Ched Evans

[TrentVilla]

I think he is innocent. Don't think he'd be pushing this hard only to be found out as a fraud especially now that he is trying to re-establish himself. 

So despite the fact he was found guilty, served time and has already lost an appeal you've come to the conclusion he is innocent based on the fact he is still claiming to be innocent?

[snowychap]

 

Is is he guilty, yes.

He is guilty, though, not because of your preamble or the Most of us have also been the victim of some sort of sexual assault but because the court (and the jury) judged him so.

[PaulC]

Lets wait and see what the outcome of the appeal is. If there is  evidence which wasn't used during the trial and it proves his innocence then he's innocent of rape and I hope people don't still call him a rapist. If it doesn't then yes he is a rapist  

[snowychap]

Yet, until that potential eventuality, he remains a convicted rapist.

Edited October 6, 2015 by snowychap

[PaulC]

quite true

[Thevillanofoz]

 

Is is he guilty, yes.

He is guilty, though, not because of your preamble or the Most of us have also been the victim of some sort of sexual assault but because the court (and the jury) judged him so.

My point wasn't that this made him guilty, my point was that the idea that women who think 'ooh, I wish I hadn't slept with that bloke, I'll go and report him for rape.' are not commonplace. I 

[Eames]

Ched's appeal is an interesting one for me. Fundamentally it seems to be based on the fact that he doesn't agree with the legal definition of rape. His behaviour and those of his "supporters" on his website has been nothing short of disgraceful and in many cases in contempt of court. On that basis alone I hope he isn't successful in his appeal. Innocent men don't launch smear campaigns against their victims. 

[PaulC]

Ched's appeal is an interesting one for me. Fundamentally it seems to be based on the fact that he doesn't agree with the legal definition of rape. His behaviour and those of his "supporters" on his website has been nothing short of disgraceful and in many cases in contempt of court. On that basis alone I hope he isn't successful in his appeal. Innocent men don't launch smear campaigns against their victims. 

I agree the way they handled it was bad, but the criminal cases review commision thinks theres a good chance the new evidence will prove his innocence, so lets wait and see the outcome before judging whether or not he doesn't understand what rape is. I'm not saying he's not an arsehole for what he did, but footballers live in an unreal world with everything handed to them at a young age and are generally dislikeable human beings.

I just wonder though, if the conviction is quashed will that be the end of it or will there be more law suits for loss of earnings for how many years as well as the time he spent in jail.

Edited October 7, 2015 by PaulC

[Czechlad]

I think he is innocent. Don't think he'd be pushing this hard only to be found out as a fraud especially now that he is trying to re-establish himself. 

So despite the fact he was found guilty, served time and has already lost an appeal you've come to the conclusion he is innocent based on the fact he is still claiming to be innocent?

I think he thinks he is innocent. Might be as well. If she was apparently too drunk to say no, how can she recall her story? This is my speculation. Not taking his side, not taking anyone's side. I just know that there have been a lot of rape accusations in today's world that ended up being the woman lied then was pressured to keep the story going. 

[HanoiVillan]

I think he is innocent. Don't think he'd be pushing this hard only to be found out as a fraud especially now that he is trying to re-establish himself. 

So despite the fact he was found guilty, served time and has already lost an appeal you've come to the conclusion he is innocent based on the fact he is still claiming to be innocent?

I think he thinks he is innocent. Might be as well. If she was apparently too drunk to say no, how can she recall her story? This is my speculation. Not taking his side, not taking anyone's side. I just know that there have been a lot of rape accusations in today's world that ended up being the woman lied then was pressured to keep the story going. 

If she was too drunk to say no, then he raped her. 

[Czechlad]

I think he is innocent. Don't think he'd be pushing this hard only to be found out as a fraud especially now that he is trying to re-establish himself. 

So despite the fact he was found guilty, served time and has already lost an appeal you've come to the conclusion he is innocent based on the fact he is still claiming to be innocent?

I think he thinks he is innocent. Might be as well. If she was apparently too drunk to say no, how can she recall her story? This is my speculation. Not taking his side, not taking anyone's side. I just know that there have been a lot of rape accusations in today's world that ended up being the woman lied then was pressured to keep the story going. 

If she was too drunk to say no, then he raped her. 

If two adults are completely drunk and decide to have sex, that is not rape. The woman should not be able to cry rape if she regrets doing something while under the influence. It's different if he was sober and used her drunken state to sleep with her, but that's still a grey area, because unless she tells him no, how can you really punish him? I don't know what happened between them. Unless she said no to him and it seems unfair to punish Evans is basically my point. I also don't want to turn this into a debate. This is a football site. 

[HanoiVillan]

I think he is innocent. Don't think he'd be pushing this hard only to be found out as a fraud especially now that he is trying to re-establish himself. 

