Controversial topic but I felt the need to bring it up because every one seems to be talking about it. So.... Where do you stand?

I was sat in the waiting area at brough train station just outside of Hull when the Hull FC team turned up to catch the train to Arsenal. They all think he's been 'stitched up' and the lass has been with rugby players in the past that they know for definite, despite her saying shed never had a 1 night stand in her life

*sharp intake of breath*

 

Where do I start - it's such a can of worms.  

 

I've been debating this on fb.  In a nutshell.  If people don't want him to undertake his trade, where would they draw the line, on what basis would a convicted rapist not be allowed to ply their trade.  Why him?  Is it because he is high profile?  A footballer? A sportsperson?  What legislation would they propose ?  No convicted rapist allowed a job?  

 

And then on to the conviction.  I haven't read all the information but.... it seems she said yes but then said she couldn't remember anything.  Why was his friend found not guilty but he was found guilty.  How could she be deemed to be able to give informed consent to one but not the other.  If no means no, doesn't yes mean yes?

 

As I said, a whole can of worms......

Tricky one because while I think all criminals should get a second chance and would like to see released convicts (even rapists) employed, I know that I wouldn't employ him if I had a business because of the damage it could do.

 

Tricky one.

there a footballers currently playing that have killed people through reckless driving. I cant remember a furore over them when they were released from prison

I was sat in the waiting area at brough train station just outside of Hull when the Hull FC team turned up to catch the train to Arsenal. They all think he's been 'stitched up' and the lass has been with rugby players in the past that they know for definite, despite her saying shed never had a 1 night stand in her life

 

 

It doesn't matter if she was a prostitute who regularly worked for money.

A girl got drunk and he took advantage without her consent. Jesus I can't believe in 2014 armchair barristers still try to discredit a victim.

 

If Evans showed remorse over what he has done I would have no problem with him trying to make his way back into society. From what I have read, and his tacit support for extremist groups piggy-backing on his agenda, he doesn't deserve that treatment. People who have no intention of reform don't deserve a second chance, it's why we keep pedophiles away from kids after they've done their time.

It doesn't matter if she was a prostitute who regularly worked for money.

A girl got drunk and he took advantage without her consent. Jesus I can't believe in 2014 armchair barristers still try to discredit a victim.

 

If Evans showed remorse over what he has done I would have no problem with him trying to make his way back into society. From what I have read, and his tacit support for extremist groups piggy-backing on his agenda, he doesn't deserve that treatment. People who have no intention of reform don't deserve a second chance, it's why we keep pedophiles away from kids after they've done their time.

his word against hers. If he says she gave consent then why would he need to apologise if he thinks hes done no wrong?

Personally I think everyone else but Oldham fans should butt out its up to them if they want to sign him no one else.

I think it is likely he's been stitched up tbh footballers are often targeted. However they should try to be not so stupid and not sleep around and be a target for this sort of thing.

Edited January 8, 201511 yr by Bobbywoodhogan

If Evans showed remorse over what he has done I would have no problem with him trying to make his way back into society.

He has always maintained his innocence, if he showed remorse or apologised it would be an acceptance that he did something wrong which he believes he didn't.

Unsafe conviction

He's been convicted and served time and deserves a chance. Should he be convicted of another serious offence then he would have made himself unemployable.

This issue is a media-driven sh*t storm.

I cant even get my head around the trial let alone the decision to re-employ him. The trial stinks to me. Im not doubting a victim, im doubting the justice system as to how they came to the conclusion that the victim was too drunk to consent yet both men had sex with her....

So she was able to consent to one but not the other? 2 men have either committed the same offence or there is no offence at all. How did 1 get let off whilst the other got charged? can someone explain that to me?

Rightly or wrongly a precedent has been set by allowing Lee Hughes to return to the profession following serving time for manslaughter.

 

You can't say "you can return to football if convicted of this crime but you can't if convicted of that one". 

 

Evans is no more of threat playing football then he would be doing a less high profile job so if a club is willing to give him a contract then I don't think you can stop him from playing. 

I cant even get my head around the trial let alone the decision to re-employ him. The trial stinks to me. Im not doubting a victim, im doubting the justice system as to how they came to the conclusion that the victim was too drunk to consent yet both men had sex with her....

So she was able to consent to one but not the other? 2 men have either committed the same offence or there is no offence at all. How did 1 get let off whilst the other got charged? can someone explain that to me?

