PaulC Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 I guess if the new evidence proves she lied to the court then she would be charged and could face a custodial sentence. I don't think there would be much point him taking out a civil action against her though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ingram85 Posted April 22, 2016 Share Posted April 22, 2016 11 hours ago, PaulC said: I guess if the new evidence proves she lied to the court then she would be charged and could face a custodial sentence. I don't think there would be much point him taking out a civil action against her though If I'd lost potential earnings of at least £200,000 a year (total of £800,000 lost) I know I'd be taking legal action. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulC Posted April 22, 2016 Share Posted April 22, 2016 Probably a lot more than that I think. But it might take the girl 200 years to pay it off. Unless he has a case against cps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ingram85 Posted April 22, 2016 Share Posted April 22, 2016 Well yeah I wouldn't be expecting all of it (I went on basis of him earning at least £5000 a week over 4 years) and especially so from just her but yeah the cps, journo's & media, girl in question and other avenues etc.... IF he is found innocent of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted April 22, 2016 Share Posted April 22, 2016 6 minutes ago, Ingram85 said: Well yeah I wouldn't be expecting all of it (I went on basis of him earning at least £5000 a week over 4 years) and especially so from just her but yeah the cps, journo's & media, girl in question and other avenues etc.... IF he is found innocent of course. I wonder if that's why they might not go for a retrial ..... as it stands there is still that kinda doubt , it's been over turned but there will always be that doubt in peoples minds .... a new trial and an innocent verdict really opens the can of worms for reasons mentioned above Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ingram85 Posted April 22, 2016 Share Posted April 22, 2016 I don't know the ins & outs of the trial but can anyone tell me if they were as drunk as each other? Was it ever said? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post BOF Posted April 22, 2016 Moderator Popular Post Share Posted April 22, 2016 7 minutes ago, Ingram85 said: I don't know the ins & outs 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted April 22, 2016 Share Posted April 22, 2016 4 minutes ago, Ingram85 said: I don't know the ins & outs of the trial but can anyone tell me if they were as drunk as each other? Was it ever said? this web link has quite a bit of detail on the case itself On 29 May 2011 the complainant finished work shortly before midnight. She drank some alcohol, went home, showered and then went to a bar, where she arrived at just after 1.30am. She drank vodka and left at about 3am. She said that she could not recall leaving the bar. She had a vague recollection of being in a kebab shop and of a large pizza box. CCTV footage, which was recovered, showed her outside the bar, inside and outside a kebab shop, and eventually her arrival at the hotel where the offence with which the court is concerned took place. The CCTV footage showed that while she was inside the kebab shop she was unsteady on her feet, at one point she fell over and landed on the floor. On the other hand, outside the kebab shop she could be seen eating pizza from a large box, although she was also seen to stumble, squat, lose her balance, and walk unsteadily. Indeed, she left her handbag in the shop. Based on this evidence, the prosecution case was that she was very drunk. more on link .... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ingram85 Posted April 22, 2016 Share Posted April 22, 2016 (edited) 1 hour ago, tonyh29 said: this web link has quite a bit of detail on the case itself more on link .... Thanks for that, I've never read it in that much detail before and it's helped clarify a few things for myself. Namely, it confirms for me that Evans is a horrid, detestable scumbag but he is NOT a rapist. She consented, saying she had drunk too much or was too inebriated potentially makes thousands and thousands of men & women on nights out or having drunken one night stands all rapists. Doesnt excuse Evans behaviour or predatory nature but it doesn't make him specifically what he was found guilty of. If me & the wife are both blind drunk, don't know what we are doing and we end up at it and we only find out the next day then potentially I could accuse her or she could accuse me? The only thing it hinges on for me is that It doesn't say if he had alcohol in his system at all or not, not that I read of anyway but could have missed it, as no matter how small the intake it could have impaired his judgement as much as it impaired hers. You can't call someone a rapist because he shagged a drunk girl who the court had heard was consenting whether intoxicated or not, he is vile opportunistic scum but he simply isn't a rapist, whether sober or not. I feel sorry for her and she doesn't