Ched Evans saga part ???
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In | RSS Feed
 Mapletree  Croydon 08 Jan 15 9.24pm |
  |
|---|---|
|
Quote Stirlingsays at 08 Jan 2015 7.54pm
Quote Ray in Houston at 08 Jan 2015 4.52pm
Quote Kingvagabond at 08 Jan 2015 3.05pm
And this is why I have an issue with it. Theres so much misinformation going around its ridiculous. The complainant met Donaldson on his way back to the hotel. They were both in the Pizza place but not together. They didn't drink together. She bumped into him on his way to get a cab. He said 'Where are you going' she said 'where are you going' he said 'To my hotel' she said 'I'm coming with you'. She'd had 2 glasses of wine, 4 double vodka lemonades and a shot of Sambucca. I have had this amount several times and gone home with girls about the same level of drunkenness as me. Have I raped them? Have they raped me? Have we raped each other? Safest thing in future is to carry a pocket breathalyzer and a stack of consent forms. Cos then I won't look like a rapist
Evans sneaked into the room unannounced and, in his case, the court found that she was incapable of giving consent. Hence his guilty verdict. Edited by Ray in Houston (08 Jan 2015 4.54pm) But that is stupid. You can't give consent if you're not conscious. ....This is meant to have been the girl's position. Whether or not an implication was given beforehand if you put your trouser snake into an unconscious girl then that is rape because she has no means to object. If your position is that this girl was incapable of giving consent in the bedroom then both of them are guilty of rape.....I view the judge's position as insensible. Personally I'm of the view that these two t***s have been had.
|
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
  |
| lancseagle burnley 08 Jan 15 9.46pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Donaldson was first in which I think was mutually agreeable what happened after wasn't hence CPS charging 1 there's a main course & then a unwanted dessert
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Ray in Houston  Houston 08 Jan 15 9.59pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote Stirlingsays at 08 Jan 2015 7.54pm
But that is stupid. You can't give consent if you're not conscious. ....This is meant to have been the girl's position. Whether or not an implication was given beforehand if you put your trouser snake into an unconscious girl then that is rape because she has no means to object. If your position is that this girl was incapable of giving consent in the bedroom then both of them are guilty of rape.....I view the judge's position as insensible. Personally I'm of the view that these two t***s have been had.
There is clearly a distinct difference between the two sets of circumstances.
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 |
|
| lancseagle burnley 08 Jan 15 10.05pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote Ray in Houston at 08 Jan 2015 9.59pm
Quote Stirlingsays at 08 Jan 2015 7.54pm
But that is stupid. You can't give consent if you're not conscious. ....This is meant to have been the girl's position. Whether or not an implication was given beforehand if you put your trouser snake into an unconscious girl then that is rape because she has no means to object. If your position is that this girl was incapable of giving consent in the bedroom then both of them are guilty of rape.....I view the judge's position as insensible. Personally I'm of the view that these two t***s have been had.
There is clearly a distinct difference between the two sets of circumstances. Correct its called invitation & gatecrashing.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| movingforward 09 Jan 15 12.43am |
|
|---|---|
|
Why everyone seems to think he is actually guilty?
“I fear the day when the technology overlaps with our humanity. The world will only have a generation of idiots.” ~ |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
The Sash  Now residing in Epsom - How Posh 09 Jan 15 8.59am |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote OknotOK at 08 Jan 2015 4.26pm
Concerned at the mindset/mentality of people who think the best reponse to this was to threaten the board member's daughter with rape to prevent a rapist being allowed at the football club. Ched Evans is a tw@t, but it would appear so are some of the people campaigning against him. Indeed
As far as the rules go, it's a website not a democracy - Hambo 3/6/2014 |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Sg Bilko  Deurne Holland 09 Jan 15 10.42am |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote Stirlingsays at 08 Jan 2015 7.54pm
Quote Ray in Houston at 08 Jan 2015 4.52pm
Quote Kingvagabond at 08 Jan 2015 3.05pm
And this is why I have an issue with it. Theres so much misinformation going around its ridiculous. The complainant met Donaldson on his way back to the hotel. They were both in the Pizza place but not together. They didn't drink together. She bumped into him on his way to get a cab. He said 'Where are you going' she said 'where are you going' he said 'To my hotel' she said 'I'm coming with you'. She'd had 2 glasses of wine, 4 double vodka lemonades and a shot of Sambucca. I have had this amount several times and gone home with girls about the same level of drunkenness as me. Have I raped them? Have they raped me? Have we raped each other? Safest thing in future is to carry a pocket breathalyzer and a stack of consent forms. Cos then I won't look like a rapist
Evans sneaked into the room unannounced and, in his case, the court found that she was incapable of giving consent. Hence his guilty verdict. Edited by Ray in Houston (08 Jan 2015 4.54pm) But that is stupid. You can't give consent if you're not conscious. ....This is meant to have been the girl's position. Whether or not an implication was given beforehand if you put your trouser snake into an unconscious girl then that is rape because she has no means to object. If your position is that this girl was incapable of giving consent in the bedroom then both of them are guilty of rape.....I view the judge's position as insensible. Personally I'm of the view that these two t***s have been had. Edited by Stirlingsays (08 Jan 2015 7.55pm) That's my view, if this girl was so incapable of giving consent for one, then the same applies for both, and if she was capable to consent for one then she was capable to consent to both. If she was so incapacitated by the alcohol she consumed how does she know either or both or which one she had sex with, if she knew she's been raped she should have filed her complaint immediately, and not leave it several days before complaining.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Superfly The sun always shines in Catford 09 Jan 15 11.01am |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote Sg Bilko at 09 Jan 2015 10.42am
Consent probably wasn't given but is reasonably presumed as she got into his cab and went back to his hotel. If she was so incapacitated by the alcohol she consumed how does she know either or both or which one she had sex with She doesn't
Edited by Superfly (09 Jan 2015 11.01am)
Lend me a Tenor 31 May to 3 June 2017 John McIntosh Arts Centre with Superfly in the chorus |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| topcat Holmesdale / Surbiton 09 Jan 15 11.16am |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote movingforward at 09 Jan 2015 12.43am
Why everyone seems to think he is actually guilty?
