[Closed] So.....Ched Evans

Alive and kicking on the Jamie Oliver thread, strangely.

ah.....I looked for Ched, but didn't spot that one. I'll move over to the other thread!

/troll_on

apparently it was good rape and not bad rape so i reckon he should even get back pay from his time inside.

/troll_off

public figure and role model. if the club had any sence/morals they wouldnt even let him cut the grass

If society's rules are unilateral, yes. If it's different rules for different people, not necessarily yes.

If it's different rules for different people, not necessarily yes.

Unrepentant* convicted rapist in a role model/aspirational public job, not good really.

*See whether he changes tack if his last appeal fails...
and will anyone believe him if he does?

[nicked off twitter]

Newcastle United announce their front 3 for the weekend;

[img] [/img]

[/nicked off twitter]

Maybe if we can get more convicted rapist footballers, people will finally stop treating them as role models?

Is part of the problem that we have made footballers role models, despite so much evidence to the contrary?

I have no issue with a released prisoner getting his job back when the justice of the times has been served. But he would be a lamb to tbe slaughter to opposition fans.

Is part of the problem that we have made footballers role models, despite so much evidence to the contrary?

Plenty of unconvicted rapists in the game as well.

With football, money talks.. Wikipedia has him at 59 goals in 167 games at Championship/League 1 level, inc 35 in 42 games in his final season, so he will undoubtedly find another club.. they'll be protests initially and then he'll start scoring and it'll slowly die down.. he's 25 so still got age on his side, so a few clubs will go in for him. I'm not saying he should have this chance, I'm just being realistic about what will happen.

Lee Hughes had a similar case (killed someone due to dangerous driving, fled the scene, probably drink driving as well) and after protests he came back and had a moderately successful career with a few different clubs

Again, not condoning any of this, just stating what will happen IMO.

Convicted rapist is released from prison having served his term. He is looking to return to his job, a job where he has no unsupervised time with women and has 20,000 people watching his every move. It is also the only job he has any skills in having done it since he was 16 therefore he is likey to be on benefits if he is not allowed into it as his sills are not transferable.

Yes, let him return to work.

It's not going to be that pleasant for either him or Sheffield united is it?

Or the victim.

Lee Hughes had a similar case (killed someone due to dangerous driving, fled the scene, probably drink driving as well) and after protests he came back and had a moderately successful career with a few different clubs

Killed two people, served 5 years & returned to playing - is still playing now in the Conference. Saw him play a few weeks back & whilst a few remembered him/what he'd done he got no grief from the crowd.

This was being discussed heatedly on the Jeremy Vine show just now and he broadened it ou to consider other celbs gone bad..boy george handcuffing a sex worker to a radiator etc.One exasperated caqller towards the end of the show said -" let's see this in context there's a rich south african due to be sentenced for manslaughter .... and he'll probably walk " .........mmmmmm

Lazy cut & paste from the JO thread

A lot depends on the individual but it's always made me laugh how people react differently to each case. There have been several footballers jailed over the years for all sorts of things from assault to rape and even causing deaths each vilified to varying degrees yet all, IIRC, continued their careers. People still refer to St Ryan as the 'model professional' and a role model to follow forgetting that he'd battered one of his girlfriends in public and slept with his sister in law for 8 years.

Evans has so far IIRC failed to show any accountability or remorse. This makes him even more of a **** IMO.

Regarding him picking up his career in football ... well, if he makes a return and earns a shed load of cash (compared to the man in the street) then people will no doubt hate him even more. If he had to "retreat" in to a £16k PA job in the high street plus relative obscurity then maybe those same people would feel better.

Can't help feel that financial envy will cloud people's opinion here.

[quote=lunge ]Convicted rapist is released from prison having served [b]half[/b] his term.

aracer, he's served the term that the British justice deemed to be the right amount. Whether it's long enough is another debate altogether...

The British justice system set his term as 5 years.

aracer, and then amended it before his release.

The British justice system set his term as 5 years.

Can't help feel that financial envy will cloud people's opinion here.

+1

People don't seem to have a problem with him getting [i]a[/i] job, it's more likely that many have a problem with him getting a job that pays money they can only dream of, despite having done something wrong. They see THAT as the injustice.

As someone mentioned above, I get the feeling that life won't be easy on the pitch for a while!

