|
Post by dozintheseventees on Oct 22, 2014 14:21:34 GMT
I know and understand people will want to widen the debate because of the nature of the 'crime' but I really do think it's pretty simple in the end. He went to trial, was convicted and served the sentence that a judge deemed appropriate. He's now free to take up employment and get on with his life whether people agree with that or not. What sickens many is the fact that the victims of crime often have to suffer the after effects for many years to come whilst those convicted appear to return to their normal lives. I understand just how hard that is to swallow and I simply cannot conceive how the families of those in the McCormick and Hughes cases must feel....It's absolutely heartbreaking. I have to wonder why any football club would feel the need, or desire to employ Evans to be honest since he was never 'God's Gift' to football and he's been away from the game for some time. That said, they are all free to offer him employment if they so wish regardless of what any of us might feel about that. Agree in principle mate, but if you're a third division club he could actually be your God's Gift. That bit is all relative and he's a proven goalscorer in the lower divisions. Possibly so mate but I'd like to think there are a good many players available, without the need to take him on, who could be equally effective. Football clubs being........football clubs, will no doubt do what they think is best for them regardless of what any of us might feel.
|
|
|
Post by ihaveadream on Oct 22, 2014 16:18:01 GMT
Evans' girlfriend is obviously so desperate to continue the wag lifestyle that she is prepared to stay with him under any circumstance He cheated on her. I imagine there's a lot of relationships that have involved one party cheating that have recovered. Not exactly straightforward cheating.
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on Oct 22, 2014 16:25:11 GMT
He cheated on her. I imagine there's a lot of relationships that have involved one party cheating that have recovered. Not exactly straightforward cheating. Only if you believe he was guilty and I believe there's a shit tonne of evidence to prove he isn't. So yes, as far as I'm concerned, he may be a cheat, but he's not a rapist. I'm allowed that opinion, despite militant feminists attempting to censor those who actually believe he's innocent.
|
|
|
Post by spitthedog on Oct 22, 2014 17:15:48 GMT
Not exactly straightforward cheating. Only if you believe he was guilty and I believe there's a shit tonne of evidence to prove he isn't. So yes, as far as I'm concerned, he may be a cheat, but he's not a rapist. I'm allowed that opinion, despite militant feminists attempting to censor those who actually believe he's innocent. You might be allowed that opinion, but you are wrong. It's a fact, he is a rapist until proven otherwise. You are confusing opinion with fact. Btw, I am not a militant feminist, but someone who believes in a society that doesn't tolerate violence against women. He's hardly being censored , he's got very expensive lawyers and PR working for him full time. He's now freer than the person who this crime was committed against who has had to change location and identity.
|
|
|
Post by Stafford-Stokie on Oct 22, 2014 17:46:05 GMT
Not exactly straightforward cheating. Only if you believe he was guilty and I believe there's a shit tonne of evidence to prove he isn't. So yes, as far as I'm concerned, he may be a cheat, but he's not a rapist. I'm allowed that opinion, despite militant feminists attempting to censor those who actually believe he's innocent. I also believe he did nothing wrong other than cheat on his Mrs. Convicted because some pissed up bint can't remember saying yes??? Load of bollox. I only hope he gets his justice.
|
|
|
Post by stokie77 on Oct 22, 2014 19:25:50 GMT
I happen to know someone who knows clayton the other guy involved and by all accounts. Yes all he has done is got involved in a bit if drunken misbehaviour the same as clayton. It may not be right but most young lads have done this and she was known as the local bike he has simply been made example of. Clayton did the same and walked free so I think in time he may be cleared and able to play again. I'm sure he had severed long enough for a mistake which in my eyes was not rape so let him live with the abuse and shit he will get that's bad enough.
|
|
|
Post by jbstokie on Oct 22, 2014 19:37:20 GMT
Only if you believe he was guilty and I believe there's a shit tonne of evidence to prove he isn't. So yes, as far as I'm concerned, he may be a cheat, but he's not a rapist. I'm allowed that opinion, despite militant feminists attempting to censor those who actually believe he's innocent. I also believe he did nothing wrong other than cheat on his Mrs. Convicted because some pissed up bint can't remember saying yes??? Load of bollox. I only hope he gets his justice. Its not that she couldn't remember whether she said yes or not. Its that she was too intoxicated to give consent, regardless of what she said.
|
|
|
Post by wizzardofdribble on Oct 22, 2014 20:08:00 GMT
All blokes know when a woman gives consent and when a woman doesn't. This man was convicted by a jury of twelve people who heard all the evidence unlike anybody on here. As a father of two daughters as far as I'm concerned this cunt needs castrating.