So despite the fact he was found guilty, served time and has already lost an appeal you've come to the conclusion he is innocent based on the fact he is still claiming to be innocent?

I think he thinks he is innocent. Might be as well. If she was apparently too drunk to say no, how can she recall her story? This is my speculation. Not taking his side, not taking anyone's side. I just know that there have been a lot of rape accusations in today's world that ended up being the woman lied then was pressured to keep the story going. 

If she was too drunk to say no, then he raped her. 

If two adults are completely drunk and decide to have sex, that is not rape. The woman should not be able to cry rape if she regrets doing something while under the influence. It's different if he was sober and used her drunken state to sleep with her, but that's still a grey area, because unless she tells him no, how can you really punish him? I don't know what happened between them. Unless she said no to him and it seems unfair to punish Evans is basically my point. I also don't want to turn this into a debate. This is a football site. 

Well, I'm going to respond anyway, whether you want a debate or not. You're free to not respond if you like, but I'll continue to post on-topic comments if I see fit. 

Your legal understanding is nonsense. If a woman is not in a position to give informed consent, it is rape. 

[PaulC]

There is obviously some new evidence which may prove she was able to give consent. I don't know. What I don't understand was how the footballer that took her to the hotel and had sex with her was found not guilty of rape but Ched Evans was, unless she sober enough to give consent to the first man but not to the second.  We dont know what the new evidence is so its hard to have an opinion either way right now.

[Czechlad]

I think he is innocent. Don't think he'd be pushing this hard only to be found out as a fraud especially now that he is trying to re-establish himself. 

So despite the fact he was found guilty, served time and has already lost an appeal you've come to the conclusion he is innocent based on the fact he is still claiming to be innocent?

I think he thinks he is innocent. Might be as well. If she was apparently too drunk to say no, how can she recall her story? This is my speculation. Not taking his side, not taking anyone's side. I just know that there have been a lot of rape accusations in today's world that ended up being the woman lied then was pressured to keep the story going. 

If she was too drunk to say no, then he raped her. 

If two adults are completely drunk and decide to have sex, that is not rape. The woman should not be able to cry rape if she regrets doing something while under the influence. It's different if he was sober and used her drunken state to sleep with her, but that's still a grey area, because unless she tells him no, how can you really punish him? I don't know what happened between them. Unless she said no to him and it seems unfair to punish Evans is basically my point. I also don't want to turn this into a debate. This is a football site. 

Well, I'm going to respond anyway, whether you want a debate or not. You're free to not respond if you like, but I'll continue to post on-topic comments if I see fit. 

Your legal understanding is nonsense. If a woman is not in a position to give informed consent, it is rape. 

So if a drunken woman tells me yes let's have sex and I am just as drunk as her I am raping her? WTF. Why is it not the other way? Why is she not raping me cause I couldn't give informed consent? You should be responsible for your own actions even when you drink. If I go do a bunch of drugs, I can't just say oh it was cause I was drunk so I didn't really mean to. It's the same thing for sex. If she said yes to sex, then felt like she was too drunk the day after to give informed consent, well tough luck, she is an adult. Plus how am I supposed to know what is too drunk? I can be very drunk and most people probably wouldn't know it. Not everyone is an obvious drunk. 

[HanoiVillan]

There is no simple answer to the question 'how much drink is too much', because it will differ for different people. However, the bright line is, is the woman able to give informed consent? All this means is that she says yes and actually wants to have sex with you. If she's capable of saying 'yes' and meaning it, and then does so, then it's not assault. Let's try to make this a bit easier. 

Situation 1: You meet a girl. She's completely sober. You persuade her to have sex, but it's not difficult, because she's up for it as well. Is it rape? Obviously not. 

Situation 2: You're in a hospital ward. There's a woman in a coma. You start sexually interfering with her. Is it rape? Obviously yes. 

These are extreme ends of the 'consent' spectrum. At some point of cognitive impairment, a woman goes from being able to give informed consent to sex to not being able to do so. Evans was convicted because the jury felt the woman in his case hadn't given informed consent and wasn't capable of doing so. 

Your responses are honestly a bit weird. Do you often find yourself in a situation where the woman the next day doesn't feel like she agreed to have sex with you? I mean, god knows I'm no lothario, but on the rare occasions I get my oats it's always been very obvious that we both just wanted to do it, whether we'd drunk anything or not. Here's a good maxim to live your life by: if you're not sure whether she wants to have sex with you, don't have sex with her. 

[Czechlad]

There is no simple answer to the question 'how much drink is too much', because it will differ for different people. However, the bright line is, is the woman able to give informed consent? All this means is that she says yes and actually wants to have sex with you. If she's capable of saying 'yes' and meaning it, and then does so, then it's not assault. Let's try to make this a bit easier. 

