Viewing 40 posts - 121 through 160 (of 176 total)
  • Ched Evans – Not Guilty
  • Junkyard
    Free Member

    ie greater blame and condemnation always apears to fall on the side of the bloke involved

    Yes its odd that folk often judge the alleged rapist as worse that the alleged victim- who knows why this is its truly unfathomable.

    Like you I am also livid about this

    WARNING POST CONTAINS IRONY

    tpbiker
    Free Member

    Yes its odd that folk often judge the alleged rapist acquited defendent as worse that the alleged victim apparently willing participent

    Would be another way of looking at it…

    anagallis_arvensis
    Full Member

    Why do you think her willing?

    Fresh Goods Friday 696: The Middling Edition

    Fresh Goods Friday 696: The Middlin...
    Latest Singletrack Videos
    tpbiker
    Free Member

    because if it wasn’t it would have been rape….and the Jury found him not guilty of that.

    cynic-al
    Free Member

    Sex pest is something different IMO.

    Have to say I’m less harsh on them both then most on here, not sure I can express why in words that won’t have me flamed.

    Nice Victorian attitude tpbiker

    aracer
    Free Member

    because if it wasn’t it would have been rape….and the Jury found him not guilty of that.

    Well now you’re getting confused about what the jury verdict shows. They have simply decided that there was reasonable doubt that she was unwilling

    MoreCashThanDash
    Full Member

    We seem to be in a pointless circular argument here.

    I hope my son grows up with a better attitude to women, sex and relationships than Evans.

    I hope my daughter grows up to have a better attitude to men, sex and relationships than the woman involved. Or Evans partner, for that matter.

    Junkyard
    Free Member

    greater blame and condemnation always apears to fall on the side of the bloke involved

    its still because he is an alleged rapist and she is a victim.

    You can re write it as you see fit but the reality is you are confused as to why “victims” get an easier ride than ” accused”.

    Acquitted does not mean innocent and it does not prove she was willing

    LINKED AGAIN FROM SECRET BARISTER

    1. So Ched Evans has been proved innocent, right?
    Wrong. You’d be forgiven for thinking this, given that it was in the prepared statement read out by his solicitor, but Ched Evans has not “demonstrated his innocence”. That is not how our criminal justice system operates. It is not a means by which the truth of a situation or event is conclusively and fully determined. Rather the jury are asked one simple question – are you sure that the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt (or, as juries are commonly instructed, so that you are sure)? “Not guilty” means just that. The jury were not sure that he was guilty. They may have decided that he was totally, utterly innocent, but we don’t know. All we know is that they considered the evidence, and were less than sure of his guilt. As I tell juries in every closing speech – if you think the defendant probably did it, he’s still not guilty.

    I wish we had passed the point where rape victims and those who go to trial on this are not the ones who get trashed – sadly some folk are not as enlightened and still wish to have a go at the women/victims;calling her a slut and saying she is just is bad is ludicrous – has she been charged with any offence? What offence could she be charged with ? They are not equivalent.

    Its worth noting again she never even accused him of rape she merely said she couldn’t remember what happened

    I have no desire to discourse this further with you as I find your attitude to be as bad , and indefensible, as Cheds

    tpbiker
    Free Member

    Nice Victorian attitude tpbiker

    I fail to see why the ackowlegement that woman can be as responsible for the sexual encounters they have as guys is a ‘victorian attitude’.

    Given the outcome of the case the probability is that she was willing to engage in a 3 up with 2 guys shes never met. IMO thats no better than the guy trying his luck in the first place.

    Others may disagree

    cynic-al
    Free Member

    No, youve used various negative terms for them both.

    Junkyard

    She is not a victim – there is no crime for her to be a victim of.

    He is innocent – because he’s not guilty.

    In the real world that is, maybe not yours…which just seems as extreme but the polar opposite of tp’s.

    MoreCashThanDash
    Full Member

    Its worth noting again she never even accused him of rape she merely said she couldn’t remember what happened

    This bit kind of puzzles me as I can’t find any info about how this originally came to be reported as a possible crime to the Police? She’s not accused him of rape, has no recollection of it happening, and (allegedly/apparently) has a history of similar behaviour, so how did the Police investigation get started – someone must have reported the events surrounding it?

    tpbiker
    Free Member

    Well now you’re getting confused about what the jury verdict shows. They have simply decided that there was reasonable doubt that she was unwilling

    No I’m not at all. I fully understand what a not guilty verdict means, and I’m inclined to think he didn’t do it. You may well disagree. Twist it how you like but hes innocent in the eyes of the law.

