Ched Evans

Status
Not open for further replies.
andymcnish said:
Hmm-- I am a practising solicitor.

The bottom line is that quite a lot of 'drunken sex' can technically tick the 'too pissed to consent' box - after all rape law evolved before it was common for 19 year old girls to go out on the lash, get rat-arsed and take a random bloke to bed as part of a night's entertainment.

That said juries are made of 12 people who do live in the real world, and they aren't going to convict a bloke for a sex crime because he was a little less drunk and should have realised his partner was more out of it than him.

So to get done you need to act in a really seedy predatory way - just like Evans did here. And in the real world I'd guess that's why McDonald got off - the jury felt labelling him a rapist would have been too harsh on him - but they had no such sympathy for Evans. And it's not some sort of racist anti-Welsh decision either - this is a home town jury and he's a local boy made good.

The clinchers for me are the night porter's direct and independent evidence that the girl on entering the hotel was 'extremely drunk' (and believe me - he will know what that looks like) and McDonald (as he exits and Evans finishes off and scuttles out of the fire exit) telling the night porter to make sure he looks after the girl as 'she is sick'. 'Sick' is a really odd phrase to use there. 'Pissed' would be fine, 'a bit worse for wear' etc. but 'sick'? You'd use that word for:

(a) someone has been physically sick
(b) for someone you have had to leave unconscious in the recovery position as they are literally out of it thru drink
(b) really poorly (fever etc.) or drugged up...

Not for a girl who the Defence are trying to portray as virtually sober and 'well up' for a bout of 4am sex...

As regards refusal of his appeal - what happens if you get convicted at Crown Court is that you put in an application to appeal to the listing judge for the Criminal Court of Appeal, stating your grounds - for example a perverse finding of fact by the jury or a misdirection by a judge .
The judge reviews the case and let's you appeal if he thinks you have a realistic prospect of success (i.e aren't wasting the appeal court's time). If he rejects your appeal (as he did here) you can appeal to a panel of three judges who consider again whether the appeal court should take the case. All three of them also refused to hear his appeal. That is the end of the immediate appeal process.

It's also worth noting that if the trial judge thinks the evidence is such the jury can't safely convict he will acquit without leaving the matter to the jury - so that is now a total of 5 expert criminal law judges who were happy to leave the matter to the jury/see no reason to upset its findings.

The only other ground or way to lodge an appeal is to the criminal cases review tribunal in the event of new evidence coming to light that casts a serious doubt on the safety of the conviction. That is the route that Evans' defence team are trying now - though what cogent new evidence they have I don't know. If it's just another whine that in effect the original jury got it wrong the new 'appeal' will be fast-tracked and kicked out in short shrift. Obviously if they do have genuinely new and admissible (so 'but she's a right slag' won't wash) evidence that would have changed the jury's mind than that would be a different matter.
Click to expand...
Interesting post that thanks.
First jury service next month.
No idea how I feel about it really.
 


ilovehorswill said:
Tbf I've seen sheep with more behind the eyes. It's the dad I cannot fathom, spending tens of thousands on a grubby little scratter who will very likely end up his son in law.
Click to expand...

What did he spend money on, lawyers and shit like that?
 
andymcnish said:
Hmm-- I am a practising solicitor.

The bottom line is that quite a lot of 'drunken sex' can technically tick the 'too pissed to consent' box - after all rape law evolved before it was common for 19 year old girls to go out on the lash, get rat-arsed and take a random bloke to bed as part of a night's entertainment.

That said juries are made of 12 people who do live in the real world, and they aren't going to convict a bloke for a sex crime because he was a little less drunk and should have realised his partner was more out of it than him.

So to get done you need to act in a really seedy predatory way - just like Evans did here. And in the real world I'd guess that's why McDonald got off - the jury felt labelling him a rapist would have been too harsh on him - but they had no such sympathy for Evans. And it's not some sort of racist anti-Welsh decision either - this is a home town jury and he's a local boy made good.

The clinchers for me are the night porter's direct and independent evidence that the girl on entering the hotel was 'extremely drunk' (and believe me - he will know what that looks like) and McDonald (as he exits and Evans finishes off and scuttles out of the fire exit) telling the night porter to make sure he looks after the girl as 'she is sick'. 'Sick' is a really odd phrase to use there. 'Pissed' would be fine, 'a bit worse for wear' etc. but 'sick'? You'd use that word for:

(a) someone has been physically sick
(b) for someone you have had to leave unconscious in the recovery position as they are literally out of it thru drink
(b) really poorly (fever etc.) or drugged up...

