Ched Evans

[The Camel]

What really clouds all of the issues here is that she awoke naked and alone in the hotel room with no memory of what happened that previous night.

She subsequently said that she thought her drink must have been spiked in the club but still didn't say anything about any rape and there was no forensic or DNA evidence.

If those two statements are true I find it hard to understand how CE was convicted in the first place.

He said he had sex with her.

The CPS claimed she was in no fit state to consent to sex, therefore it must be rape.

She never claimed she was raped, she maintained she had no recollection of the night, just woke up naked, alone and not knowing where she was.

I really feel like the victim blaming and demands for her to be sent to jail absolutely vile. She didn't accuse Evans of anything.

[Karabiner]

What really clouds all of the issues here is that she awoke naked and alone in the hotel room with no memory of what happened that previous night.

She subsequently said that she thought her drink must have been spiked in the club but still didn't say anything about any rape and there was no forensic or DNA evidence.

If those two statements are true I find it hard to understand how CE was convicted in the first place.

He said he had sex with her.

The CPS claimed she was in no fit state to consent to sex, therefore it must be rape.

She never claimed she was raped, she maintained she had no recollection of the night, just woke up naked, alone and not knowing where she was.

I really feel like the victim blaming and demands for her to be sent to jail absolutely vile. She didn't accuse Evans of anything.

I think the CPS is at fault for persuing such a flimsy case, not the girl.

[RED-DOG]

Astonished not one person has mentioned Evans has been in jail and had his career ruined when he is now acquitted.   Seems like those happy to castigate him on the original court verdict are not willing to give him the benefit of the doubt on the same basis now.

This, for anyone actually bothering to follow the original court case despite some of the ugly things done by the Eans camp there were massive holes in the prosecution.  

Evans is a fool, but I genuinley feel sorry for him.  

I also think it is relevant that the sexual history of the accuser was brought to question.  She was painted as a bit of a saint in the original trial by the prosecution.  

I could not disagree more.

She is not on trial, he is.

What she did in the last week is irrelevant. She could have agreed to group sex every day for a year and this time not agreed and it is rape. Her past should not be an issue.

It gives license for rapists to make stuff up about their victims, so their sexual history becomes evidence in a case.

I think it is relevant.

If a woman agrees to group sex for the first 364 days of the year, it surely wouldn't be beyond reasonable doubt to say that she might have agreed on the 365th.

[ripple11]

What really clouds all of the issues here is that she awoke naked and alone in the hotel room with no memory of what happened that previous night.

She subsequently said that she thought her drink must have been spiked in the club but still didn't say anything about any rape and there was no forensic or DNA evidence.

If those two statements are true I find it hard to understand how CE was convicted in the first place.

He said he had sex with her.

The CPS claimed she was in no fit state to consent to sex, therefore it must be rape.

She never claimed she was raped, she maintained she had no recollection of the night, just woke up naked, alone and not knowing where she was.

I really feel like the victim blaming and demands for her to be sent to jail absolutely vile. She didn't accuse Evans of anything.

Surely It was ridiculous for the CPS to draw the conclusion that she was in no fit state to consent....just because she says she has no recollection. The video of her minutes before the incident ...remembering the pizza outside,walking  back alone, picking Ithe box off the ground in high heels,....leaves a big doubt she wasn't able to make a conscious decision minutes later.

[rinswun]

I think the previous behaviour of the key witness is absolutely right to be called into question. This applies whether this be a rape case, robbery, GBH, fraud, whatever. Yes the key witness and the victim are the same person but it is a long established legal precedent that to probe the validity of a witness' statement in light of their previous behaviour.

It's terrible that so many rape victims feel unable to report their experiences for fear of being branded a liar but by the same token, imagine being forced to spend a portion of your life at her majesty's pleasure with your reputation in tatters due to an act which you genuinely and reasonably believed to be completely consensual.

Take away the emotion of the case and the correct legal practise would be to conduct due diligence on the prosecution's key witness and point out issues that were troubling.

[Archer]

Everything change now he's not guilty?

Bribed a witness for 50 large to say what he was told to say.  Nothing has changed for me.  Still guilty.  Why leave via the fire exit with your head down if you done nothing wrong?

Witness takes all the risk lying in court about not taking the 50 large from Ched's missus she was aggressively offering on FB.  Nice spot for Evans.  Big pockets buy you freedom.  More incredible how his bird's old man bankrolled it all though.  I haven't cheated on many girls who's dad would have been so willing to even speak to you never mind bankroll a court case for you.