    I wish we had passed the point where rape victims and those who go to trial on this are not the ones who get trashed – sadly some folk are not as enlightened and still wish to have a go at the women/victims;calling her a slut and saying she is just is bad is ludicrous – has she been charged with any offence? What offence could she be charged with

    She shouldn’t be charged with anything. Remind me where I said she should be. She not guilty of any crime, but neither is Ched.

    I have no desire to discourse this further with you as I find your attitude to be as bad , and indefensible, as Cheds

    Get a grip. I have as much distain for Ched as the next man, nowhere have I condoned what he did. My attitude towards women is the polar opposite of his, and I think its pretty ignorant and insulting of you to suggest otherwise.

    Hold off on the personal insults in future when someone holds a diffent opinion to you

    thegreatape
    Free Member

    because if it wasn’t it would have been rape….and the Jury found him not guilty of that.

    Not necessarily. Rape is not a straightforward offence. There are three elements, and to get a conviction the prosecution must convince the jury that all three are met.

    1) Was there penetrative sex?

    2) Did the victim/complainer consent to it?

    3) Did the accused reasonably believe that they consented?

    So, hypothetically, the jury could have concluded as follows..

    1) Was there penetrative sex? Yes, 100%, not in any doubt, he admitted this aspect.

    2) Did she consent? Let’s suppose for a moment that the jury concluded, with absolute certainty, that no, she couldnt, she was too drunk to consent.

    3) Did he reasonably believe that she consented? The jury would consider his evidence, her evidence, and any other relevant evidence in assessing whether or not they think he believed that she consented, and whether his belief was reasonable.

    The jury might be 100% convinced that sex took place, AND 100% convinced that she didn’t or couldn’t consent, but if they are not 100% (or 99%) sure that he didn’t reasonably believe she consented, the verdict is not guilty. The point is, certainty that she didn’t consent is not in itself enough to convict, and conversely, a verdict of not guilty does not necessarily mean the jury thought she consented.

    aracer
    Free Member

    Are you sure? Because it certainly doesn’t mean she was a willing participant, nor that the jury have decided she was a willing participant by any standard of proof. Which is what you appear to be claiming it shows.

    thegreatape
    Free Member

    This bit kind of puzzles me as I can’t find any info about how this originally came to be reported as a possible crime to the Police? She’s not accused him of rape, has no recollection of it happening, and (allegedly/apparently) has a history of similar behaviour, so how did the Police investigation get started – someone must have reported the events surrounding it?

    There are lots of ways. We’ve had calls from people who wake up and wonder if their drink was spiked, go to hospital or the doctor feeling ‘a bit funny’ downstairs, passers by reporting someone in distress, and one who woke up to a text from a lad thanking her for a good time and she had no idea what he was talking about. All these things, if reported to the police by them or a third party, will initiate an investigation to try and establish what happened. Some of these turn into rape investigations.

    tpbiker
    Free Member

    Are you sure? Because it certainly doesn’t mean she was a willing participant, nor that the jury have decided she was a willing participant by any standard of proof. Which is what you appear to be claiming it shows.

    I am well aware that the court has to prove ‘beyond reasonable doubt’, and they werent able to do this. Obviously the jury have doubts it was non consensual, and so do I. ie I think on balamce of probabilities she was willing. Thats my opinion, feel free to disagree.

    Are we going to use this standard against all individuals who are found non guilty of a crime as the same rule apply?

    BBC reported she made an allegation, no idea if thats true or not.

    MoreCashThanDash
    Full Member

    Thanks greatape – I was just wondering how it came about in this particular case – given the appalling online abuse the victim went through subsequently, if she hadn’t made the complaint originally I wondered who had.

    thegreatape
    Free Member

    Not sure for this case. Parent/friend she spoke to afterwards? Staff at the hotel in the morning if she said something to them? Her telling the police something might have happened after speaking to hotel staff and learning who she came back with?

    aracer
    Free Member

    Did you even bother to read tga’s reply?

    I think on balamce of probabilities she was willing. Thats my opinion, feel free to disagree.