We need to face up to the fact that we either build more prisons and lock up all the crims and throw away the keys or we give them the opportunity to learn from their mistakes.

but that's another argument.

There are plenty of other (less well paid) jobs that this type of conviction would rule you out of, don't see why other, shall we call them "public eye jobs", could be deemed to be inaccessible for certain convictions.

locking up people for the amount of time the justice system ... has set

is that not exactly what has happened here it's just that people don't understand that a 5 year sentence doesn't necessarily mean 5 years behind bars?

Hmm have I read [url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rehabilitation_of_Offenders_Act_1974#Exemptions ]this[/url] (wiki content!) wrong or are the FA are allowed to stop you from [i]stewarding[/i] a game if you have a conviction - but don't mind if you're playing.

EDIT: Players have no real contact with the public at a game a steward would. Seems a reasonable ish risk assessment to me
EDIT 2 after reading link: He will have to disclose his offence to any employer - like they wont know and he will be on the sex offenders register so he will need to do this for life probably, He will also be on probation as well when released so they may prevent him working

Can't help feel that financial envy will cloud people's opinion here.

He has served his time and he should be able to return to his employment like anyone else
If you do not like it change the law.

Lee Hughes killed two people, served 5 years & returned to playing - is still playing now in the Conference. Saw him play a few weeks back & whilst a few remembered him/what he'd done he got no grief from the crowd.

Interesting. I saw him play a couple of years ago and the opposition fans chanted 'Murderer' and "It should have been you" pretty much constantly for the full 90 mins.

It wasn't pretty, and if Ched Evans goes through that twice a week for the rest of his career, he certainly won't be having it easy...

For me, the issue is that he's not only a convicted rapist who's on the Sex Offender's register indefinitely, and who has already had one appeal rejected, with a second pending. His friends and family named and abused his victim on social media

I'm obviously not saying he shouldn't be allowed to work anywhere ever again, but he shouldn't be allowed to return to a high profile position where, rightly or wrongly, he's seen as a role model (unless his conviction is completely overturned after his second appeal). Although I believe that offenders should be rehabilitated, I don't think Ched Evans has been, and also that 'rehabilitated' doesn't necessarily mean that the offender has the right to walk back into exactly the same career. By letting an unrepentant rapist back into professional football, especially one with a particularly unpleasant circle of friends, it sends out the message that the club care more about goals than they do about victims of rape.

And IIRC, employers are perfectly within their rights to choose not to employ somebody with an unspent conviction - and any conviction which resulted in a sentence of four or more years, landing on the Sex Offender's register is never spent. Could be wrong though.

In the circumstances of this particular case, I am not sure that it is quite as straightforward as saying he is unremorseful. He is still appealing his conviction, so his position is therefore that he did not commit rape. The circumstances of this particular case, as I recall, are that he and a friend both had sex with the victim. The prosecution case was that she was too drunk to consent. He was convicted, his friend was acquitted. Now of course it is far more complicated than that, and a jury heard all the evidence, but it doesn't surprise me that he is challenging his conviction, and this is a situation where I could see a challenge possibly succeeding. The new legislation covering sexual offences is sufficiently recent that relevant decisions and case law are still developing, and consent/lack of consent/ability to consent/offenders knowledge or belief regarding consent are usually the crux of a rape investigation.

I feel that organisations like football clubs, have a moral responsibility to their fans/the people who pay the wages, which should probably extend to not putting people who are on the sex offenders register in positions where teenage boys idolise them, and have their names printed on the back of their replica kits.

I do agree he's served his time, and should be allowed to take a place in society - I just don't think he should be a pin up on teenagers walls.

There are no winners in this case, and if nothing else it should demonstrate what can happen to young women who drink so much they lose all control, and are taken advantage of by scummy blokes.

Once more i agree with the great ape- this is a complicated case where they both agree [ he had an acquitted co accused] they had sex with her and it was decreed she was too drunk to consent.
One was found innocent and one was found guilty
I dont know enough to comment but they should both have the same sentence.
Some miscarriage has occurred here but i do not now if they are both innocent or both guilty.

Junkyard - lazarus
One was found innocent and one was found guilty
I dont know enough to comment but they should both have the same sentence.
Some miscarriage has occurred here but i do not now if they are both innocent or both guilty.

