Reply With QuoteSky News reporting Oldham Athletic may be grasping the nettle after all.
Well she knows you so that's one I suppose.Originally Posted by teknicolourfox
You clearly said she agrees with you that a persons skin colour is relevant. You seem to be struggling to comprehend this one don't you?
So what aspect of law does she work with, you know what with her predjudiced friends and all?
(Reason for posting, daft chap doesn't understand law and is digging a very big hole for his "lawyer" friend)
Sky News reporting Oldham Athletic may be grasping the nettle after all.
robert75 - I can tell you're the sort who absolutely MUST have the last word on any matter - like a dog with a bone (again obviously nothing better to do and you are in danger of trolling on this post by clutching desperately to something someone miles away from you typed on a keyboard).
Yes I do think skin colour has an impact on anything, and yes I do think it had an impact on this case.
Yes - my invisible non existant friend also thinks the same (she sent me a note from the HUGE hole we're currently trying to dig ourselves out from) that skin colour can, and DOES have an impact on what a jurys decision might be.
No - i certainly wouldnt name her or her company - that would be idiotic and irrisponsible (I'm SURE you understand that, although it might not be what YOU think should happen so probably not).
I don't have to 'understand' law to know that skin colour impacts everybody, maybe you think we live in a world where no one cares any longer, but unfortunately we don't.
We could go on about this all day, obviously you are correct and I bow down to your all mighty, all knowing self, and one day only hope to be 1/10 as totally super as what you is gov'nor.
Quite happy to converse with you over PM and HOPE that you might see that your point of view is incredibly narrow minded, don't think we need to spoil this thread doing it.
And yes to answer the OPs questions.
For Ched Evans - he should of course be given a chance to integrate back into society and get back to some semblance of normality.
The End.
You and your friend don't seem to be able to comprehend the law, this is what seems to be the trouble. Nor is it anything to do with last word, in fact I couldn't care less what your opinion is on race or you desperate attempts to divert this thread into a debate on race and bring in Rotherham (and then has the cheek to call me trolling)
Your friend is employed in a notiffiable profession and your comments which you say she 100% agrees with call into question not least her impartiality but also her contempt for the legal system. If a solicitor were to make such comments which you say she "100% agrees with". The legal profession has a duty to report her. (Do you actually comprehend this point?).
You may have thought by using your friend as back up to support your comments it gave them some kind of validity but all it done was leave your friend in a position where on a public forum for all to see she is seen in agreement with someone who believes one man was convicted and another not based upon their skin colour.
I couldn't say! Just clearing up a technicality.
I agree with the woman on Radio 4 this morning. She basically said that if Joey Barton can be forgiven for stubbing a cigar out in another man's face to the degree that he is now both playing for QPR and appearing on Question Time, then there should be room for rehabilitation within the sport for Ched Evans.
I believe he should be given a second chance.
The main reasons that people use for him not playing again seem to be:
1. He could be perceived as a role model to young kids.
2. He shouldnt be able to earn large sums of money after his crime.
My arguments against these are:
1. If you are a parent who has raised your kids to the point that they believe rape is because a league 1 footballer did it, then you are not doing a very good job.
2. Ched may go on to make millions outside of football (unlikely) as an inventor or some other business. What do you do then? take the money off him.
Mate your very aggressive in your stance. Let me give you an example of something that really irks me. A couple years back a gang of Muslim girls attacked a white girl whilst screaming "kill the White bitch". They went to court and got a slap on the wrist I.e no prison sentence just a stupid conditional discharge. Around the same time there was some viral YouTube videos where a white woman made some racist remarks whilst drunk to someone she was having an argument with on the tube. SHE WAS SENT TO PRISON. Why? Because of the usual outcry and witch hunt. Well why didn't the usual people who jump on the bandwagon shout from the rooftops that the racist Muslim girls who beat the White girl to a pulp should have gone to prison? Because unfortunately nobody wants to be labelled a *racist*. I understand clearly where the poster you've got into an arguments coming from.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...lag-FREED.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...n-YouTube.html
My point being if Evans were a Muslim, black, Polish, etc then the human rights brigade would all be defending him saying he's done his time it's racist etc to stop him playing football.
Last edited by Yeti; 6th January 2015 at 18:17.
Really???
Hughes got the usual "you're supposed to be in jail" chants at Elland Road when he visited here after his release. Okay... goading... but I am sure that he got that up and down the land from ALL club's fans.
