You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
It didn't take the jury long to find him not guilty http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-37659009
The stuff he has admitted to doesn't really give him any cause for celebration, tbh.
He may be a bit of a self entitled scumbag but I hope he sues alot of people over this
He was heavily critisised for never admitting it and not saying sorry...Lots of people will have egg on their face now
Good decision. If the girl couldn't remember if she'd consented then IMO in the absence of other evidence it couldn't be certain beyond reasonable doubt that she hadn't.
Respect to her. She never claimed to have been raped and the temptation to "remember" that she'd consented and make the whole drama go away must have been immense. She did the right thing and stuck to the truth IMO.
Very good point, outofbreath.
outofbreath - MemberGood decision. If the girl couldn't remember if she'd consented then IMO it couldn't be certain beyond reasonable doubt that she hadn't.
Respect to her. She never claimed to have been raped and the temptation to "remember" that she'd consented and make the whole drama go away must have been immense. She did the right thing and stuck to the truth IMO.
Agreed - it's a shit case all round really, a dirty sordid thing happened, and it was worth investigating but I suspect it wouldn't have gotten past the CPS if he wasn't a footballer. Being able to use the image of young footballers being arseholes (most fit the profile it seems) made it more prosecutable IMHO.
there are no winners in this case
He is not a rapist but he is an absolute arsehole
No idea why his partner and her family stood by him given how he acted
not rape but Trumpesque in his behaviour
no winners here, evans whilst he's (wrongly) lost 2.5 years of his life and his career still looks like a scum bag
could Sheffield United have any sort of claim for compo here? Losing their star striker contributing to their relegation (iirc)
no winners here, evans whilst he's (wrongly) lost 2.5 years of his life and his career still looks like a scum bag
Indeed
Respect to her.
this...Not so much....
Unless you respect wannabe wags who get too pished to keep their pants on..
Wonder what the 'new evidence ' was...
As above, he's a tawdry character, and the girlfriend and her family sticking by him, and in fact bankrolling his case, is quite bizarre.
From what I remember from just before his release, there was CCTV footage of the girl entering the hotel, and she appeared to be in a fit state. Wasn't there also texts from the girl in the aftermath to her friends saying this was her opportunity to get rich???
All in all, a pretty grim situation
He is not a rapist but he is an absolute arsehole
This^ +1.
However, being an arsehole doesn't mean you should have a highly lucrative career destroyed. This whole thing has cost him several millions pounds.
the new evidence was a sexual partner from the week[days] before Ched and two weeks after the incident who said she said the same things
"**** me harder" basically
Rare to allow sexual history/behaviour into the trial
she sent lucid and well spelt texts to a friend whilst to drunk to consent - well an hour before the incident and pushed a man off her in a kebab shop.
Wonder what the 'new evidence ' was...
Apparently former sexual partners were interviewed which may have painted a different picture of her.
Unless you respect wannabe wags who get too pished to keep their pants on..
More respect for her than for men who have sex with pished women when they're barely in a state to consent.
The law is an ass when it comes to rape. It's ridiculous that "consent" is even used as a measure. It should be "enthusiastic participation".
I think the new witness also said she had a history of forgetting she'd consented.
Personally I think that's bollocks, but the result feels right to me.
the new evidence was a sexual partner from the week[days] before Ched and two weeks after the incident who said she said the same things
"**** me harder" basically
Really? So consent from previous times can be used for future reference? Jeez.
"The law is an ass when it comes to rape. It's ridiculous that "consent" is even used as a measure. It should be "enthusiastic participation".
You're obviously not married. 🙂
Really? So consent from previous times can be used for future reference? Jeez
No the argument was that she was consenting as she was acting in the same manner as when she did consent. One would assume a rape victim would not as for it harder for example.
No one argued she had sex with someone else weeks earlier or later so it meant she consented with him.
I was recently a juror in a rape trial.
The judge was very clear about what constituted consent. Women in a relationship can be raped and still have consensual sex with the same man before and after the rape so her history with other partners must have been particuarly relevant in this case. I didn;t hear the whole case so I don't know what basis it was included under.