Not for a girl who the Defence are trying to portray as virtually sober and 'well up' for a bout of 4am sex...

As regards refusal of his appeal - what happens if you get convicted at Crown Court is that you put in an application to appeal to the listing judge for the Criminal Court of Appeal, stating your grounds - for example a perverse finding of fact by the jury or a misdirection by a judge .
The judge reviews the case and let's you appeal if he thinks you have a realistic prospect of success (i.e aren't wasting the appeal court's time). If he rejects your appeal (as he did here) you can appeal to a panel of three judges who consider again whether the appeal court should take the case. All three of them also refused to hear his appeal. That is the end of the immediate appeal process.

It's also worth noting that if the trial judge thinks the evidence is such the jury can't safely convict he will acquit without leaving the matter to the jury - so that is now a total of 5 expert criminal law judges who were happy to leave the matter to the jury/see no reason to upset its findings.

The only other ground or way to lodge an appeal is to the criminal cases review tribunal in the event of new evidence coming to light that casts a serious doubt on the safety of the conviction. That is the route that Evans' defence team are trying now - though what cogent new evidence they have I don't know. If it's just another whine that in effect the original jury got it wrong the new 'appeal' will be fast-tracked and kicked out in short shrift. Obviously if they do have genuinely new and admissible (so 'but she's a right slag' won't wash) evidence that would have changed the jury's mind than that would be a different matter.
Click to expand...
How.about (d) "sick" = "depraved" = "up for anything and likely to get herself into trouble"?

Also "sick" is also yoof parlance for what the hippies used to call "way out". "See that lass dancing over there? She's sick!".
 
Roger Senseless said:
How.about (d) "sick" = "depraved" = "up for anything and likely to get herself into trouble"?
.
Click to expand...

True, but you're not going to go to a night porter in a hotel at 4 am and ask him to look after a girl because she is 'depraved' are you?
Or do you think he was mentioning it to the night porter in case he wanted to take advantage as well? Surely facilitating one rape would be enough?:-O
 
everstar said:
maybe so...but I don't get it. The only evidence of what happened in the hotel room comes from Ched and his friend. She says "fuck me harder" and "lick me out" sounds consenting to me.

I wonder what the papers would call him if his appeal goes well and the conviction is overturned, what would they use instead of rapist footballer Ched Evans?
Click to expand...

Not disagreeing with you mate, I think the conviction is dubious as well. People get all het up about it though, rational discussion is impossible.
 
Problem for Evans is that despite how many partners a woman has previously had, despite wanting to shag his mate minutes earlier, despite being drunk, if she says No, that should be the end of it.

This case highlights how thick footballers are, they somehow manage to get themselves in these situations and then wonder why they end up in court.

Unless he has evidence to clear his name, he should man up, admit what he did was wrong and beg for a second chance because every opposing fan in in the country is going to have a field day every time he walks out onto a pitch.
 
I took a hot guy back to mine once when I was a young un, let him do some naughty stuff to me but didn't want full sex but he still did it anyway - my own fault, I just swallowed it and moved on :confused:
 
barbieshellsaysFTM said:
I took a hot guy back to mine once when I was a young un, let him do some naughty stuff to me but didn't want full sex but he still did it anyway - my own fault, I just swallowed it and moved on :confused:
Click to expand...

Erm ;)

Awful stuff and I totally agree that no should always mean no.

The problem is in this case the lass said yes according to Ched and Clayton and according to her she doesn't remember anything :confused:

It's an odd case. The prosecution don't really argue with much of what Ched and Clayton said to the police. Only that she was in no fit state to consent which is not based on conclusive evidence IMO. The girl said she might of been spiked (not by the accused) but there is no evidence of this.
 
Keith S30S said:
Erm ;)

Awful stuff and I totally agree that no should always mean no.

The problem is in this case the lass said yes according to Ched and Clayton and according to her she doesn't remember anything :confused:

It's an odd case. The prosecution don't really argue with much of what Ched and Clayton said to the police. Only that she was in no fit state to consent which is not based on conclusive evidence IMO. The girl said she might of been spiked (not by the accused) but the is no evidence of this.
Click to expand...
yup :lol:
.......and its a dodgy case, I'll await input from the appeals court and subsequent additional evidence being seen. Currently though, the man is a convicted rapist in the eyes of the law ;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top