If Ched Evans was a decent player

[MKYid]

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?

Indeed, what if it were a mobile app developer? Would you, as a fellow mobile app developer be happy to sit at a desk across from a guy who recently served a sentence for violently raping someone?

Obviously there is a further issue in terms of a footballer in that he is in the public eye and could in all likelihood be on a poster on some kids bedroom wall...which in itself makes it a somewhat different issue to that of an app developer. There are many lower profile jobs that would not employ a convicted rapist, reformed or otherwise, why should football offer a prestigious career, and more importantly than the money, the fame, to someone who would rape another?

 

[Team Tanguy]

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?

That is not a valid analogy if you're asking this question to people who support Ched imo.

I don't believe Ched did anything non-consensual with the woman. That is the key point. It has nothing to do with the degree of sexual assault.
If I believed Ched even groped a woman without her consent, I would not be defending him.

 

[Team Tanguy]

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.

it's not that simple, 1% of the prison population is innocent, that's 100 people out of every 10000 in jail.

ched claims it was consensual, the woman didn't claim it was rape, only that she couldnt remember what happened.

it is very likely she did consent whilst drunk (which legally is valid consent) - she wasn't passed out unaware drunk as CCTV shows.
the only reason the police knew ched even had sex with her was because ched came clean from the start (there was no DNA etc).

the words of the night porter suggest both parties were having fun, hearing both female and male voices “squealing, panting and groaning”.

seems like some evidence which wasn't allowed to be used was quite relevant- the woman spoke on a private twitter account about "winning big" around the time of sentencing (surely in relation to compensation) then subsequently deleted them, the woman has previously made rape allegations.

the evidence suggests she was not that drunk where she was borderline unconscious etc Hence she was able to walk, carry her pizza, was aware of her hand bag/pizza being left behind and getting it etc.
Being drunk lowers your inhibitions meaning you can make unwise decisions, but it is still consent.
It is very likely she was drunk, but not too drunk to consent.
what if it went down how ched said it did? that she asked him to lick her out, fuck her harder, that she was the one changing positions etc?
is there any evidence which suggests otherwise? only that she cannot remember what happened. this means she very well might have gave consent (drunken consent is valid remember) and then forgot about it when she woke up.
by this logic any time a a male and female get drunk and have sex, if the woman claims the next day she cannot remember what happened she has been raped. potentially half the country are rapists.

 

[MKYid]

That is not a valid analogy if you're asking this question to people who support Ched imo.

I don't believe Ched did anything non-consensual with the woman. That is the key point. It has nothing to do with the degree of sexual assault.
If I believed Ched even groped a woman without her consent, I would not be defending him.

This is my point though, do we expect clubs to employ / not employ, based on the specifics of the case? My point with the hypothetical violent rapist V's Ched Evans case is that, upon release they are both considered convicted rapists, yet if one is considered more employable than the other, where does the line get drawn, and should it be football clubs that draw this line?

 

[yiddo2786]

I'm surprised by the number of people who know the details of this case better than the 12 jurors who were given all the evidence and found Evans guilty.

The backlash towards this victim stinks of the sexism that's deeply rooted into football. I've so many people be quick to arrive at the conclusion that 'she was just a slag who wanted it really' and that's fucking revolting. 'I saw some CCTV where she picked up a pizza box so clearly she wasn't that drunk', yeah, because none of us have ever made it home blind drunk and been close to passed out minutes later.

The girl went back to the hotel with another man, Ched was informed of this, went to the hotel reception, lied about his name to get a keycard to that room, entered without knocking and proceeded to have sex with a girl who was so drunk she couldn't remember any of it in the morning. That is rape. No ifs or buts about it. I've seen a lot of defences of Evans based on the fact that he is protesting his innocence, but he is not innocent. The law is what it is, not what criminals want it to be. To be honest if any of you think that behaviour is OK I'm worried about you.

Her wanting sex with another man, or being excited about her compensation or anything else does not mean raping her is ok. I can't believe the defence of this rapist has got to the point where I'd have to type those words.

 

[Team Tanguy]

This is my point though, do we expect clubs to employ / not employ, based on the specifics of the case? My point with the hypothetical violent rapist V's Ched Evans case is that, upon release they are both considered convicted rapists, yet if one is considered more employable than the other, where does the line get drawn, and should it be football clubs that draw this line?