She has not been proven a liar, discussion of her sexual morals on here serves no purpose, imo.
It was a very strange case. The girl never made a complaint and never did she claim he raped her.
I think the new witness also said she had a history of forgetting she'd consented
As far as I recall the new witness said that after he had had drunken sex with her, she'd woken up forgetting what had happened the night before, i.e. she had a history of losing her memory after a drink.
This was pivitol as the case had rested on the assumption that if she had been so drunk that she forgot what had happened she must have been too drunk to give consent.
Agreed I am trying to simply report what happened and not judgediscussion of her sexual morals on here serves no purpose
discussion of her sexual morals on here serves no purpose
But surely her sexual morals and the sexual morals of the 2 footballers, is what caused the whole thing?
[i] is what caused the whole thing? [/i]
what 'caused the whole thing' was a question mark over whether consent was given on this occasion, not who she might choose to sleep with?
"As far as I recall the new witness said that after he had had drunken sex with her, she'd woken up forgetting what had happened the night before, i.e. she had a history of losing her memory after a drink.
This was pivitol as the case had rested on the assumption that if she had been so drunk that she forgot what had happened she must have been too drunk to give consent"
Thanks for the correction.
You're obviously not married.
I'm afraid I am, but that's a different thread. Actually it's an entire forum. And we're back to Mumsnet!
No one argued she had sex with someone else weeks earlier or later so it meant she consented with him.
Thanks for the clarification Junkyard.
It was a problematic case for loads of reasons - not just the loss of memory, but also the fact that Evans did not initially meet up with the girl, but joined in after her original partner had finished. This was what made evidence of specific consent between the woman and Evans (or the lack of it) far more important, because there was none of the preliminary context of meeting, travelling together willingly etc.
I'm not sure that the new evidence fully answers those issues, but just pushes it slightly back into the arena of 'reasonable doubt'. Fair enough I guess, but I can't say Evans has gone up greatly in my estimation, or that I'm that bothered about his career.
More respect for her than for men who have sex with pished women when they're barely in a state to consent.
An absolute minefield and I don't know the answer to it, but I can't get my head around the fact that being too pished to be able to legally consent is a 'defence', whereas being too pished to be able to realise she's too pished to legally consent to it makes you guilty.
It's a nightmare to investigate and no doubt to prosecute/defend. There's rarely an independent witness to the event, and to be 100% sure of guilt or innocence would (in most cases) require jurors to be able to mindread - remember that the honest held belief of the man as to the partners consent is a crucial part of the crime. Alcohol complicates this further as it affects judgement on all sides.
He is not a rapist but he is an absolute arsehole
This is pretty much my view.
The new ruling feels the right one but without sitting through both trials I have no basis for that feeling bar gut instinct.
enthusiastic participation
Not sure my memory goes back that far....
Awful case, as others have said it's a legal minefield and no one comes out of it looking anything other than thoroughly unpleasant. Always intrigued me why his partner and her family have been his greatest supporters.
I'd hope that young men and women might learn something from all this, but I fear that the result will be twisted by some young lads.
Yep, feels like the right verdict now (clearly working on 3rd hand reporting at best).
Irrespective of guilt or otherwise what sort of woman would stand by him through all this? Apart from one who likes a wag lifestyle above self respect I guess.
The girl and Evans' life are all a lot lot worse for a 10 minute leg trembler in a Rhyl premier inn.
A sordid tale of ego, money, power, drink and recriminations.
Sells papers though.
Rarely does it ruin careers, only seeks to fulfil sex sells both to money and ego.
Irrespective of guilt or otherwise what sort of woman would stand by him through all this? Apart from one who likes a wag lifestyle above self respect I guess.
Don't become a psychologist.
Her parent are millionaires she does not need him for his money and has stood by him when he has noneApart from one who likes a wag lifestyle above self respect I guess.
I have no idea why
Maybe....we don't know her.
Or him.
I know, shocking!