His response.... gloating, putting his hand behind his ears and inviting it on... clapping the fans... laughing at the fans while out there earning big money in spite of causing death and disability????
Lee Hughes... no matter WHERE playing... should have ignored the fans goading him. Out of respect for his victims.
Sadly... he didn't.
I haven't seen anything as uncomfortable at a football match as this idiot grinning back and laughing. Seriously.
Didn't she say "Yes" to McDonald when she agreed to go back to his room (well at least to going back and presumably she's not argued about why).
You could say McDonald was party to it, if he invited Evans to have sex with her when she was incompetent, but I don't know enough to know if that's what was said to have happened.
Personally, I would set a salary cap of £25,000 a year on professional footballers then no-one would care if the one's convicted of rape or death by dangerous driving had a job or not...
M
I am aggressive about nothing. The law is pretty clear and the responsibilities of those in the legal profession are equally clear, I couldn't care less what his opinion is however I do care when he uses those within the legal profession to justify them.
Two words - Leslie Grantham. He shot a man in the head while robbing him serving 10 years for murder before the public knew him as Dirty Den.
Then there JayZ who stabbed a man in the stomach.
Mark Wahlberg beat a man so bad he's blind in one eye.
Even national treasure Stephen Fry committed credit card fraud.
I'm not condoning Evans or his actions etc but the man has done his time and as I see it, if he was an office worker or something there would probably be people within the system actively trying to find him work. If his punishment was too light then campaigners should lobby longer sentences not persecute ex convicts.
I think people are trying to destroy his life directly or by association, which is deeply unfair.
Perhaps because they are enraged by the money he will earn, but a surgeon could continue to be wealthy after tax evasion and noone would complain.
Maybe they wouldn't continue to hound him if he got a job in Tesco? I don't know if Evans has any other skills to fall back on or if football is his only shot at a career but that's irrelevant, either way the mob mentality shown by many senior figures in society disgusts me to be honest.
1 - Does it not also send the message "if you are talented enough then whatever you do doesn't have any consequences beyond the immediate inconvenience" ? I would bet a lot of footballers are much more careful about getting consent now than they were pre-Evans.
2 - Not unless he uses his rape conviction to make those millions. It is a bit like the MPs that were mentioned earlier - he got into the situation because he was a footballer, he has been found guilty (potentially by a biased jury but that is another topic) and by continuing to work with minimal interuption a serious criminal offence becomes little more than a "parking ticket" to a generation of wannabe footballers.
The law maybe clear and on your same train of thought about responsibility why didn't it apply to ROTHERHAM COUNCIL when a report was published in which they were said to be too frightened to address the sexual abuse of white girls by Asian men for over 10 years in case they were labelled racist. You can read all about it here..
http://defund.com/city-council-hid-h...called-racist/
Do you not think it's possible a solicitor or judge maybe swayed in his thinking if he fears being labelled right wing or racist etc?
I'm sure Mike Tyson also thought he had consent when that woman went back to his room. What did she thing they were going to do, look at his etchings? If I were in a similar situation and a woman agreed to come back to my room, I would think "game on". When you've had a few drinks and agree to go back to a bloke's room, you must have a pretty good idea what's on his mind.Didn't she say "Yes" to McDonald when she agreed to go back to his room (well at least to going back and presumably she's not argued about why).
You could say McDonald was party to it, if he invited Evans to have sex with her when she was incompetent, but I don't know enough to know if that's what was said to have happened.
Personally, I would set a salary cap of £25,000 a year on professional footballers then no-one would care if the one's convicted of rape or death by dangerous driving had a job or not...
M
Eddie
Whole chunks of my life come under the heading "it seemed like a good idea at the time".
Agreed. Is also my understanding from the case notes of why McDonald got acquitted and Evans was convicted. It was the circumstances/events leading up to the event. McDonald met the girl whilst out and she agreed to go back with him. Evans on the other hand got a text from Mcdonald saying he'd pulled, rocked up to the hotel (with two mates!), blagged his way into the room, had sex, and then left via a fire exit.
McDonald had left (by the front door) by the time Evans was getting down to it. The jury was instructed to treat McDonald and Evans as two separate events.
You seem to be very keen to bring race into this thread, is there a reason for that?
And while we are on the subject what does the actions of Asian men have to do with Evans?
Last edited by robert75; 6th January 2015 at 18:58.
David Walsh wrote a great article on this case in the Sunday Times. Worth a read.
