|
Post by miggo on Jan 7, 2015 17:28:28 GMT
Sick to death of hearing about now tbh,just sign for Oldham and everybody get on with their lifes This
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Jan 7, 2015 17:28:35 GMT
her consenting to Evans is something that Evans and McDonald said. there is no proof of it actually being fact. she said she doesn't remember anything so has no idea if she did consent to one, both or neither but that isn't the point. the point is that the jury obviously felt that her conversation with McDonald, the fact that she willingly went back to a hotel room with him and had to take a taxi journey to do so gave enough element of doubt to say she had some idea of what was going to happen with McDonald and had enough time to think it through and that was enough to clear him. Evans turning up unannounced and uninvited gave her no time to think through what she was doing, even in an inebriated state. i genuinely don't see why people still don't get the difference I think some of the reasons why people don't get the difference is not to do with both of the men did. I think its generated from an apparent anomaly that the jury have accepted that the victim consented to be with Donald and not Evans, not from where/when they have first come into contact, but from alcohol consumption. I think some people are confused about why the jury have accepted Donalds defence that she was sober enough to consent to him. In other words she is either drunk to the point where the defence becomes void or she is not. The amount of time spent with each party should probably not have formed part of the decision. The girl is either fit or unfit to consent. That is the key point. They have believed Donald had been given consent, but then disregarded his evidence, albeit as co accused, that he heard consent being given also to Evans. It's like they believe his account on one hand and not on the other. That's why some are questioning the safety of the conviction. Yes the jury got it wrong. Both were either guilty or not guilty. It seems they felt more sympathetic to McDonald since he had first taken a 10 minute taxi ride for her which could loosely constitute a 'courtship' whereas Evans dispensed with all the usual formalities like getting to know someone full stop. None of that should matter in a court of law however and of course the girl gave the same short shrift to the normal due courtship process. In the end I suspect they found McDonald okay and just plain didn't like the cut of Evans' jib.
|
|
|
Post by ukcstokie on Jan 7, 2015 17:30:30 GMT
her consenting to Evans is something that Evans and McDonald said. there is no proof of it actually being fact. she said she doesn't remember anything so has no idea if she did consent to one, both or neither but that isn't the point. the point is that the jury obviously felt that her conversation with McDonald, the fact that she willingly went back to a hotel room with him and had to take a taxi journey to do so gave enough element of doubt to say she had some idea of what was going to happen with McDonald and had enough time to think it through and that was enough to clear him. Evans turning up unannounced and uninvited gave her no time to think through what she was doing, even in an inebriated state. i genuinely don't see why people still don't get the difference I think some of the reasons why people don't get the difference is not to do with both of the men did. I think its generated from an apparent anomaly that the jury have accepted that the victim consented to be with Donald and not Evans, not from where/when they have first come into contact, but from alcohol consumption. I think some people are confused about why the jury have accepted Donalds defence that she was sober enough to consent to him. In other words she is either drunk to the point where the defence becomes void or she is not. The amount of time spent with each party should probably not have formed part of the decision. The girl is either fit or unfit to consent. That is the key point. They have believed Donald had been given consent, but then disregarded his evidence, albeit as co accused, that he heard consent being given also to Evans. It's like they believe his account on one hand and not on the other. That's why some are questioning the safety of the conviction. Good point. But if she was too drunk to consent to Evans, she was also too drunk to consent to Macdonald. The whole level of proof just isn't sufficient in my view. The jury seem to have guessed at a few things. And yes, the jury were at the trial (and I wasn't), but juries don't always give the right answer and they can be very heavily influenced by strong characters.
|
|
|
Post by ukcstokie on Jan 7, 2015 17:35:10 GMT
Was she too drunk to consent, or did she give drunken consent?? Fuck knows...the jury decided she was too drunk to consent. The worrying thing to consider on the basis of this ruling is that anyone who has slept with their wife/girlfriend/mistress/*any random girl on a night out* after theyve been on a boozy night out on the town, may very well have commited the same rape offence as Evans... And I'm guessing pretty much every sexual act on club 18/30 holiday/Costa del Sol/Brava etc. would be classed as rape then.
