Ched Evans

[Lucy Chambers]

can you at least see the inconsistency of the whole debacle. two men accused. one gets off, one doesnt. they say she gave consent; she says she cant remember.

can someone who is schooled in law at least tell me that the judge should have instructed to the jury to either find them both guilt or both not guilty to avoid basically what is happening now

You need someone schooled on e law to explain to you accessing a room without permission and engaging in sexual contact while being filmed may end badly for you?

Oh dear. Honestly, this makes me feel ill. The way people talk about this girl is vile. The premise is vile. She was pissed ergo she asked for it. Yuck. Over and out.

[Lucy Chambers]

Lucy, you have quoted me out of context there. I was replying to Curios K comment about letting Larry Murphy drive taxi's. I don't agree with that has it could leave a another female in a taxi on her own without her knowledge he was a convicted rapist!!
A convicted rapist playing football is not the same thing.
Do you agree Lucy?

If he's playing we are sending the message it is ok to do these things. It's never ok to do these things. If he wants to play football let him go train five aside for a while. A jury convicted him, you have to respect that.

[Rachel Divine]

can you at least see the inconsistency of the whole debacle. two men accused. one gets off, one doesnt. they say she gave consent; she says she cant remember.

can someone who is schooled in law at least tell me that the judge should have instructed to the jury to either find them both guilt or both not guilty to avoid basically what is happening now

Honestly, no. Perhaps she claim to be raped by both but walked into the hotel with one.
Surely she wasn't up to watch tv and eat the pizza in the company of the first fella, she went to the room to have sex with him.
Claiming rape is a bit to much.
Evans in the room, if she gave consent still she can claim rape and people would believe her. Maybe she didn't remember giving consent to Evans, as she didn't remember everything, therefore the judge taking it as she was too drunk to give consent.
Why claim rape from both? I do not know.

[Best Before]

How is it not the same. Go back to the post that I replied to and tell me that the same analogy does not apply. It's actually the exact same. That guy Steve said " Evans was convicted of rape, he was not convicted to never work again" and you agreed with that? Now why doesn't the same apply to Larry Murphy? Do you know why? I do? Because you all are talking crap. If it directly affected any of you lot, you'd want him away!

The fact is he's now a convicted rapist, like any other rapist. You might think he's an up class rapist and Larry is a low life rapist. Maybe that's how you differentiate these things. Me and other compassionate people, put all rapists in the same bracket. I certainly wouldn't let Evans babysit. And I certainly wouldn't want him to taxi a female loved one around. And that's how the fans of that club feel. They don't want a rapist. And they won't have one, he'll never play for a club again, and rightly so.

I have answered this below.

Well I would think keep him away from a female dominated job, but a less female dominated profession to football I cannot think off.

Lucy, you have quoted me out of context there. I was replying to Curios K comment about letting Larry Murphy drive taxi's. I don't agree with that has it could leave a another female in a taxi on her own without her knowledge he was a convicted rapist!!
A convicted rapist playing football is not the same thing.
Do you agree Lucy?

[Zoidberg]

She was pissed ergo she asked for it. Yuck. Over and out.

The same as the people who say "She was dress provocatively" during other cases, there is no excuse for rape, none.

[Best Before]

If he's playing we are sending the message it is ok to do these things. It's never ok to do these things. If he wants to play football let him go train five aside for a while. A jury convicted him, you have to respect that.

And I do Lucy, but as Steve says it's not a life sentence he got.

[Lucy Chambers]

And I do Lucy, but as Steve says it's not a life sentence he got.

Then let him rehabilitate himself. Give it ten years and work his way back in. He cannot expect to walk into a position of role model and the men who manage football would do well to take note of this debacle.

[Zoidberg]

And I do Lucy, but as Steve says it's not a life sentence he got.

No it's not a life sentence he got, but neither is it a life sentence for taxi driver rapists, school teacher paedos etc, but they aren't allowed to work in their chosen profession, so why is it OK for him to?

[Meursault]

It's a point of law. Of consent and the capability to give it. It's somewhat disingenuous to claim she accused both men of rape, she made a statement and two men were arrested for it. The evidence brought before the court was enough for one man to claim consent, and not the other, directly due to his actions. If you read the transcripts of the case you will discover that on most points she didn't accuse anyone of anything because she couldn't remember most of the evening. Hence she thought she had been drugged.


Anyhow. Yuck. Horrible debate and horrible thoughts from people. I'm off to the land of fluff.

when john dundon attacked his solictor john devane in a court in limerick, devane choose not to prosecute him for it. Now i understand your point. Shes saying she cant remember and has to go by police evidence. Having said that she still is prosecuting them both for rape.

Lucy can you at least understand why this is even be argued about. Two men are accused of rape by a woman who says she cant remember. They say she can. The jury finds one man who claims she consented not guilty. The other man who claims the same thing is found guilty.

So lets take it from the eye of the not guilty man: She was consenting. She knew what she was doing. He also vindicates that she consented with evans. He is found not guilty and thus his viewpoint is upheld.

Now from the guilty man: She was too drunk to consent. She didnt know what she was doing. He raped her. His viewpoint is not upheld.

that is the inconsistency. The two view points clash. if they were both guilty or not guilty. there would be no issue.

[Curious k]

Honestly, no. Perhaps she claim to be raped by both but walked into the hotel with one.
Surely she wasn't up to watch tv and eat the pizza in the company of the first fella, she went to the room to have sex with him.
Claiming rape is a bit to much.
Evans in the room, if she gave consent still she can claim rape and people would believe her. Maybe she didn't remember giving consent to Evans, as she didn't remember everything, therefore the judge taking it as she was too drunk to give consent.
Why claim rape from both? I do not know.

It doesn't make sense because it's not true! Look any inconsistencies is not taking as Inconsequential in a court of law. In fact Evans's solicitor would've had the case thrown out of court, with no grounds to argue. This is all very clear to me, so I don't wanna keep repeating myself.

The girl wanted the first guy convicted as he texted Evans. She went into a room with one man, and ended up raped by another. I already explained this earlier. That first guy only got away with it, because he left the room, and Evans got the key at reception, the first guy never committed a serious enough offence, upon reflection of all evidence. It's trolls latching on to media trying to sell paper, that's accusing the girl of crying rape against the two men. When in fact, it couldn't have stood in a court of law, if true. Fact!