Ched Evans - serious injury

[Lancet Fluke]

Regardless of whether the girl was comatosed or not, Evens is still an opportunistic c*** who took advantage of a woman when she was drunk.

However now that he has done his time I do believe that he should be allowed to play again. If not it would make a comp!ete mockary of the rehabilition system.

I take exception to that because I have on numerous occasions gone out, got hammered, got off with women who are similarly hammered and we have ended up shagging. I certainly don't believe I have ever raped anyone or shagged anyone who hasn't been consenting. I imagine most males on this forum will have done the same. When does two pissed up people shagging become an opportunist c**t taking advantage of a woman when she's drunk?

If you have gone into a room whilst your mate is shagging a woman and then decided to have a go knowing she is drunk and without her consent then your an opportunistic c*** too and should be in prison.

Don't get me wrong though I do understand where you're coming from and that's why I believe its right that his mate got found not guilty. She knowingly went back to the hotel room with the other guy as the CCTV shown she was more than capable of walking. And the fact she has volunterrily gone back with the lad is enough to create reasonable doubt in the Jury's eyes.

Surely you can see the difference between pulling a drunk girl after a few beers and taking her back to a hotel room with her consent than just stumbling upon a drunk girl in the bedroom and shagging her.

Of course I can. But just because he didn't pull her outside the kebab shop (classy) and came in to the hotel room later doesn't mean that she couldn't possibly have consented. It is entirely plausible that he stumbled in to the room later but was still consenting to sex with him. She says she didn't consent (actually I'm not sure she even said that), he says she did. We will never know the truth but it is just about whether there was reasonable doubt. The jury said there wasn't and they heard all the evidence, but considering some of the evidence that has been made public, if there wasn't reasonable doubt then I don't think I understand the meaning of the term reasonable doubt. I'm glad I'm not in my twenties these days, that's all I can say because it seems to me that a drunken shag which used to just be a normal activity is now fraught with all manner of potential shit unless of course you take a written consent form out and about with you.

 

[forevermancity]

I think its worth thinking about the type of girl that throws themselves as the meer mention of 'footballer'

99% of them are snakes to put it politely

The one positive to come out of this horrible case is that its made a 'taboo' subject into real life for a lot of young footballers who really have to have their witts about them all the time

 

[mindmyp's_n_q's]

Regardless of whether the girl was comatosed or not, Evens is still an opportunistic c*** who took advantage of a woman when she was drunk.

However now that he has done his time I do believe that he should be allowed to play again. If not it would make a comp!ete mockary of the rehabilition system.

I take exception to that because I have on numerous occasions gone out, got hammered, got off with women who are similarly hammered and we have ended up shagging. I certainly don't believe I have ever raped anyone or shagged anyone who hasn't been consenting. I imagine most males on this forum will have done the same. When does two pissed up people shagging become an opportunist c**t taking advantage of a woman when she's drunk?

If you have gone into a room whilst your mate is shagging a woman and then decided to have a go knowing she is drunk and without her consent then your an opportunistic c*** too and should be in prison.

Don't get me wrong though I do understand where you're coming from and that's why I believe its right that his mate got found not guilty. She knowingly went back to the hotel room with the other guy as the CCTV shown she was more than capable of walking. And the fact she has volunterrily gone back with the lad is enough to create reasonable doubt in the Jury's eyes.

Surely you can see the difference between pulling a drunk girl after a few beers and taking her back to a hotel room with her consent than just stumbling upon a drunk girl in the bedroom and shagging her.

After reading the website:

Clayton and Evans both said that they asked if Evans could join in and the girl said "yes"
Clayton stated that she asked Evans to "lick her out"
Clayton stated that she asked Evans to "fuck her harder"
Both state that she was changing the positions during sex (implying control).

The fact that she could not remember any of this (and therefore the story could be true or a lie) was the reason Evans was convicted.

I am not convinced as there was no evidence of sexual intercourse (to charge them) and the only evidence that they had which enabled a charge was Clayton and Evans statements.

Rape is inexcusable but so are wrongful convictions (Only my opinion but I think this one was wrong)

 

[Kippax Street 1880]

I take exception to that because I have on numerous occasions gone out, got hammered, got off with women who are similarly hammered and we have ended up shagging. I certainly don't believe I have ever raped anyone or shagged anyone who hasn't been consenting. I imagine most males on this forum will have done the same. When does two pissed up people shagging become an opportunist c**t taking advantage of a woman when she's drunk?

If you have gone into a room whilst your mate is shagging a woman and then decided to have a go knowing she is drunk and without her consent then your an opportunistic c*** too and should be in prison.

Don't get me wrong though I do understand where you're coming from and that's why I believe its right that his mate got found not guilty. She knowingly went back to the hotel room with the other guy as the CCTV shown she was more than capable of walking. And the fact she has volunterrily gone back with the lad is enough to create reasonable doubt in the Jury's eyes.

Surely you can see the difference between pulling a drunk girl after a few beers and taking her back to a hotel room with her consent than just stumbling upon a drunk girl in the bedroom and shagging her.

After reading the website:

Clayton and Evans both said that they asked if Evans could join in and the girl said "yes"
Clayton stated that she asked Evans to "lick her out"
Clayton stated that she asked Evans to "fuck her harder"
Both state that she was changing the positions during sex (implying control).

