Fairbairn Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 Not sure Steve Bruce will making himself overly popular.... http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/30742947 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASTA Mick Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 It should have been a longer sentence in the first place. The sentences for rape are absurd. Not as absurd as the punishments for woman that make up allegations. Not sure Steve Bruce will making himself overly popular.... http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/30742947 He makes a good point. The conviction was a joke. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adamntg Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 He makes a good point. The conviction was a joke. I disagree. His mate pulled a woman who was totally blootered and invited Ched round to watch him have sex with her. Then Ched dives in for sloppy seconds with the woman almost unconscious. Sounds like rape to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pool Q Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 Is Steve Bruce better informed of the circumstances of the case and the evidence against Evans than the jury were when they found him guilty? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParisInAKilt Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 I disagree. His mate pulled a woman who was totally blootered and invited Ched round to watch him have sex with her. Then Ched dives in for sloppy seconds with the woman almost unconscious. Sounds like rape to me. Agreed. If that's what happened in the hotel room then I would consider it rape as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParisInAKilt Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 Not as absurd as the punishments for woman that make up allegations. Two wrongs, but strange to claim one is more absurd than the other. 2.5 years for rape compared with other crimes and sentences is ridiculous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scouse Eddie Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 Why mention Hillsborough? Absolutely no relevance to the ched Evans case Tam glad you posted instead of me, i would get 10 pages of being a paranoid mopish attention seeking scouse c..t. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParisInAKilt Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 The Hillsborough comparison was very odd. Not offensive per say but a very strange comment to make. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biffer Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 His sentence is 5 years, it is for his Offender managers/MAPPA, etc. to decide how much of that time is spent in prison & how much outside (his release is on licence & he can be recalled at any time without a reason having to be given). Remorse is a factor but there are lots of others as well. Risk is really the big one. I would have thought that someone who doesn't think he did anything wrong would be considered at risk of doing the same thing, or something similar, again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Return of Yermaw Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 Why mention Hillsborough? Absolutely no relevance to the ched Evans case Because Taylor was seeking a comparison presumably that football fans may understand: "He wouldn't have been the first person to be found guilty, maintained their innocence and been proved right. We know what happened with Hillsborough," Taylor told BBC Sport. Rather tenuous if you ask me, but there is an element of association there........He would have been better of comparing (in his mind) to a footballer who has been red carded, appeals and has the red card rescinded - not that I am suggesting for a moment that Evans did not deserve to be found guilty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flora MaDonald Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 Is Taylor the same idiot who banned us from Wembley? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huddersfield Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 I would have thought that someone who doesn't think he did anything wrong would be considered at risk of doing the same thing, or something similar, again. I wouldn't necessarily disagree to be honest, but I've sat in MAPPA meetings looking at early release & I know that's never how it pans out. The thing is that you know they will come out sooner or later so the presumption tends to be let them out whilst still on licence so you have greater powers to observe their behaviour & recall if you spot concerns. It's not an exact science but to be fair works more often than not. If he did re-offend in a similar way there'd be what's known as a SFO (Serious Further Offence) Review & the learning from those down the years helps get most decisions right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
macy37 Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 Because Taylor was seeking a comparison presumably that football fans may understand: "He wouldn't have been the first person to be found guilty, maintained their innocence and been proved right. We know what happened with Hillsborough," Taylor told BBC Sport. Rather tenuous if you ask me, but there is an element of association there........He would have been better of comparing (in his mind) to a footballer who has been red carded, appeals and has the red card rescinded - not that I am suggesting for a moment that Evans did not deserve to be found guilty. I don't hear or read what he said as a comparison but there you go. I also can't see what he has said wrong........it is only wrong if you are looking for it to be. Mopes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 SSN Reporting the move to Oldham might be back on... "Ched Evans to get Oldham Fc drunk and sign for them anyway" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveyDenoon Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 Because Taylor was seeking a comparison presumably that football fans may understand: "He wouldn't have been the first person to be found guilty, maintained their innocence and been proved right. We know what happened with Hillsborough," Taylor told BBC Sport. Rather tenuous if you ask me, but there is an element of association there........He would have been better of comparing (in his mind) to a footballer who has been red carded, appeals and has the red card rescinded - not that I am suggesting for a moment that Evans did not deserve to be found guilty. That was pretty much my take on his comments too. He has a point, to be fair, but made it very clumsily and could have picked a fat better and more sensible comparison. It's understandable, even if they're bring somewhat over sensitive, that his comments have upset Liverpool fans. He probably felt he was actually being supportive of them but as I said was very clumsy and got it horribly wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveyDenoon Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 SSN Reporting the move to Oldham might be back on... "Ched Evans to get Oldham Fc drunk and sign for them anyway" Ouch that's bad Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YORKIE PAM Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 Is Steve Bruce better informed of the circumstances of the case and the evidence against Evans than the jury were when they found him guilty? This Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASTA Mick Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 I'd be willing to bet that Ched Evans clears his name. Juries have been wrong in the past. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
irnbruman Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 Having read the synopsis of the court case , there seems to be a sizeable element of doubt for me. Obviously I wasn't present or part of the jury. Rape is a horrendous crime but this is a bit of a grey area. She is pissed - no-one knows how much - next day she cant remember anything about it so was it consensual or non-consensual - seems like they were all pissed. I hate the idea of blokes forcing themselves on women but doesn't seem to be the case here. The prosecution case is that she was extremely drunk and couldn't give consent - must be a lot of blokes who could potentially be up for rape charges when they go abroad and end up sleeping with a girl who is pissed. Controversial but too much element of doubt for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auchinyell Sox Change Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 I disagree. His mate pulled a woman who was totally blootered and invited Ched round to watch him have sex with her. Then Ched dives in for sloppy seconds with the woman almost unconscious. Sounds like rape to me. why did the mate get off with it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adamntg Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 why did the mate get off with it I wasn't on the jury but I would guess that the fact that they'd at least met before he had sex with her introduced an element of doubt. You could argue she might have consented to the first guy but not some other guy just turning up and having a go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hertsscot Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 A summary of the case can be found here: https://www.crimeline.info/case/r-v-ched-evans-chedwyn-evans A more detailed account can be found here: https://www.crimeline.info/uploads/cases/2012ewcacrim2559.pdf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASTA Mick Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 I wasn't on the jury but I would guess that the fact that they'd at least met before he had sex with her introduced an element of doubt. You could argue she might have consented to the first guy but not some other guy just turning up and having a go. She accused both men of rape. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pool Q Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 Having read through the accounts given in Hertscot's post above I can't see any reason why Evans continues to plead his innocence. The police, CPS, jury and judge all believed him to be guilty of rape, and a subsequent review of the trial found no grounds for appeal. They, unlike anyone on here (or Steve Bruce), all had the benefit of hearing all of the evidence (not a summary of it) and of hearing and seeing the evidence given in court by the victim, defendants and witnesses, and on that basis believed the victim and not Evans. Miscarriages of justice do happen, and clearly juries can get it wrong, but I can't see what point of law or new evidence Evans (and his defenders) believe will justify the jury's decision being overturned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dandydunn Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 Boy from The Housemartins isn't happy. MNYN Did he miss Happy Hour?? I disagree. His mate pulled a woman who was totally blootered and invited Ched round to watch him have sex with her. Then Ched dives in for sloppy seconds with the woman almost unconscious. Sounds like rape to me. I haven't read much of this,but if the cctv video doing the rounds is of her "blootered" when she got out of the taxi,walked in the shoes that she borrowed and didn't wasn't really used to,then walked and bent down to pick up a pizza,then she done a damned good job of appearing sober at the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.