This is what i was wondering. However, Evans left through the fire exit and McDonald stayed throughout the night did he not? That is what happened apparently. Also rumour has it that the jury ruled 12-0 in favour to have Evans sent down. If true there must have been some really good evidence especially as all of them voted guilty.
Ched Evans Jailed
- Thread starter StephenMUFC
- Start date
- Replies 104
- Views 8K
- Status
This is what i was wondering. However, Evans left through the fire exit and McDonald stayed throughout the night did he not? That is what happened apparently. Also rumour has it that the jury ruled 12-0 in favour to have Evans sent down. If true there must have been some really good evidence especially as all of them voted guilty.
superbladesman
Member
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2010
- Messages
- 470
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
Think they met outside when Evans had finished (sorry couldn't think of how else to put it) and then they went to Ched's parents. They also said the McDonald seemed to show more care for the girl. I'm only going on updates on twitter and obviously haven't seen the CCTV but surely that can't be completely conclusive either.
Same here. I honestly thought they would both get off with it but obviously there was some big evidence against Evans.
superbladesman
Member
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2010
- Messages
- 470
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
Just really hope the players aren't affected to much by it all. Hopefully Danny Wilson keeps the players focused on the game he seems the kind of manager that will do that to be fair. Not really looking forward to tomorrow as much as I was now. Hope no **** heads start off Ched Evans songs and if they do I hope they are shouted down by others. Fans need to be United tomorrow and support the team.
Please. What if it was your sister?
What if it was your brother that was going to jail for 5 years, on what looks like extremely shaky evidence? Granted there is CCTV footage of her drunk, sure, but who knows what she said when she got to the hotel, she sure doesn't remember by the sounds of it. I can count at least 6 people I know at Uni that have had *** with someone, while completely off their face, to an extent that they cant remember in the morning, both male and female. None of these times has it even been considered 'rape' or involved anything to do with the police. Although it does sound a bit suspect, considering his brother and friends were watching through the window, I mean.. da'fuq?
I imagine it will get reversed on appeal, if not, then he will probably be out in 2 years (max) and then end up playing for Notts County or somewhere **** like that. Plymouth maybe.
I simply don't know enough facts about the case to judge the case at hand. It is worth noting that national guidelines in the UK right now dictate that they need to show some rape convictions, as the current conviction rate is thereabouts of 10% at best due to the difficulty of proving intent or consent. The bit which probably sunk him was 1. the friends and brother watching, and 2. the leaving after the act and not staying with the girl.
If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, walks like a duck. It's probably a duck. Though I agree that "probably" is in no way good enough for the legal system.
If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, walks like a duck. It's probably a duck. Though I agree that "probably" is in no way good enough for the legal system.
You mean both the couple were drunk at the time? Even if just one of them was surely the person they were having *** with wasn't in as much of a state as this girl appears to have been, and Evans came across her when she was already completely out of it, it's not like they had met earlier and she had given consent (this may be why Mcdonald got off). He appears to have been sober enough to have his wits about him- he knew what he was doing. The fact this girl could barely stand up and doesn't remember a thing makes it impossible to say whether she would have given sober consent or not, and she hardly knew what she was doing- That in my opinion is rape.
The argument some people are making that rape has to be a violent act for me doesn't hold true at all. Rape is surely any sexual act in which a person doesn't given full consent with a clear and sober head.
Also the minimum sentence is 2 and a half years. So even if he doesn't get off on appeal I imagine he will play football again. Some club will always take these people on, like Lee Hughes.
I'm with you Dunc, if the story I've read on this is even half true, half the people my age in Australia should be going to jail for rape. In saying that I dont condone it and if he really did rape her then good he is getting what he deserves, but for me the story sounds to much like a normal Saturday night binge, Sunday walk of shame.
She had no idea what she was doing, he did- and it's not the same as the cases I assume you're describing where two people who know each other or who met earlier in the night have a drunken ****. He specifically took her home with the express intention of having *** with her despite the fact he knew full well she was in no shape to give proper consent. He may not have meant it as a malicious rape, but he clearly took massive advantage of this girl and is incredibly dense if he thought it would qualify as a mutual act.