deserve what happened to her that night or what followed after but she wasn't raped. Her 'big win' tweeting antics after don't help her of course but to me, all 3, while not equally as guilty as each other (with the girl being the least guilty) she still consented to some degree. I think public vilification of Evans and the rightful distrusting of him plus making it difficult it for him to work are punishment enough, I don't believe he should have been sent down. We all know what a scumbag he is. But I repeat, a rapist he is not. The girl deserves a regretful apology from Evans, from McDonald and from those giving her hell but equally, as horrible as it sounds, Evans deserves one as well for it going this far. A load of men AND women, (let's not pretend it's only men who go out on the pull) thanks to this case, will be rightfully worried of having a night out and getting too drunk now because when they wake up the next morning they could be in a lot of trouble. Either that or the number of rapists will explode in number. Because if Evans is a rapist then there are thousands if not millions of male and female unprosecuted rapists out there plus those yet to have had a drunk one night stand. Edited April 22, 2016 by Ingram85 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted April 22, 2016 VT Supporter Share Posted April 22, 2016 (edited) I don't see how you can say from that that she consented. Evans's mate got consent, apparently. But wasn't the story that Evans had gone to bed, and then turned up after his mate had done the deed and shagged her then? If Evans had brought her back in that state on the "understanding" (used loosely) that things were going to happen then it would be a different matter, as it was for the other guy who got off. But she went home with the other guy. It's not comparable to you and your wife having drunk sex at all. Edited April 22, 2016 by Stevo985 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ingram85 Posted April 22, 2016 Share Posted April 22, 2016 The comparison was more directly about the issue of consenting when drunk part rather than directly comparing it to the Evans vs girl situation as a whole as I know the two are not the same. I was using it as an example to highlight how dangerous the judges stance is for everyone else. The judge stated that at a certain level of intoxication that even if you think you are consenting and audibly consent it doesn't count as he feels all capacity has completely gone out the window. That creates a dangerous precedent in my view for literally every one who goes out on the lash/pull. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted April 22, 2016 Moderator Share Posted April 22, 2016 2 minutes ago, Ingram85 said: The judge stated that at a certain level of intoxication that even if you think you are consenting and audibly consent it doesn't count as he feels all capacity has completely gone out the window. That creates a dangerous precedent in my view for literally every one who goes out on the lash/pull. Exactly. Not to mention it's just f**king batshit crazy to add an element of subjectivity to someone's ability to make a decision and then put that arbitrary judgement in the hands of another person after the event. Here's an idea. How about making adults responsible for their own actions, and for the state they get themselves into? Or am I just mental? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted April 22, 2016 Share Posted April 22, 2016 I can't believe what I'm reading TBH. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted April 22, 2016 Share Posted April 22, 2016 (edited) On 22/04/2016 at 13:49, BOF said: How about making adults responsible for their own actions, and for the state they get themselves into? Or am I just mental? the trouble with that is you're kinda saying to her (or others like her in general) , well it was your own fault for getting drunk ? (not you per say , but the law) I'm not allowed to go behind the wheel of a car after a session and then say Oh I wouldn't have done that or I don't remember doing that .... presumably that means I'm responsible for my actions under the influence ... therefore unless she was intoxicated/ drugged against her will , I'm not sure she can say that she wasn't responsible for her actions with Evans ? ( I'm not trying to trivialise rape here or anything , just trying to elaborate on BOF's point , which I sorta agree with ) Edited June 21, 2016 by tonyh29 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted April 22, 2016 Share Posted April 22, 2016 1 hour ago, Stevo985 said: But wasn't the story that Evans had gone to bed, and then turned up after his mate had done the deed and shagged her then? depending on how you interpret this sentence , McDonald was still actively having intercourse with the girl when Evans arrived The applicant entered the room. Sexual intercourse between McDonald and the complainant ceased Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted April 22, 2016 VT Supporter Share Posted April 22, 2016 The impression I always got was she was so pissed she didn't really know what was going on. MacDonald got away with it because the act of coming home with him and ending up shagging him, whilst not explicitly being consent, was enough to get him off because let's be honest, if you took a girl home from a club then that's probably what you were both expecting to happen. But Evans turning up halfway through and having his way with her as well doesn't have that benefit of the doubt attached. She didn't go home with him, she went home with MacDonald. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ingram85 Posted April 22, 2016 Share Posted April 22, 2016 12 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said: I can't believe what I'm reading TBH. Care to elaborate? If it's what I'm assuming, and after you've read the link Tony gave, can you categorically say 100% that Evans raped her and deserved a 5 year jail sentence? Because I can't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted April 22, 2016 Share Posted April 22, 2016 5 minutes ago, Stevo985 said: The impression I always got was she was so pissed she didn't really know what was going on. MacDonald got away with it because the act of coming home with him and ending up shagging him, whilst not explicitly being consent, was enough to get him off because let's be honest, if you took a girl home from a club then that's probably what you were both expecting to happen. But Evans turning up halfway through and having his way with her as well doesn't have that benefit of the doubt attached. She didn't go home with him, she went home with MacDonald. possibly ... the CCTV footage of her arriving at the hotel didn't give me the impression of someone that drunk , but conversely that doesn't mean she wasn't .... don't get me wrong I'm not saying she wasn't raped or that she's lying or anything like that ,I'm just reading it like a lot of people trying to understand Evans original conviction of rape from a legal aspect the weird thing for me is you have two friends outside the window allegedly filming the whole thing and yet this evidence has never been shown or theses people heard from ? surely that would have proved one way or another events as they happened ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted April 22, 2016 Moderator Share Posted April 22, 2016 17 minutes ago, tonyh29 said: the trouble with that is you're kinda saying to her (or others like her in general) , well it was your own fault for getting drunk ? (not you per say , but the law) I'm not allowed to go behind the wheel of a car after a session and then say Oh I wouldn't have down that or I don't remember doing that .... presumably that means I'm responsible for my actions under the influence ... therefore unless she was intoxicated/ drugged against her will , I'm not sure she can say that she wasn't responsible for her actions with Evans ? ( I'm not trying to trivialise rape here or anything , just trying to elaborate on BOF's point , which I sorta agree with ) Yes, obviously no-one is suggesting that it's ever a person's fault for being raped. Even getting yourself into a drunken stupour does not give someone else the freedom to do whatever they want with you. The key difference between the 2 examples you give of rape and drink driving where alcohol results in impaired judgement is that one act is done to you involuntarily (rape) and the other is done by you voluntarily (drink driving). Where it becomes a grey area and much more dangerous for the man is when the woman consents to something on the night and then decides afterwards that she didn't, and then a judge some months later decides that she was in no fit state to consent. In that scenario how on earth is anyone to know when yes means yes, now that yes can mean no? Give her a breathalyser? That might dampen the mood somewhat. Mine was a more general commentary on the fact that society seems to be moving more and more away from personal accountability in everyone's day to day life as we try to sue anything and everything for what we do to ourselves. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted April 22, 2016 Share Posted April 22, 2016 1 hour ago, Ingram85 said: Namely, it confirms for me that Evans is a horrid, detestable scumbag but he is NOT a rapist. That's interesting because the link that Tony has given is where the court of appeal refused right to appeal against both the conviction and the sentence (on each of the four grounds raised). The fresh evidence that has led to the Court of Appeal allowing the appeal, quashing the conviction and saying that a fresh indictment should be made and he should be retried won't be made available until during/after any retrial (according to the other link). Quote In summary, we have concluded that we must allow the appeal and that it is in the interests of justice to order a re-trial. Nothing can be reported that might prejudice the fairness of that re-trial. That means the contents of this statement may be reported and broadcast, in full, but nothing more about the appeal proceedings may be reported until the re-trial is concluded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts