was never a rapist and he served time for a crime he didn't commit.
And yet you accuse me of seeing everything in the world as Black and White! Oh the irony!
I stated sometime ago on this thread that the was more to this than meets the eye.
Evens Mrs has stood by hime, her father (a solicitor) has stood by him, and I think I read that the dads company are seeking an appeal and are funding it. Also remember Evans has betrayed his daughter at the very least, and at worst is a rapist, so there must be something in it for is Father in Law to back Evans.
Evans appears to be a man who has the morals of an alley cat, but is he a rapist? Like everyone on here, I have no idea, there are some that have already hung him for what he allegedly did, but I think those that have the foresight to see that an appeal was always going to happen, also have the intelligence to keep their powder dry, until the court do their (final) work.
We shall find out soon.
Karl Massey is not a lawyer. He left school at 15. He runs a chain of jewellery shops.
I stated sometime ago on this thread that the was more to this than meets the eye.
Evens Mrs has stood by hime, her father (a solicitor) has stood by him, and I think I read that the dads company are seeking an appeal and are funding it. Also remember Evans has betrayed his daughter at the very least, and at worst is a rapist, so there must be something in it for is Father in Law to back Evans.
Evans appears to be a man who has the morals of an alley cat, but is he a rapist? Like everyone on here, I have no idea, there are some that have already hung him for what he allegedly did, but I think those that have the foresight to see that an appeal was always going to happen, also have the intelligence to keep their powder dry, until the court do their (final) work.
We shall find out soon.
Yes he is a rapist and yes he did do it, no allegedly about it*.
*source = a court of law
Oh dear!
Why ? You said you had no idea if Evans is a rapist, you do beause he is.
So if his appeal is successful and the conviction is quashed is he still a rapist?
And, by the same logic, anyone who has raped a woman (or man) but not been caught and convicted is not a rapist?
1) No 2) Are you being deliberately obtuse? Ps a woman can't rape a man, it is impossible.
While that's true to an extent, a woman aiding and abetting (by merely being a lookout, for example) another individual to rape a man would be liable to the same sentence as the actual rapist. (Anal rape is rape). There is also a new offence of assault by penetration which is defined as penetration with any object to the anus or vagina. Which a woman could also be charged with. It carries the same maximum sentence of life imprisonment.
Christ, missing the point, Ok it may be a member of her family that is the solicitor (I thought I read it somewhere) but the point being, If Evans is guilty why would his wifes dad back him, why? Any ideas?
No, entirely NOT missing the point. The point being that some uneducated bloke who happened to strike lucky taking his daddy's business on - in a very dodgy industry (jewellery) - is much less likely to have the exacting standards or ability to understand the nuances of legal proceedings that a solicitor should have.
I'm suspecting that Massey is deserving of a sort of hangers-on category all to himself. FOWAGS - Fathers of Wives and Girlfriends. Before this fiasco, you can just imagine him loving all that kudos from his mates about his daughter going out with a footballer and really enjoying the reflected glory. Perhaps he feels he would lose face if he stepped back from that position? Perhaps his little girl just always gets what she wants? Some fathers can refuse their daughters nothing.
As for Evans, well he is just a rather sad and dull individual who shags drunks, he doesn't seem to have any concept of right or wrong.
Just read this and ask yourself whether it is likely that he is the sort of person you'd want your daughter going out with if you had any standards whatsoever.
MY point (borne out with the link) was why would her father defend Evans if he was guilty?
As said above, he may well think Ched Evans is innocent. But luckily the law isn't based on what his girlfriend's Dad thinks.
FFS why is it so difficult for people to grasp the point here? It doesn't matter what Evans girlfriends dad thinks in the eye of the law, thats not the point.
As her father, he must be fucking livid that Evans cheated on his daughter (forget the rape part for the moment), in fact most blokes would want him given a kicking, failing that lock the prick up. BUT her father doesn't do any of that, in fact he goes the other way, he defends Evans, privately and publicly, to the point of starting a campaign, with the family to clear his name, to be able to do that he MUST be clear in his own mind that Evans has been innocent all along (not of cheating but of rape). Therefore it follows that if someone is willing to back an accused and subsequently convicted rapist to such extremes, there HAS to be some milage in the new evidence/or innocence all along.
