FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Ched Evans wins right to appeal
Ched Evans wins right to appeal
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Will be interesting to see what the new evidence is. Whatever the outcome, I can only think that victims of rape will be less likely to go to trial as a result of this case as well as the ridiculously low conviction rate overall.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Some of the CCTV evidence didn't add up. And that was what the conviction was based on.So it could be an unsafe conviction. Can't comment on the guilt as that is now for the Judge to decide. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Some of the CCTV evidence didn't add up. And that was what the conviction was based on.So it could be an unsafe conviction. Can't comment on the guilt as that is now for the Judge to decide. "
The appeal has been granted on the basis of new information that wasn't available at the original trial. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ugby 123Couple
over a year ago
Forum Mod O o O oo |
"Will be interesting to see what the new evidence is. Whatever the outcome, I can only think that victims of rape will be less likely to go to trial as a result of this case as well as the ridiculously low conviction rate overall. "
I don't see why to be honest, if there is new evidence that shows he didn't do what they said then that has nothing to do with people who have been real victims of rape. The only people who would be wary are the people who are lying to get a conviction.
( don't know what evidence so don't have a view on that bit ) |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Will be interesting to see what the new evidence is. Whatever the outcome, I can only think that victims of rape will be less likely to go to trial as a result of this case as well as the ridiculously low conviction rate overall.
I don't see why to be honest, if there is new evidence that shows he didn't do what they said then that has nothing to do with people who have been real victims of rape. The only people who would be wary are the people who are lying to get a conviction.
( don't know what evidence so don't have a view on that bit )"
I agree, I don't think the judicial system at work will put anyone off.
What I think might put people off is how the some media and society reacted to the plaintiff. I think that would be very tough to deal with. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ugby 123Couple
over a year ago
Forum Mod O o O oo |
"Will be interesting to see what the new evidence is. Whatever the outcome, I can only think that victims of rape will be less likely to go to trial as a result of this case as well as the ridiculously low conviction rate overall.
I don't see why to be honest, if there is new evidence that shows he didn't do what they said then that has nothing to do with people who have been real victims of rape. The only people who would be wary are the people who are lying to get a conviction.
( don't know what evidence so don't have a view on that bit )
I agree, I don't think the judicial system at work will put anyone off.
What I think might put people off is how the some media and society reacted to the plaintiff. I think that would be very tough to deal with. "
I believe it was bad but can't say I saw it....what were they picking up on the most? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Will be interesting to see what the new evidence is. Whatever the outcome, I can only think that victims of rape will be less likely to go to trial as a result of this case as well as the ridiculously low conviction rate overall.
I don't see why to be honest, if there is new evidence that shows he didn't do what they said then that has nothing to do with people who have been real victims of rape. The only people who would be wary are the people who are lying to get a conviction.
( don't know what evidence so don't have a view on that bit )
I agree, I don't think the judicial system at work will put anyone off.
What I think might put people off is how the some media and society reacted to the plaintiff. I think that would be very tough to deal with.
I believe it was bad but can't say I saw it....what were they picking up on the most?"
There was a lot of slut shaming on social media.
Rape victims usually are given anonymity, but people outed her on social media too, she had to take a new identity and move away etc.
It must have been very traumatic for her.
I don't take one view either way on what happened, I wasn't there so I don't know. But if a rape victim saw what happened to that girl at the hands of social media I can imagine they might be scared to come forward. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Will be interesting to see what the new evidence is. Whatever the outcome, I can only think that victims of rape will be less likely to go to trial as a result of this case as well as the ridiculously low conviction rate overall.
I don't see why to be honest, if there is new evidence that shows he didn't do what they said then that has nothing to do with people who have been real victims of rape. The only people who would be wary are the people who are lying to get a conviction.
( don't know what evidence so don't have a view on that bit )
I agree, I don't think the judicial system at work will put anyone off.
What I think might put people off is how the some media and society reacted to the plaintiff. I think that would be very tough to deal with.