Fuck off Evans.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Oct 22, 2014 20:10:47 GMT
I know and understand people will want to widen the debate because of the nature of the 'crime' but I really do think it's pretty simple in the end. He went to trial, was convicted and served the sentence that a judge deemed appropriate. He's now free to take up employment and get on with his life whether people agree with that or not. What sickens many is the fact that the victims of crime often have to suffer the after effects for many years to come whilst those convicted appear to return to their normal lives. I understand just how hard that is to swallow and I simply cannot conceive how the families of those in the McCormick and Hughes cases must feel....It's absolutely heartbreaking. I have to wonder why any football club would feel the need, or desire to employ Evans to be honest since he was never 'God's Gift' to football and he's been away from the game for some time. That said, they are all free to offer him employment if they so wish regardless of what any of us might feel about that. 29 goals in 36 goals in his season before he was banged up. That will get him a move.
|
|
|
Post by TheWiseMaster on Oct 22, 2014 20:23:36 GMT
Yes - the information about his mates watching was part of the evidence - part of the reason he was found guilty. It had all the hallmarks of a set-up by a group of men. The girl involved has had to leave her home town as her name was publicised so the fate of her assailant shouldn't be of more concern than that of the girl that isn't true though at all the friends (one of which was his brother) were waiting in the cab for evans to come back. they got out of the cab and went to the window without Evan's knowledge at all. Really? So the two men happened to find the correct room at ground floor level and the curtains happened to be left open - and then the two men videoed the sex without the participants noticing - really? So two men go into a ground floor room to have sex and don't bother pulling the curtains to?? Quite by chance Really?
|
|
|
Post by Squeekster on Oct 22, 2014 21:39:48 GMT
that isn't true though at all the friends (one of which was his brother) were waiting in the cab for evans to come back. they got out of the cab and went to the window without Evan's knowledge at all. Really? So the two men happened to find the correct room at ground floor level and the curtains happened to be left open - and then the two men videoed the sex without the participants noticing - really? So two men go into a ground floor room to have sex and don't bother pulling the curtains to?? Quite by chance Really? Where is this video then if its as they say then the video would clear him.
|
|
|
Post by skip on Oct 22, 2014 21:41:28 GMT
All blokes know when a woman gives consent and when a woman doesn't. This man was convicted by a jury of twelve people who heard all the evidence unlike anybody on here. As a father of two daughters as far as I'm concerned this cunt needs castrating. Fuck off Evans. But late to the thread but I'd never watch Stoke if that c*** was in the side.
|
|
|
Post by Stafford-Stokie on Oct 23, 2014 0:21:42 GMT
All blokes know when a woman gives consent and when a woman doesn't. This man was convicted by a jury of twelve people who heard all the evidence unlike anybody on here. As a father of two daughters as far as I'm concerned this cunt needs castrating. Fuck off Evans. But late to the thread but I'd never watch Stoke if that c*** was in the side. Each to their own but I feel he has done his time for a crime he probably didn't commit.
|
|
|
Post by cheeesfreeex on Oct 23, 2014 0:51:00 GMT
I reckon Ched's had a bit of time to reflect on the responsibilities {as a young man} that come with the trappings of professional football. If you're in a priviliged position, it doesn't give you the automatic right to abuse other folk.
He's done some time.. I'd have him in my squad.
