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.
From a 2004 CBBC Newsround article.I'm sure that footballers have always had a bad reputation.They were usually working class oiks with other manual tradesman type jobs when they were the chattels of the club chairman. Then they got organised and better paid and so they became working class oiks with too much cash but with short careers usually meaning that they had to get a real job when they retired,usually running a pub.It's only more recently ,maybe because of the greater media spotlight and now the games gone corporate that this role model issue seems to be more in the spotlight.George Best is still revered and has an airport named after him but was an alcoholic woman beater who neglected his son.Seem to recall Jimmy Armfield talking recently about how he couldn't believe that Tom Finney would ever have been knighted back in his playing days ,so much did the establishment look down on football.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
Quite possibly and cheers for the insights In your post - good to get [legally] informed advice.
A_A thanks for the sledgehammer approach of giving a judgement without explanation* it has been helpful.
Your interpretation of what I said is deeply flawed but I have little interest in a debate with you.
As I said I am not fully comfortable with all this.
* 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
I did not. I explained in my answer why others have.
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.
no one else has in this thread or in any thread for at least a week or two
role model.
rapist.
future role model
no thanks.
why is a footballer a role model, until this I'd never heard of him.
If you want to go on a moral crusade about role models then honestly question why you think footballers are - as pointed out previously most kids think they are idiots.
The argument should not be with the prospective employer but the entity delivering the judgement and punishment. If said entity has said X equals for punishment for breaking the laws/rules laid down for someone who is a member of that society then on completion of the punishment then that person is back within that society.
For all of you who have committed an offence from a parking ticket, speeding offence and upwards should we ban you from a role that could mean you are working in a similar area once you punishment is complete.
