blonde poker forum

I'd like to hear opinions on the subject of Ched Evans returning to football after his release from prison.

Should footballers and sportsmen be judged differently to other professions when it comes to rehabilitating into society after serving a sentence. Given he is still maintaining he is innocent and is pushing for the case to be looked at again should he be allowed to play football when he is deemed fit or should he not be allowed to play again until any appeal is heard?

I've been away so only just reading stuff from this week, seems to have been some controversy on TV shows with differences of opinion and politicians also adding their opinions too. Can the guy ever be given a fair chance to rehabilitate now or does he not deserve to be given another chance given his crime is one of the worst crimes I and I am sure others can imagine?

should be allowed to work

why are professional footballers role models any more than i am a role model to children i have never met as a professional gambler?

They are deemed to be rolemodels because they earn fortunes.  Jealously from others makes them role models.  The best netball and hockey players in the UK are not role models because they don't earn £20k a week.  Your parents should be your role models, not some low IQ sportsman who you have never met and probably will never meet.

I don't see why he shouldn't be allowed to play if a team wants to sign him. He was convicted of a crime and served the sentence given to him. Market forces dictate that as he was quite a decent player, there will be a team in the football league who will sign him I would expect. Tricky thing is for the fans of that team who know they will be cheering on a convicted rapist every week. I don't see how you can say people can commit some crimes and then go back to the sport afterwards but not others, you would have to do a list of bad crimes and very bad crimes.

If he was a plumber would he be alright to return to work and would he actually be obliged to tell his plumbing clients of his past? I understand this is different because he is a role model for young people and so on. But it is no secret what he was convicted for, so everyone knows. I believe the key part of the whole debate is that he has always denied it and showed no contrition.

Birmingham signed Marlon King and I always felt a bit awkward cheering one of his goals because of his unsavoury past.

In the casino in Berlin I know a guy who is involved with Babelsberg FC (then a third division team, now in the 4th tier). They had a player called Süleyman Koç who was imprisoned for a violent robbery and they kept him on contract. He trained in prison and then when he was moved to an open prison he was allowed out for the afternoon to play fixtures in the German Third Division. Shortly after he was released he signed for Paderborn and is now playing in the top division and doing pretty well for them. I wonder if anyone has ever played for a league club in England whilst still in prison.

It is interesting that Sheff Utd didn't fire him but ran down his contract. That would indicate to me that they plan to re-sign him.

J Pennant played whilst on tag (with a tag around his ankle under his sock) for Birmingham in the EPL.  Don't think anyone has actually played whilst in prison in the UK.

Ricky Otto did four years for going over the pavement and I've fond memories of watching him play for Barry Fry's Southend. Leslie Grantham was a murderer. Is it the 'yeuch' factor at work here - that he as a sportsman committed an 'unmanly' crime?

Slightly off topic but I have done a lot of reading on this case

Was amazed he was found guilty

To be honest Arb that was one of the things that sat really badly with me looking thru todays coverage. Nick Clegg has actually said

'''Clegg, MP for Sheffield Hallam, said: "When you take a footballer on, you are not taking just a footballer these days, you are also taking on a role model."'

Other than I can't believe he has ever watched football these days if he thinks they are role models. I'm amazed Nick Clegg can lecture morals to anyone given how he acted once he got in power. That's just a small part of why this sits badly, why do Nick Clegg or other people in media decide they are well placed to dictate opinion here given they seem to have decided he should be a role model?

Totally agree with that.  I watched the video footage in the hotel lobby (what they based the case on about how drunk the girl was - she didn't look that drunk walking around the hotel lobby collecting a pizza) and the written detail and i was amazed he was found guilty.

Never followed the case at the time, so likewise I've been reading about his case on the family website.
 Very interesting.

http://www.chedevans.com

Footballers at the top level are just highly paid employees no different to city boys (brokers/traders) who piss it up the wall every night/do coke/champers/hookers/strippers etc etc.  Why are city traders not role models to young kids studying economics at school?  I just hate all this role model bullshit.  I would hazard a guess at the majority of players in the epl wouldn't even play football if the max wage was capped at a grand a week.  Most don't love the game.  It's a job.  They don't care what fans think of them etc etc.  They got bundles of cash and live the life they choose to do that your average working class lad would if he had bundles as well.  It amazes me more of them don't get caught up in stuff like this given the money involved nowadays.

Excellent piece by fleetstreetfox in the Mirror today.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/cheer-ched-evans-cant-say-4453578

Innocent or guilty, Ched Evans is a scumbag.

I believe for some very naive reason he was told and went along with the feeling he had very little chance of being found guilty.

Because of this he employed a very cheap legal team

I have no issue with him playing again at all and think it would be unfair if he was prevented from playing but I don't really understand why people think that footballers shouldn't consider themselves to be and behave as role models.  The game (and their big wages) is only viable because the players are hero worshipped and with that commes responsibility.  To compare them to highly paid bankers or other jobs is a very poor example as the other people are offering a service which in itself has an economic value.  Playing footbll is only econoically viable if people want to watch it and as a player you have a responsibility to hold the game and yourself to a higher standard than ordinary people because your job is reliant on it and to not do so lets down a lot of people.   

They let titus bramble play....

Any article that includes a persons salary in its headline and picks a picture that makes someone look as bad as they have with JF can only have one agenda surely?

It's part of the original point, why do these people think it is ok for them to decide they are the moral compass here, they seem to be using this criminals release as fodder for them to spout and write about. tbh it is laughable that the guy writes that Evans has now dragged the victim thru it all again when he has decided to write about it in one of the best selling newspapers. Why have these people decided this rapist should now have been a role model after he has offended  and that being a role model in their eyes makes his treatment after his release different to a regular guy on the streets treatment after his release?

Ok i understand that argument.  The bad guys then are the selfish, results above everything, club chairmen who will still sign him to deliver the goals but ignore the responsibility to present the correct image to their customers (younger fans). 

If sheff Utd dont sign him.someone will

The naming and the bullying of the victim by the Evans supporters was sickening to view.

Marc I love you but don't be silly. Every player would play in the prem for £1k a week (assuming that was the standard abroad)

These guys get good at the age of 6/7/8 they are not thinking about £

yes that was totally out of order wasn't it.

There are some professions and offences that are incompatible, if you have committed a child crime you can't work with kids.Can't be a lawyer if you have a deception offence and can't be a police officer if you've done an armed robbery etc. As far as I know there is no offence that rules you out of being a sportsman, so if the guy serves his time shouldn't he be treated as an ex criminal that is a sportsman and be allowed to do his job as an ex criminal that was a joiner or electrician would be allowed to do?

He played for my club and I never really thought they would take him back after he did his time so now it looks like it is a possibility I find myself swaying between 60/40 they should take him back and 40/60 the other way.

What changed my mind to he should be allowed back was reading all the TV shows and newspapers had been lobbying for him not to be taken back as if he has some mythical role model/or to be made an example of. So I do kind of agree with part of what you said, at best I think he is much closer to guilty of a crime than he is innocent and he was found guilty of being a rapist. Tho when people do their time they should be able to work in their chosen profession as long as it isn't the type of job/crime connection like the ones above.

The more I think about this (especially after bobby1's last post) the more I wonder whether he should be able to play and if he is then surely there are certain restrictions on what he should be able to do.  For example nobody would let a sex offender be a teacher yet presumably if he is signed by a team they will want him to take part in community relations including going into schools etc?  If that was any other profession parents in schools etc would be horrified.  Obviously when he plays he isnt an immediate danger but there is a lot more to being a footballer these days.

Not sure what you expect him to do?

Are there a list of suitable jobs? Binman/Street cleaner/Sewage worker? Is he also then condemned to be, for example, a street cleaner, and never allowed to better himself, if you get my drift?

If you let the guy out, as bobby says, as long as it isnt related, I am not sure how you stop him, and still be treating him fairly.

If he isn't allowed, then surely he should still be locked up?

It's a good point that Red, it would deffo seem to be inappropriate for him to do that kind of community relations. I'm pretty sure it was agreed that Lee Hughes would not do any interviews or PR work when he returned to football. Just to add some context without wishing to downplay how serious rape is, Lee Hughes was responsible for killing someone and he was allowed to play(and is still playing now) tho there was certainly this kind of coverage when he went back to being a footballer.


What is probably another tricky area and I don't know how this would work but he would be out on licence so could he be recalled if he breaches his licence by committing an offence?

Gets into a murky area if technically he could get a red card for punching someone and get taken back into custody?

I don't know if that would actually happen but given the state of the media coverage I've seen the last few days I think it would be a something for him to consider if that was a possibility.

Even if he still maintains his innocence he should speak out against the behaviour of some of supporters. because if all victims were treated like this we would definitely see a drop in rape complaints.

Oh sure it is a very difficult area and my gut feeling and initial reaction was that he should play but it is perfectly normal for sex offenders to have further restrictions placed on them that makes their lives difficult as part of that punishment and I am not sure he should be exempt from that just because he is a footballer and if he was straight up and accepted he had not behaved well and apologsed (even if he stopped short of admitting rape which may be perfectly reasonable) it would come across so much better than playing the victim in the way he has.

I am certain he has been told it would be "better" for him to put his hands up and admit to what he was charged with

He doesnt think he is though

I wouldn't employ him. There are no laws to stop him being employed, but I wouldn't employ him to clean the toilets where I work, never mind earn thousands a week to kick a ball around - I'd rather someone else got that money and the opportunity be given to someone else. Role model or not, being a professional footballer is a privileged position. He's abused that privilege. Lots of others have as well, and they're still employed and enjoy the trappings of being a professional footballer. I wouldn't employ them either.

Absolutely this.

I understand that too Kin, a part that makes me feel uneasy with him being taken back is that his previous transfer fee and possible future value might have a bearing on the decision.

How much would he have been earning prior to his trip to jail?  What would his market rate be now?

Wow, that ridiculous/sensationalist/holier-than-though article made me roll my eyes. And wtf about chucking in the tax avoiders, as if to stir everyone up to get them onside?

So he's had kids with three different partners. Does anyone have evidence of him never seeing them, or not paying child maintenance? People on benefits having one family with 6 kids is worse IMO, at least he can support them financially.


How many of us have woken up not remembering how we got home?
- Just because she didn't remember consent how was she convinced she didn't give it when drunk? Christ the stupid things I've done/agreed to when drunk.
How many of us have drunk heavily at the end of a night out and gone to sleep before the full effects have kicked in?
- I'm sure many women have lost control of their bladders after having fallen asleep
How many times have men chatted up women who agreed to come home with us "but nothing's going to happen!" (more often than not it does when they say that), then everything happens (and they are not hammered or coy when they come back).

Think we paid 3 million for him and think it was 20k a week. His value now surely very little isn't it but he was a Welsh international firing goals in before he went down and is 25 years old so could still have a transfer value in the future.

What on earth do you mean by the bolded bit?

she didnt go back with him though

I'm presuming the prosecution mentioned/used the fact that she woke up in her own (?) urine to argue that she was so drunk that she wet herself/couldn't conscent...but the loss of bladder control could have happened due to alcohol kicking in after going to sleep.

I haven't read all the facts of the case but I would be surprised whoever it was would mention to the staff member to keep an eye on the girl if he thought he had taken advantage TBH. Wouldn't he just scurry off and not mention anything?

This is taken from the Ched Evans supporters' website and I haven't been able to verify it elsewhere. It was after Ched got another key to the room and the porter knew the 3 of them were in there:

"the night porter had only minutes earlier been listening at the door of Room 14 because he was concerned that the occupancy of Room 14 was more than the hotel rules allowed. The night porter stated in Court that he had heard the sounds of people having sex – when pushed on this he said that he had heard both female and male voices “squealing, panting and groaning”. He also said that he heard a male voice ask for oral sex in a “playful” manner."

