If Ched Evans was a decent player

[lovetheshirt]

If he wins his appeal are the authorities (i.e. taxpayer - us) going to compensate him for loss of earnings? I hope so.

I didn't know much about this case because every time I turn on the TV he is addressed as "CONVICTED RAPIST" by the media outlets. The more I read into this the more and more I think he's been had over.

 

[paddy spur]

Wouldn't want a convicted rapist wearing our colours. Henry winters article in the telegraph is a pretty good summary of how I feal.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/columnists/henrywinter/

 

[ChuckleShuffle]

If he wins his appeal she should have to serve the same amount of time he has and be forever known as a lier that ruined someones life.

 

[MKYid]

I'm honestly a little torn on this one, from what I know about the case I don't think there is much to answer for other than a night of regrettable sex, however, allowing Evans to play football again leads to other potential situations, such as a player guilty of a less ambiguous rape returning to the game.

For example, what if a player went out with his mates and grabbed a girl off the street and raped her at knife point in an alleyway, he serves his sentence and is released and is considered rehabilitated. Would you want to see him on the pitch earning thousands of pounds a week again?

 

[Johnboy40]

I'm honestly a little torn on this one, from what I know about the case I don't think there is much to answer for other than a night of regrettable sex, however, allowing Evans to play football again leads to other potential situations, such as a player guilty of a less ambiguous rape returning to the game.

For example, what if a player went out with his mates and grabbed a girl off the street and raped her at knife point in an alleyway, he serves his sentence and is released and is considered rehabilitated. Would you want to see him on the pitch earning thousands of pounds a week again?

thats why, right at the beginning of this thread, I said you can only judge on a case by case basis. whether guilty or not, what evans did was a world away from beating some woman to a pulp and raping her. they shouldnt be looked at in the same way either, even though some in the media and some bloggers think they are the same.

 

[MKYid]

thats why, right at the beginning of this thread, I said you can only judge on a case by case basis. whether guilty or not, what evans did was a world away from beating some woman to a pulp and raping her. they shouldnt be looked at in the same way either, even though some in the media and some bloggers think they are the same.

Well the Evans case and the scenario I suggested are the more extreme ends of the spectrum, so where do you draw the line?

 

[Johnboy40]

Well the Evans case and the scenario I suggested are the more extreme ends of the spectrum, so where do you draw the line?

truth is, i dunno. i suppose you could argue that as there was no violence, threat of violence and no suggestion that Evans had her slipped her a mickey or got her into a drunken state he's a different case, especially as (backed up by the the only other person in the room) he got her consent. but then you could make the same argument about some twat that sees a girl whose gotten so pissed she has virtually passed out decide it's acceptable to slip her a length cos she murmured something when he asked if she fancied a shag.(but should he be held responsible for it if he's as pissed as she is)
I think we should all take responsibility for our own actions and choices. If I jump in a car whilst pissed up, I cant say "well, my judgement was impaired because i were drunk, and i couldnt make an informed decision"
The problem is, I do think the principle of informed consent is right. I think if someone slips a girl a mickey, or keeps buying her triples instead of doubles and then fucks her (like that cabbie John Worboys was doing) then there should be guilt. So on the original question, judge by the case is all we can do.

as an aside, the law on rape in the UK says this.....

1-(1) A person (A) commits an offence if—
(a) he intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of another person (B) with his penis,
(b) B does not consent to the penetration, and
(c) A does not reasonably believe that B consents.
(2) Whether a belief is reasonable is to be determined having regard to all the circumstances, including any steps A has taken to ascertain whether B consents.
(3) Sections 75 and 76 apply to an offence under this section.
(4) A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable, on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for life.

so the old "whoops wrong hole" is legally rape .
and as i read it, a woman can be guilty of rape as an accomplice (or stat rape..ie consenting sex with a minor.) Im sure that someone will tear me to shreds on this, but as i read it, if a woman slipped you a mickey and porked you with a strap on, you aint been raped.

also, interestingly, about 5% of all womem claim to have been raped. and about 5% of all men claim to have been raped by a woman (going by a 2011 cdc study in the states)

 

[lovetheshirt]

 

[SouthernCross10]

If Cristiano Ronaldo did the same thing and came back 2 years later to play,

almost every club in the world would be lining up to sign him.

Of course it's because Ched Evans isn't a top player

 

[Blanchflower]

If Cristiano Ronaldo did the same thing and came back 2 years later to play,

almost every club in the world would be lining up to sign him.

Of course it's because Ched Evans isn't a top player

Cristiano Ronaldo wouldn't be convicted imo

 

[Eskimo]

I'm honestly a little torn on this one, from what I know about the case I don't think there is much to answer for other than a night of regrettable sex, however, allowing Evans to play football again leads to other potential situations, such as a player guilty of a less ambiguous rape returning to the game.