Fair point.
I personally think it should be at the discretion of the employer to make that decision for themselves. But I also respect the rights of people to be totally against it.

 

[Team Tanguy]

I'm surprised by the number of people who know the details of this case better than the 12 jurors who were given all the evidence and found Evans guilty.

The backlash towards this victim stinks of the sexism that's deeply rooted into football. I've so many people be quick to arrive at the conclusion that 'she was just a slag who wanted it really' and that's fucking revolting. 'I saw some CCTV where she picked up a pizza box so clearly she wasn't that drunk', yeah, because none of us have ever made it home blind drunk and been close to passed out minutes later.

The girl went back to the hotel with another man, Ched was informed of this, went to the hotel reception, lied about his name to get a keycard to that room, entered without knocking and proceeded to have sex with a girl who was so drunk she couldn't remember any of it in the morning. That is rape. No ifs or buts about it. I've seen a lot of defences of Evans based on the fact that he is protesting his innocence, but he is not innocent. The law is what it is, not what criminals want it to be. To be honest if any of you think that behaviour is OK I'm worried about you.

Her wanting sex with another man, or being excited about her compensation or anything else does not mean raping her is ok. I can't believe the defence of this rapist has got to the point where I'd have to type those words.

Jurors are regular people. Full case transcripts are also available. So do not think these jurors are experts or had special information.
IMO this reeks of people being bitter towards footballers and wanting to prove a point. "Oh they're overpaid arrogant cunts who think they can do anything".
She was not blind drunk, she had the awareness to know of her pizza box and hand bag. There is CCTV of her walking fine. The night porter heard her enjoying herself she was not passed out.

Ched lied so that he could get around the policy of the people per room limit. If she consented whilst drunk that IS VALID CONSENT. He says she gave that valid consent (asking him to lick her out etc). She says she can't remember. So she's admitting she might have drunkenly consented (valid) and forgot about it...

 

[ArcspacE]

I'm surprised by the number of people who know the details of this case better than the 12 jurors who were given all the evidence and found Evans guilty.

The backlash towards this victim stinks of the sexism that's deeply rooted into football. I've so many people be quick to arrive at the conclusion that 'she was just a slag who wanted it really' and that's fucking revolting. 'I saw some CCTV where she picked up a pizza box so clearly she wasn't that drunk', yeah, because none of us have ever made it home blind drunk and been close to passed out minutes later.

The girl went back to the hotel with another man, Ched was informed of this, went to the hotel reception, lied about his name to get a keycard to that room, entered without knocking and proceeded to have sex with a girl who was so drunk she couldn't remember any of it in the morning. That is rape. No ifs or buts about it. I've seen a lot of defences of Evans based on the fact that he is protesting his innocence, but he is not innocent. The law is what it is, not what criminals want it to be. To be honest if any of you think that behaviour is OK I'm worried about you.

Her wanting sex with another man, or being excited about her compensation or anything else does not mean raping her is ok. I can't believe the defence of this rapist has got to the point where I'd have to type those words.

Take a bow, son

 

[Eskimo]

and proceeded to have sex with a girl who was so drunk she couldn't remember any of it in the morning

And there you have it, just because she doesnt remember it doesnt mean she didnt give consent, the porter heard her enjoying herself so thats three against rape and one dont know (the "victim")

I've been shit faced to the point i dont remember stuff, yet i manage to get myself home via public transport.... can i accuse london transport and first capital connect of kidnapping me briefly because i dont remember the journey home?

 

[Nick "Trevor" Sharp]

The law is what it is, not what criminals want it to be.

That doesn't mean we can't disagree with the law. If the law puts the burden of proof on the defence rather than the prosecution then I disagree with the law.

Nor that jurors are infallible in applying it. Similar to the Adnan Syed case, it's almost irrelevant whether or not he's guilty; my problem is that I cannot see nearly enough evidence to actually convict and send to jail. You shouldn't go on hunches; unfortunately jurors do exactly that.