From watching the video of the girl walking back out of the hotel unassisted and then back in again in big wedges "borrowed from a friend" (again from the supporters website) she didn't seem in too bad a state.

Alternatively you could look at an independent website to see details of the trial.  You would discover that she was so "drunk" she fell over in a kebab shop, or another CCTV showed her walking in to a wall, or the bit where the night porter told the trial she was extremely drunk or that her eyes were glazed and she looked through him when he spoke to her. She said in court she thought her drink may have been spiked. Nah best just take the word of his supporters.

A jury found him guilty, he had two appeals refused.

I guess you could argue you didn't think this was all rape, or the evidence wasn't strong enough, but hard to argue he isn't pretty damn scummy to me.  He isn't coming across as showing a lot of contrition right now.  If you had asked me yesterday if he should play I would have said yes.  I hope he comes across a bit better in his statements than the stuff I have read from his supporters as this isn't endearing him to me.

Reported details from the time are here.
http://www.stokesentinel.co.uk/Clayton-McDonald-rape-trial-Accuser-extremely/story-15813402-detail/story.html (http://www.stokesentinel.co.uk/Clayton-McDonald-rape-trial-Accuser-extremely/story-15813402-detail/story.html)

Details of appeal here

https://www.crimeline.info/case/r-v-ched-evans-chedwyn-evans (https://www.crimeline.info/case/r-v-ched-evans-chedwyn-evans)

Charlie Webster (who i think is brilliant) explains why she'll resign as a patron of SUFC if they re-sign Ched Evans

http://bbc.in/1bjJrEp

rights and wrongs of case and verdict aside, its going to be a very very tough sell to any club's female fans

Thanks for that extra evidence Doobs, some of it was on the supporters website and they also mention the fact that she drunk much more than she normally would. I mentioned where I got that info from to indicate that I recognize it could be biased, a lot of their side I felt was written in a biased manner.

I am not saying I think he's innocent, or vice versa. And I do feel that in a jury system, a lot more guilty people get off, so the evidence must have been strong.

Interestingly so much of that evidence also applies to his friend who was found not guilty. Evans had sexual contact with her about 20 mins after his friend. Both said she consented (obviously) and she says she remembers nothing. It's a big call from the jury to give two different verdicts.

I'm not keen on quoting a lot from the Evans site but as these appeared in the police interviews. She asked Evans to perform a sex act on her and the police asked her what the phrase she used meant to confirm they were talking about the same thing. During sex she instigated positional changes and neither of the males left any DNA in the room. This is just tricky to write but does a man that is raping someone perform that action and does the female ever request that in a rape situation and does someone raping a girl stop before reaching the end?

I don't really know the answers for sure but it doesn't seem likely to me that either of those things happen. @Doobs, I don't think the girl had been drinking with the players so the spiking of her drink isn't something that the players were involved in if it did happen. The first meeting was in the kebab shop I think where she fell over and both players left the shop together before she approached the other guy on the street.

I wasn't really saying it appeared clear cut and I don't like the inconsistency.  I'd still be far more forgiving if he was a bit more contrite and his supporters hadn't caused my Facebook to be full of some pretty unpleasant stuff aimed at her. 

As I say I can see why people argue against rape, not that I support them, but what he did appears pretty scummy whatever you choose to label it as.  I don't really get why an innocent fella doesn't just walk out the door he came in by and can see why they might swing one way with him and not the other.  The judge who heard the appeal didn't see an inconsistency and he has seen all the evidence too.

Yes agreed...pretty scummy whatever happened.

Can believe it but I actually agree with this. 

In the case of Ched if he has the mental fortitude to deal with the abuse that's going to come his way then he deserves to play. 

Would you have said the same about Suarez?

Who did suarez rape?

Nobody I know of but he's also a bit of a scumbag with what he has done on the field and Kinboshi's arguement is:

" Role model or not, being a professional footballer is a privileged position. He's abused that privilege. Lots of others have as well, and they're still employed and enjoy the trappings of being a professional footballer. I wouldn't employ them either. "

I don't recall him saying he wouldn't employ your mat Suar.

suar nearly won his team the league and got them £70m from selling him so it might be different!  Results orientated ftw!  It's a poker forum.

Didn't want Lee Hughes at Donny and wouldn't want Ched either. When your profession puts you on the front/back page of local/national media then your a role model and you have a social responsibility to behave like a good citizen in my opinion.

We're not going to run out of footballers anytime soon - get rid. H can become a bricklayer or something.

I don't my into role models.  Its a cop out from politicians/media imo used to go after people who are a bit naughty.

Football is a mans game, nothing I hate more than things like family sections and family atmosphere.  I've lost count overthe years when I went regularly of the times I got embroiled in arguements withmostly single mothers who took their kids to football and got all uppity at a bit of industrial language. 

Get a grip. Comparing someone nibbling on someone's arm to someone who raped a 19 year old woman is ridiculous and insulting.

You have to be joking right? Couldn't you articulate your thoughts without swearing when you know the kids are around? Bearing in mind the single mother has taken her son there because the father is out of the picture. You should be encouraging her/him instead of arguing. How about leaving the family stand, and going into the kop/singing section or wherever and swearing to your hearts content? If you weren't in the family stand then its all good I guess and I don't really blame you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMzdAZ3TjCA (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMzdAZ3TjCA)

Sir Charles.  The ultimate non role model role model.

Curiously, in today's "The Game" in The Times, Mathew Syed wrote a very interesting article about Mr Evans, & much of it was based on Barkley's "not a role model" thing. Which also said that Parents have a responsibility, too.

That's bullshit because kids are more likely to copy the actions of their role models on the field than off it and they can be protected from off-field stuff by parents. 

Was hardly a nibble amd add to the his other behaviours.   But as Arb says its all resultes orientated.

Some of the newspaper column's are pathetic

Role model a bloke they most likely had never heard of before this yet is a role model for their kids?

Really

Just another example of it being everyone's fault apart from the parent's themselves why their kids don't turn out right in today's modern day pass the blame culture.  If it's not these 'role models' fault its the bad teachers who teach them at school.  Never the fault of the people where the buck should always stop, ie the parents.

Again very much this. 

Bad parents tend to underestimate how much kids learn from them. 

What are you on about?

I said I wouldn't employ a footballer who was a rapist.  You then compared it to what Suarez did on the pitch, and I said that they're not comparable.

Nothing to do with being role-models or anything else - my argument is absolutely NOTHING to do with the role-model argument.  As I said, being employed in any job is a privileged position, especially a highly paid one like being a professional footballer. As a football club it'd be my policy NOT to employ rapists.

(incidentally, for comparatively minor misdemeanours - compared to rape - such as what Suarez did on the pitch, they should be covered by their footballing contract and they should be penalised heavily financially on top of any bans they receive from the football authorities).   

Seriously. Why would anyone choose to employ a convicted rapist? Would anyone arguing his case want to personally use someone like that as a representative of their business? Doubt it.

If Sheff Utd (or whoever) think that the damage to their brand is worth employing him then that's up to them.   I wouldn't want to employ him, but I don't have a problem if someone does after he's served his sentence.  Aren't we all supposed to be about rehabilitation these days?

Clubs have signed convicted murderers before

Luke McCormick (sp?) is captain of Plymouth - I peronally find that more repellant that Evans, but again he's served his sentence so it's up to Plymouth.

Clubs will only sign guys like this as a substantial discount cost wise.  Ched won't be on anywhere near the cash he was on before as the clubs have all the bargaining power over his salary rather than him.  So they get a 10k a week product for 5k the other cost they pay as a business is to their reputation of employing someone like this on a discount.

I know and don't care that clubs have signed murderers. I'm not saying he shouldn't be allowed to play.  I'm saying that it reflects very poorly on anyone who would employ him and says a lot about them, particularly given his lack of contrition.
Again I ask would anyone employ a convicted rapist to represent them?

Agree about the Plymouth keeper. He does at least seem to be genuinely upset and repause how bad what he did was however.

Arbboy - not sure the wages discount will happen, as he effectively generated a Bosman free transfer for himself when in the clink.  He went for £3 million from Man C to Sheff Utd so any discount to be weighed against club reputation is probably accounted for in the fact that he is now a free agent.

Also if you want to rehabilitate somebody it helps if they accept they were wrong to begin with.

The contrition point is an interesting one.

Saying "I did it, but I don't care about the victim" is a lot different from saying "I have been wrongly convicted, so I don't need to show remorse".

He was found guilty, so I presume the jury who had the most access to all the evidence made the correct decision.  But while he is still trying to clear his name it doesn't seem unreasonable for him to take this stance?

But he's not rehabilitated at all.

He still maintains innocence and his "supporters" are still harrassing and bullying the victim.

He comes out and admits what he did was wrong and then we can think about reintergrating him into society.

Agreed if you don't agree that you were guilty and are fighting it it would be pretty stupid to show remorse for something you haven't done in your mind.  It would stink of saying it for pr reasons to get a new contract which is surely worse?

Moneyball! There's a huge opportunity here for someone to assemble an entire squad of rapists, drunk-drivers &c and take on the rich teams.

McCormack killed those children by accident.

The accident was caused by his negligence, stupidity and downright disregard for the drink/driving laws.

But it was still an accident when all is said and done.

Ched Evans did not rape this girl by accident.

Huge difference.

Repeating myself here but anyway

He maintains his innocence, im sure it would be a lot easier for him and i'm sure he is being pressured to show remorse

I imagine that is not easy to do if you are innocent

Agreed - but see my point afterwards.  His stance is that he has been wrongly convicted.  Seems logical for him to have this mindset if he is still trying to clear his name?  Point taken about the harrassment of the victim.

Well if that's his position, he shouldn't be allowed to play unless he clears his name.

I wouldn't want a rapist playing for QPR regardless how good he was.

If this guy was a Sheff Weds player then Blades fans would be unanimous in their opposition to him playing again.

Anyone who looks on this case in partisan terms is mindboggingly narrow minded.

I see your point, but I don't think we should let McCormack off by calling it an "accident".  His behaviour led directly to 2 kids being killed.  

But why shouldn't he work?  He's served his sentence for the crime after being found guilty.   In the meantime he's still trying to clear his name.  I don't see why he should abandon trying to clear his name just to speed up him being able to play football again.

Where do we draw the line?  Troy Deeney kicked the living daylights out of someone and went to jail 2 years ago (although he has expressed remorse).  McCormick ended two kids lives at the wheel (again showing remorse).   Is remorse really the key here?  If Evans makes a fake apology does he get the green light?

If Evans did show remorse the persistent denigration and harassment of the victim would show it to be false. So he can't really do that now.

Yes that's true - he and his supporters have boxed him into a corner in that respect.

http://www.miscarriagesofjustice.org/

Maybe a few on here should take a look at that site.

nearly 6000 miscarriages of justice in 11 years?

There were over 20 million cases in that time so the chances are it's probably not relevant

That's results orientated thinking. It's the sort of thinking Joe Public and the Daily Mail thrive on.

But as poker players we are above that, right?

Logically Luke McCormack should have got the same sentence for his crime as if he didn't kill 2 children.

Anyone who gets behind a wheel of the car having drunk the exact same amount is capable of doing just what he did. Yet they would just get a heavy fine and a 2 year driving ban.

If that's right for them, it's the sentence Luke McCormack should have got.

(Actually I think 6 weeks in jail is a suitable punishment for drink drivers. It would act as massive detterent and cut drink driving by 90%+ at a stroke)

I would say any miscarriage of justice is relevant. 

Camel by that logic there should be no difference between murder and attempted murder. We're just being results orientated there as well!

Obviously there's no differencew between murder and attempted. Life for both obv.

Although I guess it is a fine line between GBH and attempted murder.

