Film, Media & TV1 min ago
Ched Evans - Not Guilty
I haven't been following this story , myself
He has been found not guilty
http://
He has been found not guilty
http://
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Bazile. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
//If the woman had said she was raped, then she would have raised the charge - she didn't - that is a matter of reported fact.//
FGS Andy. She didnt raise it as a charge because she cant. Only the police can charge based on CPS advice.
Fact is, she co-operated. FACT! She attended two trials. (The latter was of no consequence to her since CE had already been released on licence). Without her co-operation there would not have been one trial. FACT. I have seen no reports that she was unwilling to support the prosecution in any way (and I have just read the judgement of Mitting J and Williams J in the CA - incidentally, they refer to the young lady as "the Complainant"). Her handbag was found in the pizza parlour. She made the initial complaint when she woke up alone, with a headache and confused, having wet herself. Please stop this ridiculous posturing that she may have been overruled or may have been brought into this prosecution unwillingly.
I am more concerned with how the original jury managed to acquit Macdonald and convict Evans. Presumably if she was too shedded to consent to one, she was too shedded to consent to both - the acts complained of within a short window of time of each other. There was no trace of alcohol in her system (although there were traces of cocaine and cannabis) at 11.30am and at 4.15 that morning it was suggested that her blood alcohol limit would have been 2.5x the legal drink drink limit.
There is also no need to be quite so sarcastic. I wish we could all charge people, rather than leave it in the hands of the police.
Divebuddy - I think you are right - it's a tricky one though. E says that she asked him to give her oral sex. Presumably at the first trial the jury thought he was lying since inviting someone to perform that most intimate act is the sort of introduction I have not come across before!
FGS Andy. She didnt raise it as a charge because she cant. Only the police can charge based on CPS advice.
Fact is, she co-operated. FACT! She attended two trials. (The latter was of no consequence to her since CE had already been released on licence). Without her co-operation there would not have been one trial. FACT. I have seen no reports that she was unwilling to support the prosecution in any way (and I have just read the judgement of Mitting J and Williams J in the CA - incidentally, they refer to the young lady as "the Complainant"). Her handbag was found in the pizza parlour. She made the initial complaint when she woke up alone, with a headache and confused, having wet herself. Please stop this ridiculous posturing that she may have been overruled or may have been brought into this prosecution unwillingly.
I am more concerned with how the original jury managed to acquit Macdonald and convict Evans. Presumably if she was too shedded to consent to one, she was too shedded to consent to both - the acts complained of within a short window of time of each other. There was no trace of alcohol in her system (although there were traces of cocaine and cannabis) at 11.30am and at 4.15 that morning it was suggested that her blood alcohol limit would have been 2.5x the legal drink drink limit.
There is also no need to be quite so sarcastic. I wish we could all charge people, rather than leave it in the hands of the police.
Divebuddy - I think you are right - it's a tricky one though. E says that she asked him to give her oral sex. Presumably at the first trial the jury thought he was lying since inviting someone to perform that most intimate act is the sort of introduction I have not come across before!
Barmaid - //Please stop this ridiculous posturing that she may have been overruled or may have been brought into this prosecution unwillingly. //
It is not ‘posturing’ of any kind.
If you re-read my post, I simply put it forward as a possibility, I did not present it as a fact, simply a supposition.
On the basis that you have read the case summary, I am happy to stand corrected on the areas in which I am in error.
It is not ‘posturing’ of any kind.
If you re-read my post, I simply put it forward as a possibility, I did not present it as a fact, simply a supposition.
On the basis that you have read the case summary, I am happy to stand corrected on the areas in which I am in error.
Zacs-Master - //Seconded. Another thread descends into the weird world of AH 'logic'.
Nothing has ‘descended’ into anything.
I have offered my views and opinions where they are my views and opinions, and facts where I believe the facts to be true.
As always on any post, I am happy to admit if I am in error, and I have done so in the post previous to this one.
Nothing has ‘descended’ into anything.
I have offered my views and opinions where they are my views and opinions, and facts where I believe the facts to be true.
As always on any post, I am happy to admit if I am in error, and I have done so in the post previous to this one.
Ched Evans family considering against ITV's Loose Women and Gloria Hunniford.
http://
http://
tonyav - //Ched Evans family considering against ITV's Loose Women and Gloria Hunniford. //
I am intrigued as to what action they plan to take, and why.
Ms. Hunniford prefaced her observations by stating that she was giving her personal opinion, so I fail to understand why the family think she has offered incorrect information.
As I understand it, what she has said is a true reflection of the events of the evening in question, and even if it were not, she has not offered her observation as facts, merely her interpretation of what she understands to have happened.
Aside from anything else, given that Mr Evans has been found not guilty of the charges against him, it does nothing for his personal profile to have his family start to play the victim on his behalf - far better would be for them to let him get on with his life, and let the public and media attention move on to something else.
I am intrigued as to what action they plan to take, and why.
Ms. Hunniford prefaced her observations by stating that she was giving her personal opinion, so I fail to understand why the family think she has offered incorrect information.
As I understand it, what she has said is a true reflection of the events of the evening in question, and even if it were not, she has not offered her observation as facts, merely her interpretation of what she understands to have happened.
Aside from anything else, given that Mr Evans has been found not guilty of the charges against him, it does nothing for his personal profile to have his family start to play the victim on his behalf - far better would be for them to let him get on with his life, and let the public and media attention move on to something else.
Naomi - //Blimey, andy-hughes! You’re supporting Gloria Hunniford! That has to be a first! //
It's less a case of supporting GH than a case of supporting free speech, and querying the wisdom of the Evans family pouring petrol on a fire that is hopefully dying down.
My abhorrence at Ms/ Hunniford's constant harping on about her tragic family loss does not mean that she is not as entitled to an opinion as anyone else.
It's less a case of supporting GH than a case of supporting free speech, and querying the wisdom of the Evans family pouring petrol on a fire that is hopefully dying down.
My abhorrence at Ms/ Hunniford's constant harping on about her tragic family loss does not mean that she is not as entitled to an opinion as anyone else.
Latest Posts
Jobs & Education17 mins ago
ChatterBank20 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles24 mins ago
Assisted Dying, Here's Where It...
News28 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles33 mins ago