Lack of facts[or insight] is never a problem on this forum
Heard the coverage on R4 and Ch4 news. Allowing prior sexual history is very rare but was permitted here to it's directly relevant nature (sexual terms used and "forgetting"). I wonder whether the witness came forward after £50k reward for info was made available.
No winners here. R4 says Ched will almost certainly not be compensated as Govt scheme is limited financially and there is no company to go after. He last the best part of his career, probably more than 50% of his earnings. A nightmare for the girl - police say they will go after those who named her.
No winners
both said under oath they had not been paid and the second one said he did not know about till the first was asked about it.I wonder whether the witness came forward after £50k reward for info was made available.
then again they are known to his circle of friends according to the Guardian
i appear alone in not having much sympathy for this girl. She Had found herself in exactly the same situation before yet failed to mention this very important factor to the police.
Likewise, did she really not accuse him of Rape? BBc appears to suggest otherwise.
I wonder if those who were so appalled he never appologised have anything to say on the matter
There are no winners in this and I feel sorry for all involved
as far i know she always said she couldn't remember
Its really not inconceivable she was so drunk she could not consent and she has paid a high price - named and shamed on the internet- forced to move home, change name etc
Its not likely to make women more likely to report rape and I dont think anyone comes out of it well and they have both paid a high price
No winners? It'll tell poorly educated newly mega rich gobshites to think about keeping it dry.
Its not likely to make women more likely to report rape
this...
I also think the CPS and police should take a long hard look at themselves.
I hope Jess Ennis feels proud .
Heard the coverage on R4 and Ch4 news. Allowing prior sexual history is very rare but was permitted here to it's directly relevant nature
Same with (Fred and) Rosemary West - she had (before the most of the murders) had a young lesbian lover who she liked to strangle with blue rope whilst covering her head in a bag - which was very similar to 2 (3?) of the buried bodies found.
The young lover stopped the relationship because she thought it was going too far and that there were a few times where she was lucky to survive.
A pretty pyrrhic 'victory' in many ways. His mate texting him to say he'd "got hold of a bird". He just assumes that being a footballer means she'll be keen to let him have a bash as well. Then they both **** off and leave her to wake up naked and alone in hotel room. Not exactly Nelson Mandela being released from Victor Verster prison, is it?
I also think the CPS and police should take a long hard look at themselves
What for exactly?
Not listening to the retrospective opinions of internet big shots, obviously.
I hope Jess Ennis feels proud .
Indeed....
The first verdict was a disgrace. If you looked at all the facts in the first trial if McDonald was found not guilty then there was no way that Evans should have been found guilty.
I don't know anything about Evans' character but even though his behaviour was truly reprehensible - it wasn't rape.
Allison Pearson wrote a very well informed article in [url= http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11226209/Ched-Evans-Sorry-but-all-rapes-are-not-the-same.html ]The Telegraph[/url] in 2014 which highlighted the failings in the Evans case. She received bucketloads of hate-mail as a result. A lot of do-gooders jumped on the bandwagon without knowing anything about the case.
Not listening to the retrospective opinions of internet big shots, obviously.
Ah yes, silly me!
He's been found not guilty, get off your high horses. That's NOT GUILTY as decided by a jury - you were happy to accept the charge/conviction when it went the other way
Most people on here seem to live in some idealistic kind of self righteous utopia.
Since when did a drunken 3-some make you an evil scumbag? It happens quite a lot outside your fluffy little worlds, believe it or not! Yes he cheated on his Mrs - that's for them to deal with between themselves.
Personally, I don't really give a shit what goes off in a footballers life, or the life of some bird with a questionable sexual history. I'm more pissed off with the fact that our star striker has been driven away from our club by our retired Olympian golden girl. Chesterfield had the balls to sign an 'innocent' man and he's now banging them in for fun - oh, the ironing 😡 😉
I'm more pissed off with the fact that our star striker has been driven away from our club
Phew. I was afraid you were going to come up with something trivial there.
Ramsey Neil - Member
I hope Jess Ennis feels proud .