If there is any doubt, the sentence should reflect this.

If the jury is convinced someone is guilty of attempted murder, they should receive the same sentence as a murderer

A lot of my family have been bricklayers over the years. I think you should make this comment in front of one of them. See what happens.

yeah very surprised at that comment

Don't take it personally.

Sure Andrew just plucked the first profession which popped into his head.

He's not suggesting bricklayers are a bunch of sick perverts.

This is the bit some people don't understand/seemingly haven't thought about, he steadfastly believes he has been convicted incorrectly and seems of the mindset he has paid for something he didn't do.


It is likely he is rapist but it's also possible that the sex was consensual and the girl really cannot remember it too. It appears to be a thin line given the evidence but if this appeal agrees with the verdict then he cannot keep claiming to have been convicted unfairly and even then saying sorry is never going to be enough. He will always be a criminal and fully deserved his time. If it decides he should not have been convicted of rape do those people wanting him to apologise expect the poor girl/the courts/or the judges to apologise to him and his family too?

Bricklayer = generic profession where people can happily earn a living out of the limelight, but don't get paid £20k a week.


They wouldn't misinterpret it like you did?

So footballers that are 100% criminals have been rehabilitated after serving their sentence when their crime involved killing people.  It is something that everyone convicted of a crime can do if they are sound of mind so why is the Evans incident different Keith?

What difference did it make that he apologised after serving his time for a crime he was 100% guilty of committing?

You seem to have forgiven him for killing people but you are annoyed Ched Evans hasn't said sorry when he is still in the process of appeal?

honestly bud I think that was just a profession Andrew plucked out of the air.

McCormack killed those children by accident.

It was his fault for sure and he was stupid and negligent but it was an accident.

To my mind there is no way someone who accidentally killed someone (no matter how tragic it is) should be treated as harshly as a rapist.

I would bet a lot of money McCormack will never drink and drive again in his life. if he does, he deserves to go to prison for a very very long time.

You can't rape someone by accident.

If Evans still maintains he is innocent he has not been rehabiltated.

Confronted with the same set of circumstances he is likely to do the same thing again because he doesn't think what he did was wrong. (Well, he wouldn't obv, because he has seen what happens when he does that. But if there was no chance of getting caught he is capable of doing it again).

wow, I'm wondering of that is directed at me or not but I don't really care if he plays for my team ever again but I do strongly believe he should be allowed to go back to work wherever he is offered a job, just like other people that commit crimes do when they have served their time.

As for 'minboggling narrow minded' many people think this is a borderline case. I have expressed points to both side of the discussion and said I think it more likely he is guilty of being a rapist than he isn't. You have steadfastly said he is guilty, what he did was scummy at best and that a man that thinks he is innocent and fighting to clear his name should say sorry ( how will saying sorry change that he is a rapist if the appeal fails anyway), how did you define 'mindbogglingly narrow minded' here?

There are supporters of Sheff Weds and all other football clubs saying things favourable with regard to Evans sentence and if he should be allowed back to work, there will be ones that think he should never be let out and tough shit if he loses his career. There are Sheff Utd fans that think he should never be allowed to play for the club again but some think he should. Are all those that don't have the same opinion as you mindblowingly narrow mined even tho you have only expressed one opinion and are dismissing all the others as being wrong?

Absolutely not directed at you Phil, I can you see you are struggling to decide whether it is right or wrong for him to return. Which is entirely understandable.

Just seems that I have quite a few Sheff Utd fans as friends on Facebook. And some of their opinions are frankly unbelieveable.

As I said previously I don't have a problem with him working. I wouldn't personally wish to employ a rapist. Would anyone? Why would you.
Whether he's guilty of rape or not, and a jury found him so, his behavior then and that of his supporters since was at best disgusting.Peoples sympathy should be with the girl. She's the real victim not him.

ok thanks. I haven't seen what's happening on Facebook and it is absolutely disgraceful that the girl has been harassed but almost to a man the Blades fans I have spoken to are very uncomfortable that he might return. Most of them do think he should be allowed to play again and are again very uncomfortable that they know it might be a case of 'well if we don't take him someone will so we might as well take him'

What they do agree about tho is as this doesn't seem to be a very clear cut case( I know he was convicted so was seen as clear cut by people that know a lot more than we do about this) but there doesn't seem to be a lot of overwhelmingly rock solid evidence to convict that could/would appear in undoubted rape cases. The tricky part being that sex had already taken place with the other guy so some signs of forced sex would not show if he had raped her.

Having thought about it I do think it would be much wiser to wait until the appeal is heard because one of the points I think we are on polar opposite sides of is that he could actually have served a sentence for a crime he shouldn't have been convicted of, your side seems more that he was convicted so he has to be guilty.

Apologies. Looking back I can't possibly believe how I jumped to that conclusion. You should definitely make this comment in front of some builders then, see as how I'm the only person in the world to interpret it like this.

What would your (or others peoples) view be if he appeals and it is over-turned?

This is where it is most uncomfortable for me because even if the appeal overturns the conviction it in no way means the girl was lying/claiming something  happened that was untrue. There was either a rape, sex between 3 people that consented or Evans might have walked into the room, the girl could have been passed out on the bed and he took advantage of her when she was not in a fit enough state to say yes or no. If the third option was true then she wouldn't remember it and he is guilty, but if she consented and then didn't remember the day after then is anyone guilty of anything?

It looks a really fine line and forgetting for a moment he is a footballer that might be pretty well known if it was a brother or other relative would most people have a lot of questions about the conviction?

Exactly the same. I still wouldn't want to employ a rapist? Would you?
I'd still think he and his friends behaved abysmally at the time and I'd still think his supporters have behaved appallingly in the interim. Surely this at least goes without saying?

The way forward for Evans is to make a statement like this:

"I honestly believed I was innocent of this crime. But after due contemplation and advice from legal professionals I was wrong. I took advantage of a vunerable woman when I shouldn't have.

"It is not acceptable for a man to behave in this way.

"While I am am extremely thankful for the support of my feiends and family, some of the comments they have made are misplaced. The woman in question was a victim and should not have been harrassed in any way.

"The time has come to close this chapter and let the victim try to rebuild her life in peace.

"I'm sorry for all the pain and hurt I have caused and I'm committed to help charities aiding victims of rape in the future. I will be happy to appear on any forums or events which might halp these valuable causes"

Simple.

Absolutely mate, I fully understand that and I wasn't fully aware that the girl has been getting abuse, that is disgusting.

He can't be held accountable for his supporters. 

I don't know much about the case but if I had a friend/relaive who was accused of such a crime and they told be an convinced me of their innocence regardless of what a jury thought I don't know what lengths I would go to to prove their innocence. 

Camel you normally come across as quite a sensible chap but that last post is bullshit. 

I recall a post you made not so long ago about an incident when you were portrayed as a dirty old man, do you think you should have apologised for that?

If I was Chad Evans hell would freeze over before I showed any sort of remorse if I knew I was innocent.  Lets face it only 3 people actually know the truth. 

Do you you think everyone who drinks and drives should go to prison?

Because anyone who does that is capable of killing 2 children just the way he did.

Agree with your point about not showing remorse if I knew I was innocent.

However only 2 people maximum know the truth - as I understand it the "victim" has no memory of what happened and there was no complaint of rape, no forensic evidence and no injury.

Being devils advocate is it not possible Evans thought he was engaging In consensual sex at the time?  

Anyone who does 40 in a 30 zone is also capable of killing 2 children.  Do they go to jail as well?  

3 and a half.....the night porter was listen at the door for some of it.

Company pollutes a river due to negligence. Company kills 16000 people at Bhopal due to negligence. Same punishment?

Someone killing 2 kids driving at 40 mph in 30 zone won't go to prison.

Why is Luke McCormack going to prison?

If it is punishment he should get the same sentence as any drunk driver.

If it is rehabilitation it is pointless. He will never drink drive again and could not be sorrier for his actions.

The only justification is deterrent. Which would be even greater if everyone caught drink/driving goes to nick for a month. Would almost eliminate drink driving at a stroke.

5 1/2. His charming associate and brother were tying to film it...

I'm almost certain Evans did (and still does) think he was having consensual sex.

Ignorance of the law is not a defence though.

Ignorance of the law is not a defence.

He could phrase the statement in such a way that he shows he thought he was innocent but now realises he wasn't.

Just because a woman is drunk with her knickers off and her legs open doesn't mean anyone can ahead and shag her.

I haven't read any of Evans's statements since he was freed yet.

Has he admitted taking advantage of the girl?

At the end of the day he has been convicted of rape & some of what you say is questionable.

You have said that there is no evidence that the victim didn't consent to sex. But I think there is more than enough. She went back to a hotel with someone else, not Ched Evans. She was completely out of it, could she ever consent to sex? Ched Evans left through the fire exit.

It doesn't seem that at any point during that night she was ever had any plans to have sex with Ched.

What is also lol in this thread is that people are still talking about evidence for and against, but none of those was on that jury and are able to know full facts. The jury also has to make a decision with a huge majority, so they must be confident that he did rape her.

As for fans of United or Wednesday, pretty bad taste by Blades fans, but then again they was cheering his name and numerous songs when he got convicted. There aren't some that want him, in fact there are many, which just shows the mentality of the blades fans. As for Owls fans, there are not many at all that disagree with the verdict.

Also Bobby, you say "you aren't bothered if he does come back or not", to me that sounds as if you think he's not guilty. If you did of course think he was guilty, then it surely must be "I don't want him near my club".

He will be rejoining Sheffield United, btw.

She was completely out of it,

Debatable surely. Have you seen the video of her entering the hotel, walking alone, picking the pizza box off the floor?.....sex happen minutes later.

I couldn't disagree with you more on McCormack and as a Father I am surprised you think that.

Any twat that drives 100 odd miles an hour whilst pissed and kills someone deserves life IMO.
No matter how pissed you are, you know how fucking absurd it is to even think about driving

the hotel receptionists evidence was that she was in a bad way. Clayton McDonald said she was sick when he left the hotel.

What would you say her state was?

I have seen the video & I think the jury was given evidence by hotel staff saying she was drunk?

What is the difference between driving at 100mph pissed and not killing anyone?

Every single person who has ever done that could have been in the same situation Luke McCormack found himself.

In no way am I condoning what he did. He was stupid, arrogant, cavalier and showed no respect for the law.

But it was an accident, he didn't mean to kill those kids. And I'm sure the regret will stay with him for the rest of his life.

Does this not blow a hole in your argument about him choosing to rape verses McCormick having an accident?  McCormick was certain he was breaking the law when he got behind the wheel.

 The night porter saw her and heard her. The video shows he saw her walk in, arm in arm and then she turns around and walks out alone to get the pizza, and comes back in and goes straight to the room.

He said she appeared and sounded drunk...ok....but the video doesn't show evidence of her "out of it".

The judge stated that CCTV images showed how intoxicated she was..

Yes, you're right.

I couldn't be further from condoning what McCormack did.

But every single person who drives their car drunk know they are breaking the law. And every single one of them could have killed those 2 kids.

But for the grace of God go they.

I don't think McCormack should be punished any harsher than a drink driver who had consumed exactly the same amount of alcohol and was driving at the same speed.

It's just a sick game of roulette which of them killed 2 children, so they should all be treated the same.

Doesn't really matter a whit what any of you think about her level of control. It was deemed in a court of law that she wasn't in a fit state.  Up until the point that a court of law reverses said judgment (if ever) then we accept the ruling of her not being in control. Thus. The sex wasn't consensual and thus he is guilty of rape.

It's black and white. You can debate it up until you're blue in the face. It doesn't change the outcome.