As I said earlier this whole debate is pointless. Before you could have an opinion based on the evidence given in court but now it is complete speculation as no one knows what the new evidence is.
Out of interest... why is impossible for a woman to rape a man if one of the main definitions is consent. What about a woman who sets out to get a bloke blind drunk/off his head and then takes advantage of that situation when he's incapacitated? It's a pretty offensive statement to say that women can't rape men.
My understanding here, (and I'm happy to be corrected), is that rape involves the insertion of a penis into an orifice of another human being. The act of having sex without consent is regarded as sexual assault when it is commited by a woman. This is still a serious offence. I believe the "penis" aspect of rape is what caused the crime of "penetration" (mentioned earlier in the thread - which can involve inserting a different object) to be introduced to law.
Ah. Ok. If that's the definition by law then fair enough...
I stated sometime ago on this thread that the was more to this than meets the eye.
Evens Mrs has stood by hime, her father (a solicitor) has stood by him, and I think I read that the dads company are seeking an appeal and are funding it. Also remember Evans has betrayed his daughter at the very least, and at worst is a rapist, so there must be something in it for is Father in Law to back Evans.
Evans appears to be a man who has the morals of an alley cat, but is he a rapist? Like everyone on here, I have no idea, there are some that have already hung him for what he allegedly did, but I think those that have the foresight to see that an appeal was always going to happen, also have the intelligence to keep their powder dry, until the court do their (final) work.
We shall find out soon.
Karl Massey is not a lawyer. He left school at 15. He runs a chain of jewellery shops.
I stated sometime ago on this thread that the was more to this than meets the eye.
Evens Mrs has stood by hime, her father (a solicitor) has stood by him, and I think I read that the dads company are seeking an appeal and are funding it. Also remember Evans has betrayed his daughter at the very least, and at worst is a rapist, so there must be something in it for is Father in Law to back Evans.
Evans appears to be a man who has the morals of an alley cat, but is he a rapist? Like everyone on here, I have no idea, there are some that have already hung him for what he allegedly did, but I think those that have the foresight to see that an appeal was always going to happen, also have the intelligence to keep their powder dry, until the court do their (final) work.
We shall find out soon.
Yes he is a rapist and yes he did do it, no allegedly about it*.
*source = a court of law
Oh dear!
Why ? You said you had no idea if Evans is a rapist, you do beause he is.
So if his appeal is successful and the conviction is quashed is he still a rapist?
And, by the same logic, anyone who has raped a woman (or man) but not been caught and convicted is not a rapist?
1) No 2) Are you being deliberately obtuse? Ps a woman can't rape a man, it is impossible.
While that's true to an extent, a woman aiding and abetting (by merely being a lookout, for example) another individual to rape a man would be liable to the same sentence as the actual rapist. (Anal rape is rape). There is also a new offence of assault by penetration which is defined as penetration with any object to the anus or vagina. Which a woman could also be charged with. It carries the same maximum sentence of life imprisonment.
Christ, missing the point, Ok it may be a member of her family that is the solicitor (I thought I read it somewhere) but the point being, If Evans is guilty why would his wifes dad back him, why? Any ideas?
No, entirely NOT missing the point. The point being that some uneducated bloke who happened to strike lucky taking his daddy's business on - in a very dodgy industry (jewellery) - is much less likely to have the exacting standards or ability to understand the nuances of legal proceedings that a solicitor should have.
I'm suspecting that Massey is deserving of a sort of hangers-on category all to himself. FOWAGS - Fathers of Wives and Girlfriends. Before this fiasco, you can just imagine him loving all that kudos from his mates about his daughter going out with a footballer and really enjoying the reflected glory. Perhaps he feels he would lose face if he stepped back from that position? Perhaps his little girl just always gets what she wants? Some fathers can refuse their daughters nothing.
As for Evans, well he is just a rather sad and dull individual who shags drunks, he doesn't seem to have any concept of right or wrong.
Just read this and ask yourself whether it is likely that he is the sort of person you'd want your daughter going out with if you had any standards whatsoever.
