Jump to content

Ched Evans


Ched Evans Poll  

245 members have voted

  1. 1. Would you sign Ched Evans for OAFC

    • Yes
      58
    • No
      187


Recommended Posts

Ah right. I wasn't in court and didn't see the footage, I was going off the press coverage of the evidence and the hotel receptionist's testimony. http://www.theguardian.com/football/2012/apr/20/ched-evans-found-guilty-rape

 

Which says:

 

'CCTV footage showed her falling over in a kebab shop. A receptionist at the hotel described the woman as "extremely drunk" and said she was "stumbling" and "slurring".'

 

So I still think your right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 459
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

The hotel CCTV footage is actually on Evans' website and, as one would expect given what the site is seeking to achieve, shows the victim moving about unaided & with no issues. However, as I said earlier, the site sets out to make the same points that Evans' friends made ill-advised tweets about.

 

Even amongst the posts on this thread, people seem to doubt whether the verdict was just despite not being aware of the full array of evidence that the jury had. Of course, there are wrong convictions and miscarriages of justice but our system is based upon a jury listening to all the evidence and then deciding which they did and found him guilty. I find it odd on his website that his supporters make the point that he is referred to as 'the footballer Ched Evans' as if this was one of the reasons why the CPS and jury thought him guilty. This obviously overlooks the point that the jury acquitted another footballer charged with the same offence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The hotel CCTV footage is actually on Evans' website and, as one would expect given what the site is seeking to achieve, shows the victim moving about unaided & with no issues. However, as I said earlier, the site sets out to make the same points that Evans' friends made ill-advised tweets about.

 

Even amongst the posts on this thread, people seem to doubt whether the verdict was just despite not being aware of the full array of evidence that the jury had. Of course, there are wrong convictions and miscarriages of justice but our system is based upon a jury listening to all the evidence and then deciding which they did and found him guilty. I find it odd on his website that his supporters make the point that he is referred to as 'the footballer Ched Evans' as if this was one of the reasons why the CPS and jury thought him guilty. This obviously overlooks the point that the jury acquitted another footballer charged with the same offence.

 

Never rely on the media's reporting of a trial. Just like with Oscar Pistorius - all the public have is second hand (at best) information of snippets from a courtroom. These trials are lengthy and can turn on the slightest detail that may appear insignificant to the journalists in the courtroom but are of huge importance in terms of a verdict.

 

The result is people saying 'he's obviously guilty' or 'obviously innocent' on the back of a few paragraphs in the paper or a couple of minutes on the telly as opposed to days, weeks, months in a courtroom. Of course the justice system isn't perfect or infallible but it's a damn sight more likely to produce the right result than mob decision.

Edited by jsslatic
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The hotel CCTV footage is actually on Evans' website and, as one would expect given what the site is seeking to achieve, shows the victim moving about unaided & with no issues. However, as I said earlier, the site sets out to make the same points that Evans' friends made ill-advised tweets about.

 

Even amongst the posts on this thread, people seem to doubt whether the verdict was just despite not being aware of the full array of evidence that the jury had. Of course, there are wrong convictions and miscarriages of justice but our system is based upon a jury listening to all the evidence and then deciding which they did and found him guilty. I find it odd on his website that his supporters make the point that he is referred to as 'the footballer Ched Evans' as if this was one of the reasons why the CPS and jury thought him guilty. This obviously overlooks the point that the jury acquitted another footballer charged with the same offence.

 

This is the thing I don't get about the case. From reading the Ched Evans site (which obviously only presents the evidence in his favour, but can only present evidence given in court) no complaint of rape was made until the police had told the victim of the statements made by Evans and McDonald (unless I've misread it). According to them two, they both had consenting sex with her and told the police this when they were asked how she ended up waking up in a hotel room paid for by Evans. But the victim has no idea how she ended up at the hotel, and she was complaining to the police believing she had been spiked. So according to that website, she had no recollection of any rape or sexual intercourse. So what I don't understand is, according to the jury she could/did consent to McDonald but couldn't/didn't to Evans.