I completely believe in the justice system being an agent of reformation, and not of vengeance. That being said - if you want to clear your name then dedicate yourself to clearing your name and provide the system, the one which found you guilty beyong reasonable doubt, that you're innocent of the crime you were convicted for.

I wouldn't have any issue with him starting his life again if he has done his sentence, recognised that he was wrong to have done as he did and allowed the girl to get on with his life. Whilst the harassment hasn't come from him - it wouldn't take much for him to openly denounce it.

If, as some of you say, he is wrongfully convicted and thus she has cheated him, why should he feel remorse etc. My answer is simply that up until he has cleared his name and proved that there was any form of deception involved, he has no right in my eyes to make her life miserable.

This whole case troubles me to be frank but as Aaron says the jurors were best placed to decide after seeing cross examination. One thing that seems beyond doubt is that the treatment of the victim by friends of the perpetrator has been terrible.

Sorry I should add the other thing beyond doubt is that the jury after hearing all evidence thought she was unable to give consent.

A general statement from the family was given on release .........He's giving a video statement on Wednesday.

sorry bud, I've read your post but just don't want to reply.Was hoping to keep Owls/Blades bias out if it but obv not possible.

Very interesting to see what line he takes.

I suspect what he says will be swayed by whether he thinks he is going to be offered a contract or not.

Which will be very sad.

I don't agree with this.  He will be pretty sure he is going to get another contract.  I think he will stick to the line he has had all along.  I really believe he doesn't think he did anything wrong.  Him and his family/supporters seem totally in agreement he is innocent and i can't see him changing his stance this late on.

If Sheff Utd have told him he only gets a contract if he says something along the lines of what I suggest, what do you think he does then?

Well that is your view.

This is a legal view. You might get an answer to your questions here:

http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/s_to_u/sentencing_manual/death_by_dangerous_driving/

Instruct his agent to put feelers out for other clubs who are interested in an international striker in the championship/league 1 with a proven goal scoring record at that level whilst he maintains his stance of being innocent.

I know that is the law.

But I think the law is wrong.

The best way to stop people drinking and driving would be to lock up every offender for 6 weeks.

It would cut the crime but 90%+ and therefore the amount of deaths caused by the crime by a similar percentage.

Bobby I appreciate you want to keep the Blades/Owls bias out of it, but your comments are a little bit far from the truth. There are a very small minority of fans who will question the case and the fact it's something to do with the Blades will make that minority even smaller. As for Blades fans, I do not believe that there is only a small group of Blades asking for him back, I think there is a big enough group of fans requesting him to be a blade again, the media reports clearly show that.

There isn't no bias from me I don't believe. If he was a Sheffield Wednesday footballer I would want that contract to be torn up and him never seen at Hillsborough again. 100%.

However at no point as Sheffield United come out with a statement to say they are not signing him, of course there is the other side of the coin that says they have never said they are going to sign him. But the fact remains it seems a very clear and likely option just because of this that he is likely to be approached by the Blades. I don't want to go into this at much deeper but Sheffield United have often been labelled by themselves as a "family club", I can't see how they can ever allow themselves to re-sign Evans, not to mention this rape happened whilst a Sheffield United player too. He is a convicted rapist.

Away from the Blades/Owls thing....

I think all that happened and the evidence in the public domain and the information that isn't would be enough to convict him. If she is out of it, then she can not surely consent properly to sex. But I suppose you could talk about it all day, the jury has 12 on it and they came to a clear verdict, they know a lot more than we do.

Yep juries have never made mistakes previously

Apols. I haven't read every post, and excuse me if the analogy has already been used.

What if the it was Lionel Messi and he played for your team, not Chav Evans?

Would you be so keen to see him kicked out of your club/football in the same situation?!

I had no idea what this was about or who this guy was until I read this thread.
I find football mind numbingly boring so I have no concerns about which team or who he plays for.

As an employer I have to agree that I would not knowingly employ someone who had been convicted of rape.

I have been a witness at a similar case in Crown Court, and although all the evidence pointed to him being guilty it was impossible to prove so I wonder what the jurors were told or shown that we have missed?

I have to agree with ripple that the lady in the video is in no way out of it.
She might be drunk but she is still alert enough to collect the pizza box.

Even if she was out of it at the time, I believe that legally consent still stands?

I'm intrigued as to how some of you have such strong feelings against him, when we really have no idea what happened.
We have no idea what any of their intentions were that night.

It also appears that the only reason there is any rape charge is due to Ched admitting he had sex with her?
If he had stated that he had entered the room to take a picture of Claytons butt and was then chased out the fire escape, he would have had no charges to answer?

Has anyone read about the 'When I win big' tweets? If these are true were they not used in the court case due to how they were obtained?

The "when i win big" tweets were true

They were not used in court due to the way they were obtained which i found astounding

The CCTV from what I've seen shows a female to be unsteady. There is only a few people who can say whether she was drunk or not & I think the hotel receptionist said he thought she was drunk. If she is drunk then she clearly can not consent to sex. I think that is perhaps what the whole case has been based upon & the fact that she did not enter the hotel with Ched Evans. This is my very own personal opinion of this, but if at any point she did want to have a quickie with Ched, then I suspect he would have been going back to the hotel room with them. Instead he came after, when a girl is drunk and left through a fire exit.

I'm a bit unsure why you ask why the tweets want used in the case HP? I don't see what relevance they have to whether he raped her. A big win can be classed as many things? I'm not saying it was the right thing to mind you, if anything it was stupid.

PS - Trigg, little difference between drunk and tipsy!

Firstly I believe Trigg is perfectly safe as drunken consent legally stands no matter how drunk someone is, unless they are borderline unconscious?
There is no way the woman in the video is even close to this point, again, in my honest opinion.

If she was deemed so drunk she couldn't possibly consent then Clayton should be found guilty also, she has no recollection of consenting to either?

I would suggest that the tweets are not in line with the emotions of someone who has been raped. (Personal opinion obv)
Rightly or wrongly I believe the tweets add a level of doubt whether the victim has woken up and seen an opportunity for personal gain?

Isn't that contradictory.  You can be really drunk and consent at the time but not remember it the next day - what happens then? 

I find it really hard to believe how you can walk from your hotel room to collect a pizza from reception (down stairs potentially/into a lift) maybe have to pay for the pizza as well in cash then walk back to your room balancing a pizza box yet you are so drunk you can't consent to have sex????  Really?

I'm sure he wasn't stone cold sober either...

I don't know how the jury looked upon it. But it seems that she was more than happy in Clayton's company & she went to the hotel with him and you don't go back to a hotel with someone to play dominoes.

As for the CCTV, it's very slow the ones I have seen, I think it's hard to really grasp how drunk she is.

http://www.itv.com/news/update/2014-10-22/bbcs-buerk-ched-evans-victim-deserves-no-credit/

TODAY'S STATEMENT

YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3IiTuO4tZs

Makes me so mad.

The subtext is suggesting the victim had it coming to her because she was drunk.

Pretty meh pre-prepared statement.  I'd have preferred something from the heart.

So obviously reading from an auto cue.

He doesn't sound like the sharpest knife in the tool box does he?

I actually think his girlfriend and her wealthy family (for some biazzre reason given he cheated on her) seem more keen to fund clearing his name than he appears to be.  He never seems that bothered.  He looked half asleep in that statement speech.

I thought he sounded quite humble and sincere and came accross okay.

<edit>
I may not have heard the entire statement though as the analysis on sky talks about blaming drunkenness which I don't recall being mentioned.

Bit harsh Keith.  It is fairly clearly one of the toughest things he has had to do in his life and presumably he had some input into what was on the autocue.  I actually think he came across okay.

It would be horrifically unadvisable to say anything other than a statement your lawyer agreed when pending an appeal. Surely we didn't expect this to be off the cuff? He sounds like most reading from a statement who do not do it as a matter of course.

For a rapist.

Feel like he should definitely have said something about the way some of his supporters had treated the victim.

Even if he still claims innocence, he's got to see that behaviour is unacceptable because it might discourage rape victims going to the police in the future.

Yes that is true although if what Arb says above about his in laws not only spearheading it all but bankrolling it too then he might not be in a position to.

I disagree he may have got a bit more sympathy/empathy from the viewing public had he done it from  the heart.  I think some of the worse statements I have ever heard come directly from lawyers. 

I couldn't disagree more strongly with this.  He can't be hed responsible for his supporters. 

He should have got the McCann's PR people involved he'd be off scot-free b now.

TBF I reckon a lot more guilty people get off, than not-guilty ones sent down. Particularly since a person's previous convictions cannot be mentioned and influence a decision.

Maybe so but its upto the Police/PF/Prosecution team to make sure a case is packaged correctly for court.  If they are air tight and make sure they drill the witness and prepare them properly.

Additionally one of my main issues with the justice system is the number of cases that are tried that are not in the public interest. 

In the last few years in Scotland a fair few lads have been taken through the courts about songs sang at the football due to the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Act 2012, most of these are Celtic fans sing pro Republican songs, and whether I agree with them or not (I don't in the majority of occasions) the previous laws were sufficient, but not one of these cases have resulted in a successful prosecution yet as far as I know and I know of at least 10 boys were case was dismissed.  Other scenarious were this happens is petty crimes or repeat offenders going through the system or prosecutions for guys caught with a bit of charlie (personal use) or hash.  Additionally the number of small time dealers who are going to get 12 to 18 month then out in 6 months.  We need a radical overhaul of the entire system imo. 

I know the above has gone off topic, but it relates to your point imo as in there are too many cases going through the courts and as such the correct time/resources aren't pointed at the real crimes that have a major impact on peoples day to day lives. 

Easy to say "I appreciate everyone's support more than you can know. But please guys, can you lay off talking about the complainant. She has suffered through this whole ordeal, even though I still maintain my innocence, the time has come to stop harrassing her and let her rebuild her life." or something like that

If he genuinly is innocent though, he probably feels this girl who has wrongly accused him deserves as much pain and suffering as he has been put through. Accusing somebody of rape could ruin somebodies life every bit as much as being raped.

Not that i am saying that he is innocent though.

Agree with this.

Being raped, and the convicted rapist's family and friends abusing you online, outing you on twitter, and forcing you to move house, whilst the convicted rapist shows absolutely no remorse must ruin your life as well.

Forcing you to move house/area and change your identify twice in 2 years must be pretty fucking stressful.

Whilst he's not responsible directly for his supporters actions he could have, and still could, have told them enough is enough. I can't believe that what's gone on is going to help any appeal so it's commonsense too.
And what in God's name have the McCanns got to do with anything? The things people write make my eyes bleed...

I think for now, he should be banned at least until his complete 5 year sentence is served.

If he's innocent, he should concentrate on clearing his name. When he's exonerated, then he can return straight away.

If he's guilty, the football pitch is no place for a rapist. Football players who are caught match fixing or even spot fixing are banned for life.

Any ban less than life completely trivialises the crime.

Find yourself another career away from the limelight.

Nobody questioned that. 

Well they have literally got away with murder. 

Also think the FA should take the lead here, unfair to leave it to the various clubs.

Come out and state Ched Evans is banned unless he completely clears his name.

How have the McCanns got involved in this thread?  :D 

Totaly agree.

However what im saying is, if he is genuinly innocent, which only he and the girl know for sure, then i don't blame him for causing the girl heaps of misery.

Totally disagree

I appreciate its a very complex situation, but one thing he shouldn't be doing (or his family, supporters) is causing the girl any problems at all.

Unfortunately that is not the case

If Ched Evans really did shoot Madeline McCann in Dallas in 1963 then he should be banned from football for at least 5 years.

So if this girl has falsely accused Ched Evans of raping her, ruining his reputation, effectively ending his career and subjecting him to 2 years in prison. Never mind the stress and heartache it will have caused Ched's family. And your saying Ched should think about his actions and protect this girl? I don't know what I would do in this situation but i know it would take an incredible amount of self restraint not to want to destroy her life. An eye for an eye and all that jazz.

