Subscribe: Try a month free Subscribe
Subscribe: Try a month free Subscribe

Rod Liddle

The utterly ludicrous and petty campaign against Ched Evans

He has served the required amount of his sentence, and he should be allowed to do the job he chose and is qualified for

Ched Evans playing for his former club Sheffield United Photo: Getty

10 January 2015

9:00 AM

10 January 2015

9:00 AM

A new name to help us welcome in the new year: Jean Hatchet. A name which is almost certainly too good to be true for a perpetually infuriated radical feminist — much as, say, Roz Termagant or Betty Hitler would be. It is a pseudonym, apparently. Ms Hatchet — I assume that is the title she would prefer, although Mx is catching on quite quickly — is the woman behind the petitions to prevent the footballer and convicted rapist Ched Evans from earning a living from his trade.

The first petition was got up when Evans began training with his former club, Sheffield United — who quickly washed their hands of him as a consequence of the publicity. There was a sort of furore. The actual number of people who felt so angry that Evans should be allowed to work for a living at his chosen profession were very small indeed — Hatchet’s latest petition contains just 30,000 signatures, a mere microdot in today’s world of click-democracy. But the issue had become politicised and the subtext now read: if you are in favour of Ched Evans playing professional football again, then you are in favour of rape. To argue that he has served the required amount of his sentence is also to be in favour of rape, and in favour of rapists and in favour of sexual violence per se. And so this laughable, stupid and fatuous premise has terrified the politicians, who have now, of course, become involved. None of them dare suggest that one of the purposes of prison is to rehabilitate and that the best possible outcome for a former prisoner is that he should go straight into a job (rather than on to benefits).

One of the ironies is that the people who have signed these various petitions are more usually lenient on the issue of criminal justice — unless it is a crime to which they particularly object. Burglary, armed robbery, manslaughter, drug dealing etc. — they’re OK. Crimes against women and any racist stuff — nope, no rehabilitation, you’re scum and that’s that. Oh, and homophobia.


Scum he may well be. Don’t know the bloke. Once Sheffield United had ditched him, most other league clubs ran a mile. Hartlepool, rooted eight points adrift at the very bottom of the bottom division, showed a vague interest and then swiftly bailed. Then Oldham Athletic fancied taking him on — and they have form when it comes to the rehabilitation of offenders. Oldham employed another striker, Lee Hughes, when he had been released from prison for killing someone as a consequence of dangerous driving — there was, of course, no petition designed to prevent them. Nor have there been petitions against the multitude of other ex-offenders plying their trade in the football league. Just Ched Evans. As the Spectator columnist Melissa Kite put it, this is mob rule.

The arguments against Evans playing football again are so vacuous as to be beyond parody; it is a froth of fashionable PC outrage, and odious in its implications. First, it is alleged that in playing football, rather than being a plumber or a taxidermist, Evans is in a position of ‘influence’. Really? Playing football for a third-rate team in front of 5,000 supporters? The objectors insist that he can carry on playing football — just not for a team anyone has heard of, which is sort of mad. They also say he can get a job — but not the one he wants to do and is qualified to do. Is it possible to be more utterly ludicrous and petty? Next, they insist that he did not serve his full sentence and is therefore on licence, rather than properly at liberty. Well yes, but that applies to almost everyone released from prison. Are we to say that none of them should work? Or work only where Jean Hatchet and a bunch of moronic columnists decide is suitable? Where do you think he should clock in, Jean and friends? Why not drop him a line and explain what work you think is suitable for someone who has recently come out of prison. And then do the same thing to the other few hundred thousand people in a similar situation: you decide where they can work and how much they can earn.

Then there is the allegation that he has shown no remorse; he has not said sorry to his victim. I am not aware of this stipulation being raised in any other case. The reason he has not apologised is that he does not think that he is guilty, and his lawyers have lodged an appeal with the Criminal Cases Review Commission, so he would be ill advised to say sorry. There are grave doubts about his conviction — but even if there were not, the point and the principle remain. He has served his sentence for a serious crime. In a civilised country you would expect people to be delighted that he was now about to be offered full-time, remunerative work.

One air-headed columnist suggested that even though he had served his sentence, the woman he raped would have to live with his crime her entire life and, therefore, so should he. Ergo, he should not be allowed to play professional football. But what of the victims of muggers, killers, robbers, burglars? Do they not continue to suffer? Should we stop all criminals working on account of the legacy of misery and trauma they have left behind? I can see a case for saying ‘Yes we should!’ I don’t agree with it, but I can see the case.

But I can’t see the case for saying: no, only Ched Evans. Just him. The truth is that his case is the perfect example of the moronic inferno, the howl round of witlessness and politically motivated confected outrage.

Got something to add? Join the discussion and comment below.

You might disagree with half of it, but you’ll enjoy reading all of it. Try your first 10 weeks for just $10

Tagged, , , , , , , , ,

What to read next

Ched Evans: law vs people power

The Nigel Evans case proves that juries are smarter than our liberal elite

I’m utterly sickened by this story of a man trying to talk to a woman on a train

Soon, having sex and having children will be utterly disconnected

I’m utterly sickened by this story of a man trying to talk to a woman on a train

Soon, having sex and having children will be utterly disconnected

Show comments
  • James Phillips

    A vote in my class resulted in a 20 to 2 majority saying he should not be allowed to play football for a club, on the grounds that he would set a bad example for young fans.

    The only example-setting I can see is one of intolerance, unforgiveness and a complete disregard of one of the most important aims of prison in a civilised society, as pointed out above: rehabilitation and integration back into society.

    Another fine example of the vacuous PC brigade who act as though they are morally superior, but in rallying behind this supposedly feminist cause display nothing except a disturbing lack of hunanity.

    • GraveDave

      I think he’s an idiot. But he does only play football after all and they’re not generally the brightest sparks in the brain box area, are they? However,I don’t recall Marlon King having all this opprobrium or online campaigning done against him when he broke that utterly innocent young lady’s jaw in a nightclub merely because she wasn’t interested. As well as that he already had a record literally as long as your arm, from reckless driving to sexual assault, to hitting a policeman and theft…

      • Katherine Hughes

        Just because people have made bad decisions in the past, that doesn’t mean we should keep on making the same bad decisions.

      • Malcolm Knott

        Nor was there outrage when Leslie Grantham, a convicted murderer, became an actor and starred as Dirty Den in Eastenders. He had a tremendous fan base, especially among women.

    • Katherine Hughes

      Rehabilitation of offenders is all well and good but it is based on the premise that the offender accepts that what they have done is wrong and is committed to atoning for their past behaviour. Someone who refuses to admit that they have even done anything wrong can not be considered to be rehabilitated. And in case you’re going to start bleating about miscarriages of justice, please don’t. Miscarriages of justice happen to poor people who can’t afford lawyers. They don’t happen to rich footballers with the best lawyers money can buy. Evans’ case for his innocence is based on the fact that he either disagrees with or doesn’t properly understand the legal definition of rape. Too bad.

      • Kjafc

        What an ignorant comment. Miscarraiges only happen to poor people, what a load of ideological rubbish. Let’s not have trials then, just judge people on how much money they have. Unbelievable!

      • Sam

        Are you for real?

  • JohnCrichton89

    Nobody is stopping this guy from working, and he is not exactly destitute.

    Companies don’t want a high profile convicted rapist as the face of their brand, that’s the deal breaker in his potential contracts. Not the Facebook campaigns.
    Every time a club goes to sign him sponsors threaten to walk and it would make it harder for the club to get sponsors.
    Companies simply don’t want pay Ched Evans the rapist to wear their company logo every week on live television.

    And I don’t blame them, it would certainly make me think twice about using their products/services.

    • Christian

      Would it really? You say ‘I love nandos but they sponsor a club who hired a rapist so I’ll eat food I dislike instead’. What a bloody liar

      • JohnCrichton89

        Your very poor analogy, or straw man if you will, fails in a number of places.

        Also if you are building a straw man and paraphrasing, I don’t think you need apostrophe marks…….. although you might have been looking for the quotation marks key. It is confusing when you speak stupid as your first language, so I forgive you.

        Let’s open it up, if Nandos did knowingly promote their very tasty chicken on the chest of a convicted rapist, live on television every week (or even for one week), I would not eat Nando’s.

        Although I never actually said I would boycott it, I probably would. More over, when me and my close friends/family go out for dinner Nando’s would be off the menu.

        It doesn’t mean I’m going to live off of raw brussel sprouts, I have a very large selection of places that sell tasty chicken located quite close.
        Calling me a liar with such crapola backing it up makes you either fantastically stupid or an averagely stupid liar yourself.

    • rtj1211

      What you are saying is that there is no brand value in rehabilitating prisoners?

      But there is in offshoring profits to avoid tax??

      It’s a viewpoint, but I’m not sure you’ll become Archbishop of Canterbury holding it……

    • monsieur_charlie

      They would not give a jot if there was no petition.

  • Golden Fleece

    The lad should play the nazi feminists should get some real purpose in their sad lives MOVE ON

    • GraveDave

      Be nice if we could have a ‘straightner ‘that way.

    • Lord Taliesin

      Well there is that Christian woman about to be executed in Pakistan for drinking from a Muslim cup(no, I don’t know either) but this is far more important. Anyway, feminazis and islamofascists are on the same side.

  • No Surprise

    If Ched Evans had raped a man we would not be having this discussion as no club we touch him, no fan would say oh well he has served his time and no player would want to play with him… But its a women so it’s ok then

    • GraveDave

      Yes, likewise if my 27 year old son brought home a woman of 57 I wouldn’t have to pretend to ‘be over the moon’ about it. .But if my 27 year old son brought home a 57 year old man, I would have to tweet my happiness to the whole wide world and the moon.

      • Rob

        This has no connection to the article and is utterly irrelevant.

    • Jankers

      what? On planet earth rape is widely considered an important part of punitive sentencing of men and prisoner rehabilitation. Most feminists would argue the male victim could probably learn and benefit from the experience.

    • Lord Taliesin

      just shut up.

  • BillRees

    Whether they sign him is a matter for a football club, and I can understand the PR problems that may arise.
    But for consistency’s sake, shouldn’t the petitioners be targeting a former terrorist who is now a Deputy First Minister in part of the UK? Or did the fact that he was never convicted make it okay?
    I would rather see Martin McGuinness playing politics rather than terrorism, and I would rather see Ched Evans playing football than making a nuisance of himself elsewhere.

    • GraveDave

      Shouldn’t they also be campaigning for Theresa May to get more of a move on in her ‘tip of the iceberg’ paedophile ring investigations. Or do they hope we will somehow all forget.

    • rtj1211

      I must say that Tony Blair’s £50m+ pile since bombing the shit out of the Iraqis on a false prospectus does come high up my list of ‘suitable role models’ to place before Jessica Ennis-Hill et al……..far more high-profile, far more seniority and far more death and destruction caused. It didn’t cause Ms Hill to boycott London 2012 because old Tone was being a political slapper out in Singapore greasing palms for votes, did it?? Nor did it stop her becoming a millionaire as the ‘face of 2012’ and afterwards…

      But 100,000+ Iraqi dead due to a lying PM don’t matter.

      Cognitive dissonance and all that……….

  • Fraser Bailey

    Correct as usual, Rod. Oldham should sign that Charlie Hebdo as well.

    • prospero’s child

      I doubt that Oldham are that brave.

    • rtj1211

      Nah, Bradford City should be doing that……

  • JonahK

    I find the hounding of him chilling.

    • CouchSlob

      It’s not really though, is it? Disconcerting maybe. Uncomfortable perhaps. Hardly chilling.

      • statechaos

        The fact that members of staff at Oldham have received threats if they sign Ched Evans is chilling.

        • CouchSlob

          I just don’t find myself chilled by that. Disturbed at most.

          • sandy winder

            Is this how society treats ex-criminals these days?

          • Gwangi

            No – women who killed children and babies are defended by feminists who want no female criminals imprisoned – ever – and even want them to be allowed to work with children again… Such utter misandry on show – and another thing: why should this guy admit this crime? From what I know, some goldigger drunken dollybird sleeparound went to a hotel room to have it off with two footballers and another slipped in as she seemed rather enthusiastic. Is it R-p-? Nope.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Oh, for goodness sake. Can you point to ONE feminist who has ever said that female criminals should never be imprisoned? You’re making it up now.
            The victim emphatically did not go to that room to sleep with two footballers. On any interpretation, she went back with one only. Would you like a stranger who has lied to get a key to your hotel room to “slip in” to you on the basis of a minute’s assessment that you seem rather enthusiastic?

          • mtalk15

            she seemed pretty ok with his involvement when she asked him to lick her c**t just before she claimed to be “too drunk” to consent to sex.

          • Sarah

            She didn’t claim to be too drunk to consent. It is, though, totally plausible that a heterosexual man would be willing to lick a vagina his friend had just penetrated. I believe CM didn’t ejaculate, but the possibility of precum, ball sweat and the like seems rather a realistic one. I can definitely see why you’d believe that.

          • anonuk

            Adn that one’s even worse.

          • anonuk

            I can’t see this comment staying up, somehow.

          • Ed_Burroughs

            Nobody knows whether or not those words were ever uttered. I believe he was fitted up, but this type of comment lpays into the hands of the feminazis.

          • Gwangi

            Yes, that’s the clincher really. This girl is a golddigger riding piggyback our feminist-leaning law which is misandrist and discriminates against men. Femi-twerps need to GET REAL and stop automatically defending ALL women – that is an insult to those women who really have been brutally rayed actually. The women who accuses Ched Evans should get a 5 year sentence. I know the type – victimhood-craving, tears and histrionics. Sadly thick plods (keen to show how right on and feminist they are_ + judges + juries get taken in by such performances. Women can be such evil liars.

          • Bilbo Baggins

            There was no corroborating evidence for that, and the jury, quite wisely, rejected it.

          • Kjafc

            How can you say ’emphatically did not go to the room to sleep with two footballers’. YOU DO NOT KNOW THAT. You need to be careful because you seem to be claiming that you believe Clayton MacDonald is guilty. He was acquitted. Please be careful when you force your opinion. You come across as a very arrogant person incapable of considering the fact you might be wrong.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            How could she have? Neither MacDonald nor Evans ever suggested for one moment that she agreed to that or that she had any idea that MacDonald had texted Evans. When you have to make things up and resort to personal comments you really are betraying your desperation.

          • Kjafc

            Dear Eliza there’s a hole in your ‘facts’ dear Eliza. Have you watched the cctv footage? Have you read the witness statements? Have you read the taxi drivers statement? Have you considered how 1 man can be guilty another innocent when evidence is based on her level of drunkenness?

            Please do not call me a liar. I have no motive to lie. I do not know Chad evans or Clayton macdonald. Based on the basis evidence I have seen it believe he will win his appeal.

            You seem to be motivated by hate. You now claim it was financial. Nottage. Evans father in law offered to cover the loss of revenue. They pulled out because we have an angry group of idiots abusing the ckubs staff and sponsors threatening death etc. What’s your motive here you seem devoid of balance?

          • Eliza Doolittle

            I haven’t accused you of lying, Kjafc. Have you seen all the witnesses giving evidence? Have you seen all the evidence the jury saw? If not, how come you know better than them or the judges who considered the applications for leave to appeal?

            It’s not me who claims the club’s motivation was financial, it’s the club. I imagine they wouldn’t have accepted Massey’s offer (not Nottage) because it would have been too dangerous to put all their eggs in one basket. If he pulled out because his daughter fell out with Evans, or because they weren’t selecting him often enough in his judgment, they would be left high and dry.

          • Kjafc

            Nottage was my spell checker mistyping’ ‘not true’..!!! Again you are being selective about Oldhams statement. They cited the disgusting abuse from what can only be described as a bunch of animals as well as the financial issue. You do know the sponsors families and daughters were threatened with death? Where were these animals when macdonald was released or Lee Hughes?

          • Eliza Doolittle

            No, it’s you who is being selective since you categorically deny that the club was motivated by finance when they said they were.

            They weren’t so concerned about the family’s and daughters’ safety that they wanted to protect it by reporting the threats to the police. The police said that when they asked
            Oldham about the threats they could only point to some low level Twitter abuse.

            On that subject, what is your view of the death threats made to Evans’ victim?

          • Kjafc

            All death threats are made by animals. Do not try that trick Eliza please. This isnt me being anti anyone. Based on the vitriolic bloodlust for evans I was disturbed. So I researched the crime and became even more disturbed. I’m married with daughters so I’m not your enemy. In fact my wife agrees 100% with me on this case. In fact she’s more certain than me that this does not add up.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            What bloodlust? The very fact that you characterise petitions against Evans being employed by Oldham as bloodlust renders your research suspect

          • Kjafc

            What are you talking about. When you get people raging about Evans and then find out the very same people have been issuing ‘rape threats’ and ‘death threats’ you can see how it all appears extremely hypocritical. Those people are in it for the agenda.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            What, have all 70,000 + who signed the petitions been issuing threats? That is indeed big news, have you told the papers? Obviously can refer us to evidence of it, so let’s have it.

            Strangely, most people I know who signed have condemned the use of threats outright.

          • Kjafc

            Ps: please watch the CCTV footage in full and then comment on her sobriety.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            I have seen the CCTV footage. It does not demonstrate that she was sober then or when she was in the bedroom later.

          • Kjafc

            She gets into a taxi and agrees to go back to a hotel with a man. She walks into hotel and back out again on her own. Picks up a pizza from the pavement, walks back on her own into the hotel. All on CCTV. Other information was withheld from the jury.statements say she requested oral sex from evans which he provided. No semen only evidence sex occurred was the two players statements.

            Can you see why people have doubts? We dont all share your undying support for our justice system. The fact the jury acquitted macdonald IS relevant.

            Goodnight battery dying.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            That’s all incredibly selective. It ignores the evidence of those who actually saw her at the time. For goodness sake, Evans actually had to step over her when she was lying on the floor of the kebab shop. If you don’t realise that people who have drunk a lot have moments when they can make the effort of co-ordination, you know nothing about it.

            If you still don’t understand how it was perfectly possible for the jury to acquit one and convict the other, read the appeal court judgment

          • Kjafc

            Why do you up vote all your own comments dear Eliza?

          • Eliza Doolittle

            I like voting for sense

          • Gwangi

            Funny how femi-twerps always defend juries when they give a result they want (against men) but say how awful juries and the legal process are when they throw out cases or raype and find men innocent. Admit it, dear Eliza. You hate men.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            And it’s funny how woman haters happily accept jury verdicts in the vast majority of cases where those accused of rape are acquitted, but not when they’re convicted. Now I accept those verdicts either way.

            Sorry to muddle you, Gwangi, but no, I don’t hate men in the least. I’m happily married and have a large circle of male friends and colleagues, who incidentally can in their turn relate happily to women without feeling persecuted all the time. And who, incidentally, despise rapists.

          • Gwangi

            Yes, many. Listen to Womans Hour on Radio 4 – they have featured a campaign which aims to have NO women ever imprisoned for anything. So SH up, ignorant femi-twerp!

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Woman’s Hour has never run any such campaign. Sorry, telling people with inconvenient opinions and the evidence to back them to shut up, and slinging extremely childish insults around, doesn’t make blatant lies into truth

          • Sam

            finally some sense, hallelujah.

          • Amelia

            Don’t be ridiculous.

          • Gwangi

            Well, your argument is about as weak as the accusation of R against Mr Evans. Just coz you say it, femi-twerp, does not make it true.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Why are you so reluctant to type the word “rape”, Gwangi? Does it make you feel uncomfortable!

          • BelindaB

            Dude you are ignorant.

          • Gwangi

            No – you are. Read the evidence from the trial. This was NOT raype. Ched Evans is innocent.

          • Tam

            This is Victimisation, he has been punished for his crime and deserves the right to prove that he can continue with his life.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            No-one says he shouldn’t be able to continue with his life. They simply suggest that it is inappropriate that he should be able to do so in a position where he will be high profile and a role model for impressionable young people.

          • statechaos

            Oldham Athletic is hardly high profile. And there are plenty of footballers in the Premier League who are hardly ‘ideal’ role models for young people. How do you feel about Luke McCormick and Lee Hughes playing professional football? Both were responsible for the deaths of 2 people, in McCormick’s case 2 young boys due to drink-driving offences.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Classic “look over there” argument. Two – or three – wrongs don’t make a right.

          • sidgar

            Right, because by “looking over there”, we see something that weakens your argument. The one “distracting” others from the truth is the one suppressing evidence that might challenge them.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            How does it weaken the argument? Or are you seriously claiming that two wrongs do make a right?

          • sidgar

            Because one “wrong” got passed over and ignored while the other “wrong” is the continual subject of boycotts and harrassment. This is not even considering the weak case that convicted him in the first place. The people trying to destroy his life and career aren’t interested in “justice”, they are interested in reinforcing an agenda.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            I don’t think the issue of the other people was ever ignored. However, there is one important difference, which is that they were genuinely contrite.

          • Sam

            F**k off Eliza, he’s hardly going to be playing sensational through balls to Lionel Messi at the Champions League final is he?

            High profile? The only reason he is now high profile is because of people like you who are hell bent on condemning this man to death.

            I am an avid football fan and couldn’t tell you anybody that plays for Oldham Athletic.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Where precisely have I condemned him to death? Why, that would be nowhere. Again, when you have to make things up you betray the weakness of your case.

            The plain fact is that there are lots of Oldham fans. Oldham, like all clubs, does its best to make its players high profile because that is one of the ways it can make money.

          • Sam

            I don’t suppose you have heard of a generalisation then? You mobsters would rather see this man stood on a stool at the gallows before he can earn a penny in his trade again.

            Should the case be overturned at appeal, what would your opinion then be of Ched Evans?

          • Eliza Doolittle

            No-one objecting to Evans returning to major league football has ever suggested he should suffer capital punishment. Don’t make things up.

            Evans doesn’t have any appeal ongoing. Did you change your opinion when his appeal was rejected?

          • Sam

            Again Eliza it was a figure of speech.

            Please climb out of the box you live in and take that squishy pink thing dangling from your skull (that us normal people call a brain) with you, you moronic twat.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Wow, what an intellectual response. When you can’t find anything resembling a sensible argument you resort to sad abuse like that. You have demonstrated very clearly who the moronic twat round here is, and it’s not me.

          • anonuk

            Only rapists.

            If he had been a mugger or a gangland murderer, the Guardian would have been at the forefront of calls for his rehabilitation. However, he was not only criminal, he was far more importantly an oppressor of women- and therefore deserves to be hounded forever, apparently.

            Double standards are alive and well on both sides of politics.

          • rtj1211

            You wouldn’t be chilled by being told that your daughter would be raped if you signed Ched Evans??

          • CouchSlob

            Is that what happens when a club signs Ched Evans? Their fan’s daughters all get raped? I thought he was a footballer, not some kind of Super Rape Wizard.

          • Ed_Burroughs

            Where do we draw the line between ‘chilled’ and merely ‘disturbed’? I am ‘incensed’, as it happens.

          • Sam

            Can’t we go just go back to basics; sad, mad and bad.

            It is bad that these people would make death threats.

            It is very sad that these people are so hypocritical and cannot see it.

            It makes me mad that people are calling me a supporter or ‘rape’ because I have made a judgment myself and believe Ched Evans has been wrongly accused.

          • Ed_Burroughs

            Totally agree.

          • Gwangi

            If these threats had been made by men against professional victimhood-craving pity party feminists, they would have been arrested. So why aren’t the police arresting and charging all these obsessive haters who make threats against people just because they want to give a footballer a job? The UK police are TWERPS and USELESS and CORRUPT. Rock on Charlie Hebdo.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            I’m perfectly sure the police will arrest and charge anyone found to have made any such threats if there is adequate evidence against them, and I hope they do.

      • will91

        If you wanted any evidence that the pillars of western civilisation (freedom of thought, free speech) are currently being pulverised. I’d first direct you to the ongoing terrorist attacks in France and then I’d show you how a degenerate, anonymous mob which threatens violence against Oldham football club employees has managed to end their efforts to sign him. This is beyond sick.

        • Eliza Doolittle

          The strange thing about those threats is that none of the employees deemed them serious enough to report them to the police. But yes, if any threats were made it is certainly disgraceful.

    • JohnCrichton89

      Do rapist have the right to be forgotten if they have served time and slip back into society ?

      Serving time for what he done is, at best, should considered a form of rehabilitation or ,at worst, punishment. Considering his contentious denial, arguing he is rehabilitated is a mute point.

      Irrespective of that, his jail time does not absolve him. It was merely a punishment.

      People have a right to object. The argument falls into an infinite regression at this point, where the article writer is objecting to other peoples right to object. Where upon I object to his objection, and you object to my objection……. it goes on.

      Free speech has already suffered enough this week without this. Shame on this journalist for suggesting that people shouldn’t be allowed to voice their opinions on the matter, however bias.

      • Baron

        As far as Baron’s concerned, John, you can object to Evans kicking the ball again until the cows come home, get milked. What he (Baron) objects to is your belief you should be listened to.

        Liddle’s right, Evans served the time, he should be free to carry on with his life as he pleases.

        • JohnCrichton89

          As far as Baron is concerned ? Are you speaking about yourself in the third person ?

          Well tell baron I agree, people have the right to free speech not an audience.

          People should be able to talk about this guys rape conviction until ‘the cows come home’ also. And people should be free to ignore them, this article complains about people payin mind whilst paying mind……… it’s oxymoronic and asinine.

          If companies decide not to have a convicted rapist as the face of their brand, it’s a pretty good business decission if you ask me and an understandable decision unless you a profession pimp.

          He has the right to go on with his life, but as I said, serving time doesn’t erase what he done. It’s a punishment, not absolution.

          • rtj1211

            Actually, in a civilised society, successfully rehabilitating prisoners within your company should be a hugely positive brand building exercise. You took the challenging course for the benefit of society. Not merely interested in ‘I’m all right Jack, munee, munnee, munnee’ narcissim. Actually interested in the tough issues of society.

            That’s real leadership, you know.

            Much tougher than being holier than thou.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            In order to be fully rehabilitated, you need to acknowledge guilt. Evans fully acknowledges what he did but apparently doesn’t think that it should be a crime. That makes him dangerous.

          • hodders83

            Macdonald is still playing football and was never given any sentence

          • Golden Fleece

            The jury beleived a drunk druggie
            Evans and Mcdonald KNOW what happened YOU DONT
            That makes YOU dangerous

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Yes. And on their account of what happened, Evans is clearly guilty.

          • David Murphy

            Neither do you know, you are guessing and your belief is based on your own misogynistic view of women.

          • Kjafc

            Rubbish! He believes he is innocent, how do you think he feels. Two men together are accused of the same crime based on identical evidence. One is acquited by the jury, the other is found guilty. Evidence that was not produced in Court is now available. Both men are adamant she consented. Both men admitted they had sex and that she was willing. There was no proof that sex had taken place, other than the mens statements. She claims she cannnot remember anything about the night. There is too much doubt here, I have no idea why you are so unwilling to consider this might be a miscarriage.

          • GavinDrake

            It wasn’t identical evidence – the facts relating to the two defendants were different.

            This post might educate you: http://footylaw.co.uk/2015/01/06/ched-evans-sifting-facts-from-fiction/

          • Kjafc

            The jury found him guilty of having non consented sex on the grounds that she was too drunk to consent. Macdonald was acquitted. The full CCTV footage was not shown. Of course this is unsafe.

          • GavinDrake

            “Of course this is unsafe” – the Lord Chief Justice, who is better qualified than you or I, disagrees. And he has had the chance of reviewing all the papers and hearing from Ched Evans’ lawyers.

            How do you know that the full CCTV footage wasn’t shown? I’ve not seen that reported anywhere. Why wasn’t it shown? Ched Evans’ lawyer could have shown it. And that only shows what happened when she arrived at the hotel – not what happened afterwards.

          • Colonel Mustard

            Within my own lifetime innocent men have been hanged by judges and Lord Chief Justices and Home Secretaries “reviewing all the papers”.

            Within my own lifetime homosexuals were once relentlessly persecuted and prosecuted by the authorities who knew best.

            Those two facts make me less credulous about those who dispense justice.

          • Starbar Rothschild

            this is nonsense, since when are you in a better position than the court to decide his guilt?

          • Kjafc

            Since I read all that was available in the public domain including evidence that was not submitted to the jury. Unlike some people, I have an open mind and am not motivated by an agenda. She was notvtru drunk there is no evidence that said she was. Her drinks had not been spiked. She admitted that because she was working late she didn’t drunk as much as she usually would. She lied about the cocaine. She went willingly into a taxi. She conversed with the taxi driver moving from the back seat to the front when he asked. She walked out of the hotel unaided on her own to collect the pizza she had left on the pavement.she walked back on her own unaided. When she left the hotel the next day to report here missing handbag she was sober.

            The jury had to decide beyond a reasonable doubt that both accused men had had sex with her when she was too drunk to say no. Macdonald was acquitted. Evans found guilty.

            I cannot see how any person can say there is no doubt. There is no proof positive that she did not give consent. None. Where is it? Why was macdonald acquitted, does that alone not raise doubt?

            I am surprised that we have people in a civilised society acting like a lynch mob, even more surprised at the disgusting abuse handed out to the staff at Oldham & the sponsors.

          • Bilbo Baggins

            I am given to understand that the person working in the pizza/takeaway shop sad that ” he had seen her drunk before, but not as drunk as that night”. She also fell over in the shop during the course of spending an hour in there chatting to people, offering them food and taking food from them. What rational person spends an hour in a takeaway shop? The fact that she left her handbag there shows she wasn’t functioning effectively and having memory losses.

          • Starbar Rothschild

            no -one one here is condoning the vile abuse allegedly directed at OAFC. the fact remains that Evans is a rapist by definition, he was convicted on the evidence in court and neither you nor I can dispute that. If you want to represent him at his appeal I would suggest that the time for that has long passed. he is perfectly free to gain employment anywhere, I would further suggest that he does so somewhere less open to public scrutiny and where young men and boys do not look on him as a role mode,.perhaps outside football ? Am still not sure what you would see as a positive outcome here, all of us have events in our past which potentially reflect on our careers if allowed to.

          • Gladysnight1

            Read the comments underneath, footylaw gets torn apart by the posters.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Not so. They try to do so but fail completely.

          • David Murphy

            It might be, but then again currently as stands he is a convicted rapist.

          • Kjafc

            True according to the verdict he is a convicted rapist. However he is adamant, as is Macdonald that she consenTed. Based on the transcripts & evidence in the public domain I find it incredible he was he was found guilty without reasonable doubt. Made even more bizarre because there was doubt with macdonald. This is more unsafe than a house built on quicksand IMO.

          • mandelson

            A bit like the Guildford 4 and the Birmingham 6 – why didn’t they show contrition. Oh I forgot its because they were innocent. But you knew that all along didnt you?

          • Eliza Doolittle

            The difference is that the Guildford 4 and Birmingham 6 weren’t convicted on the basis of their own evidence. Evans fully acknowledges everything he did, he just doesn’t think it should be a crime.

          • Kjafc

            The rubbish you come out with is terrible. Where did He say he raped her? You keep lying about this. His statement and macdonalds said she asked him for oral sex which he performed. His statement also said she consented to sex after.

            Stop lying.

            Stop up voting all your comments. Sus you up.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            One admitted to a chain of facts which demonstrated that he cannot reasonably have believed that she was consenting. That was supported by the evidence of a number of other victims and by video evidence

          • Mellowman

            maybe around a third of the country doesn’t think it should be a crime , either does that make us all “dangerous”

        • Sarah

          You need to tell that to the sponsors, then. As this is a free country, people are allowed to spend their money where they please and to advise sponsors of anyone signing Rapist Evans that their custom will be going elsewhere. The sponsors listen, naturally, because their responsibility is to remain profitable and if enough people boycott because of their sponsorship of a club signing Evans, they’ll withdraw the sponsorship. The club then have a decision to make- player or sponsors.

          This is all simply business. No more, no less. An employee is either worth having or they’re not- if their presence causes enough trouble to their employer, they tend to fall into the latter camp. Or do you think the normal rules of the job market and commerce ought not to apply to Evans?

          • Des Demona

            In what way do the ”normal rules of the job market” apply when the employer is being sent death threats and staff told their wives and daughters will be raped if they employ someone?

          • Sarah

            To clarify, the normal rules of the job market are sponsors decisions to steer clear of OAFC if they sign Evans, and OAFC’s subsequent decision to refrain from such.

          • Des Demona

            On the basis that Evan’s wealthy prospective father in law had already offered to cover any financial loss from sponsors pulling out then those ”rules” did not apply. The club pulled out of the deal because of the vile threats it had received.
            In any event, this has all the hallmarks of a witch hunt. The man was found guilty and imprisoned. To prevent him from returning to his former trade on the spurious basis that somehow he is a ”role model” and somehow that might influence fans attitude to rape seems little more than vindictive.

          • Sarah

            Yes, they say it was due to the rape threats received. However, you assume that Massey’s offer to cover any loss of sponsorship was acceptable to the club and all those there, which is a stretch. After all, this is quite an unprecedented situation: you have someone basically paying for their rich relative to be able to play football. It’s a level up from even the more controlling sugar daddy oligarchs. One wonders what level of control he would expect for this- would he, once he’d got them by the short and curlies, expect the rapist to start a certain number of games, for example? What if Evans was rubbish, they wanted to let him go at the end of the season but they couldn’t afford to because they’d lost the contracts and needed Massey’s money? The manager was rumoured to be against the signing and it’s not hard to see why. It could easily undermine his autonomy. It’s quite possible the board realised what a poor business decision they were making, particularly as the sponsors dropped out thick and fast. The rape threats, appalling as they are, have also come at a rather convenient time for the board. It allows them a get out from a position that was clearly an exceptionally risky one.

            As for witch hunting, presumably you feel the same about every instance where a convicted rapist is prevented from returning to their former industry? So teachers, lawyers and the like?

          • Des Demona

            Massey’s offer was acceptable to the club – that was why they were going ahead with the deal.

            ”As for witch hunting, presumably you feel the same about every instance where a convicted rapist is prevented from returning to their former industry? So teachers, lawyers and the like?”
            You presume too much. A teacher would be on the sex offenders register and therefore could not be offered a job. A lawyer with a criminal record would be disbarred.
            There may be some instances where a convicted rapist should not be allowed to take up their former trade, for safety or security reasons for example, but I don’t see how football is in that bracket.

          • Sarah

            We have no way of knowing whether Massey’s offer was acceptable to the club once the volume of sponsorship they were going to lose became clear: the more they lost, the more of their eggs they were going to be putting in one basket. It is, of course, convenient for the board to suggest that, as it detracts from what a risky business decision they were choosing to make.

            As for the occupations, you hide behind the professional regulations for solicitors and barristers, but you haven’t told us whether you think they constitute a witch hunt or not.

          • Des Demona

            The board themselves said the deal was acceptable.
            I hide behind…. really? The professional regulations for solicitors and barristers are there for reasons of professional probity. Someone dealing with law is deemed unfit to do so if they have a criminal record. That is not a witch hunt.

          • Sarah

            The board said the deal was acceptable, yes. Then they lost more sponsorship. Clearly the business case for signing Evans is going to vary according to how much sponsorship it’s going to lose them. Losing just one sponsor requires putting fewer eggs in the Massey basket than losing two, or three, or nine. This means that the board’s motivation cannot be assumed to remain the same throughout this process- because the commercial case doesn’t.

            Regarding witch hunting, I’m glad you’ve now told us you don’t think the various professional regulations don’t constitute a witch hunt- that’s more than you did previously (although it’s not true that a person is automatically deemed unfit to deal with law if they have a criminal record- solicitors will not necessarily be debarred for minor offences). However, you’re still wrong about this being one. Witch hunts do not involve regard for guilt. Evans,on the other hand, is being held to account for what he has done, by the forces of the market. The witch hunt victim here is the woman he raped.

          • Des Demona

            I’m not at all sure what you are getting at with my ”supposed” views on what constitutes a witch hunt. Professional regulations clearly don’t. What is your point?
            Rather disingenuous to state he is being held to account by market forces. He is being held to account by a witch hunt using threats and coercion, after already being held to account by imprisonment. What gives you the right to continue to be judge and jury?

          • edithgrove

            Who are the sponsors of Oldham Athletic? I’m inclined to boycott them for going along with this witch hunt. Give me names please, my poison pen is ready.

          • Dave

            I think we should blame the cps and not the football club

          • Dave

            Evens should still be playing football .. I beleave he has been wrongly convicted .. There are tree peaple who know the truth .. She says she carnt remember .. So that makes two .. If Thay where all drunk who can say what really happened

          • Billy Thrivel

            ‘Supposedly’… raped. Nobody knows exactly what happened exfept the people involved. Its offensive for you to throw around the term rape..or rapist when there is a crime case review in waiting. When people like yourself use this term so often…it seems to belittle the crime case reviewers…and the process of truly trying to get to the bottom of whether the case was conclusive or not. Just my opinion…but I think you shouldnt presume guilt when a jury found him guilty on such a lack of evidence and a potentially loose version of what rape/consent implies. Wait until the hearing/review is done…then…and only then…should you revert back to naming and shaming in a rather derogatory manner. Thank u.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Not in the least offensive when he has been convicted and has had his appeal turned down. Fewer than 1% of cases reviewed by the CZcRC result in convictions being overturned

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Sorry, that should be CCRC

          • Billy Thrivel

            I think if there is that small a percentage in overturned convictions then the justice system in which we live is a little (or aclot perhaps) flawed. There is so much angst on here…about him still not having apologised for his crime. If a man maintains his innocence…clearly people disregard this on here..and in society/press when they say a convicted rapist without remorse shouldn’t be allowed back a role-modelesque job. Thats a fair point. ..However I dont believe unless you met the man and judged for yourself his nature you could truly evaluate what he offers to society. The question of the matter is…if…ghe jury had acquitted ched evans…would all of this still be happening in the media…would parents/fans and investors still be cautious in taking on this player? If we behold..exactly what the state/govt’s inform us is correct…throughout life…we most certainly will end up disappointed/disgusted at some point. I have read the reports…and in my eyes there is still a huge lack of evidence to convict this man. So many people who have followed this closely know this also…and to be honest it looks alot like a couple of jury members decisions have influenced the entire swing of opinion in this. It is possible…that on another day kn court this would have been thrown out…which as the author of this article has mentioned. And if people find someone in this kinda case guilty…when there is clearly…reasonable doubt. .then im seriously fucking worried about the courts and how potentially innocent people can be sent down (and then be denied reasonable requests to clear their names after coming out) when the case at best..is speculative/hypothetically guilty. Now look..maybe one or both of them did this. .and are guilty…but the mockery is also the way that one man went free and the other found guilty. Perhaps also that if there wasnt a sexist element in this case. ..It could jave been the men? Who could claim to be raped if they said they could not remember? Its all so up in the air…but the prejudices of the court system here are really seriously being contested. .and rightly so when so many factors are unknown..there are so many ifs and buts…and as a law grad has also already commented on this article..this case should have been thrown out at the start. It all raises a variety of philosophical questions…not least of all…do we consider exactly what the authorities/court system/prosecutors tell us to be 100% infallible? And the answer in this case…is fuck no we don’t. If youre gonna get the man…get some more damn evidence!

          • Eliza Doolittle

            But the jury saw Evans giving evidence, and heard him being cross examined. So they had ample basis on which to judge his nature. You haven’t seen or heard anything like the amount of evidence that the jury did, so on what basis do you think you know better?

          • Dave

            This one will defo be overturned other otherwise these courts will have to close ther doors if Thay keep getting things so wrong. I pitty the real rape victims .. And the damage this case has coursed … I blame the pub for letting them drink so much

          • FedUp

            There are still degrees within the categories of offence and regardless as to whether his conviction is overturned or not, the judge clearly believed that it was at the minor end of the scale by awarding the minimum sentence.
            That aside, should the public decide who or who should be employed by whom and in what capacity? Yes, that is up to the organisation to decide but I would suggest that the witch hunt effectively forced arms up peoples backs.
            There is no requirement that those who have served time should return to their original employment. Equally, unless there are restrictions on their release, there is not. They are the rules and if you don’t like the rules then go through the proper channels and seek to have the guidelines changed FOR ALL CRIMINALS rather than witch hunting one!

          • Dave

            So that said why are you making the comment .. Have you read the statements and seen the videos ? It sounds like the judge is bowing to public pressure .. It would be ok ..if the public read up on the case but Thay don’t do Thay ? … Anyway blame jean hatchet for the mess ched evens is in with the football clubs …. And how much money has she erned out of this ?

          • Eliza Doolittle

            The judge’s sentencing remarks indicate that one reason for the relative leniency of the sentence was his belief that Evans had destroyed his football career, so he presumably thought that was in effect part of the punishment.
            Since when was signing a petition not a “proper channel”? Do you think all the people who, for instance, petitioned for a new Hillsborough inquest weren’t using the proper channels?

          • MenControlTheMedia

            No Eliza, Women aren’t allowed to influence the outcomes of things. Only men’s channels and men’s outrages are non-trivial and proper.

          • shaz

            People like you get right on my nerves. So self right ions and prim. The man has served his sentence, for God’s sake let him get on with his life. Would you be kicking up all this fuss if he was a toilet cleaner. NO. Maybe that’s what you would like him to do. If people make a mistake do they have to pay for the rest of their lives. Cases like these are decided on people’s opinion. None of us know what really went on except the people involved, and one persons word is taken over another’s. Time for you to stop the witch hunt and shut up. PLEASE

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Wake up at the back. I hadn’t said anything for 6 months at the time you posted, so goodness knows why you are begging me to shut up. At the time I posted these comments he hadn’t in fact completed his sentence. But, more importantly, I never suggested that he should serve any further sentence.

            I simply pointed out that no-one has any automatic right to go into or return to their previous employment after leaving prison, which is undoubtedly the case. You presumably won’t expect Rolf Harris to return to a job on TV when he is released, for example, despite the fact that he will have served his sentence. If the previous employment of a convicted person involved them being in the public eye and a role model, and if they had been convicted of a crime as serious as rape on the basis of their own evidence – as Evans was – then it is perfectly reasonable to question the desirability of them returning to that employment. Evans doesn’t have to pay for the rest of his life, in fact he had a perfectly good offer of employment from his girlfriend’s father which no-one objected to him taking up.

