[Closed] Ched Evans conviction quashed

(whatever anyone makes of the case, don't forget it's back sub judice again)

Stoner is correct and there is new evidence

Best to let justice do its thing rather than let the internet do its thing.

There are no winners here that I can see

Dont quite know what to make of the whole case etc...

That will be up to the jury on the retrial.

Be interesting to see what happens when the new evidence is heard in court.

Re-trial. I read today that the victim never made a claim of rape.

@danny if he's acquitted at the retrial he will be entitled to compensation for loss of earnings, thats going to be quite a big bill for the tax payer.

I read today that the victim never made a claim of rape.

For me that's the clincher. Where was the evidence.

The jury must have assumed that bloke 1 didn't rape her and bloke 2 did based on their own gut feeling.

How can that be beyond reasonable doubt?

@outof .. I believe the key thing at the original trial was that the jury found she had been too drunk to have possibly consented to having sex with Evans but she had been awake/sober enough to have consented to the first guy who was acquitted. I think there was phone video too.

As JY says there are no winners here

If the victim never made a claim of rape...what did she go to the police about?

If Evans has had sex with her without her express consent then it is rape...drunk or not.

If the victim never made a claim of rape...what did she go to the police about?

Lost handbag.

Express consent? What is express consent?

If Evans has had sex with her without her express consent then it is rape...drunk or not.

I really struggle to understand the rules in this regards as I have never, not once, in 20+ years of having sex, ever had a partner "express consent", but I'm no rapist.

Express consent? What is express consent?

..and how do we know beyond reasonable doubt that there was no 'express' consent.

Express consent? What is express consent?

"Forget 4play, just get on with it...." ?

This is a struggle / complexity with the law. If you (as have most of us I am sure) gone to bed when both are quite drunk you could be found guilty. I heard recently students at some American Universities are doing advised to get explicit consent for sex every time even with a repeat partner.

Again, what is it? how you you get it? and how you record that you have done so?
Bloody glad I'm married, and to someone who is at least moderately enthusiastic about intercourse! 😉

..and how do we know beyond reasonable doubt that there was no 'express' consent.

[img] [/img]

..and how do we know beyond reasonable doubt that there was no 'express' consent.

Surely it's for the prosecution to prove not the defence .

..and how do we know beyond reasonable doubt that there was no 'express' consent.

Surely it's for the prosecution to prove not the defence .

..and how do we know beyond reasonable doubt that there was no 'express' consent.

Surely it's for the prosecution to prove not the defence .

Prosecution don't have to prove it beyond reasonable doubt, they just have to convince the jury. Which is a subtly different proposition.

Again, what is it?

Not sure on the precise definition but I'd imagine it is someone saying "Yes" as opposed to someone "not saying No".

I'd not have thought it a particularly difficult thing to understand.

Prosecution don't have to prove it beyond reasonable doubt, they just have to convince the jury. Which is a subtly different proposition.

Jesus, not this again.

Look up "consent tea analogy", I would quote it myself but my internet is being rubbish. It's not that hard.

Look up "consent tea analogy", I would quote it myself but my internet is being rubbish. It's not that hard.

There you go...

Not sure on the precise definition but I'd imagine it is someone saying "Yes" as opposed to someone "not saying No".

I'd not have thought it a particularly difficult thing to understand.

Not sure on the precise definition but I'd imagine it is someone saying "Yes" as opposed to someone "not saying No". I'd not have thought it a particularly difficult thing to understand.

Assuming your guess is correct then the bit I don't understand about it is that by that definition every non-virgin male and female is a rapist since couples rarely if ever precede lovemaking with verbal consent.

Not sure on the precise definition but I'd imagine it is someone saying "Yes" as opposed to someone "not saying No". I'd not have thought it a particularly difficult thing to understand.

Assuming your guess is correct then the bit I don't understand about it is that by that definition every non-virgin male and female is a rapist since couples rarely if ever precede lovemaking with verbal consent

And here in lies the tricky bit. What is consent really. Does the law mean you have to get a firm, verbal 'yes' everytime.

Only when trying to defend a rape allegation it would seem.

Will Mrs Danny's 'oh go on then if you must' suffice for example?

What about non-verbal consent?