For example, what if a player went out with his mates and grabbed a girl off the street and raped her at knife point in an alleyway, he serves his sentence and is released and is considered rehabilitated. Would you want to see him on the pitch earning thousands of pounds a week again?

But what if the same thing happened with a mobile app developer who earns thousands, why should footballers be singled out?

And what if Ched evans offered to play for a year with his wages going to a womans refuge, why should the amount he earns matter?

 

[JDK]

It's not like he is accused of something, he was convicted of rape. The guy has continually been turned down the right to appeal due to lack of evidence. Everyone's rights have been respected. He's been granted due process and a trial by his peers. Should we just throw the justice system out the window?

The logic of people defending him by saying I've known a woman who got drunk and said she was raped when she wasn't is inane. By that logic it's like saying I once saw a case where a man was falsely imprisoned for murder when he didn't do it, so now every person accused of murder probably also didn't do it. It's false equivalency.

The guy has been given every chance to fight his case in a neutral courts and he's getting another chance to appeal. In a democracy, this is how guilt is decided by reviewing the evidence independently. The fact that you once knew a girl who falsely cried rape or you think all women are the devil has nothing to do with it. Just because a few woman claim false rape doesn't mean they all are. That's absolutely absurd. It's like calling all Muslims terrorists, it's asinine. It's also widely agreed that it is very rare for there to be false rape accusations. http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/mar/13/rape-investigations-belief-false-accusations

Evans will get another chance with his case but he's already failed on numerous occasions. The guy is a CONVICTED rapist. If that changes then obviously it's different but until at very least he's finished his sentence he shouldn't be allowed to return to football. I don't understand why so many people are willing to discount the legal system and due process which are the very hallmarks of democratic society for a seeming hatred or distrust of women. It makes me sick.

Once again, Evans will get another chance to present his case. If it is overturned on new evidence then the woman should be disciplined harshly. Falsely reporting any crime is morally repugnant. But until that happens, people are ridiculously smearing the woman based on almost nothing besides their own beliefs and fears. Once again, a higher and far more reliable authority than your own opinion has convicted Evans of one of the most heinous crimes on earth. The fact that people are so intent on discounting that in face of the present facts is very odd and disturbing.

 

[yiddo2786]

It's not like he is accused of something, he was convicted of rape. The guy has continually been turned down the right to appeal due to lack of evidence. Everyone's rights have been respected. He's been granted due process and a trial by his peers. Should we just throw the justice system out the window?

The logic of people defending him by saying I've known a woman who got drunk and said she was raped when she wasn't is inane. By that logic it's like I saying I once saw a case where a man was falsely imprisoned for murder when he didn't do it, so now every person accused of murder probably also didn't do it. It's false equivalency.

The guy has been given every chance to fight his case in a neutral courts and he's getting another chance to appeal. In a democracy, this is how guilt is decided by reviewing the evidence independently. The fact that you once knew a girl who falsely cried rape or you think all women are the devil has nothing to do with it. Just because a few woman claim false rape doesn't mean they all are. That's absolutely absurd. It's like calling all Muslims terrorists, it's asinine. It's also widely agreed that it is very rare for there to be false rape accusations. http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/mar/13/rape-investigations-belief-false-accusations

Evans will get another chance with his case but he's already failed on numerous occasions. The guy is a CONVICTED rapist. If that changes then obviously it's different but until at very least he's finished his sentence he shouldn't be allowed to return to football. I don't understand why so many people are willing to discount the legal system and due process which are the very hallmarks of democratic society for a seeming hatred or distrust of women. It makes me sick.

Once again, Evans will get another chance to present his case. If it is overturned on new evidence then the woman should be disciplined harshly. Falsely reporting any crime is morally repugnant. But until that happens, people are ridiculously smearing the woman based on almost nothing besides their own beliefs and fears. Once again, a higher and far more reliable authority than your own opinion has convicted Evans of one of the most heinous crimes on earth. The fact that people are so intent on discounting that in face of the present facts is very odd and disturbing.

This is a fantastic post

 

[ChuckleShuffle]

It's not like he is accused of something, he was convicted of rape. The guy has continually been turned down the right to appeal due to lack of evidence. Everyone's rights have been respected. He's been granted due process and a trial by his peers. Should we just throw the justice system out the window?

The logic of people defending him by saying I've known a woman who got drunk and said she was raped when she wasn't is inane. By that logic it's like saying I once saw a case where a man was falsely imprisoned for murder when he didn't do it, so now every person accused of murder probably also didn't do it. It's false equivalency.