            This case wasn’t decided on the basis of people’s opinions, it was decided on the basis of the evidence, crucially the admissions of Evans and his friend.

          • Dave

            Maybe Thay should bring back hanging … Then if Thay make a mistake Thay can stitch is head back on ? Anyway if it’s 1% it’s 1% that could add up to thousands in a year And that’s disgracefully hay ?

          • Gladysnight1

            He hasn’t had his appeal turned down.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            He has applied twice for leave to appeal and been turned down twice. Check the Court of Appeal judgment which is available online.

          • Dave

            Could it be the peaple who convicted he where jealous because he erned more money than them… And you know how these dogooders minds work … There not happy till Thay get to the top of the pile … I feel it should high profile courts that deal with these cases and the jury should be of the same pay scale as accused

          • Conroyjohn

            Utter tosh. Whether you agree with Evans’ punishment or not, we all abide by the fact that the judge or jury decide guilt and punishment. There is no requirement in law that an offender MUST rehabilitate. Any attempt by a person who is neither qualified or authorised to continue any further punitive course of action based on nothing more than the opinion that they have not been punished enough or are not rehabilitated, has to be seen as wrong. To hold that opinion is absolutely right to use that opinion to drive others of the same opinion into action against a person or people that would adversely effect them in any way , especially if that person has been already been held to account for their actions, is pretty much the modern definition of witch hunt. My abhorrence of Rapists runs deep but I will not mix the two arguments together. Rape is wrong. If the court punishes it then any attempt at further punishment is also wrong.
            A quick aside to this, is that Hatchet has not shown any real empathy with the rape victim and his/her/their feelings towards the victim seems an irrelevant sidebar in comparison to their need to vent about feelings towards Evans. Why do I get the impression that this is just a vehicle for Hatchet who will move on without a second thought once the furore has died down.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            There is equally no requirement that offenders must return to their former jobs. Most don’t, because employees don’t want to employ rapists and investors don’t want to fund them. Why should Evans be an exception, particularly given the potential harm to impressionable young people. And whilst he refuses to acknowledge his crime there is an ongoing danger of repetition.

          • Billy Thrivel

            Yet again. ..he refuses to acknowledge the crime because he doesnt believe he has committed it. People need to stop mentioning that until every single appeal and case appeal is denied (if).

          • Dave

            Yes I agree billy This man has suffered so much just because the police have tried building a case out of nothing

          • ArthurSparknottle

            Did you know that the girl never alleged rape when she went to the police. She said she had woken up in a hotel bed soaked in urine and didn’t remember what happened. She had no injuries and no semen on her.

          • MenControlTheMedia

            Then he shouldn’t be out on license.

            He’s been convicted and his appeal turned down. He’s guilty.

          • Billy Thrivel

            Excuse me, ‘mencontrolthemedia’, if yo don’t have anything Insightful to add to this discussion…kindly get lost. This is an adult conversation about the open-ness of belief systems and the lack of clarity and common sens within our justice system. If yoi would however like a lesson on how not to be a feminist annnoyance (as you’re proving to be) request it and ill put you straight. Another note for the road…if you are superficial enough to think your reply had a positive effect on any argument or ppint raised in this entire article/list of comments…let it be known you obviously have no clue what the main points of the article were to begin with. That is all.

          • dazter22

            what ,,, firstly menhavenorights or whatever , WHY IS RAPE BY A FEMALE NOT RECOGNISED AS A CRIME IN UK/.. OH AND WAS HER CLASS A DRUG ABUSE LEGAL , HW IN GODS NAME DID HE KNOW SHE WAS A COCAINE USER. AND worse of al who do you think actually told police sex took place

          • Conroyjohn

            Absolutely right. Except that there was an employer willing to employ him until Hatchet through sustained action made that untenable. What you are saying is we agree to abide by the laws of our society, in that the courts decide on guilt and punishment and that we agree to that otherwise popularism rules. We also must then abide by the law that states once he has completed his punishment then he is free to go about his business. If part of that punishment is an ongoing program, then so be it, but once completed we as a society agree that no further punishment can be applied to the same crime. But what Hatchet is doing is something quite different. She/he/they say that ‘I agree but only in matters where I don’t have an opinion. Where I do have an opinion it won’t count and I will arbitrarily decide on further punishment’.
            The fact that Evans shows no remorse is dealt with in the sentencing. If he still shows no remorse, abhorrent as that may be, who the hell is anyone to use that as decide what job he can have, how he lives, etc. just because someone applies their own subjective reasoning to an issue does not mean the resultant action is right or even laudable. Essentially you are saying until he shows some contrition we should arbitrarily punish him until he does. What happens if he shows remorse but not enough? Does that allow someone else to use external pressure to dictate his life until he shows them the right amount of remorse? And what happens when someone feels that no matter how much remorse he shows he shouldn’t live his life the way he wants to? If they apply external pressure then, would you consider THAT to be a witch hunt? Where is your line drawn ? Mine is with the objective view of the criminal justice system.
            As for ‘ until he shows he has done wrong he poses a danger’, on what basis is that inference made? Notwithstanding he still has an appeal which if held makes this a moot point because he would be innocent (!) , on what basis have you drawn the conclusion he remains a danger because he hasn’t admitted the crime. In fact it is again following an arbitrary pattern of ‘I think therefore it must be ‘ . Nothing wrong with that, it’s an opinion whether it is based in fact, intuition, or even fantasy. It us when you act on that opinion and get others of like mind to do the same that it becomes an issue.
            If someone wants to employ him after he has served his punishment then that is up to them. Any external influence to change that in some sort of perceived notion of justice is a witch hunt no matter how popular it may be

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Evans wasn’t employed because the people who funded his prospective employers didn’t want their names associated with a rapist. They have no obligation to continue that funding, and they are fully entitled to make a commercial opinion based on their perception of how it would harm their commercial interests.

          • stray57

            What we need to do is take every man/woman who has ever taken advantage of a man/woman in a vulnerable state, whether he/she is drunk, lonely, angry, sad, whatever, convict them all of rape, imprison them and on their release, vilify them, insult them just like a school child or a Rupert Murdoch publication would, (‘rapist Evans’ etc) and do our best to make sure they never work again in their chosen field. They could even be put to work building the new prisons required to house them. There would probably still be some people left out there, there would be much lower unemployment, and nobody could say that Ched Evans is being made a scapegoat for all the sins of man since there have been men and women.
            We are nearly all guilty so stfu. Let those without sin cast the first stone etc.

          • Dave

            So are you saying all yound peaple should tape and film while Thay have sex so there’s no misunderstanding if Thay get accused of rape ? Maybe all hotel and band bs should have cameras in the rooms

          • Eliza Doolittle

            No, where do you get that from? I simply say that anyone having sex should make sure that the person with whom they are having sex is consenting and is capable of doing so. If you con your way into someone’s hotel room and penetrate his companion within a minute or two of arriving, you run the risk that a jury is not going to believe that you could possibly have made any assessment of whether she was capable of giving legally valid consent.

          • ArthurSparknottle

            You miss the point that Oldham and others were happy to discuss employing Evans, until the mob descended on them with threats and faux outrage. Evans is certainly a yob; after drinking himself he certainly had sex with a woman who had been drinking. She walked unaided and competently into that hotel (I’ve seen the CCTV – it is online). I dare say that nobody thinks Evans brought any credit on himself when he went there that night, but I would say that many of us think he has good grounds to claim he believed that she had consented. The Night Porter at the hotel knowing there were two men in the room (Evans had paid for the room) went and stood outside the door and testified that he heard a man and a woman having ‘enthusiastic sex’….. I suppose he meant noisy sex – a man AND A WOMAN. Evans is guilty of promiscuity and bad judgement. He’s a footballer, not a moral philosopher.

          • Dave

            What tosh .. It’s us that should decide if he gets it wrong .. Freedom of speech a good thing hay ? Sack the judge sell his house take is pension Pay it all to ched for the stress coused that’s what I say

          • Conroyjohn

            Which shows why you are not involved in the criminal justice system. It is one thing to have freedom of speech, and an informed opinion is a mark of intellect but whether or not you think he is guilty of the rape is not the issue here. I mean he has been found guilty and at this moment that judgement still stands , but it is the pernicious and ill informed actions of people who believe he should be punished further by them deciding what he can now do with his life that is the issue here. If we can say that Evans was wrong (forget if it’s illegal) by any reasonable moral standard based on the evidence presented, then we must also be able to say that any attempt to punish him further by dictating how he can live his life is also wrong. My point is if he has served out his time, NO ONE other than those authorised to do so can put any restriction on his life. The arrogance of those who seek to do so or agree with that course of action is astounding.

          • Partner

            Could you explain which jobs you think it is ok for a convicted rapist to do and those that are not acceptable and the principle you use to distinguish?
            Tv announcer?
            Politician?
            Guardian columnist (two of them are ex cons imprisoned for lying and dishonesty)person convicted of wrongful rape accusations?
            Undertaker
            Cook?
            Receptionist
            Actor (who may earn more and be more famous than a footballer)
            I really do not understand the logic you are applying to the situation, although clearly you are applying lots of emotion.

          • Dave

            It sounds like he could do ant of the above jobs … But maybe he would be better as a footballer .. When his conviction is overturned …

          • Dave

            Rape is a very serious crime. How many girls have been scared off because of this case .. I fear we will never know ..

          • charlie888888

            If young women ( my own 3 daughters included) are being “scared off” getting extremely drunk, being out alone at 4.00 AM and agreeing to go to a hotel room with someone they just met, that would be a good thing.
            If men were scared off” by the fact that they could go to jail for taking advantage of such irresponsibility, that would be a good thing.
            It is not a good thing that the justice system decisions can be overrun my mob rule.

          • Dave

            What would you think if you had 3 boys … And Thay had girls wanting to go back to hotel rooms with them … .. Or should it be law to have video camras in all hotel rooms. So there can be no misunderstanding ?

          • newminster

            Scared off what?
            Sex? Going out with men? Dressing like tarts and getting thoroughly pissed? Scaring them off that one wold improve the general state of Britain’s streets of a weekend.

          • MenControlTheMedia

            Yes scared of sex, dressing how they want to, socialising, using public spaces, drinking, and a myriad of other things. You know, those non-trivial things called civil and human rights that men enjoy and terrorise women out of?

            Arrogant berk.

          • 1DrFortuneMBezzla7

            Lesley Grantham killed someone.

            The BBC happily employed him. I suspect the publicity caused by the controversy helped

          • Des Demona

            I suspect if it had been a woman he killed rather than a German cab driver he wouldn’t have lasted 2 minutes. And in that case I would have probably agreed.

          • Dave

            Yes I agree it’s a two tear system hay .. And all the perverts the BBC has hhired over the years hay and prince Andrew is not out of the hot water yet hay ?

          • Dave

            The BBC seems to be tottally controlled by the government now anyway …. What about all the pervert m ps ?

          • Tim

            Ha it would be an absolute embarassment for most supporters and a massive marketing fk-up for the shirt sponsor to have a rapist on TV wearing their shirt, it just isn’t practical and the only reason it was ever on the table is the ridiculous value now placed on footballers compared to everyone else in society, i.e Oldham thought they could make a fortune off getting him on the cheap as a goalscorer, not because of some act of compassion for the poor defenseless rapist

          • Dave

            If you have a problem with evens why do you not have a problem with his friend who was with him ?

          • MenControlTheMedia

            Because if a woman consents to sex with one man she’s consented to it with every man, eh?

          • hugh_36

            GMP have recieved no evidence or complaints about these threats. Until they are confirmed I would suggest they are treated as rumours

          • Baron

            Read Des Demona’s posting below, Sarah, he makes the point the blue veined barbarian would have made, makes it well.

            In a sense, what we have here is a weak replica of the Charlie Hebdo case, weak because the offended party, the mob that believes Evans should write off his life, have only threatened, and the possible victim, the football club, gave in.

          • Sarah

            There is no possible level on which your Charlie Hebdo analogy works.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            What Des Demona leaves out of account is that the club’s own official statement makes it clear that the primary reason for withdrawing was financial. Also, when the police contacted them and asked for details of the threats they were unable to produce anything beyond low level stuff on Twitter.

            However, I take it that you agree that the very serious threats made against Evans’ victim were wholly unacceptable?

          • Des Demona

            ” Also, when the police contacted them and asked for details of the threats they were unable to produce anything beyond low level stuff on Twitter.”
            You can’t just make stuff up. Where have the police said it was just low level twitter abuse?

          • Gwangi

            It is all after a huge bullying campaign by obsessive feminists actually – who will not leave this man alone. They even sent threats to managers of Oldham football club and threatened to raype their daughter. But our pc femi-police do nothing – not when women are abusive and make threats. Oldham fc were ready to sign him and the sponsors were happy – then he femi-mob got involved with their hate campaign. This man seems innocent to me – so why the H should he apologise as the femi-fascists demand for a non-crime eh?.

          • Terry Field

            Feminism has morphed to a foul bitter man-hatred coupled with an obvious economic agenda, supported by global American capitalism to foster sexual discord and resultant economic activity.
            it is one of the two corruptions of the time. It will fail and be overcome by biological imperatives.

          • David Murphy

            You are a paranoid delusional nutter. American capitalism (whatever that means) doesn’t give a toss about feminism but it cars about profits. Many self-styled feminists clearly do hate men, most do not. Compare the fascist Jessica Valenti and the words of Emma Watson. – chalk and cheese, but both call themselves feminists.

          • Terry Field

            Idiotic and utterly naive observation Murphy; american capitalism promotes the three Ts as a means of maximising market penetration and of maximising market size – that included encouraging the individuals to act economically via conflict; divorce, multiple sex partners, whatever, in order to sell maximal quantities of goods and services. That is one reason why Moslems are revolted by western cultural activity – and in that I must say they have a point; unlike you you dreamboat.
            And you have smelly feet.

          • Tim

            Wow you’re really in your own little dreamworld aren’t you

          • Terry Field

            Of course I do! So do you, Tim old cocker. Now don’t spread it about, but EVERYONE lives in their own little heads. You are a very silly fellow. little Tim.

          • Gladysnight1

            Hermione’s speech was just as bad as anything Valenti has to say, she looks like a little princess so people give her a break.

          • MenControlTheMedia

            You brought it on yourselves for hogging all the resources, attacking us, depriving us of our rights and whining incessantly.

          • Terry Field

            ‘we brought it upon ourselves’
            It is not ‘us’ and ‘them’, you stupid bitter little deranged bitch.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            My, when you have to resort to slinging insults like that you demonstrate precisely who is stupid, bitter and deranged. And it’s not MenControlTheMedia.

          • David Murphy

            No, obsessive feminists are one group, but this has aroused indignation from a much broader spectrum of people. He is a convicted rapists and shows no remorse or concern for his filthy behaviour. Football is unique in the hero worship that goes with it and it is not a good thing for a convicted rapist who refuses to acknowledge guilt or remorse or even slight concern about his behaviour. He needs to wise up.

          • Gwangi

            Nope. Why should he say sorry when he considers himself innocent?
            Would you have wanted Mandela to say sorry for terrorism? Or anyone wrongly convicted saying sorry for things they did not do.
            Football is not a special case at all. Stop parroting ignorant femi-twerps.
            I see him as a vulnerable thick footballer lured by drunken golddigger trollops and husssies into trouble. He won’t be the first to be falsely convicted of such things.

          • hugh_36

            He was convicted by a court. Whether you think he is innocent is immaterial.

          • Dave

            Maybe he was that makes it worse .. If you spend time in a police station and where wrongfully arrested the commpanstion is usually around £1000 per hour . When this sad case is overturned .. What will the commpanstion bill be .. And it’s us that’s paying Heads need to roll

          • Tim

            Then how did the jury find beyond any reasonable doubt that she was beyond consent, considering that 1000s of cases, in which a huge proportion the offender was actually guilty, are thrown out because of lack of evidence? You can go and read the Ched Evans website and it paints this picture but conveniently leaves out things like the fact that he changed his story from telling police that he asked clayton for permission then in court it became him asking the victim for permission… anyway unlike all the idiots on here who think they know best often despite their lack of ability to type coherent sentences, i don’t like discussing a case about which none of us except the jury know a god damn thing about

          • Paul

            It has aroused indignation by many because the many evaluate this no further than you apper to have done. He’s a convicted rapist and that’s that. I wonder how many of those crucifying him are aware the victim has never accused him of raping her. She’s never accused him of anything. It was the police who decided this was rape on the grounds that she was incapable of giving consent. In which case, how did the jury come to the conclusion that one was innocent and the other guilty? It defies logic! Encounters of this nature occur in their thousands every week and I would suggest most men have had sex with a drunken stranger at least once in their life. Are we all rapists?

          • mic foreman

            paul FFS MAN! THINK HARDER!

            you said

            “It was the police who decided this was rape on the grounds that she was
            incapable of giving consent. In which case, how did the jury come to the
            conclusion that one was innocent and the other guilty? It defies logic!”
            she asked to go home with the man who was cleared..she didnt ask or expect anyone else to be involved.if you agree to have sex with 1 man does this agreement also cover sex with any sleazebag who may be in his phones contact list?
            she was clearly blotto and evans was clearly predatory.
            so, if by chance, a good looking close friend or beloved relative of yours (of the female kind of course) has a drunken nights fling with someone she wants to and i also happen to be in the lucky guys contact list i can be next up when she crashes out?
            does that sound wrong to you?
            she didnt accuse him because she didnt know he was there.she did know (at least at some point that night) the man who was cleared because she had a conversation with him and asked to go back with him.1 man.and it wasnt ched evans.
            your logic stinks as bad as your morals do.

            think harder or dont bother.

          • Paul

            Actually she couldn’t remember meeting either man or going to the hotel, so that kind of screws your theory and her friends testified that she wasn’t particularly drunk (compared to her normal standards), so your assertion that she was ‘clearly blotto’ isn’t one that she herself would agree with. But I’m sure you’ll find some offensive smart Alec answer for that too – most people I’ve met with intellectual-superiority complexes find it difficult to cope rationally with criticism or counter-argument.

          • mic foreman

            paul….you are doing it again……think harder.

            it doesnt “screw my theory” at all

            i didnt say she remembered them the next morning.

            please think harder paul.

            i said at some point that night she was aware of the man who was cleared.

            she spoke with him and decided to follow him back to where he was staying.

            this is where the assumed consent comes in, because she went with him under her own free will, the jury decided there was enough reasonable doubt not to convict him guilty and to assume consent had taken place at that moment.hence the not guilty verdict.

            she may never have been aware of ched evans though,depending on how drunk you believe she was.

            is that clear enough for you now?

            do you even know how evans got into the room she was in?

            as for the the “clearly blotto” thing, falling over and losing stuff and not knowing you had slept with 2 guys (when you only went back with 1!) kinda does fall into that catagory, dont you think?

            here is some happy reading for you from the case summary.

            On 29 May 2011 the complainant finished work shortly before midnight.
            She drank some alcohol, went home, showered and then went to a bar, where she arrived at just after 1.30am. She drank vodka and left at about 3am. She said that she could not recall leaving the bar.

            She had a vague recollection of being in a kebab shop and of a large pizza box.
            CCTV footage, which was recovered, showed her outside the bar, inside and outside a kebab shop, and eventually her arrival at the hotel where the offence with which the court is concerned took place. The CCTV footage showed that while she was inside the kebab shop she was unsteady
            on her feet, at one point she fell over and landed on the floor. On the other hand, outside the kebab shop she could be seen eating pizza from a large box, although she was also seen to stumble, squat, lose her balance, and walk unsteadily. Indeed, she left her handbag in the shop.

            sounds quite far gone to me,how about you paul?or is that a sober night by your standards?

            who knows how much more she drunk after that point.
            she could well of been blotto by the time evans turned up.

            read it again and think hard paul.

          • Paul

            Mic, I”m perfectly happy with how hard I’m thinking about this, thank you. With all due respects, your frequent assertions that if things aren’t A then they must be B shows a greater deficiency in your thought process than mine.

            The lack of solid evidence showing the girl acknowledging Evans’ presence is not proof that she wasn’t aware he was there. Witness statements suggest she was indeed aware Evans was in the room. Video evidence from the hotel shows her to be quite stable and cognitive when she arrived at the hotel and the same evidence shows Evans turning up about 10 minutes later. Everyone is entitled to draw their own conclusions on what happened next, but as yet I haven’ seen any evidence that proves your conclusion beyond all reasonable doubt.

            On the point that her memory loss proves she was blotto. I disagree this is the only possible explanation. I myself don’t need to be particularly drunk to lose an hour or two and toxicology reports found traces of cocaine and cannabis in her which could also explain the memory loss.

            None of this explains the jury’s decision though. It’s the jury’s job to decide if the prosecution has proven their case beyond all reasonable doubt. It’s not their job to play detective and try to work out themselves what happened. To the best of my knowledge (and I’m sure you’ll correct me, along with references if I’m wrong), the prosecution never claimed the girl had passed out. Furthermore, they presented exactly the same case against both players, therefore how did the jury conclude that their case was proven for one player but not the other. This is what is illogical.

          • mic foreman

            oh dear paul!……..its as though you cant help yourself.

            you
            may be happy with “how hard you are thinking about this” which is all
            fine and dandy, but im just suggesting you shouldnt be.lets see why.

            nows the time to think harder paul.

            you said “With all due respects, your frequent assertions that if things aren’t A
            then they must be B shows a greater deficiency in your thought process
            than mine.”

            the only thing i have asserted is the girl was blotto and evans acted like a sexual predetor.

            granted,the 1st assertion is open for debate (or maybe not as we shall see later), the second is not.

            where have i said anything like ” if things aren’t A
            then
            they must be B” show me where this has happened paul.you wont be able
            to.its one of a few blatant lies you have made in your last reply to me
            isnt it paul?

            think harder paul.

            this bit is funny…you
            said “shows a greater deficiency in your thought process than mine.”
            why do i have a greater deficiency” when you have just asserted
            something we both know i havent done?show me where paul (think harder
            time paul)

            that besides,its more funny that you typed “im smarter
            than you” in as many words.it may well be true (if only you tried to
            think harder paul) but its the complete drivel and lies that follow such
            a statement. thats what makes it funny 🙂

            you said “The lack of
            solid evidence showing the girl acknowledging Evans’ presence is not
            proof that she wasn’t aware he was there.”

            agreeded.this is your
            finest hour :).i am well aware that the girl could be lying but this
            surely is stating the obivious?the evidence points towards her being
            “extremely drunk” when she entered the hotel as we shall see later.alas,
            its mostly downhill from here though.

            you said ” Witness statements suggest she was indeed aware Evans was in the room”

            misleading.only
            3 people where in that room that night.2 of evans friends tried film
            them through the window.the curtains were quickly drawn.the night porter
            only heard “sounds” from oustide and in the corridorand left.the 2 outside may not
            be considered credible due to thier close association with evans (they
            traveled with him to the hotel).

            the people to best judge her
            intoxication were the 2 defendants (aside from the girl who says she doesnt
            remember a thing)they said she was coherent,but you would expect them to
            say that, wouldnt you paul?

            think harder paul

            you said “Video evidence from the hotel shows her to be quite stable and cognitive when she arrived at the hotel”

            you are lying paul.you shouldnt lie,it reflects badly on your parents.
            think harder time paul.
            i
            have already told you how the COURT HAS SEEN CCTV of her FALLING OVER
            trying to buy a pizza and LEAVING HER HANDBAG BEHIND. I
            have already told you how the jury saw video of her STUMBLING, SQUATTING AND WALKING UNSTEADY in the street. She was drunk paul. Why do you keep lying about this?

            the
            last independent witness describes the girl, (the night porter,at the
            time of going into the the hotel room), as “EXTREMELY DRUNK”

            did you understand that last sentence paul?think harder time paul.

            more happy reading for you from the CASE SUMMARY.

            The
            complainant had no recollection of anything which took place after 3am.
            That extended to the fact that she and McDonald entered the hotel at
            4.15am. The night porter (Mr Burrough) described her as “extremely
            drunk.”

            evidence strongly shows she was very drunk and not
            lightly intoxicated like you keep inferring. god only knows why you seem
            to know better than the judge and jury and the night porter who had the
            evidence before their eyes! why do you know better paul? think harder
            time paul

            you said “shows her to be quite stable and cognitive when she arrived”this is a lie paul.
            and also…
            the
            man cleared said as he was leaving the hotel to the night porter “look
            out for the girl in room 14.shes sick” why would he say that paul? did
            he mean sick from alcohol intake?

            i think my assertion that she
            was blotto is *much much* closer to your assertion that she was “hardly
            drunk”. so does the jury and the judge.
            no more lying about this
            matter paul.she was at least “extremely drunk” when she entered that
            hotel as i have and the EVIDENCE have explained.

            think harder paul

            you said “On the point that her memory loss proves she was blotto. I disagree this is the only possible explanation.

            agreeded,
            but with 1 minor point, i didnt say it was the only possible
            explanation.i am well aware she could be lying as could ched evans could
            well be about being not guilty.BUT we have seen lots of evidence that
            suggests she was smashed, havent we paul? think harder paul.

            you said “I myself don’t need to be particularly drunk to lose an hour or two and
            toxicology reports found traces of cocaine and cannabis in her which
            could also explain the memory loss.”
            much blah here…it has no
            bearing on anything how YOU handle YOUR drink.it also doesnt matter how
            the woman suffered memory loss, the main point being she did not lie
            about it and did actually suffer memory
            loss.(I’m well aware she could be lying paul) .

            you dont need to
            think hard about that part paul 🙂 (as long as you except the evidence
            she was smashed when she entered the hotel)…on second thoughts….
            think harder paul 🙂

            so,
            for the last time paul….she was “exceptionly drunk” when she entered
            the hotel and if you dare try to tell me you know better …think harder
            paul.

            You said “None of this explains the jury’s decision
            though.” the jury
            had ALL the evidence paul, not just want you disagree with or care to lie about.

            you said ” It’s not their job to play detective and try to work out themselves what happened”

            it
            kinda is paul.they get given both sides and of the story and then ” try
            to work out themselves what happened” with all the available
            evidence.why am i telling you how a court works paul? how else will they
            come to a decision without ” trying to work out themselves what
            happened”from the evidence?.seriously paul, how does a jury come to a
            decision without “working it out for themselves”?

            think harder paul

            you said ” To the best of my knowledge (and I’m sure you’ll correct me, along with
            references if I’m wrong), the prosecution never claimed the girl had
            passed out”.

            no one else was in the room paul, it was just the 3
            of them.2 of cheds buddies were looking through the window but the
            curtains were quickly drawn.the girl says she remembers nothing so only
            the 2 defendants really know (the girl could be lying, i know) .whether
            they were guilty or not they are going to say the same thing,arent they
            paul?

            think harder paul

            you said “Furthermore, they presented exactly the same case against both players,
            therefore how did the jury conclude that their case was proven for one
            player but not the other. This is what is illogical. ”

            another lie paul.

            more happy reading paul….

            The
            circumstances in which each ofthe two men came to be involved in the
            sexual activity was quite different; so indeed were the
            circumstances in which they left her. These seem to us to be matters entirely open to the jury.
            There is no inconsistency.

            i
            already explained this paul….she met the man cleared on the street,
            ched just burst through the door after lying to the porter to get the
            key.he also left via the fire exit and not the main entrance.why did he
            do that paul? if you dont understand,well thats just funny,im just glad
            there wasnt 12 guys like you in the jury 🙂

            the only thing “illogical” and that “defies logic” around here is you paul.why would you lie and make bold claims about something you know little about?
            “This is what is illogical. ” indeed.

            think.harder.paul.

          • Paul

            Mic, that’s a very long post. I can see from glancing through that it’s littered with what appears to be your standard patronising insults and I’m guessing it’s also littered with your usual cabbie-esque logic too, so I’m going to pass on reading it and responding.

          • mic foreman

            FFS PAUL….stop talking of logic like you know what that means

            you said “cabbie-esque logic too, so I’m going to pass on reading it and responding”

            paul you DID respond…that is illogical paul

            i wrote a long post so you would find it harder to twist it to suit your own agenda .it will take like 5mins to read my last post….. but is not the reading you have trouble with is it paul?……its the “working it out for yourself” part you have trouble with, isnt it?

            you also told me “most people I’ve met with intellectual-superiority complexes find it difficult to cope rationally with criticism or counter-argument.” indeed paul.i find eventually they just give up the ghost ,dont they paul? (i always knew you wouldnt have the stomach for it) your own words back down your throat buddy! 🙂

            a small snippet from my last post for the hard of thinking

            think harder paul
            you said “Furthermore, they presented exactly the same case against both players,
            therefore how did the jury conclude that their case was proven for one
            player but not the other. This is what is illogical. ”

            another lie paul.

            more happy reading paul….

            The circumstances in which each ofthe two men came to be involved in the sexual activity was quite different; so indeed were the circumstances in which they left her. These seem to us to be matters entirely open to the jury.
            There is no inconsistency.

            i already explained this paul….she met the man cleared on the street, ched just burst through the door after lying to the porter to get the key.he also left via the fire exit and not the main entrance.why did he do that paul? if you dont understand,well thats just funny,im just glad
            there wasnt 12 guys like you in the jury 🙂

            the only thing “illogical” and that “defies logic” around here is you paul.why would you lie and make bold claims about something you know little about?
            “This is what is illogical. ” indeed.

            think.harder.paul.

          • Paul

            Mic, I meant that I wasn’t going to respond to your comments as I hadn’t read them and didn’t plan on reading them. I apologise for the confusion.

            I’ve now read trough your posts and can see you are absolutely correct on all accounts. Thank you so much for taking the time to enlighten me.

            Regards

          • mic foreman

            lol, paul.
            did you get someone smarter to explain it all to you then?

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Those few seconds of jerky, grainy, soundless video evidence at the hotel really don’t show her to be stable and cognitive. Anyone who has seen people who are drunk are well aware that cognitive abilities ebb and flow and a drunk person may be able to hold things together for a minute or two before relapsing – it doesn’t make them any less drunk. Also she would have been absorbing alcohol into her bloodstream all the time, so she would be more drunk in the hotel room than she was in the lobby.l
            Perhaps the most important point is that the receptionist, who actually saw and HEARD her at the time, was sure she was drunk. Don’t you think he knew more about it than a few randoms looking at a few seconds of video?
            Manifestly the prosecution didn’t present exactly the same case against the two, because the circumstances were different. McDonald brought the girl to the hotel and the jury seem to have given him the benefit of the doubt in that they decided he might have formed a reasonable belief that she was consenting. Evans, however, previously only saw her when she was lying on the floor; he then conned his way into the room and was penetrating her within a minute or two, on his own evidence. The jury reasonably decided that he just had no reasonable basis for thinking she was legally capable of giving consent, and indeed it strongly appears that he really didn’t bother to try to work it out. He clearly went there with the intention of shagging her and determined to do so. He told the police that he believed that every girl wants to shag a footballer. How wrong he is.

          • Bilbo Baggins

            What we do know is that the victim mislaid her handbag and didn’t realise that until she got out of the taxi at the Premier Inn. Then she asked McDonald to stop the taxi leaving to look for it. He did this and it wasn’t found because it had been left in the takeaway shop. She continued to accompany him into the Motel.

            Now, I’m willing to bet that most women in their right minds would freak out if they lost their handbag on a night out. She didn’t, suggesting to me that she wasn’t 100% “with it”, especially as the CCTV footage showed her going back to the entrance for the pizza, which somehow had been dropped.

            Also, McDonald claims, I believe, that she hailed the taxi. Why would she hail a taxi if she knew she had no money to pay for it? But if so, then surely he was aware that she had no handbag (and no coat) so that should have told him that something was amiss with her cognicance?

            IMO too many things don’t stack up here.

          • mic foreman

            you also told me……….. “most people I’ve met with intellectual-superiority
            complexes find it difficult to cope rationally with criticism or
            counter-argument.”……….. indeed paul.i find eventually they just GIVE UP THE GHOST ,dont they paul? (i always knew you wouldnt have the stomach for
            it)………….. your own words back down your throat buddy! 🙂

          • Paul

            Mic, why are you following me? It should have been obvious a while ago that our conversation was going nowhere so I tried to call an end to it, but you came back with more, so I gave you the “victory” you needed and you came back again – twice. So I ignored you. At this point, any sane person would have left it at that but I find you’ve now posted more abuse on another thread AND started following me! Of all the forums I might expect to find myself the obsession of a nutter, this would be among the last! Leave me alone you absolute fucking freak!

          • Powerdaddy

            Whatever. …..

            To answer your last sentence from your comment where I made my first reply to you
            No paul, we are not all rapists
            you slimy bastard.

          • Bilbo Baggins

            But she was drunk by the time she got to the takeaway later, by this time the lacohol was taking effect ;- http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-north-east-wales-17730672

          • Eliza Doolittle

            On the contrary, most of the sponsors were not in the least happy.

          • MenControlTheMedia

            Yeah because men are the real victims here. The bullies are the masculine bastions of the sport and media doing a hatchet job on the women who are raped and hounded by their employees and supporters.

          • Lord Taliesin

            I wish you people didn’t cite commercial reasons for him not playing. The commercial angle will be decided by the normal rules of commerce. If you turn out to be right I expect he’d be quietly dropped by the team he was playing for. In other words, why not give your theory a chance if you think it holds water.
            On the other hand if you just consider yourself morally superior and you’re not happy with the law as it stands, just say so.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Commercial reasoning has already decided this. Oldham’s decision was based primarily on the withdrawal of sponsorship.

          • Jagdeep Shokar

            Ah the market decides. Well, that’s one way of looking at it. The market, of course, makes all sorts of decisions: what if a manager rejects an applicant for a job because he sees that she’s 28 years old, and snooping around her social media tells him that’s recently married and has just bought a house in the suburbs with her husband…?

          • Dave

            He should be allowed to get back to normal and play football .. That’s his thing peaple play football for the game and not the money

          • charlie888888

            So if a neighborhood gang of white thugs threaten a shop owner for employing a black kid that would be ok? That is what is happening here, this mob rule is threatening the businesses into discriminatory decisions they would not otherwise take.

          • Dave

            Sod the sponsors it shoul be all about the game

          • Eliza Doolittle

            The game isn’t going to happen without the players being paid an awful lot of money, and without someone paying for the staff, the stand, the publicity etc etc. Where do you imagine that is going to come from if not the sponsors?

          • ArthurSparknottle

            It is mob rule Sarah. The courts and Parliament make the criminal law in this country not twitter mobs which in my opinion (free speech you know) are little better than the mob during the revolutionary ‘Terror’ in France in the eighteenth century baying for the blood of the aristocrats and anybody else they didn’t like the look of.

        • Don

          my ex-wife makes $69 an hour on the laptop . She has been laid off for 7 months but last month her payment was $18654 just working on the laptop for a few hours. check;.will be going…

        • Dave

          He should not have served any time … What happened is a load of what he said she said …while drunk …

        • MenControlTheMedia

          Would you want a convicted rapist to sit next to you at work?

          There’s no promise of being able to pick up where you left off once you have transgressed the rules of civilised behaviour, or proven yourself to be a threat to the public. He’s on the sex offenders register for a reason.

          • Gladysnight1

            Well as long as he or she didn’t smell, I wouldn’t much mind as long as they had served their time.
            I believe in second chances.

          • Baron

            Get real, MenControlTheMedia, we have thousands rapists, people who have committed other serious crimes sitting or living next door to us.

            What do you reckon happens to those who served the time? Are they packed to some distant country, kept in isolation on an island, frozen and kept in a freezer?

      • M Connaughton

        Hardly just objecting… they’re threatening.

        Sure, those who do just object can sign petitions, and vote with their feet and pockets, but objection? Insisting is also another thing which goes beyond objection; practiced by a mob of professionally offended arseholes.

        “I’ll rape your wives if you sign the rapist” is beyond anything we should be willing to accept.

        Let the nay-sayers decry those threats… but they wont.

        • Amelia

          Apparently, one Board member’s daughter was threatened with rape if the rapist Ched Evans was signed – appalling, I agree, and I am disgusted by it. Not to mention the stupidity of registering one’s objection to the employment of a rapist by threatening rape. However, a threat of that nature under the circumstances would be reported to the police immediately, especially in the circumstances and where it’s seriousness is a reason for pulling out of the signing.

          Apparently, though the MPF have received no report of such a threat. They have contacted the Club and itsBoard, and have been told there was some low level Twitter abuse. Doesn’t sound like a threat to rape to me.

          • Des Demona

            Nonsense

            From the club’s website

            ”We deplore and condemn the vile and abusive threats, some including death threats, which have been made to our fans, sponsors and staff whilst this process has been in the public domain.”

          • Amelia

            Is that low level Twitter abuse? If not, why is it not reported to the police?

            I do deplore threats of that level of seriousness. I wonder why they don’t seem to have been reported to the police?

          • Des Demona

            Seems it is only you who is claiming it was low level twitter abuse.

            As far as the police are concerned, wonder no more. —

            ”Greater Manchester’s chief constable Sir Peter Fahy said his force would be
            launching an investigation into threats to the club’s staff and their families.

            “It is totally unacceptable,” Sir Peter told BBC Radio 5 live.

            “We will be contacting Oldham Athletic to make sure that it’s investigated.”

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Why was it up to the police to contact Oldham? Surely such serious threats would have been reported by Oldham as soon as they were received, in order to protect the people concerned?

          • Des Demona

            Not sure why you keep banging on about who should contact who and when. Neither you nor I know when Oldham contacted the police and in what circumstances. If it is some kind of attempt by you to minimise the rape and death threats or to imply they never actually happened then only time will tell, but it is highly unlikely that the club would post it on their website if it hadn’t happened.

            BTW why do you keep upvoting your own posts?

          • Lord Taliesin

            ha-ha. busted.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Since when was mentioning something once banging on about it? I notice you avoid answering the point. Surely if they were that bothered about the threats they would have gone straight to the police?

          • Wessex Man

            give us a flash.

        • Eliza Doolittle

          Actually, they have. Repeatedly.

      • rtj1211

        I don’t think he’s objecting to their right to voice their opinions, what he’s lamenting (a quite different emotion) is the nature of their opinions and the implications thereof.

      • monsieur_charlie

        I don’t think anybody objects to other people objecting, free speech and all that. Just that it is a stupid thing to object to and done in a nasty PC kind of way.
        So, I go along with Rod on that and say, object all you like, I quite enjoy the spectacle of nasty people looking foolish.

        • Sarah

          Ah yes, PC. That umbrella term for anything one doesn’t like. Personally I enjoy the spectacle of convicted rapists who think they can have any woman they want having their arses handed to them.

          • sidgar

            PC is the very umbrella from under which you throw stones at others without fear of reprisal. Holding the populace captive for fear of “offending” someone renders this “free” nation prisoners in their own home. It’s basically saying “You’re free…unless you disagree”. Then, it’s smear campaigns, blacklists, and protests. Even when the evidence would otherwise exonerate you.

          • Sarah

            You sound hatstand. I’d love to read more of your work.

          • sidgar

            A smear? What a surprise! You’re doing a better job of demonstrating your mindset than I could.

          • monsieur_charlie

            “Personally I enjoy the spectacle of convicted rapists who think they can have any woman they want…” Well, footballers don’t just think it, it’s true… and I wonder why that is. Maybe something to do with having loads of money.
            p.s. nice turn of phrase there, very feminine.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            You seriously think footballers can have any woman they want? What world are you living in? Have you asked your wife, girlfriend, sister, mother, daughter, niece, about that? Or is the reality that you have absolutely no idea whatsoever about what women do or do not want?

          • Gwangi

            Oh listen, love – and get real. Footballers are targeted by gold-digger girls who want to have intimate relations with them – because they want money and fame. You talk as though these bints who want to be WAGs of rich sportsmen are vestal virgins! Most lost their virginity at 13 and have had multiple p’partners’ often at the same time.
            Also, the law infantilises women – they claim they were too drunk to consent. What PLANET are hey on? These bikes are always drunk!

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Dear me, what a very unpleasant place the inside of your head is. And you seem to be incapable of basic logic. Yes, apparently some women do want to sleep with footballers. Since when did that mean that all women do?

            You do realise that the law about purported consent when drunk also applies to men, don’t you?

          • mandelson

            Funny how you sound just like the raging Guardianistas who on this issue are further to the right than the Daily Mail. Hang em and castrate em hey sister?

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Who precisely has said Evans should be either hanged or castrated? Are you making things up by any chance?

      • Charli33

        They do as much as any other convicted criminal does. His admission of the guilt regarding the crime of which he was convicted is irrelevant.

      • bondi1000

        She’s not suggesting that at all. She’s expressing concern that supposedly mature adults listen to them and base their recruitment policies on petitions got up by rabble-rousers. Once the people at Oldham had started down this path they should have had the guts to stick with it, as all that came their way was entirely predictable.

      • bondi1000

        Your analogy with events in France is valid but for completely opposite reasons. The anti-Evans petition-mongers are actually the equivalent of the religious maniacs who seek to hound and silence those to whom they take exception.

        • JohnCrichton89

          Easily debunked, I am anti rapist Ched Evan’s. Give me a petition and I’ll sign it……. I have no intention of telling you to shut up.

          I don’t go looking for petitions, I have never signed one. But I would, if only to let companies know I would avoid their goods and services if they sponsored A CONVICTED RAPIST to wear their company logo.

          I shouldn’t be allowed to tell companies this ? I think they would want to know.

      • A. Walton

        ‘Do rapists have the right to be forgotten if they have served time and slip back into society’ ?
        Yes its called fairness as opposed to mob rule.

        Oh and yes people who are convicted of crimes including rape also have a right to appeal and have their cases reviewed for possible unsound convictions just like Ched Evans is doing. Also it is just possible that not everyone convicted of a crime is guilty and if so has a right to proclaim their innocence. Having read some of the details of this case I think there are grounds for a successful review . I wish Ched Evans the best of luck with this and hope he can return to his football career at the earliest opportunity free from the harassment and threats including violence of a social Media mob which is anything but democratic.

      • Terry Field

        You are sanctimonious. I bet your cupboard is full of dark secrets.

      • Lord Taliesin

        It’s people like you who think your opinion should be override the rule of law that leads to the murders we had in Paris this week.