I'll try just one more time, you have missed the point like Nicky Bailey misses a penalty. MY point (borne out with the link) was why would her father defend Evans if he was guilty? Any father would want to give him a kicking JUST for betraying his daughter. Thats all.
Also your making a lot of character assumption (I'm suspecting that Massey is deserving of a sort of hangers-on category all to himself. FOWAGS - Fathers of Wives and Girlfriends) re Evans father in law, I dont understand what it brings to the debate.
Well, you made the erroneous point that her father was a lawyer. Ergo, he would have a good understanding of the law and its various nuances.
I've countered that by indicating that he is an individual with little secondary education, let alone a law degree, and as such is unlikely to be in a position to decide on whether or not the evidence points to Evans' guilt or otherwise. He can have opinions like the rest of us but they are just that, opinions. He brings nothing to the table on your "more than meets the eye" argument. There isn't "more than meets the eye". There is the evidence and there is the legislation.
I've then given you potential hypothetical reasons as to why he might be standing by Evans because that's what you asked for! You can't ask for such ideas and then say you don't understand why I've introduced them to the debate!
Anyway, of course, Massey has employed lawyers and private detectives to work on the case and they will have enjoyed being paid and unless the matter was hopeless, they'd be quite happy to continue. That said the CCRC must believe that the two trances of new evidence bring something new to the case. I, just like almost everybody else, have no idea what the "new evidence" is. Although it's a little odd that the evidence didn't get to the CCRC until as late as January and April this year. Where has the evidence been all this time? Nonetheless, clearly the CCRC felt it merited further consideration by the Court of Appeal. In its own words it is the "view of the Commission, (that the new evidence) could have added support to Mr Evans’s defence at trial and therefore raises a real possibility that the Court of Appeal may now quash the conviction."
The CCRC claims some 70% of the matters it refers are "quashed". But this figure is somewhat manipulated as it includes cases that the CoA sent back for trial by jury where the defendant was still found guilty and where alternative but lesser offences were imposed (manslaughter instead of murder for example). So, their real "success rate" may be a fair bit lower than that. (Of course there is little prospect of a re-trial for Evans as he's already out of jail - he'll either be guilty or not.)
Will the verdict be overturned or upheld once the CoA gets to consider the new material is the only thing that really matters.
If it is overturned, in theory, Evans is employable again. So, as you say, we will find out soon.
I stated sometime ago on this thread that the was more to this than meets the eye.
Evens Mrs has stood by hime, her father (a solicitor) has stood by him, and I think I read that the dads company are seeking an appeal and are funding it. Also remember Evans has betrayed his daughter at the very least, and at worst is a rapist, so there must be something in it for is Father in Law to back Evans.
Evans appears to be a man who has the morals of an alley cat, but is he a rapist? Like everyone on here, I have no idea, there are some that have already hung him for what he allegedly did, but I think those that have the foresight to see that an appeal was always going to happen, also have the intelligence to keep their powder dry, until the court do their (final) work.
We shall find out soon.
Karl Massey is not a lawyer. He left school at 15. He runs a chain of jewellery shops.
I stated sometime ago on this thread that the was more to this than meets the eye.
Evens Mrs has stood by hime, her father (a solicitor) has stood by him, and I think I read that the dads company are seeking an appeal and are funding it. Also remember Evans has betrayed his daughter at the very least, and at worst is a rapist, so there must be something in it for is Father in Law to back Evans.
Evans appears to be a man who has the morals of an alley cat, but is he a rapist? Like everyone on here, I have no idea, there are some that have already hung him for what he allegedly did, but I think those that have the foresight to see that an appeal was always going to happen, also have the intelligence to keep their powder dry, until the court do their (final) work.
We shall find out soon.
Yes he is a rapist and yes he did do it, no allegedly about it*.
*source = a court of law
Oh dear!
Why ? You said you had no idea if Evans is a rapist, you do beause he is.
So if his appeal is successful and the conviction is quashed is he still a rapist?
And, by the same logic, anyone who has raped a woman (or man) but not been caught and convicted is not a rapist?
1) No 2) Are you being deliberately obtuse? Ps a woman can't rape a man, it is impossible.