He can maintain his innocence all he likes, but a jury and an appeal court have found him guilty/upheld it

Now he is appealing again, with the help of new advisors

Going through judicial processes is fine, but any of the actions/motivations you are suggesting are worse than out of order. "an eye for an eye" is ludicrous. She's a victim, not someone to seek vengeance against.

It reflects very badly on him and his supporters (who he may have no influence over whatsoever) and (if I were running a football club) would sway me very strongly against employing him

--

On a broader issue I do believe that all other things being equal once someone leaves prison they should be allowed to rebuild their lives. Sentence served etc. How this is achieved for someone

a) in a role in the public eye

b) for an offence like rape

is a difficult one when the person is a politician, actor, singer, sportsperson etc

Not sure anybody, from official bodies through to the press through to the public has solved that one yet

Agree with everything you say. However, what i'm saying is if Ched Evans is genuinly innocent, and this girl has made incorrect accusations (not what the court thinks, but what actually happened that night).

If i was innocent, but the court ruled i was guilty, then i wouldnt just accept it, i'd fight to clear my name.

Never mind all this talk of Ched Evans - I'm wondering who'll sign Harry Roberts?

Chelsea.

They were partial to a bit of Harry Roberts is our friend . . . . .

So the McCannns got away with murder and Ched Evans is nit a rapist?
Did M15 kill Princess Diana?
And are the Americans responsible for 9/11?

Thinking before making comments as if they are facts. How can you possibly know what happened to Madeline McCann?

Surely the independence referendum should have taught you something?

I know her parents neglected their duty and she was perhaps snatched.  That is a bigger crime than what Ched done in my books. 

I have at no stage said he wasn't guilty, all I have said is he is not responsible for the acts of his supporters, and I don't think he should apologise to the victim here if he genuinley believes he is innocent.   I know of a number of people who have been sent down by a jury who have been innocent only for the convictions to be over turned anda number of them had appeals refused. 

So in fact the McCanns may not have literally got away with murder. And may in fact possibly be parents who live with amistake they made every day of their lives?

Are you serious?

100%

I really couldn't disagree with this more.

The legal system has run its course, Evans is now a free man and should be allowed to get back to work and re-integrate with society. He's unlikely to repeat the offence whilst he is at work so I can't see any reason why you would want him unemployed instead.

A ban from the FA should be for footballing reasons. Performance enhancing drugs, match fixing etc not for things completely unrelated to football.

good post, big plus 1.


i love camels posts, they are like how i played poker 1 year ago, find the most fps way to rationalise something :D


think this one is pretty simple tbh.

Rare i agree with a loony leftie but i do here Kmac!  I don't agree with the bolded statement though but everything else i do.

You filthy mysogynists the lot of ya lol  ;danafish;

The McCanns left their kids in a hotel room with a baby monitor while they were a few hundred yards away and checked the room every 20 mins.  You think that is worse than raping someone?

Pretty sure there wasn't a baby monitor involved........although the resort provides them at about £ 10/hr.

If nothing else, Evans presence on the pitch is going to lead to violence off it.

Leaving moral arguments aside, that is enough to ban him IMO

How can you possibly know this Keith, invented time travel have you?

It doesn't take Emmett Brown to work this out.

Opposing fans will taunt him mercilessly, Sheff Utd (assuming they offer the scumbag a contract) fans defend him just as vigorously.

Clashes ensue.

Sure they did.  Did you watch the documentary and see where they left their kids from where they sat? 

It is unforgiveable what they done.  You don't take kids on a holiday and leave them in a hotel room by themselves.  Especially not at the ages their kids were. 

Scumbag?

Do you actually know the victim Keith because you're coming across as a real plum at the moment?

Chedwyn Evans has been convicted of rape, that is an indisputable fact.

Let's put ourselves in his friends shoes for one minute though. 90% of what I state is also indisputable so is it A, B or C?

A.

Clayton McDonald (you) is having consensual sex with some Woman he picked up fifteen minutes earlier outside a Kebab shop at three in the morning in an hotel room. In walks his best friend who watches the pair of them have sex. The subject is broached whether he can join in. The Woman categorically says "no, I do not want to have sex with that Man". Clayton McDonald (you) finishes but doesn't ejaculate and presumably says to his best friend "do whatever you want". He (you) then proceeds to watch his best friend have oral sex with the Woman before raping her in several different positions. Halfway through this he leaves to speak to his best friends Brother who is outside filming him have consensual sex with her and his Brother raping her. Finally Chedwyn appears, who also hasn't ejaculated and you all go back to his house.

B.

Clayton McDonald (you) is having consensual sex with some Woman he picked up fifteen minutes earlier outside a Kebab shop at three in the morning in an hotel room. In walks his best friend who watches the pair of them have sex. The subject is broached whether he can join in. The Woman categorically says "no, I do not want to have sex with that Man". Clayton McDonald (you) finishes but doesn't ejaculate and presumably says to his best friend " She'll be unconscious in 30 seconds and then you can do whatever you want". He (you) then proceeds to watch his best friend have oral sex with the unconscious Woman before raping her in several different positions. Halfway through this he leaves to speak to his best friends Brother who is outside filming him have consensual sex with her and his Brother raping her. Finally Chedwyn appears, who also hasn't ejaculated and you all go back to his house.

C.

Clayton McDonald (you) is having consensual sex with some Woman he picked up fifteen minutes earlier outside a Kebab shop at three in the morning in an hotel room. In walks his best friend who watches the pair of them have sex. The subject is broached whether he can join in. The Woman casually says "yeah". Clayton McDonald (you) finishes but doesn't ejaculate and presumably says to his best friend " carry on Bud do whatever you want". He (you) then proceeds to watch his best friend have oral sex with the Woman before having consensual sex with her in several different positions. Halfway through this he leaves to speak to his best friends Brother who is outside filming him have consensual sex with her and his Brother also having consensual sex with her. Finally Chedwyn appears, who also hasn't ejaculated and you all go back to his house.

So, you're Clayton McDonald, is it A, B or C.

Do you really watch your best friend raping someone? Do you really not tell him it's a really bad idea and he should leave? Do you really leave a Woman with your best friend after she has said that she doesn't want to have sex with him knowing that your best friend will lose everything and end up in jail? Do you really do that to your best friend?

If your answer is A or B then you're either a shockingly bad person or you're a liar.

Not sure how me having a different opinion to you makes me a "plum".

Ched Evans has been found guilty of rape by a jury.

He appealled and they found no reason to overturn that verdict.

He is appealling again and unless he is successful he is not only "convicted of rape".

He is a rapist.

Best not let black people play then, or Muslims. We probably shouldn't play against Germany any more either, better safe than sorry.

Camel are you familiar with the Birmingham 6, Guilford 4, The Cardiff 3, Barry George, TC Campbell and Joe Steele to name but a few? 

All were convicted and the convictions were overturned after numerous appeals.  Look at the facts of the Ched Evans case as I have done recently only through becoming involved in this thread and the case against him looks pretty flimsy. 

I certainly am.

If he is cleared, I will eat a large portion of humble pie and admit I was wrong.

Don't think it will be happening, but stranger things have occurred.

Tikay won a poker tournament once.

People far more versed in the evidence than you me and the Camel have decided amongst them that he is guilty. That is far more likely the case than what we can figure out from the internet.

Maybe so but the same could be said of the other cases I pointed out. 

The fact that the jury far more versed in the evidence found him guilty probably does mean there is something that none of us are aware of that makes the case a lot stronger.

However, just because he is found guilty and his appeal fails doesn't mean he IS a rapist, it means he is almost definitely a rapist!

Personally I think there is a 50/50 chance he gets cleared, however i can understand most people saying it is 1 in 10.

Keith will you let us a have a one in a million chance he is not a rapist?

(http://assets.inarkansas.com/31844/so-youre-telling-me-theres-a-chance.jpg)

Say what?

Ched Evans: Sheffield United allow convicted rapist to train at club

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/29980279

Charlie Webster currently on Newsnight talking about the case and her resignation as a Sheff Utd patron.  Very impressive individual and hugely convincing in her arguments imo.

Sheff United fans have already been recording singing "Ched Evans, he rapes who he wants"

Opposition fans are going to give him the most abuse any player has ever received. And it won't be even close.

I would put the chances of clashes between "fans" over this issue at circa 100%

I agree, she was excellent.

The rehabilitation argument the PFA is using is completely spurious.

How can you be rehabilitated if you don't accept what you've done is wrong?

Yep, all this.

United fans are not exactly the tamest bunch anyway (My completely objective opinion as a Wednesday fan). I just don't see how this ever ends well for the Blades. He really will be the most aggressively booed player in history. It will be awful for the moral of the rest of the team, and Sheff U will just have to fork out for extra security/fines/media shit storms etc etc.

They need Sean Bean to take a stand IMO.

Seems to me people are using Sheff Utd as a scapegoat because they don't agree with the country's sentencing for the crime.  Or people don't think he should have been released if he didn't admit that he committed the crime and show remorse.  It's politicians/judiciary/parole boards that people need to complain to.

As things stand, he has served his punishment as dictated by society, so we should let the guy have a job of an employer is willing to employ him. 

The fact that the player will be booed should have zero impact on our views.  Shall we also ban Ashley Cole as well because opposition fans hate him?  Maybe we can ban panto villians as well as we don't want theatre unrest.

Not saying he should or should not be banned based on booing, simply saying I think it's not worth doing from the teams point of view for the impact such booing will have on the crowds/atmosphere/team moral etc.

Believe me, the booing Ashley Cole, John Terry, Emmanuel Adebayor or Sol Campbell have ever got is going to be child's play to the abuse Evans will get,

I grant you a great deal of it will be from people who have no opinion on his crime or whether he should play or not. They will just be trying to cause trouble.

And they will succeed.

It's a reasonable argument

but

the precedent has been set before by other football clubs of players being sacked for a variety of crimes such as dangerous driving and assault; it sets a worrying precedent if they can be sacked for assaulting someone but not for raping them (for example).

I don't even want to think what a derby match would be like (thankfully currently not an issue).

Just out of interest, would the people who are defending Evans right to work feel the same if a player was convicted of downloading child pornography?

Chris Langham has hardly worked since his conviction.

It's pretty much the same ball park, but child pornography would be a more angry response.

With celebrity rape cases, there is something of a stigma on the victims with some people. 'Doing it for the money' and 'asking for it' and other horrible accusations are made by some small but vocal corners.

I went to the third game Luke McCormick played after he killed two children. A murmur no more...

Charlie Webster the same lady that was very happy to have a picture, excited in fact to have a selfie with Mike Tyson a few years ago?

As I said earlier in the thread there is a huge difference between Evans and McCormick.

McCormick was an idiot, recklessly flaunting the law for drink driving. He deserved his punishment.

Fom everything I've seen he could not have shown more contrition and I think he will regret what happened for the rest of his life.

But when all is said and done, it was an accident.

You don't rape someone by accident. And Evans is still claiming he is an innocent man.

If Evans had gone about this differently, he could have become a spokesperson against rape.

Explaining to young men why what he did was wrong and trying to teach them about the sanctity of consent.

That really would have been rehabilitation.

He has served his punishment as dictated by our society.  At that point it's not really your business whether he gets employed or not - that is for the employer (Sheff Utd) to decide whether the pros of hiring a certain player are outweighed or otherwise by having a convicted rapist on the books.  It would be the same argument for child pornography/murder whatever (and some crimes carry a bigger stigma than others).

Now whether the punishment dictated by our society for each crime is sufficient is a different argument and is irrelevant to whether he should be able to work or not.

We've been here before.  You don't get into a car after boozing all day by accident.