IIRC her standpoint was that the club should not sign an (at the time) convicted rapist, seems like a pretty fair p.o.v, so yes she should feel proud
David Walsh wrote a superb article on this case a while ago and subsequently - rightly or wrongly - I believed Evans to be innocent of rape. It remains a fascinating case, though, and certainly one of many nuances worthy of discussion. Being innocent doesn't automatically make you a decent chap.
I was going to link the Court of Appeal judgement that allowed the retrial but this is shorter and more accessible:-
https://thesecretbarrister.com/2016/10/14/10-myths-busted-about-the-ched-evans-case/
I understand where we got to with the judgement and the jury's verdict but this is not an easy case that leads to clear answers
You are donald trump and I claim my $5 🙄Most people on here seem to live in some idealistic kind of self righteous utopia.
The manner of the thresome is the issue nor the fact we are all offended it was threesome *Since when did a drunken 3-some make you an evil scumbag?
WHat makes him a scumbag was when he cheated on his partner, when he walked in uninvited , when he left afterwards, or that he did not even know her name or when he said
“We could have had any girl we wanted. When we go out it’s not uncommon to pick up girls. We’re footballers. Footballers are rich and they have money. That is what girls like.”
Its quite hard to defend his behaviour as good though we could debate how "bad it was but what is the point.
* technically I think it was one after the other rather than an actual one.
The first verdict was a disgrace. If you looked at all the facts in the first trial if McDonald was found not guilty then there was no way that Evans should have been found guilty.
The reason why McDonald was found not guilty seemed to be quite clear: because the woman had willingly accompanied McDonald to the hotel, the jury considered that she had given consent and/or that McDonald had reasonably believed that consent had been given. The circumstances involving Evans were quite different. With regard to looking at all the facts, that's what the jury did.
Allison Pearson wrote a very well informed article in The Telegraph in 2014 which highlighted the failings in the Evans case.
Is that genuinely your idea of a very well informed article? It seems Alison Pearson also struggles with the idea that 12 jurors who listen to all the evidence presented in court are best placed to come to a verdict, so instead she seeks her verdict from an alternative source:
My informal jury at the beauty salon concluded that, if you go to a hotel room with a footballer, “you’re not going to end up playing Scrabble, are you?” Unlike the law of the land, the twentysomething therapists believe that young women like them have to take responsibility for their own behaviour and not rely on the bloke “to know whether you want it or not”.
My informal jury at the beauty salon concluded that, if you go to a hotel room with a footballer, “you’re not going to end up playing Scrabble, are you?”
rubbish
[img] https://flic.kr/p/N2F7Y9 ][img] https://c1.staticflickr.com/6/5618/30211360632_dc130808b4_z.jp g" target="_blank">https://flic.kr/p/N2F7Y9 ][img] https://c1.staticflickr.com/6/5618/30211360632_dc130808b4_z.jp g"/> [/img][/url][url= https://flic.kr/p/N2F7Y9 ]2942062400000578-3106230-image-a-4_1433181308932[/url] by [url= https://www.flickr.com/photos/134487805@N07/ ]mike.mcdermid[/url], on Flickr[/img]
shes a proper dog though
Not guilty of rape. Wow, that's a ringing endorsement, then. The next time I see a CV should I expect to see "non-rapist" in the personal statement as some kind of guarantee of good character?
Brilliant, so is that the model, then?
"Don't worry, mate. So long as she's so pissed you can't really tell whether the murmur is a 'yes' or a 'no', then you can do what you like". This strange looking glass world, eh?
I'll pass on the whole "being exonerated of a serious crime by a hair's breadth means you are a saint" line of reasoning.
Not dissimilar to Wayne Rooney next in line as official national treasure after good old Babs Windsor. Anyone remember 'Auld Slapper'?
Still, lads will be lads, won't they?
Until they get caught out, then they'll need to pay a clever lawyer an awful lot of cash to wheedle them off. That's egalitarian. A real working class tale to warm the cockles.