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on Oct 23, 2014 10:11:10 GMT
Only if you believe he was guilty and I believe there's a shit tonne of evidence to prove he isn't. So yes, as far as I'm concerned, he may be a cheat, but he's not a rapist. I'm allowed that opinion, despite militant feminists attempting to censor those who actually believe he's innocent. You might be allowed that opinion, but you are wrong. It's a fact, he is a rapist until proven otherwise. You are confusing opinion with fact. Btw, I am not a militant feminist, but someone who believes in a society that doesn't tolerate violence against women. He's hardly being censored , he's got very expensive lawyers and PR working for him full time. He's now freer than the person who this crime was committed against who has had to change location and identity. That's one heck of an assertion to make, unless I've taken that the wrong way. I seriously hope that you've not come to the conclusion I somehow condone male to female violence, because if you knew me in person you'd quickly know that I despise it. One of my good friends was routinely beaten in a violent relationship when she was even younger than the victim was in this case, I supported her at that time and saw the damage it did both physically and mentally. Trust me, I do not tolerate violence against women, be it physical or emotional and those who try and justify it can go fuck themselves. Evans has been found guilty, that I cannot deny. He firmly maintains his innocence despite media outlets desperately trying to force him to apologize to his victim (effectively admitting guilt) which is something he has the right to do. He also publicly protests his innocence which is something militant feminists are desperate to stop and this is where I believe he is being censored. Police are already investigating his website despite the fact it simply states facts of case. Anything else would be libellous, you know that. For a guy who is now out of jail and free to continue life, he seems strangely motivated to clear his name. Do I believe Evans is innocent? No. I believe he cheated on his incredibly supportive girlfriend who has stood by his side while he was tried and convicted and provided support while he's served the custodial sentence of his punishment. His infidelity in itself, is an unforgivable act and something he will have to live with for the rest of his life. He is also incredibly lucky that she was willing to stay with him. It must have also been an absolutely awful situation for her to be in, not only seeing her partner go through a trial for rape but knowing that he'd also gone behind her back. The irony, is she herself has received hostile abuse from feminists and other anti-Ched Evans for continuing to support him, with the main accusation being that she's just in it for the 'WAG' lifestyle. What they fail to acknowledge, is that she's the daughter of a multi millionaire jeweller and diamond dealer, who turns over about 20 million a year. I'm pretty sure the 500 grand Ched Evans is going to make over the next 3 years (assuming SUFC sign him again) isn't even pocket money to her. I do have the right to be sceptical. The media will feed you anything to sell papers and improve ratings, especially the red tops, everyone should know that by now. The BBC have been so biased in their reporting over the last few days that any reasonable person should want to find out the other side of this whole situation. They interviewed numerous Sheffield United fans and if you said "no, he shouldn't play again" you are a progressive intellect, and if you said "yes, he should", you are a rape apologist, which is completely false. There's a certain irony when the BBC, a company who protected Jimmy Savile who raped child after child to start preaching morality about rape. I've examined the evidence, I've looked at the facts and I've briefly read through the court transcripts. It didn't take me particularly long to do but it allowed me to form an opinion, one free of influence from the media tabloids and BBC. It is only an opinion but it's my opinion and so long as I express it in a non-libellous way, I have the right to say how I feel. It may be right, it may be wrong. Only 3 people know what truly happened and I imagine we'll never know for sure. For what it's worth, if you genuinely think I'm ignorant, I actually know of two women who grew up near me who were raped (separate incidents, not related) a number of years ago. One went through years of depression, numerous suicide attempts and a string of broken and dangerous relationships. She effectively went into hiding for several years. The other had a near mental breakdown and began blaming herself for what had gone on, trying to somehow rationalize her attackers actions and even spoke about him in a positive light (despite not knowing him before that night). Again, it took years for her to come to terms with it and by the time she finally accepted what happened, it had been too long realistically for the police to actually do anything. She's now able to talk about it (I've spoken to her about it) but it clearly opens a wound when she does. Oh... and neither Tweeted about ' winning big'...
|
|
|
Post by greyface on Oct 23, 2014 11:07:54 GMT
If I got sent down for rape I would not be re-employed by my employer on release. In fact I'd probably not get employed by any other employer at the level I am, I'd have to try and get a low paid job, possibly in another profession, and work my way back up. So should he. Simples.
Edit - regardless of me maintaining my innocence.