I guess it's a pointless argument.

I could not stomach a paedo playing football for QPR when children are in the crowd cheering him on.

The same goes for a rapist when 20%+ of the audience are women.

I'm not suggesting he should never work again, just he shouldn't be allowed to work in a public position.

I saw her previously say that she made a mistake there.   She shouldn't have a view because she made a small mistake in the past?  I don't see this on a par with what Ched did and not sure why people find it relevant.

I heard Nigel Clough saying that they wanted to concentrate on the 4 games in 10 days yesterday.  It struck me that the 4 games in 10 days was something you should have considered before taking Ched Evans back in training.

I do think he really needs to resolve this issue before coming back into football.   I think he should concentrate on the outstanding appeal first.  If he is found innocent, people will have to accept that and move on, if he is found guilty again he has to accept that and show a bit more contrition.  Where we are seems very unsatisfactory for all parties.  

You are just being pedantic now, you know exactly what I mean.

This is an excellent post.

I think if he had held his hands up and admitted his crime and started working towards redeeming himself the reaction of critics would be a great deal different.

The behaviour of some of his supporters towards the victim has been appalling.

We talked about this weeks ago Camel.  We agreed it's possible (likely?) that Evans at the time thought he had consent from the victim.  Subsequently the court found that she was incapable of giving consent in the situation so he was guilty of rape.

Evans in his footballer arrogance thinks he has consent to have sex with a girl.  He didn't and the result is that a girl was raped.
McCormick thinks he can drive home drunk without incident.  He couldn't and the result is that two children are dead.

It will vary person to person, but personally given the situations I think McCormick's crime is worse (as reflected in his sentence).  Your passing off of McCormick's crime as a tragic accident troubles me :(

I agree with you Camel though that the actions/behaviour of the Ched Evans support group towards the victim are dreadful.

The only reason to send LM to prison for so long was as a deterrent to others not to drink drive.

He is not a danger to society and there's no chance he re offends.

I think a better deterrent would be to jail all drink drivers for 3 months - that would wipe out the crime at a stroke.

How do you know he won't reoffend?  Because he told the newspaper he was sorry?  Because he waited a year to send a letter to the parents?

"We've had a letter from Luke. It is private, but he has shown remorse and that has helped us.  We have been asking for a letter from him for a long time, pretty much since the court case finished, and I felt he didn't show much remorse.

But hey ho - he's said what needed to be said in the newspaper to complete his rehabilitation so lets welcome him back into football with open arms.  

Isn't an 'accident' by definition something for which neither party can be reasonable found to be negligent?

I would strongly disagree that Luke showed remorse he came under massive pressure at the time and basically sent a letter after repeated requests from the parents

I really think that last paragraph sums up my thoughts too. All these people steadfastly refusing to accept there is a possibility he was wrongly convicted are going to have some egg on their faces if it turns out he was wrongly convicted. If he loses his appeal then it has to be the end of it and he is without doubt a rapist and needs to show some remorse and apologise.

Just back to the original point of the thread and touching on the Charlie Webster point, again we have someone else( and I accept she is personally affected by this incident far more than a huge majority of the other people filling in newspaper columns and getting TV time) going on TV/radio/newspapers to give their opinion on Evans. I saw a piece from Nick Clegg again yesterday talking about role models etc and there is still a really uneasy feeling sitting with me that these people are still using this case to get themselves some media time.

I think three patrons have resigned from Sheff Utd, why does Webster have to go on a TV news show and announce it through the media? She is using the things she feels strongly enough about to resign to do interviews instead of just resigning.

Without being rude to her it makes not one ounce of difference to the club if she resigns, I had forgotten she was even a patron and how many people can name their own clubs patrons or a handful of other clubs patrons.

That should really be a non story (as it is with the other 2 that have resigned) if she doesn't take the doing it thru media route imo, yet she has found a way on to Newsnight on the back of a footballer raping a girl.

"I saw her previously say that she made a mistake there.   She shouldn't have a view because she made a small mistake in the past?  I don't see this on a par with what Ched did and not sure why people find it relevant."

Errrr hold on a bit where did i compare her having a picture with Tyson to raping someone?

I find it relevant as Bobby says she seems to have somehow become a bigger "personality" out of all of this, the fact she deleted the original tweet suggests to me she is well aware of what she is doing.

I like Webster a lot and she did present her thoughts really well in that interview but let me ask this.

If it is decided that Evans should never have been found guilty of rape and has spent 2 1/2 years in prison on a miscarriage of justice who will have done the most harm to victims of rape, Evans for being wrongly convicted or Webster for happily posing and expressing delight at having her picture taken with a rapist that got 6 years?

As far as I know she didn't pose with Tyson, she posted that she missed the opportunity. 

If anybody thinks that she was aware that he was a convicted rapist at the time she made the tweet seems to be making a leap way too far to me.  They don't carry signs and she is a lot younger than us.  Even though I am aware of tyson's history, I can't say I would have remembered it without this memory jog.

How many people here know of Floyd Mayweather's domestic violence history before priniting photos of him posing with some huge sum of money or with a big betting Receipt?  I expect many wouldn't make the posts if they knew.  It just isn't the first thing most will think of if they saw him in a hotel lobby.

Sure that's certainly possible but she didn't say any of that afterwards which in all probability she would have done if it was the case. My point really is she has seemingly chosen to use her thoughts on this case to her own benefit, she announced two weeks ago ffs that she would resign if Evans was taken back. She could have done all of that in private if she was simply using her position as patron to lobby the powers that be at Sheff Utd.

If Evans is pardoned and has served 2 1/2 years he shouldn't have served, will Newsnight ask him on to talk about Charlie Webster fighting for victims of sex crimes yet happy to have her pic taken with a rapist?

Will radio Sheffield ask him on twice in a month to give his views on how Nick Clegg as the deputy PM should be a role model to people in this country instead of one of the biggest political liars we have ever voted in?

What does it say to the kids of today that just saying whatever you want to make you popular and then failing to fulfill those promises when you have got to a position of power?

That's why I agree with you that we should really just wait to see what the appeal decides, we then know 100% that he is a rapist or 100% that he is a victim of a miscarriage of justice but as it stands it feels like he is being used by people to curry favour through the media.

Jess Ennis issued a statement saying she wants her name taking off the "Jessica Ennis" stand if they give Evans a contract.

Her statement makes it clear she feels that she has a responsibility to act as a role model as a public figure.

There's no doubt that with the enormous rewards comes responsibility, this seems to be lost on some people.

Sheff Utd will be scoring a massive PR and marketing own goal by signing him.

They have lost patrons, will lose sponsors and public figures like Ennis.

Not the smartest move for a community based football club.

I get the impression that McCabe wants to sign him but the Saudi co-owners aren't keen. This may be wrong but if its true its perhaps a sign of McCabe's desire to clawback some of the £30-40m he's effectively lost by bankrolling SUFC historically.

I don't really feel like we disagree much here. 

I can't say I understand women fully, but if I said to my wife get your photo taken with ex-world champion boxer, Mike Tyson, I think she would respond much as Charlie Webster did in the tweet.  If I said to her, by the way he was found guilty of rape and served 6 years, I just think there is no chance she would respond like that.  She'd tell me to GTFO pretty sharpish.  I know all women are different and all, but just think most would respond like my wife.  So when people say she is a hypocrite, I just assume she can't have been aware of his history or had forgotten it.  The vilification of her feels a bit close to that of the victim for my liking.

Anyway as I said further up, I think there is enough doubt that he should be allowed to appeal and I also think he should be allowed to play if he served his time and shows some remorse.  I do think it us best if he steps away until the appeal is resolved.  I'd have to try and respect any decision the court makes, but as I said earlier, he has done something wrong whatever you describe it as.

Would be pretty difficult to cheer him on if he shows up at Valley Parade afterwards and to explain it to my daughter whatever the result.  Then again I have cheered some right wrong uns there before.

Agree its best if everyone waits now.
 Odds aren't generally good on it being referred back it seems....however if it is...the chances of success are good.

CCRC has referred for appeal 3.43%, or one in every 29, of the applications considered. Of the cases referred by the CCRC to the appeal courts, approximately 70% have succeed at appeal.

It isn't really about Evans anymore I don't think.  You can't reasonably or legally prevent him from working in whatever capacity but that puts the onus onto the clubs and when they sign a player they are effectively saying they think it is acceptable for that person to be put up as a role model to their community.  If my two year old daughter for some reason decided to become a blade when she was 6 or 7 it would make me incredibly sick to see her cheering a convicted rapist but it would have been Sheffield Utd that were responsible for that situation effectively because they still have a choice to make.

They won't sign him. Some smaller team will come along and grab a bargain though, they always do.

Domestic violence is the first thing I think about when I hear Stan Collymore's stupid loud voice on the radio, then quickly turn off TalkSport as I want nothing doing with wife-beating scum like that!

"There's no doubt that with the enormous rewards comes responsibility, this seems to be lost on some people."

I just don't agree with this line of argument.  This makes it sound like a convicted rapist is going to be patrolling the streets of Gotham in a batsuit.

The rewards aren't dictated by responsibility.  They are dictated by market forces and he happens to be in a profession that pays very well.  Sheff Utd will likely not sign him because the revenue they will lose and brand damage they will suffer will outweigh the benefits of picking up a decent striker for nothing.  And that should be their decision.

Otherwise, we'll have to set up a committee that judges whether any footballer has enough "responsibility" for his profession.   It seems clear that killers and rapists won't play.  What about people who have hit their partners?  Players with gambling problems?  Players who headbutt each other?  Players who bite each other?  Obviously raping someone is a world apart from common assault, but none of these sound very responsible and in return for their enormous rewards.

Or are we just going to pick and choose as we go along, depending on the level of media anger?

I feel like the weight of opinion has moved strongly against him getting a contract.

I'd be pretty surprised if Sheffield Utd offer him one now, at least until his final appeal is heard.

If he loses that appeal, the only way back for him would be to play in Europe somewhere.

When you are on £20k a week and part of an organisation that  is a community based whether you like it or not you have different responsibilities to a builder or a window cleaner.

It comes with the territory with the game as it is today. Bear in mind that SUFC have pushed hard to be a club that attracts young fans - it gives away thousands of tickets to youngsters on a very regular basis. Its tried very hard to attract a family audience. When you are selling a Club on this basis, your employees have a responsibility to understand that, especially as a headline star player on big money.

Given that philosophy, the guy definitely has added responsibilities in his position.

Do you think that in another high profile family based entertainment industry in would be any different? Lets say the presenter of a high profile family TV entertainment show were convicted of rape, they would re-employ him? It would be madness.

Let him get a job but not where he acts as a high profile role model for youngsters.

Jessica Ennis made that point very eloquently in her statement - "Those people of influence should respect the role they play in young people's lives and set a good example"

In the case of the TV presenter they wouldn't re-employ him I imagine.  And that would be a decision for the TV company after weighing up the pros and cons.  They aren't not hiring him because they are taking a moral high gound.  They are acting in the company's interests.

However, since we are now entering a moral arena on who gets to play footballer and who doesn't, where do you stand on the other examples I mention?   Luke McCormick is captain of Plymouth.  Steven Gerrard/Joey Barton/Troy Deeney have beaten people up from memory.  John Terry threw racist insults.  All setting poor examples to youngsters and playing at present. 

Who is going to form the moral committee to decide who gets to play - Sepp Blatter?

I think the FA should take the lead and bring in a code of personal conduct package all registered players need to stick to or face bans or discipline.

For very serious breaches such as rape, murder etc it would be a lifetime ban

Thus taking the decision whether to employ a player with a shady past out of the hands of the individual clubs.

As an individual he is absolutely within his rights to work again having served his sentence.