While that's true to an extent, a woman aiding and abetting (by merely being a lookout, for example) another individual to rape a man would be liable to the same sentence as the actual rapist. (Anal rape is rape). There is also a new offence of assault by penetration which is defined as penetration with any object to the anus or vagina. Which a woman could also be charged with. It carries the same maximum sentence of life imprisonment.
Christ, missing the point, Ok it may be a member of her family that is the solicitor (I thought I read it somewhere) but the point being, If Evans is guilty why would his wifes dad back him, why? Any ideas?
No, entirely NOT missing the point. The point being that some uneducated bloke who happened to strike lucky taking his daddy's business on - in a very dodgy industry (jewellery) - is much less likely to have the exacting standards or ability to understand the nuances of legal proceedings that a solicitor should have.
I'm suspecting that Massey is deserving of a sort of hangers-on category all to himself. FOWAGS - Fathers of Wives and Girlfriends. Before this fiasco, you can just imagine him loving all that kudos from his mates about his daughter going out with a footballer and really enjoying the reflected glory. Perhaps he feels he would lose face if he stepped back from that position? Perhaps his little girl just always gets what she wants? Some fathers can refuse their daughters nothing.
As for Evans, well he is just a rather sad and dull individual who shags drunks, he doesn't seem to have any concept of right or wrong.
Just read this and ask yourself whether it is likely that he is the sort of person you'd want your daughter going out with if you had any standards whatsoever.
MY point (borne out with the link) was why would her father defend Evans if he was guilty?
As said above, he may well think Ched Evans is innocent. But luckily the law isn't based on what his girlfriend's Dad thinks.
FFS why is it so difficult for people to grasp the point here? It doesn't matter what Evans girlfriends dad thinks in the eye of the law, thats not the point.
As her father, he must be fucking livid that Evans cheated on his daughter (forget the rape part for the moment), in fact most blokes would want him given a kicking, failing that lock the prick up. BUT her father doesn't do any of that, in fact he goes the other way, he defends Evans, privately and publicly, to the point of starting a campaign, with the family to clear his name, to be able to do that he MUST be clear in his own mind that Evans has been innocent all along (not of cheating but of rape). Therefore it follows that if someone is willing to back an accused and subsequently convicted rapist to such extremes, there HAS to be some milage in the new evidence/or innocence all along.
I don't want to jump into someone else's argument here but I can believe that her dad could know what he did and still defend him because his daughter loves him and he is, almost certainly, the most financially successful man she is ever going to get. Most people are pragmatic. It is unlikely that a good looking (apparently he is) professional footballer is not going to be offered sex regularly and he is unlikely to always say no.
I don't wish to tarnish all footballers with the same brush, but a lad of 21 (or there abouts) with the fame and fortune these men have is likely to cheat on his long term girlfriend, from time to time. Irrespective as to the consent rules with regard to excessive alcohol I can see why a bloke (with minimal education) might be willing to continue to 'bless' his daughter's relationship with (and planned marriage to) a multi-millionaire footballer.
As disgusting as it might sound to you or I, I am not in the least surprised that her father didn't turn on him after the conviction. I am even less surprised that he supported him before he was found guilty. For all we know her father is not always faithful to his wife, and may have even, secretly, had respect for Evans' sexual encounters - of which I suspect there was more than one!
I stated sometime ago on this thread that the was more to this than meets the eye.
Evens Mrs has stood by hime, her father (a solicitor) has stood by him, and I think I read that the dads company are seeking an appeal and are funding it. Also remember Evans has betrayed his daughter at the very least, and at worst is a rapist, so there must be something in it for is Father in Law to back Evans.
Evans appears to be a man who has the morals of an alley cat, but is he a rapist? Like everyone on here, I have no idea, there are some that have already hung him for what he allegedly did, but I think those that have the foresight to see that an appeal was always going to happen, also have the intelligence to keep their powder dry, until the court do their (final) work.
We shall find out soon.
Karl Massey is not a lawyer. He left school at 15. He runs a chain of jewellery shops.
I stated sometime ago on this thread that the was more to this than meets the eye.