      • Martin Hasler

        I see it the other way! A minority of people have decided that they do not like the way the law is and have decided to subvert it to enforce their own beliefs!
        This was not the expression of free speech, it was the baying of a mob!

        • Eliza Doolittle

          It was a bunch of people freely exercising their right to petition.

          Would you characterise those who campaigned for the Hillsborough inquest as a baying mob?

      • Conroyjohn

        Jean Hatchet is not stating an opinion! She he or they are actively involved in a campaign to ensure that Evans is not employed in his chosen profession. This is far beyond your attempt to trivialise what the writer is saying as nothing more than tit-for -tat bickering. If you say Evans’ prison sentence was strictly punishment, why do you not condemn Hatchet for trying to punish him further? If you believe in the courts decision to find him guilty then you must uphold the punishment handed to him and any attempt at further punishment must be seen as wrong. If Jean Hatchet followed this activity for anyone just because she/he/they didn’t like them a case could be argued for harassment under the 98 Act or the 2003 Act. The fact that Evans shows no remorse does not mean he has none (he is after all still involved in this case legally speaking) . My opinion of Evans aside I cannot condone Hatchet because the actions she/he/they are driven by opinion (a rather shaky foundation) but have gone far beyond any passive quote into an active attempt to personally punish someone who, in law, has already been punished.

        • Eliza Doolittle

          Yes, they’re engaged in a campaign to stop a rapist taking a high profile job where he will be a role model – in circumstances where he was refusing, until forced to by his lawyers and the PR people, to dissociate himself from friends and relatives who were hounding his victim. She’s absolutely entitled to do that.

          • Conroyjohn

            Actually like most western people who believe that if it’s legal then it conveys entitlement. It doesn’t . You talk about entitlement without the understanding that it often comes with a rider, in that there are usually conditions. The most notable of these is that if you have entitlement to speak or do something then so does the opposing faction. You say she has entitlement to oppose his employment but give no quarter to the fact that having served his punishment he is perfectly entitled to seek that employment and that the employer is perfectly entitled to hire him. The problem with the hatchets of the world is that they believe they know better and hypocritically do not apply the same rules to others as they do to themselves. And they do it in the belief that because it is a popular idea that it validates their cause. But the most abhorrent thing is that hatchet and supporters believe it is up to THEM to decide what job he can have. That it is up to them if he has shown contrition. That is up to them to decide if he has actually disassociated himself. What job do you suggest he is allowed hmmmm? It’s rhetorical. Any attempt to answer it will just compound the arrogance being shown here. Furthermore I would like to know what type of parent would allow any soccer player to be a role model just for playing a game. The amount of lessons that could be taught by a parent to an impressionable mind over this is infinite. The fact he is a soccer player does not by virtue of that fact alone make him a rolemodel. The inaction of parents to teach their kids why he is not a role model is what allows that to happen and is far more fundamental to the youth of today. Hatchet is entitled to an opinion, any action after that may be legal, but it comes with certain responsibilities . As for entitlement, I could probably live with that if it was done with Empathy and the rape victim as the primary focus. It isn’t . It’s with nothing more than retribution in mind with the rape victim seemingly an afterthought.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Of course people who disagree with Jean Hatchet are entitled to express that disagreement. She has never said anything different.
            He hasn’t served his punishment. No-one says he should not be entitled to seek employment; in fact he has the offer of a job from his girlfriend’s father and no-one has objected to that. People are however entitled to object to his having a job which puts a convicted rapist up as a role model to impressionable young people. It doesn’t matter whether parents should be doing a better job in stopping them revering footballers, the fact is that many do: and we really don’t want young people growing up thinking that anything Evans did that night was big or clever. And, most importantly, if he is offered a job but those who sponsor his prospective employers don’t fancy being associated with a rapist, they are entitled to tell those employers that they will withdrawn sponsorship – because they are entitled to take commercial decisions about what will harm their own brand.
            It’s not a matter of Jean Hatchet or anyone else deciding whether he has shown contrition. The plain fact is that, until last week, he has shown none whatsoever – and last week he blatantly only did so because his PR advisers told him to. And what is particularly important is that he maintains a website which tells rather a lot of lies about his conviction and which has encouraged people to track down and hound his victim, and for three years he did nothing to dissociate himself from it and the people who made his victim’s life hell. Whether he has dissociated himself is not a matter of opinion, it is a matter of fact.

          • Conroyjohn

            You still don’t get it do you? You are essentially saying one employment is ok for a convict ( does it matter about the offence – or does hatchet get to decide on that too)) but another type of employment isn’t. You and hatchet base this on something as arbitrary as what YOU think and what YOU feel. Do you see the gaping hole in your argument yet? You are saying that Somebody other than those authorised, allowed and qualified to do so can place undue pressure on an employer in order for a person who by Those who are authorised, allowed and qualified to do so has been sentence and proceeded to serve it. And the reason that cannot be the way ahead is because it allows mob rule and witch hunts to prevail. BUT here is where I really get confused about Yours and Hatchets premise. You say it is about not allowing a rapist to be in the position of a role model. What about the footballers who have solicited prostitutes and admitted it? The ones who have assaulted people, who have been done foe drink driving? Jesus, been caught speeding for that matter? Where were the hatchets of the world at those points? Or is it the type of crime only that bothers hatchet and you? And if you can apportion your level of outrage at ‘role models’ based on your scale of criminal activity is there not then an argument for a scale to be attributed within the crime for which Ched Evans was imprisoned? And lo, it appears there is a scale applied to that particular crime which is reflected in the sentencing which He Has Served. Now, one further thing comes to mind in that one of the tenets of your arguments is that Evans, an ex convict, should not be in a position where his actions can influence children due to his role model moniker just by virtue of being a footballer. Notwithstanding the fact that Hatchet was not up in arms when other footballers have committed offences, I cannot see proof that children have been swayed to a path of criminal activity by other footballing role models who have committed criminal acts. Now unless there is some evidence that previous role models who have committed criminal acts have somehow influenced children to do the same (there are quite a few footballers who fall into this category) then there is some precedent that children are not as influenced as you think and that Evans would have barely any influence on their actions. In fact in my rather humble experience it is the people closest to the child that have the most influence and not some intangible individual on TV or a football pitch. History certainly bears that out.

      • kingkevin3

        This is not voicing your opinion, this is justice of the mob. Clearly you don’t understand how a civilised society functions. He claims he is innocent. Do you know he isn’t? Have you read what actually happened? This is the pc feminist misandristic mob trying to pervert justice. It won’t work in the long run.

      • Partner

        He didn’t say that they shouldn’t voice their opinions. He said they were a disgraceful mob of idiots.

      • spartacus

        what the fuck is a mute point?

        • JohnCrichton89

          moot, sorry but that……….. your deductive reasoning skills must be non-existent if you couldn’t grasp what I meant

      • ArthurSparknottle

        Doesn’t Rod Liddle have free speech rights? Can’t he suggest that the people ganging up to impose their own nonjudicial sentence are a mob?

        Do you think free speech means that no one can argue against what you say or do?

        Think again.

        • JohnCrichton89

          Did you even read my post ?

          As I said, objecting to others right to object enters a infinite regression and is anti-free speech and pointless.
          People are free, as are sponsors, to ignore those bringing Chad Evans rape conviction to the attention of potential sponsors.

          I never suggested the article author shouldn’t be allowed to object.

          Why don’t you think first.

      • mark fennell

        People are voicing their opinions, but only one side of the argument is being heard. Enough with the patrophobia.

      • susan

        NO

    • ohdeer

      that’s funny. i found his rape of a 19-year-old girl quite chilling

      • Sam

        It wasn’t rape. Wrongly accused.

        • ohdeer

          it’s a shame the judge and jury who convicted him didn’t hear your well-reasoned and incontrovertible statement. i’m sure it would have been enough to convince anyone.

          • Sam

            Watch the CCTV taken from the Premier Inn on the night in question. Please then can you tell me, honestly, that she was ‘too drunk to consent’.

            Please explain to me how you believe Ched Evans to be a rapist? If you respond by saying, “Because he was convicted”, please see yourself to the nearest library and read a book.

          • Bilbo Baggins

            I have watched it.

            What we do know is that the victim mislaid her handbag and didn’t realise that until she got out of the taxi at the Premier Inn. Then she asked McDonald to stop the taxi leaving to look for it. He did this and it wasn’t found because it had been left in the takeaway shop. She continued to accompany him into the Motel.

            Now, I’m willing to bet that most women in their right minds would freak out if they lost their handbag on a night out. She didn’t, suggesting to me that she wasn’t 100% “with it”, especially as the CCTV footage showed her going back to the entrance for the pizza, which somehow had been dropped.

            Now what woman in their right mind would attach more importance to a pizza than a lost handbag?

            Also, McDonald claims, I believe, that she hailed the taxi. Why would she hail a taxi if she knew she had no money to pay for it? But if so, then surely he was aware that she had no handbag (and no coat) so that should have told him that something was amiss with her cognicance?

            Or am I a dinosaur and young women routinely walk around town centres at 4.00.am alone with no handbag, no coat and carrying oversized pizza boxes?

          • Sam

            Based on what you have just said I would agree with your last statement. I have come to the conclusion that you haven’t been out in a long time and are indeed a dinosaur.

            A strong amount of young women do exactly what you have just described, parading round in next to nothing in the freezing cold weather, with no care in the world. Many of which do go back to parties / boys houses or wherever with the intention of having sex with somebody. I do not condone rape but this case and the womans statement do not draw me to the conclusion of rape, rather toward the fact she got a little pissed, had a threesome, found out they were footballers and saw an opportunity to gain financially.

            Bilbo Baggins I would suggest you crawl out of your hobbit hole and go for a drink this weekend, you will begin to realise that what this woman did is not out of the ordinary.

          • Bilbo Baggins

            Sam,

            The last time I ventured out of my cosy hobbit-hole and visited a town centre (Chesterfield actually) I noticed a lot of young girls in vertigious heels and short skirts walking about in groups. All of them had coats on and had handbags surgically attached to their persons. None of them were alone or carrying oversized pizza boxes or falling down drunk.

            Maybe in North Wales they are more hardy specimans and don’t need coats in May?

            This report shows how drunk she was ;- http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-north-east-wales-17730672

            I fail to follow your argument about “an opportunity to gain financially”.

            If that was the case why did she not go straight to the police as soon as she woke up and make rape allegations straight away? She did not because she did not know what had happened. It was the police who brought the case not her, and I cannot see any way she could have manipulated this to her advantage.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            If a woman agrees to go back to a hotel room with one man, do you believe that she thereby consents to have sex with a total stranger who cons his way into the room and asks the man – not her – whether he can “have a go on her”? Because that is what Evans did.

          • Dave

            This case is an insult to the legal system

        • Eliza Doolittle

          So how precisely do you know better than the jury which heard and saw all the evidence, and the judges who rejected his applications for leave to appeal? You do realise, don’t you, that he admitted to all the facts on which his conviction was based? He just doesn’t think it should be a crime.

          • Kjafc

            He did not admit to all the facts!! Stop lying. He admitted to having sex, read his police statement. He and macdonald said she consented. He was convicted because the jury agreed with prosecution that she was too drunk to consent. But not too drunk to consent to Macdonald. Cctv footage and taxi drivers statement IMO suggest otherwise.

            What’s your agenda Eliza?

          • Eliza Doolittle

            He admitted that he received a text saying MacDonald had got a bird, going back to the hotel and lying to get a key. He said initially that he had gone into the room and asked MacDonald whether he could have a go. Later he changed his story to allege that he had asked the girl. He admits that he immediately stripped off and entered her without stopping to consider whether she was in a fit state to consent to anything. He admits that he then left via a fire escape whilst MacDonald went and told a Reception that she was ill.

            On those facts, he was guilty of rape. The jury found that she was incapable of giving valid consent and that he could not reasonably believe that she had. The taxi driver could not give any evidence of her state at the time Evans saw her, and the CCTV footage does not indicate that she was sober.

            My “agenda” is simply that I like the rule of law to be upheld. I hope yours is, too.

          • Kjafc

            No. The witness statements state she consented. In fact, they state that she asked ched evans to (in very crude terms and she admitted it was a term she used) to pleasure her orally first. So your claim about him entering her without her consent is not true. It also suggests she consented. I do not know the truth, neither do you but there are too many doubts. And macdonald?

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Do wake up Kjafc. The issue is notvwhethervshecsaidcwords indicating consent, but whether she had legal capacity at the relevant time to give consent.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Do wake up, Kjafc. The issue is not whether she said words indicating consent, but whether she had legal capacity at the time to give valid consent. The jury, who did not rely solely on written statements but who saw and heard the witnesses when they actually gave evidence on oath in court and were cross examined, decided that she did not. I think they know more about it than you. The issue is also whether either or both men had a valid defence on the basis that they nevertheless believed she was giving consent, a point which you seem incapable of taking in.

          • Lord Taliesin

            Ah, I see. So she gave consent orally but decided the next day it wasn’t valid consent. This is getting a bit tricky for men to ‘wade’ through. I hope even you can see a dilemma here.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Are you totally incapable of understanding the concept that people may get into a state where they have no idea what they are saying? If someone says yes whikst in the middle of a major epileptic fit, is the man concerned entitled to take that as consent?

            And actually, she didn’t decide the next day it wasn’t valid consent. She had no memory of any of it and made no accusations.

          • Steve

            How can any one tell when someone else is too drunk to consent. What is the criteria?

          • Bilbo Baggins

            The two men said that the girl was asked if Evans could join in and she said “Yeah”. Now anyone who has teenage girls knows that if you ask then a question the usual answer is “Yeah” often followed by “Whatever”. So it’s a moot point if she actually knew what she was consenting to.
            Now if she had responded enthusiastically (they said she was “enthusiastic” BTW) she would have said something like “Yeah big boy let’s go for it !! or something of that ilk. She didn’t and the jury didn’t buy it either.

          • Dave

            How many peaple get drunk and have sex every weekend … Do you think that Thay are going to get the law books out to see if it’s legal or not Crazy .thease peaple knew each other

          • Gwangi

            ‘she was incapable of giving valid consent and that he could not reasonably believe that she had. ‘ Which is NO evidence of R at all – the law is an A.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Of course absence of valid consent is evidence of rape. It’s fundamental.

          • Dave

            So how do you know about whether consent was given or not ? It sounds like it could have been a problem with the paperwork in the court case.. She had already erleyr that day said she wanted sex with him he payed for the room .. She entered the room .. The only this she was not happy with was that she had lost her handbag

          • Bilbo Baggins

            No, that’s incorrrect.
            Nowhere have I read that she said she wanted sex with him.

            On the morning in question (when she went to the motel with McDonald) she seemed unfazed that she had mislaid her handbag.

            However, she was upset about it when she woke later at 11.00.am and couldn’t find it in the room.

          • Dave

            Well Thay where all in the room .. Who knows if consent was given .. It’s all gess work … The thing is she made no complant ? She only turned into a gold digger after

          • Eliza Doolittle

            There was evidence from the hotel receptionist, the pizza owner, the CCTV and others that she was far too drunk to give valid consent. Can you not get it into your head that if someone does not have the legal capacity to give valid consent – whether because they are too young, too ill, too drunk or whatever – they can say “Yes” a million times, but having sex with them will still be rape.
            By the way, the word is “they” not “thay”.

          • Lord Taliesin

            You like the rule of SOME laws to be upheld, you mean.
            Because at the moment the law says Ched Evans is free to resume his career in football. But you and your mob have decided you don’t like that law so you’ll override it.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Since when did any petition override any law? Precisely what law do you claim it broke? Anyone is entitled to express a view or indeed to boycott a company whose actions they disagree with.

          • Dave

            And how much money has jean hatchet made from thease petitions … How much hate has she coused ?

          • Eliza Doolittle

            How on earth do you imagine she makes money from it? No-one has to pay to sign, you know.

          • Dave

            Yes I agree ..it seems the police have had nothing better to do so Thay have made a case out of nothing .. Then the cps has backed them .. Then the judges must have been on a hangover for the trial lol. .. Thay all should be sacked.. And sued

          • mandelson

            Good so if the Criminal Cases Review decides there was a miscarriage of justice you will be eating a bucket load of humble pie, yes?

          • Eliza Doolittle

            The Crimibal Cases Review Commission doesn’t get to make that decision, mandelson, only the courts do. You know, the courts that have already refused leave to appeal twice. All that the CCLC can do is decide whether to refer the case to the courts again. As they only refer 3.3 of the cases they review to the courts,mand that has resulted in under 1% being appealed successfully, I’m not holding my breath.

            Tell me, if the CCRC decide there is no ground for referral, will you accept Evans’ guilt?

          • mandelson

            Not holding your breath doesnt answer my question.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Why bother with such a very hypothetical question? Do you accept that he is guilty based on the Court of Appeal’s actual dismissal of his application for leave to appeal?

          • Partner

            The rule of law has been upheld. He went to prison. The issue now is whether the rule of the mob should deny him the right to work.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            No-one denies him the right to work. He has a job offer with his girlfriend’s father, no-one has objected to him taking that up.

          • Partner

            Do you think this is the New Statesman? In a free society people should have complete and total freedom to do whatever they job want, if they are offered employment, with a few obvious exceptions like teachers (in the case of crimes against children) and lawyers. Who are you to dictate what job is acceptable or not. Get thee gone to the Guardian.

          • Gwangi

            Yes a VERY flimsy case and a miscarriage of justice, I agree. Being too drunk to consent is a nonsense law that infantilises women an discriminates against men – after all, a man cannot claim he was too drunk to know what he was doing, can he? Women need to take responsibility for being so drunk and loose. Ched Evans did not R anyone.

          • Sam

            Please outline the facts to me? The facts are that he and his friend had sex with a woman in a hotel on a night out in Rhyl. The facts are that the accuser cannot remember anything from the night in question and the fact remains that there was no evidence to condemn either man to prison.

            I invite you to watch the CCTV footage obtained from the night in question, please share with me your opinion and then tell me, honeslty, that this girl was ‘too drunk to consent’.

            Based on her state seen in this video I would say she was more than capable of consenting to sex, so capable that she remembered a pizza on the side of the road and managed to walk back in wedged shoes to go and pick it up without falling over.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            I’ve seen the CCTV footage, and read the facts. Like the judge and jury, I have no doubt that that footage shows her to be extremely drunk. I also bear in mind the evidence of those who actually saw her at the time and saw much more than a few seconds of grainy CCTV footage who again described her as very drunk. You might also like to consider the fact that MacDonald himself told the receptionist that she was ill. The pizza incident proves nothing whatsoever

            As for the other facts, I suggest you look at the appeal court judgment.

          • Sam

            Which facts are these? I asked you to outline them to me, yet you have failed to do so.

            I like how you try to discredit the CCTV footage by calling it ‘grainy’.

            She wasn’t pissed at all, she was just doing what hundreds of other young women do on a weekend, hanging outside takeaway in next to nothing, waiting to go to a party or back to somebody’s house to get laid. She found out they were footballers and saw an opportunity to gain financially. The sooner the ruling is overturned the better.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            I’m surprised you post without knowing the facts. If you look through this thread, I have posted a summary elsewhere. One of the facts is that the CCTV footage posted on Evans’ website is undoubtedly grainy; it is also time lapse, which is one of the reasons you can’t see the victim staggering. Another fact is that on the website they have unaccountably failed to show the other footage shown to the jury of her staggering up the road from the pizza shop, and squatting down to urinate.
            The pizza shop owner, who knew her, said that she was undoubtedly intoxicated, more so than he had ever seen her previously. Indeed, Evans had to step over her when she was lying on the floor. The hotel receptionist said she was very drunk. When McDonald left, he told the receptionist that she was ill. She woke up next morning having wet the bed and having no recollection of the previous night. She didn’t report rape: she simply went to the police station about her lost handbag. It was the police who pieced together the fact that she had been raped, not her. Hardly the conduct of someone out to make money, is it? And in fact the police pieced that information together in particular from the information given to them by McDonald and Evans.
            In relation to those hundreds of women you talk about: do you contend that, even if they decide to go to bed with on man, they thereby consent to having sex with any stranger who breaks into the room?

          • Bilbo Baggins

            It is a matter of record that McDonald told the receptionist at the hotel to “look after the girl in Room16, she’s sick”. So he was aware of her physical condition at that time but put the onus for here well-being on the hotel. After seeing her consume part of a pizza and fall down drunk in the takeaway it was pretty obvious she wasn’t firing on all cylinders.

            We all know the dangers of driving too much, then eating, then passing out, vomiting and choking on it. Neither of the men concerned seemed to be bothered by this aspect of the situation.

            If Mc Donald thought the girl was sick he should have sought medical help.

            These two men also thought it was OK to have serial unprotected sex with a girl they had never met before. Have they never though about STDs? Evans never thought about the health risk to his girlfriend in all this.

            To top it all they left her in a hotel room with no means of getting home. McDonald knew she had no handbag as, apparently, she asked him to stop the taxi leaving so she could look for it. The fact that she went back to fetch the dropped pizzza and didn’t make a fuss about having no handbag should have alerted McDonald that her congnicence was off.

            The least they could have done was leave her some money for a taxi.

            Even if Evan’s conviction is overturned – which I doubt – the behaviour of both men was irresponsible and distasteful. It says a lot IMO about their moral characters.

          • Partner

            I don’t know if you are a women, but you certainly post like one. Are you able to get your head around the fact that this is not a debate about whether he is guilty or not? It is about whether he should be able to work.

          • Tim

            Meanwhile in the real world… What planet do you live on where convicted sex offenders can just walk back into their old job when they get released, especially while they’re only out on license?? No one is saying he shouldn’t work, they’re saying footballers shouldn’t be exempt from the same realities the rest of us have to live in, i.e assuming he doesn’t clear his name, he should work his arse off to find a job that will accept him and damn well be grateful for it, just like any other bloke would have to.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Did you know that there are women in the highest positions in government, the Civil Service, the judiciary, the law, medicine, business and elsewhere? And that they perhaps all post messages like women and express extremely logical, knowledgeable opinions?:
            Your problem is that you aren’t apparently reading what I have posted. As pointed out repeatedly, neither I nor, I suspect, anyone who has signed the petition say Evans should not be able to work. Have a look upthread.

          • Partner

            The petition I have seen says “To even consider reinstating him as a player at the same club is a deep insult to the woman who was raped and to all women like her who have suffered at the hands of a rapist.”
            See my questions above as to what principles are being applied. Could he be an actor or direct TV commercials? Could he be a TV repairman? Could he work at a petrol station? Could he present the weather on TV? Why distinguish? and do you take this position for all criminal offences or just rape? And if just rape, why?The Guardian, outrageously,employs two ex con MPs to write columns for it in spite of proven dishonesty. However I would not dream of trying to stop the Guardian giving them a job if that is what it wants to do although I find it distasteful. . Do you say Mr Evans couldn’t write for the Guardian? why not?’I am a lawyer. If I raped someone I could not practice as a solicitor, as with any crime – there is no special rule for rape. Are you telling me with a straight face in that case I could not be a professional footballer if I had the talent? unbelievably silly.
            I know lots of brilliant women in the fields you mention but they think rationally and logically, unlike you.

          • Dave

            Thease peaple were not total strangers All 3 have had there lives totally destroyed this case is unsound … Jean hatchet seems to be the one stiring up all the hate .. Amazed peaple follow her like lost sheep. She should be in jail for her cruel comments on this case

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Precisely which cruel comments would those be? Suggesting that Evans is guilty of rape? That he shouldn’t be employed in a position where he will be a role model? Nothing cruel about those.

          • Dave

            It not a crime to have sex is it ? If the judge in this case is concerned it would be

          • Eliza Doolittle

            It is a crime to have sex with a woman who doesn’t consent or is incapable of giving valid consent. The judge and jury in this case applied the law impeccably, which is no doubt why the application for leave to appeal has been refused twice.

      • Partner

        Read what RL says. If the crime was committed, he is not seeking to make excuses. The issue here is whether the man in question should be able to have a job after having served his sentence. As, unlike RL, I am not a football follower, I can say that if a not very brilliant ex con cannot work as a man kicking a football; about a muddy field, what on earth can he do? Why on earth deny him paid work, particularly as the Guardian is now employing no less than two ex cons who are proven liars as columnists ,and I do not notice massed petitions about that. If we are going to have a new rule that ex cons cannot be employed (and presumably can’t receive benefits either) well, let’s debate it as a general principle.

        • Tim

          Let me rephrase what you’re saying a bit more accurately: it’s wrong that a convicted sex offender can’t walk straight back into his old £2000/week job to carry on in what is a dream job for millions of young boys, be watched every week by families with young children, wear a football shirt with sponsors’ logos, all in the public eye? It’s an absolute joke to even suggest it and I can’t comprehend how anyone fails to understand why 10000’s of people are speaking out against it when I really doubt you’d be happy having a convicted rapist working in your area as a teacher or policeman or even working in the local shop the schoolkids go in? It’s just reality, if you’re a sex offender or convicted for theft or serious violent crime, you come out of prison and if someone offers you a job shoveling sh1t, you take it and you damn well thank them for it. Why should he exist outside of the reality that all of us would have to face just because he happens to have been a footballer as opposed to working in any other sought-after profession???

          • Partner

            Certain jobs are restricted to sex offenders or ex cons. Setting those aside, please expalin how you would decide what jobs an ex con can and cannot do. can he be a magician, comedian, undertaker, TV actor, politician? What is your rationale for saying he should not be a footballer except its well paid? Footballers are brainless working class oafs. If an ex con cannot be a footballer what can he be? Only a window cleaner requires less brains.

          • Tim

            Yes there are legal restrictions so obviously a sex offender can’t become a teacher. But what I’m talking about is employers’ discretion. For everyone else in the world, if you go to an interview and impress way beyond all the competition, you still won’t get the job because at the part where you have to declare that you’re a registered sex offender, they drop you like a giant stinking sack of dog poo.

            How people on here can fail to grasp that a huge number of people in this country find it outrageous and quite sickening that footballers can live by completely different rules and walk straight back into their job like he expects to do, in spite of the fact that they’re idolised by millions of children and constantly in the public eye, I really don’t know, and despite what you’re claiming, being a footballer is a massive priveledge (even if you don’t value it personally), it pays way more than any other job for “working class oafs” and unfortunately, a vast proportion of people are of the same opinion. The only difference between football and any other job (except possibly trading, high end finance and a handful of others) is that the balance of power is so massively in the players favour that some club will always be willing to take on someone like Ched in spite of any moral reasoning because there’s so much at stake and so much to gain, not only demonstrated by this case but by all the ridiculous spoilt, deeply unprofessional behaviour a lot of them exhibit, knowing full well the worse that will happen is that they see out the last years of their career on £10k a week instead of £100k.

            The man is a convicted rapist, he should have to endure what every other convicted rapist has to, not be exempt from it just because he has a greater level of ability in kicking a ball around. There is plenty of menial labour around if the man seriously wants a job (or will he give up and do sod all if he can’t play football any more because he’s too good for proper hard work, we’ll see).

      • Dave

        Whitch bit do you find chilling ? She had already said erleyr that night she wanted sex … He payed for the room

        • Bilbo Baggins

          When and where did she say that ??

      • Dave

        What rape do you know something where you there ? O I get it your the woman who wants a new pink mini … Should you not be in hiding

    • Sarah

      I find the idea that anyone could possibly think he’s being hounded chilling.

      • sidgar

        I don’t know how else to define “hounded” but by protestors and activists following this man around trying to prevent his employment and return to society after falsely being labelled a “rapist”.

        • Eliza Doolittle

          No-one is trying to prevent his employment. He has a perfectly good job offer from his prospective father in law which not one person has objected to.

          • Swansea_Jack

            The target in this case is not just Ched Evans but football in general. In the last year or so we have had regular character assassinations of people involved on football. Their private emails and texts have been used to reveal their attitudes to the usual suspects women, race and gays.

            Ched Evans allows the feminists to get two for the price of one – and also slander all those involved in football as being Neanderthal at best – rape supporters at worst.

            The fact is that for those of us of a certain age, our humour is sometimes a bit like a Carry On movie. Shock horror to feminists. Okay, so what is this great new world you have where on-line porn is often shockingly debased, where Tinder and Grinder are used as some kind of on-line store for sex, where teenagers use their phones for taking and sending intimate selfies… Nice work. The day has already arrived where the supposedly sexist world of the 80’s is seen as a golden period for male female relations. Sure, there were wrongs taking place then – but I fear that greater wrongs are taking place today.

            Oh, and as for everyday sexism in the workplace… It takes two to tango.

    • robertsonjames

      Agreed,

      Personally I’m queasy about much of the doctrine of rehabilitation and would be very nervous indeed about employing someone who had committed a significant criminal offence. This is simply because I’ve always worked on the assumption that this conviction says something about their character and probity, which are things that matter to me as an employer.

      But then I’m a conservative and would be expected consistently to hold such opinions.

      What I won’t take, however, is hypocritical left-wingers, who’d accuse me of discrimination and bigotry if I declined to hire a Muslim applicant who had served time for terrorism-related offences or a woman with a series of convictions for breaking into and vandalising military installations, turning round and denouncing (even threatening) an employer who actually indicates that they might wish to hire a rapist who has served his time.

      That the Muslim or the woman should be denied well-paid employment of any kind after the criminal justice system had finished with them, or that they should be prevented from working in their former occupation once released, or even that they should be required formally to declare their guilt and their remorse before being permitted to work again in their previous profession, would never be suggested because left-wingers would insist that such further punishments would all be self-evidently wrong in principle as well as clearly bad for society.

      The difference, it seems to me, is only that hypocritical left-wingers have come to allow radical feminists to make the running in asserting that a very small sub-set of criminal offences are special cases to which the normal rules don’t apply and where rehabilitation should not take its normal course. Frankly I just don’t see why that should be so.

      • Kennybhoy

        “… allow radical feminists to make the running…”

        While they most assuredly made the running they were undoubtedly and significantly aided and abetted by the traditional right-wing/conservative law n’ order brigade. A truly unholy alliance of ideological opposites. The “special victim” ideology which originated in the US back in the late 1970s into the early 1980s suited lazy law enforcement agencies, prosecutors and judges, and a judicial system that favours default outcomes. But most of all it pandered to the worst instincts of the consumers of popular mass media. Scary.

    • Phillip Fawcett

      Absolutely. Very serious indeed. The public (correction, a baying and hateful segment of it) are being allowed to sentence him again and again ad infinitum. They did not kick up such a fuss when Oldham employed a hit and run child-killer, though. They obviously value one promiscuous woman’s power higher.

      • Eliza Doolittle

        They did object to the hit and run footballer, in fact. Possibly less noticeably, but then he did admit his crime and repeatedly express regret for it, and his relatives and friends didn’t seek to vilify his victims.

    • Dave

      Yes it feels like a fox hunt and he’s the fox … I find it chilling to … I bet he feels raped by society … I bet there are millions of men in this country that have done worse than this and never spent one night in jail .. So if a girl jumps on top of you while you are drunk is she committing rape .. This is screwed up

      • Ben Sorin

        Yes if a woman jumps on top of you and has intercourse with you when you are camatose or so severley intoxicated you cannot reasonably consent it is rape. Is it so hard to understand?

    • Ben Sorin

      Did you find the hounding of the victim chilling as well?

      • Dave

        No but I find it chilling when you see the woman get out of a taxi with very high heals on looking totally sober enter the hotel not stumbling at all walk back outside to the cab to pick up a pizza then walks back into the hotel remember ing to shut doors .. And when she whent out side to pick up the pizza she picked it up off the floor where ched evens friend had left it . She picked it up without stumbling … Could this have been planned?

        • Eliza Doolittle

          How precisely could she have planned that MacDonald would text his friend and that said friend would come back to the hotel and lie to get a key to get into the room? How could she have planned all the independent evidence of her drunken state?

        • Bilbo Baggins

          She did not “shut doors”. The CCTV footage clearly shows the doors open and shut automatically. Most hotel have such door to comply with various Disability Acts.
          When she picked up the pizza she was partially off-camera.

        • Bilbo Baggins

          You are mistaken.
          She did not shut any doors – they all had automatic opening/closing mechanisms. This is mandatory in hotels to comply with the Disability Act.
          In addition, if you have viewed the footage from Ched Evans own website you will see (if you look at the time recording at the bottom of the first video clip that certain segments are missing. At one point the recording jumps 30 seconds . Ask yourself why this is and what was happening at the time?

    • Gwangi

      A 16 year old schoolboy in Wales have just killed himself because he had it off with some drunken girl at a party and the school ‘inclusion officer’ (no doubt a finger-wagging feminist) had told him he was for it.
      No doubt femi-worms are pleased.
      The whole ‘too drunk to consent thing’ is a nonsense. Men cannot use that defence but women can; therefore it breaks equality laws. It also infantilises women. If you are too drunk to remember you won’t care anyway, no? British women are really evil nasty devils. No wonder so many men marry foreign girls.

      • Eliza Doolittle

        It isn’t a defence. A person alleging that sex was consensual can’t rely on consent apparently given when the victim was incapable of giving valid consent for any reason, for example if she is mentally ill, drunk, drugged or unconscious

      • Eliza Doolittle

        The rule about consent applies equally to men and women. If a man were buggered when he is too drunk to remember, I am quite sure he would care a great deal. Wouldn’t you?

        Can you produce evidence of anyone who is pleased that a boy has committed suicide? No? Why am I not surprised.

    • hugh_36

      He really doesn’t help himself, the first version to “not least” the victim was pathetic

    • Jules0607

      Tis a pity you don’t find the hounding of his victim [on 5th identity change in 2 years] as chilling

      • Dave

        There’s only her that can let peaple know where she is .. I find it chilling she gets so much help .. When she bragged so much about her big win

        • Jules0607

          BIG WIN?????

          • Dave

            Have you not seen her twitter comments ? You should Where she offer to take her mates out and get a pink mini when she gets her big win. And she says lol a lot

          • Eliza Doolittle

            It’s been shown that that is not her account.

        • Eliza Doolittle

          What big win? You do know she hasn’t received on penny’s compensation, and hasn’t sold her story, don’t you? And why shouldn’t a rape victim who is being hounded and vilified by the rapist’s supporters receive help?

    • jaykay

      But the hounding of rape victims doesn’t bother you a jot.

    • WhiteMensFreedomOfSpeechCameAt

      I find the hounding of his victim chilling. She’s the ones who’s had to move house five times, who can’t see her family, who’s had her trauma paraded by him and his truly bizarre father-in-law to be who seems content to throw his own daughter under the bus in his pursuits of fame and money.

      They set up the dumb website inviting the public to decide. Well it has.

    • susan

      I find it rational.

  • GraveDave

    A new name to help us welcome in the new year: Jean Hatchet. A name which is almost certainly too good to be true for a perpetually infuriated radical feminist

    Ho-ho… But you’re gonna get it in the neck for this one Rod.

    • Gwangi

      Yes you couldn’t make it up really could you (though they do all the time).
      A bit disturbing that 150,000 self-righteous femi-twerps see fit to sign a petition because they want to destroy a man – yet hardly any can be bothered to do anything to stop women killing babies and children with such alarming regularity, or exposing them to abuse via whatever new squeeze they have invited into their one parent mess-family?
      In an age of Islamofascism, methinks their focus is a bit off. How many have signed a petition to stop all extremist Muslims working or spreading hatred eh?

      • Sarah

        Full bag of glue this morning, was it?

      • monsieur_charlie

        You’re right about the killing of babies but what is gobsmacking is that they don’t seem to care much when only female babies are targeted for purely social reasons. They don’t seem to care much either about how many old people are injured and even killed in care and hospital.

        • Eliza Doolittle

          How do you know the views on abortion and elderly people in care of all the people signing the petitions? Have you asked them?

          • monsieur_charlie

            It would be a waste of my time to bother replying in the normal way to such a childish comment as yours. Of course it’s not your fault, after all, you never asked to be born did you?

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Would that be because you can’t think of a sensible reply? Seriously, do tell us how you know the views on abortion of all the people signing the petitions?

          • monsieur_charlie

            Seriously? Refer to my previous answer. However, let me pose a question for you to answer. Why do women believe their right to do whatever they like with their bodies allow them to believe they can destroy, by abortion, another persons life?

  • OldhamFC

    She used the alias “Jane Russell” on Facebook.

    • Aberrant_Apostrophe

      That’s an unfortunate choice, as presumably she’s unaware of the old Max Factor joke.

      • OldhamFC

        Humour is not her forte.

    • Gary Moore

      Why mention that?

      • OldhamFC

        Oh I omitted her links to North Wales Police.

  • mandelson

    Couldnt agree with Rod more, this campaign is driven by a feminazi agenda supported by various dead soul politicians and pc hucksters. The bit that makes me laugh is that as a footballer he is a role model? Yeah those guys out there swearing puce face an inch from the face of the referee, or continually spitting, or continually lying about being fouled – all traits that should be imitated I assume. Its just kicking a bag of air about FFs not an audition for sainthood. Let him play and earn.

    • Kjafc

      Mandelson, I have to say I am starting to agree. I dont see them hounding Clayton MacDonald. I fear this has become an opportunity for some people to jump on a bandwagon and grind some axes. Not what you expect in a civilised Country.

      • mandelson

        I saw on the news that the Bandwagon has Dave for a passenger sticking his nose in and slipping in a comment about the sentence being short. FFS can you imagine a serious politician in the past gossiping like an old fishwife about a single individual footballer and his attempts to find work. Nauseating.

        • Kjafc

          It really is bizarre. It’s become a giant band wagon for people with questionable motives. The fact people bullying evans are now bullying sponsors & the innocent staff at Oldham proves what they are. Nasty. Peoplet who havnt even bothered to read the statements and evidence are legal experts. The world’s an unpleasant place with some vindictive & nasty people who are hypocrites.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Yes, if people are bullying Oldham staff it is indeed nasty. But it is odd that they didn’t see fit to,report that to the police. However, over 70,000 people have signed petitions and there is no suggestion at all that all 70,000 have had anything whatsoever to do with bullying.

            However, if you read the information that is publicly available, it doesn’t take a legal expert to see that the jury and judges were right. Evans was condemned out of his own mouth.

      • Eliza Doolittle

        People are simply and reasonably accepting the jury verdict which has not been overturned despite Evans’ best efforts

        • Kjafc

          I give up. Please do not ever accept an offer for jury service.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            If you can’t accept that this jury and several judges may know more than you do, Kjafc, it is you who are unfit for jury service.

  • fordwich

    Way to go Rod! Spot on in all areas!

  • Eliza Doolittle

    There really, really aren’t sensible doubts about this conviction. Essentially Evans was convicted on his own evidence. He just doesn’t accept it because he doesn’t think that what he did should be a crime.
    And equally, he has not lodged any appeal. He has twice had his application for leave to appeal turned down. All that is happening now is that the Criminal Cases Review Commission – which has nothing to do with the courts – is looking at whether there are any grounds for trying a new application for leave to appeal. As they agree to do so in only 3.3% of the cases referred to them, I’m not holding my breath.
    The issue with this man is that, no matter how you belittle Oldham, the fact is that taking him on as a player would be to place him in a position where he is able to influence thousands of impressionable young people. The other fact you skate over is that Evans has failed completely to dissociate himself from a website which misrepresents the facts of his conviction and seeks to vilify his victim; equally he has failed to dissociate from or condemn the efforts of various supporters in repeatedly hounding her down to the extent that she has had to change her name, and has had to change address no less than five times.
    The fact that you choose to use personal ridicule about the reasonable concerns of over 70,000 decent men and women says everything about your inability to raise a respectable argument.

    • Christian

      Evans was convicted on the basis that the police can tell from ten seconds of grainy video of a woman walking that she was too drunk to give consent. What makes it more absurd is that, she was deemed sober enough AFTER that video was taken to have sex with Evans friend and give consent, but literally one minute afterwards was too drunk to give consent to Evans. If it gives you no concern that a jury can find one man innocent and one guilty then you have no grasp of logic or justice.

      • Gwangi

        Yes, absurd – it infantilises women too so is secksist.
        Being drunk is No excuse – women should take responsibility for themselves.
        Can a man argue he was too drnk to remember having it off sith someone or stealing something or having a fight? Nope – no excuse in law. But it is for women who allege they are ‘too drunk’ to consent (NONSENSE legal argument!)

        • Eliza Doolittle

          She didn’t actually allege she was too drunk too consent. She had no memory of the event. Evans was largely convicted on his own evidence and that of his friends.
          The plain fact is that the law states that consent not freely given is not consent. Would you think it OK for someone who had a severe learning difficulty to be subject to sexual intercourse when they had no understanding of what they were consenting to? The situation is precisely the same.

      • Dorian Beige

        Obviously nobody except the jury know exactly how close McDonald was to being found guilty of rape, but all that it is logically possible to deduce from the decision is that it felt there was at least reasonable doubt that the claimant was not capable of giving consent to him.

        So, the jury didn’t actually say she was definitely capable of giving consent to McDonald, which is what you are suggesting. But they clearly felt that by the time Ched Evans entered the hotel room she was incapable of giving consent.

        On that basis, it’s perfectly logical that the jury arrived at different verdicts for the two men.

        • Charles_Dilkes

          >>So, the jury didn’t actually say she was definitely capable of giving consent to McDonald, which is what you are suggesting. But they clearly felt that by the time Ched Evans entered the hotel room she was incapable of giving consent.<<

          Which is of course arbitrary, pure conjecture and, ultiamtely, absurd.

          I hope you can see that.

          • Dorian Beige

            What is arbitrary, pure conjecture and absurd?

            From the judge’s summing up, and from the appeal court’s decision, this was the legal test applied to the facts. Ched Evans failed that test, whereas McDonald didn’t.

            There’s nothing absurd about that. The facts of each defendant’s interactions with the girl were very different, so it is hardly surprising that two different results were possible.

            I’m not saying whether the jury were correct in their decision, nor that they were wrong, simply that it is possible to arrive at two different decisions for the two men.

          • Charles_Dilkes

            It’s not rationally possible to come up with separate pronouncements. The appeal court’s judgments are irrelevant – the only thing they’d be looking at are misapplications of the law; they don’t review the illogicality of jury decisions.