I believe it was bad but can't say I saw it....what were they picking up on the most?
There was a lot of slut shaming on social media.
Rape victims usually are given anonymity, but people outed her on social media too, she had to take a new identity and move away etc.
It must have been very traumatic for her.
I don't take one view either way on what happened, I wasn't there so I don't know. But if a rape victim saw what happened to that girl at the hands of social media I can imagine they might be scared to come forward. "
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
It did have a big effect on his life, and didn't she get super d*unk and couldn't remember stuff?
Her outing was unfortunate, but I can understand why people did it.
Either way its going to haunt him into the future, forever. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I was not at the trial and did not hear the evidence. I assume that applies to all posting here.
From what I have read (and that is a big caveat), the result of the trial does seem very odd. Since the prosecution's case seems to have been that she was too d*unk to consent (and admitted to not remembering much), it is strange that the co-accused was found not guilty.
The appeal has been allowed on the basis of fresh evidence but there is no indication of what that evidence is. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I was not at the trial and did not hear the evidence. I assume that applies to all posting here.
From what I have read (and that is a big caveat), the result of the trial does seem very odd. Since the prosecution's case seems to have been that she was too d*unk to consent (and admitted to not remembering much), it is strange that the co-accused was found not guilty.
The appeal has been allowed on the basis of fresh evidence but there is no indication of what that evidence is."
The trial details are readily available if you want to read them, setting out the difference between the accused and why the jury could reach different verdicts. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ugby 123Couple
over a year ago
Forum Mod O o O oo |
"
There was a lot of slut shaming on social media.
Rape victims usually are given anonymity, but people outed her on social media too, she had to take a new identity and move away etc.
It must have been very traumatic for her.
I don't take one view either way on what happened, I wasn't there so I don't know. But if a rape victim saw what happened to that girl at the hands of social media I can imagine they might be scared to come forward. "
Yes that I agree with. Sadly that's the downside of the internet |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *icky999Man
over a year ago
warrington |
"I was not at the trial and did not hear the evidence. I assume that applies to all posting here.
From what I have read (and that is a big caveat), the result of the trial does seem very odd. Since the prosecution's case seems to have been that she was too d*unk to consent (and admitted to not remembering much), it is strange that the co-accused was found not guilty.
The appeal has been allowed on the basis of fresh evidence but there is no indication of what that evidence is."
the judge seemed to suggest that buying a pizza and agreeing to go back to a hotel room was consent to sex 
I cant remember what he said but he made comments to the jury that showed he had no idea of how young people consent and have sex. daft old dinosaur.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
There was a lot of slut shaming on social media.
Rape victims usually are given anonymity, but people outed her on social media too, she had to take a new identity and move away etc.
It must have been very traumatic for her.
I don't take one view either way on what happened, I wasn't there so I don't know. But if a rape victim saw what happened to that girl at the hands of social media I can imagine they might be scared to come forward.
Yes that I agree with. Sadly that's the downside of the internet"
Custodial sentences for those who revealed the name would be a start. Anonymity for defendants should also be introduced. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *eavenNhellCouple
over a year ago
carrbrook stalybridge |
"I was not at the trial and did not hear the evidence. I assume that applies to all posting here.
From what I have read (and that is a big caveat), the result of the trial does seem very odd. Since the prosecution's case seems to have been that she was too d*unk to consent (and admitted to not remembering much), it is strange that the co-accused was found not guilty.
The appeal has been allowed on the basis of fresh evidence but there is no indication of what that evidence is.
the judge seemed to suggest that buying a pizza and agreeing to go back to a hotel room was consent to sex
I cant remember what he said but he made comments to the jury that showed he had no idea of how young people consent and have sex. daft old dinosaur.
"
the outcome was that she consented to have sex with the player aquitted before they went into the room but did not give consent to have sex with Evans who appeared later after being summond by text .the whols thing woud probarbley not come to light had two other members of the team not circulated a recording of the whole thing .the whole thing is pretty sordid whatever happend |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *icky999Man
over a year ago
warrington |
"I was not at the trial and did not hear the evidence. I assume that applies to all posting here.