Situation 1: You meet a girl. She's completely sober. You persuade her to have sex, but it's not difficult, because she's up for it as well. Is it rape? Obviously not. 

Situation 2: You're in a hospital ward. There's a woman in a coma. You start sexually interfering with her. Is it rape? Obviously yes. 

These are extreme ends of the 'consent' spectrum. At some point of cognitive impairment, a woman goes from being able to give informed consent to sex to not being able to do so. Evans was convicted because the jury felt the woman in his case hadn't given informed consent and wasn't capable of doing so. 

Your responses are honestly a bit weird. Do you often find yourself in a situation where the woman the next day doesn't feel like she agreed to have sex with you? I mean, god knows I'm no lothario, but on the rare occasions I get my oats it's always been very obvious that we both just wanted to do it, whether we'd drunk anything or not. Here's a good maxim to live your life by: if you're not sure whether she wants to have sex with you, don't have sex with her. 

See this is why I did not want to discuss this because somehow this has turned from a discussion about Ched Evans to me. You are now directly asking me if I am in a position where I have essentially raped a woman. This is ridiculous because now I have to defend myself instead of discussing the issue. No I have never been in a situation where the woman did not agree to have sex me with. Sex is rarely ever a question. I don't directly ask my girlfriend if we want to have sex. Things progress to a point where that happens from our actions.

Let's go over exactly what happened. Evans was in a room with the woman who was obviously drunk because she said she had little to no recollection of the events. The only way she even knew she had sex with Evans was because Evans stated it. The woman apparently was too drunk to give consent to Evans, but for some reason Evan's friend McDonald was not punished for having sex with the woman with Evans. So somehow McDonald was legally given consent whereas Evans was not? There is a major grey area here because we don't know if she told Evans not to join in, or she wanted him out because she did not remember, and neither Evans nor McDonald said anything, so if she did say no, but he went on ahead anyway, that is clear cut rape. BUT if she did not protest to Evans joining in, that is not rape even if she was so drunk that she could not remember what happened. Unless she was actually unconscious or unable to function like a normal person, it seemed consensual. 

Plus the woman's behavior was very suspicious as well. She had been messaging her friends that night, but deleted all the messages so they could not be used. Why would she do this? The woman also went to twitter during the accusations claiming she won big, and would be making all her dreams come true which included purchasing multiple mini coopers. Again why would a woman who was raped go out an publicly say these things?

Then there was the interview with McDonald who when asked if the woman seem overly drunk/non-coherent responded with:

A Normal, clear, she wasn't slurring her words and falling all over the road.  If that was the case would have gone to the taxi by herself and sent her home myself.  Yeah she was consenting. 

If this is all true, that is not rape. BUT again grey areas. Two mates could easily have stuck by their story this whole way through knowing that is would ruin Evans. I personally think Evans really does believe he is innocent. I can't say either way because I don't know everything, but from the evidence and testimonials, it did seem consensual. 

Edited October 9, 2015 by Czechlad

[HanoiVillan]

There is no simple answer to the question 'how much drink is too much', because it will differ for different people. However, the bright line is, is the woman able to give informed consent? All this means is that she says yes and actually wants to have sex with you. If she's capable of saying 'yes' and meaning it, and then does so, then it's not assault. Let's try to make this a bit easier. 

Situation 1: You meet a girl. She's completely sober. You persuade her to have sex, but it's not difficult, because she's up for it as well. Is it rape? Obviously not. 

Situation 2: You're in a hospital ward. There's a woman in a coma. You start sexually interfering with her. Is it rape? Obviously yes. 

These are extreme ends of the 'consent' spectrum. At some point of cognitive impairment, a woman goes from being able to give informed consent to sex to not being able to do so. Evans was convicted because the jury felt the woman in his case hadn't given informed consent and wasn't capable of doing so. 

Your responses are honestly a bit weird. Do you often find yourself in a situation where the woman the next day doesn't feel like she agreed to have sex with you? I mean, god knows I'm no lothario, but on the rare occasions I get my oats it's always been very obvious that we both just wanted to do it, whether we'd drunk anything or not. Here's a good maxim to live your life by: if you're not sure whether she wants to have sex with you, don't have sex with her. 