Its all rather murky imo. Luckily I'm married and don't have to worry a) about having sex in the first place and b) what might or might not happen following a drunken taxi ride home from a nightclub will a lady (other than Mr Danny of course but then refer to point a).

And here in lies the tricky bit. What is consent really. Does the law mean you have to get a firm, verbal 'yes' everytime.

...agree but in this case I'm not sure that's significant since all three of them were wasted so it's very hard to say for sure that a firm verbal 'yes' wasn't said.

Although I might be wrong about that, maybe Evans and the other guy are both saying they remember clearly there was no yes.

...agree but in this case I'm not sure that's significant since all three of them were wasted so it's very hard to say for sure that a firm verbal 'yes' wasn't said.

My understanding is that the key question isn't whether the girl said yes, but instead whether she was in a fit state to be able to give consent and therefore whether Evans should have realised she was too drunk to give consent i.e. even if she said yes he should have treated it as a no.

I've never followed the case in great detail, the evidence went to a jury who convicted him and now fresh evidence has come to light saying it needs to be retried.

I've never really understood why, based on what was originally being stated were the facts, he felt that he was innocent or why his other half and her family were supporting him. Maybe a retrial with new facts will get it clarified. If he broke the law, he broke the law.

I just hope my kids grow up with enough sense to make sure they know whether everyone has given consent or not.

What @epic says with the added complexity that the court decided she had consented with the first guy.

It's horrible mess and certainly very low quality behaviour from Evans and the the others.

It's horrible mess and certainly very low quality behaviour from Evans and the the others.

He may or may not be guilty of rape, but he's definitely guilty of being a scumbag.

My understanding is that the key question isn't whether the girl said yes, but instead whether she was in a fit state to be able to give consent and therefore whether Evans should have realised she was too drunk to give consent i.e. even if she said yes he should have treated it as a no.

So express consent has an additional clause that requires an assessment of the other persons ability to "expressly consent"...

Also raises the question of why didn't the girl also get done for rape since I assume Evans was wasted too.

He may or may not be guilty of rape, but he's definitely guilty of being a scumbag.

This IMHO.

My understanding is that the key question isn't whether the girl said yes, but instead whether she was in a fit state to be able to give consent and therefore whether Evans should have realised she was too drunk to give consent i.e. even if she said yes he should have treated it as a no.

What if he's not in a fit state to judge whether she's in a fit state or not?

So express consent has an additional clause that requires an assessment of the other persons ability to "expressly consent"...

Correct. In the Evans case I don't think it's even particularly disputed whether she said yes or not (she can't remember and Evans and the other guy says she did).

What if he's not in a fit state to judge whether she's in a fit state or not?

Maybe it's viewed that if the male is in a fit state to perform he's in a fit state to tell the difference?

So slip the argument round - lad goes to a police station and says I went back to girls houise last night. We were both ****ered and I woke up with her bumping and grinding on top of me.

What would the police response be do we think.

Its a massively difficult area and I think very hard to have an open mature debate as people start saying victims are being balmed etc.

I don't think legally a woman can rape a bloke? I may be wrong.

Maybe it's viewed that if the male is in a fit state to perform he's in a fit state to tell the difference?

Debatabley, he would have been raped on a few of these occasions, though I suspect he didn't think that way.

I don't think legally a woman can rape a bloke? I may be wrong

I sincerely hope that is not true...

I don't think legally a woman can rape a bloke? I may be wrong
I sincerely hope that is not true...

As to rape someone you need to penetrate them with a penis, I guess only a man can rape someone?

As to rape someone you need to penetrate them with a penis, I guess only a man can rape someone?

unlawful sexual intercourse or any other sexual penetration of the vagina, anus, or mouth of another person, with or without force, by a sex organ, other body part, or foreign object, without the consent of the victim.

Ah, ok - I see. However it would still be classed as a serious sexual assault by the looks of things

[url= https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_in_English_law ]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_in_English_law[/url]

Rape is a statutory offence in England and Wales. According to the law, a rape can only be committed by a male as the penetration can only be done with his penis. If a victim is forcefully penetrated with an object, this is classed as Sexual Assault by Penetration, in English law.

The above is the dictionary definition of rape.
I very much doubt being "raped" with a hand or foot or firework is any nicer than being raped with a penis.
Stupid english laws redefining words again. ****ing bedwetters.
We should now class sexual assault as severe as rape though.