Quizzes & Puzzles10 mins 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.
Mr Hughes believes he an neverbe wrong.
However this shows women have the same moral responsibility as men.
You get popped up dont blame the bloke. I have woken up next to someone I would not have slipped a length to under sober circumstances and that is just life. If women want want equal rites the thy need to accept this is the way of the world.
For once comen sense seems to have prevailed.
However this shows women have the same moral responsibility as men.
You get popped up dont blame the bloke. I have woken up next to someone I would not have slipped a length to under sober circumstances and that is just life. If women want want equal rites the thy need to accept this is the way of the world.
For once comen sense seems to have prevailed.
interesting postscript article on the BBC website today, quoting former solicitor general Vera Baird, who was instrumental in the 1999 law change that sought to protect rape victims from scrutiny of their past sexual history:-
http://
ordinarily the evidence of the 2 others with Mr Evans could not have been heard, but the case was adjudged "exceptional" and the 1999 stipulation was overruled.
http://
ordinarily the evidence of the 2 others with Mr Evans could not have been heard, but the case was adjudged "exceptional" and the 1999 stipulation was overruled.
YMB - //Mr Hughes believes he an neverbe wrong. //
That's not true, but you are free to believe it if you wish - and be wrong.
// However this shows women have the same moral responsibility as men. //
Actually, this shows that if you can get legislation designed to protect women in rape cases overturned, you can provide enough doubt in a jury's mind to produce a not guilty verdict.
//You get popped up dont blame the bloke. I have woken up next to someone I would not have slipped a length to under sober circumstances and that is just life. //
Your life maybe.
Unedifying though your own sexual history is, it does not have any relevance to the subject under debate.
Ched Evans was accused of rape, and has been found not guilty on the basis of his victim’s previous sexual history, which was not permitted to be heard in his first trial.
Personally, I don’t care if she swings naked from a chandelier singing Lorelei in her previous encounters, that should not have any bearing on the case in question.
Mr Evans’s previous sexual experience was not considered an aspect in this case – even though the evidence confirms that he is willing to have sex with a girl he has never met, and never spoken to previously.
// If women want want equal rites the thy need to accept this is the way of the world. //
Leaving aside your presumption that women must pay a price for the same rights that men enjoy, what exactly is // … the way of the world//?
That a woman who may have chosen to have sex with one man, is free for the pleasure of another man without her consent, and that is allowed on the basis that she has a sexual history?
// For once comen sense seems to have prevailed. //
The law has prevailed, and as often occurs, when the law walks in through the door, common sense exits through the window.
That's not true, but you are free to believe it if you wish - and be wrong.
// However this shows women have the same moral responsibility as men. //
Actually, this shows that if you can get legislation designed to protect women in rape cases overturned, you can provide enough doubt in a jury's mind to produce a not guilty verdict.
//You get popped up dont blame the bloke. I have woken up next to someone I would not have slipped a length to under sober circumstances and that is just life. //
Your life maybe.
Unedifying though your own sexual history is, it does not have any relevance to the subject under debate.
Ched Evans was accused of rape, and has been found not guilty on the basis of his victim’s previous sexual history, which was not permitted to be heard in his first trial.
Personally, I don’t care if she swings naked from a chandelier singing Lorelei in her previous encounters, that should not have any bearing on the case in question.
Mr Evans’s previous sexual experience was not considered an aspect in this case – even though the evidence confirms that he is willing to have sex with a girl he has never met, and never spoken to previously.
// If women want want equal rites the thy need to accept this is the way of the world. //
Leaving aside your presumption that women must pay a price for the same rights that men enjoy, what exactly is // … the way of the world//?
That a woman who may have chosen to have sex with one man, is free for the pleasure of another man without her consent, and that is allowed on the basis that she has a sexual history?
// For once comen sense seems to have prevailed. //
The law has prevailed, and as often occurs, when the law walks in through the door, common sense exits through the window.
Caribeing - //Whilst I don't condone what happened he was never guilty //
According to due process followed in his first trial, Ched Evans was guilty.
//I have been following this story and the woman was there for the taking ... //
Do you ever read your posts back before you submit them?
Do you have any idea how callous, cynical, and downright wrong that statement is?
No woman is 'there for the taking' - that's a disgusting attitude to women in any situation.
// she was so drunk didn't know what was happening and with who //
Does that mean that because she was ‘there for the taking’, it’s OK for any passing man to have sex with her? I hope to high heaven that you don’t have a wife or children if this is your attitude. Should the girl have been in that situation, no, but that was stupid behaviour, and last time I checked, stupid behaviour did not render a woman ‘there for the taking’ as you so delicately put it.
//he should never have been accused of rape //
The jury of his initial trial, and the prosectuon service, based on evidence which we have not heard, think rather differently on that subject.
