|
|
Post by nott1 on Apr 25, 2017 6:22:25 GMT
Reportedly (ITV headline) about to re-join Sheffield United.
|
|
|
|
Post by baltipiesmuggler on Apr 25, 2017 6:28:17 GMT
Mental if true
Sent from my SM-G928F using proboards
|
|
|
|
Post by nott1 on Apr 25, 2017 6:29:39 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2017 6:32:16 GMT
Mental if true Sent from my SM-G928F using proboards Why? |
|
|
|
Post by Fegg 'Ayes Observer on Apr 25, 2017 6:36:10 GMT
Best of luck to him.
He shagged a tart who then set him up and did two and a half years in de slammer.
Most expensive shag he's ever had.
|
|
|
|
Post by baltipiesmuggler on Apr 25, 2017 6:37:57 GMT
Mental if true Sent from my SM-G928F using proboards Why? Well, setting aside all debate around the incident, he's still a convicted rapist. Sent from my SM-G928F using proboards |
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Apr 25, 2017 6:39:01 GMT
Mental if true Sent from my SM-G928F using proboards He's had his conviction quashed by the court of appeal and was found not guilty at a retrial. So the law says he is innocent - and on the evidence I saw I'm surprised he was convicted in the first place - it never seemed a "safe" conviction to me. So I can't say I am surprised that he is playing football again nor that his previous club wants to sign him. Does this mean he's a good role model for young people? No, of course not! Does it mean that I would be rushing to re-sign him if I were on the board at the Blades? Probabaly not. But it is down to the Blades and their fans whether they wish to sign an ex player who, in the eyes of the law, is innocent of any criminal offence. |
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Apr 25, 2017 6:41:12 GMT
Well, setting aside all debate around the incident, he's still a convicted rapist. Sent from my SM-G928F using proboards I think you are misunderstanding the law. If his conviction was quashed and he was found innocent at his retrial - then he is NOT a convicted rapist. |
|
|
|
Post by werrington on Apr 25, 2017 6:41:39 GMT
Well, setting aside all debate around the incident, he's still a convicted rapist. Sent from my SM-G928F using proboards Is he ? |
|
|
|
Post by baltipiesmuggler on Apr 25, 2017 6:43:10 GMT
Well, setting aside all debate around the incident, he's still a convicted rapist. Sent from my SM-G928F using proboards I think you are misunderstanding the law. If his conviction was quashed and he was found innocent at his retrial - then he is NOT a convicted rapist. Was he? I completely missed this - thought his appeal was overturned. Fair enough then I guess. Sent from my SM-G928F using proboards |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2017 6:44:32 GMT
Cad and a bounder - yes
Rapist - no
|
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Apr 25, 2017 6:50:05 GMT
Best of luck to him. He shagged a tart who then set him up and did two and a half years in de slammer. Most expensive shag he's ever had. She has never accused him of anything and has had to suffer for this kind of reaction |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2017 7:07:57 GMT
Mental if true Sent from my SM-G928F using proboards Why? He has been found innocent, while Luke McCormack is being allowed to play for and even captain Plymouth, which is an absolute disgrace. |
|
|
|
Post by senojbor on Apr 25, 2017 7:09:12 GMT
Good luck to him
|
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Apr 25, 2017 8:15:44 GMT
I think utd supported up until his conviction. Had to sack him after his conviction.
They then tried to help him on his release but the PC brigade wouldn't let him.
Now he's been proven innocent they are doing a moral thing in giving him a deal.