|
|
|
Post by dutchstokie on Oct 23, 2014 11:10:56 GMT
But late to the thread but I'd never watch Stoke if that c*** was in the side. Each to their own but I feel he has done his time for a crime he probably didn't commit. Bollox...let the bugger swing
|
|
|
Post by ihaveadream on Oct 23, 2014 12:49:59 GMT
If I got sent down for rape I would not be re-employed by my employer on release. In fact I'd probably not get employed by any other employer at the level I am, I'd have to try and get a low paid job, possibly in another profession, and work my way back up. So should he. Simples. Edit - regardless of me maintaining my innocence. You are right, the majority of employers take a dim view of criminal records
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 23, 2014 13:05:41 GMT
You might be allowed that opinion, but you are wrong. It's a fact, he is a rapist until proven otherwise. You are confusing opinion with fact. Btw, I am not a militant feminist, but someone who believes in a society that doesn't tolerate violence against women. He's hardly being censored , he's got very expensive lawyers and PR working for him full time. He's now freer than the person who this crime was committed against who has had to change location and identity. That's one heck of an assertion to make, unless I've taken that the wrong way. I seriously hope that you've not come to the conclusion I somehow condone male to female violence, because if you knew me in person you'd quickly know that I despise it. One of my good friends was routinely beaten in a violent relationship when she was even younger than the victim was in this case, I supported her at that time and saw the damage it did both physically and mentally. Trust me, I do not tolerate violence against women, be it physical or emotional and those who try and justify it can go fuck themselves. Evans has been found guilty, that I cannot deny. He firmly maintains his innocence despite media outlets desperately trying to force him to apologize to his victim (effectively admitting guilt) which is something he has the right to do. He also publicly protests his innocence which is something militant feminists are desperate to stop and this is where I believe he is being censored. Police are already investigating his website despite the fact it simply states facts of case. Anything else would be libellous, you know that. For a guy who is now out of jail and free to continue life, he seems strangely motivated to clear his name. Do I believe Evans is innocent? No. I believe he cheated on his incredibly supportive girlfriend who has stood by his side while he was tried and convicted and provided support while he's served the custodial sentence of his punishment. His infidelity in itself, is an unforgivable act and something he will have to live with for the rest of his life. He is also incredibly lucky that she was willing to stay with him. It must have also been an absolutely awful situation for her to be in, not only seeing her partner go through a trial for rape but knowing that he'd also gone behind her back. The irony, is she herself has received hostile abuse from feminists and other anti-Ched Evans for continuing to support him, with the main accusation being that she's just in it for the 'WAG' lifestyle. What they fail to acknowledge, is that she's the daughter of a multi millionaire jeweller and diamond dealer, who turns over about 20 million a year. I'm pretty sure the 500 grand Ched Evans is going to make over the next 3 years (assuming SUFC sign him again) isn't even pocket money to her. I do have the right to be sceptical. The media will feed you anything to sell papers and improve ratings, especially the red tops, everyone should know that by now. The BBC have been so biased in their reporting over the last few days that any reasonable person should want to find out the other side of this whole situation. They interviewed numerous Sheffield United fans and if you said "no, he shouldn't play again" you are a progressive intellect, and if you said "yes, he should", you are a rape apologist, which is completely false. There's a certain irony when the BBC, a company who protected Jimmy Savile who raped child after child to start preaching morality about rape. I've examined the evidence, I've looked at the facts and I've briefly read through the court transcripts. It didn't take me particularly long to do but it allowed me to form an opinion, one free of influence from the media tabloids and BBC. It is only an opinion but it's my opinion and so long as I express it in a non-libellous way, I have the right to say how I feel. It may be right, it may be wrong. Only 3 people know what truly happened and I imagine we'll never know for sure. For what it's worth, if you genuinely think I'm ignorant, I actually know of two women who grew up near me who were raped (separate incidents, not related) a number of years ago. One went through years of depression, numerous suicide attempts and a string of broken and dangerous relationships. She effectively went into hiding for several years. The other had a near mental breakdown and began blaming herself for what had gone on, trying to somehow rationalize her attackers actions and even spoke about him in a positive light (despite not knowing him before that night). Again, it took years for her to come to terms with it and by the time she finally accepted what happened, it had been too long realistically for the police to actually do anything. She's now able to talk about it (I've spoken to her about it) but it clearly opens a wound when she does. Oh... and neither Tweeted about ' winning big'... great post mate!!!!! i myself have no issues with people having their opinion on the matter as long as it is an informed one rather than just "He was found guilty, end of, he's a bastard!" how many times have the British judicial system been found to have carried out miscarriages of justice in the past????? it's happened in the past and still happens now..a simple verdict given by the court (and let's remember that Evan's "Appeal" isn't an appeal in the usual sense of the word but an appeal against the legality of the original trial in the first place, there's a reason why his legal team are going down that route!) does not give proof that cannot be questioned and anyone who has read the