From what I have read (and that is a big caveat), the result of the trial does seem very odd. Since the prosecution's case seems to have been that she was too d*unk to consent (and admitted to not remembering much), it is strange that the co-accused was found not guilty.
The appeal has been allowed on the basis of fresh evidence but there is no indication of what that evidence is.
the judge seemed to suggest that buying a pizza and agreeing to go back to a hotel room was consent to sex
I cant remember what he said but he made comments to the jury that showed he had no idea of how young people consent and have sex. daft old dinosaur.
the outcome was that she consented to have sex with the player aquitted before they went into the room but did not give consent to have sex with Evans who appeared later after being summond by text .the whols thing woud probarbley not come to light had two other members of the team not circulated a recording of the whole thing .the whole thing is pretty sordid whatever happend "
it come to light because she reported her phone lost.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
It's either a case if another footballer who thinks is he us above the law or a cheap slapper whos on the make I'm afraid, I'm not sure which but would a court convict without substantial evidence hmmm |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *abioMan
over a year ago
Newcastle and Gateshead |
"
Her outing was unfortunate, but I can understand why people did it.
"
ahem.... his "friends" outed her ..... not once so she had to change her name.... 4 times so far....
she is the only person in the UK where she has been allowed to in effect go into "witness protection" because people kept naming her...
as has been said... he got to go home and sleep in the same bed he did before he incident... she isn't even allowed to contact her own family!!!!
and you still understand why people do/did it????  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *icky999Man
over a year ago
warrington |
"It's either a case if another footballer who thinks is he us above the law or a cheap slapper whos on the make I'm afraid, I'm not sure which but would a court convict without substantial evidence hmmm "
or a bimbling police force, daft old judge and twelve puddings to stupid to get off dury duty. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *abioMan
over a year ago
Newcastle and Gateshead |
"I was not at the trial and did not hear the evidence. I assume that applies to all posting here.
From what I have read (and that is a big caveat), the result of the trial does seem very odd. Since the prosecution's case seems to have been that she was too d*unk to consent (and admitted to not remembering much), it is strange that the co-accused was found not guilty.
The appeal has been allowed on the basis of fresh evidence but there is no indication of what that evidence is."
I would google "crown vs chedwyn evans" because all the trial notes are there... and gives an explanations as to why the cases again evans and mcdonald were in effect conducted seperately..... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"It's either a case if another footballer who thinks is he us above the law or a cheap slapper whos on the make I'm afraid, I'm not sure which but would a court convict without substantial evidence hmmm
or a bimbling police force, daft old judge and twelve puddings to stupid to get off dury duty."
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I was not at the trial and did not hear the evidence. I assume that applies to all posting here.
From what I have read (and that is a big caveat), the result of the trial does seem very odd. Since the prosecution's case seems to have been that she was too d*unk to consent (and admitted to not remembering much), it is strange that the co-accused was found not guilty.
The appeal has been allowed on the basis of fresh evidence but there is no indication of what that evidence is.
I would google "crown vs chedwyn evans" because all the trial notes are there... and gives an explanations as to why the cases again evans and mcdonald were in effect conducted seperately....."
His real name is Chedwyn?  Well I have learned something on this thread! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *harpDressed ManMan
over a year ago
Here occasionally, but mostly somewhere else |
Whatever the truth of the situation, the result of this appeal could be interesting.
Hypothetically, the conviction is quashed - Given that he's served his sentence, CPS are unlikely to see any benefit in in vesting in another prosecution.
However, Evans is likely to sue if he's then "innocent "...so do CPS have to go for a retrial as an insurance?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *icky999Man
over a year ago
warrington |
"
Her outing was unfortunate, but I can understand why people did it.
ahem.... his "friends" outed her ..... not once so she had to change her name.... 4 times so far....
she is the only person in the UK where she has been allowed to in effect go into "witness protection" because people kept naming her...
as has been said... he got to go home and sleep in the same bed he did before he incident... she isn't even allowed to contact her own family!!!!
and you still understand why people do/did it???? "
he's undoubtedly innocent, she plodded along with the trial.
