Ched Evans saga part ???
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In | RSS Feed
 We are goin up!  Coulsdon 09 May 16 2.19pm |
  |
|---|---|
|
This post has been merged from a topic called 'Ched Evans' by jamiemartin721 Didn't she say she couldn't remember anything and yet had 3 units of alcohol? Thought it sounded very very dodgy at the time, still think the same.
The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money. |
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
  |
| fed up eagle Between Horley, Surrey and Preston... 09 May 16 2.25pm |
|
|---|---|
|
This post has been merged from a topic called 'Ched Evans' by jamiemartin721 Originally posted by dannyh
can't remember if this was talked about at the time (few weeks ago) however I was highly criticised for suggesting the girl involved was a gold digging slag who new exactly what she was doing. It would seem I may have been right. I wouldn't slag you off for that as I had the same thoughts myself, what with the recent story about the girl at the May ball who had a three way and then accused the blokes of rape despite having a history of doing that kind of thing.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stuk Top half 09 May 16 2.26pm |
|
|---|---|
|
This post has been merged from a topic called 'Ched Evans' by jamiemartin721 topic is here:
Optimistic as ever |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| jamiemartin721 Reading 09 May 16 3.01pm |
|
|---|---|
|
This post has been merged from a topic called 'Ched Evans' by jamiemartin721 Originally posted by We are goin up!
Didn't she say she couldn't remember anything and yet had 3 units of alcohol? Thought it sounded very very dodgy at the time, still think the same. The grounds on which the appeal has been accepted haven't yet been published, and won't be pending the retrial. Its unlikely to be any evidence that was presented at the original trial or in the failed appeal previously. So I'd imagine its new witnesses, and likely about the time line or reliability of a witnesses that was key to the prosecution. Nor does it automatically equate to her being guilty of lying. It may only point towards the reliability of 'reasonable doubt' verdict by its omission.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| jamiemartin721 Reading 09 May 16 3.04pm |
|
|---|---|
|
This post has been merged from a topic called 'Ched Evans' by jamiemartin721 Originally posted by fed up eagle
I wouldn't slag you off for that as I had the same thoughts myself, what with the recent story about the girl at the May ball who had a three way and then accused the blokes of rape despite having a history of doing that kind of thing.
Which three ways? or accusing people of rape after sex. Only one of those is a viable defence in a rape case.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| dannyh wherever I lay my hat....... 09 May 16 3.25pm |
|
|---|---|
|
This post has been merged from a topic called 'Ched Evans' by jamiemartin721 Call me old fashioned, but I thought rape was forcing yourself onto a women by foul means against her will. Not her waking up in the morning, realising she's been a right slag, saying I was too pissed to remember consenting, and then then ruining a guys life for some fast cash whilst in the process of updating your facebook page with all the money your going to get. He was hung out to dry by the bint at the CPS who has a track record of this type of thing, I have no doubt (if you read his website) that any new evidence will be effective in reversing the original decision, and I hope all the clubs that sacked him have to pay out compensation. The tart in question should have to pay all the money back and be named and shamed, not to mention jailed for perjury and lying like a 10 dollar crack whore. Thing is every time one of these tarts does this it just makes the already horrendous crime of rape that much more difficult to convict on, and until the wolf criers are punished it will still be an easy way for unscrupulous tarts to ruin lives for money.
"It's not the bullet that's got my name on it that concerns me; it's all them other ones flyin' around marked 'To Whom It May Concern.'" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| jamiemartin721 Reading 09 May 16 3.46pm |
|
|---|---|
|
This post has been merged from a topic called 'Ched Evans' by jamiemartin721 Originally posted by dannyh
Call me old fashioned, but I thought rape was forcing yourself onto a women by foul means against her will. I'll call you old fashioned. Originally posted by dannyh
Not her waking up in the morning, realising she's been a right slag, saying I was too pissed to remember consenting, and then then ruining a guys life for some fast cash whilst in the process of updating your facebook page with all the money your going to get. Actually, consent in law places responsibility on both parties. As such, its not the actions of a reasonable man, who is sober, to accept consent from someone who is really pissed up. Its reasonable to say no, rather than think 'technical consent' for the win. Especially when, as the prosecution demonstrated, you turned up at the hotel, and took advantage of the situation in an manner that it wasn't reasonable to assume consent. Originally posted by dannyh