I think the difference is the acquitted guy met the girl and was drinking with her and they were seen getting 'friendly' before going back to his hotel.

Evans turned up at the hotel later and 'got involved'. The jury decided she hadn't (or was not in a state to) give consent to this.

doris5000 - Member
Lee Hughes killed two people, served 5 years & returned to playing - is still playing now in the Conference. Saw him play a few weeks back & whilst a few remembered him/what he'd done he got no grief from the crowd.
Interesting. I saw him play a couple of years ago and the opposition fans chanted 'Murderer' and "It should have been you" pretty much constantly for the full 90 mins.

Lifer - yes, it was along those lines, although as I recall they both had sex with her while she was in the same state. This leads on to questions regarding continuation of consent, withdrawal of consent (whether through choice or developing impairment), and also the mindset/belief - [i]mens rea[/i] - of each defendant, which is not necessarily the same, and could be why the two different verdicts were reached in this case. Rape cases are often not simple.

I definitely think there needs to be a lot of education, particularly for young men, about the consent issue.

Isn't the real question to be answered..are you happy spending money with companies/clubs that employ convicted rapists, and indeed are you haapy to continue spending money with the companies that sponsor/finance such football teams.

I was surprised at the acquittal in the trial, the judge said

"The complainant was 19 years of age and was extremely intoxicated. CCTV footage shows, in my view, the extent of her intoxication when she stumbled into your friend. As the jury have found, she was in no condition to have sexual intercourse. When you arrived at the hotel, you must have realised that."

I don't know why her intoxication was a factor in Evans' case and not in the other unless the jury thought drinking with the other guy and going with him implied consent (if such a thing exists?).

I think the difference is the acquitted guy met the girl and was drinking with her and they were seen getting 'friendly' before going back to his hotel.

I definitely think there needs to be a lot of education, particularly for young men, about the consent issue

Sadly, it is at the point where their judgement is most impaired by either alcohol and hormones that they have to assess consent, and realise that even a completely pissed woman who is superficially enthusiastic may not have the capacity to give it.

I'm sure there are many hundreds of rapes every weekend under these criteria, with a much smaller number of attackers/victims who retrospectively realise the true nature of what's taken place.

I'm sure there are many hundreds of rapes every weekend under these criteria, with a much smaller number of attackers/victims who retrospectively realise the true nature of what's taken place.

I'd imagine most of them get filed by both parties as 'doing something when pissed that you later regret', because frankly, who hasn't?

You need a consent-confirming app on your phone! It probably already exists. 🙂

th prosecution submitted that the pair "targeted" her for sex after she "literally stumbled across their path" and demonstrated herself to be too intoxicated to consent. Two friends of the men were also alleged to have watched and attempted to record the act through a window.

The prosecution argued they bith raped her

I see no reason to give different sentences

The complainant stated that she had no memory of any sexual activity with either of the two men.

https://www.crimeline.info/case/r-v-ched-evans-chedwyn-evans

This gives a clear explanation of the events that are best read

I still do not see how they can say she consented to one but not the other tbh
Reading it though it seems pretty clear she was pissed and they took advantage of this

In simple terms, rape requires three things:-

Penetration

Lack of consent

Lack of reasonable belief that there is consent

The inference being that the jury felt that MacDonald did have a reasonable belief that she consented to him having sex with her, while Evans did not. (The course of their respective nights out, and contact with the victim, differed).

Ew,sloppy seconds,ban him from human society.

I'm a Sheff U supporter and I'd have him back.

Picking up from gwaelod's post, I suspect that we all pay money to businesses that employ convicted criminals including rapists and killers.

The issue is whetherbhe should be put in a position where idiots can admire him or continue to publicly abuse him.

I don't recall footballers setting themselves up as role models (I may be wrong as I don't follow football in any depth): isn't it some fans that see them as role models? Maybe a bit of rethinking amongst fans is required? I don't mean that shouting abuse whilst he is on the pitch is desirable.

As others have said it may be that the sentencing is wrong. This person is now in eyes of the law a free man who has served his sentence, so I guess that he should be free to return to work with whatever strictures are in place.

I think it is appalling that Judy Finnegan and her daughter have had rape threats as a result of someone voicing an opinion to which she is entitled in a country which claims to espouse free speech.