I have no idea if Evans is guilty or not. I have no idea, and neither do you. I do not take conviction to mean guilt, any more than I take a lack of conviction to mean innocence. But from all the evidence I've seen, I could not come to a guilty conclusion myself. Even if I have the feeling he's lying, even if I have the feeling he's guilty, without actual evidence to make me sure I could not convict.

 

[Nick "Trevor" Sharp]

Now, assuming he is guilty, assuming the woman was passed out on the bed and he had sex with her anyway, assuming he actually has raped her in a manner we all agree is rape - where do people's boundaries sit?

I disagree with the assertion that someone guilty of rape, in this date-rape manner, is a danger to children. I don't understand that at all. Can someone shed light on that? Is there a proven link between sex offences and paedophilia? If not, it seems rather odd to me.

Secondly, I disagree that every footballer is a role model, I also disagree that they should be held to some impeccable standard just because what they do is prominent. Gascoigne was an alcoholic and a serial wife-beater, yet look at the latest TFC fanzine. Would you have had him banned from WHL, stricken from the records? I doubt it; I certainly wouldn't. I rated him for what he did on the pitch, not off it.

Lastly, the argument about "walking" back into a high-paid job. This one is just plain silly. Firstly his earnings mean piss all in this discussion, and secondly he's not going to "walk" back into the job easy as pie, he's going to face a continuous torrent of abuse every time he steps onto the pitch. Which he would deserve (again, assuming guilt), and would have to deal with. Perhaps that's better than him disappearing into obscurity in an office job somewhere in North Wales? Playing for a football team will make him a constant reminder to everyone of what he did and how the world feels about it. Links back to my second point; he's not a role model if you don't make him one.

Anyway, I'll probably get a torrent of disagrees from that, but please understand what I'm trying to say - I do not condone date rape. I think it's a despicable thing to do. But, I disagree with a lot of the reasons put forward for blocking his way into a footballing job.

 

[SchmoodSpur2013]

I'm surprised by the number of people who know the details of this case better than the 12 jurors who were given all the evidence and found Evans guilty.

Aren't the transcripts available, hence, people can make their own assertions?

 

[Maccer]

West Ham United fail in a move for Ched Evans. When interviewed, Evans said, "I wouldn't stoop so low , I do have some fucking morals you know"

 

[lovetheshirt]

Now, assuming he is guilty, assuming the woman was passed out on the bed and he had sex with her anyway, assuming he actually has raped her in a manner we all agree is rape - where do people's boundaries sit?

I disagree with the assertion that someone guilty of rape, in this date-rape manner, is a danger to children. I don't understand that at all. Can someone shed light on that? Is there a proven link between sex offences and paedophilia? If not, it seems rather odd to me.

Secondly, I disagree that every footballer is a role model, I also disagree that they should be held to some impeccable standard just because what they do is prominent. Gascoigne was an alcoholic and a serial wife-beater, yet look at the latest TFC fanzine. Would you have had him banned from WHL, stricken from the records? I doubt it; I certainly wouldn't. I rated him for what he did on the pitch, not off it.

Lastly, the argument about "walking" back into a high-paid job. This one is just plain silly. Firstly his earnings mean piss all in this discussion, and secondly he's not going to "walk" back into the job easy as pie, he's going to face a continuous torrent of abuse every time he steps onto the pitch. Which he would deserve (again, assuming guilt), and would have to deal with. Perhaps that's better than him disappearing into obscurity in an office job somewhere in North Wales? Playing for a football team will make him a constant reminder to everyone of what he did and how the world feels about it. Links back to my second point; he's not a role model if you don't make him one.

Anyway, I'll probably get a torrent of disagrees from that, but please understand what I'm trying to say - I do not condone date rape. I think it's a despicable thing to do. But, I disagree with a lot of the reasons put forward for blocking his way into a footballing job.

Great post. Sums up my feelings on the the whole saga. I don't know if he's guilty or not (like you) but I feel society has allowed mob rule to take over in this matter which is wrong. These are the facts:-

1. He has served his custodial sentence.
2. He has a right to work.
3. He has a right to play football.
4. Oldham had an appetite and financial means to employ him.
5. How many of the 70,000 petition signatories were at Boundary Park on Saturday (serious question - this is important)?
6. The "he's a 'sex offender' ergo, he can't do xyz is a weak / irrelavent argument".
7. People keep moving the goalposts.
8. Jealousy and bitterness of the wealth of footballers have a big role to play in people's reactions to him returning to football - although his detractors would never admit it.