Just read the very 1st page of this long thread and you say there you were amazed he was found guilty. Now you think he is still guilty.  I'm confused

He left via the fire exit because it was the nearest door to the road he was going down to go home.

[Archer]

Astonished not one person has mentioned Evans has been in jail and had his career ruined when he is now acquitted.   Seems like those happy to castigate him on the original court verdict are not willing to give him the benefit of the doubt on the same basis now.

This, for anyone actually bothering to follow the original court case despite some of the ugly things done by the Eans camp there were massive holes in the prosecution.  

Evans is a fool, but I genuinley feel sorry for him.  

I also think it is relevant that the sexual history of the accuser was brought to question.  She was painted as a bit of a saint in the original trial by the prosecution.  

I could not disagree more.

She is not on trial, he is.

What she did in the last week is irrelevant. She could have agreed to group sex every day for a year and this time not agreed and it is rape. Her past should not be an issue.

It gives license for rapists to make stuff up about their victims, so their sexual history becomes evidence in a case.

Agree totally.  Why can't a woman consent to whatever sexual activity she likes without it being brought up in the future against her when she doesn't want plain vanilla sex with a random guy.  She could be an escort and it has no influence on a rape case.  It is a disgrace and sets a huge issue moving forward for rape cases.  Evan's lawyers have certainly morally crossed the line for me bringing this up.  

Not sure I agree with this. From the Guardian link Tighty posted:

The vice-president of the court of appeal criminal division, Lady Justice Hallett, who heard the appeal with two other judges, said the evidence would be admissible only if the defence could “overcome the high hurdle of relevance and similarity”.

Hallett also said Laws was right to emphasise the importance of offering complainants in sexual offences protection from “intrusive and unnecessary questioning about their sexual history”.

However, she said with “a considerable degree of hesitation” the court had decided that the evidence of Y and Z could be admitted. She added: “This a rare case in which it will be appropriate to indulge in this kind of forensic examination of sexual behaviour with others.” Evans’ conviction was quashed and a retrial ordered.

[Archer]

I think the previous behaviour of the key witness is absolutely right to be called into question. This applies whether this be a rape case, robbery, GBH, fraud, whatever. Yes the key witness and the victim are the same person but it is a long established legal precedent that to probe the validity of a witness' statement in light of their previous behaviour.

It's terrible that so many rape victims feel unable to report their experiences for fear of being branded a liar but by the same token, imagine being forced to spend a portion of your life at her majesty's pleasure with your reputation in tatters due to an act which you genuinely and reasonably believed to be completely consensual.

Take away the emotion of the case and the correct legal practise would be to conduct due diligence on the prosecution's key witness and point out issues that were troubling.

I broadly agree but the law for rape is framed differently. This link that Tighty posted earlier is worth a read:

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/oct/14/campaigners-fear-evans-case-will-stop-women-reporting?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

[teddybloat]

afaik her sexual past was allowed in as Evan in his denial of rape reported she had a distinctive and assertive manner when having sex, using certain phrases and wanting specific positions.

if the cps is alleging that Evans is lying about this,  or asserting she was too drunk to act in that manner, then it is absolutely correct for ex partners to be able to confirm that the phrases, positions and assertiveness Evans reported was entirely in character. It's a big part of Evans' defence.

Its not like any moral judgement was made on her enjoying sex.

I agree that a victims previous behavior does not generally have a bearing on a case, but where distinctive sexual patterns, language are alledged to have been used - and especially when that behavior is assertive - i do think that its necessary to be able to establish what constitutes normal behavior.

[Doobs]

afaik her sexual past was allowed in as Evan in his denial of rape reported she had a distinctive and assertive manner when having sex, using certain phrases and wanting specific positions.

if the cps is alleging that Evans is lying about this,  or asserting she was too drunk to act in that manner, then it is absolutely correct for ex partners to be able to confirm that the phrases, positions and assertiveness Evans reported was entirely in character. It's a big part of Evans' defence.

Its not like any moral judgement was made on her enjoying sex.

I agree that a victims previous behavior does not generally have a bearing on a case, but where distinctive sexual patterns, language are alledged to have been used - and especially when that behavior is assertive - i do think that its necessary to be able to establish what constitutes normal behavior.

but is there anything distinctive in the phrase "fuck me harder"?   Hardly on a par with DNA evidence, is it?