            The jury’s verdict on the case is absurd. And you’ve written above about ‘reasonable doubt’ as it relates to the claimant – that’s incorrect; ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ is the legal principle that has to be satisfied in order to secure a conviction of the defendant. I don’t think there’s any way you can believe beyond any reasonable doubt that the claimant could NOT give consent when it ultimately boils down to one word against the other, and that’s compounded when the co-defendant is acquitted.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            You are wrong about the function of the appeal courts. I suggest you look at the judgment. It’s freely available.

          • Charles_Dilkes

            No I am not. Appeal Courts do NOT review jury decisions on the basis of illogicality – how could they? To do so is to undermine the princple of trial-by-jury; who issues the verdicts? Judges or juries?

            The only thing they’ll reviewd is applications of law, or whether the jury have been instructed incorectly.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            They can retire jury decisions on reasons of illogicality, in fact – for example when a jury comes to different decisions on exactly the same evidence.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Sorry, review, not retire

          • Charles_Dilkes

            No they cannot. I’m sorry, but you’re just wrong.

            There is a element of law called ‘lingering doubt’ which does allow judges to overturn jury decisions due to be poor rationale but it is almost never cited because it undermines trial-by-jury.

          • Dorian Beige

            The appeal court considered whether the judge misdirected the jury in advising that they could arrive at different verdicts. They found that the judge hadn’t misdirected the jury.

            The jury was directed as follows: “When you come back …. you will be asked to return separate verdicts in respect of each of the two defendants. Accordingly, when you retire you must consider the case, that is to say the evidence for and against each of the two defendants separately. Whilst there is a considerable overlap in that evidence, the evidence is not identical, and whilst your verdicts may very well be the same in the case, they might be different. The important thing for you to remember is your approach to the case for and against the defendants must be considered separately.”

            And you’ve misunderstood what I’ve said about reasonable doubt. I simply said there was reasonable doubt in the case of McDonald but not in Evans’ case. That is, the jury clearly were certain over Evans’ guilt but not McDonald’s. That’s nothing to do with offering reasonable doubt to the victim, who didn’t actually appear to contradict any evidence.

            It just seems pretty straightforward that two different decisions were possible.

          • Charles_Dilkes

            Sorry, I get that – juries are allowed to make stupid decisions. As I keep repeating: there is no element of law that allows for appellate courts to overturn ILLOGICAL decisions, ergo, the decision of the jury to vindicate one and not the other can stand, even though it’s seemingly irrational.

          • Dorian Beige

            The appeal considered that too. It’s the following paragraph from the one I quoted above.

            “Given that direction, it was open to the jury to convict both defendants, to acquit both defendants, or to convict one and not the other defendant. That was the point of a joint trial in which separate verdicts were to be returned. It was open to the jury to consider that even if the complainant did not, in fact, consent to sexual intercourse with either of the two men, that in the light of his part in what happened — the meeting in the street and so on — McDonald may reasonably have believed that the complainant had consented to sexual activity with him, and at the same time concluded that the applicant knew perfectly well that she had not consented to sexual activity with him (the applicant). The circumstances in which each of the two men came to be involved in the sexual activity was quite different; so indeed were the circumstances in which they left her. Those were matters entirely open to the jury; there was no inconsistency.”

            It seems the judges at the court of appeal considered that the facts for both men were significantly different too.

          • Charles_Dilkes

            Sorry, but no it doesn’t.

            Appellate courts NEVER consider the logicality of jury decisions – to do so undermines the princple of trial-by-jury. You can’t have judges overturning jury verdicts on the basis of stupidity.

            All the appellate court will do, as highlighted in that quote, is reviwed the jury decision in light of their instruction.

          • Dorian Beige

            I’m not talking generally, I’m talking about your specific point about the jury arriving at two different decisions.

            The passage I’ve quoted shows that court of appeal specifically reviewed the decision to permit two different decisions and did not find it to be illogical.

          • Charles_Dilkes

            Well then we’re talking at cross purposes.

            I didn’t say the jury COULDN’T deliver two separate verdicts, I said it’s irrational that they did; and the court didn’t look at the illogicality of delivering two verdicts because that was never in question. The review is of legal instruction.

            Ultimately the jury rationalised that either:

            1) The claimant was of sound mind to give consent to McDonald but not to evans, literally 10 or so minutes later.

            That’s illogical.

            2) The claimant was NOT of sound mind to give consent to either party but consent was presumed because she met McDonald some 10 minutes prior.

            If that’s you reasoning – as arbitrary and subjective as it is – then you need to convict both because the faculities of both defendents are one the same in determining the ability / inability of the claimant to express consent.

            For either rationalisation, the jury’s determiniation is buiilt on nothing more than cojecture & speculation.

            It’s the most ridiculous case I’ve read in a long, long time. The police & CPS should NEVER have brought this to court, and the relevation that the police actually SUGGESTED to the claimant that she was a victim of a rape speaks volumes.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            The issue here with whether either or both men had available to them the defence that they reasonably believed the victim was consenting even though she was too drunk to do so. For the reasons I have given upthread, it was perfectly logical for the jury to decide that the case against McDonald was not proved beyond reasonable doubt for that reason, but that there was no reasonable doubt that Evans reasonably believed the victim was able to consent.

          • Charles_Dilkes

            That’s not what was said. It’s not the case that Evans reasonbly BELIEVED the claimant was consenting, it was that she EXPRESSED consent. The claimant maintained she couldn’t remember, and the jury had to determine whether she was of sound mind given the circumstances.

            Which then invites all manner of bogus conjecture and speculation on the part of the jury who have clearly accepted the word of one party and dismissed the other. Can you see how poor a decision that is?

          • Eliza Doolittle

            No, the point is that if she expressed consent, it is not valid consent if she was so drunk that she was incapable of forming the necessary intent. However, if she was too drunk, the men would still have a defence if they reasonably believed she was genuinely consenting. It is perfectly logical for the jury to have decided that that defence had not been negated beyond reasonable doubt in relation to MacDonald, but that they did not believe at all that Evans genuinely though she was consenting.

          • Charles_Dilkes

            You need to take a step back and reread what you’ve just wrote and then look at the verdict.

            How the jury came to that decision is baffling; absolutely moronic. Absolutely saturated in speculation and conjecture.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            No, I really haven’t. The jury manifestly wasn’t accepting the word of one person against another, not least as the victim was unable to give any evidence of what happened in the hotel room. They accepted the evidence of several witnesses and the CCTV that she was too drunk to consent. They saw Evans and MacDonald giving evidence and saw them being cross examined, and decided that they didn’t accept Evans’ evidence that he thought she was consenting.

          • Charles_Dilkes

            Bored of this now – you can think what you want.

          • Dorian Beige

            Again, I don’t think you’re applying the question of reasonable doubt. Something gave the jury reasonable doubt in the case of McDonald that was not present in the case of Evans.

            There are a few possibilities which all may contribute, one which springs to mind is the evidence of the night porter where he heard the girl asking McDonald not to leave her.

          • Charles_Dilkes

            Which would then undermine your rationalisation that the claimant was unable to express consent. But that’s by-the-by –

            If you take a step back, and just think about the stretches of creduility you’re having to employ, the sheer conjecture and speculation you’re having to indulge, and the sheer subjectivity of testimonies, then it altogether makes a very, very unconducive case. There is such a strong element of reasonable doubt in the entire case that you have to employ mental gymnastics based on nothing more than speculation to substantiate a guilty verdict.

            Poor decision by the jury.

        • Christian

          How close to being found guilty? My a God, listen to yourself. He was found INNOCENT. Therefore the facts are these; Evans begins having sex with her less than a minute after McDonald, if she was too drunk to give consent at 1am she MUST have been too drunk to give consent at 1259am. The police assessment of her drunkenness was based on the CCTV footage as she walked into the hotel. This was BEFORE she had sex with either man. I don’t think you and logic have ever been acquainted.

          • Dorian Beige

            Sorry, that’s missing the legal principle that appears to have been used in the case. What I am saying is that the jury was certain over Evans but had doubts over McDonald due to the difference in their circumstances.

            But even so, as a matter of logic your assertion is clearly false. You just need to consider the situation where the claimant became too drunk to give consent at 1am,

            That’s not a comment on the case, just a bit of logic for you to mull over. But there was also a blood test indicating an alcohol level 2.5 times the legal driving limit and traces of cocaine and cannabis, I think.

            Anyway, there was also expert evidence provided to the jury to consider. I haven’t read it, but it wasn’t just the police’s opinion.

          • Christian

            How could she be too drunk at 1am but not too drunk at 1259am? Do share this logic with us, should be entertaining. She had ZERO alcohol in her blood when tested, ZERO. An expert estimated her blood alcohol at the time to be 2.5 times the driving limit but said her claim to have memory impairment was highly unlikely. That’s a nice way of saying she’s a liar. The CCTV footage was key and if it indicts Evans it indicts McDonald. Both innocent or both guilty. There’s no escaping it. Logic demands it.

          • Dorian Beige

            Alcohol doesn’t enter the bloodstream immediately upon consumption. It takes time and, I think, there was evidence suggesting that the girl consumed a significant amount of alcohol prior to departing the club.

            So, it’s perfectly possible, if not inevitable, that somebody’s capacity continues to diminish after finishing drinking.

            And you really should read the appeal decision. One of Ched Evans’ new expert witnesses provides a plausible explanation of the memory loss, which seems to undermine his own case, bizarrely.

            https://www.crimeline.info/uploads/cases/2012ewcacrim2559.pdf

          • Christian

            She initiated sex with McDonald 90 minutes after her last drink. Evans arrived sometime after this. I assure you, she was as drunk as she was going to get when even McDonald began having sex with her, let alone Evans. So, no, it’s not possible at all.

            I’ve read the appeal decision, the new expert had no besting either way. Interestingly the complainants memory loss didn’t extend to bring unable to recall being at the hotel.

          • Bilbo Baggins

            Did she initiate the sexual activity? We only have McDonald’s word for that.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            You don’t help your argument in any way by being offensive. The issue is whether it was proved beyond reasonable doubt that neither man reasonably believed she was consenting. The doubt went one way of the line for McDonald, the other way for Evans, based on the different circumstances applying to each.

          • Christian

            The circumstances were EXACTLY the same. Are you a liar or just ignorant?

          • Eliza Doolittle

            No, they weren’t exactly the same. Why can you not understand the issue that each man had to prove beyond reasonable doubt that they had no reason to believe that the victim was not consenting? And that it was perfectly possible for the jury to decide that there was a reasonable doubt in relation to McDonald based on the fact that the victim had willingly gone back to the hotel room with him, but none in relation to Evans of whom she knew nothing before he conned his way into the room?

          • SusanM123

            “And that it was perfectly possible for the jury to decide that there was a reasonable doubt in relation to McDonald based on the fact that the victim had willingly gone back to the hotel room with him,..”

            No – not if she in fact was too drunk to consent (regardless of whether she willingly went back with him or not) and a reasonable person should have seen that.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Sure. But that’s an argument for convicting MacDonald. It isn’t an argument for acquitting Evans.

          • Bilbo Baggins

            Agreed.

          • Bilbo Baggins

            “and a reasonable person should have seen that.”

            Exactly. But this begs the question as to whether either of them were being “reasonably”.
            McDonald actually stepped over her in the takeaway, where she had fallen down drunk and then still agreed to take her with him to the hotel. This was despite her having no handbag and no coat. Was that “reasonable” behaviour?

          • Christian

            You dont even know the basic principles of English law. The defendants don’t have to prove anything. ZERO. That’s the prosecutions job. Evans was convicted on one factor and one factor alone, the claimants sobriety, or lack thereof. As the judge said in the original case; “When he came to pass sentence the judge said: “…. [the complainant] was in no position to form a capacity to consent to sexual intercourse, and you, when you arrived, must have realised that.” So we have the judge saying she wasn’t in a position to consent to Evans (even though the only evidence we have is of her walking from the taxi into the hotel in extremely high heeled platform shoes without a problem, even remembering to go back outside for her pizza and bending down to pick it up) and yet she WAS in a position to consent to McDonald even though she could only be MORE sober when Evans arrives than when McDonald initiated sexual,intercourse with her. This is basic chronology and logic.

          • Lord Taliesin

            Feck me, you’re a patient man, Christian, but I fancy you’re wasting your breath with that one. Imagine finding yourself in court with a Doolittle on the jury.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Yes, it’s so inconvenient having someone who bases their opinions on facts, logic and the law, isn’t it? If only these uppity women would accept whatever nonsense their lords and masters spout without question.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            No, if the defendants allege that they reasonably believed that someone was consenting when they were in fact too drunk to consent the burden of proof shifts to the defence. It’s not a very difficult burden to meet as they only have to prove enough to make the jury decide the case against the defence is not proved beyond reasonable doubt. You really don’t know as much about the law as you think.

          • Golden Fleece

            Of course they were the same
            the girl was drugged up semi pessed and wanted a good time
            she went back for fun with 1 MacD,Ched turned up said could he join in of course she said yes ,she like a good time.
            I cant understand how as many stupid people cant see what really happened
            Do-Little is thick as shyt

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Says someone not bright enough to write English properly. Oh, the irony.

      • Eliza Doolittle

        You really don’t understand what you are talking about, do you? I suggest you read the Court of Appeal judgment when he was refused leave to appeal which sets it all out.
        The plain fact is that the jury, which saw and heard all the witnesses and saw all the evidence, decided that she was too drunk to consent to sex. However, in order to convict they also had to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the men had no reasonable belief that she was consenting. They probably acquitted the other man on the basis that they thought that was not proved beyond reasonable doubt, probably because she went back to the room with him. However, that did not apply to Evans: he received a text that his friend had “got a bird”, turned round to go to the hotel, lied to get a key to the room, and went in and found his friend having sex with the victim. On his initial account he asked his friend whether he could join in, though he later changed that to alleging that he asked the girl. In either event, he immediately penetrated her. After he finished, he escaped via a fire escape (and why if he thought he had just had consensual sex?), and his friend also left, very tellingly informing the hotel receptionist that the victim was sick.
        The jury presumably decided that in the few moments between coming into the room and starting intercourse there was no evidence that he made any effort to decide whether she was actually capable of consenting. It’s a perfectly logical decision.

        • Christian

          They probably acquitted the other man on the basis that they thought that was not proved beyond reasonable doubt, probably because she went back to the room with him. ” Good grief. The prosecution case was that she was too drunk to consent, can’t you comprehend that? That she went back to the room with him was irrelevant. If she couldn’t consent to Evans then she couldn’t consent to McDonald. There was zero alcohol in her blood when she went to the police to report her handbag stolen. Yes, ZERO. The defence expert estimated she might have been 2.5 times over the limit at the time of sexual activity but that her memory could not have been impaired as she herself claimed. She was lying in other words.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Can you not comprehend the basic fact that the prosecution has to prove a number of things in relation to a rape? Yes, they have to prove that the victim either did not consent or was not legally capable of consenting, but the accused have a defence if they can satisfy the jury that there is a possibility that they reasonably believed that the victim was consenting. The jury here may well have taken the view that, because the woman consented to go back to McDonald’s room with him, then even though she was too drunk to consent there was at least a possibility (enough to introduce reasonable doubt) that he in fact thought she was not too drunk and that she was consenting genuinely. However, on any interpretation when she went to that room she was not consenting to sex with someone who lied to get a key to the room and came in. Do you seriously contend that in the moments before he started having intercourse Evans bothered to make a considered assessment of whether she was capable of giving consent?
            Your information as to her blood alcohol is incorrect. Remember, the jury heard and saw all the evidence: you have not.

          • thebicu

            For reasons I don’t understand, the jury WERE NOT SHOWN THE SECURITY VIDEO of her walking, perfectly capably, through the reception, and remembering to go back and pick up the pizza they had set down. So in fact you are wrong, they did NOT have all the evidence that we now have available.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            You’ve been making the mistake of believing that stuff on Evans’ website, haven’t you? You do realise that if the prosecution doesn’t bring forward relevant evidence the defence can and will do so? And, of course, the jury did see this.

          • Kjafc

            Probably? You are crazy if you think probably is sufficent enough for you to be so certain of his guilt as you keep saying. A CCTV does not lie. It was not shown to the jury. It proved she was able to make decisions. Have you bothered to watch it? How can the jury be certain that she was too drunk to have sex with evans and not macdonald. Have you read the witness statements? Of course you havnt youve made your prejudiced mind up.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Kjafc, yes, I have seen the CCTV footage. So did the jury. As it does not contain sound, it doesn’t prove she had capacity to make decisions, and it certainly doesn’t prove what state she was in later as more alcohol entered her bloodstream.

            You weren’t in the jury room and don’t know what their findings were. The likelihood is that they found that she was too drunk to consent to either MacDonald or Evans, but then went on, as they were required to do, to decide whether either man might nevertheless reasonably have believed that she was validly consenting. They may at that point have decided that there was an element of doubt in relation to macDonald but not in relation to Evans.

            Look,I’m know you find it terribly aggravating to be presented with the facts. But that makes you prejudiced, not me.

          • Kjafc

            Wow you are condescending too. You have displayed incredible prejudice, I do not know evans and have no agenda. When taking into account all the evidence this seems unsafe IMO. Last I heard we still allowed freedom of speech. You resort to calling me prejudiced because I dont agree withyou. How is that prejudiced. Why resort to calling Peopleton ‘ist’ when they disagree? I hope he gets his appeal and all the evidence is heard. I will be more satisfied with either decision then. Let’s hope the animals on both sides do not abuse or threaten anyone.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            You really do need to get used to the fact that disagreeing with someone does not in any way derogate from their freedom of speech. I don’t call you prejudiced because you disagree with me but because you disagree with incontrovertible facts when they don’t support your extremely weak arguments.

          • Kjafc

            I understand from a lawyer on the radio today that the information on evans website was all in the public domain and factual and that all statements had been made on oath to solicitors. Under the justice system, prisoners can use the Internet via a third party to plead their innocence. The experienced lawyer felt this was a case that should have an appeal hearing. They are not allowed to name the alleged victim even though she now has a new identity.

          • SusanM123

            The problem with this is that McDonald saw her for a longer time, spoke to her on the street, presumably in the taxi, walked into the hotel with her (how long did that all take, 10 minutes? 15? ). He was in the better position to assess her inebriation, and yet he was entitled to the reasonable belief that that she was not too drunk to consent. Yet Evans was not entitled to the same reasonable belief. It just doesn’t make sense. If her state of drunkenness was such that a reasonable person should have seen that she was incapable of consent, then MacDonald should have been convicted too.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            That may be an argument for MacDonald’s conviction, but it’s not an argument for Evans’ acquittal. On his own evidence he made no attempt whatsoever to work out whether she was capable of giving valid consent.

          • Christian

            Her blood alcohol level was zero at the police station. This is a matter if fact. It may be inconvenient for your bigoted narrative but such is life. So she could be too drunk to consent to McDonald but it wouldn’t matter due to how she met him, but she could be too drunk to consent to Evans, but that would matter due to how she met him. Your grasp of reason is stunning.

            Evans asked for the key card as he’d paid for the room. What’s the lie and anyway, what’s the relevance? Do you seriously contend that McDonald made a considered assessment of her ability to consent?

            She made sexual requests to Evans and initiated changes of position herself, but she wasn’t consenting? Hmmmmm

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Actually, her blood alcohol level was not zero. Do check.

            Evans admitted that he lied to get the key. Why would he want entry to a room where his friend had I his own words “got a bird”

          • Eliza Doolittle

            I have no idea what MacDonald did. Apparently the jury gave him the benefit of the doubt. The evidence of her alleged requests came from two people with every motive to lie. Do you really believe that Evans happily licked up his friend’s sperm?

          • Bilbo Baggins

            Her blood level at the police station was zero because she didn’t go there until 11.30.pm that night. If she had gone as soon as she woke up it might be a different story.

    • Jay_Sands

      “70,000 decent men and women” – you know them all?

    • Ally Gory

      “the reasonable concerns of over 70,000 decent men and women”

      You don’t seem to grasp the blunt suggestion 70,000 have abandoned reason and are not decent. Your version of events “Evans was convicted on his own evidence” and Christian’s, below, “she was deemed sober enough AFTER that video was taken to have sex with Evans friend and give consent, but literally one minute afterwards was too drunk to give consent to Evans” are very different and only one is factually accurate.

      • Eliza Doolittle

        As I have indicated above, that is not my version of events, and is not what I said in my post. Do keep up.

        • Ally Gory

          For clariity, the words I quoted directly from your opening comment, which remain in situ, are someone else’s, though they appear under your name and not as quotations?

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Sorry, I was referring to the stuff about being sober after the video etc.

            The point is that it is not factually accurate to say that she was deemed sober one minute and too drunk the next. As explained above, the likelihood is that she was deemed too drunk to consent to either man, but MacDonald got the benefit of the doubt as to whether he might reasonably have believed that she was consenting ( for example, if she consented on the way to the hotel) whereas the jury may have found that Evans, never having seen her before, could not have believed she was validly consenting.

            I am deliberately being cautious here because I wasn’t in the jury room. And nor, I assume (otherwise you would be committing a very serious offence) were you.

          • Ally Gory

            No I wasn’t, nor have I taken the unusual step of seeking sight of the trial transcript. It is a curiosity that you have in this instance, just as it is that this one case has attracted so much vitriolic interest. From what has been presented here by others, which has also been gleaned from the records of the case, the nature of the evidence suggests those vilifying this man could find a more worthy target, whilst reassessing what constitutes a role model for those deemed lower life forms who cannot make any value judgements for themselves.

            “otherwise you would be committing a very serious offence”

            You tried being patronising before and merely made yourself look foolish, would you care to have a third go?

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Nothing patronising there, you’re being ever so sensitive.

          • Ally Gory

            Look up “patronising” in the dictionary, it’s obviously beyond your understanding at present.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            No, I can see that your comment certainly satisfies the definition.

          • Ally Gory

            You see very little, but you have a lot to say anyway.

    • Gwangi

      Why shouldn’t this man despise the witch who lied to get him locked up for 2,5 years eh?
      No anonymity for accusers. That is the way to go. Plus long prison sentences or all who lie and make false accusations.

      • Eliza Doolittle

        She didn’t lie. She said she couldn’t remember anything that had happened. If the prosecution had rested on her evidence alone, it would have got nowhere. Evans was convicted on the basis of his own evidence, that of his friends, and others such as the hotel receptionist.
        Way to go, by the way, in demonising a rape victim further. People like you really do not help Evans’ cause.

    • rtj1211

      What you are saying is that you are too useless to also influence those impressionable young people by talking to them about what prison means, what rehabilitation means and what ‘a role model’ is.

      Martin Samuel at the Daily Mail has done precisely that with his kids.

      Perhaps you could look in your own parenting mirror also??

      • Eliza Doolittle

        Nothing to do with me, my children aren’t interested in football. But can you honestly claim that every parent in the country can and does prevent their child from being influenced by footballing role models, and that every stroppy adolescent listens to his or her parents? Clearly football clubs make an awful lot of money out of young people who idolise their players, so they really cannot wash their hands of any responsibility in that respect.

    • CS

      “The Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) is an independent public body that was set up in March 1997 by the Criminal Appeal Act 1995. Our purpose is to review possible miscarriages of justice in the criminal courts of England, Wales and Northern Ireland and refer appropriate cases to the appeal courts.” From the CCRC’s own website. Doesn’t bear any relation to your incorrect description above.

      • Eliza Doolittle

        Yes it does. I said that it has nothing to do with the courts. The statement confirms that it is independent. It has the power to refer appropriate cases to the courts, that doesn’t mean that it is in any way connected to them – after all, solicitors’ firms regularly refer cases to the courts, it does not make them part of the court system.

        • CS

          The language in your clarification is better – i.e. not part of the court system but it is somewhat disingenuous to say that a body set up under statute with a specific remit to refer potential miscarriages of justice to the Court of Appeal has nothing to do with the courts.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            But it isn’t. It specifically sets out that it is independent.

    • Ed_Burroughs

      There are numerous reasons to doubt his conviction, as I state here: https://edwardburroughs.wordpress.com/2015/01/07/ched-evans-rape-conviction-makes-a-mockery-of-justice-demeans-women-and-rape-victims-and-the-petition-mobsters-pursuing-him-are-ethically-illiterate/ (presumably linking is allowed?)

      Regardless, there is no justification for the hate mob currently trying to ruin the mans career.

    • Open Mind
    • Kjafc

      Eliza, yes there are sensible doubts, what are you talking about? Two men were
      accused of having sex with a girl that was ‘too drunk’ to say no. Based
      on identical evidence, one was found guilty the other acquitted. Does
      this not raise serious questions? They are either both guilty or both innocent.

      How do you know the website misrepresents the facts of his conviction? You don’t. The
      Minisitry of Justice allow prisoners who beleive they are innocent to
      use the internet, via a third party, to protest their innocence.WIth conditions.

      The majority of information contained on his website is already in the
      public domain as it has been given in an open Court of Law.
      Where information is referred to that was not admitted in evidence at
      the trial, the individuals providing the information gave sworn signed
      statements to the defence solicitors acting on behalf of Ched Evans
      during the trial and the appeal process.

      I do not know Ched Evans. I deplore the crime of rape. I deplore murder. I deplore racism. But I deplore miscarriages of justice, which this appears to be looking at all the evidence.

      I just cannot understand people like you acting like executioners and portraying lynch mob mentality.

      • Eliza Doolittle

        I do know the website misrepresents the facts, because I have seen an awful lot of discrepancies.

    • bondi1000

      What do you think these thousands of impressionable young people whose
      minds you claim to know are going to end up doing if they see Mr Evans
      play football? Presumably his presence on a football pitch would if
      anything be a constant reminder that sex where consent is even slightly
      in doubt may led to prison. Why is that a bad thing?

  • Tom

    The only ludicrous and petty campaign is the one being conducted by Ched Evans’ fans and rape apologists against the victim herself, who has had to change her identity five times.

    • Christian

      She probably shouldn’t have tweeted multiple times about how much money she was hoping to get out of Evans with lots of “lols” thrown in.

      • Eliza Doolittle

        She didn’t. She has never got one penny out of Evans, and has not attempted to do so.

        • Christian

          She did. An American hacker accessed her twitter account. She received 5500 compensation.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            That has been fully established as an outright lie. The only bodies who could be liable for compensation were Evans and the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme. The CICS has no reason to keep quiet, and Evans is only likely to pay if he acknowledges his guilt – which he doesn’t.

    • Jay_Sands

      Not then the campaign against Oldham whose club staff have had their families threatened and one told that his daughter would be raped? The mob signing the petition against Ched Evans, and I am no apologist for him or his team mates whose behaviour was in my opinion disgusting and they all ought to be hanging their heads in shame, are not much different from those threatening the girl who, drunk or sober, should not have been used in the way she was or be treated as she has been since.

      • Eliza Doolittle

        Where do you get the idea that everyone signing the petition condones threats against Oldham staff? It’s just extraordinary. I strongly suspect each and every one of them condemns that threat wholeheartedly.

        • Jay_Sands

          I haven’t said that. I said the people signing the petition (number 1) against Ched Evans are not much different from those threatening the girl in this case (number 2). The campaign (number 3) being waged against Oldham club staff and their families is more than likely another set of people entirely.

        • Jay_Sands

          I did not say so. I said the people signing the petition against Ched Evans (1) are not much different to those threatening the girl (2). The campaign threatening Oldham staff and their families (3) is more than likely to be another group altogether. I don’t agree with any of the three groups. You are, however, suggesting that you strongly suspect to know how 70,000 people you’ve never met think and calling others on here stupid, intolerant bigots because they don’t agree with your opinion.

        • Jay_Sands

          I did not say so. I said the people signing the petition against Ched Evans (1) are not much different to those threatening the girl (2). The campaign threatening Oldham staff and their families (3) is more than likely to be another group altogether. I don’t agree with any of the three groups. You are, however, suggesting that you strongly suspect to know how 70,000 people you’ve never met think.

        • Jay_Sands

          I’ve tried three times now to reply to your inaccurate reading of my comment. No idea what’s up with disqus but it’s extremely annoying.

      • Tom

        Obviously rape threats should be condemned.

        However, it’s interesting to note that Oldham Athletic, and Ched Evan’s supporters, take rape threats more seriously than rape itself. It’s interesting how it suddenly mattered that it was their staff and families being threatened, when they could so brazenly dismiss the suffering of the actual rape victim.

        • Jay_Sands

          The person whose behaviour in this whole sordid business is the most unfathomable in my opinion is Evan’s fiancee’s father. Why would you want your daughter to be married to someone who not only behaves appallingly but clearly cannot be trusted.

    • Arthur Rusdell-Wilson

      Who is a rape apologist? Be careful. Rod will probably have a go against those who have coined that phrase next week.

  • AJH1968

    Do you think you would see a similar pogrom against Taxi drivers from Rotherham by those brave and principled harridans?

    • rtj1211

      I doubt it – the British way is to fight facile easy battles, not tough necessary ones.

      • not my real name

        Alas, that is often true — but it’s not essentially ‘the British way’ — rather it’s what happens when political morality is hijacked by the Left.

    • Eliza Doolittle

      Have you seen any of the so-called harridans supporting rapist taxi drivers from Rotherham? What are they supposed to do about them, given that those proved guilty of rape and collusion in rape have been caught, tried and sentenced?

  • Michael Gardner

    Perhaps he should have gone into the Celebrity Big Brother house, or called their bluff and offered to work for women’s charities?

    • rtj1211

      Actually, he should offer to enter a life of crime, burgling the houses of all those who say he can never work again no matter what.

  • philiphuw

    But at least the “bunch of moronic columnists” were just as strident and just as vociferous about the industrial-scale rape of vulnerable under-privileged girls in Rotherham, as revealed by the Jay Report. …..Oh….wait!

  • GraveDave

    Latest news and reaction as League One club ends bid to sign convicted rapist after sponsor pressure and threats to club staff.

    The Daily Telegraph.

  • Tyler Durden

    Ched is innocent, the sex was consensual and that woman is one of low value, I hope she gets her just deserts.

    • AgeUke

      The courts disagree, and it’s desserts unless you are referring to the Sahara 🙂

    • Eliza Doolittle

      What just desserts? You do realise that he has just dissociated himself from threats like this?

  • Gwangi

    I agree. And I do wonder whether our useless pc plods will arrest all those feminist nutjobbs who threatened members of Oldham FC and threatened their daughters with raype – because, after all, if anyone even jokes about that online some hairychinned wpc turns up and knocks on yr door in the middle of the night with her sanctimony truncheon arresting you for expressing an opinion…

  • Andy Capp

    I heard the shadow sports minister getting in his tuppence worth of publicity on the issue on radio this morning (naturally supporting the ban on Evans). Chad Evans has become a “soft target” for greasy politicos wanting their voices heard ahead of the election……..on top of the usual middle-class know-alls who use issues like this to justify whatever useless charity or quango that employs them at six-figure salaries.

    • rtj1211

      There’s an election in 5 months and all politicians are too cowardly, pragmatic or wise to risk being trashed by the tabloids.

      What’s needed is a concerted campaign of leadership from all our politicians that ‘rehabilitation means rehabilitation just as no means no…….’

      As it is, they are a bunch of kiss the tabloids’ arses non-entities taking the easy and cowardly way out.

  • AgeUke

    Will there be similar campaigns to reinstate Rolf Harris, Stuart Hall, Max Clifford et al? Once they’ve served their time that is, of course.

    • Gwangi

      Well, women who kill babies and children get practically no punishment and can work in any job. So child killing is a less worse crime that a man having it off with some drunk nothing?

      • AgeUke

        Will there be similar campaigns to reinstate Rolf Harris, Stuart Hall, Max Clifford et al though?

        • GraveDave

          You’ll have to ask Theresa May, but she’s rather busy at the moment with her own stables. Or at least she says she is.

      • Eliza Doolittle

        You mean, women like Myra Hindley and Rosemary West? Well, if you call several years in prison “practically no punishment”, I suppose.

  • Jimmyz

    EXCELLENT article, fully agree. Where the hell does this Ms Hatchet get off telling people who they can an can’t work for ?

    • rtj1211

      Repressed dominatrice………

  • Gwangi

    Good ole Betty Hitler – my favourite halal fishmonger in old Al-Londonistan town…

  • Tam

    So everyone who has committed a Serious Crime can never work again ??????? What happened to rehabilitation.

    • Eliza Doolittle

      No-one is suggesting Evans should not work again. He has a lucrative job offer from his girlfriend’s father, and no-one has ever suggested he should not take that offer up.

  • Griffin Mill

    What I find particularly baffling about the case itself is that her defence claimed she was too drunk to remember what happened – and too drunk to consent. So why was the first people she had sex with that night found not-guilty? The jury essentially called her a liar in this regard; claiming the sex with him was entirely consensual after all. So if she was in fact NOT too drunk to consent and NOT to drunk to remember what happened with the first man – then why the second man?

    • GraveDave

      The one who had invited him over should have at least been done with enabling a rape, if ‘rape’ was the charge , then this guy should have been found partially guilty..
      I wonder if it was because he was erm…

    • not my real name

      Right. What little I know (or want to know) of this very seedy case really does not add up at all. And another thing: who on earth brought this girl up? One cannot behave as she did, at any point in the proceedings, and be happy. Whatever happens to Evans, the woman is not ‘getting away’ with anything, as it’s clear that she wasn’t equipped with the foundation for a happy life.

    • Eliza Doolittle

      She didn’t have a defence because she was not on trial. The jury did not call her a liar, not least because she did not make any claims about what happened because she could not remember.

      • Griffin Mill

        If she could not remember then how does she know the sex with the men wasn’t consentual?

        • Eliza Doolittle

          She didn’t say whether it was consensual one way or the other, precisely because she had no memory of it. The evidence that it wasn’t consensual came from the other witnesses, including the two accused themselves.

          As for how the jury could find one guilty and acquit the other, look at the a Court of Appeal judgment and my comments unthread.

          • Griffin Mill

            Having examined this case, the suggestion that it wasn’t consensual came from the police when she turned up to report a stolen handbag. They took it upon themselves to decree what happened to her constituted “rape”. Correct me if I’m wrong. She maintains she had no memory of what happened the night before. That her drink was spiked. Still no idea why the nefarious scenario depicted by the prosecution was valid and believable with Person 2, but not with Person 1 who was found not-guilty. It makes very little sense.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Look at the appeal judgment which explains this.

          • Griffin Mill

            Sorry, but in all probability nobody raped anybody.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Sorry, but the 12 people who actually saw and heard all the evidence – including Evans himself giving evidence and being cross-examined – decided beyond reasonable doubt that he raped someone. The judge agreed with that, and the appeal court refused leave to appeal.

  • ant

    The ‘victim’ never reported the ‘rape’ rather she went to the police to report her missing handbag and to allege her drink had been spiked (tests confirmed it hadn’t) The police built the case against BOTH men from there, and persuaded the poor love – who had made no secret of her desire to ‘win big’ from a footballer – to go along with it.

    The ridiculous, Labour-inspired alcohol v consent amendment of existing rape laws did the rest. No-one with any intelligence who looks at the case and the trial could conclude the verdict is anything other than perverse.

    But the internet, twatter and the likes of change.org does indeed bring out vast swathes of morons with, alas, opinions. QED. The fact that ‘rape’ campaigners have now threatened those connected to Oldham with rape and forced, not only a U-turn but the resignation of its chairman. Brilliant.

    • not my real name

      Oh, is that what happened? That explains a lot. The case still seems incoherent, but it clears up a lot of my confusion about why there was a case at all.

    • Eliza Doolittle

      Actually, the prosecution case was based to a great extent on the evidence of Evans and McDonald.
      And do you know for a fact that the moron who allegedly threatened rape to Oldham actually was in fact a rape campaigner? Do produce your evidence.

  • Rockin Ron

    sgfsggdg

  • chatterchino

    Outstanding, I too had noticed the ‘nom de guerre’ Hatchet attached to each of the petitions reported so breathlessly by all stripes of media (except this). To add further context to the volume of antis – 30,000 – 60,000, Change.org where they are generated, says they have 80million+ members, if Justin Bieber farts a few 100 thousand will tweet instantly.
    I had never heard of Ched Evans before this and confess that I don’t even like football, but this small group of vociferous and vituperative people who exclaim outrage and expect the rest of us to bend to their will is what gets my goat.

  • He should not have been so stupid to have created a website in which he basically said that the woman was a slapper and he was innocent.

    • GraveDave

      the woman was a slapper and he was innocent.

      Bird, bird, bird, have you heard about ‘the bird’.

  • chatterchino

    Je Suis Ched

  • Davey

    Of course ex-convicts should be allowed to work. Whether they actually find work is another matter entirely. If a professional person breaks the law and is imprisoned, they are then deemed untrustworthy, are henceforth removed from their respective professional register, and in most cases never reinstated. Why should footballers be any different? Rod Liddle makes the mistake of comparing this guy to the average Joe. He’s not. Like it or not footballers have a very high profile and are role models to many young people (and some old ones). If a club takes him on and lets him play again what message does that send to all the impressionable young fans? That committing crime is OK really and has little or no consequences? Ched Evans would be better off re-training as a brickie or a roofer or something and lying low for the rest of his life. Financially he might even end up better off.

    • not my real name

      It sends the message that if you are convicted you will go to jail, but since our society is not endlessly vengeful (unlike other, worse societies), you can rebuild your life so long as you continue to abide by society’s fundamental rules. I think that’s a great, indeed necessary message to ‘send to all the impressionable young fans’.

      • rtj1211

        Well said. It’s also a message to all parents out there who think that it isn’t their responsibility to be ‘greater role models’ to their children than the TV, the internet and the sports pages.

      • Davey

        So it’s OK to commit a serious crime as long as it’s just the once then is it?

        • not my real name

          Your question doesn’t make sense. Where did I say or imply that it’s ‘OK’ to commit a crime?

        • Martyn Parker

          it’s not ok to commit crime full stop but his trade does not require a CRB check or do you believe that some are more equal in the eyes of the law

    • rtj1211

      He’s hardly in the public eye outside East Manchester. I know the names of precisely zero Oldham Athletic players and I am a keen follower of football. League One is almost never on the TV before children should be in bed.

      EPL stars are ‘role models’. They are constantly in the public eye. In the papers, on the TV, websites etc etc.

      League One players earn the average UK wage, play in front of 5000 people.

      • Davey

        So he would be better off as a roofer then!! He’s only a footballer for Christ’s sake – we haven’t lost a cancer cure here!

    • Martyn Parker

      Because his job does not require a CRB check untill it does that is how it is campain your local mp to have professional football added to the list of jobs that require a CRB check untill then stfu

      • Lord Taliesin

        Well said. The insufferable arrogance of members like Davey. Deciding where and when people work. Must be brain dead.

    • Lord Taliesin

      That’s real big of you. Letting him do a job that you decide he can do. Who the feck do you think you are?

      • Eliza Doolittle

        So why does he have an automatic right to work as a footballer if sponsors don’t want to fund clubs that employ him?

      • Davey

        I’m someone who wouldn’t employ a convicted rapist. You?

  • It is mental. He’s not allowed to play because he might be a “bad influence”. I even saw a woman on Channel 4 News the other night explaining that it would be okay if he had “no profile” and that he “reached more young people than a teacher because although he wasn’t seen for as long he was seen by more people”. Really they want to let him out only so long as he is invisible. But then if you have no visibility you are in a kind of prison. So really they still want him in prison …which is the real problem. “We’ll allow you out so long as you don’t have contact with anyone” is keeping people in prison. But rather campaign for longer sentences they’re chasing him from employer to employer …I even heard someone say he should be forced to join a five a side team …which is stupid because that team’d win the amateur 5 a side team league. Which, of course, is stupid. So actually the further they push him down the leagues the more likely they are to turn him into a local star.

    Perhaps the real problem is that feminists just hate football because it represents homosocial activity and he is a good boot to give it a kicking with.

  • not my real name

    Darn right, Rod. These busybodies should be told to mind their own business.

    • rtj1211

      thats far too polite: call them self-absorbed sexually unattractive piles of misandrogynist gash…….

      • Eliza Doolittle

        Well, you could call them that, if you wanted to show yourself up as a stupid, intolerant bigot.

  • gerronwithit

    They are another level of self appointed intolerant filth who feel that anyone who does not submit to their prejudices is to be hounded out of society as defined by themselves. They sum up everything wrong with this country. indigenous hating, man baiting harridans whose prime objective is to deconstruct the UK into a multicultural, misandrist monstrosity.

    • Eliza Doolittle

      There goes someone who clearly can’t handle women forming independent opinions

  • Duran Duran

    We have tons of issues in the USA right now with females falsely accusing males, especially prominent athletes, of rape. There is one case regarding a quarterback for Florida State college by the name of Jameis Winston who was falsely accused of rape. After examination by FOUR different judicial bodies, even quasi legal bodies, there was no evidence found, and consider that this woman had sex with at least 3 other people on the same night, and yet because of the unwillingness of people to actually demand evidence of rape, women are more emboldened now that even to claim they’ve been raped.

    I feel for this man who is very likely innocent, but beyond that, there is a cultural shift in people who have no direct involvement in matters like this that believe they have the right to determine where and how someone makes a living.

    • Eliza Doolittle

      Why do you think he was “very likely innocent”? Have you seen all the evidence that the jury saw? Why do you think you know better than them and the appeal courts?
      In this case the victim made no accusation, because she had no memory of what happened.

      • Aethelflaed

        It hasn’t been heard by an appeal court!!

        Indeed. The complainent has no memory, so there is reasonable doubt. She does’t remember if she said yes or not!!

        • Eliza Doolittle

          It has. Evans applied to two courts for leave to appeal when the issues were fully aired. He was refused leave to appeal.

          It doesn’t matter whether she said yes. The jury found she was too drunk to give valid consent. Just as, for instance,a person suffering major delusions might say yes but that also would not be valid; or if a child said yes, likewise that would not be valid consent.

          • trevor lawrie

            Don’t trust our Judges, most of them could be ex-Prosecutors or more correctly ex-poachers turned gamekeepers, they will never grant an appeal against the CPS, it is a waste of time. It is common knowledge that trials are rigged and innocent people are framed, it happens all of the time, I used to work for a law firm specialising in Crime and Asylum, and it was like working in a Den of thieves, with all dirty tricks going on, and a common request the Criminal Defence would get from the Prosecuting Barrister is if the Defence could help their, in short can the Defence sell out their client.

            I am in a mega battle with Crooked Police and Corrupt CPS regarding the murder of my Grandson.
            http://www.rhyslawrie.com

      • EEEE

        She managed to remember her pizza though before it all happened….I wonder what flavour it was?

  • Martyn Parker

    this whole matter can be settled with the answer to one question, does his job require a CRB check

  • Tox66

    I bet Jean Hatchet is as lenient as you like on the rapists of Rotherham.

    • Harry Pond

      Most of them haven’t been arrested let alone convicted.

      • Tox66

        And Rotherham is merely the tip of the iceberg.

        • Harry Pond

          Derby and Oxford to name two.

          • Tox66

            Oldham, Rochdale etc etc

          • Harry Pond

            There are two separate justice systems in this country, one for Ched and another for Mo.

          • Tox66

            Stamford & Barons Court doubtless.

      • Eliza Doolittle

        And Jean Hatchet is responsible for that how?

      • Eliza Doolittle

        So what has that got to do with Jean Hatchet?

    • Eliza Doolittle

      Any evidence for that?

  • rtj1211

    Where’s Michael Gove when you need him? Just the sort of meaty principled issue he’s ideally suited for. Sadly his lips are currently velcroed as he’s organising the election campaign.

  • Sara Sinclair

    Rod you are being disingenuous. This case is unique, and has caught the nation’s attention. To allow Evans to carry on as before would send out a very powerful message to the young men and women of Britain. For an example of this look to gwangi’s response below. Lovely.
    There would also be a tacit condoning amongst the footballing fraternity (if there isn’t already). Put simply, “guilty” or not; “rape” or not, this man is despicable and should not be in the public eye, however limited the exposure. If anyone is in any doubt of this, read the transcripts of what he did.

    • Martyn Parker

      sorry you are an idiot only one question matters, does his job require a CRB check, it doesn’t, therefore the campaign against him is a restriction of trade, i personally think all nonces should die , but we are all equal in the eyes of the law

      • Eliza Doolittle

        Personal abuse doesn’t help your argument, Martyn. There is no such thing as a CRB check any more. And it is not relevant as this is not an issue about him having direct contact with children.

        • Martyn Parker

          you show further ignoranceas the CRB check does still exist and it not only applies to people working with children

          • GraveDave

            I have to have one myself ever so many years.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            As you’ve acknowledged, the CRB check doesn’t exist. The DBS check certainly doesn’t apply to people dealing with football fans.

        • Martyn Parker

          sorry they’ve changed the name to dbs
          *

    • Aethelflaed

      Russell Brand .

  • Guest

    “Rod Liddle

    10 January 2015” – Can I have the Euro results for Friday please while you are at it

  • Justice Chaser

    MAYBE IF IT WERE YOUR DAUGHTER HE WAS ACCUSED OF RAPING YOU MAY ALSO WANT HIM TO GET A JOB ON A BUILDING SITE.

    • Martyn Parker

      And just because you shout that makes you right,

      • Justice Chaser

        Did that silly thing where you get your caps locks the wrong way round so when I looked up it was back to front, so instead of typing out all out again I simply changed the first M to a capital.

    • Martyn Parker

      that little outburst has lost you the argument he hasn’t been accused of anything he has been convicted in a court of law, served his sentence and is subject to the law as we all are go campaign to your mp to have professional footballer added to the list of jobs that require a CRB check

    • Aethelflaed

      I would be far more concerned about rape gangs.

      I would also ensure my daughter had enough self worth and moral fibre so she did not get drunk and go back to hotel rooms for sex with men she did not know!!

      • hugh_36

        Good for you then……

    • Lord Taliesin

      Let him work on a building site, will you, JC. With all the other rapists, is it? Seems an odd form of ‘punishment’.

  • hodders83

    Spot on article, it is of a high probabilitly that he did not actualy rape this women…these women put thereselves in these sort of positions all the time in the hope of becoming wags… they are just stupid, thick money grabbing airheads that footballers should avoid at all costs

    • Martyn Parker

      you are as big an idiot as the people who campaign against him he has been convicted of a serious offence and until cleared of the conviction at an appeal court he is a convicted rapist

      • hodders83

        If u read about the trial you wouls be aware that the women in question stated that she did not say no she was just somdrunk that she could not remember sleeping with him, thus her rape allegation dick head,.. also she slept with clayton mcdonald the same night and he was not chargef?

        • Eliza Doolittle

          Do you not understand the basic legal concept that if a woman is too drunk to consent then she has not consented? It’s the same principle as children and people who are unconscious or lacking in mental capacity for other reasons being unable to give valid consent.
          And McDonald certainly was charged.

          • mtalk15

            and found not guilty. women have the same status as children within the legal process…now that doesnt sound very…equal does it?

          • Eliza Doolittle

            No. A woman or indeed a man who is too drunk to know or understand what they are doing cannot give valid consent. A child who is deemed to young to understand the nature of the act cannot give valid consent. It’s the law, live with it.

          • Lord Taliesin

            Lacking in mental capacity? So that’s your consent invalidated then.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Loving your repeated demonstrations of your inability to think up a respectable argument, Taliesin. Do carry on.

        • Martyn Parker

          ive just heard the woman next door getting it deep and cool of her old man think ill pop in and have a go myself despite her objections and pray you are on the jury

          • Lord Taliesin

            Stop listening to your neighbours, you disgusting pervert. Well named, ain’t you.

    • Martyn Parker

      it is not for you to doubt the jurys decision
      *

      • Aethelflaed

        Really. You’ve never heard of Hillsborough then Or the many other overturned verdicts on cases!!!

        • Martyn Parker

          hillsborough god bless their souls ha never untill now been subject to jury process
          *

          • Martyn Parker

            and look below i said until cleared by an appeal court he is a convicted rapist notice the until cleared bit

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Please tell me the you are not seriously trying to compare Hillsborough victims with this rapist.

      • not my real name

        We can certainly disagree with a jury’s decision, even if we have to accept the consequences of it. O. J. Simpson — ring a bell?

        • Martyn Parker

          so tell me you were in the court or the room where the offence took place

  • Aethelflaed

    I first heard of Mr Evans’ case when Jessica Ennis wanted her name removing from a stand at Sheffield if he was to play for the club again. What, terrible thing has happened to warrent this, thought I?

    So, I read a piece by Alison Pearson in the Telegraph. I was amazed. Not regarding Mr Evans, but at Miss Ennis for such bigotry and intolerance – she has slipped a mile in my estimation !!

    As the misandrists and even the Home Secretary, have intensified their witch hunt, I have watched with growing revulsion their disregard for the law and abhorrent sexism;and racism. For I have not heard a peep from these witches about the real scourge of Rape gangs.

    Then I was alerted to a website, set up on Mr Evans’ behalf which lays out the grounds for his appeal. It is easily found on Google. My view now is that Mr Evans guilt was not ‘beyond reasonable doubt’, and therefore his appeal should be heard.

    I also agree with another point made; that people like Miss X, the complainent, and the evil Twatter witches, make getting real convictions, against REAL rapists, who injure REAL victims harder.

    Well done to Oldham

    • Eliza Doolittle

      Don’t place any reliance on the accuracy of that website.

      • Aethelflaed

        There are two sides to every story Eliza and it is beholden on us to consider both. If you don’t then you are a bigot. I’ve heard both sides I have taken a view, let others do the same!

        • not my real name

          ‘There are two sides to every story’: let’s put that up there with ‘it’s the thought that counts’, another sounds-good-but-isn’t idea.

          Why only two? And what makes for a ‘side’? (I’m not on the ‘side’ of either party in this case — and in a way, our justice system should not be, either, but do only what justice requires.) And are you saying that in the Paris massacre there are ‘two sides’ to the slaughter of Westerners?

          Speaking of ‘sides’ and naming two is like saying ‘the world is black and white, and we must hear from the black as well as the white’. On the one hand that’s too simplistic, too Manichaean, and on the other hand it lets the guilty too easily off the hook.

        • Eliza Doolittle

          Accepting the verdict of the jury doesn’t make anyone a bigot.

  • Amelia

    Why oh why didn’t the silly rapist just take the job his enormously rich prospective father in law offered him months ago? Then he could have issued a statement telling his fans/supporters thathe was disgusted by the hounding of the girl and it should stop immediately, and told his prospective father in law to take down the inflammatory website and redesign it in a more appropriately supportive fashion. Then, people would have seen that he was on the way to being rehabilitated.

    As it is, it is only today he has said anything about the poor girl’s hounding by his fans/supporters, and that was just to say, in so many words “not my fault, I don’t know them”.

    He really needs a new pr person. And new legal advisors too.

    • Aethelflaed

      I am disgusted by people like you who have no regard for fairness, justice or the law. Why don’t you apologise for the vicious hounding he has had? What has the financial position of anyone have to do with it. The issue here is justice not PR and money?

      • Eliza Doolittle

        And the justice system has pronounced it’s verdict on the rapist a Evans.

    • Golden Fleece

      there is no evidence that the drunk girl has been hounded its just stuff her father who apparently was absent for most of her upbringing is crying now.
      I dont beleive she has moved 5 times

      • Eliza Doolittle

        There is MASSIVE evidence that the victim has been hounded, Golden. Not least because a lot of her persecutors have been dumb enough to,put it in writing and. /or have been recorded. Are you aware that several have been convicted (many pleading guilty) and fined?

  • Graeme S

    the rank hypocrisy scares me …. never mind the industrial rape of whites by Asians, not a peep of indignation …. this man should be allowed to ply his trade !

    • Eliza Doolittle

      If you really think no-one objected to rape of girls by Asians (or indeed anyone else) you are living a fantasy life.

      • Ally Gory

        Considerably less fuss was made of that than this one instance. Funny that.

        • Eliza Doolittle

          Have any of those convicted rapists been trying to get lucrative employment in high profile roles? Strange, the papers seem to have missed that.

          • Ally Gory

            Is that worse than the respective crimes? It certainly shouldn’t be. I strongly suggest you reassess your priorities.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Do read what I have said properly. Those guilty of taking part in the gangs in question have been rightly vilified. The point is that no-one is signing petitions against them because they’re in prison and keeping quiet. If one of them came out of prison and tried to get a lucrative job as a high-profile role model I have no doubt that the outcry would be a hundred times greater than we have experienced in relation to Evans. Would Evans’ supporters be as vociferous in defence of the gang member, I wonder?

          • Ally Gory

            Your lack of interest in a truly horrendous case in comparison to one highly dubious case is telling.

  • Benjamin Barton

    His punishment was prison, not unemployment.

    • Eliza Doolittle

      So does everyone who comes out of prison have a right in law to return to their previous employment? That will be a relief to Rolf Harris.

  • Matt

    It strikes me that, there isn’t a singles shred of evidence against him, in fact quite the contrary.

    It’s descended into the realms of idiocy, I am against rape, in much the same way as I am against murder. Saying someone hasn’t done it, is not an endorsement of the crime.

    Do you know how many times I have woke up “naked and confused” after a one night stand? Too many, or not enough 🙂 But I am a man, so that’s fine isn’t it.

    It’s also fair to say even if he had done it, he has served his time.

    Imagine being him, done time for something you never did, something that shouldn’t have gone to court, and now the media are all sticking the boot in, no one mentioned the thousands of people who joined the facebook group in support of him, they only mention the imbeciles who jumped on that petition, 60,000? Oldham only get 8000 on if they are lucky, it’s crazy.

    I want to see him cleared on appeal, and then these people need to crawl over broken glass to apologise to the poor guy.

    • Golden Fleece

      No evidence whatsoever,it sickens me to the core what has happened to this guy HE IS INNOCENT ,a blind man could see it clear as day

    • Eliza Doolittle

      Ridiculous to say there was no evidence against him. He was convicted on the basis of a large amount of substantial evidence, including his own.

      You do realise, don’t you, that he doesn’t actually have any appeal ongoing?

      • Matt

        Of course he is appealing, you really show your ignorance. Tell me some of the evidence against him then? If there is any, let me help you, you can’t show evidence, because there is none, he is innocent.

        • Eliza Doolittle

          Still no permission to appeal, still no application for permission lodged. The evidence against him came largely from his own admissions.

  • Henry
    • Martyn Parker

      utter garbage

    • Golden Fleece

      total bollox henry son

      • Eliza Doolittle

        Can’t you handle all the dreadful facts in that article?

  • Golden Fleece

    What a well written article taking the most sense ive read on this desperate case.
    if Ched Evans is a rapist so are 500+ young men every weekend in the UK.
    The luney tunes feminists need a reality check .

    • hugh_36

      I’m sure you will be delighted when your daughter meets someone who behaves as he did. The fact that people do it doesn’t make it right.

  • mtalk15

    an absolute nonsense of a conviction.

    • Golden Fleece

      The worst in the history of all cases in the uk,JOKE JURY

      • Eliza Doolittle

        Really? Worse than the wrongful conviction of Timothy Evans and his subsequent hanging?

  • bricol

    I don’t agree with above article because Ched Evans does not
    show any remorse. He does not think he is guilty. I don’t understand how a
    sentence of 5 years can be reduced by half if a person does not accept his
    guilt. How can he be rehabilitated? How can he even been released? He has been
    found guilty, and until overturned by another appeal, he is guilty of rape, and
    should eat a bit of humble pie until his full 5 years are over. He should be
    lucky he is out of prison.

    • Golden Fleece

      Are you thick ,he is entitled to protest his innocence ,that is his right,
      Why would he apologise for a crime he hasnt commited.
      Because he was found guilty deosnt mean he is a rapist.
      Jury’s in this country get it wrong many many times and wil continue.
      It seems to me there wasnt 1 ounce of common sense on this jury and if people can be convicted of rape with such flimsy eveidence 500 young men every weekend in the uk could end up on rape charges

      • bricol

        Of course he is entitled to protest his innocence, but my
        argument is, that he should not have been released at all before the 5 years
        are over. I would like the law to be changed that a reduction in prison
        sentence should only be considered for people who admit their guilt and have
        gone through a rehabilitation programme. His conviction might be overturned on
        his appeal, but until that happens, he has to be regarded as a convicted
        rapist.

        • not my real name

          Or it could be that sentencing in some cases is over-long; also that the criminals that would benefit from confessing would be a) those that actually did it, so might as well confess guilt, and b) those that are willing to lie in their own interests (‘yes, yes, terribly sorry, yuronner’).

          What you want is for honour to be satisfied — and your moral indignation to be assuaged. But that might not actually separate the real evil thugs from the merely stupid, nasty, and unlucky.

        • Golden Fleece

          The easiest way he could have got back into football would be to have said- i admit what i did , im sorry to my victim etc etc immediately upon release.
          He hasnt done this and is going about getting back on a pitch the hard way because of the principle of right and wrong.
          Dont know about you but if i thought i was wrongly imprisoned id do exactly the same.

          • bricol

            A case like the Ched Evans is a grey area. A lot of women
            think it’s rape. Some people just think he and his friends who watched and filmed
            at the window behaved very badly indeed. And there are obviously a few who
            think that a man should take whatever he can and can get away with. But the
            jury thought it was rape, and until it is overturned it is rape. There is certainly nothing for Ched Evans to plead absolute
            innocence when reading about his behaviour.

          • Golden Fleece

            Exactly its all a grey area which the dopey jury should have seen also.
            the only evidence of when Ched and girl were together is what the night porter heard at the door
            2 voices male and female enjoying sex hardly rape eh!!

          • bricol

            So, a conviction should only stand when Golden Fleece says
            so…?

          • Golden Fleece

            you got to be real dumb to not see this case is totally flawed.
            Rape convcitons should be 100% beyond reasonable doubt not merely ‘guessing’ if a defendant was too drunk to consent.

          • bricol

            First I would like to state that I am neither thick, nor real
            dump. I also don’t think that the jury was dopey.

            Could I remind you of the definition of rape in case of
            intoxication:

            “If, through drink – or for any other reason – the
            complainant has temporarily lost her capacity to choose whether to have
            intercourse on the relevant occasion, she is not consenting, and subject to
            questions about the defendant’s state of mind, if the intercourse takes place,
            this would be rape.

            “However, where the complainant has voluntarily consumed even
            substantial quantities of alcohol, but nevertheless remains capable of choosing
            whether or not to have intercourse, and in drink agrees to do so this would not
            be rape.”

            He added that the “capacity to consent may evaporate well
            before a complainant becomes unconscious”.

            I suggest this should be compulsive reading for any man who is
            turned on by a heavily intoxicated woman and hasn’t got an innate decency to
            restrain himself. It’s a strange world. But then, there are apparently even men
            that are attracted to sheep. Poor sheep.

          • Golden Fleece

            Like i said Bambi where is the dna ,the breathalyser readings,the witness who actually saw what happened ?
            Oh dear there isnt ANY AT ALL
            beyond reasonable doubt -JACKANORY
            He was senteneced on Guesswork like i ALREADY SAID
            Take the wool of your eyes and Get real

          • Eliza Doolittle

            There were rather a lot of witnesses in fact. One of them Evans himself, who largely convicted himself by his admissions. He seems to have admitted everything because he genuinely thought that slagging someone too drunk to consent should not be a crime.

  • Eliot Banks

    The irony comes from Labour’s shadow sport’s minister calling for the FA to block the proposals. If we want to work on that premise then Labour should be banned from ever running a council!!! These people don’t give 2 s*ts about the victims either, they have their own narrow agenda of PC and intolerance when it suits them, often at the expense of victims!

  • Rhys

    There are some people who think that Evans could never be punished enough: even if he isn’t guilty, he ought to be.

    He’s finished as a professional footballer. The hassle from the media and the faux outrage of the “fans” who would hound him at every game, makes him an outcast that no club will take a chance with.

    • hugh_36

      Exactly. He is in the same positon he would be in if he was a teacher, lawyer, policeman or member of the armed forces etc. Being a professional footballer is incompatible with being a convicted rapist.

      • Mark Eltringham

        Says who?

  • Neil Megson

    Wow, Piddle managed to complete a whole sentence before comparing campaigners to Hitler – well done! I trust that as soon as all of those done under Operation Yewtree are released, Piddle will also be demanding that they get to immediately return to their previous jobs.

    • Golden Fleece

      What a pathetic post

      • Neil Megson

        better than this abysmal article deserved

        • Golden Fleece

          and thats another pathetic post

  • Sean L

    Good stuff – I’m sure that pretty much summarises most people’s view, at least those acquainted with rational thought. Political discourse meanwhile is driven by headline writers, ‘activists’ and ‘community leaders’ who between them supply ‘the story’. . . It’s remarkable that this man’s name is now inescapably in the public domain, while the identities of the numerous under-age grooming gang rapists are relatively unknown. Incidentally, the footballer Marlon King, with an astonishing criminal record, served time for a brutal assault, leaving his victim permanently disfigured after he smashed her in the face when she didn’t take kindly to his grope, yet there wasn’t a batsqueak of protest from the bien-pensants on his return to the game. He’s back inside now for something else. Why the disparity in treatment? Go figure the common theme. . .

    • GraveDave

      I mentioned this one earlier.I don’t know if it’s still there. Ched’s ‘bredwin’ seems to have got off rather lightly too. Though it appears he instigated much of it .

  • colizgg

    Absolutely spot-on.
    Not one of the nauseating mob rule PC numpties spewing lefty propaganda on Change.org or twitter have a clue about the importance of the principles of the law.

    They choose causes their shallow minds can emotionalise and ignore complexities when they don’t fit their narrative.

    Sky news ran a new year item on the “real news in 2014” based on twitter popularity, Harry Styles & One Direction were deemed more important than Russia invading the Ukraine. That tells you all you need to know about the mentality of Social Media.

    • Eliza Doolittle

      Perhaps they do honour the principles of law. Like the fact that this man had been properly convicted and is still serving his sentence but does not acknowledge his guilt.

      • colizgg

        They clearly don’t. Have you read the article?
        It’s not respecting the law when a baying mob demands punishment beyond other offenders. Evans was released after he’d served no more & no less prison time than similar offenders. Many criminals are released too soon but that’s not an argument for singling out Evans.

        And as for acknowledging his guilt, there’s an appeal pending so all he can do is acknowledge the damage done as a result of his actions; he has.

        The same ugly social media mob who think twitter noise supersedes the law are the ones sending death threats to OAFC staff and family. The hypocrisy is breathtaking but they’re too stupid to see it.

        • Eliza Doolittle

          No, they’re not demanding punishment beyond other offenders. No offender has an automatic right to walk back into his or her previous employment after serving their sentence. In fact, when he was sentenced the judge specifically referred to the fact that he’d ruined his football career and took that into account – it probably helped to get him a lighter sentence.

          Most, if not all, of those who objected to Evans being employed by Oldham also totally condemned the threats to Oldham. You appear to be too blinkered to acknowledge inconvenient facts like that.

          • colizgg

            Facts like What? You confuse facts and your own opinion. No one said Evans has an automatic right to his previous job. And the judge was right about Evans ruining his career but he didn’t say he should never ply his trade again.

            In a civilised society offenders must be able to earn a living after release, and to do that they’ll need to work at whatever they’re trained in. If they have no skills the prison system trains them so they can work when released.

            You imply that its Oldham specifically you object to employing him but the same rabble also bullied Sheff Utd & Hartlepool, a lynch mob isn’t selective. In fact the mob will ride this aggressive bandwagon through every club in the country then on to anywhere else who thinks of employing Evans.

            Through their behaviour the social media mob have shown how ignorant and cowardly they are. It’s so much easier to click a mouse and abuse, threaten or petition for a cause than it is to think through the consequences.

  • Lina R

    Don’t understand why this case got as far as court in the first place. Consensual sex seems to have taken place – but of course I wasn’t there, just like everyone else commenting on this case.

    • Eliza Doolittle

      The fact that he was convicted and his applications for leave to appeal have been refused twice constitutes more than enough confirmation that the case should have gone to court. I suggest you read the appeal court judgments.

  • Dyedooshka

    Well said colizigg! Spot on!

  • Frank Burns

    Thank god for Rod!! I was beginning to think I was the only one who finds this business distasteful. I have no particular leanings toward Mr Evans but each time I switch the radio on I hear some cretin going on-and-on about how he is ‘A role model…’ What rubbish THAT phrase has always seemed to me! I’m a football fan…I have NEVER thought of them as ‘role models.’ I never saw anyone as a ‘role model’ and certainly not a League2 footballer. Let him play again…and let’s put this sad sorry tale to bed once and for all. he will have to weather a storm of bile each time he runs on to a pitch but if he thinks he can handle it then leave him alone to get on with it.It’s tiresome. Still…it sells more daily mails I guess.

    • Eliza Doolittle

      You may well not think he is a role model. But can you be sure that impressionable Young football fans don’t? After all, Sheffield fans were using the chant “Chedwyn Evans f*cks who he likes”.

  • S&A

    ‘The reason he has not apologised is that he does not think that he is guilty.

    If we believed every con or ex-con who told us that he or she is innocent, we wouldn’t have a criminal justice system worthy of the name.

    He was convicted in a court of law after due process was done, and after the deliberations of a jury of his peers. There is nothing more to be said.

    And the only person being ‘hounded’ is his victim.

    http://www.itv.com/news/2014-12-28/ched-evans-rape-victim-forced-to-move-house-five-times/

    • The_greyhound

      Wrong. If we automatically assumed the perpetual guilt of anyone convicted, there would be no purpose in having an appeals system.

      So there may well be plenty more to be said.

  • Sean L

    The basis on which this guy was convicted is a green light for any woman scorned or even labouring with a fit of ‘buyer’s remorse’ to square things as she sees it, with the might of the British state behind her. Effectively being a cad has been crminalised. The Vicomte de Valmont, Don Juan, Flashman would be serving life. Meanwhile the poor besotted sap who falls instantly in love after a drunken encounter is merely erased from history the moment she recognises that he’s not the man she might have imagined when the cognac and cokes were flowing.

    • Sam

      What he did was already illegal. Now more people are aware that it is illegal.

      • Golden Fleece

        Since when was drunken sex illegal

        • hugh_36

          He was convicted of rape. He is a criminal in the eye of the law. The fact you do not appear to consider this an offence is immaterial.

    • Golden Fleece

      EXACTLY

    • Eliza Doolittle

      Do you have the slightest idea how hard it is to get a conviction in a rape case?

      • not my real name

        Evidently, not very.

        • Eliza Doolittle

          Look at the statistics. They demonstrate that it is particularly difficult.

          • not my real name

            What statistics? Whose? Hard to trust statistics. They’re often like the Wizard of Oz behind his curtain: they tell the right people what they want to hear.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Crime conviction statistics are a matter of record, poem for public examination, and rock solid.

  • Mr Nike Top

    At this point, Ched Evans has been convicted of rape and does not repent of the actions that saw him jailed. There will be further legal proceedings where he will challenge the verdict but those proceedings have not yet reached their conclusion. Whatever the rights and wrongs of the case, he is a convicted rapist in the eyes of the law at this point in time.

    I would be grateful to anyone who might take the time to reply to consider the following question – What is your present employer’s attitude to offering paid work to people in that particular legal position and do you support it?

    • not my real name

      Oh fercrissake, the man has to earn a living. Unless you are suggesting that the taxpayers compensate him for doing nothing. The other blindingly obvious fact is that, as a football player, his job brings him into almost no interaction with women. Let him be around men all day: they have nothing to fear and it’s the best possible solution!

      • Mr Nike Top

        Thanks for taking the time to engage with me but I am afraid your answer does not shed much light on the question I asked.

        • not my real name

          I think it does, but never mind.

  • jack

    There are so many holes in this case it is very questionable to say the least. Too drunk to make a decision but not too drunk to remember her pizza and bend down to pick it up in high heels. Too drunk to consent to Evans but not McDonald?
    Being intoxicated may affect judgement but it does NOT eradicate it. If we view intoxicated sex as “rape” then hundreds of thousands of people (only applies to men) will be guilty of rape every single weekend. I fear this has just become a witch hunt in which people such as Jean hatchett and Charlie Webster (mike tyson fan) are just riding it to promote their own name.

    The main reason for preventing him from returning to football is “fear of promoting violence against women”. So let me ask you, why was no fuss shown when Luke McCormick Returned to football? he is now captain of plymouth. Does that “promote drink driving and killing two children”, does allowing Mel sykes and Kelly Brook to carry on prospering “promote abuse against men”? does this outcry prove that we as a society deem the lives of two young boys (Luke McCormick case) to be worth less than we do the mental wellbeing of an intoxicated woman?
    I’d bet most people can tell Right/Wrong without the need of such action, the people who can’t will not be impacted by banning a footballer from returning to the game, they are not normal people, and as of yet, there seems to be no way of preventing them from acting on their inability to separate right/wrong.
    I fear this is just another Agenda set by feminists and Evans has been used as the guinea pig, the agenda to redefine Rape to mean “anything women want it to mean”, and radical feminists have jumped upon this opportunity not because they care about the victim as they claim, but to perpetuate their agenda and use this case an excuse to gradually label ALL SEX , as rape. Think I’m joking, I’m not, many radical feminists truly believe that SEX is rape. By allowing “Drunk sex” to be viewed as rape too, this will help keep their withering statistics alive. Jean hatchett may have radical views, but the people signing her petition may not.

    Finally , anybody who thinks he will be welcomed back into football with open arms are quite frankly deluded. He will be boo’ed everytime he touches the ball, shouted obscenities at and when children ask their father “why are we booing him”, they will be told the reason. His own team mates wont take well to him either.

    • Eliza Doolittle

      Jack, the problem with your thesis is that it ignores a little matter of the law. You may not like it, but the law is really quite hot on the fact that if a woman (or indeed a man) is legally incapable of giving consent to sex, then having sex with her is rape.

      • Lord Taliesin

        And your ignoring the law that he has every right to resume his career free from harassment from harridans like you.

        • Eliza Doolittle

          Precisely what law bestows on anyone an absolute right to be employed as a footballer?

  • Chris Brook

    To add to Rodd’s point…”Next, they insist that he did not serve his full sentence and is therefore on licence”. I understand that Luke McCormick, current captain of Plymouth Argyle, is also on licence. He was sentenced to 7 years and 4 months in October 2008 – serving almost 4 years. If I am right, those quoting the “full sentence” argument should also focus on Luke McCormick, at least until February 2016.

  • rtj1211

    I must say Mr Liddle that one of the greater examples of cognitive dissonance in football in recent years is the acceptance, indeed the semi-cult status of the Kray twins in the East End of London, but the absolute no-second-chance for an already-rehabilitated rapist from Begium who had served his time, played with a Belgium club and had applied himself sufficiently to be worthy of consideration for transfer to an EPL club.

    Just remind me what the Kray twins did now?? Was it multiple murders, torture, paedophilia, gangland terrorism etc etc. That’s all forgiveable and worth saluting at funerals, apparently. At least it is according to many West Ham fans.

    But a teenager who did one little bit of that, namely participated in a gang rape, was suitably punished and suitably rehabilitated?? No chance.

    I have to say it would make an interesting case study test for immigrant applications: after all, if we want to rid ourselves of primitive hypocrisy, perhaps we should bring in immigrants capable of distinguishing between incurable psychopaths and a rehabilitated prisoner??

    It doesn’t make me tolerate rape, it simply makes me say that the Krays were infinitely worse than one-time rape offenders and should have been afforded no funeral rights, no press coverage and absolutely no respect whatsoever. Didn’t see any rampant feminists objecting to Kray funerals, did you??

    Should have been, shouldn’t there??

  • futureboz72

    is there a petition to get Ched a game and where do i sign?

    • hugh_36

      I bet your wife and mother will be really proud.

    • Lord Taliesin

      And me.

  • jay

    I am not a feminist

    He has been found guilty of rape. If he is not guilty, which he maintains he is not, then he should focus his efforts on his appeal rather than looking for a football club

    Aside from this, he has NOT finished serving his sentence (he has only served half of his sentence – he may not be in prison but he is on licence) and he has not been rehabilitated as he refuses to accept responsibility for what he has done and the harm he has cause (a key element of rehabilitation)

    • colizgg

      You clearly haven’t read the piece. All of those arguments have been covered by RL.

    • Golden Fleece

      he has accepted responsibilty for what he has done
      drunken consentual sex and cheating on his partner
      he is focusing on the appeal and is entitled to play football NOW
      No law says he cant

      • Eliza Doolittle

        He doesn’t have an ongoing appeal.

  • bondi1000

    What do the petition-mongers think these impressionable young people whose
    minds they claim to know are going to end up doing if they see Mr Evans
    play football? Presumably his presence on a football pitch would if
    anything be a constant reminder that sex where consent is even slightly
    in doubt may led to prison. Why is that a bad thing?

    • hugh_36

      I imagine they’d prefer not to watch and pay for a convicted rapist to provide their entertainment on a Saturday afternoon. Anyone who thinks he has a future in professional football in this country is deluding themselves.

      • bondi1000

        If what you say in your first sentence is true, what’s the problem? Why the fuss about him being a ‘role model’ and ‘in a position of influence’ if young people will, as you say, react to his presence on the pitch by boycotting games?

    • Eliza Doolittle

      We already know. Sheffield fans have been chanting “chedwyn Evans – he f*cks who he likes”. The concern is that young people will pick up his warped perception of his right to have sex with whoever he likes irrespective of whether they genuinely consent.

      • not my real name

        That’s disgusting, but it has more to do with the decadence of our age than the facts of this particular case.

        • Eliza Doolittle

          So would they be chanting that if he admitted that everything he did was sleazy and vile and quietly went off and took the job with his father in law?

          • not my real name

            I’ve lost the context of the discussion at the mo, Eliza. I have no doubt that, for all that Ched Evans is above the usual in looks (why are most men so dreadfully plain?), he is no one I would speak to in the street, never mind get to know. He is vulgar to his soles and that is probably in large part due to his upbringing. There are a lot of people at fault: his parents, to name two.

  • My name is Blanca Payne . To cut a long story short I tried about 3 different spell casters over a period of 3 months and all they wanted was more & more money and kept coming up with excuses as to why the spell wasn’t working. Just when I was about to give up I came across several good testimonies of Dr. Oyinbo over the internet. I contacted him and he promised to restore my faith back into spell casters, that they are real and love spells do actually work. I was very sceptical after several scam spell casters. Mine wasn’t a simple spell but Dr. Oyinbo went above & beyond his way to look for extra money when extra work was required. Always called & txt on time. Replied to emails on time. Only asked for half the spell money as initial payment. My partner had walked out on me one day with no explanation …. I was devastated. When I was about to give up hope, Dr. Oyinbo words guided and encouraged me, and then he was back 3 days after the spell was cast. I recommend Dr. Oyinbo extremely highly. Dr.oyinbo you are a gifted man and I will not stop recommending him because he is a wonderful man. If you have a problem and you are looking for a real and genuine spell caster, Try him anytime, he is the answer to your problems. You can contact him on ( prophetoyinbojesus@yahoo.com or prophetoyinbojesus@yahoo.com) or call him +2348074066640. He is the best caster that can help you with your problems. He restored my faith and I AM FINALLY HAPPY.
    ccccccccc

  • Christopher Billy Barlow

    He hasn’t served his time, his sentence is 5 years and is out on parole and on the sex offenders list. The man is abhorrent, what kind of man has sex with an unconscious woman after his friend has just had sex with her? Then to show no remorse for the real victim – the woman he raped.

    • Golden Fleece

      if what your saying is true then his friend must also be guilty or are you saying she only fell asleep when ched came in room
      err no she actually wasnt unconcious the porter heard male and female voices

      • hugh_36

        Having sex with someone without their consent is rape. If she is unable to give her consent, it is rape. That is the crime he has been convicted of.

        • lindzen4pm

          If both parties are unable to give their consent?

          • Eliza Doolittle

            No-one suggests Evans was unable to give consent.

  • que sera

    Ched Evans got charged, convicted, hung drawn & quartered over this promiscuous girls allegation of ‘rape’ simply bcoz he was a low profile footballer playing for a small town club. He would never have even got charged -let alone convicted- if he was a high profile football superstar like Christiano Ronaldo playing for a global brand name like Manchester United.
    Does anyone recall any do good voices or concerns being raised at all when Christano Ronaldo’s rape allegation whilst he was a man-u player, was so quickly and quietly swept under the carpet ? ? ? ? ? ?

    • Golden Fleece

      yep thats about it
      MP Mark pritchard rape charge was swept under the carpet rapidly also

    • hugh_36

      It was not “rape” he was convicted of but Rape. His assertion of innocence is not unusual among convicted criminals.

    • Eliza Doolittle

      She didn’t allege rape. She could not remember anything that happened. He was convicted on the basis of independent evidence, including his own.

  • The_greyhound

    I’d like to thank Rod Liddle for standing up against the spiteful little witch hunt against Evans. There’s an ugly similarity between the self-appointed guardians of the new puritan morality and the nutters who perpetrated the outrage in Paris. So stuff the yowling halfwits leading the vendetta against Evans, and stuff the slack-mouthed dunderheads who sign their blasted petitions.

    And to anyone I haven’t damned, a peaceful and prosperous New Year.

    • hugh_36

      There is no similarity what so ever between someone saying a convicted rapist should not be a public entertainer (footballer) and massacring people over cartoons.

      • Lord Taliesin

        There is but you’re too thick to see it.

        • Eliza Doolittle

          You have to be be thick or sick to think that is a valid comparison.

  • Em

    There’s nothing “radical” about thinking that a convicted rapist (who is still within the period of his original sentence) should not be highly paid, in a position of influence, as a role model for young people. If his chosen profession had been school teacher, or police officer, this crime (of which he has been convicted, let’s not forget) would mean that he would no longer be allowed to work in that profession. Why should a high-paid, high-influence role as a sports star be any different?

    This isn’t about his entitlement to be employed after serving his time, or his right to make a choice about the nature of that employment (a right he actually does NOT have, btw, due to child protection laws) – it’s about the nature of that employment, and its appropriateness, given his crime.

    • The_greyhound

      Oldham weren’t thinking of signing Evans as a role model, but as a footballer. Perhaps you didn’t know that.

      And the suggestion that Evans’ future employment is in some way governed by child protection legislation is a particularly poisonous, as it is gratuitous and unfounded, implication.

      • hugh_36

        Professional football is a part of the entertainment industry. As such customer make their choice and suppliers of it need to consider their views. I think a convicted rapist is a poor choice as a entertainer.

        • Mark Eltringham

          Really? And how long has Jean Hatchet been a season ticket holder?

      • Eliza Doolittle

        Like every other big football club,
        Oldham certainly wants its players to be idolised. How else would they be able to sell all those shirts and posters!

    • Golden Fleece

      Err There is no law stating footballers cant go back to playing football even after a very dubious rape charge
      He only kicks a bloody ball around,get real before its too late

    • Lord Taliesin

      You keep mentioning his ‘high pay’. Now we’re getting to the crux of the matter.

  • Sean L

    It reminds me of the Guardian’s treatment of the Stephen Lawrence murder trial, when no punishmnent was enough for the killers. Whereas when young men were petrol bombing Carpetright round the corner here on Tottenham High Rd at three in the morning, laughing as they did so at the women and children screaming from the upper floor windows, amongst other atrocities, including murder, the paper was calling for lenience, with any number of columnists invoking ‘deprivation’ in mitigation. Yet no such mitigation was forthcoming for the Lawrence killers. But why should one form of criminal violence be any more or less influenced by social and economic forces, its perpetrators any less subject to them, than the other? For no reason other than the political prejudices of those who supply them with the motives in each case. As if the looters and arsonists of Tottenham were any more or less politically enlightened, any more or less criminally violent, than their counterparts in Eltham. The severity of the crime is determined solely by the ruling political ideology that conditions public discourse, and prevails throughout corporate life, not least in the criminal justice system itself.

  • John Andrews

    Rod, have you read the story of how he behaved? It was cruel and ugly. If guilty as charged he is not suited to a career as a performer/entertainer/footballer.

    • hugh_36

      He was guilty as charged, his view that he is innocent or has an appeal pending is of no relevance. As you say, professional football is not a suitable career form convicted rapist

      • Mark Eltringham

        Says who?

  • Cymrawes

    Punishment is not necessarily atonement and without atonement forgiveness does not follow.BUT forgiveness sometimes never happens- no- one forgives child killers , murderers , paedophiles or rapists.Everyone defending this guy’s right to work would not leave him on his own with a defenceless teenage daughter.
    Work by all means Ched- but not where you get public applause. Convicted rapists are never applauded .
    Go to appeal – you are lucky enough to be able to afford it.
    Try another court .
    Overturn the conviction .
    Then try and get a club.
    Until then- lie low.
    Thankfully my opinion does not matter.
    But the judge’s does.
    BTW:
    Rod Liddle just trying to raise the profile of his paper in a ‘red top’ way ?
    Except the ‘red tops ‘ for once don’t agree.

    • Katherine Hughes

      I agree – I thought this was an intelligent publication but the intellectual rigour shown by Rod Liddle in this article and many of the commenters here is more worthy of the Daily Mail.

  • David Maher

    Sheffield United could have taken him back and started playing him with the reserve team.

    • hugh_36

      No they shouldn’t

  • mandelson

    This isnt about Ched Evans playing football anymore it is an attempt to destroy him utterly. If the mob succeeds we will all be the worse off for it. Perhaps its time for us to hold up placards saying “we are all Ched”

    • hugh_36

      I’ll bet your mum, wife, GF would be really proud.

      • mandelson

        Relevance? Anyway none of them would be part of your torch bearing mob.

      • Lord Taliesin

        people as thick as you appear to be shouldn’t be allowed access to the internet.

        • Eliza Doolittle

          You really aren’t capable of reasoned discussion, are you?

    • Katherine Hughes

      Really? I mean… did you really say that?

      “We are all Charlie” = we live in a free society and defend the right to freedom of expression.

      “We are all Ched” = we all think it’s ok to rape drunk young women in hotel rooms?

      Think before you type.

    • Eliza Doolittle

      Comparing this rapist with the Paris victims is seriously messed-up.

      • mandelson

        Ah Eliza poor Professor Higgins must be spinning in his grave.

        • Eliza Doolittle

          You do know Professor Higgins is fictional, don’t you?

          • mandelson

            A devastating put down Eliza, those many days and nights were well spent.

  • Cymrawes

    Debasing the loss of life from terrorism does nothing to help the argument.
    Let the courts decide .
    Oh – of course, they already have.
    I am not arrogant enough to think I know better.

  • Greyfox

    Maxine Carr and the killers of Jamie Bulger were given new identities and protected by law. Were they less guilty and were there crimes less horrendous?

    • Katherine Hughes

      They were protected not because they deserved to put their crimes behind them because otherwise they would almost certainly have been killed in retaliation. (And yes, that would have been “mob justice”, unlike in this case.)

      Many people are disgusted by what Ched Evans has done (although a worrying number of people appear not to be), but no one is going to murder him. His life is not at risk.

      Ironically it is his victim who has been hounded by his supporters and forced to move town and change her identity for fear of what people will do to her.

      • not my real name

        His life is not at risk.
        I don’t think you can guarantee that. Are you Hera? Even if you were, you couldn’t promise that.

        • Katherine Hughes

          Of course I can’t guarantee it. But there is no evidence that his life is any more at risk than yours or mine. Even Jean Hatchet has expressed no desire to murder Ched Evans. In the case of the killers of James Boulger, several people said (on TV) that if they ever found out where either of the killers were they would kill them and happily serve time for murder.

          • not my real name

            I would say that his life is at considerably more risk than yours or mine. If he wasn’t a hated figure to begin with, he is now….

          • Katherine Hughes

            I think that’s being over-dramatic. Sorry. A lot of people think he’s scum and think he deserves to lose his career over it, but no one is actually going to physically harm him.

          • not my real name

            Famous last words.

          • Katherine Hughes

            He is more likely to be eaten by a crocodile than attacked by a “Feminazi”. (And that’s even taking into account the fact that we don’t have any crocodiles in this country and he’s not allowed to go abroad under the terms of his licence.)

          • not my real name

            Send him here: I’ll introduce him to an alligator ; )

          • Katherine Hughes

            Haha 🙂

      • Greyfox

        If he wins his appeal many people are going to look very silly. The entire case is a mess and I am unwilling to hound the man to death merely because he makes a lot of money.

  • Cymrawes

    No. Where do they work?