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Jan 7, 2015 17:37:16 GMT
Chatting some bird up in a kebab house or taxi is not a preclude or a right to sex
I understand the point but you are either sober enough to consent or too drunk
Can't be one and the other
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Jan 7, 2015 17:41:31 GMT
I realise that Mick I was looking at it from Claytons point of view if she consented to him she wasn't drunker when Evans had sex with her surely, and so Clayton either watched consenting sex or a rape, if he watched a rape he is equally guilty in.my eyes I suspect in truth not even the prosecution genuinely believe Evans is guilty and so they have probably pushed their luck far enough already without attempting the stunt of prosecuting Clayton for witnessing a rape.
|
|
|
Post by harryburrows on Jan 7, 2015 18:49:20 GMT
Evans was asked if he new the best way to Oldham , " A headlock is best " he replied
|
|
|
Post by lawrieleslie on Jan 7, 2015 19:14:22 GMT
He will be subjected to absolute dogs abuse by opposition fans that's an racing certainty. And there is nothing that authorities can do whilst he remains a convicted rapist.
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on Jan 7, 2015 19:24:23 GMT
He will be subjected to absolute dogs abuse by opposition fans that's an racing certainty. And there is nothing that authorities can do whilst he remains a convicted rapist. I can't speak for Ched Evans, but I've played football to a reasonably decent level when I was younger, and there was one thing that wound me up and got me fired up for a game, and that was unfounded accusations and what not, whether it be from the opposition players (you f*cking diver), the opposition manager (trying to talk the ref into giving them decisions because of x). If I was Evans, I would be more determined to score than ever. I hope he scores a hat trick against Sheffield United because they could, and should, have supported their man through this ordeal. They failed him. They should have believed him and told do-gooder publicity whores like Jessica Ennis to go fuck themselves. I applaud Oldham for taking a stand, hopefully, this is the beginning of the end, but I worry it's merely the start.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Jan 7, 2015 22:10:02 GMT
|
|
|
Post by spitthedog on Jan 7, 2015 22:32:58 GMT
He will be subjected to absolute dogs abuse by opposition fans that's an racing certainty. And there is nothing that authorities can do whilst he remains a convicted rapist. I can't speak for Ched Evans, but I've played football to a reasonably decent level when I was younger, and there was one thing that wound me up and got me fired up for a game, and that was unfounded accusations and what not, whether it be from the opposition players (you f*cking diver), the opposition manager (trying to talk the ref into giving them decisions because of x). If I was Evans, I would be more determined to score than ever. I hope he scores a hat trick against Sheffield United because they could, and should, have supported their man through this ordeal. They failed him. They should have believed him and told do-gooder publicity whores like Jessica Ennis to go fuck themselves. I applaud Oldham for taking a stand, hopefully, this is the beginning of the end, but I worry it's merely the start. What happens to your theory if he is guilty, and deluded, a bit like you?
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on Jan 7, 2015 22:42:33 GMT
I can't speak for Ched Evans, but I've played football to a reasonably decent level when I was younger, and there was one thing that wound me up and got me fired up for a game, and that was unfounded accusations and what not, whether it be from the opposition players (you f*cking diver), the opposition manager (trying to talk the ref into giving them decisions because of x). If I was Evans, I would be more determined to score than ever. I hope he scores a hat trick against Sheffield United because they could, and should, have supported their man through this ordeal. They failed him. They should have believed him and told do-gooder publicity whores like Jessica Ennis to go fuck themselves. I applaud Oldham for taking a stand, hopefully, this is the beginning of the end, but I worry it's merely the start. What happens to your theory if he is guilty, and deluded, a bit like you? if he's guilty then what? He's guilty, all the abuse he's getting will be justified. You can be feel happy.
|
|
|
Post by luke2u on Jan 8, 2015 9:34:48 GMT
I hate this thread on our message Board as this is not a player we're interested in. Hopefully I'll be the last one who bring this to the top of our Board. 1k Messages and nothing related to us??????
|
|
|
Post by BigKahunaBurger on Jan 8, 2015 11:11:17 GMT
"Oldham's deal to sign Ched Evans is OFF, according to one Sky source."