The guy has been given every chance to fight his case in a neutral courts and he's getting another chance to appeal. In a democracy, this is how guilt is decided by reviewing the evidence independently. The fact that you once knew a girl who falsely cried rape or you think all women are the devil has nothing to do with it. Just because a few woman claim false rape doesn't mean they all are. That's absolutely absurd. It's like calling all Muslims terrorists, it's asinine. It's also widely agreed that it is very rare for there to be false rape accusations. http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/mar/13/rape-investigations-belief-false-accusations

Evans will get another chance with his case but he's already failed on numerous occasions. The guy is a CONVICTED rapist. If that changes then obviously it's different but until at very least he's finished his sentence he shouldn't be allowed to return to football. I don't understand why so many people are willing to discount the legal system and due process which are the very hallmarks of democratic society for a seeming hatred or distrust of women. It makes me sick.

Once again, Evans will get another chance to present his case. If it is overturned on new evidence then the woman should be disciplined harshly. Falsely reporting any crime is morally repugnant. But until that happens, people are ridiculously smearing the woman based on almost nothing besides their own beliefs and fears. Once again, a higher and far more reliable authority than your own opinion has convicted Evans of one of the most heinous crimes on earth. The fact that people are so intent on discounting that in face of the present facts is very odd and disturbing.

Basically what you've just said in that post answers your question of Should we just throw the justice system out the window?

Why can't he return to work if he has reformed?

 

[JDK]

Basically what you've just said in that post answers your question of Should we just throw the justice system out the window?

Why can't he return to work if he has reformed?

Never said he couldn't, I said it will be gross when he does. His sentence isn't over though. However, if I was running a club I wouldn't sign him on principle but others can. However, he is still at least two years away from completing his sentence iirc.

 

[ChuckleShuffle]

Never said he couldn't, I said it will be gross when he does. His sentence isn't over though. However, if I was running a club I wouldn't sign him on principle but others can. However, he is still at least two years away from completing his sentence iirc.

Yes he has still got two years to complete his sentence but surely if he has been released then he has been deemed safe/reformed. If that is the case then he should be allowed to return to his career.
If he isn't allowed to return then it makes a mockery of our justice system and we should just throw the justice system out the window because it clearly doesn't work

 

[yiddo2786]

Yes he has still got two years to complete his sentence but surely if he has been released then he has been deemed safe/reformed. If that is the case then he should be allowed to return to his career.
If he isn't allowed to return then it makes a mockery of our justice system and we should just throw the justice system out the window because it clearly doesn't work

If a sex offender can't be back in his lucrative job - that involves working with children - within 2 years then the entire justice system should be scrapped?

Part of the intended deterrent to crimes like this is the long term repercussions of committing crimes like rape. Judges know full well when sentencing that this will be the case. If I was imprisoned for rape I certainly wouldn't expect to rejoin my current job upon release. Ched hasn't had any special negative treatment, this is the way the judicial system works.

 

[ChuckleShuffle]

If a sex offender can't be back in his lucrative job - that involves working with children - within 2 years then the entire justice system should be scrapped?

Part of the intended deterrent to crimes like this is the long term repercussions of committing crimes like rape. Judges know full well when sentencing that this will be the case. If I was imprisoned for rape I certainly wouldn't expect to rejoin my current job upon release. Ched hasn't had any special negative treatment, this is the way the judicial system works.

I'm not saying it's all wrong I am getting at the fact that it has been put in place for a reason, that reason is reform. The time spent inside was meant to reform him and if he has been released then he has technically been deemed reformed. If he is reformed then why shouldn't he be allowed back?

He isn't going to is job though... I'm sure you'd look for work in the same industry though right?

 

[JDK]

I'm not saying it's all wrong I am getting at the fact that it has been put in place for a reason, that reason is reform. The time spent inside was meant to reform him and if he has been released then he has technically been deemed reformed. If he is reformed then why shouldn't he be allowed back?

He isn't going to is job though... I'm sure you'd look for work in the same industry though right?

It's my understanding that the vast majority of violent or sexual offenders at prestigious jobs do not return to the same prestigious field. Personally, I think after he's finished his five years of original sentence he could fairly return to football. Having said that, I would find it distasteful and not support the club who makes that choice but I wouldn't begrudge them it.

 

[yiddo2786]

I'm not saying it's all wrong I am getting at the fact that it has been put in place for a reason, that reason is reform. The time spent inside was meant to reform him and if he has been released then he has technically been deemed reformed. If he is reformed then why shouldn't he be allowed back?

He isn't going to is job though... I'm sure you'd look for work in the same industry though right?

I'm sorry, but you've made the entirety of that first paragraph up. Prison sentences are not designed solely for reformation. Prisoners are not released with the guarantee that they are reformed or that they will not offend again. I will also note here that there is no legal issue standing between him playing again. The law has not stopped him signing for a club, instead no club is prepared to sign him, some for moral reasons, but sadly most just because they want to avoid the wrath from sponsors and fans. Just as a headteacher who wanted to hire a sex offender who was an excellent teacher would face a tonne of shit from the parents.