  • hugh_36

    The difference between the jobs mentioned eg a plumber is that professional football is pure entertainment. The income comes from people paying to watch him play or buy products associated with him. As a convicted racist people appear not to want to watch him and therefore he cannot make a living playing football. I am sure playing a game with his friends on a Sunday for free would be possible of a job where the output is less linked to entertainment. Plumber would be good.

    • Mark Eltringham

      Yep. Alone in a house with a woman rather than on a field in front of 5,000 mostly men. Great logic. Not about his job really, is it hugh? Go on. Admit it.

  • kevin

    Its not the fact that he shouldn’t be able to work for a living its the fact that as a convicted rapist he shouldn’t be able to work as a role model and reap the inevitable rewards and benefits that come with being a professional footballer, rewards and benefits that most decent, law abiding and hard working citizens will never receive in there lines of work. What’s wrong with him retraining in another field or trade, I mean Christ almighty are footballers programmed to only do one thing with there entire lives are they completely incapable of adapting to life when things don’t go there way?!!!!

    • lindzen4pm

      Jaysus H. Corbett. Anyone who regards footblahs as role models need their bleeding bumps felt. He’s a footblah, and should be let play if a club wants him.

    • Lord Taliesin

      Aww, wadda matter kevy. Does he earn more money than you?

      • kevin

        Erm no actually coz hese currently unemployed!!!!

  • hugh_36

    There are many many professions where a convicted rapist would be unable to continue, teacher, doctor, lawyer, in the armed services, police etc etc. This would not be “hounding” and would cause no surprise to anyone. He is an entertainer, people do not want to be entertained by ex-rapists.

    • not my real name

      Then let the audience decide, and the football clubs — not some lynch-mob easily assembled on the Net.

      • hugh_36

        They have decided. They are not prepared to risk it. As entertainment providers they cannot risk offending their customers.

        • bondi1000

          Oldham in the end haven’t been prepared to risk it because their staff received vile threats of physical violence. “Do what we want or you’ll get it in the neck”. Where else have we heard that this week? The anti-Evans camp and anti-Charlie Hebdo camp are closer bedfellows than the former, in all its vainglorious righteousness, might care to admit.

          • Katherine Hughes

            That is a disgusting thing to say. (But you have the right to say it, of course.)

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Oldham themselves gave ad their main reason the fact that sponsors were pulling out.

        • Mark Eltringham

          And the number of times Jean Hatchet has been to see Oldham play is?

    • Lord Taliesin

      If you don’t want to be entertained by him then don’t, and indeed, say you don’t. But don’t presume to speak for everybody

  • Cymrawes

    They have.

  • Joe Jon Fitzpatrick

    If he raped you would you forgive him? What if you knew he’d raped your friend/wife/daughter/brother/etc, then cheer him on a football field. Really?

    • lindzen4pm

      Isn’t that the headline from Torch and Pitchfork Wielders Monthly?

  • I find it difficult to believe how stupid, churlish and hate-filled the far-left in general, and radical feminists in particular are.

    Which is exactly why I’m in favour of precisely the freedom of speech they spend their lives attacking (though have mysteriously gone quiet on after the horrible events in Paris) – because if they didn’t have the freedom to say the stupid things they say, then how would the rest of us know how stupid they are?

  • Cymrawes

    Only one thing worse than threats of physical violence- being convicted of it.

  • Peter Stroud

    As a professional footballer – especially as a goal scorer – Evans will soon become an idol for youngsters supporting whatever club signs him. So, he has to join the teachers, doctors, magistrates and the many other offenders employed in ‘sensitive’ areas, who cannot carry on in their chosen professions, after being convicted of rape or indecent assault.

    • Lord Taliesin

      You need to petition your MP to get the law changed. Just because you’ve decided inside your little head that ‘he has to join the teachers, doctors, etc’ doesn’t make it so.

      • Eliza Doolittle

        It does if sponsors don’t want to support clubs that employ convicted rapists.

  • Katherine Hughes

    Ridiculous article. He is a convicted rapist, which would prevent him from re-entering many professions far less lucrative and high-profile than professional football. I’m a lawyer. If I committed an offence as serious as that I would never be allowed to re-enter the profession. Same for teachers, doctors and any other number of jobs. Being a professional footballer is not just about kicking a ball around. When you’re a professional footballer you’re part of a brand. You represent your club and your country. Children have posters of you on their bedroom walls and shirts with your name on the back. An unrepentant convicted rapist whose supporters have hounded his victim should not be allowed to return to a position of privilege where he is a role model for young people. What message would that be sending out? That you can do whatever you like as long as you score enough goals?

    • Henry Clarson

      When did playing third division football become a position of privilege?

      • Katherine Hughes

        Good point, but £20,000 per week looks pretty privileged to me.

    • Charli33

      Yes but your prohibition to re-enter your profession would be a function of the laws of the land (as I am sure you, as a lawyer, are aware) and not the opinion of the torch and pitchfork wielding crowds. There is a big difference.

      • Katherine Hughes

        There may be a technical difference but there is no moral difference. I would be barred from re-entering the profession because I would be considered ethically unfit to be in a position of responsibility and not suitable to represent the profession. Just like Ched is unfit to represent his club or his country or be a role model to young people.

        • lindzen4pm

          Role model? Any parent who spouts that crapola at their offspring regarding footblahs probably deserves a visit from social services.

          • Katherine Hughes

            I agree, but there is a big difference between what should be the case and what is actually the case.

            Footballers are role models whether we (or they) like it or not.

  • que sera

    I’m sure you’ve heard of many, many historical convictions where after wasting 10-30 years of a mans life it has then been PROVEN that the he was innocent after all.

    • Katherine Hughes

      I’ve heard of it happening to poor people who can’t afford lawyers. Find me an example of where it has happened to a rich person with the best lawyers money can buy and maybe I’ll listen. The facts of the case do not support any argument that there has been a miscarriage of justice. The jury’s decision was unanimous. The Court of Appeal refused leave to appeal. The Criminal Cases Review Commission have been bullied into looking into the case, but I highly doubt they will take a different view.

  • The point is that this case is a fulcrum of the feminazis push to increase the conviction rates for rape by changing the definition, particularly of ‘consent’. This is covered in Sections 74 & 75 of Blair’s Sexual Offences Bill 2003, and this is why they are fighting tooth and nail not to give ground. As I understand it, the woman didn’t even report rape, but contacted the police because her bag was missing. The fact that she couldn’t remember what had happened was sufficient for the police to suggest she had been raped. One man whom she couldn’t remember having sex with was acquitted, the other (Evans) was convicted. The whole situation is a travesty. I know a rape survivor, and she certainly remembers what happened to her.
    There’s a problem with rape reporting and rape convictions, and to my mind, what Evans did was seedy and shameful, but I agree with Julia Hartley-Brewer on QT tonight, I can’t see that he was guilty of rape.

    • que sera

      Totally agree.

    • Katherine Hughes

      “I know a rape survivor and she remembers what happened to her.”

      Yes. What’s your point? All rapes are different. Are you saying that if someone is raped whilst she is unconscious then it doesn’t count?

      • not my real name

        There is certainly a difference between a woman in fear of her life from a violent predator and the sleazy get-together that this case involves. There is certainly more trauma to someone such as the actress Fran Drescher or to a girl who knows nothing of sex except being violated than to someone that didn’t even go to the police except for the purpose of reporting her missing handbag. She ought to have reported her missing common sense, while she was at it.

        I knew the case of a woman lawyer who represented a violent man’s opponent in court (might have been his former girlfriend). Anyway, the man lost the case, or the girl, or both. He turned up at the lawyer’s place of work one night — she was working late — and beat her badly and raped her. If you can’t see the difference between that horrendous crime and what happened in the Evans case, you have let ideology blind your mind. And your heart.

        • Katherine Hughes

          Lacking common sense is not a crime. Rape is.

          A victim of actual bodily harm is less seriously injured than a victim of grievous bodily harm. Should we not bother to prosecute people for actual bodily harm?

          • not my real name

            You get my point, you’re just avoiding it. When I was her age, I would have considered her behaviour doing everything I could to put myself in harm’s way. Girls need to learn that playing life the playboy’s way does them no good at all. They need to live what the truth generally is: that they are better than the boys.

          • Katherine Hughes

            Of course I get your point, but it’s not the answer.

            It’s not a great idea for girls to get really drunk and put themselves in a vulnerable position. It’s not a great idea for boys to do it either, come to that. I know that if I go out, get really drunk and wander the streets alone, I could be raped. Or I could fall into a river or walk in front of a bus. So it’s not a good idea to get into that kind of state.

            But women get raped when they’ve got themselves drunk, when they’ve had their drinks spiked, when they’re sober, late at night, early in the morning, in cities, in rural areas, by strangers, by people they know, wearing skimpy clothes and wearing the burkha.

            Yes, there are precautions you can take to help protect yourself against danger. But ultimately, the only thing which will definitely stop rapes from happening is men not committing rape. And that is why the responsibility always has to lie with the rapist, not the victim.

          • not my real name

            Would that it were so. But I think we have to acknowledge that creepy men will push their advantage. It doesn’t make them less creepy if they don’t have the chance to do it. But girls need to know that a) there are a lot of creeps out there, b) they think their ‘need’ justifies it, c) if you don’t want to be their victim, you must find ways to thwart it.

          • Katherine Hughes

            Yes, I agree, to a point. But ultimately, you can do everything in your power to try and avoid being raped (even never leaving your house) and still be raped. I agree that everybody (women and men) should take sensible precautions to protect themselves. But that’s as far as it goes. Putting responsibility onto the victim to try to prevent rape lessens the responsibility of would-be rapists not to commit rape.

          • not my real name

            Fine. The men bear the blame for rape of all kinds and a pox upon their sex for burdening women even with the thought of it.

            But then we get into slushy territory where it’s one word against another, when no one is thinking straight, when passions on both sides are out of control. Then justice becomes difficult if not impossible for outsiders to see, or decide.

          • Katherine Hughes

            Rape cases are notorious for being one person’s word against the other’s, particularly where alcohol is concerned. But in this particular case, the offence of rape is not actually that difficult to make out, despite what Evans supporters would have us believe.

          • not my real name

            No I don’t think that’s always so, not in the least. The woman whose house is broken into (physical evidence), whose face is pushed into the furnishings (physical evidence), with the resultant act (physical evidence). And then there is the physical evidence of their injuries or their dead bodies. Let’s not be Pollyanna here.

          • Katherine Hughes

            I said “notorious”. I didn’t mean every case of rape is one person’s word against the other, just that it is a common problem in rape cases. And so-called “non-violent” rapes are far more common than “violent” ones.

          • not my real name

            Maybe. I know that while I was growing up the papers were full of rape-murders: so much so that I was distinctly fearful of any bump in the night when I was by myself as a teen babysitting. I always looked over my shoulder, at night. I was terrified of rape as a young woman. Thanks, guys!

          • Katherine Hughes

            Me too. But now I’m more likely to walk home alone at night, not because I think the danger is any less, but because I’ve decided that life is too short to look over your shoulder all the time. Don’t forget that the violent cases are the ones which make the papers. The vast majority of rapes are far more mundane, and a great number go unreported.

          • not my real name

            Good for you, and I hope so. I have a lovely nature walk I go through, and today I scanned all the area and thought: ‘if I see a monster, what am I going to do about it, anyway?’ But I do feel better with company. Shame, really. If I were my husband, I wouldn’t give it a second thought.

          • Katherine Hughes

            I’m lucky enough to live somewhere which feels “safe”, although you can be unlucky anywhere. I used to live in a city and a few years ago there was a series of attacks on young women in my neighbourhood. I lived alone and it made me not want to go out at all. When I did go out I took to carrying a bottle of wine with me at all times so that if someone did attack me I could hit them with it, and if I was later questioned about it I wouldn’t have to justify why I was carrying a “weapon”. That was a horrible feeling.

          • not my real name

            I bet it was. You took a bottle of wine… I wrote a detective story once (it was flawed) featuring a magnum as the murder weapon! Real life corroborates! I’m going offline but what do you think of this — my grandmother says ‘we always worry about the wrong things’. My husband doesn’t find this reassuring at all. He says ‘so what are the *right* things we *should* be worrying about?’ Life is a dodgy place but we have survived this far, and still can laugh! I wish you well.

          • Katherine Hughes

            I’m off to bed too – nice talking to you!

          • David Glen

            Thing is more men would admit to urban fears if their ‘social norms’ didn’t frown on ‘cowardice’. Not ‘mansplaining’ here at all, just sad to see us stuck in the same old ruts…
            As a student of the 80’s I would not have expected to be reading articles like this in 2015.

            About the nature of rehabilitation of course , but not ‘jokes’ about hatchet faced feminists, or comments suggesting feminism is for resentful uglies.

          • David Glen

            Leaving aside your useful ideas of how a girl should behave – something ironically more commonly espoused by the popular people from the East generally criticized round these parts, if a woman had been dragged ‘cold’ from the street the sentences would have reflected this and of course there would be no controversy since he would never have been considered re-employable.

          • not my real name

            I didn’t make nature, David. In fact I rue it very often. I wish men would be more like women, often. But they aren’t. We all have to live with that fact. And women have to defend themselves against the worst men, who are legion.

          • David Glen

            Yeah I concede that point, but doing so should never mean slipping into the mindset of victims “asking for it”.

          • not my real name

            Of course not. No one asks to be hurt. This girl was done a great disservice by the people that should have protected her — and I mean those that raised her and educated her.

      • I am saying that there needs to be corroborating evidence that she was unconscious or incapable, and that is dubious at best here. There is certainly a reasonable doubt

        • Eliza Doolittle

          There was an awful lot of corroborating evidence as to her drunkenness and therefore her inability to give valid consent to rape. For instance, the fact that Evans stepped over her when she was on the floor in the kebab shop and that she left her bag there; that the CCTV showed her staggering unsteadily down the streets; the evidence of the receptionist of her drunkenness; the fact that MacDonald told the receptionist that she was ill; the fact that shevwoke several hours later with no memory of what had happened and having lost control of her bladder.

    • David Glen

      Why is it that there is a 99.9% correlation between the loud-mouthed armchair judges in this case, and the use of terms like feminazi, harridan, Ms Hatchets name as an apt name for characterising anyone concerned with rape, references to the victim as wanting it, enjoying herself, being a gold digging slapper etc etc?

      Well at least among the men.

    • Sean L

      I never realised that – outrageous. I’d feel safer with the police in Nairobi, and certainly the criminal justice system there.

  • Sean L

    An alternative view of ‘rape’. Some years ago I was in a cab with my wife going into central Nairobi from the outslirts for a night out. It was late, after midnight, and you’d spot the odd group of girls in the headlights (no street lights) walking home to their slum homes from their jobs as housemaids, as well as the occassional security van on patrol, this being a prosperous residential area. My wife was chatting to the driver in Swahill which I couldn’t follow. I asked what they were talking about. The driver was just telling her how the security guards would often grab such girls and rape them in the back of their vans. At this time I was a bit naive about the world and I asked why the girls wouldn’t go to the police? They both laughed. Any girl who went to the police for such a thing would likely be raped again. . . But even here in England what Ched Evans did wouldn’t even have qualified as rape until very recently. That’s why I can’t take it any more seriously than “racism”, a comparable offence in its ideological significance. Its gravity being purely ideal rather than arising from any harm incurred by its victim – ‘racism’ typically not requiring a victim at all, being merely something you say or are suspected of *being*. Almost the same word, too. Comparable headline fodder “ra(-)ist” and form of denunciation. I read that people are now routinely let off with a caution for muggings and burglary, crimes whch more often than not infiict lasting harm to a person, and I dare say of a graver than forgotten and drunken copulation. By this standard anyone who was a teenager in the 70s or 80s, the parents of today’s students, are all rapists to a man, victims to a woman. That we are ‘racist’ has already been established incontrovertibly.

    • not my real name

      Makes you wonder who’d be a woman who could be a man. Nature loads the dice against the women: where is natural justice?

      • Sean L

        Don’t think that’s true at all, even in Africa. Women mostly have the power where it counts in daily life. And in this country, because of social housing legislation and fmaily law, to an overwhelming and scary extent. Scary because the state has effectively usurped the father. Men aren’t *needed*, certainly not poorer ones. Anyway good night!

        • not my real name

          Women mostly have the power where it counts in daily life.

          Evidence, please. Anyway, life isn’t all about ‘power’. The burden of being female: menstruation, pregnancy, fear of, men’s power, men’s refusal to do the domestic work so women end up drudges, etc…..

          • Sean L

            Ok. briefly, I should say *attractive* women have the power. Feminsm is largely an expression of resentment on the part of undesirable women, however it might be orchestrated by attractive ones. Just as leftist politics the resentment of the weak and powerless, however powerful and charismatic its leaders. I’d agree that if there’s one type whose plight merits sympathy beyond any other, it’s that of the undesirable woman. Even desirable ones have a limited shelf life. But the notion of “women” as a unifrom political bloc or oppressed constituency is for people whose reality is informed by fashionable ideas, newpapers and so on rather than their own experience. Anyone can see that a truly attractive woman has the world at her mercy, including the most powerful of men. History is littered with examples as is the world around you. . .

          • Katherine Hughes

            So only “undesirable women” are interested in having the right to vote, or equal pay?

            What a load of rubbish.

          • Sean L

            No only totally repellent ones concern themselves with such momentousness. And don’t give me that ‘misogynist’ rubbish. If a woman says men are ‘creeps’ or ‘bast*rds’ is she deemed to harbour a hatred for men as such? I’m merely stating that some women or more attractive than others. But you’re determined to deny reality anyway, that’s already evident. Needless to say men can be no less repellent, but the ones who busy themselves about ‘equal pay’ are women anyway.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            In my experience, men who acknowledge women’s rights are the real men. Misogynists are invariably sad little inadequates

          • GraveDave

            So only “undesirable women” are interested in having the right to vote, or equal pay?

            No, he didn’t say that, you did.Still it’s no worse a stereotype than when the msm paints a certain political party as largely followed by fifty something year old blokes with little going for them.

          • not my real name

            A man’s view. You don’t know what it is to be a woman. You see the power and attraction, you don’t see the burdens, the physical pain, the sense that men (doctors, suitors, workers you hire) want somehow to seize an advantage (subject you to tests you don’t want; test your loyalty; give you bad service and threaten you when you protest). You have no experience of this. I do.

          • Mr Nike Top

            Sean L – This is a tour de force and I am really glad to have read your contributions.

            There are those curmudgeons who would suggest that a discussion of a sad situation involving either a rape, a miscarriage of justice or both is not a fit place for levity but trolling such as this is a triumph.

            The balance of provocative, reactionary nonsense and surreal comedy is the work of a real master of the craft and I salute you.

          • Sean L

            Yeah cheers mate. But what’s ‘surreal’? That there are more or less desirable women? That the desirable have an advantage in life? That that desirability fades? You deny that? Get your head out of your arse.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Hilarious, Sean, you haven’t realised that Nike was taking the piss out of you.

          • Sean L

            Of course I do. Just mildly irritated by the term ‘surreal,’ Eliza. What I put is quite intelligible. Whether it’s true is another matter. . . But ‘surreal’. . . it’s just one of those terms that people throw in for ballast but are empty of content. Glad it amused you anyway, because I like your name.

        • Eliza Doolittle

          The vast majority of victims of domestic violence are women. Do you think they have power where it counts?

    • Katherine Hughes

      We still bother to prosecute people for common assault, even though there are others committing grievous bodily harm and murder. Just because this particular example of rape is less violent than others doesn’t mean it’s not rape. It’s the same crime. Rape is rape. More violent rapes will generally incur a longer sentence. That is how we distinguish.

      You also seem to be suggesting that the law should not evolve – that just because this wouldn’t have been considered a problem in years gone by, we should turn a blind eye to it now. But in the past, men were allowed to rape their wives (it wasn’t considered to be rape in the eyes of the law) and most of the BBC turned a blind eye as the likes of Jimmy Saville abused children.

      The law is more enlightened these days, but some people are obviously still taking a while to catch up.

      • GraveDave

        `Common assault’? A few years ago a woman kicked her boyfriends eye out with her stiletto heel. They were in a taxi. They had been arguing. She was drunk. She called it self defense. It wasn’t. The cabby saw everything. .But guess what -she got off with it. .

  • Melting Granite

    If Ched Evans was drunk when he “raped” the woman who was drunk and therefore couldn’t consent, shouldn’t she should also be charged with rape? Then Miss Hatchet can start a campaign against her ever working again in her chosen field.

    • Katherine Hughes

      I can’t even…

      • Melting Granite

        Do men have a special power that allows them to give consent no matter how intoxicated they are?

        Seriously, please explain the difference. Are you saying that men can consent no matter how intoxicated they are, yet somehow a woman lacks the same ability when she is intoxicated?

        Being mentally able to consent while under the influence shouldn’t be a sex-dependent ability. Do you disagree?

    • Eliza Doolittle

      He’s never once claimed that he was too drunk to know what he was doing. Indeed, he glorified it, telling the police that he believed every woman is gagging for sex with footballers. So your comment is totally irrelevant.

  • mrsjosephinehydehartley

    But once a jury’s job is done, there is no case in the common sense.

    I think what’s made a refreshing difference in this situation is a certain duty of care which has thankfully manifested in all kinds of ways – not just through people with a contract or respectable position like eg policemen, dames, business leaders – even the BBC mentioned it on its web-site I noticed; but most importantly through ordinary people who care enough about each other to respond in kind to the prospect of a convicted rapist running about our national sport.

    Not only is the convicted rapist seemingly unable to understand why it’s common sense to carefully make sure a person actually consents to sex but this footballer doesn’t appear to understand or care that the victims personal effects ( including images/video of herself ) are apparently still being taken for granted( probably again without her consent) and published on some dedicated website.

    It’s all the rage these days, data control, I understand, we’ve even got a commissioner for CCTV stuff. One wonders what he gets paid for.

  • Dave

    I shocked why don’t these peaple who sign these pettitions read the statements and watch the videos

    • Katherine Hughes

      Why don’t all the people who think Ched Evans has suffered a “miscarriage of justice” read the case and the legal definition of rape?

  • Michael Steane

    The law under which he was convicted is absurd. The woman consented therefore he did not rape her under normal understanding of the word. It is not disputed that she frequently drank quantities of alcohol similar to that she had consumed on the evening in question. What if she had driven a car? Would she be absolved because she was too drunk to know what she was doing? She chose to drink. She chose to have sex with him. He was convicted by a rigged system. He maintains his innocence because he is innocent.

    • Katherine Hughes

      The woman did not consent. That’s the WHOLE POINT. What makes you think you know better than the jury?

      • Melting Granite

        She consented, but she was drunk when she did so, so it didn’t count.

        He also consented, but if he also was drunk when he consented, shouldn’t she also be charged with rape?

        If no, why not? Why is it men can consent when they’re drunk, but women can’t? I would really like to hear your reasoning on this.

        • Eliza Doolittle

          As he hasn’t claimed to be too drunk to consent, this is utterly irrelevant.

    • Katherine Hughes

      PS – if she had driven a car she would have committed a crime. But she didn’t drive a car, and she didn’t commit any crime, so I’m struggling to see why you would even make that connection.

  • nicky sharpe

    Yes, the BBC of course has a lot to say about this and very little to say when it comes to violent, religiously sanctioned crimes of this nature against underage girls. I wonder how much publicity Mr. Evans would have received if Mr Evans was in a position to play the race card????? No, I don’t have to wonder when it comes to pathetic, spineless left wing rabble like Hatchet as the answer is so miserably clear.

    • Eliza Doolittle

      The BBC repeatedly condemned violent crimes against under aged girls.

  • FrankS2

    is there no end to the demands from the perpetually outraged? Now they want the chief of the Footballers Union to resign for sticking up for Evans and citing Hilsborough at the same time… the bear pit of “rape culture” harpies in sickly alliance with the hallowed ground of aggrieved Scousers.

    • Eliza Doolittle

      Relatives of the Hillsborough victims are very angry that they are being compared to a convicted rapist of a particularly sleazy type. Wouldn’t you be in their position!

  • artemis in france

    Rod, I could kiss you! You have said anything and everything that should be said about this lamentable case of mindless self-righteousness which has so gripped the “imagination” of a certain kind of person. That the media are encouraging it because it gives them a rolling news story is appalling. I am one of those older women who believes there’s far too much talk of rape thèse days. Women who are careless with their personal safety and trust a man they’ve just met enough to get drunk with him and then enter his hôtel room are asking for trouble. Their mothers have failed in their duty to warn them against such behaviour. How she had the nerve to report the occasion I don’t know. Financial I suppose. Either that or annoyed that she never got a call back! She wasn’t harmed and any damage incurred now is self-inflicted. Rape is not the worst thing that can happen to a woman unless she is so badly injured that it affects her future ability to have sex or produce children. Where there is no violence and no further conséquences, she should shrug it off and learn from it. On another note, I see that Gordon Taylor, a courageous and wise man, is now under fire for speaking the truth. Britain is a worrying place.

  • anna

    I’m feeling pretty bad at the moment. I bitterly regret signing the first petition that was circulated. I did so because it was widely reported that Evans had not apologised to his victim. I felt that if he had said he was sorry, had promised to learn from his experience and conduct himself in a more civilised way in future then he could have resumed his career.

    More petitions asking for my signature dropped in my inbox which I did not sign as I had read more about the case in the meantime. It transpired that Evans had actually asked the woman if he could have intercourse with her and she had agreed. Despite this, he was deemed a rapist because the woman was ‘too drunk to give informed consent.’ and she had no memory of the event. How was he to know that ‘drunken consent’ would be deemed ‘too drunk to give informed consent’ and render him liable to prosecution.?

    Moreover, I have learned that his silence was not because he was unrepentant but because he was acting on legal advice as an appeal was pending. While the matter is still unresolved, he has made a carefully-worded but nonetheless gracious apology to the girl for the effects of his actions and condemned his so-called supporters for their abuse of her.

    I shall be very careful before I sign another petition to make sure I am fully informed. I think this young man should be allowed to resume his career.

    • StephanieJCW

      “More petitions asking for my signature dropped in my inbox which I did not sign as I had read more about the case in the meantime. It transpired that Evans had actually asked the woman if he could have intercourse with her and she had agreed. Despite this, he was deemed a rapist because the woman was ‘too drunk to give informed consent.’ and she had no memory of the event. How was he to know that ‘drunken consent’ would be deemed ‘too drunk to give informed consent’ and render him liable to prosecution”

      I thought by the stage she “consented” to Evans she was almost passing out. I think as adults it’s just basic decency not to stick your penis into somebody you cannot be sure would have wanted it. If I pass a man almost passed out on the street, completely wasted, and he throws me his car keys and tells me to have his car. I wouldn’t think “oooh, free car!” I’d think the guy has no idea what he is doing, I should probably decline. I am not sure rape should be different.

      • Melting Granite

        Was he drunk too? How could he have given consent if he was also drunk? When will she be arrested, tried, convicted, and sentenced?

        • StephanieJCW

          Go away with your moronic response.

          Firstly, no, he wasn’t drunk. Secondly, nobody, not even the law has stated that being drunk prevents a person from consenting to sex. A drunken consent is still consent.

          But obviously there are degrees of drunk. There are drunk when you are merry and drunk when you are drifting in and out of consciousness, barely aware of what is happening to you. If the latter is the case, is a “yes” truly a “yes”?

      • Golden Fleece

        Errr she was fully concious the porter confirmed this by listening at door

        • Eliza Doolittle

          You can be conscious whilst being legally incapable of giving valid consent. Remember, in this case MacDonald asked the receptionist shortly afterwards to keep an eye out for her as she was ill.

        • StephanieJCW

          From a detailed report of the case (available on line) the porter stated hearing what sounded like sex occurring, not necessarily that he heard her conscious. Although that is from one source I have read – if you have alternative sources I would like to read them.

          However even if conscious – is that the level we are aiming at, the person was conscious, although so drunk they weren’t aware of what was happening. People will debate the legality and while the law states a drunken consent can still be consent, there is a “can” there are clear cases when a “yes” cannot be said to mean that.

          Even if legal, I look at somebody who pushes their penis into the body of a person who is barely aware of what is occurring to be a pretty low form of pond life.

    • Lord Taliesin

      Well said Anna. It takes guts to admit you made a mistake.

  • StephanieJCW

    ‘Then there is the allegation that he has shown no remorse; he has not said sorry to his victim. I am not aware of this stipulation being raised in any other case. The reason he has not apologised is that he does not think that he is guilty, and his lawyers have lodged an appeal with the Criminal Cases Review Commission, so he would be ill advised to say sorry”

    Stopped clocks and all…

    It is amazed me the number of militant feminists who fail to see this. It hasn’t shown “remorse” because he insists he is innocent of the charges laid against him. How can you show remorse for a crime you insist did not occur?

    Now if he freely admitted that he raped a woman, but couldn’t care less how she feels about it, I could see the ire but this…this is madness.

    And quite right, he has done his time. He should be able to get on with his life.

    • Eliza Doolittle

      As he was convicted largely on the basis of his own evidence and has had requests for leave to appeal twice, perhaps he should face reality. No appeal has been lodged with the CCRC, as that isn’t a court.

      But even if he couldn’t apologise to that extent, he could easily have produced three years ago the apology which he came out with yesterday. Unfortunately his inordinate delay renders that apology virtually worthless.

      No one denies that he should get on with his life. Just not in a position where he can influence young people.

      • StephanieJCW

        Why not? Those are the rules according to who? (And I would argue that those who look to footballers for influence or as role models need to have a word with themselves.)

        He has served his time and he is not prevented from doing his job. So he should be able to continue to earn a living.

        • Eliza Doolittle

          It’s not a matter of “rules”. And sure, maybe young people shouldn’t use footballers as role models, but the fact is that they do, in their thousands. Indeed, football clubs make very large amounts of their money out of that fact.
          It’s partly a matter of commercial reality. People tend not to want to buy products associated with rapists. Therefore firms who sponsor football clubs will lose money if those clubs employ rapists. Therefore they are entitled to withdraw their sponsorship money. It’s essentially no different to any other sort of employer who can decide that employing a rapist is not a good business decision – and that sort of decision is made all over the country every day.
          He is free to earn a living, and has been offered a good job by his girlfriend’s father. No-one suggests he shouldn’t take that job.

  • Terry Field

    This is the hunt of men by monstrous regiments of dyke women. It will die down and he will get a job as a footballer when the monsters get bored and slash at another male victim with their foul manicured nails.
    Great fun to watch from a distance; horrible for the poor man. Time to confront these foul females.

  • Tony

    Ched Evans has every right to try and defend his actions in as much as he clearly believes he did not rape the young lady in question. I would personally suggest to a large part this is due to the fact his mate Clayton was found not guilty for rape, having had sex with the same woman. Having looked at the website which was setup by a third party to gather support in clearing Ched Evans of being a rapist (www.chedevans.com), I find it curious why most people would not question Ched Evans own views of what is rape and not rape.
    Ched Evans was tried and convicted of rape in a court of law. He has served his time, been released and proceeded to clear his name of rape. As far as I am aware you can not be convicted for having a lack of moral compass, honour or integrity in a court of law. The public at large have every right to bring these aspects of a person’s character in to question, especially when said person is in the public eye. Having read the undisputable facts as posted on Ched Evans official website, when prompted by his mate Clayton, Ched Evans redirected himself from going to help out a friend in need at the Police station to having some easy sex at a hotel. His reasoning for this is the hotel was en route to the Police station. Whilst I accept his partner has undoubtedly forgiven his infidelity and bravo for her, Ched Evans clearly felt it was perfectly ok to do what he did and the fact he is was then caught, tried and convicted he has now decided to behave like a petulant child who clearly wants his cake and to eat it. Either this or he is completely ignorant of his actions.
    It seems to me Ched Evans wants to portray himself as the victim of his own decisions and choices in life. Man up would be my initial response. Does he deserve to go back to his chosen profession as a professional footballer? Yes, if he can simply accept what he did was wrong and let it go himself. Look at his website if you want to see his own suspect interpretation. Ched Evans may not like the label of being called a rapist but unfortunately for him he was tried and convicted as such.
    If Ched Evans wants people to move on, he needs to allow them to move on by not defending what most normal people would regard as highly immoral behaviour, irrelevant of the label of rape. This was not his tipsy or drunk girlfriend, fiancé or wife he had sex with. It was with a complete stranger he had never met before in his life and whilst he was en route to help a friend out at a Police station he was invited by his friend, and not the woman in question, to come along to the ‘party’ and join in.
    Just an opinion.

  • Diggery Whiggery

    Rod, you’re one of the few voices of reason left in Britain. Look after yourself, for your own sake and our sanity.

  • iainthegooner

    Well, some interesting ‘debate’ on this. Seems to me that there is a feminist / angst ridden vitriol that is acting as smoke around the wider context. Evans was found guilty and served time- notwithstanding that he has consistently protested his innocence. He may be the victim of a miscarriage of justice, he may be guilty as charged, but either way has already endured an agreed punitive measure.

    The argument that his victim has a longer sentence to endure has validity, but under British law he was sentenced and has finished that sentence so has been considered rehabilitated and issued back into society. The ‘witchhunt’ is offensive in the extreme. A section of the populace, herded by individuals behind nom-de-plumes have ‘decided’ that this man should be eviscerated from his previous life as an extra level of punishment. This isn’t part of what the law decided was the punitive measure that matched his crime so as such has no place in a civilised society.

    The role model discussion is irrelevant. If he is guilty, he goes to prison. After his release he is deemed rehabilitated and then its up to an employer to decide if he is a worthy potential employee.

    Rape is a despicable crime- its a crime based on the very primal elements of primarily male behaviours and indoctrines. It takes the genetic coding of reproduction and turns it into something sinister and takes physical superiority and turns it into a scenario based on power and oppression. Thus the natural reaction is one of abhorrence and non tolerance. However how does gnashing of teeth help society cure itself of these ills- it doesnt.

    Evans may well be found innocent on appeal as there appears to be some evidence that puts his guilt into question. In much the same way that capital punishment leaves no room for a reversal, a movement designed to ruin the mans existence, would, if successful, leave little room for him to return to an existence of his choice – something the law decrees he has the right to do.

    Sponsors will run a mile as the bombastic elements make their noise and throw their vile rhetoric. As Sarah put, this is just business. That is not sinister. What is however is the mob attitude, fueled by partial facts and internet ‘fact free’ journalism.

    Whats the answer- who knows. Time will be the master that governs whether Evans is telling the truth or he is found wanting and his conviction considered sound. Either way, those that hound him now should hang their head. He may well be the victim of an illegitimate charge or may well be a rapist, who was caught, charged and served his time but either way, burning him at the internet virtual stake now is wrong.

    • Eliza Doolittle

      He hasn’t finished his sentence, he hasn’t got any appeal ongoing, and he’s been refused leave to appeal twice If he had just kept his head down and taken the job his girlfriend’s father offered having wholly dissociated himself from all the threats against his victim, no-one would have heard a word more about him.

  • Dave

    I do beleave evens was convicted for who he is … And not what he’s done

    • Eliza Doolittle

      So on that basis why wasn’t his mate convicted?

      • GraveDave

        Maybe because it doesnt look as good sending a black rapist to prison. Marlon King, as has been pointed out no end of times on here, did far, far worse than this Ched character and hardly a peep from anyone when he was released and was asked back.

  • Ben Sorin

    Presumably if Stuart Hall gets out Rod Liddle will be advocating he should be able to take up football commentary again, if Rolf Harris gets out Rod Liddle will be decrying any ludicrous campaign to stop him getting a TV slot and if Max Clifford gets out Rod Liddle will write an article supporting his right to get a media column.

    • Dave

      Now

  • camdogg66

    I’m sorry but how many people who signed that petition have actually looked at the evidence, or do they just think, “he got convicted, therefore he’s guilty”. If they did look at the evidence, they’d realize that there are so many holes in this case, it practically a collider. The victim doesn’t say she didn’t give consent, only that she doesn’t remember. Meaning its totally possible that she gave consent and then couldn’t remember. How can a jury then decide that she must’ve gave consent to one of the accused, but not the other. And why does no one in the media bring up the fact that they found traces of cocaine and weed in her bloodstream, that must mean something.

    To the people saying that the FA should bring in a rule forbidding players like Chad Evans and Lee Hughes making a return to football, it is obvious to football fans that this rule will never happen. Its easy to stop League One players playing, but how are the FA going to react if a top England striker is in the position Evans is in now, I wonder if there would be a same outcry, especially considering that he would be a much bigger role model than Chad Evans.

    Finally, if people who signed the petition condemn Evans for not stopping people naming the victim, have you heard Charlie Webster condemn people threatening to rape Evans’ family, or the daughter of an Oldham director. Hypocrisy lives. But of course as a white male, I can’t complain.

    • Ben Sorin

      In legal terms if convicted he is guilty and he remains guilty of the crime of rape unless and until that verdict is overturned. And he has already had one appeal which was rejected on all grounds. The appeal judgment (have you read this before YOU spout off?) as well as the judge in his direction to the jury in the original trial specifically considered the issue you raise: they were both clear that just because the victim couldn’t remember does not ipso facto mean she did not consent. Yet the jury in the trial still found Evans guilty and the appeal judges upheld the verdict: both clearly concluded there was evidence beyond reasonable doubt that the victim was not in a position to consent to intercourse with Evans.

    • Eliza Doolittle

      No, she could have said yes, but if she was too drunk to know what she was doing it is not valid consent – any more than, say, marriage vows would be valid if one of the parties had no idea what they were consenting to. If she had cocaine in her bloodstream, if anything that would support the view that she was incapable of giving valid consent. As for the discrepancy between the verdicts, read the appeal judgment.

      I’ve heard plenty of people who signed the petition condemning the alleged threats.

  • Dave

    So then why . When she had sex with ched evens friend with him in the same room .. Then ched had sex with her .. Why was it ok for his friend but not him.? .. So if Thay had done it the other way round would his friend have gone to jail.. .? When you read the tweets from that young lady bragging on how much money she is going to get and how she will take her friends out … And how she will get a pink mini when she gets her compo .. I find that more chilling ..

    • Ben Sorin

      Dave one of the grounds of Ched Evans’ appeal was that the jury came to a
      perverse judgment in convicting him but not McDonald and the appeal
      court judges refused this ground of appeal with very clear reasoning.
      You might want to try reading the judgement yourself given it is freely
      available online. As for the tweets – we have only the Ched Evans campaign website’s assertion that these were her tweets. And, even if they were her tweets they don’t establish much in my view. The Evans website presents a number of things in a skewed way in Evans’ favour. The website is also currently under investigation by the Attorney General. I do find it interesting that you are willing to question a jury verdict, upheld by an appeal court, without reading those judgements in detail and yet are willing to accept a tendentious campaign web site’s assertions as gospel truth.

  • Christopher Mooney

    You do sound like a bit of a sexist, bigot yourself. So I’m not surprised you’re writing this article

  • Christopher Mooney

    The important information you’re purposefully leaving out, is he’s used his status and wealth to attack, and campaign against the victim.

    This has led to football fans incriminating themselves, by following his lead, and ending up in prison themselves.

    It’s perfectly obvious that he’s neither “fit or proper” to hold any position of responsibility or status

  • Christopher Mooney

    Finally, would the head of Apple, go straight back to his position after a rape conviction?

    Of course not. He’d be fired. And he’d probably never work again in such a lucrative, public, role.

    Your logic is ridiculous.

    Rape convictions do end the careers. If your career is that of a role model, and public figure

    Ched Evans is free to work. Just not as a role model, or public figure

    • FedUp

      I am sure that there are many captains of industry out there who have been in similar positions to that which Ched Evans found himself in and are still working in their positions. Would the head of Apple go back to working in IT – probably, why not? No, it might not be at Apple but then they couldn’t have no CEO for 2.5yrs could they? Do people convicted of fraud return to positionso f accountancy, company directors etc? Yes, if they are legally allowed to do so. Convictions can end careers but that is between the employer and the convicted person – not you or anyone else who does not have a direct interest to decide on their behalf

  • Christopher Mooney

    Sex Offenders on license, are not even allowed to work with Children.

    Football is watched by millions of children. Children are ball-boys. Children are mascots. Children are cheerleaders.

    Your argument is completely false. Convicted sex offenders are allowed to work in APPROPRIATE work.

    Not any work they want!

    • FedUp

      Your point is what? Children will see plenty of people at work but that doesn’t mean that they will come into contact with them in a way which puts them at risk. Just because they watch football doesn’t put them at risk. Children being mascots or cheerleaders does not put them at risk. Yes, convicted sex offenders are allowed to work in appropriate work, never said otherwise. Football hasn’t been considered by the law to be inappropriate to he is only pursuing what he is legally able to pursue

      • Eliza Doolittle

        But the people who have sponsored his putative employers are perfectly entitled to say they don’t fancy having their products associated with a sex offender and they will withdraw sponsorship if he is given the job. That nothing more than commercial realism.

  • FedUp

    Totally agree and have had numerous ‘arguments’ with others who fail to see that mob rule, kangaroo courts and the principle of the media deciding what justice is is a dangerous premise. The seem unable to move beyond the emotive ‘rape’ word and that he is a ‘role model’. The latter I would suggest is more a sad reflection of their needing to have a ‘role model’ and being unable to distinguish between a professional skill and personality. A person can have skill and / or knowledge but still be an idiot – know plenty of them! We have to save other women is another cry. Well aside from the dubious prosecution, they are unable to accept that he is not putting women at risk whilst kicking a football around a bit of grass coming back to the role model and that women are likely to throw themselves at him argument. I refer back to my point that that saying more about them than him. Rape is about ‘power’. Sorry, disagree that that is the case in all ‘rapes’ but we need to stop mixing the emotion with the facts and the legal system. IF you want the list of restricted professions for those convicted of sexual offences extended to include footballers – make sure you stick your pop stars, TV presenters, actors etc etc in there too AND go about it the right way rather than hanging a person in public who is just trying to pursue what he is rightly able to do

    • Eliza Doolittle

      The point is that this sends a signal to impressionable young people that acting as he did, and his attitudes to women, are OK. We already have evidence of Sheffield supporters chanting “Chedwyn a Evans, he fucks who he likes” as if promiscuity and rape were things to boast about.