 

 

Anyway, no, I wouldn't want us to sign a convicted rapist. Just like I didn't want us to sign someone who crashed into someone whilst tanked up and did a runner leaving them for dead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

This is the thing I don't get about the case. From reading the Ched Evans site (which obviously only presents the evidence in his favour, but can only present evidence given in court) no complaint of rape was made until the police had told the victim of the statements made by Evans and McDonald (unless I've misread it). According to them two, they both had consenting sex with her and told the police this when they were asked how she ended up waking up in a hotel room paid for by Evans. But the victim has no idea how she ended up at the hotel, and she was complaining to the police believing she had been spiked. So according to that website, she had no recollection of any rape or sexual intercourse. So what I don't understand is, according to the jury she could/did consent to McDonald but couldn't/didn't to Evans.

 

 

 

 

Anyway, no, I wouldn't want us to sign a convicted rapist. Just like I didn't want us to sign someone who crashed into someone whilst tanked up and did a runner leaving them for dead.

Don't you think there is a difference between spending an evening with a girl, taking her back to a hotel room over a longer time period and just walking in and just getting on with it straight away so to speak? I've looked at the one sided Evans website and I'm not sure how the jury could give a guilty verdict for McDonald as how could they prove beyond reasonable doubt that consent wasn't given. With Evans though, he had a much bigger job of proving he had obtained consent in a very small window of opportunity. In my view, I'm not sure whether Evans could actually do that in that time period. On a basic level, he didn't protect himself even if she had been happy for him to join in.

Edited by jimsleftfoot
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't you think there is a difference between spending an evening with a girl, taking her back to a hotel room over a longer time period and just walking in and just getting on with it straight away so to speak? I've looked at the one sided Evans website and I'm not sure how the jury could give a guilty verdict for McDonald as how could they prove beyond reasonable doubt that consent wasn't given. With Evans though, he had a much bigger job of proving he had obtained consent in a very small window of opportunity. In my view, I'm not sure whether Evans could actually do that in that time period. On a basic level, he didn't protect himself even if she had been happy for him to join in.

 

 

Yes, I think there is a massive difference. But according to the one sided Evans website, McDonald didn't spend the evening with her. It sounds like they met not long at all before the rape took place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Yes, I think there is a massive difference. But according to the one sided Evans website, McDonald didn't spend the evening with her. It sounds like they met not long at all before the rape took place.

Surely that's the reasonable doubt that got Mcdonald acquited though? She was awake at the point between meeting him and having sex with him. The point at which a really pissed person can give meaningful consent is another question.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"We were very mindful of the fans' thoughts,"

 

Absolute bull:censored:.

 

My dad emailed the club to complain at the time. The response he received said. "we only looked at footballing reasons" the fsns voices or concerns were not given a 2nd thought. So that doesn't wash.

 

Its all water under the bridge, but it was the response and dismissive nature why my dad stopped his season ticket at the time (and didnt go to home games). He is now back, going to the vast majority of home games, but due to work - no season ticket. I too didnt get a season ticket for 2 years. I still went to games though.

 

This was the only period of Latics history I have been embarrassed to be a latics fan.

Edited by pukka
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"We were very mindful of the fans' thoughts,"

 

Absolute bull:censored:.

 

My dad emailed the club to complain at the time. The response he received said. "we only looked at footballing reasons" the fsns voices or concerns were not given a 2nd thought. So that doesn't wash.

 

Its all water under the bridge, but it was the response and dismissive nature why my dad stopped his season ticket at the time (and didnt go to home games). He is now back, going to the vast majority of home games, but due to work - no season ticket. I too didnt get a season ticket for 2 years. I still went to games though.

 

This was the only period of Latics history I have been embarrassed to be a latics fan.

Fair play. A view Im sure is shared by many.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But many fans did agree with the decision...

It wasn't a vote - it was listening to opinions . No matter what anyone's views are of Barry and the rest of the Board , if there had been massive or overwhelming evidence that Hughes' signing was going to lead to significant supporter decrease or resentment then they wouldn't have made that decision.