Falsely accused of rape, then cleared sounds a bit different to your opening gambit though dannyh?
The rest of your made up opinionated post is your made up opinion.
I wish we had a like button on this forum.
What i really would like is a clear explanation as to how the fresh evidence that lead to his aquital came about and developed over time , it appears from a scan reading of the CRT of appeal report that crucial chunks were not in the first draft of witness ev and only developed after the families investigators re interviewed . The court of appeal accepted the good faith of this process but their question was limited to is their fresh evidence that may cast doubt on the conviction (gloss for internet debate ) the jury heard it and believed it may be credible. It is one of those cases where at the end of the day you can never be sure which under our system means not guilty, not proven innocent.
Falsely accused of rape, then cleared sounds a bit different to your opening gambit though dannyh?The rest of your made up opinionated post is your made up opinion.
Ah, the people's game. Wonderful, isn't it?
I have an opinion. Whoa, shit, really? I really must stop stuff like that.
Did Rooney cheat on his missus and shag an elderly prostitute or not? Pretty sure that's not my opinion. And yet he's still held up as someone who is a role model. Errrr, if it's all the same, you can take your role model and, well, you know the rest.
Luckily, you're just trolling, though. So I don't have to take anything you type seriously.
[quote=TheArtistFormerlyKnownAsSTR ]Falsely accused of rape, then cleared sounds a bit different to your opening gambit though dannyh?
The rest of your made up opinionated post is your made up opinion.
Accused of rape then found not guilty beyond reasonable doubt sounds a bit different to your first line
Trolling.......but not very well.
[img] 
[/img]
I hope Jess Ennis feels proud .
She damn well should feel proud. It would have been much easier for her to have said nothing, and she had little to gain (and probably more to lose) by taking a stand (no pun intended) on the issue.
The club presumably wanted to benefit from the association with Ennis' success and wholesome image when it named the stand after her, and I imagine that it was part of marketing a positive image for the club.
'Unfortunately' for the club Ennis' wholesome image wasn't just an image - she genuinely is wholesome and quite reasonably and justifiably she decided to make it clear that she did not want her name associated with a club that employed Evans. Given Evans' admitted behaviour, I would not be surprised if Ennis did not change her view.
Whether the club did or did not decide to employ Evans was the club's choice, and the situation they found themselves in was a problem entirely of their own making. To blame Ennis for that decision is pathetic.
Ah, the people's game. Wonderful, isn't it?I have an opinion. Whoa, shit, really? I really must stop stuff like that.
Did Rooney cheat on his missus and shag an elderly prostitute or not? Pretty sure that's not my opinion. And yet he's still held up as someone who is a role model. Errrr, if it's all the same, you can take your role model and, well, you know the rest.
Luckily, you're just trolling, though. So I don't have to take anything you type seriously.
So you don't have a response to my post, apart from blathering that you have an opinion?
You then go completely off tangent.
And then accuse me of trolling?
Get back under your bridge, or give some weight to your 'guilty as NOT charged' verdict...
Funny how jury's decisions are questionable when it doesn't suit someone's prejudiced opinions
Personally, I don't really give a shit what goes off in a footballers life, or the life of some bird with a questionable sexual history.
You start your post by saying what happened is nothing unusual then you focus on the girls "questionable sexual history". That either makes you very very stupid or a bit of a misogenistic bell end.
crankboy - Member
I was going to link the Court of Appeal judgement that allowed the retrial but this is shorter and more accessible:-
https://thesecretbarrister.com/2016/10/14/10-myths-busted-about-the-ched-evans-case/
I understand where we got to with the judgement and the jury's verdict but this is not an easy case that leads to clear answers
Thanks crankboy, I've bookmarked him.
This is a very good link and well worth a read for anyone with an interest in the actual legal issues in this case. For those that prefer to align their opinion to an uninformed quote or headline, it's not really for them.
Thesecretbarrister.com is quite informative, I recommend some people read it.
Thanks to deadlydarcy
Sorry crankboy didn't see you hab already linked to it.