An employer should imo think long and hard before employing a convicted rapist. Which is what he is.

Which is why surely it's better for him to wait for any appeal to take place. If he is innocent then of course its horrific for him. But at the same time, if he is, he obviously won't want people singing that he can rape who he wants to. Unfortunately as I said before his supporters treatment of the victim, with or without his approval, have made the situation much worse for him.

Whatever happened to the rule you cannot get parole from a sentence if you are still claiming you are innocent?

Is that just from life sentences?

Or is that from another country?

Or have I just seen it in the movies somewhere and assumed it was fact?

I thought exactly the same thing Camel, but since this case I am wondering if I got mixed up with another country's rules.

http://www.mojuk.org.uk/bulletins/paroleboard.html

Some simply disgusting tweets reportedly sent to Jessica Ennis today, what on earth do these people think they are doing?

It's a vile medium really

The replies mertesacker got the other day when tweeting remembrance of encke were the worst I have seen

Luckily these "people" will be getting a knock on the door shortly.

According to the Guardian the lady that started the petition against him has been receiving up to 500 abusive tweets a minute.  If true that is both amazing and vile.

You quite often hear that English football/society does not have a problem with racism these days

A very quick search of twitter on any day will soon show that is not true

Same is true of sexism

That is simply impossible.

You can search the tweets a person has received by using @ in the search box.

I saw she had some horrible remarks aimed at her, but 500 a day would be exaggerating, 500 a minute is far more than Bieber gets

Yeah it does seem fairly unlikely but if she is even receiving fifty a day it is pretty horrendous.  I just don't get what would make someone want to do something like that.  I mean I find Nigel Farage  pretty unsavoury but I can't imagine ever tweeting anything at him never mind threatening him.  I just find it bizarre

I don't often agree with Mr Hawkins' views, mainly because they often allow no concession to the idea that there may be some shades that fall in between black & white. This suggestion seems eminently sensible though, and prompts the thought that maybe being a convicted rapist just might, fall under the category of 'bringing the game into disrepute'.

Paul Heaton, former "Beautiful South" frontman, is the latest to resign as a Sheffield United Patron, which should save him a little time.


“I firmly believe that Ched Evans has the right to rebuild his career in football but rebuilding a career should not involve walking straight out of prison and into the shirt of the club he so badly let down,” said Heaton

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/nov/17/singer-paul-heaton-quits-patron-sheffield-united-ched-evans


(https://s.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/naBKVsuBAo3L3IZDrQKigg--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7Y2g9MTE1Mjtjcj0xO2N3PTIwNDg7ZHg9MDtkeT0wO2ZpPXVsY3JvcDtoPTM1NTtxPTg1O3c9NjMw/http://media.zenfs.com/en_uk/News/skynews/pa-5211539-1-2048x1152-20141117-204013-115.jpg)

Very well put piece that

The Irish PFAs solicitor has written an article on the case.

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/nov/17/ched-evans-irish-pfa-guildford-four

He's actually a former team mate of mine in schoolboy football!
There is a link in the Guardian article to his his original piece which I read yesterday. However when I click on that link now, it seems like his article has been pulled.
In fairness to him, he was simply writing it for the Irish PFA website, I'm sure he didn't think it would get picked up by the British media. I think the Irish PFA would have been better leaving it up as now you only have the Guardian journalist taking the most inflammatory pieces quotes from it.

Oh dear - given that there have been several people pilloried over suggesting that some rapes are worse than others I don't think he can argue something similar without expecting it to be picked up by other media.

Naive at best but I suspect he's just the same as the other apologists for Ched the Rapist, the only difference is he happens to be a solicitor.

Heaton's argument above about him being able to be rehabilitated - but not just by picking up where he left off is much more convincing.

Well this is why I think they should have left the article up. As I say, he was writing it for an Irish audience and asking could it happen to a player in Ireland. His legal view is that that case would not see the light of day in an Irish court.

Ireland isn't exactly known for women's rights - so that isn't exactly surprising

Lowest rates of convictions for rape in Europe according to Wikipedia

someone has to be lowest

Surely the conviction statistic is meaningless as a comparison unless all CPS equivilants require the same level of evidence to send a case to court and all laws regarding a particular crime are indentical country to country?

Although having said that, if they wouldn't take the Evans case to court (and similar) and they also still have the lowest conviction rate then it doesn't paint them in a good light.

This is to give an indication
http://www.amnesty.ie/news/damning-indictment-ireland%E2%80%99s-attitude-women (http://www.amnesty.ie/news/damning-indictment-ireland%E2%80%99s-attitude-women)

The summary is that social surveys in Ireland suggest that a higher than average level there would think a lot of cases aren't really rape - or the very least partly the woman's fault.

It's not directly relevant to this case but I think the suggestion would be that this solicitor's contribution is less of a defence for Evans and more of an indictment of the Irish system.

Well it seems they have different laws.  It's likely Evans would have got off on this basis if the crime had been in Ireland:

Hmmm - doesn't look like a great system does it?

"A defendant can assert an “honest but mistaken belief” that the victim consented, which is decided by the jury on the basis of whether the defendant believed the complainant has consented, no matter how unreasonable that belief.  Where such a defence is raised, the defendant is more likely to be granted leave to produce evidence of, and cross-examine the complainant on, the complainant’s sexual history. (The Examiner survey found that 29% of the public believe the woman partially or totally responsible if she has had many different sexual partners.) "

Waiting for the "she had a short skirt on so was asking for it" defence to be made.

Waiting for Sean Bean to get dragged into the debate.

It's like a variation of Godwin's Law.

This is what they need right now

YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XeLkCKLhPos

Sheffield United have decided not to allow Evans to train on their facilities.

Good.

Finally common sense prevailed.

Shocking PR though from United, couldn't have handled the whole thing much worse.

one good thing has come out of all this i remembered what a good film when saturday comes is and just watched it again

A guy I know well is one of Sean Bean's oldest friends from Sheffield, we all went to the "world premier" of WSC at the cinema's at the Meadowhall shopping centre in dinner jackets. He was in the film as one of the guys in the pub at the end watching the penalty.

It was hardly Leicester Square, we walked through the food hall and up the escalators which were cordoned off from the crowds eating their big macs wondering what was going off :-)

I vaguely remember a few of us blagging our way into the "VIP" area.

I'm assuming they were thinking along the lines that the capital value of the player was worth ignoring the moral aspects of the situation and just got a bit of a shock when it turned out that both parts of their assumption were wrong.

Something that I think has been overlooked in all this is that Sheff Utd didn't decide to let him train off the top of their own heads - the PFA were the ones who started this by asking Sheff Utd if they would let him train, yet they seem to have emerged from this whole mess virtually unscathed.

Good point - I haven't heard anybody have a go at the PFA - just at the Blades.

The PFA are tossers.

But seriously, they are meant to be a union looking after the players, etc.  Gordon Taylor from the PFA was highlighting the fact that if Evans was employed by Sheffield Utd, he'd pay taxes on the money he'd earn and that would help society.  Completely ignoring the fact that if Evans wasn't employed by Sheffield Utd, another player (who hasn't raped anyone), would be paying exactly the same taxes.

That's hardly an argument as to why Sheffield Utd should employ Evans.

Bit harsh they are simp,y doing their job in the best interest of their member would be very odd if they did anything different surely?

Conversely I agree that argument is stupid and pointless and actually makes them look weak as a union.

I was just responding to Dungbeetle as he said no one had said anything against the PFA.

:D

I thought it might be a wind up i wasn't 100%!

United score another own goal.

One of their directors basically saying "we wanted to sign him but had to give in to mob rule" aint the smartest way to handle it.

Hibs offer Ched Evans a contract.......


http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/30662865


(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_UjmzIMC72tU/TEsNLtuiH0I/AAAAAAAAA2E/TrI5kJNYkVg/s1600/Hibernians-FC.png)

Knowing Malta quite well, I would be amazed if this deal went through smoothly.

This is a country that only recently voted (51/49) I think, in favour of divorce.

Gey yerself out there as his agent ;-)

Sheffield United have close ties with Malta, in fact one of our Sponsors is the country of Malta.

Might have been an attempt to get him playing again somewhere out of the limelight?

Think wherever he goes, he will be in the limelight. Think I heard today he can't go abroad to work anyway, so looks like this is a no go.

That would have some logic, to sort of ease the pressure on all parties I suppose.

But wait. What's this?

Sheff U are sponsored by a COUNTRY?

 

Rumours about Evans signing for a League One club next week, Barnsley mentioned.

Athletico Madrid are sponsored by Azerbaijan.

Yes, & in a way, Man C are sponsored by Abu Whatsit, or UAE.

But Sheff U, a little Third Division North Team, sponsored by a country?

What, why?

lol, we were young and needed the money.

http://news.sky.com/story/1401597/rapist-ched-evans-barred-from-playing-abroad

Convicted rapist Ched Evans is in talks about signing with an unnamed League One club, according to players' union chief executive Gordon Taylor.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/30671692

If he signs, will they have to name him then?

I suppose he could play with a bag over his head.


(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/6SgAclSkCpA/hqdefault.jpg)

Supposed to be Barnsley according to the rumour I mentioned yesterday.

Yuh, have heard the same. Surely not though. He would get so much stick from rival fans that games would become a farce.

Oldham Athletic apparently

gordon taylor asks journalists to attend a press conference tomorrow but can't say where!

Oldham are getting cold feet after 20,000 sign a petition in short order

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/30678251

I don't think an Online Petition means much - that could be, & probably is, 20,000 people from across the UK, maybe even many from Sheffield, rather than Oldham supporters.

Any Club that wants to sign him is going to either have to man up & face the inevitable hoohah, or just forget the whole idea.

If he were to, say, sign for a Conference Club, & start scoring goals galore, a desperate League Club would take him on soon enough, for sure.   

Of course if Oldham do say no to Evans he'll probably take it as a yes... (with thanks to David Schneider on Twitter)

Ed Milliband welcomes the news that Oldham are reconsidering.  Ed's involvement make you almost want to switch to Ched's side?

Yes. From the few details I've heard, I have some sympathy for Ched's situation anyway.

it's unreal isn't it?

Another to add to the long line of people that have jumped onto the bandwagon of using the guy to improve their own publicity. It's a pretty amazing thing that the leader of the Labour party is claiming that a low level footballer is a role model. I'm expecting Anne Kirkbride, Christopher Biggins or Cannon and Ball to tell Oldham they will stop coming to games and wont take up their season tickets again next year if he is allowed to play.

Haha! Hilarious but prob true! :(

Ed Miliband would not employ Ched Evans as Chancellor of the Exchequer it seems.  Seems reasonable.  I doubt Mr Evans would be anymore qualified for the role than other football intellectual collossi such as Wayne Rooney or John Terry?

I may be wrong, but wasn't John Terry on TV the other day celebrating his part in the deficit reduction program? 

More people who had never heard of him last year outraged at him returning to work.


Role model not a chance

Wasn't he on a radio station and get asked the question? What else is he sposed to say?

Think it's pretty clear Oldham will sign him- just need to be seen to reacting to the media outcry

This is turning into a vendetta now. 

Only those who have heard of someone before are entitled to be outraged when their actions hit the headlines?

No

But to say Ched Evans was a role model to my son/daughter from a journalist who is based in London is farcical.

It is a big price they had heard of him this time two years ago

Its all going to be rather awkward if he is found innocent. I'm not sure how he can show remorse whilst still appealing but it would have been a wise mood. He has affected a young lady's life in some manner.

Is Ched Evans really this thick?

NO ONE WANTS YOU AT THEIR CLUB.

It is as simple as that.

Why doesn't he go and find something else to do with his sad little life?

Why would a club that doesn't want him be discussing a deal with him?

Or does typing in upper case letters trump logic?