      • FedUp

        No it isn’t. Weaknesses of the case and whether or not it was rape aside:
        1) he was sent to prison sending out a very clear message that that behaviour is considered to be inappropriate, criminal and punishable by the harshest sentence that we have – incarceration.
        2) we have (whether you like it or not) a system whereby you are punished and then the punishment is over (with conditions for licence and further restrictions for other crimes where people are arguably considered to be a risk to society still). Or, perhaps you would like your kids to spend the rest of their lives on the naughty step because punishment never ends? Maybe you bring up past misdemeanours every time they do something wrong? Or perhaps you have NEVER done anything which you later regret or which could be called inappropriate or stupid. Perhaps you should still be ‘punished’ now for disobeying your mother years ago or for skipping school. Glass houses? Or perhaps we should hang everyone who has ever done anything stupid or wrong?
        3) I for one can separate stupid behaviour from professional skill. I assume you and others can do (or are at least capable of doing) the same otherwise half of these people you claim to be ‘idols’ and hold ‘privileged positions’ as I have heard claimed would not still be pop stars, actors, sporting stars etc. It is NOT about what is acceptable or not – we all know that taking drugs, drinking to excess, sleeping around, mistreating others, drink driving etc etc etc is not appropriate behaviour but we should teach our kids (I hope) that Amy Winehouse, Simon Cowell (struggling for names because I don’t do celebrity but know there are plenty who have been stupid in the past) might have skills which we can say are great, but can and do behave stupidly LIKE NORMAL PEOPLE which should not be copied. As an aside, it does nark me that people can generally be so silly as to put others on a pedestal for what they do but that is a different argument although an element of it is appropriate here. I would also suggest that kids would perhaps marvel at his football skills and not know about anything else unless you tell them and then you tell them what is right or wrong.
        4) You could equally take the chanting as being a harsh reminder of inappropriate behaviour and even if you choose not to, it is no different to what men (and women) say about other men and women up and down the country every day by text, in pubs and clubs – get over it. You can interpretate it as boasting IF YOU choose to do so. If men and women act like that, they will be reminded of it BUT without a media storm and hysteria it is alike the news – here today and tomorrows fish and chip wrapping.
        So, it is NOT about signals that it sends at all or that his attitude was ok. It is about YOU not liking that we have a system of punishment and that people are not punished for the rest of their lives. And don’t start on the ‘he hasn’t said sorry’ argument. If he didn’t believe it was rape he cannot apologise for rape (although he could have been quicker about an apology for inappropriate behaviour – I assume he was acting according to legal advice however). There are plenty of cases where courts and juries have got it wrong and there are only 3 people who will ever know what the intentions at the time really were.

        • Eliza Doolittle

          On that basis, I assume you would be happy for Rolf Harris to return to children’s television? After all, he will have served his sentence, and he will be returning to the job in which he has professional skills.

  • Dave

    Ok well it not just me is it …did you watch question time last night ..

  • Dave

    And as far as the appeal … It looks like Thay have not looked properly .. And her face book messages .. Why are Thay not on show .. Ched evens was jailed for who he is not what he’s done .. The woman never complained of rape .. Why where no drug tests done on her ? Sending a young man to jail should have been a last resort .. In my opinion he was silly but should never of gone to jail for what he did

    • Ben Sorin

      Dave this is really tedious. Go and look up the facts of the case properly first. They did do both drug and alcohol tests on her and the results were presented in the first trial. What Facebook messages??? More ‘evidence’ you’ve got from the dodgy innuendo-laden Ched Evans campaign web site I presume. Show me where the ‘evidence’ of the messages actually is.

  • Mr Creosote

    Still Banned?

  • Mr Creosote

    Yay, apparently not. You’ll like this one Rod.. I was banned from the site for suggesting that Lucy Powell was marginally more awful than Harriet Harman – go figure!

  • Dave

    Ok so do you think his friend should have been guilty to then ?

    • Jules0607

      The victim chose to have sex with his friend. When she passed out Evans had sex with her. That is what he was imprisoned for. That is not being ‘unfaithful’, it is non consensual sex which IS rape in England/Western Europe/America. There are few countries where this is not considered rape. The only way the conviction could be quashed will be as a legal technicality, not because he didn’t do it.

      • Dave

        How would you know if she passed out .. Could she have just been shutting her eyes like most girls do while having sex ?

  • Ian

    “But the issue had become politicised and the subtext now read: if you are in favour of Ched Evans playing professional football again, then you are in favour of rape.”

    Nope. Literally no-one is arguing this. Either overtly or covertly.

    “To argue that he has served the required amount of his sentence is also to be in favour of rape, and in favour of rapists and in favour of sexual violence per se.”

    Nope. The arguments about his sentence are that he hasn’t completed the sentence because he is out on licence. Not that arguing he has served the custodial part of his sentence makes you a rape apologist.

    “Then there is the allegation that he has shown no remorse; he has not said sorry to his victim. I am not aware of this stipulation being raised in any other case. The reason he has not apologised is that he does not think that he is guilty, and his lawyers have lodged an appeal with the Criminal Cases Review Commission, so he would be ill advised to say sorry. There are grave doubts about his conviction — but even if there were not, the point and the principle remain. He has served his sentence for a serious crime. In a civilised country you would expect people to be delighted that he was now about to be offered full-time, remunerative work.”

    Presumably not many other convicted criminals have set up a website designed to discredit the victim of a crime?

    Does Rod do any research?

    • Lord Taliesin

      I was accused of being a closet-rapist weeks ago, by a moderator on a chat-site, for supporting Ched Evans’s right to work.

  • Eliza Doolittle
  • Dave

    Do you also feel it’s right to threaten peaple who have any simpothy for him .. Of threaten the lives of peaple who offer him a job .. Surely that’s a lot worse than anything he ever did … Justice should be justice

  • jayne

    In my opinion he should never play football again. Being a footballer nowadays means you are in the public eye and are a role model. A convicted rapist should NEVER be a role model. The same goes for the other footballers who have killed while drink driving……I wouldn’t want my son or daughter looking up to a rapist or a killer or a wife beater.

  • anon

    The girl in question had consensual sex with the first guy who was found not guilty, had sex with Evans shortly after with no further consumption of alcohol but was found to be too drunk to have consented. How does that make sense? I find that chilling.

    • Eliza Doolittle

      Read the court of appeal judgment

  • john p reid

    Well said Rod

  • Amber Edmondson

    I am a league one season ticket holder, not at OAFC but I have visited their ground on several occasions. As a female, he was a 19 year old boy and probably very arrogant – I don’t think he is a dangerous individual. I’d attend a game in which he was fielded – i’d be a hypocrite not to – I watched Pennant play with an ankle tag, I’ve seen Hughes more times than I would care to remember. As a football fan, I don’t think OAFC have ever had so much publicity – give it a rest now and let him get on with it. From what I can see the majority that object don’t watch football, i’d rather hear the other transfer news (like is Uche going to extend his loan..) and less about Evans

  • Paul

    Whatever Evans has or hasn’t done, however deserving he is of being on the receiving end of the current events, it’s good to see one organisation / individual willing to stand up against the mob. Opinions are opinions and at a time when so many people are emotionally championing the free-speech cause, it’s a shame so many still seek to crucify those with different opinions to their own.

  • Suleiman

    We have not all forgotten the part played by Harriet Harman and Virginia Hewitt in the affiliation of Paedophile Information Exchange to National Council for Civil Liberties.

    Ched Evans is not allowed to play football, but these two women are allowed to rule the country.

    • Mr Creosote

      Patricia Hewitt – sorry to be pedantic.

      The difference is they are wimmin, so they can carry on being role models – though why any sane individual would want to emulate them is totally beyond comprehension.

      • Suleiman

        Thank you for correcting me. My memory is not as good as it has been once. But I still remember them.

    • Eliza Doolittle

      Neither of them ever condoned paedophilia. Neither of them committed rape. Neither of them have been convicted of a crime.

      • Suleiman

        Is this all that you have to say about this episode with PIE ?

        • Eliza Doolittle

          Yes. Because it’s the only relevant thing to say about it.

  • Kjafc

    Where were these people who are threatening the lives of Oldham’s staff and their sponsors, when Lee Hughes returned to football? Lee Hughes killed a father of four and was convicted of drink driving and his conviction was clear cut. Serious question.

  • Blue

    Ms Hatchet? Technically a troll?

  • Greg

    Most comments on this thread all seem to work on the underlying assumption that all rapes are equally heinous. Had Chad Evans been uniquivocally convicted of a violent rape which scarred the victim physically or emotionally, I would buy the argument that he should be barred from a high profile “role model” type job such as a professional footballer. Moreover I don’t think we would be having this debate as I doubt whether any football league club would touch him.

    But this is not the case. What Ched and his buddy Clayton got up to was pretty sordid, scuzzy and immoral but let’s get real, it’s the type of thing which goes on at 3am in the morning in city centres up and down the country every Friday and Saturday night as vodka filled girls stagger out of nightclubs into the arms and beds of lager filled yobs.

    To my mind the case against Evans was extremely flimsy. The only logical interpretation of the acquit Clayton, convict Ched verdict was that the jury had concluded that the complainant was too drunk to be capable of giving consent to either guy, but that given Clayton had met her, bought pizza togther and she’d agreed to come back to his hotel arm in arm at 3am in the morning Clayton could reasonably have believed she had given consent whereas Ched who had sneaked into the hotel apparently in the hope of geting some “sloppy seconds” could not. I’m not surprised the jury saw a difference with respect to the second clause, but after watching the girl entering the hotel with Clayton going back to collect a pizza etc to conclude beyond reasonable doubt that she was too drunk to give consent to either guy is frankly rediculous.

    • Ben Sorin

      I actually agree that all rapes are not the same. But all rape is a serious crime and rape does not just mean physically and violently coercing someone into sex (as some Evans supporters seem to think) but having sex with them when they are unable to give consent. As for ‘unequivocally’ convicted – you are either convicted of an offence or found not guilty. Trying to differentiate between ‘equivocal’ and ‘unequivocal’ convictions is a recipe for disaster. I also largely agree with you on the likely reasons for the different verdicts against McDonald and Evans and think the distinction entirely justifiable. I disagree that you can conclude too much from grainy staccato footage of her walking in and out of the hotel. She was drunk enough to fall over in the kebab shop (where Evans walked over her), drunk enough to leave her bag in the kebab shop, drunk enough to be unsteady on her feet leaving the kebab shop, drunk enough that the hotel night porter noticed and testified she was heavily intoxicated, and drunk enough that on leaving the hotel, after having had intercourse with her, that McDonald told the night porter to ‘keep an eye’ on the woman. Finally I agree that what McDonald and Evans did was ‘sordid, scuzzy and immoral’ and I’m therefore surprised by your willingness to see him back on a football pitch when he has done nothing to acknowledge that – other that a half-hearted apology dragged out of him grudgingly yesterday after Oldham withdrew. If you’re right that Evans would be a role model and this type of ‘sordid, scuzzy and immoral’ behaviour is going on up and down the country (which I’m not convinced is true, but I’ll accept for argument’s sake) then it would seem particularly important that Evans is indeed not let back into football at the current time.

      • Dave

        The fact is there are only 3 peaple who know wheather concent was given or not . And everyone else is quessing .. Two men having sex with one girl doz happen a lot these days And also one man having sex with two wimen ….. I don’t beleave any of the 3 peaple involved beleaved Thay where committing a crime

        • Cymrawes

          But the jury and judge have decided.
          Game set and match until a successful appeal is fought.
          Shouldn’t be a financial problem -he is not like us- he can afford it.
          Or his dad in law can – ironically helped by the profits of WAG’s diamonds!

      • Mav Rick

        I think Ben you have more made a case for McDonald to be found guilty rather than Evans as McDonald saw her in numerous settings where she was in your words “drunk enough”. Evans saw none of that “drunk enough” behaviour, only meeting her in the hotel room, where he arguably could more likely beyond reasonable doubt have concluded that she was able to give consent.

        the ability to give consent or not to have intercourse with both men took place in the hotel bedroom, not in the kebab shop.

        • Ben Sorin

          Mav Rick. No, Evans did see her in the kebab shop but I can see your point. However I tend to agree with the inference Greg suggested above as to the jury’s logic as to what McDonald could reasonably believe about consent, and Evans could not. However this is guess work. We will never know the jury’s deliberations, or have all the evidence before the jury and appeal court. We can read the judgments and draw limited conclusions. I merely want to counter some of the assertions here that the verdict was obviously unfair or perverse. I don’t believe it was from the publicly available information and many of the points made on here raise concerns/questions about the verdict as if they were new points when in fact they were clearly already addressed in the two court hearings. The appeal court judgment and the original judgment strike me as giving rigorous, fair and balanced attention to a number of issues, including : why McDonald could be found not guilty and Evans guilty, in what circumstances someone is too drunk to consent, and the significance of the woman’s memory loss in relation to her consent.

          • Mav Rick

            Ben I do think the verdict by this jury is perverse, and unsafe, on the basis that in the circumstances of this individual case that there was a consent to have sex with one man but not with the other. The consent took place in the bedroom, not in the kebab shop or the hotel lobby. The agreement to go back to the hotel is not an agreement to have sex with any of the two men. Her capacity to give consent must have been the same for both men, as the sex appears to have been virtually at the same time.

            The judge’s direction does appear to indicate that he too expected the same verdict for both men “whilst your verdicts may very well be the same in the case, they might be different”. Apparently having now got to this stage, which the vast majority do not, there is now a 69% chance of the conviction being quashed.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            It appears that the jury found that she was too drunk to give valid consent to either. However the jury seems to have given the benefit of the doubt to MadDonald, probably because they thought he might have believed she had given consent as she agreed to go back to the hotel with him. But they were entitled to find that a Evans didn’t bother to consider the matter given that started having intercourse within an extremely short time of entering the room.

          • Mav Rick

            Eliza you too appear to be struggling with the consistency of this jury’s verdict. A reasonable doubt should find someone not guilty.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            No, I’m not struggling in the least. As the Court of Appeal stated, it was perfectly logical for the jury to give different verdicts because the circumstances of the two men’s cases were not the same. It was just about possible for McDonald to believe she was consenting even though she wasn’t; Evans, having conned his way into the room, only asked McDonald if he could “have a go on her” and then penetrated her without bothering to consider whether she was capable of consenting, could not possibly have had a reasonable belief that she did consent. And that’s on the basis of his own evidence and that of McDonald. There isn’t a reasonable doubt.

    • Dave

      You say it was a violent rape .. Why do you say that the girl carnt even remember so it carnt have been violent .. Can it … And if it was violent why was his mate not convicted ? You should read the statements and watch the vidios

      • Eliza Doolittle

        The statements and videos don’t demonstrate all the evidence and cross examination that took place in court that the jury saw.

      • Greg

        You misread me. Whether or not what happened was a “rape” no one has claimed that it was violent. Had it been a violent rape, then I would not be happy to see him return to a role model type role. As it is I think his behaviour was crude, scuzzy and deserving of being shamed and possibly sent on community service / fined but is frankly probably the sort of thinkg that 25% of our footballers have got up to at one time or another. There are plenty of older people here from nice middle class liberal backgrounds who need to get a reality check here. Sadly the typical moder footballer is not the Gary Lineker type.

        • Dave

          I agree with you partly … I feel this case should never have got to court .. Thay should all have had words of wisdom spoke to them … But now I feel sadly that ched evens will win his appeal .. And get a massive amount of commpanstion ..which some of will come from the tax payer …I feel the crooks in this case are the peaple that are stopping this man playing the game of football .. I herd the other day some top police officers saying he should never be allowed to go back to playing football .. These police should loose there jobs ..

  • John

    For a more balanced view of the issue read ‘the utterly ludicrous and petty campaign against Ched Evans’ in the Spectator. Fine journalism which, Phil, this is not.

  • Anonymous

    Ched Evans should not be treated differently to other people found guilty of rape. If an accountant, a lawyer, a teacher, a policeman, a pharmacist, or a doctor, or a public figure such as a senior civil servant or politician was found guilty of rape it is unlikely they would be permitted to return to their chosen profession, The above article poses an interesting question: is being a professional footballer any different to being a “plumber or a taxidermist”? I think many people would consider that it is. Even in lower divisions many football clubs have fanatical supporters, a significant number of whom are children. Supporters buy the players’ football shirts and follow their lives on social media. Even certain footballers’ wives are famous for simply being exactly that: footballers’ wives. It is important that Ched Evans is given the help and support he needs to find work, and that he is given the chance to contribute to, and integrate into society once again. However, he should not be permitted to return to work as a professional footballer. He should instead be given help to find alternative work, just as a lawyer, teacher, policeman, pharmacist, doctor or a public figure would have to.

    • Greg

      Are you suggesting that should Evans be hired by Oldham it will encourage young Oldham players to go out and be rapists? Common give me a break!! If anything having Evans playing football and therefore to some extent still in the public eye will provide youths with a valuable lesson about how in this PC world there is massive downside from not making absolutely sure that you have girl’s consent before you have sex with her.

      • Anonymous

        I take you point Greg, I wasn’t suggesting that Oldham employing Ched Evans would encourage young supporters to go out and become rapists. I just feel uncomfortable with a situation where as a society we allow a convicted rapist (or for that matter, a murderer, paedophile or a terrorist) to be placed on a pedastal, and treated as a hero, particularly by young people. If on appeal he is acquitted, then of course he should be allowed to play again.

  • miggsie

    Jean Hatchet is guilty of cyber bullying, which is listed as a hate crime, as such she should be arrested, named, tried and sent to prison, then we can all make a claim that she should never be allowed near a computer for the rest of her life. Someone else who should go to prison is the girl who was ‘raped’. Once you have read the tweets she wrote (and tried to delete) the day he got charged, you cannot think this is a person who has been through the trauma of rape, gloating and celebrating her ‘big win’, if they had been allowed to be used in the case he would’ve walked. This is about getting a large sum of compensation money from a rich young footballer, pure and simple. “I don’t remember anything” is the easiest get out there is when you know damn well what you did.

    • Cymrawes

      Did she ask for money? Must have missed that bit.

      • not my real name

        Do you think, C, that you are privvy to everything just because you read about the case in the papers? And then there is the question of: which papers did you read? The young woman in question is hardly a paragon of probity, restraint and integrity, is she?

        • Cymrawes

          Don’t read the papers.Hence the question!

          • not my real name

            Neither do I: it was a figure of speech. We all get the news from somewhere, though.

          • Cymrawes

            Not all influenced by it though. Not by any means! God help us if we were!!

          • not my real name

            I don’t believe you.

          • Cymrawes

            Gosh- I won’t sleep now…! Guess you’ll just have to ‘deal with it!’

          • not my real name

            Ask whoever you live with to conk you over the head. That should do it.

          • Cymrawes

            What an example of probity and restraint you are!

          • not my real name

            Yes. Glad you realize it but wouldn’t bother me if you didn’t.

          • Cymrawes

            Xxxxxxx

          • not my real name

            Dog slobber right back at you.

          • Cymrawes

            Will never trade insults sweetie . Nite nite! Lol

          • not my real name

            Don’t let the bats in your belfry bite.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            The victim has not made any financial claim. Does anyone seriously believe Evans would not have publicised if she had?

          • Dave

            The news papers glam things up anyway and twist and turn things to sell more papers …it seems the police do the same so Thay can get more funding… When my 13 year old nice saw the copper at her school looking at porn on the school computer .. Her life was made hell ..

    • Eliza Doolittle

      You clearly know nothing of the legal definition of a hate crime.

    • Dave

      Yes scanless that girl bragging about her big win and getting a pink mini ..sounding like she’s won at bingo .. Could she have lied about the consent just to get her compo and her pink mini knowing he was a rich footballer

      • Eliza Doolittle

        She hadn’t claimed compensation.

        • Dave

          Dos that not worrie you ? If she tryed claiming compensation now after her bragging about how much she was going to get in her tweets .. The judge did fine the peaple who said her name online .. And I think she got almost £6000

          • Eliza Doolittle

            That’s hardly compensation for having people hound and vilify her and having to change address five times and change her name, is it?

    • Golden Fleece

      Absolutely ,this feminst pig hatchet needs to be sent down.
      When Ched gets his case cleared the lying girl should be sent down for 20 years .
      How foolish and gullible are the people who believe the ‘i dont remember card’ ,a 5 year old could work it out

  • borishater

    Irrespective of whether or not he is guilty of rape, and I accept the way things stand at this moment in time according to the law-of-the-land he is. However this discussion is about obeying the law-of-the-land, which currently says he is free to play professional football, and a football club is acting within-the-law if they employ him. But the feminist mob then resorts to threats and intimidation to impose their own twisted mob rule. Why are the police and other law enforcement agencies not taking action against the feminist mob?

    • Cymrawes

      Trouble is – at the moment, he is guilty of rape.
      Suggestion: appeal ( he can afford it or Preston’s can), clear his name, prove all the trolls wrong and play with whom he likes.
      Result.
      Just be dignified and lie low for the moment.
      Plenty of time.

      • borishater

        Point taken you make sense, but it is annoying that the feminist mob can ignore the-law-of-the-land, and nothing is done about it.

        • Cymrawes

          Believe you me – the law of the land is very specious……

        • Eliza Doolittle

          The law of the land does not say that he has an automatic right to go back to a job as a footballer, nor that sponsors have to support clubs that employ him. It does say that boycotting sponsors and petitioning are perfectly legal.

          • borishater

            But making death and rape threats ARE NOT LEGAL.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Who says they are? But going on about the threats that OA weren’t bothered enough to report to the police doesn’t change the fact that Evans is a rapist who should not be employed in a post where he will be a role model to, and have frequent direct contact with, impressionable young boys and girls.

          • borishater

            In YOUR OPINION, NOT THE-LAW-OF-THE-LAND. If these threats were made to you or the rest of the feminist mob, you’d never shut up about it.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Nope, the law is the law, not a matter of opinion. Certainly I would object to having threats made against me. I object to threats being made against anyone. So what?

          • FedUp

            It is YOU who has decided that he is a role model. He is a footballer. There are many, many professions out there and many of them where you could argue that people consider those within them to be role models. Sad that you need a ‘role model’. Personally I just see them as people who have different skills to I. As for impressionable boys and girls – I would suggest that they would admire him for his footballing skills, nothing more. Again, it is YOU suggesting otherwise

          • Eliza Doolittle

            I didn’t decide it, it is just a fact. How do you imagine football clubs sell all those shirts and posters if it were not the case that young people idolise and revere footballers? I don’t need a role model, I don’t particularly think that young people need them, but the fact is that they have them. It would be great if impressionable young boys and girls would admire rapist footballers for their footballing skills and nothing more, but get real, for goodness sake. Where do you think those chants amongst Sheffield footballers came from about Evans fucking who he likes? Were they praising up his football skills?

  • Mav Rick

    The man has been treated like the most hated man in Britain. I have read the legal transcripts available and Evans has a case to take to appeal. I agree with Steve Bruce and admire his guts to speak out as there has been almost no discussion of the facts of the trial in this case in the media as nobody has had the courage to cast any doubt on the conviction, for fear of offending the victim. The media have treated this man abonimably, and have not allowed for the potential,of a wrong conviction.

    • Eliza Doolittle

      Given that his attempts to appeal have been turned down twice and he was convicted largely on the basis of his own admissions, that’s hardly surprising.

  • Lord Taliesin

    I used to think lesbians couldn’t get a man because they were fat and ugly. But reading this lot I reckon no man could put up with their blether.

    • Cymrawes

      Taliesin – paid a bod mor ffol! Lol:-)

      • Lord Taliesin

        ;o)

        • not my real name

          A winking pig. Who would’ve thought?

          • Cymrawes

            Sweet though!

    • Ben Sorin

      I’m not convinced you ever thought that much, but it’s clear you stopped some time ago

  • Brian1290

    Excellent article. This situation highlights again the power that internet and social media have given to extreme opinion holders. The moderate tolerant voice does not get heard. Create a petition and have my family members threatened with rape because I have dared to express a tolerant counter position ? No thanks!! Those moderates with strong principles (eg OAFC chairman) will always lose because moderates are a silent majority.

    Other examples exist. Should law abiding high street coffee shop chains pay the amount of tax that the social networks deem is appropriate, or what the law of the land says they should? You don’t like the law, write to your MP.

    The internet is an excellent tool for open heathly debate ( such as this comment chain) but does make mob rule/mobbing too easy.

    • Cymrawes

      You know – some of us are moderates. Even Taliesin is a pussycat really …; !

  • Strabo

    Well said, Mr Liddle!

  • Dave

    I bet he would give up all the money just to play the game ..

    • Cymrawes

      And that of ‘Prestons’ !

      • Dave

        Yes you are right

      • Dave

        And what about the mps in the 80s and Thay suspect there could have been murders of under age boys .. Maybe Thay could put ched evens as chairman of that sex abbuse inquiry .. As Thay carnt get anyone else to do it .. And he’s out of work .. Now because of all the dogooders saying sex when your drunk is criminal affence

  • Hateshitjournalism

    You idiot. How Has he been rehabilitated if he won’t accept he is guilty. Do you know the conviction rate for rape is 6%, pretty tough to be wrongly convicted.

    He could have accept his guilt, apologised and none of this would have happened. He lost his own career by not being rehabilitated or Remorseful.

    I certainly wouldnt want my children thinking it’s ok to be accused of rape, convicted, serve time, make a girls life hell, chase her out our town, refuse to accept guilt and go back to a business as usual.

    You idiot, there is not investigative journalism here just shit uneducated ideas.

    • Hateshitjournalism

      Ps he is on the sex offenders register. Are you telling me you think everyone on that regiater has been rehabilitated because they have served their time?

      Why have the register at all then?!?! If they don’t pose a risk?!

      • FedUp

        There are plenty on the register who don’t pose a risk. Alike all knee jerk legislation (the dangerous dogs act being another great example) it doesn’t achieve what it was originally set up to do. There are 16 year old boys on there who slept, with full consent, with their 15 year old girlfriends. Your not telling me that that was what the sex offenders register was wanting to really record?

    • Greg

      Having looked at the evidence from a neutral perspective, I would agree with him that he should not have been found guilty or at the very least could not be thought so “beyond reasonable doubt”. I suspect that many would have told him that having served his time, his only realistic chance that the PC brigade would not sobotage his chance of playing again was to bow down in humble contrition. Maybe he is foolish not to fake contrition but at least he’s being honest.

      • Ben Sorin

        So do you think Evans’ apology yesterday was fake contrition?

        • Cymrawes

          In true ‘Benidorm’ style-‘ohhhhh yessss! ‘ .

        • Greg

          As far as I can see he (or rather his lawyers) were trying to put out something that looked a bit like an appology without admitting that there was a crime that needed to be appologizing for.

      • Hateshitjournalism

        Greg,

        Don’t you think it is the judicial system and court of appeals place to decide if he has been wrongly convicted? This case has not been overturned, he is guilty.

        Why is that so hard to accept? A jury of our peers convicted him on the evidence they had, with him given the opportunity to defend himself and he was convicted, he has not won any appeal, so he and his peers have taken to the Internet and tried to find a non legal way to over turn his conviction through public opinion.

        Why is there so much doubt in our judicial system? Maybe he doesn’t understand the term rape, would you want to have sex with a girl who was very drunk? Would you be absolutely sure she wanted to do it? He has a girlfriend but a very drunk girl is (apparently) saying yes, your friend has just had sex with her (consensual or not), you really don’t know how much she has drank and your mates are trying to film it through the window… Why would you say yes? Does that not show a lack of respect of the girl at the very least? I know my husband wouldn’t think it appropriate to have sex with her in that position; he would put her in a taxi and make sure she got home safely.

        You can say without a doubt you would be happy for your daughter to meet him on a night out after she had a few to many drinks, she lost her friends in a bar and be sure he would get her home safely? Mmmm…

        • Greg

          No I don’t have much faith in our judicial system. I think there are quite a few miscarriages of justice and that this is clearly one of them. One of the core principles of our justice system is “beyond reasonable doubt” rather than “on the balance of probabilities”. Here we have a case which has been extensively discussed with perhaps hundreds of thouands of people taking the trouble to look at the evidence in some detail. my guess is something like a third of those people have concluded that he was not guilty of rape. With so many people pretty convinced that he is innocent, how can the majority validly claim that he is guilty “beyond reasonable doubt”????

        • Golden Fleece

          This happens every weekend up and down the country ,what are men supposed to do – get a breathalyser out and say oh i must take the reading before we have consentual sex.
          Doubt in our judicial system – oh yes
          Google the number of miscarraiges of justice in the uk there has been MANY

        • Lawrence13

          Yes the jury system was very good with Tony Martin

    • Golden Fleece

      Your the frigging idiot -if you didnt commit crime would you apologise for something you didnt do.
      The rate is low thats why the police will go to any length to try and get a conviction.
      Also how many bogus rape claims are there every year
      The stats proved that after this case rape claims went up totally out of proportion
      Ched was an easy target here its bloody obvious.

    • Lawrence13

      Look if Evans is guilty of rape because a woman went of with a total stranger McDonald back to a hotel where she was introduced to Evans, she then willingly has sex with McDonald but can’t remember any of it although she remembers exactly what she had to drink. If he is guilty of that then men between the ages of 16 -35 over the last 50 years should all be imprisoned for doing things very similar to that for at least once in their lives . What get me is the people wanting to vilify Evans say nothing about the accepted porn that is shown daily to our kids through the media and music. Look a Miley Cyrus carrying out dance moves with symbols that leave nothing to the imagination and in front of a pre pubescent girl audience at places like the O2 ,hypocrisy knows no bounds with the hateful left

      • Eliza Doolittle

        The jury’s verdict demonstrated that she was not legally capable of having sex willingly with anyone. If other men have had sex with extremely intoxicated women who have no idea what is going on then yes, they have committed rape. If you go to a bedroom with a woman who is so drunk that she fell over in a pizza parlour so that you had to step over her, left her handbag there, then staggered along the street stopping only to squat down and urinate in public – it really isn’t too hard to work out that she is in no state to know what she is doing and that if you have sex with her you will be raping her.

  • charlie888888

    Is there a petition I can sign condemning this mob rule hounding of an individual?
    In a civilized country it is laws juries and judges that decide guilt and punishment.
    Guilty, punished. Done.
    There is no statute preventing him working.
    If one tried to create one, there are worse crimes than a drunken rape which would have to be included. The list of jobs not allowed would be complex. This is why the UN has conventions against cruel and unusual punishments which is surely what Chad Evans is being subjected to.

    • Ben Sorin

      If you feel so strongly then why don’t you start one, it’s easy enough to do. And you are right, there is no statute preventing him working. And also none that says he has to be allowed to play professional football again.

    • Cymrawes

      No Charlie -just the law. Our law. And yes it is an ass sometimes – but he can use his-or WAG diamonds money- to appeal.He is not like us mere mortals financially.

      • Dave

        The joke is it’s us pessents who pay for the law .. ..it’s the rich who take the pea out of it .. I feel if someone in power or public sector commits a serious criminal affence .. Thay should loose there retirement fund

      • WFC

        he was a lower league player. They earn a small fraction of the amounts paid to top league players.

        They aren’t badly paid in comparison with other jobs – around £50k a year, on average – but they are hardly dripping in diamonds.

  • sixmilesanhour

    Excellent article. Thank you.

  • Emon Khan

    Ched Evans is entitled to seek work and Oldham Athletic are entitled to employ him. However, people are allowed to protest this, but, of course, there should not be a mob mentality with threats and abuse.

    It is not a witch hunt. A witch hunt is when Ched Evans’ victim has had to change her name 5 times as a result of his supporters, cannot see her family and her family not know where she is, so not to risk her safety. In addition, as much as people think Ched Evans is being vilified, she is by his website, which has been set up by fiancee’s father. The same fiance he elected to cheat on. Pretty bizarre.

    He was sentenced for a crime, which has a 7% conviction rate. Not only that, but he appealed and this was declined. He is taking his final option which is the CCRC. The CCRC reviews 17000 cases per year, recommends 500 for retrial and 350 of these lead to a change in conviction. That’s 2%.

    It is not straight forward whether he should or should not go back to football. I agree footballers are not role models, but clubs think they are. In fact, Oldham Athletic have a long history of community service, including having footballers speak to young men and boys about sex. That sounds like something from Brass Eye, but is true.

    It does not matter to me whether he is a bad or good man. His crime defines him. The fact is this is a problem for football and it is up to football to have a code of conduct. It has nothing to do with how much he earns, but there’s the public nature of his job that makes me wonder whether he shouldn’t at least wait for the outcome of the CCRC review.

    I understand why people think he should have a chance, but it makes me wonder whether any of you could go back to your job if you had a rape conviction. Probably not.

  • Anonymous

    In order to be not guilty of rape, the law not only requires that Ched Evans actually believed that the victim had given her consent (the “subjective” limb of the test), but also that it was reasonable for Ched Evans to have held that belief (the “objective limb” of the test). It is this second limb of the test in particular that the jury may have had difficulty with.

    In considering the second limb of the test, the jury would have had a statutory obligation to have regard to all the circumstances, including any steps Ched Evans took to ascertain whether the victim gave her consent. This might include, for example, whether the victim invited Ched Evans to the hotel room or whether he just turned up; whether the victim had been drinking or not; whether Ched Evans and the victim had discussed that they were going to have sex earlier that evening etc.

    Given the circumstances, it may be that the jury found it difficult to reach a not guilty verdict, on the basis that any belief held by Ched Evans that the victim had consented was, from an objective point of view, unreasonable. To put it another way, it is possible Ched Evans did genuinely believe that the victim had provided consent. However, in law, this alone is not enough. The question is: was that belief reasonable given the circumstances? From a legal perpsective those are the sort of issues the jury would have had to consider at the time.

    Some of the information on Ched Evans own website appears to inadvertently provide support to the argument that any belief he may have held that the victim had given her consent was objectively ureasonable. If I was Ched Evans’ legal advisor I would carefully review the website to ensure that he was not unintentionally incriminating himself.

    • Guest

      .

      • Anonymous

        Perhaps there is. I was just using the word as a legal term of art. I wasn’t making any judgment as to whether she was a “victim” in any other sense or on Ched Evans’ culpability.

    • Ben Sorin

      Very helpful post. One thing to add in to the mix is that the jury only had McDonald and Evans’ accounts that they had gained the victim’s consent and Evans testimony was questionable in several respects which may have led the jury to question the reliability of his own account. Evans booked the hotel room but both he and McDonald stayed at his family home after leaving. So why book a hotel room at all if not for planning to take a woman/women back to, as the prosecution contended? Evans alternative explanation was not convincing. Secondly Evans explanation of why he went to the hotel on getting McDonald’s text that he had ‘got a bird’ was that he wanted to see who the woman was. This is not a credible explanation, the far more likely reason being that it was shorthand for come over to the hotel for group sex, as the prosecution contended. This is further supported by Evans brother and friend hanging outside the hotel bedroom window trying to film what was going on on a phone. Finally Evans and McDonald contradicted each other on who asked the vicitim’s consent for Evans to join in, each saying the other had asked.

      • Golden Fleece

        Dont forget Evans and Macdonald were probably drunk also.
        Have you never gone out had a few too many and changed your plans.
        It was a bit sordid but im sure a drug taking ,regular heavy drinking wild child was well up for it all.
        Rape – never in a million years.
        Eavsn was stitched up by police having to hit targets simple as.

      • Greg

        I don’t disagree that Ben’s conjecture as to the footballers’ motivations etc are plausible, however though this may impact our MORAL assessment of the events (and I don’t think anyone here is claiming that the behavior of all concerned was not prety sordid) it should imact the LEGAL analysis. In my view it is highly plausible that the jury did infact conflate these two aspects and that the whole sordidity or the events combined with the distaste for the arrogance and attitude twoards women by many footballers including these two was what lea to the guilty verdict.

        Anonymous has provided an excellent clarification of the second elememt of the consent question. But let’s not forget that this element only comes into play in the event that the jury has concluded that she either didn’t give consent (and let’s remember the girl is saying she cant remember whether she did or not) or that she was so drunk that she was in no position to do so even if she did.

        • Eliza Doolittle

          On Evans’ own version of events he conned his way into the room, asked McDonald if he could “have a go on” the victim, and started having sex within a minute or two of entering the room. There was evidence from numerous sources that she was too drunk to give valid consent, and on that version of events Evans made no effort whatsoever to establish whether she had a clue what was going on or whether she was capable of consenting – in fact, on that evidence, he didn’t care whether she consented or not. The verdict is clearly correct.

  • Karl Massey

    An intelligent well written piece but the one point I’d like to address is that at no point did I offer Oldham Athletic the sum of £2m, or indeed any amount to cover the shortfall in income should sponsors withdraw. This “story” was originally published in The Independent and is from an unknown source. It is totally untrue and without foundation. Thank you.

    • Ben Sorin

      I would like you to address why you are funding a website which encourages the hounding of the rape victim in this case?

      • Golden Fleece

        There is no website that encourages hounding of the victim ,there is a website that lets people make up their own mind on viewing the only piece of real evidence available.
        You might learn something if you watch it .

        • Ben Sorin

          If you mean the video, I’ve watched it and there is little I learned from it. What do you think it shows? And really the website doesn’t encourage hounding of the victim? What is the purpose of prominently displaying the alleged tweets, if not to impugn the trustworthiness of the victim? The publishing a letter purporting to be from a rape victim which states” this girl is the reason why me and plenty other girls who are VICTIMS don’t get justice. ” “Girls like this ruin lives, girls like this mess things up for girls like me”. And ” This girls mind is screwed up and I hope she cannot sleep at night”. No, Golden Fleece those things don’t encourage the bad mouthing and blaming of the victim at all.

          • Golden Fleece

            the video shows someone who aint comatosed drunk walking very steadily in a straight line bending down picking up a box in very high heels.
            If you cant she shes fully capable by watching it you need to go to specsavers.

          • Ben Sorin

            If she was ‘fully capable’ why did she fall over in the kebab shop? Why did she leave her handbag in the shop? Why was she unsteady on her feet walking away from the kebab shop – and why, given there is CCTV footage of her unsteady on her feet, does the website you’re so fond of not put this footage up for people to ‘decide for themselves’. Presumably as it doesn’t tally with the character assassination job on the victim the website wants to effect. Why did the night porter testify the victim was heavily intoxicated? Why did Clayton McDonald tell the porter to ‘keep an eye’ on the victim when he left the hotel? And why are you so convinced of Evans’ innocence despite the verdicts of two courts?

          • Golden Fleece

            Where is the kebab shop footage ?
            Comeon clever shite point me in the direction on you tube ?
            She walks stone cold sober into and out of the hotel
            The night porter didnt testify she was intoxicated it was the receptionist ,probably got a back hander for saying so on the promise of the when i win big tweets.
            She has history for this type of event,there are witnness statements that verify this.
            A 6 year old kid could work this out

          • Ben Sorin

            That was my question to you – why the CCTV footage of the woman in the kebab shop and just after is not on the Evans is innocent web site. We know it exists and both the appeal court judgment as well as The Evans is innocent web site on which you -selectively – rely for all your information confirm this. It’s not on youtube because, my friend, it’s court evidence not a pop video. And you’re wrong the night porter testified the woman was “extremely drunk” (read the appeal court judgment for goodness sake). Interesting that you’re so convinced Evans is innocent but are so poorly acquainted with the facts of the case. I think a 6 year old would be better equipped for jury service than you.

          • Golden Fleece

            Look numpty you are preaching there is kebab shop footage
            Where is it ?
            Why is it not anywhere to view
            Surely the mob would be showing this stuff as more fuel to slay Ched
            Ched Evans is displaying probably the only footage available
            The woman looks incredibly in control in that footage bizarre the other so called footage displays the contrary .

            And if it was rape and the victim was unconcious why quote from the trail tarnscript ”He waited outside the room for a while and concluded from the noises that he could hear within the room that a couple were having sexual intercourse. No other concerns were raised in his mind.”

            I presume you were 1 of the idiots on the jury
            like i said a 6 year could work out what happened

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Guess what, the CPS doesn’t put its video evidence online for the public to gawp at. The interesting thing is that copies of all the video evidence were supplied to Evans and his team in order to help them prepare his defence, but they seem to have omitted to post the kebab shop footage. Why do you imagine that might be?
            The other interesting thing is that those responsible for the website are now being investigated for contempt of court for posting that evidence plus an identifiable picture of the victim.

          • Greg

            The one thing that EVERYONE is agreed on is that she was drunk. But sadly the same can be said for hundreds of thousands of women in our country every weekend probably thousands of whom end up in bed with someone they have bairly met with very vague memories of what happened when they wake up and with a massive hangover in the morning. It;s pretty obvious that Ched and Clayton genuinely believed that she was agreeing and consenting to sex, if they had thought they were doing anything wrong they would not have booked the room in their own name, admitted to the police that they had had sex (without such an admission there would have been no evidence at all that they had had sex). No if one looks at the CCTV footage – which bizzarely the appeal judges didnt actually bother to do!!! many people including myself will conclude that its pretty damn obvious that though drunk she was fully able to make a decsion whether she wanted to have sex or not. There are also many other people who have looked at the same footage and concluded that she was too drunk to concent. I have a hard time understandig how they come to this view but no matter, To convict someone of rape and lock him away for 2,5 years and restrict his freedom of employment for his entire life and in this case destoy his career, the law quite sensibly says that the eidence against the defendant must be BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT. Whether or not you conclude that on the balance of probabilities he might be guilty how on earth can anyone conclude that the case is BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT when something like a third of the country thinks its pretty damn obvious he wasnt guilty.

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Have you seen all the footage and heard the evidence of the people who actually saw her at the time? How on earth do you claim to be better able to assess her state than the jury who did?
            And on what basis do you claim that Evans reasonably – and I stress reasonably – believed she was consenting? He entered her within a minute or two of coming into the room. On his own evidence he didn’t stop to check whether she was consenting or capable of doing so.

        • Eliza Doolittle

          Please tell me you don’t believe the nonsense that that is the only piece of evidence or even the only piece of video evidence. You really are very credulous indeed if that is the case.