I must have been a right soppy sod in my time - I've had plenty of women come back to my room for drinks and a laugh without wanting to shag them. Then again, there have been plenty that I have too
Gray
I think you being awfully naive if you honestly think that judges & juries take no notice of someones race/class during a criminal trial, none would ever vocalise such a thing but for sure it goes on.
So you believe Evans was convicted because he was White? Can you provide evidence of this.
Having started this thread I am shocked at some of the points being raised.
Let's all keep away from any race references - it's about Evans.
Quite.
Wow. I really do have to spell it out for you. Your arguments seem to yield some highly implausible theories in that you think somebody who is in a position of authority i.e a solicitor could not have a racist opinion and that it would be highly implausible. If you live in the real world you would notice that as much as I, like yourself, would like to live in a perfect, morally correct world, I am in fact a realist. I took umbrage to your mocking of a fellow poster accusing him of being a liar because he and a solicitor friend remarked that the evans case could have been different if evans were of a different skin colour. Whilst I'm not sure I agree entirely with this, you had no right to accuse the poster of lying. I have merely highlighted examples of cases where people of ethnic origins or religions have been treated with "gloves" rather than had the book thrown at them as to not stoke up the "anti racist" brigade. I highlighted the Rotherham council case to prove to you that even people in the council who have a moral duty to protect and serve much like a solicitor can get things wrong which you were so adamant could not happen and kept calling the poster out as to who these dirty rotten scoundrel solicitors where.
What gave you that impression, or are you as stupid as you appear?
Wouldn't it be better for everyone if he were to play abroad for a season or two to allow everything to calm down.
I don't condone what he was involved in but maybe the break would allow the lynch mob to focus on something else.
I believe he's out on license, on probation which precludes him from working abroad as he is required to be supervised and report to his handler ie he's still serving his sentence.
Gray
Doublyderpostie
Gray
Had I committed rape I'd find it very difficult to secure equivalent employment due to the fact I'd fail the CRB checks - I'd be free to secure employment of course but getting it at the level I'm at now wouldn't happen. More to the point, I wouldn't expect to walk back into the same level of job either, I'd expect to have to start again and I'd expect to have to find an employer who wasn't too fussy about my past
I feel the same applies here - Ched Evans is free to gain employment but it's hard for a club at his level to let someone on the sex offenders register do community work with kids etc etc so arguably they can't really employ him fully. (Believe it or not football players are sent out to schools on a regular basis on community duty or asked to support in training the clubs ladies team). He has to drop down until he finds a club that can accommodate his circumstances and if this means a part time club and he has to do a 'normal' job then so be it...
His other alternative is to wait for his appeal and if he is found to be innocent then he can have his conviction quashed and he's free to do whatever.
I actually think he and his management missed a trick - if he'd done his time, come out and shown some contrition, maybe donated some of his first 12 months wages to charity you could probably reckon he'd be back playing and other than getting a load of stick from the terraces it would have blown over...
An interesting aspect of this case is that as a man and a supporter of the club Evans let down so spectacularly, my views are irrelevant. As indeed are those of his male dominated profession and the male dominated boards of his prospective employers.
Their problem is that they sold their game to commercial sponsors a generation ago and with that sale gave women a 51% stake in it. You'd be hard pressed to find a woman who isn't repelled and outraged, both Evans behaviour in the first instance and then by his failure to attempt to quell the shit storm that descended on his victim. Successful appeal or not, clubs will be hard pressed to find sponsors who will tolerate the threat to their brand.
I doubt that any club in the UK, having done the sums, will think he's worth it.
Read your own post you brain dead tool.
You quite finished or did you not notice the OP's comment?
I never once said a solicitor can't have racist views I said if one did they should be immediately reported as they are not fit for the job. I don't believe a word your pal is saying because none of it adds up. It reads more like he hoped to post his own view and use someone within the legal profession to give it credence which unfortunately for him fell very flat. Therefore, yes I believe him to be a complete and utter liar. If it's not so he can always PM me the solicitor firm he speaks of.
Where did I say that Evans was convicted because he was white?
The original comment came as a consequence of my discussion with the other chap who believed that Evans was found guilty because he was white and his pal wasnt because he was black. Hence my question.
Perhaps you didnt read the original comment and miss-understood, if so it was a miss-understanding on both our parts (comment and reply)
Regarding Evans so, how long did he actually have on his contract when he was convicted and was it terminated because when he came out didnt Utd offer to let him train with them?