Oops. That came out ruder than intended.

I was metaphorically shouting at Evans to get it through his thick head.

A few "football" people who cannot grasp the bigger picture might entertain the idea of Evans playing for their team.

But the majority of supporters/sponsors/the community of every club you can name definitely do not want him.

And as they effectively pay the wages of everyone employed at a club, he won't get to play again (unless his name is cleared obviously)

Somebody please tell me this isn't true.  I may lose all faith in humanity if we, as a country, have plumbed these depths...

It really needed a photoshop and I am not good enough.   Not true I am afraid.

It isn't that simple.  Oldham, Tranmere, Hartlepool and Sheff Utd did want him at their club, but were subsequently put off by media campaigns against him because they were worried about the damage to their brand.  If clubs keep opening negotiations with him, then he is hardly thick if he wants to explore each avenue?

At least one sponsor finally has some sense.  Step forward Web Applications UK:

"To deprive a human being of the right to work in their chosen profession should be a decision taken by a judicial system that dispassionately balances the rights of the individual against that of the society as a whole.  There are cases where such rights should be restricted for the good of the whole, but it is not a decision that should be made by an IT company.  Whether Oldham Athletic choose to employ Ched Evans is a decision for the manager and board of directors of the club. We will not interfere with that decision."

Perhaps someone can communicate these words to the Witchfinder Generals out there on twitter.

And each one has been nixxed almost straight away.

The threat by a shirt sponsor to end their deal immediately will be enough for any second or third tier team to pull out of any agreement to sign Evans.

Unless he wins his appeal, I don't think he'll play league football in England ever again (I suppose if his victim comes out in support of him playing - then he might get a chance)

I think it's more that management at those clubs want him because they know they can get him really really cheap and aren't too concerned about the ethical considerations.

The general public are a bit more vocal about that side of things.

The Independent have a reasonably good op ed piece on it here (http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/football-clubs-might-turn-a-blind-eye-to-rape-but-while-ched-evans-supporters-still-run-a-website-vilifying-his-victim-we-shouldnt-9958981.html)

If he were to win his appeal, would there be a "victim"?

Where Evans is scoring a PR own goal is this website that BBC were talking about earlier today which contains a video of the girl.

Sounds like her father is trying to get the site taken down by the authorities.

They reported that it was found to be registered in his name at an address in Alderley Edge.

The treatment of the victim by his "supporters" looks bad.

Sounds like she has had to move 5 times since the case.

I'm sure he could appeal to those people to leave her alone and let him get on with his legal case without the bad PR all that brings.

The shirt sponsors are worried about the same thing the clubs are.  That the baying mob on Twitter will give them negative publicity and that will mean that their sponsorship value is reduced.   We are ignoring how our justice system works and bowing to the lowest common denominator on social media because they shout the loudest.

Agree with all that. 

Yes Ched would be the victim.

Just as an aside, I'd not necessarily read too much into that.

A "malicious" website that was recently maliciously harassing Sky Poker, & me, was, after investigation, found to be registered to.....blondepoker Ltd.

We obviously knew nothing of how that happened, but it took many months of hassle, legal threats & all sorts to get the registration of the site disassociated with blondepoker.

We said "who paid the Registration Fee?".

They said "we can't tell you that, due to the Data Protection Act".

"But you claim it was blondepoker, that's us"

"Yes, but we can't disclose who paid the fees". 

So it's possible Evans & his crew know nothing of it.

I find it interesting that hundreds of thousands of people expressing their opinion on social media or through their respective companies as sponsors or club community members are called a 'baying mob' when there are Evans supporters hunting down the woman that he is convicted of raping.

She has been forced to changed her identity, create a new life from scratch five times because she is being hunted down and abused, yet Evans says nothing to discourage this behaviour.

This woman can't walk down the street without the well founded fear of being abused, yet some are up in arms about Evans not being allowed to walk back into an x thousand pounds a week job which to me is pretty baffling.

And in society today (especially after all the publicity on other sexual crimes Rotherham, Rochdale, TV personalities etc) that is just not on and neither should it be.

We should be protecting all victims and the treatment of her currently does Evans no favours.

It's a seperate issue.  The baying mob on Evans' side should be prosecuted for victim intimidation/stalking or whatever charge is appropriate.  Why they are not is a question for the authorities.

Evans was prosecuted, and served time in jail.

Just because the law isn't being upheld on one side shouldn't mean that Evans shouldn't be free to continue his career now his sentence is served.

I agree that Evans should do more to silence his own "supporters".  It does his cause no good at all.

In a liberal objective way I think it's right he should carry on his career - but I think the natural response from most people would be that they wouldn't really want to employ or work with a convicted rapist, or to be associated with them in any way. I think it's a bit odd if people can't understand that's where the protests against him come from.

Only the custodial part of his sentence is served, he is currently out on license while attending a rehabilitation program for sexual offenders and having meetings with probation officers. If he breaks the terms of his license he'll be back in prison tomorrow.

I'm not sure if I'm reading the 'law being upheld on one side' comment correctly but are you suggesting that there being very little public appetite for him to continue in his role as a footballer is in breach of law and that the police are deciding to look the other way?

Absolutely, I think he has a big opportunity to make a bold statement on the issue of consent. If he was to come out and say that when put in a situation of very questionable consent he made a bad decision and consent not just for men but for women as well should be paramount in any sexual encounter then he'd be doing a lot of good for society as a whole.

It would be very hard to do since he's a long way down the road of denial and it flies in the face of 'lad' culture that seems to be very prevalent in football especially but in wider society too. If he did that then I think he'd be showing that he's on the road to rehabilitation and could certainly make a return to football.

He has got to odds against to never play league football in the uk again surely whether he wins the appeal or not.  Lee Hughes has been playing for years after killing someone and nothing is ever said now.  I would happily back him at even money to play league football again in the uk.  Some club is going to get him for a tenth of his market salary and won't be able to turn it down at the lower levels.  Whether he ever plays epl/championship level again is a lot more unlikely as these clubs have a lot more financially to lose via the corporate side of the game.

4 football clubs have wanted to employ him.  And I'm fairly sure those who sign these petitions aren't the prospective team mates.  So as far as I can see the protests against him aren't from the employers or employees, but from people online who have to fill their hours and make themselves feel important, as opposed to allowing a man to serve his sentence and then try and rebuild his career.

30,000 people signed the Oldham petition.  In the context of how many people attend football or watch it every weekend it's tiny.

No - I'm saying the idiots who hound the victim in this case must be breaking laws when doing so.  Why aren't they being put in the dock themselves?

Less than 300 of them will be people who have actually attended an Oldham game this year imo.

The Evening Standard conducted a poll in London which showed about 2/3 of the respondents wouldn't want him to play for their club - I'd expect the figure to be at least similar for most places.

That's even taking into account the laddish football culture which is more likely to blame the victim - in the general population about working with a convicted rapist I'd expect the figure to be even higher.

Ask tranmere fans or Hartlepool fans if they could sign him for £500 a week when his market value is £5-8k a week with the promise he keeps them in the football league and i think you might get a different answer.  They might not be as keen to admit it in public just like the vast majority of silent people in the yes/no vote were no voters whilst the loud minority was shouting yes at the top of their voice.  It is crazy to think footballers at the lower level of the game are role models when they earn less than most of us on this forum and are totally unknown to 99% of the people in the town they play in.

"The Evening Standard conducted a poll in London which showed about 2/3 of the respondents wouldn't want him to play for their club "

Would you be more likely to respond to this poll if you felt strongly anti Evans?  

Plus asking an Arsenal fan if he wants a player to join them who is miles below 1st team standard who is a convicted rapist seems a pretty pointless question.

Given the lengths his supporters have gone to I'd have thought it could be argued either way.

On the general point that was made - do you think most people wouldn't mind working with a convicted rapist then?

Most poker players sit and play willingly with criminals every time they play to various degrees.  There was a dtd reg who went down for child offences in the last 12 months in a multi year sentence.

In a football environment i don't think the average footballer would care less about Evan's history if he helped him earn his win bonuses every week with his goals.

There was a poll on an Oldham athletic fan forum I saw where 80% of the fans were against the signing.  This is kind of where I am, I think deep down he should have a right to work, but wouldn't want him at 'my' club. 

Just for Tikay.  The website is clearly associated with Ched, as that is where his apology video first appeared.  That website could do many things to prevent the attacks on the current victim without admitting Ched's guilt and has chosen not to.

If any criminal had served their prison sentence I think I'd be okay working with a convicted person.  Dunno though - it's easy for me to say that before it actually happens.  On principal I would anyway.  

Hughes was sentenced for 6 years for death by dangerous driving.  Evans 5 years for rape.  Why is Hughes allowed back into the game but Evans isn't?  What if a talented 18 year old footballer went down for 10 years for serious drug dealing and was let out at 24 would he get the same treatment as Evans?

I assume it is the remorse aspect? 

Why should he be remorseful when he doesn't believe he committed the crime and is appealing?

Can't imagine too many people being remorseful if they felt that strongly they had been wronged by the system to be honest.

I guess that is the crux of it.   

I assume if Evans says sorry to his victim after his release, everyone is happy for him to play like McCormick/Hughes?

So assuming he doesn't get to play till his appeal process is finished, and it doesn't get overturned can he say sorry at that point and still mean it?  It would seem hard for him to do it at that point.   

Can you ever work again if you think you are a victim of injustice but the legal system tells you you are wrong?  Or are you in a constant state of "non rehabilitation"?

I'm playing devils advocate here.  The best course for Evans (unless he is 100% that she fully consented) was to say something along the lines of:

"I thought I had consent at the time.  After looking at evidence in retrospect I didn't.  I am mortified that I have committed rape and apologise unreservedly to the victim for the harm I have done.  I hope she can rebuild her life"

However, I am interested in what life holds for him if he genuinely thinks that he is a victim of injustice and will never show remorse.  Is he cast to the abyss forever by society even though he has served his sentence?

No not at all.  He will have to just hope a club it desperate enough to need his services and put up with the short term bad pr like Hughes' clubs had to to get a foot back in the door.  Pretty sure no one at Forest Green cares about hughes 6 year sentence a decade later.

The other thing to remember is Evan's will not be able to play outside of the UK due to the terms of his release so from a pure supply/demand point of view the number of clubs he can offer his services to is massively reduced which will probably force him to take an even lower offer salary wise than he would have had the option of aboard been available to him.  Therefore the price is going to become so cheap that some club will scupper to the PR issues and take him on.
If that doesn't happen then he will just have to get a 'real job' or work for his loaded bird's dad i suppose.  Sure he will never struggle financially in life.  We shouldn't feel overly sorry for him.  Worse case he ends up in the real world like the rest of us.

If you dont believe he did that (like me) then its probably ok to feel sorry for him

I agree.  I don't know if he did or he didn't.  What i am pretty sure of is that he has probably done nothing different to what a lot of footballers have probably done abusing their status with young pretty female fans.  There must be a lot of footballers thinking 'thank fuck it wasn't me'

There are 64 million people in the UK and its being described a public outcry that 30,000 of them singed an online petition tho. Media have set out their stall when he was released and are going to stick to it. Think it was reported as about 160,000 people signed the last online petition, so 130,000 that did vote then didn't this time.

Neither do i. I am going more on the actual evidence that was presented but anyway had this debate about five times on this thread already

How many of the people that believe that he's innocent of any crime do we think will change their view if the judicial review upholds his conviction?

There seems to be so much talk about not wanting Evans playing for your club/people not being willing to work with a convicted rapist etc in these online polls.

What would you do if you were sitting at DTD playing cash and Evans sat down next to you for the evening?  It's easy to sit online and tick these online surveys etc but they mean nothing if you don't back it up with your own actions.  

More than 50% but not all.