I'd be expecting I file in my cake but this is a start. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oo hotCouple
over a year ago
North West |
This appeal has been long overdue and the reality now is that it is likely that he will be found not guilty.
It is interesting that the CCRC have stressed that the new evidence was the deciding factor, but I wonder if that will actually turn out to be the case.
Society vehemently dislikes rapists and for good reason. But society also needs to judge people on the law and not their interpretation of other peoples morals.
If the conviction is quashed... Then what?
Compensation for Ched Evans running into the £millions?
Humiliation and unwanted publicity for the rape victim who never was?... Or will we see her "story" in the press?
And what of the money spent by the public of hiding her?
Hopefully we will at least see heads roll in the North Wales Police and CPS. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oo hotCouple
over a year ago
North West |
"It's either a case if another footballer who thinks is he us above the law or a cheap slapper whos on the make I'm afraid, I'm not sure which but would a court convict without substantial evidence hmmm
or a bimbling police force, daft old judge and twelve puddings to stupid to get off dury duty."
Exactly this |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"This appeal has been long overdue and the reality now is that it is likely that he will be found not guilty.
It is interesting that the CCRC have stressed that the new evidence was the deciding factor, but I wonder if that will actually turn out to be the case.
Society vehemently dislikes rapists and for good reason. But society also needs to judge people on the law and not their interpretation of other peoples morals.
If the conviction is quashed... Then what?
Compensation for Ched Evans running into the £millions?
Humiliation and unwanted publicity for the rape victim who never was?... Or will we see her "story" in the press?
And what of the money spent by the public of hiding her?
Hopefully we will at least see heads roll in the North Wales Police and CPS."
It will all depend on the strength of the new evidence whatever that is. The previous conviction had already been through a judicial review and upheld. A case like this is always likely to raise strong views. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Ok, fuggit, im going to say it.
Legal responsibility when pissed.
She has sex(so the story goes) but is deemed too pissed to be able to give consent. so has no responsibility.
He has sex, so the story goes, and was pissed - but he is deemed responsible (for deciding whether she is too pissed or not, to give consent) and got banged up.
Is that right? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I was not at the trial and did not hear the evidence. I assume that applies to all posting here.
From what I have read (and that is a big caveat), the result of the trial does seem very odd. Since the prosecution's case seems to have been that she was too d*unk to consent (and admitted to not remembering much), it is strange that the co-accused was found not guilty.
The appeal has been allowed on the basis of fresh evidence but there is no indication of what that evidence is.
I would google "crown vs chedwyn evans" because all the trial notes are there... and gives an explanations as to why the cases again evans and mcdonald were in effect conducted seperately....."
I have read the previous Court of Appeal judgement in which he was denied leave to appeal.
The Court decided (amongst other issues) that it was not illogical for him to be found guilty and the co-accused not guilty (despite the victim not remembering the incidents). Logically, that is correct. The jury believed that she consented to one and not the other. We will never know whether the jury believed she was too d*unk to consent to one and not the other or whether she was not too d*unk to consent but consented to one and not the other. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Whatever the truth of the situation, the result of this appeal could be interesting.
Hypothetically, the conviction is quashed - Given that he's served his sentence, CPS are unlikely to see any benefit in in vesting in another prosecution.
However, Evans is likely to sue if he's then "innocent "...so do CPS have to go for a retrial as an insurance?
"
Don't think the CPS will do anything other than state when asked that he was tried and convicted on the evidence available at the time..
which if his conviction is overturned would make one think they would only look less than efficient if they tried to press the DPP to run it again..
does make one wonder where this new evidence was at the time the investigation was carried out..
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Ok, fuggit, im going to say it.
Legal responsibility when pissed.