See this is why I did not want to discuss this because somehow this has turned from a discussion about Ched Evans to me. You are now directly asking me if I am in a position where I have essentially raped a woman. This is ridiculous because now I have to defend myself instead of discussing the issue. [1] No I have never been in a situation where the woman did not agree to have sex me with. Sex is rarely ever a question. I don't directly ask my girlfriend if we want to have sex. Things progress to a point where that happens from our actions. [2]

Let's go over exactly what happened. Evans was in a room with the woman who was obviously drunk because she said she had little to no recollection of the events. The only way she even knew she had sex with Evans was because Evans stated it. The woman apparently was too drunk to give consent to Evans, but for some reason Evan's friend McDonald was not punished for having sex with the woman with Evans. So somehow McDonald was legally given consent whereas Evans was not? [3] There is a major grey area here because we don't know if she told Evans not to join in, or she wanted him out because she did not remember, and neither Evans nor McDonald said anything, so if she did say no, but he went on ahead anyway, that is clear cut rape. BUT if she did not protest to Evans joining in, that is not rape even if she was so drunk that she could not remember what happened. Unless she was actually unconscious or unable to function like a normal person, it seemed consensual. [4]

Plus the woman's behavior was very suspicious as well. She had been messaging her friends that night, but deleted all the messages so they could not be used. Why would she do this? The woman also went to twitter during the accusations claiming she won big, and would be making all her dreams come true which included purchasing multiple mini coopers. Again why would a woman who was raped go out an publicly say these things? [5]

Then there was the interview with McDonald [6] who when asked if the woman seem overly drunk/non-coherent responded with:

A Normal, clear, she wasn't slurring her words and falling all over the road.  If that was the case would have gone to the taxi by herself and sent her home myself.  Yeah she was consenting. 

If this is all true, that is not rape. BUT again grey areas. Two mates could easily have stuck by their story this whole way through knowing that is would ruin Evans. I personally think Evans really does believe he is innocent. I can't say either way because I don't know everything, but from the evidence and testimonials, it did seem consensual. 

1] The reason I'm addressing the argument to 'you' is because in your last comment you used the word 'I' on 9 occasions, and the word 'me' on a further two occasions. If you want to use more neutral language, then fine, let's do so. However, please also note that I certainly didn't accuse you of 'having essentially raped a woman'. I accused you of giving responses that were 'a bit weird' (that's being chritable - you're redefining the legal definition of consent after all!) and then asked a hypothetical question. The reason I asked you that question is because I was confident of getting an answer like [2]. 

2] You're right, most people rarely do have to ask a specific 'may I have sex with you' question. This is because it's normally clear that the person someone is sleeping with is enthusiastically consenting to having sex. It's also normally the case that even if a sex partner is drunk, most people have sex with people they know rather than people they've never met for even one minute before who are engaged in intercourse with somebody else at the time (which was the relationship between the complainant and Evans). 

3] McDonald's actions were scuzzy enough to warrant a trial, but there was some mitigating evidence in his favour that wasn't present for Evans. For example, the complainant willingly got into a taxi with him to go back to the hotel, and while at the hotel, the porter testified hearing the woman ask him 'you're not leaving me, are you?' In short, while no-one would consider McDonald the very definition of a modern gentleman, there was enough evidence that he could reasonably have interpreted her actions as consent to intercourse for him to be acquitted. Those considerations weren't available for Evans, and the judge allowed the possibility for separate verdicts. 

4] How can you say what 'seemed consensual'? You weren't there. What is 'functioning like a normal person'? She had fallen over during the evening on at least one occasion and left her handbag in a kebab shop, that's how drunk she was. Is that a normal course of events?

5] There's no such thing as a 'perfect rape victim'. It's possible to find character flaws in nearly everyone. What's more, being raped is a traumatic event which people respond to in different ways, sometimes erratic. Two courts had the opportunity to find her testimony unreliable, they didn't do so. 

6] McDonald is not exactly a disinterested analyst of the situation! See my 4] for some reasons she was drunk. It was also testified that her top was dishevelled and that she was slurring and staggering. On one level, it's kind of understandable that McDonald might not have realised how drunk she was - after all, he was drunk himself - but that doesn't mean he's an acute observer  of the situation.  

[Stevo985]

On point 3, as far as I'm aware, McDonald was having sex with the girl. on their own in McDonald's room. Evans then turned up and also had sex with the girl.

That is the massive difference and why McDonald got away with it. The girl gave consent to McDonald, she didn't give consent to Evans.

 

At the end of the day, Evans has gone on trial before a jury. That jury has decided, given all the evidence, that he's guilty. That's pretty damning. If the evidence was sketchy then they wouldn't have convicted him.

[PaulC]

I don't know, it depends how the jury interprete the  evidence and if they have had the new evidence which has now come to light would they have still found him guilty. 

[bobzy]

At the end of the day, Evans has gone on trial before a jury. That jury has decided, given all the evidence, that he's guilty. That's pretty damning. If the evidence was sketchy then they wouldn't have convicted him.

[can of worms] Completely depends on the jury. [/can of worms]

The whole situation is incredibly odd.  There's a chance that the victim believes she has been raped, Evans believes he has done nothing wrong and both are correct.

Personally, I can't believe Evans has done "nothing wrong" here.  Even if you take the legality issue surrounding rape away from it, it sounds scummy as ****.