Except for the glaring inaccuracies.
having had to deal with the consequences of a daughter being raped by a 'celebrity' I don't have a whole shit load of time for this discussion. Evans stance is one demonstrated on a regular basis by a segment of the male population who, in my humble opinion, see no need to respect in any way the position of women in society and as a consequence need the living shit beaten out of them.
I am unapologetic about this stance; as the comments above show, the victim is given absolutely no credence or standing, and the rapist is allowed to continue with little consequence.
Evans deserves nothing. he's earned the right to have his livelihood at risk, his character impuned, his future in doubt, because he, in the view of a jury of his peers, attacked a woman.
for those defending him, consider your viewpoint if you were the relative of the woman involved, rather than a supporter of football. as a minimum, it should provide a pause in your defence of the man.
and just to emphasise the jury of peers bit, unless you were in there, I doubt there is a full grasp of the case as presented.
rant mode off...
That just about sums up my personal view...
Well said I totally agree, all crimes have a victim, who in-turn have a family who are all to easily forgotten.
If he is not allowed to play football what will he be allowed to do. Stack shelves in a supermarket cue petitions and boycott of store. So he claims benefits. Cue petitions and media outcry.
Certain crimes quite rightly preclude you from working with children and young people. Or in finance, the Police etc.
Let him play. He'll get a lot of stick on the pitch.
But what will be interesting to see is when the appeal is heard. If it fails and he does not appeal that, maybe he'll apologise. If it's successful, will all those who've criticised him and jumped on the bandwagon apologise to him. I doubt it.
As someone said, no one comes out of this looking particularly good.
We shall have to wait and see what happens.
I don't really care if he was guilty or not. Our legal system, and indeed our system should look to rehabilitate. Is he a danger? I don't believe he is. What is the bad message that allowing him to work would send (?) - he has been to prison. This should be the only consideration, and must have been considered before he was released.
Was the verdict appropriate? Possibly not - if a girl was considered unable to consent, then two convictions should have taken place - she also quite clearly and very early on, aimed for a cash payout; not a course of action I would expect from a devastated victim - but who knows.
Personally, I don't watch football and could care less in that respect.
It's just a matter of time...
I have every sympathy for people who have gone through rape, any decent man in this country would feel the same, I certianly do, BUT
I don't think anyone is actually defending him, I just think they are taking the case and evidence and working out that it's not just as clear cut as made out.
The irony of your post however is amazing as apparently anyone on this thread with a different opinion than yourself is clearly wrong.
But people ARE defending him.
So what are we supposed to do for the victim? Punish the offender more?
Go on then, care less than you currently do ;-)
Blinking Americanisms are killing our language. I am sure you meant couldn't care less.
Gray
Eddies post noting that Evans rectitude in accepting his guilt may be tied to a forthcoming appeal is a good point. The moral challenges of crime and punishment remain perplexing at many levels, as pointed out in a piece by Matthew Parris is The Times this morning. As such there cannot be a clear cut position.
My strongly felt 'however' is that condoning rape by any means isn't acceptable as that perpetuates the view that somehow it's ok. And it's not.
The real irony is that there are two sides to a rape case, and the commentary in this thread was running the risk of losing that perspective.
Based on the case people have made their decision, for me, I don't need someone taking the moral high ground and assuming that everyone on this forum who doesn't agree with them is somehow condoning his actions, which isn't the case.
His fiancee's dad is a multi-milllionnaire and is supporting them and bankrolling the appeal. Also, rumours are that he would be paying the salary if Evans was signed by Oldham.
The case summary here draws a distinction between the two men in both their circumstances (one met her in the street), access to the hotel and treatment of the girl and is probably the closest we will get to understanding the jury's viewpoint.
https://www.crimeline.info/case/r-v-...-chedwyn-evans
I have often talked to friends about this case, and his Fiancee's father often comes up. At worst, Ched Evans raped a girl. At best, he admits he had sex with a girl whilst in a relationship with her, as well as evidence in court that he was regularly having sex with other girls throughout their relationship. If that was my Father-in-Law, he'd never speak to me again, never mind do what this guy is doing. I realise he's a footballer, and I'm not, however her Dad is loaded by all accounts, so it's not like the family needs the pay cheque... A very forgiving chap, I think, and a bit naive if he thinks that his daughter won't get dragged through the hedge in the future. This story will go on for quite some time I think...
Diddums.
Posting Permissions