Like I said this type of thing happens all the time in Australia. You look at it so 1 dimensional, she could have quite easily said yes but she claims she doesn't remember (**** she might not remember but that is not my point). She could of consented and the fact that these guys are young and dumb didn't think her being drunk mattered to that fact. I've been out on the town several times and seen guys pick up girls who are just able to walk and they do not know each other so for me if the story I've read is true, these guys are guilty of sheer stupidty, not rape. Yes they took advantage, yes there should be repercussions, but 5 years for rape? That for me is a joke.
NOW pump the breaks a moment Alicwkd. You're facts are whack. He (Evans) didn't take her any where - apparently she agreed to go to the other lads hotel room who (the other bloke mcdonald or something) text'd Evans to come by so he did according to testimony Mcdonald asked the girl if Evans could join in and she said yes (This is just testimony so don't get your **** outta sync here).
You may be right on the placement of the case being slightly different than the one jono proposed but he isn't far off to be honest. There was no intent by Evans to 'rape' or 'molest' this girl it was not premeditated which is why he only got 5 instead of the 15 which it is normally for rape. Jono is clearly alluding to the fact that any drunken mis-adventure could technically be called rape by a woman at any point, and legally he's right. If you have read the majority of the posts on this thread you would have read my post earlier about the married couple where the wife claimed her husband raped her.
I will tell you right now that consent is one of the hardest things to prove in a court of law. I believe that the girl was in a automaton state and would have had no control or hindsight about her actions. However as it was ruled in a 1960 case there is no space for that sort of defense so why would it be used to condemn a man?
How do you know what's shaky evidence? All we know is what's released through the media, whereas there was a 12 man jury to hear all of the facts by the prosecution and defence and they arrived at a guilty verdict. I'll trust the justice system to deliver a fair verdict over anecdotal evidence of different scenarios. He's a convicted rapist and I'll condemn him as such. If, if he wins an appeal against the verdict I'll happily repent. But at this moment in time he is guilty, and I'll trust that verdict under the pretence that any for/against arguments that can be made here will be have been made and more in a superior way in court than anyone here can do, and he was still found guilty.
Maybe she did say yes, but the fact that she was so heavily intoxicated means it's hardly a credible consent. For me if someone who is sober or close to be sober picks up someone else who is barely concious and takes them home to have ***, that is worthy of severe punishment. The law is clear that under the influence of large amounts of alcohol (or other intoxicants) the individual in question is not deemed able to give true consent.
Evans must have known this, and he knew full well she was under massive influence of alcohol, so he surely must have known what he was doing was against the law. Whether you class it as an act of rape is a matter of opinion, but what is clear is that he was violating the law.
I see where you're coming from. The point I was making is that although she may very well have given consent, the law does state that if an individual is under the influence of intoxicants it doesn't constitute full consent. They must have known this law, and they must have at some point down the line questioned whether it was a good idea to have *** with this girl who, in the eyes of the law at least, was not a consenting individual.
Reportedly the jury verdict was unanimous, which leads me to believe facts came out of which we have no knowledge. I could be wrong of course, but it seems as though all the evidence pointed to a situation where there is no way Evans could have known if she would have given consent had she been sober.
Anything of importance that the jury knows, the media will report. It's their job, and moreover, they can't give a biased report in this case due to laws against it.
The judge is to give his summary on monday. Anything that hasn't already come out about the case may do then. The fact there was a unanimous verdict makes me think the evidence must have been strong. Although of course that is a slightly dangerous assumption to make.
There won't be anything that hasn't already come out. The judge's summary is just that, a summary of the case and such.
True, but regardlessly the people who made the verdict are far more well placed to decide his guilt. The fact that he picked her up in an initial state where all evidence would indicate that she was drunk to the point where she was incapable of doing much let alone consent, going by the law would indicate he was correctly convicted. Also, since he apparently filmed it I assume the contents of that were used as evidence against him in some way.
It's not like it's just her word against his, where convictions are rare. There's CCTV footage and multiple witnesses that can verify her being in no fit state to legally consent. I think he's a vile idiot, and deserves his punishment.
- Status