Eight out of 10 kids think footballers are bad role models who get into trouble and the same number think they get too much money for playing.

Junkyard reading your link it is pretty clear why the jury could have aquited the guy she chose to go back to a hotel room with no matter how drunk but convicted the guy who brought two mates along to watch lied to get onto the room then had sex with her after the first " consensual" sex was over at a time when she was so drunk she could not consent .
The jury had the benefit of hearing the evidence but is not illogical to not be sure that d 1 did not reasonably believe that the girl who had chosen to come back with him alone was consenting to sex, but then be sure that d 2 who snuck in later uninvited had no such belief.

Northwind nailed it earlier. The guys done his time. Now he moves on. Isnt that the point or are we going to have a hierarchy of crimes that will determine whether aomeone can be rehabilitated or not.

Anyway don't forget this is football after all.

Pity he is playing for "the blades"...

He has the right to return to his job. I have the right not to pay to watch him.

I'll get flamed for saying this, but in the grand scheme of things he hasn't committed the worst crime in the world. The hysteria appears to be because hes a 'rapist', and I can't help but think if it was any equally nasty non sex related crime then noone would bat an eyelid.

Off the top of my head I can think of Joey Barton, kicking the shit out of some poor lad outside a nightclub whilst egged on by his chums, then stabbing someone in the eye with a fag...noone batted an eyelid when he returned.

Or Luke Mckormick, the footballer who killed two kids through dangerous driving yet is still playing league football,

Or Naseem Hamed, who broke pretty much every bone in some poor lads body in a car crash, went to jail, and was pretty much welcomed back into the boxing fold no questions asked. Granted he didn't fight again, but he considered it, and he also regularly appears ringside on big fight nights.

I'm not saying Ched didn't deserved to be punished, he did and he was, but hes now done his time and he should be allowed to get on with things

edit...I'm pretty sure that the victims of those other crimes mentioned were equally affected as that poor girl

Reading that link up above what he did seemed premeditated and pretty nasty, the examples you give didnt. Sex crimes are rightly viewed as serious imo.

well the criminal justice system thinks that getting behind a wheel pished and killing 2 people is more serious (the guy above got 7 years) so I'm not sure I agree

for those doubting his innocence,
have a read of the full court transcript,,,
that jury must have been thuck as fick !
the lad was guilty of being stupid, nothing more,
the girl has made a mockery of rape victims everywhere and people keep saying he should come out and show remorse and regret for his actions,
would you show remorse or regret if you yourself knew you was innocent ?

I grew up with someone who is now coming to the end of his professional football career and when he was in his late teens and early twenties he had stories about how his colleges treated woman that would make your hair curl.
The widely reported term at the time was roasting.
He participated once but decided it was not for him.

But he and his friends patronised certain bars where woman would go because they knew there were professional footballers there and would throw them selfs at them.
And were seen as fair game and treated cheaply as such.

I do not beleive this woman was raped in a helplessly drunken state if she was only 2 and a half times over the drink drive limit, but did something she deeply regretted while very drunk.
But I beleive these men had there wits about them and knew exactly what they were doing and took advantage of her.
And I have no problem with the conviction.

But he has served his time and free to continue his life and hopefully will treat woman with more respect in the future.

Don't know what the fuss is about, most Daily Mail reading football [s]hoooligans[/s] fans seem to be closet rapists anyway.

tonup - Member
for those doubting his innocence,
have a read of the full court transcript,,,
that jury must have been thuck as fick !
the lad was guilty of being stupid, nothing more,
the girl has made a mockery of rape victims everywhere and people keep saying he should come out and show remorse and regret for his actions,
would you show remorse or regret if you yourself knew you was innocent ?

you sir are a rape apologist and as reprehensible as Evans is

I read the transcript and came to the opposite conclusion to you.

A simple solution to this kind of issue would be for the FA to grow a pair and introduce a code of conduct that included the right to terminate a players registration if convicted of certain crimes like other professional bodies do.

No registration means no ability to play. Whilst it may be too late to apply such rules in this case it would help to shape future behaviour as the possibility that their registration could be withdrawn for offences such as drink driving, rape etc could act as an additional deterrent for players.

However it will never happen, too much money and self interest from the clubs and the FA have a history of having no balls.