The fact that she could not remember any of this (and therefore the story could be true or a lie) was the reason Evans was convicted.

I am not convinced as there was no evidence of sexual intercourse (to charge them) and the only evidence that they had which enabled a charge was Clayton and Evans statements.

Rape is inexcusable but so are wrongful convictions (Only my opinion but I think this one was wrong)

Reminds me of the Mike Tyson case. In his autobiography he said he must have performed the longest cunnilingus in criminal history. I also believe Tyson was very hard done by after reading his autobiography. (Of course its from his point of view, but it is well supported)

 

[bobmcfc]

People are saying that only ched and the girl knew what happened that night but that simply isn't true. Two of the footballers friends were watching through the window and had tried to record the incident on their phones. I reckon the jury must have seen some of the footage of ched engaging in the sexual act with the woman and on that decided on his fate. She claims she didn't feel too drunk when she entered the hotel but has no recollection of having sex with either of the men. Cocaine and cannabis were in her system but she doesn't recall taking drugs that night either.

 

[TGR]

People are saying that only ched and the girl knew what happened that night but that simply isn't true. Two of the footballers friends were watching through the window and had tried to record the incident on their phones. I reckon the jury must have seen some of the footage of ched engaging in the sexual act with the woman and on that decided on his fate. She claims she didn't feel too drunk when she entered the hotel but has no recollection of having sex with either of the men. Cocaine and cannabis were in her system but she doesn't recall taking drugs that night either.

So lets get this clear:
She was drugged up on coke & weed and so hammered on the booze she doesn't remember having sex with two different blokes at different times in the same bed? As another poster has stated she wanted to change positions during the sex sessions - so not exactly completely & totally drunk?
I can understand why she might just want to forget the whole evening.

 

[M18CTID]

People are saying that only ched and the girl knew what happened that night but that simply isn't true. Two of the footballers friends were watching through the window and had tried to record the incident on their phones. I reckon the jury must have seen some of the footage of ched engaging in the sexual act with the woman and on that decided on his fate. She claims she didn't feel too drunk when she entered the hotel but has no recollection of having sex with either of the men. Cocaine and cannabis were in her system but she doesn't recall taking drugs that night either.

I could be mistaken but wasn't the mobile phone footage deemed to be inconclusive?

 

[bobmcfc]

People are saying that only ched and the girl knew what happened that night but that simply isn't true. Two of the footballers friends were watching through the window and had tried to record the incident on their phones. I reckon the jury must have seen some of the footage of ched engaging in the sexual act with the woman and on that decided on his fate. She claims she didn't feel too drunk when she entered the hotel but has no recollection of having sex with either of the men. Cocaine and cannabis were in her system but she doesn't recall taking drugs that night either.

So lets get this clear:
She was drugged up on coke & weed and so hammered on the booze she doesn't remember having sex with two different blokes at different times in the same bed? As another poster has stated she wanted to change positions during the sex sessions - so not exactly completely & totally drunk?
I can understand why she might just want to forget the whole evening.

you are simply recounting Evans version of events which the jury didn't seem to believe judging by the fact they convicted him.
She said she didn't feel she drank too much to be that incapacitated that she couldn't remember, she had drugs in her system but does not recall taking any. She cannot remember the events after she entered the hotel. She stated it was her belief that she may have had her drink spiked.

 

[M18CTID]

People are saying that only ched and the girl knew what happened that night but that simply isn't true. Two of the footballers friends were watching through the window and had tried to record the incident on their phones. I reckon the jury must have seen some of the footage of ched engaging in the sexual act with the woman and on that decided on his fate. She claims she didn't feel too drunk when she entered the hotel but has no recollection of having sex with either of the men. Cocaine and cannabis were in her system but she doesn't recall taking drugs that night either.

So lets get this clear:
She was drugged up on coke & weed and so hammered on the booze she doesn't remember having sex with two different blokes at different times in the same bed? As another poster has stated she wanted to change positions during the sex sessions - so not exactly completely & totally drunk?
I can understand why she might just want to forget the whole evening.

you are simply recounting Evans version of events which the jury didn't seem to believe judging by the fact they convicted him.
She said she didn't feel she drank too much to be that incapacitated that she couldn't remember, she had drugs in her system but does not recall taking any. She cannot remember the events after she entered the hotel. She stated it was her belief that she may have had her drink spiked.

You state that he's merely repeating Evans's version of events but then go on to state her version of events. So it seems to have come down to believing one story over another and that's dodgy to say the least.

 

[bernabias home shirt]

So lets get this clear:
She was drugged up on coke & weed and so hammered on the booze she doesn't remember having sex with two different blokes at different times in the same bed? As another poster has stated she wanted to change positions during the sex sessions - so not exactly completely & totally drunk?
I can understand why she might just want to forget the whole evening.

you are simply recounting Evans version of events which the jury didn't seem to believe judging by the fact they convicted him.
She said she didn't feel she drank too much to be that incapacitated that she couldn't remember, she had drugs in her system but does not recall taking any. She cannot remember the events after she entered the hotel. She stated it was her belief that she may have had her drink spiked.

You state that he's merely repeating Evans's version of events but then go on to state her version of events. So it seems to have come down to believing one story over another and that's dodgy to say the least.

Thats why theres a thing called a Jury to listen to all the facts
He was found guilty,appealed & yep still guilty of being a RAPIST.