Ched Evans - serious injury

[Prestwich_Blue]

You misunderstand the nature of the appeal ruling. The Court of Appeal didn't say that the new evidence would have changed the jury's mind. They said it might have, which equally allows for the possibility that it might not have. Because there's a possibility that the new evidence could have changed the jury's mind, the original conviction can't be regarded as safe and was set aside. There's a new hearing so that a jury can hear the case with the new evidence and decide on it one way or the other.

The Court of Appeal ordered a retrial, upholding a request of the CPS. Under the CPS's guidelines, they would only have been pressing for a retrial only if they thought, among other things, that there was a realistic prospect of a conviction. We can infer the Court of Appeal's agreement with that from the fact that it upheld the request for a retrial. If they thought the new evidence would definitely have changed the jury's mind in the first trial, the current retrial wouldn't be taking place.

I wouldn't read too much into the retrial decision. A barrister friend I was talking to recently told me that the CPS are sending rape/sexual assault cases for trial on the flimsiest prosecution evidence, which is well below the threshold they would apply to other cases not involving sexual offences.

So in other words it's a political decision that they will actively pursue cases of this nature even if they don't seriously believe there's a possibility of a conviction, just so that they can say they're taking rape accusations more seriously.

Given Evans' profile, a retrial was always going to be on the cards.

 

[petrusha]

I wouldn't read too much into the retrial decision. A barrister friend I was talking to recently told me that the CPS are sending rape/sexual assault cases for trial on the flimsiest prosecution evidence, which is well below the threshold they would apply to other cases not involving sexual offences.

So in other words it's a political decision that they will actively pursue cases of this nature even if they don't seriously believe there's a possibility of a conviction, just so that they can say they're taking rape accusations more seriously.

Given Evans' profile, a retrial was always going to be on the cards.

Actually, that's a fair point, although I do think there's a possibility he could be convicted again. That said, I expect an acquittal (not that my view is worth too much as I'm an expert in criminal law).

 

[GaudinoMotors]

Will be acquitted. The "grounds" for the retrial are simply to correct the trial Judge's mishandling in the first instance.

 

[Lancet Fluke]

I agree with this. It's a very unusual case. I don't find it a stretch to believe that he might be guilty but I don't see a sufficient level of certainty for me to be able to convict him if I were on a jury.

Not sure it is that unusual. I assume lots of rape cases essentially come down to one person's word against another with not a great deal of other witness evidence. Surely it is the nature of the beast?

 

[M18CTID]

Will be acquitted. The "grounds" for the retrial are simply to correct the trial Judge's mishandling in the first instance.

When I read up about the original failed appeal, it did appear that the judge in the first trial offered the jury some guidance towards a guilty verdict which I found a bit odd. I don't know whether that was just my reading of it but I'm sure someone else on here - could've been PB but can't remember for sure - alluded to this too.

 

[Lancet Fluke]

I wouldn't read too much into the retrial decision. A barrister friend I was talking to recently told me that the CPS are sending rape/sexual assault cases for trial on the flimsiest prosecution evidence, which is well below the threshold they would apply to other cases not involving sexual offences.

So in other words it's a political decision that they will actively pursue cases of this nature even if they don't seriously believe there's a possibility of a conviction, just so that they can say they're taking rape accusations more seriously.

Given Evans' profile, a retrial was always going to be on the cards.

The CPS made it clear quite some time ago that they were going to effectively attempt to subvert the idea of innocent until proven guilty in rape cases. Prosecuting on less evidence is an inevitable consequence of that.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...oman-said-Yes-under-tough-new-rape-rules.html

 

[M18CTID]

Not sure it is that unusual. I assume lots of rape cases essentially come down to one person's word against another with not a great deal of other witness evidence. Surely it is the nature of the beast?

True enough but I think the unusual nature of this case surrounds the fact that a rape wasn't reported in the first place. I'd be interested to know what percentage of rape cases that get as far as court - regardless of the outcome - have come about as a result of the complainant not reporting that they were raped. I'm guessing not very many.

 

[petrusha]

Not sure it is that unusual. I assume lots of rape cases essentially come down to one person's word against another with not a great deal of other witness evidence. Surely it is the nature of the beast?

It's not really one person's word against another's, though. Her evidence has always been that she doesn't remember what happened, so she's never accused him of rape. And, even though she was obviously drunk, he could still have had a reasonable belief in consent. It's the police and CPS who've decided to take matters forward. That's what I think is unusual, although maybe there are common examples and I'm just unaware of them.

 

[petrusha]

Looks like there'll be no more evidence today. Jury "likely to be dismissed until tomorrow morning" to allow discussions about law to take place.

 

[Lancet Fluke]

It's not really one person's word against another's, though. Her evidence has always been that she doesn't remember what happened, so she's never accused him of rape. And, even though she was obviously drunk, he could still have had a reasonable belief in consent. It's the police and CPS who've decided to take matters forward. That's what I think is unusual, although maybe there are common examples and I'm just unaware of them.

I was more picking up on M18CTID mentioning there being no independent witnesses which is the bit I assumed you were responding to. It may be unusual in the sense that she didn't initially report a rape but once in court she must have given evidence to suggest that she was not in a position to consent and there must be a fair number of other cases where alleged victims claim they were not able to consent rather than actively saying "no" especially in the wake of the advice given by the CPS a year or two ago in terms of men having to actively evidence that they received consent. The initial trial sounded like a farce from what I remember.