He was hung out to dry by the bint at the CPS who has a track record of this type of thing, I have no doubt (if you read his website) that any new evidence will be effective in reversing the original decision, and I hope all the clubs that sacked him have to pay out compensation. The job of the CPS in an accusatory system is to put the prosecutions case, their best case. Same goes with the defence. Now the prosecution has a responsibility to make sure that it doesn't withhold evidence of someone's innocence. But it doesn't have a responsibility to expose weaknesses in its case, that's the job of the defence. I'm happy that the judge has decided that new evidence requires a mistrial. But his website also proclaimed his innocence when he was found guilty. Oddly the family and friends of people do tend to be rather biased. Its down to a jury of peers, on reviewing the evidence of the prosecution and defence, to decide, beyond reasonable doubt, whether someone is guilty. Presently, Evans, is not guilty, pending retrial. But that doesn't automatically make the alternative true. Now if it turns out she has committed perjury etc. then certainly, she deserves to face charges and libel - but its important to remember that a 'not guilty' also means reasonable doubt. One of the most common reasons why people accused of rape, don't sue, is because the lower balance of probability in civil court, leads to determining in the respondents (defences) favour.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| dannyh wherever I lay my hat....... 09 May 16 3.56pm |
|
|---|---|
|
This post has been merged from a topic called 'Ched Evans' by jamiemartin721 Originally posted by jamiemartin721
The job of the CPS in an accusatory system is to put the prosecutions case, their best case. Same goes with the defence. Now the prosecution has a responsibility to make sure that it doesn't withhold evidence of someone's innocence. But it doesn't have a responsibility to expose weaknesses in its case, that's the job of the defence. I'm happy that the judge has decided that new evidence requires a mistrial. But his website also proclaimed his innocence when he was found guilty. Oddly the family and friends of people do tend to be rather biased. Its down to a jury of peers, on reviewing the evidence of the prosecution and defence, to decide, beyond reasonable doubt, whether someone is guilty. Presently, Evans, is not guilty, pending retrial. But that doesn't automatically make the alternative true. Now if it turns out she has committed perjury etc. then certainly, she deserves to face charges and libel - but its important to remember that a 'not guilty' also means reasonable doubt. One of the most common reasons why people accused of rape, don't sue, is because the lower balance of probability in civil court, leads to determining in the respondents (defences) favour. She was able to walk straight, and squatted low down to pick up her purse without falling over, a known coke user who had been on the devils dandruft that very night. not a chance she didnt know what she was doing. Gold digger, said it from day one.
"It's not the bullet that's got my name on it that concerns me; it's all them other ones flyin' around marked 'To Whom It May Concern.'" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| jamiemartin721 Reading 09 May 16 4.13pm |
|
|---|---|
|
This post has been merged from a topic called 'Ched Evans' by jamiemartin721 Originally posted by dannyh
She was able to walk straight, and squatted low down to pick up her purse without falling over, a known coke user who had been on the devils dandruft that very night. not a chance she didnt know what she was doing. Gold digger, said it from day one. Possibly. Although its interesting that the defence couldn't make that case. As someone who's been known to dabble in el diablos scalpings, I'd say that it can give you the illusion of being sober (when in fact your still drunk, you're just high and drunk). People also make very bad decisions when coked up (and the same law applies, regarding informed consent when intoxicated to drugs). Of course this could be used as a reasonable doubt defence by Evans, because the use of cocaine, if he didn't know she was taking it, could make her appear to be sober. For me, the issue really revolves around Evans actions prior to sex and whether or not the girl was intoxicated. McDonald, I believe is innocent still, his actions seem reasonable - he travelled back with the girl - Evans, by the prosecutions case, lacks that reasonableness. The case really hinges on intoxication and how Evans came to the hotel, rather than sex. If he can show its reasonable to doubt her account or the events, or show that it was reasonable for him to turn up at the hotel, then he could well win the case. Or if he can show, that after the event, she admitted lying about the events in question, he could establish reasonable doubt. His problem is a) evidence of intoxication b) it was not reasonable for him to assume consent by the prosecutions case c) he admitted to having sex with her. Even if she was coked up, it still is questionable in the time frame that his actions were reasonable. I think its an interesting case, largely because there is no evidence that sex actually occurred, other than his own admission (which is an important lesson to people when interviewed by the police, never admit to anything that could be used against you always make them prove the events). Edited by jamiemartin721 (09 May 2016 4.17pm)
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| jamiemartin721 Reading 09 May 16 4.25pm |
|
|---|---|
|
This post has been merged from a topic called 'Ched Evans' by jamiemartin721 That said, I did buy into the prosecutions case which was quite elegantly constructed to avoid becoming about he said / she said. Now I'm not so sure, given the appeal being granted. It'll be interesting to see what happens if he is found not guilty on retrial, given his career is already 'down the swanny'.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Ray in Houston  Houston 09 May 16 5.59pm |
|
|---|---|
|
This post has been merged from a topic called 'Ched Evans' by jamiemartin721 Originally posted by jamiemartin721
For me, the issue really revolves around Evans actions prior to sex and whether or not the girl was intoxicated.
Maybe he needs to move to Oklahoma.
We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
 Cucking Funt Clapham on the Back 09 May 16 6.28pm |
|
|---|---|
|
This post has been merged from a topic called 'Ched Evans' by jamiemartin721 Originally posted by Ray in Houston
Maybe he needs to move to Oklahoma. Flight booked.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / Register
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2023 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.