    I do, and the jury verdict can’t be used to support your opinion over mine as you were attempting to use it (even ignoring tga’s third item). Hence you have no evidence for your opinion and assertion.

    Junkyard
    Free Member

    Did you even bother to read tga’s reply?

    I doubt it and it was an excellent explanation
    Clear, concise and simple to understand
    Thanks
    Its an excellent site this place when folks expertise comes along to aid understanding.

    thegreatape
    Free Member

    It’s nice to know a couple of people read it 🙂

    hora
    Free Member

    I agree with today’s Observer, I hope it doesn’t lead to a drop in women coming forward to report rape.

    tpbiker
    Free Member

    yes i did read GTA’s explanation. It doesn’t change my thoughts on what i think happened. My opinion on the matter is just as relevant as yours, thats something you need to grasp if you are going to try and debate on a forum rather than try to belittle and patronise.

    Just so we are absolutely clear on my thought on this episode:

    – The girl in question had at least 3 one night stands in the space of around a month with folks she didn’t know, that in my opinion is ‘sluttish behaviour’. You may not agree, many will.

    – Sluttish behaviour is no excuse for Rape

    – I find the idea of Rape abhorant

    – I think on the balance of probability she wasn’t raped, based on what has been reported in the news about the case and about the girl. Again this is my opinion.

    – None of this excuses the fact that Ched Evans is a sleezebag

    Junkyard
    Free Member

    yes i did read GTA’s explanation. It doesn’t change my thoughts on what i think happened. My opinion on the matter is just as relevant as yours,

    Its not because your opinion is at odds with the actual facts as clearly explained by GTA. You are entitled to be wrong and maintain your ignorance of the law and what the verdict meant but that is not equivalent or as relevant as an opinion that is consistent with the law. the verdict did not prove she consented.

    thats something you need to grasp if you are going to try and debate on a forum rather than try to belittle and patronise

    if you wish to be respected you need to grasp and understand facts rather than insist that you can ignore them and we should respect your view. Opinions that are clearly wrong on matters of fact have to be “belittled” – by which you mean challenged for being false- because they are false
    If you cannot understand this distinction then, unfortunately, its another reason to not take your opinion seriously
    Its not really debatable ;its only a measure of your ability to comprehend information clearly presented to you.

    That is not meant to be rude though you make take it that way

    If I contend, despite the evidence, that the sun orbits the earth it is not an equally valid opinion to someone who explains why the earth orbits the sun.
    Basically the decision does not prove that she did not consent. It might , it might not but it is not DEFINITE as tga explained clearly.

    The rest of your post is your opinion and you are entitled to it.

    anagallis_arvensis
    Full Member

    The girl in question had at least 3 one night stands in the space of around a month with folks she didn’t know, that in my opinion is ‘sluttish behaviour’. You may not agree, many will.

    Whats that got to do with it?

    Consent is like the probability of a coin toss. What occurs before or after doesnt affect it.

    cynic-al
    Free Member

    A-A – it does relate to the (successful) defence.

    But TP also likes to judge women on their sexual behaviour.

    aracer
    Free Member

    Not directly.

    Junkyard
    Free Member

    i dont think his defence was she is a “slut” therefore i did not rape her

    and here we all are Bunch of blokes given up on discussing him and now discussing her sexual history and whether her being a “slut” is relevant like its 1974 🙄

    SLOW HAND CLAP
    exits thread
    ASHAMED and refusing to take part in shaming her thread rather than discussing the issue thread

    TheFlyingOx
    Full Member

    Whats that got to do with it?

    Consent is like the probability of a coin toss. What occurs before or after doesnt affect it.
    Except – in an objective setting such as a court room, where you’re trying to either dispel any doubt or introduce reasonable doubt – it does.

    It doesn’t sit well with most folk, because it involves sex and young women and arsehole footballers, but if you take the humanity out of it then it makes sense to look at past behavior to inform the decision.

    aracer
    Free Member

    Though as has been pointed out, that isn’t exactly how the evidence was used, and in fact such evidence isn’t normally allowed at all in rape trials.

    scotroutes
    Full Member

    I can give you an example of where sexual behaviour was involved in a rape trial;

    Scandinavian girl claims to have been raped.
    She has no memory of the incident as both she and the accused were drunk (he so much so that he had to be taken to hospital).
    She claims that she would never have consented because he’s not “her type”, she only goes for tall, blonde guys.
    A witness is presented saying that she’d been coming on to him after falling out with her boyfriend only a few hours before the alleged rape.
    The witness is short and dark.