// good luck to him and his girlfriend in the future but it will be difficult for them to get over this as he did cheat on //
Suddenly, a moral aspect enters your post? Evans does not deserve ‘good luck’ – he has been found out behaving appallingly, and credit to him, he did have the grace to apologise for his behaviour outside the court.
Evans has been acquitted on the basis of evidence which should not have been brought before the court because it is not relevant in judging his behaviour - and let’s not forget the vital detail here – he was charged, not the woman he had sex with.
This has not been a good day for justice, or for the rights of women to decide who they will be intimate with.
According to due process followed in his first trial, Ched Evans was guilty.
//I have been following this story and the woman was there for the taking ... //
Do you ever read your posts back before you submit them?
Do you have any idea how callous, cynical, and downright wrong that statement is?
No woman is 'there for the taking' - that's a disgusting attitude to women in any situation.
// she was so drunk didn't know what was happening and with who //
Does that mean that because she was ‘there for the taking’, it’s OK for any passing man to have sex with her? I hope to high heaven that you don’t have a wife or children if this is your attitude. Should the girl have been in that situation, no, but that was stupid behaviour, and last time I checked, stupid behaviour did not render a woman ‘there for the taking’ as you so delicately put it.
//he should never have been accused of rape //
The jury of his initial trial, and the prosectuon service, based on evidence which we have not heard, think rather differently on that subject.
// good luck to him and his girlfriend in the future but it will be difficult for them to get over this as he did cheat on //
Suddenly, a moral aspect enters your post? Evans does not deserve ‘good luck’ – he has been found out behaving appallingly, and credit to him, he did have the grace to apologise for his behaviour outside the court.
Evans has been acquitted on the basis of evidence which should not have been brought before the court because it is not relevant in judging his behaviour - and let’s not forget the vital detail here – he was charged, not the woman he had sex with.
This has not been a good day for justice, or for the rights of women to decide who they will be intimate with.
Huge double standards from Nanny AB.
It appears it is acceptable for Andy Hughes to refer to an inncocent man falsely accused of rape as an odious rutting goat, and yet my post wherein I wanted to provide some balance by suggesting the woman who falsely accused him of rape was a slapper has been removed.
Absurd.
It appears it is acceptable for Andy Hughes to refer to an inncocent man falsely accused of rape as an odious rutting goat, and yet my post wherein I wanted to provide some balance by suggesting the woman who falsely accused him of rape was a slapper has been removed.
Absurd.
-- answer removed --
Second post has now been removed because i had the temerity to suggest that the woman who falsely accused Chad Evans
of rape was a slapper.
It appears the AB editors are quite happy for an innocent man to be referred to as an "odious rutting goat" by Andy Hughes, and for Murraymints to imply he was guilty, but it's not OK for me to suggest the villain of the piece is the false accuser.
Incedible.
of rape was a slapper.
It appears the AB editors are quite happy for an innocent man to be referred to as an "odious rutting goat" by Andy Hughes, and for Murraymints to imply he was guilty, but it's not OK for me to suggest the villain of the piece is the false accuser.
Incedible.
Nanny AB, what are you scared of?
Ched Evans has been exonerated. By dint of this he was falsely accused.
Please, grow a set and don't censor what is factually correct.
OK, let’s address what is factually correct.
Ched Evans has not been exonerated, he has been found not guilty after a second trial, which is not the same thing at all. Let’s not forget he was tried and convicted on evidence available at the time, that does not make him falsely accused.
Your assumption that another trial with evidence not available to the first jury means he was falsely accused is incorrect – since you are so keen on the facts, those are the facts.
Ched Evans has been exonerated. By dint of this he was falsely accused.
Please, grow a set and don't censor what is factually correct.
OK, let’s address what is factually correct.
Ched Evans has not been exonerated, he has been found not guilty after a second trial, which is not the same thing at all. Let’s not forget he was tried and convicted on evidence available at the time, that does not make him falsely accused.
Your assumption that another trial with evidence not available to the first jury means he was falsely accused is incorrect – since you are so keen on the facts, those are the facts.
Deskdiary - // Second post has now been removed because i had the temerity to suggest that the woman who falsely accused Chad Evans of rape was a slapper. //
I am not going to get into the editorial policy of the Answerbank, but I will raise a question – why are you so keen to defend this man?
Why do you feel it necessary to balance his behaviour with what you perceive to be bad behaviour by the woman involved in this situation?
I would certainly agree that her behaviour was unwise, in being so intoxicated that she does not remember the events of the evening, but the actual events are something known only to the people who were there, so she does not merit your abuse on no basis whatsoever – and again, why do you feel the need to abuse her in this way?