Evens Mrs has stood by hime, her father (a solicitor) has stood by him, and I think I read that the dads company are seeking an appeal and are funding it. Also remember Evans has betrayed his daughter at the very least, and at worst is a rapist, so there must be something in it for is Father in Law to back Evans.
Evans appears to be a man who has the morals of an alley cat, but is he a rapist? Like everyone on here, I have no idea, there are some that have already hung him for what he allegedly did, but I think those that have the foresight to see that an appeal was always going to happen, also have the intelligence to keep their powder dry, until the court do their (final) work.
We shall find out soon.
Yes he is a rapist and yes he did do it, no allegedly about it*.
*source = a court of law
Oh dear!
Why ? You said you had no idea if Evans is a rapist, you do beause he is.
So if his appeal is successful and the conviction is quashed is he still a rapist?
And, by the same logic, anyone who has raped a woman (or man) but not been caught and convicted is not a rapist?
1) No 2) Are you being deliberately obtuse? Ps a woman can't rape a man, it is impossible.
While that's true to an extent, a woman aiding and abetting (by merely being a lookout, for example) another individual to rape a man would be liable to the same sentence as the actual rapist. (Anal rape is rape). There is also a new offence of assault by penetration which is defined as penetration with any object to the anus or vagina. Which a woman could also be charged with. It carries the same maximum sentence of life imprisonment.
Christ, missing the point, Ok it may be a member of her family that is the solicitor (I thought I read it somewhere) but the point being, If Evans is guilty why would his wifes dad back him, why? Any ideas?
No, entirely NOT missing the point. The point being that some uneducated bloke who happened to strike lucky taking his daddy's business on - in a very dodgy industry (jewellery) - is much less likely to have the exacting standards or ability to understand the nuances of legal proceedings that a solicitor should have.
I'm suspecting that Massey is deserving of a sort of hangers-on category all to himself. FOWAGS - Fathers of Wives and Girlfriends. Before this fiasco, you can just imagine him loving all that kudos from his mates about his daughter going out with a footballer and really enjoying the reflected glory. Perhaps he feels he would lose face if he stepped back from that position? Perhaps his little girl just always gets what she wants? Some fathers can refuse their daughters nothing.
As for Evans, well he is just a rather sad and dull individual who shags drunks, he doesn't seem to have any concept of right or wrong.
Just read this and ask yourself whether it is likely that he is the sort of person you'd want your daughter going out with if you had any standards whatsoever.
MY point (borne out with the link) was why would her father defend Evans if he was guilty?
As said above, he may well think Ched Evans is innocent. But luckily the law isn't based on what his girlfriend's Dad thinks.
FFS why is it so difficult for people to grasp the point here? It doesn't matter what Evans girlfriends dad thinks in the eye of the law, thats not the point.
As her father, he must be fucking livid that Evans cheated on his daughter (forget the rape part for the moment), in fact most blokes would want him given a kicking, failing that lock the prick up. BUT her father doesn't do any of that, in fact he goes the other way, he defends Evans, privately and publicly, to the point of starting a campaign, with the family to clear his name, to be able to do that he MUST be clear in his own mind that Evans has been innocent all along (not of cheating but of rape). Therefore it follows that if someone is willing to back an accused and subsequently convicted rapist to such extremes, there HAS to be some milage in the new evidence/or innocence all along.
Why does there? The father in law might just be a terrible judge of the facts/Ched Evans's character.
I did grasp the point. I just think it's a daft point, sorry.
I stated sometime ago on this thread that the was more to this than meets the eye.
Evens Mrs has stood by hime, her father (a solicitor) has stood by him, and I think I read that the dads company are seeking an appeal and are funding it. Also remember Evans has betrayed his daughter at the very least, and at worst is a rapist, so there must be something in it for is Father in Law to back Evans.
Evans appears to be a man who has the morals of an alley cat, but is he a rapist? Like everyone on here, I have no idea, there are some that have already hung him for what he allegedly did, but I think those that have the foresight to see that an appeal was always going to happen, also have the intelligence to keep their powder dry, until the court do their (final) work.
We shall find out soon.
Karl Massey is not a lawyer. He left school at 15. He runs a chain of jewellery shops.
I stated sometime ago on this thread that the was more to this than meets the eye.
