Quizzes & Puzzles18 mins ago
Ched Evans - Not Guilty
I haven't been following this story , myself
He has been found not guilty
http://
He has been found not guilty
http://
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Bazile. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
jack - is 'Last Word-ism' a notion we should consider?
I think we should!
The day a woman thinks that another woman's 'character' has a bearing on her being raped or not is a sad state of affairs indeed in my view.
Let's not forget - the woman was not on trial here, she was not accused or tried or convicted or sentenced or imprisoned and condemned for her actions - but I bet she certainly feels like she was!
And that is the most disgraceful part of this whole situation.
I think we should!
The day a woman thinks that another woman's 'character' has a bearing on her being raped or not is a sad state of affairs indeed in my view.
Let's not forget - the woman was not on trial here, she was not accused or tried or convicted or sentenced or imprisoned and condemned for her actions - but I bet she certainly feels like she was!
And that is the most disgraceful part of this whole situation.
Hang on - if a woman who offers sex for money can be raped, and no-one would consider her professional status as a valid defence against an accusation of rape, why does a woman who simply has the same sexual history as thousands of her contemporaries have her sex life brought into evidence, successfully to defend her attacker?
andy-hughes, //is 'Last Word-ism' a notion we should consider? //
Don't be rude.
//The day a woman thinks that another woman's 'character' has a bearing on her being raped or not is a sad state of affairs indeed in my view. //
I don't think a woman's character has a bearing on her being 'raped', but I think it has a bearing on her behaviour. I simply doubt that this woman was 'raped'. I've always doubted it.
Don't be rude.
//The day a woman thinks that another woman's 'character' has a bearing on her being raped or not is a sad state of affairs indeed in my view. //
I don't think a woman's character has a bearing on her being 'raped', but I think it has a bearing on her behaviour. I simply doubt that this woman was 'raped'. I've always doubted it.
"I fail to understand why people appear to WANT him to be judged guilty."
You might be right here -- I've tried to avoid saying this explicitly, and I hope it's not true, but the possibility always exists that I'm allowing myself to be biased about this case for various reasons, most of which are personal (and I'll leave it at that).
When I first heard of this case in around the time Ched Evans was looking for a new football club I read into it pretty extensively. A lot of what I said at the time can be found easily enough in previous AB posts in this subject. Essentially, though, I think that the first verdict of guilty was correct at the time, and I am struggling to appreciate how the "fresh evidence" changes things enough to overturn that verdict. Presumably there's something I am missing, or perhaps the jury simply reached a different view, which is also possible under the system.
It's a sorry case all round. I hope it doesn't set too much of a precedent in future case law -- A-H is wrong when he talked about legislation from 1999, relating to the legal relevance of a rape complainant's sexual history, being "overturned", but still this case had better be the exception rather than the rule in that regard. But I'll try not to say any more than that on this topic.
You might be right here -- I've tried to avoid saying this explicitly, and I hope it's not true, but the possibility always exists that I'm allowing myself to be biased about this case for various reasons, most of which are personal (and I'll leave it at that).
When I first heard of this case in around the time Ched Evans was looking for a new football club I read into it pretty extensively. A lot of what I said at the time can be found easily enough in previous AB posts in this subject. Essentially, though, I think that the first verdict of guilty was correct at the time, and I am struggling to appreciate how the "fresh evidence" changes things enough to overturn that verdict. Presumably there's something I am missing, or perhaps the jury simply reached a different view, which is also possible under the system.
It's a sorry case all round. I hope it doesn't set too much of a precedent in future case law -- A-H is wrong when he talked about legislation from 1999, relating to the legal relevance of a rape complainant's sexual history, being "overturned", but still this case had better be the exception rather than the rule in that regard. But I'll try not to say any more than that on this topic.
jim360 - // A-H is wrong when he talked about legislation from 1999, relating to the legal relevance of a rape complainant's sexual history, being "overturned", //
I concede that my use of the term 'overturned' was inaccurate in this conext.