 

[Anthony Beale]

if a woman slipped you a mickey and porked you with a strap on, you aint been raped.

Sir, you are a fucking poet.

 

[Anthony Beale]

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.

I can't speak for everyone, but for me, that isn't it at all. If you trust the legal system then thats fine, that should be it for you. If i choose to hold my reservations, then that is entirely my choice. The thing about a case like this, is the personal experiences of a juror can have way more effect, than if it was.. a burglary trial. This whole Ched evans thing has been a huge gender battle. Ive seen women declaring all men this and all men that. Saying that, anyone that has even a shred of doubt about Cheds innocence, is just doing so because they're not comfortable with the fact it means they've raped someone before.
Crazy shit like that.
You can try and simplify it, and say "thats like a murder case..." etc etc, but it just isn't. Rape isn't comparable to any other crime. rape cases aren't even comparable to each other. Its such a personal thing. Even more so than a physical assault.
Our western society is still learning to walk in terms of the laws around rape.

 

[Anthony Beale]

This is a ridiculously complicated issue and anyone that thinks or says it isn't can't be fully understanding it.
For me it plays out like this.

Can Ched Evans play football?
Well he's served his prison time and is free to resume work
Great, so he can go play football again right?
Well only if a club employs him.
But he's done his time, surely theres no reason to not employ him?
Yes but Ched Evans is yet to apologise for his crime
Ah, so he's morally bankrupt, case closed right?
Well no, Ched maintains his innocence.
Ah so he didn't do it?
Well he was found guilty by a jury of his peers
Well then how can he maintain his innocence?
Well he insists that all sexual activity that took place was consensual
well then if its consensual it isn't rape, is it? So why is the victim accusing him of rape?
Well she hasn't actually claimed rape.
Ok so why was there even a trial?
Well the victim claims to have been drunk to the point she cannot remember what happened. Therefore legally speaking her consent doesn't count. No matter how much she asked and how much she begged, she was deemed to have been not conscious enough to give consent. Months after the incident happened.
Ah unconscious! so she was spiked?
Almost certainly not as she was tested and no trace of any kind of foul play was detected
So how did she end up in a hotel with these men? Something dodgy must of happened right? They got her drunk deliberately?
Actually no, she'd spent the night at work and then out with friends. She bumped into a friend of ched evans as the night was drawing to a close. She agreed to get into a cab and to go back to the hotel with ched evans friend. With the intention of having sex.
So she agreed to it, it was consensual right?
Except, some people, somewhere, have deemed that, if a person is past a certain level of drunk, their consent shouldn't count.


I could go on.. but basically theres so many levels to this whole thing. And the fact its a rape case, has put a huge bias on the case. Im pretty sure nothing I've said there is opinion.. its all fact i think. The main sticking point, is if she did consent, was she in the right frame of mind for that consent to be valid.
And thats an incredibly personal thing to be in contention. Every single one of those 12 jurors will have different experiences when it comes to alcohol. Some may have never even drunk. How is an old white male JUDGE, a fair judge of the life and state of a 19 year old girl that gets battered straight after work, has a pizza and then goes back to hotels to fuck footballers.

With some crimes, different laws can vary around the world and whats legal in one country is illegal elsewhere. Or the punishments may vary. Some form of theft in this country may just get you a slap on the wrist, but somewhere in the middle east, they may cut off that wrist. And thats fine, from border to border it doesn't matter if the standards are different, because you adjust to whatever the laws of the land you are in are.
BUT, with this case, we're talking about within the same country! There's such wildly contradictory opinions, within the same towns, streets, even houses, its impossible to judge fairly.
And now look at the situation we're in. If things stay as they are, Ched Evans will get hounded for the rest of his life, will likely have to move abroad if he wants to work again.
If he concedes, admits his guilt and apologises, he gets hounded out even more than he currently is, branded a liar, and has to move abroad.
If the case is overturned, and its deemed that her consent was valid, Mps, judges, etc will get hounded out by every woman in the land claiming they aren't being protected.

Basically, whatever side you're on loses. Its a lose lose lose lose situation.