Evens Mrs has stood by hime, her father (a solicitor) has stood by him, and I think I read that the dads company are seeking an appeal and are funding it. Also remember Evans has betrayed his daughter at the very least, and at worst is a rapist, so there must be something in it for is Father in Law to back Evans.
Evans appears to be a man who has the morals of an alley cat, but is he a rapist? Like everyone on here, I have no idea, there are some that have already hung him for what he allegedly did, but I think those that have the foresight to see that an appeal was always going to happen, also have the intelligence to keep their powder dry, until the court do their (final) work.
We shall find out soon.
Yes he is a rapist and yes he did do it, no allegedly about it*.
*source = a court of law
Oh dear!
Why ? You said you had no idea if Evans is a rapist, you do beause he is.
So if his appeal is successful and the conviction is quashed is he still a rapist?
And, by the same logic, anyone who has raped a woman (or man) but not been caught and convicted is not a rapist?
1) No 2) Are you being deliberately obtuse? Ps a woman can't rape a man, it is impossible.
While that's true to an extent, a woman aiding and abetting (by merely being a lookout, for example) another individual to rape a man would be liable to the same sentence as the actual rapist. (Anal rape is rape). There is also a new offence of assault by penetration which is defined as penetration with any object to the anus or vagina. Which a woman could also be charged with. It carries the same maximum sentence of life imprisonment.
Christ, missing the point, Ok it may be a member of her family that is the solicitor (I thought I read it somewhere) but the point being, If Evans is guilty why would his wifes dad back him, why? Any ideas?
No, entirely NOT missing the point. The point being that some uneducated bloke who happened to strike lucky taking his daddy's business on - in a very dodgy industry (jewellery) - is much less likely to have the exacting standards or ability to understand the nuances of legal proceedings that a solicitor should have.
I'm suspecting that Massey is deserving of a sort of hangers-on category all to himself. FOWAGS - Fathers of Wives and Girlfriends. Before this fiasco, you can just imagine him loving all that kudos from his mates about his daughter going out with a footballer and really enjoying the reflected glory. Perhaps he feels he would lose face if he stepped back from that position? Perhaps his little girl just always gets what she wants? Some fathers can refuse their daughters nothing.
As for Evans, well he is just a rather sad and dull individual who shags drunks, he doesn't seem to have any concept of right or wrong.
Just read this and ask yourself whether it is likely that he is the sort of person you'd want your daughter going out with if you had any standards whatsoever.
MY point (borne out with the link) was why would her father defend Evans if he was guilty?
As said above, he may well think Ched Evans is innocent. But luckily the law isn't based on what his girlfriend's Dad thinks.
FFS why is it so difficult for people to grasp the point here? It doesn't matter what Evans girlfriends dad thinks in the eye of the law, thats not the point.
As her father, he must be fucking livid that Evans cheated on his daughter (forget the rape part for the moment), in fact most blokes would want him given a kicking, failing that lock the prick up. BUT her father doesn't do any of that, in fact he goes the other way, he defends Evans, privately and publicly, to the point of starting a campaign, with the family to clear his name, to be able to do that he MUST be clear in his own mind that Evans has been innocent all along (not of cheating but of rape). Therefore it follows that if someone is willing to back an accused and subsequently convicted rapist to such extremes, there HAS to be some milage in the new evidence/or innocence all along.
Why does there? The father in law might just be a terrible judge of the facts/Ched Evans's character.
I did grasp the point. I just think it's a daft point, sorry.
BUT its also gone to appeal, and the whole family and friends believe he is innocent so they started the campaign....I really cant be bothered anymore.........!
It has already been clarified whether he raped her or not. He did.
But somehow, by your own admission, if his appeal is successful he did not rape her? The conviction, or lack thereof, somehow changes the actual event that occurred? Utterly bizarre!
Absolutely. It isn't that bizarre - the definition of a rapist is someone who has been convicted of rape, Evans has therefore he is.
If that changes in the future then of course so does his status.
I'm with SE9 here. He was convicted of rape so he is a rapist. If he is subsequently cleared then he isn't.
Really??? He either is a rapist or he isn't. He can't be both!!!!!