 

Best guess, his friend was the one who the victim went back to the hotel with in the taxi and Evans arrived back there alone and walked into the room whilst they were already engaged in sexual activity. 

 

He then, presumably, joined in without consent and that's what he was convicted for.

Best guess, his friend was the one who the victim went back to the hotel with in the taxi and Evans arrived back there alone and walked into the room whilst they were already engaged in sexual activity. 

 

He then, presumably, joined in without consent and that's what he was convicted for.

I haven't read much about it but I did see that both Evans and his friend said that she had agreed to sex with Evans.  The girl herself said the next day she couldn't remember anything about meeting them or anything after.  So I'm not sure how it can be said she didn't give consent - even she says she doesn't know.   I'm no expert but I have read that the law says that drunken consent is still consent.  It all seems a bit of a surprise there was thought to be enough to convict him in my opinion. 

Was there just as much of an outcry when Marlon King decided to join a club after his convictions? I'm not sure there was, Ched Evans is almost being picked on for being a fairly decent, White guy, Simply because the witch hunt folks know they will not get any discrimination accusations labelled at them and can basically go hell for leather trying to stop him.

I haven't read much about it but I did see that both Evans and his friend said that she had agreed to sex with Evans.  The girl herself said the next day she couldn't remember anything about meeting them or anything after.  So I'm not sure how it can be said she didn't give consent - even she says she doesn't know.   I'm no expert but I have read that the law says that drunken consent is still consent.  It all seems a bit of a surprise there was thought to be enough to convict him in my opinion. 

 

Apparently the girl herself never claimed to have been raped, the Welsh police were the ones who pursued the conviction.

 

Without wanting to be too crass, neither of the men involved ejaculated and so the only evidence that they had, had sexual contact with the victim was through their willingness to cooperate with the investigation. 

 

Apparently it is extremely rare, almost unheard of, for two men to be trialed for rape and for only one to be convicted. 

 

Drunken consent is an extremely grey area at the best of times and I'm sure there are more than a few of us on this forum who have had a drunken sexual encounter that we might have regretted in the stone cold sober light of the morning but, in my opinion, that doesn't equate to rape. 

Rightly or wrongly a precedent has been set by allowing Lee Hughes to return to the profession following serving time for manslaughter.

 

You can't say "you can return to football if convicted of this crime but you can't if convicted of that one". 

 

Evans is no more of threat playing football then he would be doing a less high profile job so if a club is willing to give him a contract then I don't think you can stop him from playing. 

 

Lee Hughes has shown genuine remorse for his action and has been in contact with the family of the person who died. Meanwhile convicted rapist Ched Evans maintains he did nothing wrong, and his victim continues to be hounded by his supporters and has had to move home and change her identity several times. It seems that some people are trying to make Ched Evans as the victim in this case, which makes me very uncomfortable.

 

There is no rule to stop clubs employing Ched Evans, it is up to the clubs to decide whether they want to sign him and that's how it should be. If Oldham want to damage their reputation while turning themselves into a side show then that's up to them.

Lee Hughes has shown genuine remorse for his action and has been in contact with the family of the person who died. Meanwhile convicted rapist Ched Evans maintains he did nothing wrong, and his victim continues to be hounded by his supporters and has had to move home and change her identity several times. It seems that some people are trying to make Ched Evans as the victim in this case, which makes me very uncomfortable.

But perhaps he is? The law has made innocent people guilty before.

 

Drunken consent is an extremely grey area at the best of times and I'm sure there are more than a few of us on this forum who have had a drunken sexual encounter that we might have regretted in the stone cold sober light of the morning but, in my opinion, that doesn't equate to rape. 

 

Exactly!  And something I read on a legal site yesterday said exactly the same - drunken consent is still consent even if you regret it when you're sober (or words to that effect).  

But perhaps he is? The law has made innocent people guilty before.

 

Usually it doesn't though. He was found to be guilty beyond reasonable doubt by a jury of his peers for a crime that it is notoriously difficult to get a conviction for, so I'm inclined to give his victim the benefit of the doubt here.

Lee Hughes has shown genuine remorse for his action and has been in contact with the family of the person who died. Meanwhile convicted rapist Ched Evans maintains he did nothing wrong, and his victim continues to be hounded by his supporters and has had to move home and change her identity several times. It seems that some people are trying to make Ched Evans as the victim in this case, which makes me very uncomfortable.