|
|
|
Post by santy on Jan 8, 2015 12:00:39 GMT
I can't speak for Ched Evans, but I've played football to a reasonably decent level when I was younger, and there was one thing that wound me up and got me fired up for a game, and that was unfounded accusations and what not, whether it be from the opposition players (you f*cking diver), the opposition manager (trying to talk the ref into giving them decisions because of x). If I was Evans, I would be more determined to score than ever. I hope he scores a hat trick against Sheffield United because they could, and should, have supported their man through this ordeal. They failed him. They should have believed him and told do-gooder publicity whores like Jessica Ennis to go fuck themselves. I applaud Oldham for taking a stand, hopefully, this is the beginning of the end, but I worry it's merely the start. What happens to your theory if he is guilty, and deluded, a bit like you? Nothing happens if he is guilty, as he's done the time determined for the crime. What are you expecting to happen? It's amusing how many people somehow want to forbid him from doing anything that will let him earn money in life, presumably far happier to support him through their tax contributions. "Don't your dare work rapist. Make sure you pass the bill on to me for anything you need though son."
|
|
|
Post by Stafford-Stokie on Jan 8, 2015 12:05:35 GMT
Admin are all over you and send pm's if you call hughes a cunt but this sort of shit is ok? What a joke this board is becoming!
|
|
|
Post by foster on Jan 8, 2015 12:06:37 GMT
The mods tend to do nothing on here at the best of times. Ive been called a cunt, a twat etc for posting something that someone else tends to disagree with. In fact I can never remember a time anyone said anything pleasant to me on here whatever the subject....yet arnt we all supposed to be fellow Stoke City supporters? You're one hell of a cool dude.
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Jan 8, 2015 12:09:40 GMT
Admin are all over you and send pm's if you call hughes a cunt but this sort of shit is ok? What a joke this board is becoming! This from you who once inferred as a teacher I interfered with children in my care. What a sickening hypocrite you truly are.
|
|
|
Post by lawrieleslie on Jan 8, 2015 12:10:37 GMT
All over Internet now "Oldham not signing Rapist Evans" due to sponsors pulling out and threats to their own staff.
|
|
|
Post by luke2u on Jan 8, 2015 12:12:28 GMT
Delete this thread!
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Jan 8, 2015 12:18:51 GMT
Admin are all over you and send pm's if you call hughes a cunt but this sort of shit is ok? What a joke this board is becoming! This from you who once inferred as a teacher I interfered with children in my care. What a sickening hypocrite you truly are. To be fair to SS, it must be refreshing for him not to be the most offensive person on the thread.
|
|
|
Post by jbstokie on Jan 8, 2015 12:20:04 GMT
Lock the thread, its got fuck all to do with Evans now and has become grown men degrading themselves.
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Jan 8, 2015 12:21:17 GMT
All over Internet now "Oldham not signing Rapist Evans" due to sponsors pulling out and threats to their own staff. There you go. The two mobs are winning.
|
|
|
Post by Ayupshag on Jan 8, 2015 12:24:44 GMT
I hate this thread on our message Board as this is not a player we're interested in. Hopefully I'll be the last one who bring this to the top of our Board. 1k Messages and nothing related to us?????? I said this 2 days ago mate. Bullshit thread that's fuck all to with SCFC
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 8, 2015 12:27:01 GMT
This ^ it's embarrassing
|
|
|
Post by southcranford on Jan 8, 2015 12:28:03 GMT
protesters advocating the used of violence against innocent board members and their families....unbelievable double standards Jeff
|
|
|
Post by MrFlirty on Jan 8, 2015 12:35:47 GMT
Whatever your thoughts, threatening to kill innocent people is taking it a bit to far. Correct, ridiculous double standards
|
|
|
Post by PotteringThrough on Jan 8, 2015 12:39:17 GMT
All over Internet now "Oldham not signing Rapist Evans" due to sponsors pulling out and threats to their own staff. Quite astounding really regarding the threats to their own staff.
|
|
|
Post by nicholasjalcock on Jan 8, 2015 12:44:04 GMT
Whatever your thoughts, threatening to kill innocent people is taking it a bit to far. Correct, ridiculous double standards How is it H.M. Police have not intervened and charged people? It has been an orchestrated campaign by the same small group of people. Given we have more criminal offences on the Statue Book than Victorian times surely these people have committed a criminal offence?
|
|
|
Post by Stafford-Stokie on Jan 8, 2015 13:22:21 GMT
Admin are all over you and send pm's if you call hughes a cunt but this sort of shit is ok? What a joke this board is becoming! This from you who once inferred as a teacher I interfered with children in my care. What a sickening hypocrite you truly are. Thank you. The whole thread has been saved just in case it is required for future reference. Delete away admin.
|
|