full facts of the case, which are a matter of public record so easily available to anyone, can if nothing else see there are many, many questions surrounding not just the evidence itself but the way in which the trial was carried out (the judge was actually publically criticised for constantly referring to the defendant in court as "The professional footballer Ched Evans" as this was believed that it could unfairly prejudice the jury against him given the reputation footballers have of thinking themselves above the law. the judge also ignored facts laid down by the medical examiner,the fact that was no forensic or physical evidence whatsoever that a rape had even occurred, the fact that the victim never once actually complained that she had been raped in the first place and the toxilogical reports which PROVED that the level of alcohol in her blood were not in any way consistent with the idea that she would not remember the previous nights events.) as you rightly said, none of us will ever know what actually happened and personally i don't really have an opinion myself on his guilt or innocence but as a reasonable person i can perfectly understand why Evans would want to continue his fight given the complete lack of evidence given to illicit a guilty verdict in the first place.....in some cases people are wrongly convicted, in some cases people are wrongly let off but for people to simply decide on what happened based on what the media have said and slag others off for their opinion which is actually based on far more knowledge of the case is ludicrous. ludicrous as that is however it is no way even close to the disgusting and reprehensible idea that if you question the original verdict or those that accept it that you can somehow be labelled a rape apologist or be berated for not caring about the wider issues.i'm not aware of one single person that has even close to saying anything that could be considered to be condoning or even accepting any kind of assualt ona woman but ubnfortunately it's just a lazy, disgraceful and unforgivable tactic adopted by many in the media (Charlie Webster being an example...especially given her hypocritical stance after she tweeted about being so excited to see Mike Tyson come out of a hotel and wanting his autograph...she then had to be reminded by someone that he had been convicted of and served time in prison for rape!) and seemingly some on here. questioning the verdict here (if you have bothered to read the facts of the case) is perfectly understandable...it in no way, shape or form makes anyone on here someone that is a rape apologist or just indifferent to the issue! anyone who uses this tactic and tries to use it simply to belittle someone's post on an internet forum about footy deserves a ban IMO. it's ridiculous behaviour and completely unwarranted.
|
|
|
Post by manicstreetpotter on Oct 23, 2014 13:06:37 GMT
I also believe he did nothing wrong other than cheat on his Mrs. Convicted because some pissed up bint can't remember saying yes??? Load of bollox. I only hope he gets his justice. Its not that she couldn't remember whether she said yes or not. Its that she was too intoxicated to give consent, regardless of what she said. Too intoxicated to give consent? So you think that is the same as giving consent then?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 23, 2014 13:10:47 GMT
Its not that she couldn't remember whether she said yes or not. Its that she was too intoxicated to give consent, regardless of what she said. Too intoxicated to give consent? So you think that is the same as giving consent then? that isn't what he's said AT ALL!!!! he's pointing out to Stafford that he wasn't convicted because she didn't give consent but because even if she did, in a court of law it can still be rape if it's judged that she was too drunk to know what she was consenting to or if it can be reasonably assumed it's something she wouldn't give consent to under normal circumstances and it was simply the level of her intoxication that led to her giving consent. he was simply laying out the facts of the case rather than casting an opinion (and you still completely put words into his mouth even then!)
|
|
|
Post by wizzardofdribble on Oct 23, 2014 13:27:33 GMT
Rape is a very emotive subject, Mick so it's hardly surprising that some posts will not be devoid of emotional content. It's not always possible to post strictly academic comments written in the correct linguistic and semantic way. Human beings don't always operate like that. It's not our 'modus operandi' mate.
|
|
|
Post by Stafford-Stokie on Oct 23, 2014 13:33:24 GMT
Rape is a very emotive subject, Mick so it's hardly surprising that some posts will not be devoid of emotional content. It's not always possible to post strictly academic comments written in the correct linguistic and semantic way. Human beings don't always operate like that. It's not our 'modus operandi' mate. The thing is that some see that if you have the opinion that someone is in fact innocent of a crime you are condoning that crime. This is clearly not the case. I think rapists should face a very slow and painful death, I just happen to think that this chap is innocent of rape.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 23, 2014 13:39:41 GMT
Rape is a very emotive subject, Mick so it's hardly surprising that some posts will not be devoid of emotional content. It's not always possible to post strictly academic comments written in the correct linguistic and semantic way. Human beings don't always operate like that. It's not our 'modus operandi' mate. i haven't asked anyone too mate....i've simply said that if someone has already said that they have read all the facts that are out there and come to a conclusion based on that then it isn't really fair for others to slag them off if their differing opinion is merely based on the tabloids (i.e. far less info) and that for people to try to infer that anyone who questions the verdict is somehow therefore a rape apologist or they just don't care about the issue of violence towards women, is disgraceful behaviour and the worst kind of trolling you can get! i'd say both are fairly reasonable things for humans to expect in any situation from other reasonable, grown adults whether it's an emotive subject or not....not really a lot to ask is it?