She has sex(so the story goes) but is deemed too pissed to be able to give consent. so has no responsibility.
He has sex, so the story goes, and was pissed - but he is deemed responsible (for deciding whether she is too pissed or not, to give consent) and got banged up.
Is that right? "
Two pissed people having sex I'm sure happens all the time. But having read the judicial review this was very different, predatory and pre-mediated. We may all have differing views on it, but I can see how a jury found him guilty of rape. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Ok, fuggit, im going to say it.
Legal responsibility when pissed.
She has sex(so the story goes) but is deemed too pissed to be able to give consent. so has no responsibility.
He has sex, so the story goes, and was pissed - but he is deemed responsible (for deciding whether she is too pissed or not, to give consent) and got banged up.
Is that right? "
it may not be perfect but its surely preferable than pissed men raping pissed women en masse and getting away with it cos they were too pissed to realise she was comatose..? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"remember there was two footballers involved this case one got away with it and also the female may well have been a gold digger "
if one 'got away with it' then that infers the other one was bang to rights so unlikely the victim was a 'gold digger'..
maybe she was asking for it, you know like how she was dressed..? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oo hotCouple
over a year ago
North West |
It is extremely rare for a case recommended by the ccrc to the court of appeal to be upheld. Bookies would unlikely take bets on the conviction being upheld.
The repercussions may well be massive for quite a few people involved and the costs to the taxpayer in compensation to Evans is likely to be in the £Millions. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *andS66Couple
over a year ago
Derby |
"Ok, fuggit, im going to say it.
Legal responsibility when pissed.
She has sex(so the story goes) but is deemed too pissed to be able to give consent. so has no responsibility.
He has sex, so the story goes, and was pissed - but he is deemed responsible (for deciding whether she is too pissed or not, to give consent) and got banged up.
Is that right? "
I've often wondered about the too d*unk to make a valid decision rule ( personally, I think it's sexual discriminating against men), but my question is this, ( and I know it's off topic, and also a bit tongue in cheek),
If a woman can, the morning after, say she was too d*unk to make a responsible decision as to whether to have sex or not, how come she can always be sober enough to make a responsible decision as to whether to drive or not? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Ok, fuggit, im going to say it.
Legal responsibility when pissed.
She has sex(so the story goes) but is deemed too pissed to be able to give consent. so has no responsibility.
He has sex, so the story goes, and was pissed - but he is deemed responsible (for deciding whether she is too pissed or not, to give consent) and got banged up.
Is that right?
I've often wondered about the too d*unk to make a valid decision rule ( personally, I think it's sexual discriminating against men), but my question is this, ( and I know it's off topic, and also a bit tongue in cheek),
If a woman can, the morning after, say she was too d*unk to make a responsible decision as to whether to have sex or not, how come she can always be sober enough to make a responsible decision as to whether to drive or not?"
Don't quite get the analogy, but it is an area of law that probably needs looking at clarifying and made clear to all (the definition of rape that is, not drink driving which is pretty clear cut). |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Ok, fuggit, im going to say it.
Legal responsibility when pissed.
She has sex(so the story goes) but is deemed too pissed to be able to give consent. so has no responsibility.
He has sex, so the story goes, and was pissed - but he is deemed responsible (for deciding whether she is too pissed or not, to give consent) and got banged up.
Is that right?
I've often wondered about the too d*unk to make a valid decision rule ( personally, I think it's sexual discriminating against men), but my question is this, ( and I know it's off topic, and also a bit tongue in cheek),
If a woman can, the morning after, say she was too d*unk to make a responsible decision as to whether to have sex or not, how come she can always be sober enough to make a responsible decision as to whether to drive or not?"
I don't think that was the point, really. We will never know whether the jury accepted the "too d*unk to give consent" argument. I would guess not as if she had been too d*unk to consent to sex with Ched she would have been too d*unk to consent with McDonald.
Oh, well ... Juries are unpredictable things. Sometimes for the better, sometimes for the worse. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