He currently is a convicted rapist.
What part of the justice system and appeal system do you find impossible to grasp? Why does everything in the world need to be black and white?
*Sigh*
The world is not as simple as saying "he was found guilty so he's a rapist but if he's now acquitted he's no longer a rapist".
If he's acquitted surely that means he was never a rapist and he served time for a crime he didn't commit.
And yet you accuse me of seeing everything in the world as Black and White! Oh the irony!
oh the irony indeed. What in my comment is untrue? He is a convicted rapist. You're the one asking for definitive "is he a rapist or not?"
Just learnt to fold quotes. Makes this a much more bareable thread.
It isn't as black and white as Convicted = FACT .
A conviction by one's peers means that a small group of people have been persuaded to believe one story and evidence over another story and evidence. This decision is then supported by a judge who carries out the sentancing.
If you need it black and white, let's look at these 4 scenarios.
1. If Ched Evans raped her, he is both a rapist and convicted as a rapist.
2. If Ched Evans didn't rape her, he is still convicted as a rapist but he is not actually a rapist.
3. Based on scenario 2, If Ched Evans is found based on the new evidence to be innocent, he was incorrectly convicted as a rapist and was never a rapist.
4. based on scenario 1, If Ched Evans is found based on the new evidence to be guilty still, he was correctly convicted as a rapist and is a rapist.
I don't get why this is so hard to grasp for others...
But what if in her drunken state she said yes and she was so drunk so cannot remember doing so? As soon as she says yes she has consented. Now I am not saying that is the case and it happened that way. In my mind like killing someone be it murder where you have killed someone when you intend to kill them or manslaughter when you kill them when you don't intend to kill them. Killing someone is graded. I think the same can be said for rape even if it's not the law. There is a case when someone is raped to intend to harm them both pysically and psychologically. Then there is the case when someone is raped when somebody is mistaken just so they have sexual pleassure from it. The latter seems to be the case with Ched Evans if he is rightly convicted.
But what if in her drunken state she said yes and she was so drunk so cannot remember doing so? As soon as she says yes she has consented. Now I am not saying that is the case and it happened that way. In my mind like killing someone be it murder where you have killed someone when you intend to kill them or manslaughter when you kill them when you don't intend to kill them. Killing someone is graded. I think the same can be said for rape even if it's not the law. There is a case when someone is raped to intend to harm them both pysically and psychologically. Then there is the case when someone is raped when somebody is mistaken just so they have sexual pleassure from it. The latter seems to be the case with Ched Evans if he is rightly convicted.
Saying yes doesn't constitute consent if you are too drunk to understand what you are consenting to (and importantly the man reasonably knows it)
Right now Evans is a convicted rapist and based on the evidence at the time this verdict was reached by a jury,
If the new evidence supplied makes this verdict unsafe and a re trial is needed to quash this conviction then all well and good he will no longer be a rapist and nonce
As for his birds father the geezer Is a prick tbh even ignoring the rape issue he is supporting someone who has not denied having sex with the girl and as a result embarrassing and causing humiliation to hos daughter he has actively supported him, when 99 out of a 100 dad's would've kicked the shit out of Evans and ensured his daughter stayed away from him, there is more to be learnt about the relationship of the Father and Evans and how he can so publicly support someone who thinks so little of his daughter,
Although when you're a fifties-something company director, living on a diet of business lunches, trying to kick the shit out of a very fit, six feet tall young man may not be a cunning plan. He should have paid someone else to do it for him.
Comments
The world is not as simple as saying "he was found guilty so he's a rapist but if he's now acquitted he's no longer a rapist".
If he's acquitted surely that means he was never a rapist and he served time for a crime he didn't commit.
And yet you accuse me of seeing everything in the world as Black and White! Oh the irony!
As her father, he must be fucking livid that Evans cheated on his daughter (forget the rape part for the moment), in fact most blokes would want him given a kicking, failing that lock the prick up. BUT her father doesn't do any of that, in fact he goes the other way, he defends Evans, privately and publicly, to the point of starting a campaign, with the family to clear his name, to be able to do that he MUST be clear in his own mind that Evans has been innocent all along (not of cheating but of rape). Therefore it follows that if someone is willing to back an accused and subsequently convicted rapist to such extremes, there HAS to be some milage in the new evidence/or innocence all along.