    I think that’s a relevant example of when it’s right to establish some sort of behaviour but I don’t think its otherwise possible to extrapolate from past events.

    anagallis_arvensis
    Full Member

    but if you take the humanity out of it then it makes sense to look at past behavior to inform the decision.

    It really doesnt. Thats why its not normally used in rape cases. In this one it appears to have been used due to the memory loss aspect not to prove that she was a “slut” as that idiot up there did.

    tpbiker
    Free Member

    Basically the decision does not prove that she did not consent. It might , it might not but it is not DEFINITE as tga explained clearly.

    i’m not arguing that point, i’m saying that imo, based on what was reported and her previous history, I think she did. What part of that is so contentious?

    discussing her sexual history and whether her being a “slut” is relevant like its 1974

    The Judge thought her previous sexual encounters were very relevant, hence they were allowed in court. I agree that it wasn’t because she was ‘a slut’, but because she has a history of one night stands after which she would have absolutly no recolection.

    My point is one of double standards. We are happy to slate a guy (who in the eyes of the law is innocent) for his lack of morals, but seem to take offence when we simlarly critisise the girl involved for her behaviour.

    Noone really knows what happened, but there is no more evidence that she didn’t consent than there is that she did. Yet with this in mind he is still the scumbag, and she gets a free pass (from those on here).

    as for

    if you wish to be respected you need to grasp and understand facts rather than insist that you can ignore them and we should respect your view. Opinions that are clearly wrong on matters of fact have to be “belittled” – by which you mean challenged for being false- because they are false
    If you cannot understand this distinction then, unfortunately, its another reason to not take your opinion seriously

    please quote me where i i have been wrong on matters of fact. All ive stated is that i personally think she was happy to go along with it, in the eyes of the law he is innocent, and that her behaviour and sexual history would be described by many as ‘sluttish’. What matter of fact have i missed?

    remember….Please provide evidence in quotes of where i have chosen to ignore facts on this thread, rather than just the usual bluster you come out with?

    tpbiker
    Free Member

    In this one it appears to have been used due to the memory loss aspect not to prove that she was a “slut” as that idiot up there did.

    Where did i say her past sexual history was used to prove she was a slut in court? Please feel free to quote me on that, as if i did say that then i will full admit that is not the case

    aracer
    Free Member

    If you insist:

    aracer
    Free Member

    Where did a-a say anything about proving it in court?

    From the moral perspective, you don’t seem to see a difference between having a few one night stands and walking in and taking over with a drunk girl (when you have a fiance at home). I don’t think anybody would be condemning Evans for having a few one night stands – I’m sure lots of professional footballers do that, along with lots of the rest of the population. It’s not the sort of thing men get called “slut” for doing.

    tpbiker
    Free Member

    Obviously the jury have doubts it was non consensual

    Thats a fact

    » because if it wasn’t it would have been rape….and the Jury found him not guilty of that.

    fair enough in light og TGA’s statement that he may have thought she consented but she han’t thats not entirely accurate as a point of law. I’ll give you that.

    next!

    tpbiker
    Free Member

    Where did a-a say anything about proving it in court?


    but if you take the humanity out of it then it makes sense to look at past behavior to inform the decision.

    It really doesnt. Thats why its not normally used in rape cases. In this one it appears to have been used due to the memory loss aspect not to prove that she was a “slut” as that idiot up there did

    is this not was is being implied here?

    tpbiker
    Free Member

    few one night stands

    3 in a month leads me to think she may have had more than a few in her time….morality is subjective. I would agree that Evans’s behaviour is worse, but not by much. Just my opinion though.

    aracer
    Free Member

    er…

    fair enough in light og TGA’s statement that he may have thought she consented but she han’t

    Regarding the second “fact” of yours, it’s not only the issue raised by tga concerning whether Evans knew she was willing, but also as I pointed out when you first made that statement, the jury simply found there was reasonable doubt, their decision certainly doesn’t mean that she was willing even if you ignore that point.

    next!

    How many times do we have to show you to be wrong on matters of fact to support JY’s statement?

Viewing 40 posts - 121 through 160 (of 176 total)

The topic ‘Ched Evans – Not Guilty’ is closed to new replies.