Yes, some people were and are vehemently against it. I can understand and respect that. But hundreds of fans chanted his name, thousands exulted when he scored....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But many fans did agree with the decision...

It wasn't a vote - it was listening to opinions . No matter what anyone's views are of Barry and the rest of the Board , if there had been massive or overwhelming evidence that Hughes' signing was going to lead to significant supporter decrease or resentment then they wouldn't have made that decision.

Yes, some people were and are vehemently against it. I can understand and respect that. But hundreds of fans chanted his name, thousands exulted when he scored....

I disagree with the start of your point. Whos opinions were gathered exactly? Fans? I wasnt asked. Were you?

 

As far as I could tell, it was more a case of - we signed him - Its tough.. then most people supported him and chanted his name.

 

And it was the dismissive nature and the line "we have looked at footballing reasons only" which rankled most from that email. There wasnt a discussion or opinions. He could help the team, :censored: your morals attitude.

Edited by pukka
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm with Pukka, my views at the time and to this day mirror his posts in this.

 

I was fuming when we signed him. I hated the fact it was my club who were the ones to sign him up. I thought the adverse media attention it brought to our club affected us then; and its aftermath is IMO still felt today.

 

I was sat in the stand away at Burnley when a decent number of our crowd gave him a standing ovation and chanted his name as he walked across the pitch jn his club tracksuit, a day or so after his release and i was appalled - i actually got into a very heated arguement with a group of our fans over it.

 

It never sat right when he played and scored; i was happy we'd scored sure i was, but it was always mared by the fact that it was him who had scored it. And dont get me started on those who mirrored back at him his :censored:e dance routine after scoring....

 

It hugely affected the club signing Lee Hughes; whether Barry admits it or not, it did. I'd argue it continues to affect us to this day.

 

Signing Ched Evans would be a repeat all over again, but you could argue, with what he's done; even worse. even forgetting about the moral and ethical side of things, it would affect us even more at this stage with all the commercial deals being formed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Not me I can say with a clear mind that I never celebrated one of his goals the only acknowledgement he has ever received from me was when he missed the penalty against us, the bloke like Ched Evans is a Grade A :censored: and will always be in my eyes.

Edited by athleticosOA95
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Barry's had more to say about a rapist's hypothetical signing for a League One rival than a dozen key issues for Latics fans in the last 12 months.

 

I passionately oppose the way he's treated on here - the personal level comments are not acceptable - but that doesn't mean the above is anything short of a complete farce and totally undermines his 'voice of the fans' role.

 

Barry - where are you?

  • What's the stand latest?
  • How do you feel about the BBC saying we're the 4th most expensive club in the League?
  • What're thoughts on the good start?
  • What're we looking to do in the next 10 games if things go well, will we invest a little more? It's all well and good gambling on promotion with 10 games left... but the key is to carry momentum through the entire year!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pukka

You have sincere and strong views about this ...

I'm sure you made them known once the idea of signing Hughes was made public and so didn't have to be formally asked . Your dad did just this.

And I appreciate that you weren't happy with the reply he got - but the fans didn't revolt in great numbers and , as I said, it would seem that there were significant numbers that liked the contribution that Hughes made.

 

Now, with Ched Evans there is a 145,000 name petition that's against him being resigned by Sheff Utd. That's significant ....and , again, there's been no formal consultation by the club.

 

It's good your dad is back at matches

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not me I can say with a clear mind that I never celebrated one of his goals the only acknowledgement he has ever received from me was when he missed the penalty against us, the bloke like Ched Evans is a Grade A :censored: and will always be in my eyes.

 

Absolute bollocks!!!

 

Your telling me you didnt celebrate any of his hat trick at Millwall or any other crucial goals he scored

 

Everyone deserves a 2nd chance in life regardless of what they have done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had no problem when we signed Hughes, he served his time and said all the right things about doing voluntary work in the community about drink driving etc, however once he'd been here a while his attitude just didn't sit right, instead of keeping a low profile and just getting on with rebuilding his life and career he was out getting drunk regularly and goading the opposition and his silly little dance when he scored just didn't seem right

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...