|
|
|
Post by wizzardofdribble on Oct 23, 2014 13:42:09 GMT
Rape is a very emotive subject, Mick so it's hardly surprising that some posts will not be devoid of emotional content. It's not always possible to post strictly academic comments written in the correct linguistic and semantic way. Human beings don't always operate like that. It's not our 'modus operandi' mate. The thing is that some see that if you have the opinion that someone is in fact innocent of a crime you are condoning that crime. This is clearly not the case. I think rapists should face a very slow and painful death, I just happen to think that this chap is innocent of rape. That's fair enough Stafford mate.
|
|
|
Post by wizzardofdribble on Oct 23, 2014 13:43:53 GMT
Rape is a very emotive subject, Mick so it's hardly surprising that some posts will not be devoid of emotional content. It's not always possible to post strictly academic comments written in the correct linguistic and semantic way. Human beings don't always operate like that. It's not our 'modus operandi' mate. i haven't asked anyone too mate....i've simply said that if someone has already said that they have read all the facts that are out there and come to a conclusion based on that then it isn't really fair for others to slag them off if their differing opinion is merely based on the tabloids (i.e. far less info) and that for people to try to infer that anyone who questions the verdict is somehow therefore a rape apologist or they just don't care about the issue of violence towards women, is disgraceful behaviour and the worst kind of trolling you can get! i'd say both are fairly reasonable things for humans to expect in any situation from other reasonable, grown adults whether it's an emotive subject or not....not really a lot to ask is it? Fair comment Mick, wouldn't disagree with any of that.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 23, 2014 13:56:33 GMT
i haven't asked anyone too mate....i've simply said that if someone has already said that they have read all the facts that are out there and come to a conclusion based on that then it isn't really fair for others to slag them off if their differing opinion is merely based on the tabloids (i.e. far less info) and that for people to try to infer that anyone who questions the verdict is somehow therefore a rape apologist or they just don't care about the issue of violence towards women, is disgraceful behaviour and the worst kind of trolling you can get! i'd say both are fairly reasonable things for humans to expect in any situation from other reasonable, grown adults whether it's an emotive subject or not....not really a lot to ask is it? Fair comment Mick, wouldn't disagree with any of that. actually i just re-read it and i disagree with it.....why i'd expect most on here to be "Reasonable, grown up adults" god only knows (and i'm including myself in that)
|
|
|
Post by stokester1989 on Oct 23, 2014 14:51:27 GMT
i think hes innocent and actually feel for him. any girl who goes back to a hotel with a man shes met on anight out must know the score and what his intentions are. i think he was an easy target for some slag who wants to earn a quick quid.
|
|
|
Post by jimmygscfc on Oct 23, 2014 15:06:51 GMT
i think hes innocent and actually feel for him. any girl who goes back to a hotel with a man shes met on anight out must know the score and what his intentions are. i think he was an easy target for some slag who wants to earn a quick quid. I give up sometime. You seem to be doing a lot of thinking without much end product.
|
|
|
Post by jimmygscfc on Oct 23, 2014 15:11:14 GMT
Only if you believe he was guilty and I believe there's a shit tonne of evidence to prove he isn't. So yes, as far as I'm concerned, he may be a cheat, but he's not a rapist. I'm allowed that opinion, despite militant feminists attempting to censor those who actually believe he's innocent. I also believe he did nothing wrong other than cheat on his Mrs. Convicted because some pissed up bint can't remember saying yes??? Load of bollox. I only hope he gets his justice. Stafford, you have a right to express your opinion so I'll express mine. I think your ramblings on this topic are pure conjecture, thoughtless and insensitive. Just my opinion of course.
|
|