// It appears the AB editors are quite happy for an innocent man to be referred to as an "odious rutting goat" by Andy Hughes, and for Murraymints to imply he was guilty, but it's not OK for me to suggest the villain of the piece is the false accuser. //
Firstly I stand by my reference to Mr Evans’ behaviour, he was willing to admit that his behaviour was bad, and there is no way it could be described as any other – and that has been evidence in both his court cases.
And actually, no it is not OK for you to suggest that the villain of the piece is the false accuser, for one very good reason – the woman at the centre of this case did not accuse Mr Evans of rape. Since in your subsequent post you are keen on ‘the facts’ – then please ensure you are aware of them before you start slinging accusations around.
And finally – have you read Mr Evans first interview since is acquittal? I have, and in it he says that he did not wish for the internet abuse dished out to the woman in the case by complete strangers, and, quote “I do not condone it.” So again – why do you feel the need to pour vitriol on someone about whom you know nothing?
I applied my opinion based on the fact that Mr Evans was arrested accused, tried, convicted and sentenced on the basis of the way he behaved – and that happens by legal process, not internet opinion.
The woman in this case has not been accused or charged with anything – she is the person to whom the term ’innocent’ applies – maybe you will think about that before using your nasty language about her.
I am not going to get into the editorial policy of the Answerbank, but I will raise a question – why are you so keen to defend this man?
Why do you feel it necessary to balance his behaviour with what you perceive to be bad behaviour by the woman involved in this situation?
I would certainly agree that her behaviour was unwise, in being so intoxicated that she does not remember the events of the evening, but the actual events are something known only to the people who were there, so she does not merit your abuse on no basis whatsoever – and again, why do you feel the need to abuse her in this way?
// It appears the AB editors are quite happy for an innocent man to be referred to as an "odious rutting goat" by Andy Hughes, and for Murraymints to imply he was guilty, but it's not OK for me to suggest the villain of the piece is the false accuser. //
Firstly I stand by my reference to Mr Evans’ behaviour, he was willing to admit that his behaviour was bad, and there is no way it could be described as any other – and that has been evidence in both his court cases.
And actually, no it is not OK for you to suggest that the villain of the piece is the false accuser, for one very good reason – the woman at the centre of this case did not accuse Mr Evans of rape. Since in your subsequent post you are keen on ‘the facts’ – then please ensure you are aware of them before you start slinging accusations around.
And finally – have you read Mr Evans first interview since is acquittal? I have, and in it he says that he did not wish for the internet abuse dished out to the woman in the case by complete strangers, and, quote “I do not condone it.” So again – why do you feel the need to pour vitriol on someone about whom you know nothing?
I applied my opinion based on the fact that Mr Evans was arrested accused, tried, convicted and sentenced on the basis of the way he behaved – and that happens by legal process, not internet opinion.
The woman in this case has not been accused or charged with anything – she is the person to whom the term ’innocent’ applies – maybe you will think about that before using your nasty language about her.
Andy > I would certainly agree that her behaviour was unwise, in being so intoxicated that she does not remember the events of the evening...
Any person who is so intoxicated and is not in control of their actions is running the risk of coming to grief whether through a terrible hangover at one end of the scale through to serious sexual assault at the other.
However, as Andy himself has stated, the issue of consent is another altogether. The jury in the second trial were not able to find on the evidence heard that they could be satisfied that consent was not given by the victim. Whilst that determination can only be reached by the said evidence, there is still the possibility that the reality of the situation could have been different.
Who really knows what happened in that hotel room? The female's sexual history does not necessarily mean that she gave consent merely that it cast doubt on the allegation against Evans.
The amount of references to 'slapper' is just insulting. The same word was regularly applied to the young female in the Johnson case.
Why some footballers appear to be accorded phoney special status where morals are concerned beats me and yet the females who associate with them are treated with contempt with attitudes that they deserve all that they get by having too much to drink.
Any person who is so intoxicated and is not in control of their actions is running the risk of coming to grief whether through a terrible hangover at one end of the scale through to serious sexual assault at the other.
However, as Andy himself has stated, the issue of consent is another altogether. The jury in the second trial were not able to find on the evidence heard that they could be satisfied that consent was not given by the victim. Whilst that determination can only be reached by the said evidence, there is still the possibility that the reality of the situation could have been different.
Who really knows what happened in that hotel room? The female's sexual history does not necessarily mean that she gave consent merely that it cast doubt on the allegation against Evans.
The amount of references to 'slapper' is just insulting. The same word was regularly applied to the young female in the Johnson case.
Why some footballers appear to be accorded phoney special status where morals are concerned beats me and yet the females who associate with them are treated with contempt with attitudes that they deserve all that they get by having too much to drink.
Latest Posts
ChatterBank18 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles24 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles31 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles49 mins ago