And wouldn't you always claim she was assertive if you were trying to show you didn't force yourself on her?  You are hardly likely to say she said nothing at all and just lay there?   Especially if you claim you didn't say anything yourself.

Whole thing is a farce.  I feel very uneasy about the financial reward for evidence, and the way the same website attacked the "victim".  I am not sure how anyone can be sure he is guilty or innocent.  So not guilty is likely the right verdict, but that doesn't mean he is either innocent or guilty.

Having said all that, I was glad to see Ched Evans apologise afterwards, and I am glad he wasn't punching the air.  Maybe he has come out of this a better person?

[teddybloat]

Not in the phrase, but coupled with the postition, orrifices and general demeanour, it would be a huge coincidence if evans just managed to guess at what seemed to me to be a pretty indiosyncratiic way of enjoying sex.

Yes Evans would say she was assertive and demanded to be taken a very specific way if he was guilty (or more likely to say that than she was pliant due to being pissed), but he would also say that if he was innocent and had taken part in what he reasonably believed to be consensual sex with a confident and assertive person.

Which is why it is completely appropriate to assertian whether that reported behaviour was usual for the girl. If it was then it does rubbish the idea that Evans had had sex with a person unable to consent, possibly incapacitated through drink, and had  invented a specific pattern of sexual practice that by a remarkable coincidence happened to match that of the girl.

[horseplayer]

Not in the phrase, but coupled with the postition, orrifices and general demeanour, it would be a huge coincidence if evans just managed to guess at what seemed to me to be a pretty indiosyncratiic way of enjoying sex.

Yes Evans would say she was assertive and demanded to be taken a very specific way if he was guilty (or more likely to say that than she was pliant due to being pissed), but he would also say that if he was innocent and had taken part in what he reasonably believed to be consensual sex with a confident and assertive person.

Which is why it is completely appropriate to assertian whether that reported behaviour was usual for the girl. If it was then it does rubbish the idea that Evans had had sex with a person unable to consent, possibly incapacitated through drink, and had  invented a specific pattern of sexual practice that by a remarkable coincidence happened to match that of the girl.

Correcto

[The Camel]

Astonished not one person has mentioned Evans has been in jail and had his career ruined when he is now acquitted.   Seems like those happy to castigate him on the original court verdict are not willing to give him the benefit of the doubt on the same basis now.

This, for anyone actually bothering to follow the original court case despite some of the ugly things done by the Eans camp there were massive holes in the prosecution.  

Evans is a fool, but I genuinley feel sorry for him.  

I also think it is relevant that the sexual history of the accuser was brought to question.  She was painted as a bit of a saint in the original trial by the prosecution.  

I could not disagree more.

She is not on trial, he is.

What she did in the last week is irrelevant. She could have agreed to group sex every day for a year and this time not agreed and it is rape. Her past should not be an issue.

It gives license for rapists to make stuff up about their victims, so their sexual history becomes evidence in a case.

I think it is relevant.

If a woman agrees to group sex for the first 364 days of the year, it surely wouldn't be beyond reasonable doubt to say that she might have agreed on the 365th.

A woman working as a prostitute has sex ten times per day.

Do you think she can't be raped?

[RED-DOG]

Astonished not one person has mentioned Evans has been in jail and had his career ruined when he is now acquitted.   Seems like those happy to castigate him on the original court verdict are not willing to give him the benefit of the doubt on the same basis now.

This, for anyone actually bothering to follow the original court case despite some of the ugly things done by the Eans camp there were massive holes in the prosecution.  

Evans is a fool, but I genuinley feel sorry for him.  

I also think it is relevant that the sexual history of the accuser was brought to question.  She was painted as a bit of a saint in the original trial by the prosecution.  

I could not disagree more.

She is not on trial, he is.

What she did in the last week is irrelevant. She could have agreed to group sex every day for a year and this time not agreed and it is rape. Her past should not be an issue.

It gives license for rapists to make stuff up about their victims, so their sexual history becomes evidence in a case.

I think it is relevant.

If a woman agrees to group sex for the first 364 days of the year, it surely wouldn't be beyond reasonable doubt to say that she might have agreed on the 365th.

A woman working as a prostitute has sex ten times per day.

Do you think she can't be raped?

No. I think if she's having sex ten times a day it is a relevant factor and could give rise to reasonable doubt.

Do you really disagree with that?

[teddybloat]

Yes I disagree 100%

It has no bearing on her claim of being raped.