Crankboys link is excellent and everyone should read it before commenting.
Especially Point 10. 😥
+1 to thesecretbarrister link.
There's a dichotomy here, as there is with all criminal legal cases, in that it's seldom a binary situation yet the decision is. 90% probability.... still not guilty. So is he completely innocent - probably not - and he wasn't found innocent, just not guilty. And certainly not innocent of being a bit of a scumbag that thinks it's OK to join his mate and a girl, have sex with her and then walk off again.
And in that respect I think it's fine for Jess Ennis-Hill to ask not to be associated with him in any way irrespective of whether what he did was rape or not. Clubs and companies have the right to dismiss people if they commit acts that bring their organisations into disrepute, which i don't think many would argue this has not done, so i see no reason why an individual can't effectively do the same.
The fact these acts are not uncommon within professional football isn't a defence; I'm a lifelong football fan and deeply ashamed by this aspect of the culture, but it's gone on for far longer than the last few years, let's not kid ourselves. It just hasn't been as media exposed, with the change that a proportion of the 'victims' are willing participants seeing it as a route to making some money. George Best? Robin Friday? Still revered but if they were players today they'd be paying lawsuits and injunctions week after week.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not apologising or excusing Evans (or Best or Friday). Picking up a girl and taking her back to a hotel with your rich footballer mates so you can video her participating in group sex is abhorrent, but it's not necessarily a crime.
The guy has been found not guilty, thats all that matters. His personallity is irrelavent, I don't give a monkey if he's an a-hole or not as he has no impact on my life. He should be left alone to get on with his life. He isn't the first or the last footballer to be a ****.
That either makes you very very stupid or a bit of a misogenistic bell end.
They're not mutually exclusive.
I don't think any Male should be celebrating his Not Guilty verdict.
bikebouy - MemberI don't think any Male should be celebrating his Not Guilty verdict.
really, why would that be? so anyone thats found not guilty is an unproven criminal? what a world we live in that you think that way.
They're not mutually exclusive.
I was trying to be generous 😆
bikebouy - Member
I don't think any Male should be celebrating his Not Guilty verdict.
really, why would that be? so anyone thats found not guilty is an unproven criminal? what a world we live in that you think that way.
Because it demonstrates that people in this country still have some very backward views about women. Evans comes out of this looking like someone with a prehistoric attitude towards women. It sits right along side Trumps attitude towards women as beacon of misogyny (even if the allegations of his behaviour are false). I would hope my son grows up to be someone who respects women rather than the abhorrent, manipulative, predatory role models these two represent.
[quote=poah ]really, why would that be? so anyone thats found not guilty is an unproven criminal? what a world we live in that you think that way.
I'm fairly sure he didn't suggest that. However in this particular case given all the evidence available it seems quite reasonable to question whether not guilty means innocent (the background to that has been mentioned a few times, and is covered very well in the Secret Barrister link), and whether there might have been a different verdict in a Scottish court...
I'm not even going into the question of whether the new verdict shows Mr Evans to be a better person.
he is just the same as a lot of people that maybe speak shite but don't act on it. men and woman are just as guilty of speaking poorly of the opposite sex. Do I say things that are mysogynisc and sexist, yes but only when its in the sport of the converstion and I certainly don't act like that towards woman. You should hear some of the things I hear about men in my work.
This is a good quote which sums up how I feel about it. There are of course exceptions.
Richard Garside, director of the centre for crime and justice studies said: "Clearly there is some kind of notion that footballers are role models and there is some kind of notion that individuals should not continue to have a public role if they have been convicted of an offence.
"My concern is that those people who feel strongly that he should not be a footballer are confusing the question of practice with the appropriate provisions of a criminal sanction. The court does not impose unemployment as a punishment.
"My view on life after the crime remains the same regardless of whether the original verdict is held or he is acquitted. His return to work should be on the basis of footballing judgement.
"Part of a law-based society is that you respect the decision of the law rather than fall back on informal justice imposed and handed out by members of the community who feel strongly about certain matters."