But I entirely agree, why the jury decided that Evans was not guilty on the basis of evidence from two former boyfriends - and indeed why that evidence was allowed into the court, is going to remain a mystery for ever.
I concede that my use of the term 'overturned' was inaccurate in this conext.
But I entirely agree, why the jury decided that Evans was not guilty on the basis of evidence from two former boyfriends - and indeed why that evidence was allowed into the court, is going to remain a mystery for ever.
ummmm - //Do any of you have daughters? //
I do indeed ummmm, as you know, I have three adult daughters and a granddaughter of twenty.
I am not blind to the fact that young women can drink too much and can behave in a way that they would not when they are sober.
But I will never concede that foolish behaviour allows men to take advantage, and be excused for it.
I have opined previously about both rock stars and footballers - young women may throw themselves at you, but you are not automatically bound by your base urges to catch them!
I do indeed ummmm, as you know, I have three adult daughters and a granddaughter of twenty.
I am not blind to the fact that young women can drink too much and can behave in a way that they would not when they are sober.
But I will never concede that foolish behaviour allows men to take advantage, and be excused for it.
I have opined previously about both rock stars and footballers - young women may throw themselves at you, but you are not automatically bound by your base urges to catch them!
I haven't followed this case very much at all. My views were and still are that Evans is a muppet and I had no sympathy for him. when he was convicted. However I accept the verdict of the second trial.
I have never been one to repeat 'innocent until proven guilty' one every other similiar thread to the Ched Evans case, yet the poster who is very fond with using the term seem very unaccepting of the verdict of the second trial.
What would the term for this be?
I have never been one to repeat 'innocent until proven guilty' one every other similiar thread to the Ched Evans case, yet the poster who is very fond with using the term seem very unaccepting of the verdict of the second trial.
What would the term for this be?
Talbot - //I have never been one to repeat 'innocent until proven guilty' one every other similiar thread to the Ched Evans case, yet the poster who is very fond with using the term seem very unaccepting of the verdict of the second trial. //
I assume that I am the 'poster' to whom you refer - in which case, please let me clear up any confusion -
I absolutely accept the result of the second trial because that is legal process.
I absolutely do not accept the methods used to obtain it, and the way in which the jury were steered by what is in my view irrelevant and biased testimony which has led to a verdict that in my view is wrong.
Accept the verdict - yes.
Agree with the verdict - categorically no.
I assume that I am the 'poster' to whom you refer - in which case, please let me clear up any confusion -
I absolutely accept the result of the second trial because that is legal process.
I absolutely do not accept the methods used to obtain it, and the way in which the jury were steered by what is in my view irrelevant and biased testimony which has led to a verdict that in my view is wrong.
Accept the verdict - yes.
Agree with the verdict - categorically no.
I thought this post was at an end the other day, but see it is still going, and reading the the latest few, I am surprised that some are so naive.
These days, the younger generations behaviour is more open than what we were like in our youth, but similar incidents happened, which I am sure some of you must know about.
If some of the things that I know about, when I was between 19/25 happened now, there would be court cases everyday, and I dont me me personally.
Woman/girls, still got drunk or drugged up (not the hard stuff like today) but were not seen falling over, throwing up, showing their boobs off, and fighting in the high streets, it was done behind closed doors.
I still think that the person/persons accusing somebody with similar accusations, should be named like the defendant is.
These days, the younger generations behaviour is more open than what we were like in our youth, but similar incidents happened, which I am sure some of you must know about.
If some of the things that I know about, when I was between 19/25 happened now, there would be court cases everyday, and I dont me me personally.
Woman/girls, still got drunk or drugged up (not the hard stuff like today) but were not seen falling over, throwing up, showing their boobs off, and fighting in the high streets, it was done behind closed doors.
I still think that the person/persons accusing somebody with similar accusations, should be named like the defendant is.
-- answer removed --
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles22 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles28 mins ago
Food & Drink35 mins ago
Crosswords230 mins ago
Crosswords277 mins ago