I've countered that by indicating that he is an individual with little secondary education, let alone a law degree, and as such is unlikely to be in a position to decide on whether or not the evidence points to Evans' guilt or otherwise. He can have opinions like the rest of us but they are just that, opinions. He brings nothing to the table on your "more than meets the eye" argument. There isn't "more than meets the eye". There is the evidence and there is the legislation.
I've then given you potential hypothetical reasons as to why he might be standing by Evans because that's what you asked for! You can't ask for such ideas and then say you don't understand why I've introduced them to the debate!
Anyway, of course, Massey has employed lawyers and private detectives to work on the case and they will have enjoyed being paid and unless the matter was hopeless, they'd be quite happy to continue. That said the CCRC must believe that the two trances of new evidence bring something new to the case. I, just like almost everybody else, have no idea what the "new evidence" is. Although it's a little odd that the evidence didn't get to the CCRC until as late as January and April this year. Where has the evidence been all this time? Nonetheless, clearly the CCRC felt it merited further consideration by the Court of Appeal. In its own words it is the "view of the Commission, (that the new evidence) could have added support to Mr Evans’s defence at trial and therefore raises a real possibility that the Court of Appeal may now quash the conviction."
The CCRC claims some 70% of the matters it refers are "quashed". But this figure is somewhat manipulated as it includes cases that the CoA sent back for trial by jury where the defendant was still found guilty and where alternative but lesser offences were imposed (manslaughter instead of murder for example). So, their real "success rate" may be a fair bit lower than that. (Of course there is little prospect of a re-trial for Evans as he's already out of jail - he'll either be guilty or not.)
Will the verdict be overturned or upheld once the CoA gets to consider the new material is the only thing that really matters.
If it is overturned, in theory, Evans is employable again. So, as you say, we will find out soon.
I don't wish to tarnish all footballers with the same brush, but a lad of 21 (or there abouts) with the fame and fortune these men have is likely to cheat on his long term girlfriend, from time to time. Irrespective as to the consent rules with regard to excessive alcohol I can see why a bloke (with minimal education) might be willing to continue to 'bless' his daughter's relationship with (and planned marriage to) a multi-millionaire footballer.
As disgusting as it might sound to you or I, I am not in the least surprised that her father didn't turn on him after the conviction. I am even less surprised that he supported him before he was found guilty. For all we know her father is not always faithful to his wife, and may have even, secretly, had respect for Evans' sexual encounters - of which I suspect there was more than one!
I did grasp the point. I just think it's a daft point, sorry.
It isn't as black and white as Convicted = FACT .
A conviction by one's peers means that a small group of people have been persuaded to believe one story and evidence over another story and evidence. This decision is then supported by a judge who carries out the sentancing.
If you need it black and white, let's look at these 4 scenarios.
1. If Ched Evans raped her, he is both a rapist and convicted as a rapist.
2. If Ched Evans didn't rape her, he is still convicted as a rapist but he is not actually a rapist.
3. Based on scenario 2, If Ched Evans is found based on the new evidence to be innocent, he was incorrectly convicted as a rapist and was never a rapist.
4. based on scenario 1, If Ched Evans is found based on the new evidence to be guilty still, he was correctly convicted as a rapist and is a rapist.
I don't get why this is so hard to grasp for others...
Not sticking up for the bloke just never believed the stuff against him
But I would never want him anywhere near our side despite I expect many many sides signing him on his acquittal
If the new evidence supplied makes this verdict unsafe and a re trial is needed to quash this conviction then all well and good he will no longer be a rapist and nonce
As for his birds father the geezer Is a prick tbh even ignoring the rape issue he is supporting someone who has not denied having sex with the girl and as a result embarrassing and causing humiliation to hos daughter he has actively supported him, when 99 out of a 100 dad's would've kicked the shit out of Evans and ensured his daughter stayed away from him, there is more to be learnt about the relationship of the Father and Evans and how he can so publicly support someone who thinks so little of his daughter,
Maybe the mirror reflects the same image
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-north-east-wales-35707858