 

There is no rule to stop clubs employing Ched Evans, it is up to the clubs to decide whether they want to sign him and that's how it should be. If Oldham want to damage their reputation while turning themselves into a side show then that's up to them.

 

At present Evans has an appeal regarding his conviction ongoing, if he were to apologise it would imply guilt on his part and so the lack of remorse is because he is still currently trying to prove his innocence. 

 

Should his appeal be unsuccessful then perhaps he should then issue a apology but by this point it would probably be just a PR attempt at appeasing those who feel that's what he should have done following his release. 

 

I agree that it is wrong that the victim has been harassed but you can't hold Evans accountable for that. 

 

There isn't a rule no but I do find it strange that you have 20,000 people signing a petition telling Oldham how to run their football club. 

 

I don't side with Evans but there is a lot of hypocrisy surrounding this debate with regards to players who have returned to sport or even high profile professions such as music and cinema following convictions for serious crimes. 

It is indeed a can of worms and I agree that it's up to Oldham if they want to employ him. I find the whole thing perplexing, but I also think that working class footballers get a particularly rough ride in the press, there's just something about someone who they consider their social inferior that gets up journalists noses...Perhaps its the money they earn, when they are widely perceived to be thickos. But even John Terry who was found not guilty in court of racism, was found guilty in the court of public opinion.

 

I didn't realise the girl couldn't remember if she said no or not, as a Woman I believe that however drunk you are, even if the bloke is primed and ready, once you utter the word no, that's it, end of story. Its such a grey area and as someone else said, if Ched Evans maintains he is innocent, showing remorse implies guilt.

 

In short I haven't a clue how I feel about this.

there a footballers currently playing that have killed people through reckless driving. I cant remember a furore over them when they were released from prison

 

Well there was. Lee Hughes (also employed by Oldham) got a smaller amount of this simply because rape is viewed differently by people.

 

He's been convicted and served time and deserves a chance. Should he be convicted of another serious offence then he would have made himself unemployable.

This issue is a media-driven sh*t storm.

 

Seems to be very grass roots actually with Twitter driving it. Technically he's still on parole so not completely served his time.

 

Was there just as much of an outcry when Marlon King decided to join a club after his convictions? I'm not sure there was, Ched Evans is almost being picked on for being a fairly decent, White guy

 

Fairly decent white guys (or black, brown, pink or blue) don't tend to get convicted of rape.

 

I'm not going to get into the actual incident because I've not got the facts that the jury had. But the simple fact is that Ched Evans is an unrepentant, unapologetic convicted rapist. Not only that but he doesn't seem to have said a single word to his 'supporters' who have hounded a woman who was raped by the way (in the eyes of the law) to stop them from hounding her. She has apparently been forced to move five times because of this harassment.

 

Now Evans has every right to do whatever he wants. But football, like any other entertainment industry is beholden to it's stakeholders. That's the fans who are being forced to make a choice that no fan should, whether they and their families (including women) can feel it conscionable to support a team containing an individual who raped a woman. There's the sponsors who have to decide whether they want to be associated with an organisation who hires convicted rapists, and that's pretty much the bottom line - money.

 

Simple fact is that Oldham Athletic have hired a convicted rapist to help them win football matches and make more money. There's no nobility in it, it's simply a cold, callous move to pick up a moderately talented footballer on the cheap. 

 

Well done Oldham.

 

I agree that it is wrong that the victim has been harassed but you can't hold Evans accountable for that. 

 

 

So he's said that she shouldn't be harassed then? He's spoken out to his 'supporters' through his website, on Twitter or in the media to say that this woman perhaps shouldn't have been harassed to the extent that she has had to move a number of times?

 

 

There isn't a rule no but I do find it strange that you have 20,000 people signing a petition telling Oldham how to run their football club. 

 

 

What's odd about that? We had many fans exercise their freedom of expression to voice their disdain of Rafa. Supporters at clubs have ALWAYS voiced their opinions about how clubs are run. That's essentially the point of this very forum isn't it?

 

 

I don't side with Evans but there is a lot of hypocrisy surrounding this debate with regards to players who have returned to sport or even high profile professions such as music and cinema following convictions for serious crimes. 

 

You don't like a Roman Polanski movie then don't be in the cinema audience.

 

If you're an Oldham supporter who has been going for years but have weird hangups about women being raped, what should you do? There's a whole thread on the Oldham forum about who will boycott games - that is a horrendous position to be put in by a board that the Oldham support seem to loathe in large part.