Tonup did you really read the full court transcript ? If so where did you get it from?

crankboy - and I am not fully comfortable defending what either of them did tbh- but if she was sober enough to consent with one she was sober enough to consent with the other - there was a porter outside the room so if sh did not want to one would assume he would have heard this.

I would not like to defend the behaviour of either of the players that night. I can see why Evans's is worse but there is not more evidence for her being unwilling with him than with the other fella.

I still find it strange tbh.

They are both scumbags though dont get me wrong there and I do not want to be seen as an apologist for rapists.

Yes but her lack of consent is only one element that makes the offence. To be guilty the jury must also be sure the defendant did not reasonably believe she was consenting (used to be genuinely believe.) From the sumary you linked to I got the impression that the trial and apeal judges felt that the evidence suggested she was too drunk to consent throughout but that the first footballer had reasonable grounds to believe she was consenting , hooked up in street happily went back to hotel with him "don't leave me " etc . The second bloke did not make the jury think he might reasonably have believed that she was consenting to someone she had never met before jumping on her after his mate had finished or made the jury think he actively knew she was too drunk to consent. His basic proposition can be caricatured as if a girl is willing to sleep with one man then she can be presumed to consent to sex with all his mates .

I also think d1 was lucky with his not guilty verdict . ( based only on a limited knowledge of the case)

and yet in other sports people just beat the crap out of another guys face in the actual field
[img] [/img]
the justice system deals with crime, punishment and rehabilitation. The world deals with the rest.

crankboy - and I am not fully comfortable defending what either of them did tbh- but if she was sober enough to consent with one she was sober enough to consent with the other - there was a porter outside the room so if sh did not want to one would assume he would have heard this.

What bollocks the offence happened later than the consenting sex and if you cannot understand that women or men dont always scream when raped there is little hope you'll understand.

crankboy - and I am not fully comfortable defending what either of them did tbh- but if she was sober enough to consent with one she was sober enough to consent with the other - there was a porter outside the room so if sh did not want to one would assume he would have heard this.

If she was unconscious or semi-conscious, she wouldn't necessarily scream either, but it would still be rape.

I must admit I was a little bit surprised by the conviction on what was reported, and given the difficulty posed by the suggestion she couldn't remember a thing about the whole incident. The jury has to make lots of deductions about her likely condition from witnesses who earlier saw her stumbling around in the street, in a taxi or at reception. I would have thought that would introduce some degree of reasonable doubt, particularly as both men insisted she consented verbally and was enthusiastic.

All the parties involved represent typical sleazy Brits in my opinion. Thick arrogant aggressive footballer made good earning the wedge to attract no hoper minimum wage Primark assistant retail executive called Freya or similar. All pissed go to hotel room where he gets the ride and she hopes to get wedged by association. Texts his equally grubby thick mate saying easy ride here. Said mong turns up and bangs it. They then fvck it off and victim gets the hump that she's made no money out of the incident. Nongenius girlfriend stands by sleazy footballer in the belief that the shagging around is a one off incident (yeah whatever baby). Have I missed anything?

tonup is on the money IMO

I also think d1 was lucky with his not guilty verdict

* i think this is why some folk bring up your profession.

As Evan's imprisonment has been served and he is on licence he is legally able to get back into employment of some form.

IIRC Sheffield United terminated his contract when he was found guilty. It is a completely separate issue as to whether they, or any other football club, choose to consider employing Evans. Sheffield United have no legal obligation to re-employ him.

The media, and many on here, seem to be confusing and linking two separate issues.

Junkie.. my profession again why bring it up. You want an explanation I gave you one. Not all rape victims scream but as I said in my original post if you need this explained you wont get the point anyway. Some pretty distasteful opinions on this thread.

Some pretty distasteful opinions on this thread.

Agreed, but not from JY, who as far as I can see is only querying what at first glance and before any explanation has been offered appears to be an odd outcome.

why bring it up

Your interpretation of what I said, again and still, remains deeply flawed and not worthy of response and I am getting tired of agreeing with the greatape.

It still seems an odd decision though crankboy has explained it and I understand why this decision was reached.

*pops head into STW, looks around, ****s right back off again*

Oh so why is my interpretation of what you said deeply flawed?

 I explained in my answer why others have.

role model.

rapist.

future role model

no thanks.