It's 106 miles to Chicago, we got a full tank of gas, half a pack of cigarettes, it's dark... and we're wearing sunglasses. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 09 Jan 15 11.44am |
 |
|---|---|
|
Quote Mapletree at 08 Jan 2015 9.24pm
No, your point is stupid. If you are correct they were both guilty and not innocent. So how can they both of been 'had'? It's just Donaldson just about got away with it. If she wasn't raped but intended both to be convicted for her financial gain then she had tricked both....Hence, 'had'. I'm pointing out the absurdity of the judgement. The idea that you can imply consent from minutes before intercourse takes place when you aren't there. This girl says she wasn't aware what was going on.....How can that be consent? I'm pointing out the illogical and arrogant nature of the assumption. It's stupid. Consent can't be counted upon unless you are actually there.....It's a guess. No one can state that a girl reasonably agrees to sexual intercourse unless they are the girl themself or they are watching it. This girl said neither had consent.....The court delivered the most illogical judgement possible......They convicted one and freed another based purely on assumption. What is far more likely to me is that she was either genuinely raped or she has lied for gain. I cannot know which is actually true but I suspect from what I gather that this isn't a safe conviction. Those who claim with confidence to know that this girl was definitely raped are in my view way over confident in their assumptions. Edited by Stirlingsays (09 Jan 2015 11.49am)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 09 Jan 15 11.53am |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote movingforward at 09 Jan 2015 12.43am
Why everyone seems to think he is actually guilty?
Still, for some people I think it's because they are over confident in their assumptions...Like I think the judge was....Some others are lazy and just go with whatever everyone else says.....The 'boo, hiss' crowd. Maybe for some others they are willing to go with the judgement because....well even if they are both innocent the whole situation was pretty naff and these guys were in the end banging a drunk girl. But that's not the same as being sure that a rape took place. Edited by Stirlingsays (09 Jan 2015 11.58am)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Hoof Hearted 09 Jan 15 12.07pm | |
|---|---|
|
Quote Stirlingsays at 09 Jan 2015 11.44am
Quote Mapletree at 08 Jan 2015 9.24pm
No, your point is stupid. If you are correct they were both guilty and not innocent. So how can they both of been 'had'? It's just Donaldson just about got away with it. If she wasn't raped but intended both to be convicted for her financial gain then she had tricked both....Hence, 'had'. I'm pointing out the absurdity of the judgement. The idea that you can imply consent from minutes before intercourse takes place when you aren't there. This girl says she wasn't aware what was going on.....How can that be consent? I'm pointing out the illogical and arrogant nature of the assumption. It's stupid. Consent can't be counted upon unless you are actually there.....It's a guess. No one can state that a girl reasonably agrees to sexual intercourse unless they are the girl themself or they are watching it. This girl said neither had consent.....The court delivered the most illogical judgement possible......They convicted one and freed another based purely on assumption. What is far more likely to me is that she was either genuinely raped or she has lied for gain. I cannot know which is actually true but I suspect from what I gather that this isn't a safe conviction. Those who claim with confidence to know that this girl was definitely raped are in my view way over confident in their assumptions. Edited by Stirlingsays (09 Jan 2015 11.49am)
At the point I set off in my car p1ssed as a parrot I had no idea if I was doing the right thing and was totally oblivious to the dangers to myself or others because I was so drunk. The magistrate I had quite reasonably and fairly decided to disqualify me from driving and give me a hefty fine.... and a lengthy lecture on my future responsibilities and the absurdity of my actions and the effect it could have on others. I suggest that this girl brought all of this on herself and the fact that she was drunk was no excuse. She cannot remember what she did and it can be argued that she led both men on. Most definitely an unsafe conviction.
|
|
| 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.