          • Mellowman

            We have been told that there is CCTV footage of her stumbling over out side the kebab shop, squatting down outside the nightclub etc. We also know hat she sent an accurately typed text to a friend and paid for chose and paid for the pizza fishing the correct amount of change from her purse. The one thing that EVERYONE agrees on is that she was intoxicated. The issue is whether by the time that she was back at the hotel room saying yeah to sex, was she BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT sufficiently drunk to lack awareness of what was going on and therefore the capacity to be deemed to have consented. This is a very tough thing to prove and rightly so because a young man’s liberty and right to pursue his career depends on it. Quite frankly even if the prior video did show her completely smashed and stumbling around rather than as the defense explained tripping over once or twice on high healed shoes if should not be enough to convict or even charge the footballers because the Hotel CCTV footage taken maybe only 5 or 10 minutes before she was having sex was the best evidence we have of her state at the time she is said to of agreed to have sex. And by that stage she seems to have sobered up quite a bit.

  • moraviandwarf

    He’s probably a sacrificial lamb to those who (Correctly) believe many footballers are above the law with their expensive lawyers and club backing when they do something appalling.

  • Mellowman

    This is a very sensible article though I think one could dig deeper into the ultimate cause of this fiasco which has served to ruin several young lives (Ched, the girl and to a lesser extent Clayton), not to mention the various celebrities who have been called to resign / snowed with hate mail for suggesting perhaps he isn’t totally guilty or the Ched supporters who the police have tried to convict (and consequently add to the Sex offenders list with all the implications, for retweeting the girls name) . The immediate blame should be laid at the police and CPS. Don’t forget the girl had no intention of reporting a rape initially, she claims she can’t remember anything and at best would have had a hazy memory of a sordid night out which I have no doubt whatsoever was only one of a series of similarly sordid escapades she had got herself into. She only contacted them because she thought her handbag had been stolen – infact she had left it at the pizza place I believe. So it was the police that persuaded her that she may have been raped. Once she realized that this particular sordid night out might be construed as having been raped by two semi famous footballers she reacted like a typical 19 year old excitedly tweeting her friends about how she can buy them matching pink mini coopers and exotic holidays once she had “won big” .

    Google “Ched Evans tweets” for the full texts

    Sadly, even for the girl this has backfired tremendously as she has quite outrageously been remorselessly hounded by idiots purporting to support Evans.

    We then must ask how the police turned from Dixon of Dock Green sensible social problem solvers to the cause for so much heartache for all concerned and it turns out that the drivers are performance driven “targets” combined of course with the pervasive PC driven attitudes towards sexual crimes.

    • WFC

      “Sadly, even for the girl this has backfired tremendously as she has quite outrageously been remorselessly hounded by idiots purporting to support Evans.”

      Which, of course, would never have happened but for the huge song and dance which has been created by the twitch-hunters.

      • Greg

        Exactly, the witch hunting mob are just as responsible for ruining the girls life as they are Ched’s. Had the girl not happened to leave her handbag in the pizza parlour and called the police to report it stolen all of this utter stupidity would have been avoided. The appeal court judge’s “No force had been used on the complainant and no injury had been caused in the course of the rape. But the longterm psychological consequences to her could not be ignored.” is rediculous. If the police hadn’t persuaded her that what happened to her could be construed as rape, she would have thought of it as yet another blurrily remembered wild night out in Rhyl. If she had not found out that it was 2 overpaid footballers, I very much doubt she would have been bothered about persuing the matter, but as soon as she found that out she saw ££ signs and tweeted her buddies about taking them on exotic holidays and getting matching pink Mini Coopers. Sadly for her, once the boys in blue and CPS and media got hold of it the whole thing span wildly out of control and dreams of an out of court settlement involving mini coopers were quickly replaced by disgusting hate mail and threats etc from some of the millions of guys who feel alienated and disenfranchised by the Politically Correct farce our society has descended into.

      • Eliza Doolittle

        Nonsense. The witch hunting of the victim started with the trial verdict, years before the recent petitions.

        • WFC

          Purlease! Very few people outside their immediate circles would have heard of, or care about, either, before the twitch-hunters got going.

    • Ben Sorin

      How many similarly sordid escapades had McDonald and Evans engaged in? Have you no doubt whatsoever that they had behaved similarly before? And what of the tweets? Assuming they are true -which is an assumption, how do you know she hadn’t bought a lottery ticket and was referring to what she would do with the winnings? And even if she were referring to the compensation money – so what? It doesn’t say anything about her veracity. Several years ago I was mugged and beaten unconscious while walking home. I claimed criminal compensation and was entirely honest in my account of what had haappend. Yet while I was waiting for the compensation decision I did discuss with my partner what I might do with the money if the claim were successful – a pretty normal thing to do I would say. And by the way, the criminal compensation the woman was entitled to would have nothing to do with the status of the alleged perpetrators : she would not have got more compensation because McDonald and Evans were footballers. The compensation is based on the crime and the impact of it on the victim. The fact that some people-including the evans is innocent web site managers-are making the tweets out to be hidden evidence which point strongly towards so Evans’ innocence is lamentable, and actually suggests to me that his grounds for further appeal are likely very weak indeed.

      • Greg

        I’ve no doubt M and E have a long record of similarly sordid escapades as well. Anyone who ventures out onto our city streets after the clubs close every Friday and Saturday night can be in little doubt that this sortof thing is going on up and down the country veery week. Sadly most of the people involved in such activity are either semi iliterate or got way more interesting thigs to do with their lives than comment on internet forums. Therefore we tend to see a very biased sample of coments from people who grew up in way more conservative times and who are happily tucked in bed by 10.30 pm with a cup of cocoa.

        Such people may think all this type of behaviour is lamentable and i wouldn’t disagree, but its not worth destroying young lives by locking hundreds of thousands up and putting them on sex offenders lists.

  • Lawrence13

    The thing is Rod just of the top of my head Marlon King same level player has been to prison three times for offences like sexual assault, physical assault all on a female and motoring offences. Yet the media frenzy was nowhere to be seen. If you go to the BBC on-line news and search Marlon King you get hardly any mention of his misdemeanours in fact you get (seriously) Ched Evans. Of course it goes without saying that if you search Ched Evans you get wall to wall articles, ten to the page about him.
    I’ve paid no intention to the case until driving to work on Monday morning listening to R4 they never stopped banging on about it, that day and all through the week. it was by Thursday am I thought this is ridiculous , its a left wing witch hunt. . I believe all of us not on the left would love to see far stiffer sentences for violent rape crimes and so on and even Capital punishment for indisputable murder so I don’t take Ched Evans and his supposed rape crime lightly so I had to find out what all the fuss was about
    Did he rape
    was he violent
    what were the facts
    Well when you look into it the whole thing looks like a miscarriage of justice. But you can make your own mind up. However if he was guilty of rape then he has done his full time by refusing to admit guilt I believe and therefore that is the end of it. yet the media with the tone set by the left with that idiot of an MP for Eltham SE London Clive Efford who presides over one of the more crime ridden areas in the UK was on R4 demanding that Evans never be allowed to play again.
    I could go on as I have a theory on how the media present crime based on the colour of the victim and the colour of the perpetrator but I’ll leave that or now.

  • Guy Grundy

    Rod’s nailed it…

    Thank God there’s a least one journalist capable of clear reasoned thinking and happy to take on the ( orchestrated) baying Mob.

  • hugh_36

    Given a football player obviously represents his team and in the case of a team like Derby, the town itself to at least some extent you can see why having a convicted rapist as a representative might cause some disquiet.

    • FedUp

      But that is for the team and management to decide – not the lynch mob who have nothing to do with either party, probably don’t even follow football let alone Derby and have decided that his original sentence was not sufficient

      • Eliza Doolittle

        Ultimately it was the sponsors who decided this – as is their right.

        • FedUp

          And if it hadn’t been for the lynch mob who get over emotional and think the worst when they hear the word rape and believe that they shouldn’t use their skills back in society, am sure the sponsors wouldn’t have been that bothered. Indeed, Oldham clearly stated that the reason for their decision was the disgusting threats by some of those same so-called do-gooders which led to that decision

  • carl jacobs

    All the rationalizations are on display in this thread:

    1. The “She was asking for it” excuse,

    2. The “I know better than the court, and he shouldn’t have been convicted” excuse.

    3. The “He swears he is innocent, and when has a guilty man ever lied about his innocence.” excuse.

    4. The “OK, maybe people can get legitimately upset about a rapist on a football club, but it’s a dumb thing to get upset about.” excuse.

    5. The “What about all these other people? If they got away with it, why shouldn’t he?” excuse.

    6. The “Have you checked out her sexual history? No way she was raped.” excuse.

    7. The “Just because he’s a rapist, that’s no reason to refuse to hire him … unless of course we think there might be good reasons not to hire him .. but only if we get to determine what those reasons can be.” excuse. Yes, that excuse doesn’t work too well. Best to stay away from it, and get back to “She was asking for it.”

    8. The “It’s all a man-hating Feminist plot” excuse.

    9. The “He’s done his time (sort of), and people should never ever ever ever ever hold his conviction against him ever again because then we can’t achieve rehabilitation” excuse.

    10. The “You’re all a bunch of morally superior fascists!” excuse.

    No morally superior judgmentalism in that last example. Not at all.

    • Golden Fleece

      Hes innocent Zip it bird brain

      • carl jacobs

        So then. I guess we don’t need all those courts and police officers and prosecutors and stuff. We can just trust to your pronouncement. Much more efficient I suppose.

        • Golden Fleece

          The judgemnet of a bird would be better than the present system .
          Come on dumbass would you honestly trust a drugged drunkard who says she cant remember at selected times .
          Or would you trust the police who cover up what they feel when it suits them
          Get real boy

          • carl jacobs

            Hrmmmm. Should I trust the police? You mean, as opposed to (say) you? Let me think about this for a minute. Should I trust the courts and the police and the prosecutor? Should I trust some guy on the Internet who thinks “dumbass” is a credible line of argument?

            That’s a tough question. Can I buy a vowel first?

          • Golden Fleece

            Remember what happened to Barry George eh?
            Lets hope you dont get setup 1 day eh?

          • Eliza Doolittle

            The thing is, Barry George didn’t admit to conning his way into a hotel room and penetrating within a minute of entering the room a woman to whom he was a total stranger, without bothering to establish whether she was capable of consenting. There is a bit of a difference.

    • Mellowman

      No 2 He shouldn’t have been convicted. Take a look at all the evidence and apply the “beyond reasonable doubt” test. Then even if YOU think he is guilty, ask yourself if it can really be “beyond reasonable doubt” if maybe a third of the people who have looked at the evidence, not just football fans but even Government Ministers (before they were censored and doubtless told their political future was in jeopardy.) are pretty convinced he’s not guilty

      • Eliza Doolittle

        Have you seen and heard all the evidence that was before the jury in this case? Were you in court during the trial and therefore able to observe their demeanour when they gave evidence and how they dealt with cross examination? Twelve jury members plus the judge found that he was guilty beyond reasonable doubt. On what basis do you claim to know better?

        • Mellowman

          No neither I nor as far as we know, anyone else here was on the jury. However the facts (as opposed to the interpretation of the facts and the moral assessment) of the case are actually remarkably simple and well documented. and well summarised by the Appeal Judges. The girl claims (implausibly in my view but nevertheless that is her position), that she remembers nothing between leaving the bar and waking up at 11.30am alone in Premier Inn. The only evidence that any sex went on at all is (1) the footballers statement that consensual sex had happened and (2) the testimony by the night porter that listening behind the door after Evans had gone up he heard the sound of a male and female voice that he interpreted as having sex. Had the boys really thought they had raped someone, all they would have needed to say is “no comment” or ” I can’t remember what happened either” and the whole matter would have been dropped as there would be no case to answer.

          Given that the girl cannot remember whether or not she did say yes to either of both guys, the whole case boils down to the question of (1) was she beyond reasonable doubt so drunk that she did not have the capacity to make a decision and (2) even if is sure beyond reasonable doubt that she was so drunk as to have lost the capacity to make decision, might one or both of the accused have reasonably believed that was in a position to consent?

          So the key question is: How drunk was she? Only 3 people were in the room, the 2 accused plus the girl who can’t remember. The Nightporter heard a male and female voices seeming to be having sex so we can be pretty confident she was not unconscious or passed out. The latest independent evidence is the hotel CCTV footage taken around 5 minutes before Clayton was having sex with her and maybe 15 minutes before Ched arrived. Plus the assessment of the Nightporter who said she was “extremely drunk” – without as far as has been indicted elaborating exactly what he considered to be “extremely” . The Hotel CCTV footage is of course (for now at least) online. She is walking around unaided and then arm i arm with Clayton, she retrieve a pizza that Clayton left om the pavement, she is wearing borrowed high wedges not so easy to walk in if too drunk but nevertheless doesnt fall over. In my view this, the evidence closest to the incident makes it ridiculous to conclude that beyond reasonable doubt that she was too drunk to consent. Now I understand that there was quite abit of further evidence, CCTV footage from the Kebab shop and from her approaching Clayton and exiting the nightclub, where she stumbles and sqats etc. But so what? Everyone admits that she was drunk, the issue is whether bythe time the incident takes places we can be completely sure that did not have the capacity to make a choice. During this time she did mage to choose a pizza, pay with the correct change , send a text to a friend transfer from the back seat to the front seat of the taxi when requested. If one examines the legislation it is very clear that ther mere fact of being drunk and perhaps making uninhibited or rash decisions is not enough to invalidate consent, one has to lack the capacity t o make a decision. Of course this is a grey area where its difficult to draw a clear demarcation but to me this is someone who can barely walk straight without falling down , lacks awareness of whats around them etc. I think the jury’s misinterpretation of this line is the ore of the problem in this case. Sadly it may well be very difficult for Ched to overturn as what is needed to conduct a successful appeal is new evidence, a mishandled case etc not merely the jury messing up. For reasons best known to themselves the Appeal judges declined to look at any of the evidence to assess how drunk she was and just accepted the judge/jury’s assessment of how drunk she was. I understand the legal thinking behind that decision, but nevertheless think it was a major mistake firstly because an innocent guy spent a coupe of years in prison and will suffer extraordinary penalty in terms of lost earnings (probably something like £5m) secondly because this has become a case with which millions of people have soem knowledge of witha very sizeable minority pretty convinced that there has been a serious miscarriage. Sadly I don’t think the defense had a terribly strong case for a successful appeal on strictly legal grounds because they were struggling to come up with new information, the judge didn’t handle the summing up well in my view but nor did he make a clear legal mistake. The defense tried to make something of the inconsistency of finding Clayton not guilty and Ched guilty but I think the argument is rather more subtle than they seemed to make and was thus easily dismissed by the appeal judges. For what it’s worth, I would have put the inconsistency as follows: The case turns upon whether when she was in the room with the footballers she was too drunk for her to have a capacity to consent. Implicitly the Jury seems to have concluded that she didn’t but given there was such a short time between the two incidents and with no evidence to the counry if she was too drunk to validly consent to Ched then she was too srunk to validly consent to Clayton. However Clayton was found not guilty presumably on the belief that he reasonably believed that she was not too drunk. However if it is concluded that Clayton reasonably believed that she was not too drunk to consent what additional information was available to the jury to make them sure beyond reasonable doubt that she was too drunk to consent? Clayton was around when most of the CCTV clips were taken and in particular the last one at he hotel. The jury did have some additional information in terms of the police test of alcohol in her blood the following day but none was found and a text she sent to a friend and correctly got the right change for the pizza etc but the additional information seems to make it less likely that she was too drunk to consent rather than more! Ironically it was Ched who had least information as to her drunkenness apart from how she seemed to him in the room.

          Try and put yourself in his position for a while. You have been for a night out with your old friend and a couple of buddies. You have had a few to drink. You get separated from your friend. A few minutes later your friend texts you to say “i’ve got a bird”,. At that time you are in a taxi driving towards the police station to give a witness account for some other friends who have been picked up by the police following some scuffle that you witnessed. The hotel you booked for your out of town friend to stay in is on the way to the police station so you ask the taxi driver to stop so you can find out who the girl that your friend has picked up is (quite possibly with a half a mind to also see if anything sexual developed). You booked the hotel in Clayton’s name and that of another friend so knowing the hotel has a 2 persons rule you blag your away to getting a room key by saying that the other friend wont be using the room . When you enter room you find your buddy having sex so you or he says can You join in ? She says “yeah”. “Lick me out?” After that you have vaginal sex. Reportedly with plenty of “f me harder encouragement. And after that you start feeling guilty about cheating on your girlfriend and worried she might all to check what you are up to so you leave, too embarassed to go by the front desk you exit by the fire escacpe. The girl seems pissed off that you have both left her but pulls up the sheet s to go to sleep.

          Next thing you know a day or two later you are being questioned by the police and accused of rape. Night n the cells , then 11 months of ignomy and shame before a trial , you are found guilty with 5 year sentence – two and half years later having lost aroud a £1m of earnings you are out , but your efforts to resuscitate a career where you could reasonably have expected career earnings of say £5m are torpedoed by internet activists most of who have very probably never been to a football match with spurious arguments about how seeing you play will corrupt mythical child supporters.

        • Mellowman

          Eliza you have a naive and quaint faith in the judge and jury system. In a case like this, the judge has a huge impact on the case because the legislation is rather inexact, in particular the question of how drunk is too drunk to consent and the stress he might choose to lay on the “beyond reasonable doubt” issue. IMHO the judge in this case was somewhat biased against Ched, though not sufficiently to call into question the handling of the case from a strictly legal point of view. As for the jury we know that one or two strong minded characters who have made their mind up about the case and argue passionately can swing the fence sitters . Of course we only have a fragment of information about this jury. We know they finished the case on Friday afternoon at the end of the jury’s 3 weeks of jury service. After 4 hours of deliberation they could not reach a unanimous verdict but the judge insisted that they retire to try and do so if necessary coming back the following Monday. A few minutes later they came back and delivered the unanimous guilty verdicts. Of course its speculation but I don’t think it takes a psychological genius to surmise that the person or people who were skeptical of the verdict decided to capitulate to save everyone having to start a 4th week of service.

    • Lawrence13

      Are you dense? No way did this constitute a
      heinous crime. Was it violent rape, was it clear cut rape if rape that is can
      be construed as going with a stranger (McDonald) to a hotel room and meeting
      Ched Evans there, Then a girl who can remember exactly what she drank agrees to
      sex in a strange hotel room with McDonald but cannot remember Evans having sex
      even though he said he did? It just doesn’t hold up to scrutiny. If Evan had
      been shown by the evidence to have carried out violent rape I too would want
      harsher sentencing but he didn’t and all he did is what men and women have done
      for decades if that’s worthy of a rape charge then most men who have been
      involved in something like that at least once in their lives over the past
      forty years would qualify for prison. The other issue is how come the BBC and
      Guardian don’t gun for Marlon King I
      mean this man sexually and physically assaulted a woman and caused a major car
      accident and has spent three years in prison.

      Tell me why that when I search for Kings
      name here on BBC news you get Ched Evans name

      http://www.bbc.co.uk/search?q=marlon%20king with only a couple of references to Kings
      crimes yet search Ched Evans and see what you get pages of the stuff about the
      rape where with King there were pages about his playing career.

      How can this be ? I can only assume as Evans is white there is no minority
      group or left who will cry racism in his defence

      • Eliza Doolittle

        Any rape is a heinous crime.

    • Lawrence13

      Jacobs.
      Are you saying that we all condone rape? That is a typical left slant. As Rod says the left do not want to know about crime and if they are really forced they blame George Bush. Yet all of sudden the left are outraged by the Evans case, There are tens of thousands of cases of rape every year in the UK yet Hatchett is only concerned with this one. The woman is racists pure and simple

      • Eliza Doolittle

        When has she ever said she is only concerned about this rape and no others? Could you be making that up?

  • Tessa Garrard

    I was horrified to see that,among other Christians,a Bishop had joined the witch hunt. I think Christ would have had something to say about who was without sin so that he could throw the first stone..

    • Ben Sorin

      Yes, and Jesus also went around minimising the seriousness of rape. It’s at the heart of Christian values

    • Eliza Doolittle

      Hate the sin, love the sinner. But loving the sinner doesn’t have to extend to putting him into a job where he will have contact with vulnerable young people and will be a role model to them.

  • Tessa Garrard

    Yes,the incident was horrible and sordid. That is why Evans was given a prison sentenced and served it. So how many times must he be tried fir the same offence.

  • Lawrence13

    I have to say this bloody message board software is shite that’s twice now I’ve lost messages.

  • Tessa Garrard

    Sorry Ben, I can,t think where in His words you find this.you will, however ,find forgiveness

    • Ben Sorin

      I was being sarcastic and apologise for that, as it was disrespectful. But are you seriously trying to contend that the only Chrisitian position is to argue for Evans return to football? And if forgiveness is the only value you hold to then surely you are against ever sending anyone to prison irrespective of their actions?

      • Tessa Garrard

        No Ben ,I am not as forgiving as Christ. But Evans HAS been to prison, was judged by a jury,what more do the hunters want.How many times is he to be tried and punished.

        • carl jacobs

          He isn’t going to be tried and punished again. But individuals are not just going to forget the fact that he was convicted of rape when they have some reason to interact with him. Those individuals have the freedom to act on that information, and they will do so. If they want to economically punish concerns that try to employ him, that is their right. You have no standing to say “Don’t do that.” If they don’t want to employ him because of his past crime, they won’t. You have no standing to say “Assume the risk for the public good.”

          Again and again, we come back to this curious idea that the completion of a prison sentence should result in the crime being expunged from history. The completion of the prison sentence merely means the punishment is complete. The consequences go on.

          • FedUp

            Nobody is disputing that the consequences don’t go on following a conviction leading to a prison sentence, or any conviction of any kind. However, here we have consequences not because of his crime, but because a person decided that they did not like that the consequences were not severe enough and whipped up a media storm

  • Liffeyboy

    Spot on. I’m not a fan of Rod Liddle but he is 100% correct on this.

  • Lawrence13

    I’ve just read Ched’s statement below and this convinces me more than ever that my instincts that Ched’s rape charge was politically motivated by the police and CPS to pursue a guilty charge purely on the colour of his skin and the left media have grabbed the moral low ground and proceeded to give the man a deadly kicking. Its a shameful injustice.
    Ched’s Statement

    Thank you for taking the time to visit my website.

    On 20 April 2012 I was convicted of a crime I did not commit, this followed an incident that took place on 29 May 2011, my friend Clayton McDonald was acquitted of the same charge despite the prosecution’s case against him being the same as against me.

    This website has been created by my family and supporters to present the facts in an accurate and factual manner and in compliance with the law.

    I would like to thank so many people for their love and support but especially my girlfriend Natasha, my parents, sisters and brother and Natasha’s family.

    Many, many thanks.

    Ched Evans

    • StephanieJCW

      The race card comes out again….blame the jury. They accepted that McDonald could believe the victim consented, given she agreed to go to the hotel with him. They don’t accept Evans, who entered the room after the fact, had any reason to believe she wanted to have sex with him.

      • Greg

        ….. other than her saying words to the effect of “yes its ok to join in can you lick my pussy”….

        • Eliza Doolittle

          The evidence that she said that is very shaky, coming as it did from Evans who changed his story about whether he even bothered to ask for consent.

      • Lawrence13

        I am saying the police and the CPS are to blame they tried to grab the PC moral low ground and as Evans is white which self interest group is going to support him crying prejudiced treatment. However the ‘is he guilty’ part is just the first part of this story. part two is the left liberal media wanting him practically lynched although these type of people are always against Capital Punishment.
        How do you explain the BBC’s role in this? They have lead the shrill cries to make sure he never plays professional football again , yet employ Stan Collymore who boasted of such sexual activities in his ‘dogging’ escapades and physically assaulted Ulrika Johnson . Yet the BBC love Stan.

        • GraveDave

          Marlon King, who, given all his breaks and second and third chances, should have just been left alone to get on with his alternative life as a wannabe yardy.

        • Eliza Doolittle

          So how do you account for the fact that 93% of rape accusations do not result in convictions? The majority of those accusations involve white people.

      • Gearoidc

        “They accepted that McDonald could believe the victim consented, given she agreed to go to the hotel with him.”
        But the video shows her falling around the place at about this time!!! How did the jury arrive at the conclusion that McDonald “reasonably believed” that she was giving consent to sex???

        The inconsistency of the two verdicts is shocking.

        • Eliza Doolittle

          So are you saying that McDonald could not have reasonably believed that she was consenting and that he should have been convicted also?

          • Gearoidc

            You could make a case for that. Alternatively one could argue that the jury’s verdict on McDonald rules out the theory that the jury formed a view that she was CLEARLY too drunk to consent. In which case, on what basis was Evans found guilty BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT?

    • GraveDave

      Of course it was politically motivated.Having said that I’ve got no time for Ched Evan’s.But justice is supposed to be blind and not there just to please certain lobby groups.

    • Eliza Doolittle

      How on earth does that prove anything? It’s plainly very carefully drafted by his lawyers and PR people, and he should have said it three years ago.

  • anna

    Jean Hatchet, whoever he/she is, should be utter ashamed. They’ve done nothing but relentless bullying of this young man who has served the time required of him. Don’t think so?? Then take it up with the justice dept but stop hounding his potential employers. I personally don’t think he’s guilty and before anyone asks, I’ve read all the trial transcript and have seen the cctv to footage. This was no rape victim, this was a girl very clearly on the make.

    • Golden Fleece

      Ashamed ? no i can think of much better ways to deal with a witch.
      Cant beleive in 2015 someone can destroy another human beings life and hide behind a false name and get away with it .

      • anna

        Agreed!!!

      • Eliza Doolittle

        She hasn’t destroyed his life, he did that by committing rape. But fortunately for him his life isn’t completely destroyed: he has the woman he betrayed standing by him, her strange father standing up for him, and the offer of a lucrative job from the father.

  • Dogsnob

    For that brief spell when it looked like Evans would sign, I was about to become a staunch Oldham Athletic supporter, despite the fact that football is shit. I think someone should start up a boycott of all the sponsors who bowed to the wickedness of the Hatchet mob.

  • christhechameleon

    What kind of society condones the idea that someone can get so drunk they have no memory of events but can still blame someone else for what happens to them? We take drinking to excess far too lightly in the UK – we seem to have turned it into a disability with all the rights that go with it.

    To continue to hound this guy now is morally wrong. Two people allowed circumstances to result in them making a mistake. Now they should both be able to get on with their lives.

    • StephanieJCW

      “What kind of society condones the idea that someone can get so drunk they have no memory of events but can still blame someone else for what happens to them?”

      A society that holds people responsible for their own actions! Her getting HERSELF drunk does not hold her responsible for somebody else’s decision to push their penis inside her. Of course there is a debate around whether she consented or not. And whether it can truly be considered consent – but I think it’s a dangerous road to claim that if I get drunk, then anything that happens to me is my own fault. If I am robber when drunk, the mugger is still at fault yes?

      • christhechameleon

        No Stephanie, of course I’m not. There is, I believe, no such thing as consensual mugging. My point remains that if someone is so drunk that they can’t remember what happened, how is it safe to assume that it was the other person who initiated the “offence”?

        • not my real name

          Sometimes it’s hard to remember what happened even if you’re not that drunk, i.e. quite capable of functioning and speaking without slurring your words (I know). In short: I agree, with knobs on (so to speak).

      • FedUp

        But if she really was that drunk, her getting herself that drunk means that she needs to take responsibility for her own actions ie the consequences of getting into a position where she is unable (allegedly) to get herself home safely or to clearly say no to sexual acts with someone else

  • carl jacobs

    So I have slugged my way though this entire thread, and three statements stood out to me.

    Encounters of this nature occur in their thousands every week and I would suggest most men have had sex with a drunken stranger at least once in their life. Are we all rapists?

    Effectively being a cad has been crminalised.

    Evans fully acknowledges what he did but apparently doesn’t think that it should be a crime.

    Apparently, the notion of getting a woman drunk enough to say “Yes” is seen as a perfectly legitimate way for a guy to get in a woman’s pants. It’s just typical behavior for many guys and suddenly Ched Evans becomes more than a footballer. He becomes every man who has ever bought a woman a series of drinks with intent. “He must be innocent or I am a rapist.” It surely does explain the frantic desire to exonerate, and the host of bad argumentation offered towards that end. Consent must be allowed to flow from a bottle.

    Eliza Doolittle, In ten years commenting on the Internet, I have never seen someone dominate a thread the way you have dominated this thread. It was an impressive display. Please tell me you are not lawyer.

    • StephanieJCW

      The law states a drunken yes is still a yes.

      However there is ‘drunk’ and ‘drunk’. And certainly a degree of drunkeness where the drink party is not capable of the slightest understanding of their surroundings. In such a state is a ‘yes’ truly a ‘yes’?

      • carl jacobs

        Sure, there is ambiguity. The problem is that there is suddenly a lot more ambiguity for a lot of guys who want to get laid and aren’t too particular about how they achieve that objective.

    • FedUp

      The woman was not out drinking with the men she slept with so your claim that they got the woman drunk is incorrect – they purchased NO drinks for her

      • carl jacobs

        That’s not really relevant to my point. What matters (to the vindicators of Evans at least) is not how a woman gets drunk, but that she be presumed responsible for her decisions even though she is drunk.

    • not my real name

      ‘Dominated’ the thread? Doolittle the Dominatrix, who would’ve guessed? Well, we can guess what filled *your* dreams overnight.

      • carl jacobs

        Yes, ‘dominated’ as in “Beat them like a rug.” I’m not sure the Crime Scene guys could even find DNA. Just my objective unbiased observation.

  • Jules0607

    The basis of the issue is the complete lack of remorse by the offender. There is a campaign to ‘rush through’ a third appeal – this is not how every other offender is treated. there is an expectation/that this person receives special treatment & yet there are so many comments that he should get treated like every other convicted criminal.. How can a 3rd appeal [at PUBLIC expense again] succeed when there is a website offering money for defamation of his victim – who will believe any witness that Evans defence will provide – how much will they have been paid? Anecdotes about his victim [on 5th identity change – at PUBLIC expense yet again] does not make a ‘man’ who snook into a room to have sex with a woman who’d passed out suddenly become innocent. What can the new evidence be that could possibly undermine a film clip through a hotel window showing him having sex with an unconcious woman? but this is what he did, not merely being unfaithful to his fiance. so it can only be the hope of getting him off on a technicality now,
    The
    cunning aspect of his campaign [martyrdom – this poor young man is being victimised??] were the ‘threats’ allegedly sent by people
    [rightly] disgusted with sexual aggression @Oldham “A club director told BBC
    sports editor Dan Roan that a staff member was informed a named relative
    would be raped if the deal went ahead”. So now people with concerns are being accused of doing exactly what
    Evans supporters WERE doing… Funny that isn’t it?
    I sincerely hope Mr Liddle hasn’t received a ‘campaign’ payment for this ‘article’. I’m a hardliner on ALL crime, including bribery and corruption.

    • FedUp

      The basis of the issue is not his lack of remorse. The basis of the issue is that he should be allowed, as per the law, to return to society. IF any of those who claim to be defending the victim REALLY had any concerns for her welfare, they would not be dragging all of this up, making a huge issue out of it and letting her rebuild her life too. There are plenty of victims who believe that punishment is not fair (not going to get dragged into whether he was innocent or not in this post) but that is life and life is not fair. When you have two opposing parties, it is rare that you will end up with a win-win situation

      • Jules0607

        For me it’s the victim & all the other silent victims that i am concerned for. What’s the message from society to victims & perpetrators?

      • Eliza Doolittle

        No-one has ever said that he shouldn’t return to society, or indeed that he shouldn’t be able to work. He should take up the job offer he has from his girlfriend’s father.

        • FedUp

          Just do the job that the mob think is right for him? Because the mob know better than anyone else? They can ‘see’ concerns where the unemotional cannot? Lets face it, they could find just cause for him to do no job and probably that is ultimately what they would prefer

    • Greg

      People who have been wrongly convicted generally don’t appologise for their offence. There was no flm clip through the wondow of him havig sex witha passed out woman. His buddies apparently did make soe attempt to take some pics or cam of what was going on but presumably they wer unsuccessful. The only actual evidence that they had sex was 1 the 2 Footballers admission that they had. 2 the night porter listening at the door and hearing lots of moaning and growning but no screaming or other protestations one might associate with non coercive sex

      • Eliza Doolittle

        You haven’t got it, have you? The existence of screaming doesn’t amount to any evidence for or against a conviction of rape. If the victim is so drunk that they have no idea what is going on, there is an excellent chance that she won’t scream, but it is still rape.

    • Dave

      Why should he show remorse if he feels he done nothing wrong .. If someone goes to jail or is convicted it should be beyond reasonable doubt ….. I don’t think so in this case …. Theirs to many loose ends

      • Eliza Doolittle

        Perhaps he should have the sense to realise that he has done something wrong? Sneaking into someone else’s room and plunging your penis into his partner without checking that she is capable of consenting isn’t normally thought to be right, is it?

    • Dave

      What about jean hatchet earning money of this ?

  • trevor lawrie

    The Lynch Mob are determined to get a forced confession out of Ched Evans, even though they know he is innocent, that woman he supposed to have raped, is nothing but a slapper who prowls the streets 3 and 4 in the morning looking for excitement, and when she discovered was laid by a pair of footballers, she screamed rape.

    Who has not had one night stands with these sorts of women, they are common and plentiful, and they are forgotten once dawn breaks and they make their way home, but celebrities and footballers beware, because if these women get to know who you are, they will sing like canaries, so be clever wear a disguise, if they bed a nobody they will be sure to keep their mouths shut.

    These women never seem to get raped by Mr. Nobody, only the rich and famous are the ones who go about raping women. See my site http://www.rhyslawrie.com

    • Ben Sorin

      You sound like a sexually frustrated virgin with no friends and a mysogyny problem, Trevor. You should seek help

      • trevor lawrie

        You take a good look at the hotel lobby video, and work out how inebriated she was and see who could have taken advantage of her, she went up to the room unaccompanied, and unaided, and five minutes later she was squealing with delight, she was raped was she?

        • Golden Fleece

          Wasting your time reasoning with this prat,Benny was prob on the jury
          he cant see the wood for the trees

          • Eliza Doolittle

            Why, were you in court? Does it occur to you that people on the jury who saw and heard all the evidence, not those highly selective bits on Evans’ website, might know more than you?

        • Eliza Doolittle

          The hotel video is poor quality time lapse footage, hence it cannot show her staggering. What is significant is that on Evans’ website he chooses not to show the footage of her out in the street where she was staggering along and at one point squatted down to urinate in public.
          You also need to bear in mind that the people who actually saw her, including the pizza shop owner (who knew her already) and the hotel receptionist described has as being obviously drunk. And McDonald told the receptionist on his way out that she was sick, which rather suggests that he knew also that she was very drunk.

    • Greg

      You are being unfair on the girl in question. She didn’t scream rape. She had no idea she was raped. She only thought she had lost her handbag or that it had been stolen so she called the police. It turned out thta the bag had been left in the pizza place and was presumeably returned. Then as the police found out what had gone on they interviewed the footballers, They admitted that they had had sex with the girl – if they had simply said “no comment” there would not have been a case as the girl supposedly could not remember anything and thee was no physical evidence of harm or anything else. Some time afterwards she reaslised this could be her lucky day and started excitedly tweeting her friends that she had won big and was going to take them ona foreign holiday and buy matching pink mini coopers. Presumably she had in mine either and out of court settlement or selling her story to the newspapers. However by that stage the police and CPS had got the bit between their teeths and were determined to proceed so that what would normally be a minor embarassing incident was to make all three lives a misery.

      • GraveDave

        Then as the police found out what had gone on they interviewed the footballers,

        Conversely when they found out what was going on with the so called ‘Asian rape’ gangs, they just kept it on a very low back burner for about thirty years. Very much like now with the Westminster paedo gang.

        If only old Bill could always be so zealous.

        • Eliza Doolittle

          Indeed. But it doesn’t make Evans’ conviction any less deserved.

      • trevor lawrie

        Greg,

        You seem to paint a far worse picture of this girl than I did, by implying that she innocently discovered she had been laid by two footballers and tried to financially capitalise from it.

        You state she had no recollection of her tryst with the footballers, and that is easy to explain, because women like her have programmed their memory to be wiped clean after each embarrassing sordid encounter they seek with strangers, even though their brains are fully functional, which was fully evident from her remembering she had a half eaten pizza and went out of the hotel to scrape it off the pavement, in order to finish it off after the energy sapping sex session she was expecting.

        No wonder she fights to remain remain anonymous, if she still wants to make money she should try and sell her secret sex on film, which could be a best seller in certain sleazy circles.

      • Eliza Doolittle

        The evidence was that she didn’t send those tweets.

  • Henddraig

    I am female and 73 years old. I see some foolish young people who drank too much. I don’t think that is so terrible, just foolish! I also see a blackmailer who threatened to stalk, corner, pin down and rape a girl purely because her father is on the board of a football club! THAT is criminal behaviour! Why have the police not found the blackmailer/rapist and charged him? Nothing Ched Evans did is as bad as what this other man has threatened!

    • trevor lawrie

      Now that is Rape, Forceful Rape, that is what the Police should tackle, but it is not in the Public Interest they say, because Rape is only committed by the rich and famous, not ordinary folks, and definitely not Pakistani Gangs who prey on young girls, they are all left alone, mention a footballer or a celebrity and the Police ears begin to prick up.

      • Eliza Doolittle

        The police can only tackle these things if the victim makes a complaint. They didn’t, which suggest that actually they didn’t view the threat as a serious one. As the Asian gang members you talk about were actually convicted of rape, what on earth are you talking about?

        • trevor lawrie

          Over 1400 girls have complained to the Authorities which include the Social Services and the Police, and only the Rotherham Pakistani Muslim Gang was prosecuted, that too after many many years of reluctance by the Authorities to prosecute them because of so called difficulty in gathering evidence and fear of being branded racists.

          There are still dozens of Gangs who have escaped prosecution that were operating in Leeds, Birmingham, Cardiff etc, etc. Why have they not brought been to book.

          Because they are not White Wealthy Celebrities, who happen to be the easiest targets to prosecute by the Law Enforcement Agencies, where the law of anonymity facilitates the Police to recruit false witnesses to make up stories regarding false allegations of rape and abuse.

          The Police groom these false witnesses to lie in Court with the assurance that they have noting to fear and their malicious act is totally risk free because they will remain unknown, remove this anonymity law and the climate of false allegations will be killed in an instant.

          No one should be allowed to be anonymous especially when making the most serious allegations, while the Police have the ability to change identities of Whistle Blowers and grassers, they can easily do the same for these Rape Accusers if they feel they are in danger.

          Their accusations need to be tested and corroborated, and guaranteeing them full anonymity prevents that from happening.

          Then let us see how many women will step forward with concocted stories of rape. Right now it is far too easy for a woman to turn her one night stand into a Rape Allegation.

    • Lawrence13

      What I find so disturbing in our modern society is that kids and the all of us are surrounded by pornography. Just note the recent shows at the 02 by Miley Cyrus where the audience is pre -pubescent girls and Miley runs around almost nude with phallic props and dance routines with posturing that leaves nothing to the imagination . Where are the left media on that issue.?

    • Eliza Doolittle

      Making what the father himself described as a low level tweet allegedly threatening to rape someone is worse than actually raping them? What planet are you on? Remember neither the father nor the girl took the tweet sufficiently seriously even to report it to the police.

      • Henddraig

        I am very confused. If the father did not take the threat seriously, then why did the club change its mind about signing Ched because of the threat? I do know some blackmale victims fear going to the police in case that brings worse problems.
        Also, to some who have written very anti-male comments, I am female, so not everyone who looks at the affair logically is male!

  • Lawrence13

    I see Janet Street Porter has joined in the Salem Witch-hunt. She says that Ched Evans should do further community service. I have to laugh as it was she who apparently when out drinking in a club with Kelvin McKenzie is supposed to have said
    “Kelvin if I give you a couple of thousand quid, would you find me a boyfriend”
    Apparently Kelvin looked at her and retorted
    “with a face like that I’ll take that as a deposit”
    Yes that is cruel , she’s not that unattractive and a woman like that wouldn’t want to be anyway.

  • Dave

    Yes but did she pass out ? We where not there That’s. All I’m saying

    • Greg

      No one has claimed she passed out. By the time all this had happened it was 5am she had had plenty to drink and a couple of sex sessions so like any one else would she fell asleep. Like a couple of cads Ched and Clayton decided to leave her alone and at some stage she urinated in the bed . Very oafish action, but not something which should sensibly be classified as rape or is worth ruining three young lives over.

      • Eliza Doolittle

        You do realise, don’t you, that no-one has ever suggested that leaving her alone constituted rape? Do you think maybe entering her without bothering to check whether she was capable of consenting might have had something to do with it?

        • Mellowman

          Of course no one has suggested that but that doesn’t mean that it has not crucially impacted the case. My guess if that Ched or Clayton had stayed with her and they had woken up together in the morning (as she had requested Clayton to do) it would not have entered her head to start talking about rape. Of course that would not be the reaction of every woman, doubtless some, maybe even a majority would be pretty upset about it, but you must be careful of projecting your OWN reactions, values , insecurities, moral code onto someone else. YOU may well have felt used, violated etc etc in that situation, but I have an inclination that you are not a woman who would regularly get hammered at a nightclub and be found wandering around the town center at 4am in the morning inviting yourself into the hotel room of young men you had only bumped into a few minutes before in a kebab shop. It would have been useful had the complainant actually told the court what HER reaction was and whether for example she would normally not be interested to partake in such activity however as I understand it she declined to do so. I strongly suspect that the reason for this coyness was that it would allow the defense to introduce a large number of witnesses who would testify to the fact that she was very well used to causal hookups. By saying nothing apart from that she couldnt remember anything from laving the nightclub to waking up confused the following morning she prevented the defense introducing such witnesses.

  • borishater

    If Evans was black would he have been found guilty? I doubt it.

    • Eliza Doolittle

      I don’t. The evidence against him was overwhelming, irrespective of his colour.

  • Dave

    Most wimen shut there eyes when having sex so is all sex rape ? .. Or do we need a doctor in the room to tell us when we can have sex or not … Maybe we need a copper there to

    • Lawrence13

      You mean PC69

    • Eliza Doolittle

      There, there, Dave. Should you ever persuade a woman to have sex with you, you should be able to work out that whether she has her eyes open or not has nothing whatsoever to do with whether she is consenting.

  • Dave

    Yes I agree .. And how many of the peaple that have signed the patitsions would see it that way if Thay had bothered to look at