That's my thoughts on it. Ennis still won't be happy though
|
|
|
|
Post by RichJonesy on Apr 25, 2017 8:18:04 GMT
He has been found innocent, while Luke McCormack is being allowed to play for and even captain Plymouth, which is an absolute disgrace. No job is good enough for McCormack let alone being a professional footballer. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2017 8:19:01 GMT
I think utd supported up until his conviction. Had to sack him after his conviction. They then tried to help him on his release but the PC brigade wouldn't let him. Now he's been proven innocent they are doing a moral thing in giving him a deal. That's my thoughts on it. Ennis still won't be happy though Bloody PC Brigade at it again. They really are the root of all evil....... |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2017 8:19:36 GMT
He has been found innocent, while Luke McCormack is being allowed to play for and even captain Plymouth, which is an absolute disgrace. No job is good enough for McCormack let alone being a professional footballer. Served his time, entitled to make a living..... |
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Apr 25, 2017 8:20:38 GMT
I think utd supported up until his conviction. Had to sack him after his conviction. They then tried to help him on his release but the PC brigade wouldn't let him. Now he's been proven innocent they are doing a moral thing in giving him a deal. That's my thoughts on it. Ennis still won't be happy though Bloody PC Brigade at it again. They really are the root of all evil....... Well, people have this opinion that you shouldn't get on with your life after serving their time (The argument about how much time is a different one) |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2017 8:25:08 GMT
Bloody PC Brigade at it again. They really are the root of all evil....... Well, people have this opinion that you shouldn't get on with your life after serving their time (The argument about how much time is a different one) I suppose I would be described as the PC Brigade (maybe?) and I certainly agree that if you serve your time you're entitled to earn a living (with obvious exceptions paedophiles working with children, farudsters working in the city etec etc) Might not be palatable at times (Luke McCormick at Plymouth) but it's the law and unless you subscribe to draconian measures of locking people up for life you have to try and rehabilitate and allow people to contribute to society.... |
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Apr 25, 2017 8:26:57 GMT
Well, people have this opinion that you shouldn't get on with your life after serving their time (The argument about how much time is a different one) I suppose I would be described as the PC Brigade (maybe?) and I certainly agree that if you serve your time you're entitled to earn a living (with obvious exceptions paedophiles working with children, farudsters working in the city etec etc) Might not be palatable at times (Luke McCormick at Plymouth) but it's the law and unless you subscribe to draconian measures of locking people up for life you have to try and rehabilitate and allow people to contribute to society.... Exactly |
|
|
|
Post by RichJonesy on Apr 25, 2017 8:29:27 GMT
No job is good enough for McCormack let alone being a professional footballer. Served his time, entitled to make a living..... Perhaps it's just me but for his crime I don't think his sentence was enough. Served less than 4 years for completely shattering a family's life. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2017 8:31:58 GMT
Served his time, entitled to make a living..... Perhaps it's just me but for his crime I don't think his sentence was enough. Served less than 4 years for completely shattering a family's life. The actual length of his sentence is a different debate but absolutely there's a strong argument to say he should have served more time (not sure what the MAXIMUM sentence for that crime is without checking) |
|
|
|
Post by RichJonesy on Apr 25, 2017 8:33:35 GMT
Perhaps it's just me but for his crime I don't think his sentence was enough. Served less than 4 years for completely shattering a family's life. The actual length of his sentence is a different debate but absolutely there's a strong argument to say he should have served more time (not sure what the MAXIMUM sentence for that crime is without checking) Neither do I. To allow him to earn his living in the public eye doesn't sit nicely with me either. I'm surprised Plymouth took him back. |
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Apr 25, 2017 8:42:56 GMT
The actual length of his sentence is a different debate but absolutely there's a strong argument to say he should have served more time (not sure what the MAXIMUM sentence for that crime is without checking) Neither do I. To allow him to earn his living in the public eye doesn't sit nicely with me either. I'm surprised Plymouth took him back. Totally irelevant to the length of his sentence but by all accounts he has done a lot of work in the safe driving industry. It doesn't absolve him but it's the only tiniest speck of good to come out of the situation |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2017 8:53:30 GMT
The actual length of his sentence is a different debate but absolutely there's a strong argument to say he should have served more time (not sure what the MAXIMUM sentence for that crime is without checking) Neither do I. To allow him to earn his living in the public eye doesn't sit nicely with me either. I'm surprised Plymouth took him back. Football was his trade though. No different to a plasterer or a welder going back to work in that respect. I look at him and think "Does he regret that incident every day of his life?" and I think he probably does. I worked with a bloke up until recently who served a similar sentence for killing a teenager down in Portsmouth when he was in his early 20's and it took him years to try and rebuild his life and reputation. But it tormented him and affected everything he did, and when you think about it in the cold light of day how many "decent" people at some point have sent a quick text whilst driving, or had 3/4 pints and risked driving home, or gone on a works night out rolled in at 02:00 and then jumped in their car at 08:00 to drive home? In McCormick's case it was a blazing row with his missus after getting drunk and then driving after only a few hours kip to sort things out. He clearly wasn't thinking straight, and what unfolded was absolutely tragic. But there are no winners in that situation and I don't think depriving him of a life afterwards helps anyone as sad as it is.... |
|
|
|
Post by wizzardofdribble on Apr 25, 2017 8:57:24 GMT
Well, people have this opinion that you shouldn't get on with your life after serving their time (The argument about how much time is a different one) I suppose I would be described as the PC Brigade (maybe?) and I certainly agree that if you serve your time you're entitled to earn a living (with obvious exceptions paedophiles working with children, farudsters working in the city etec etc) Might not be palatable at times (Luke McCormick at Plymouth) but it's the law and unless you subscribe to draconian measures of locking people up for life you have to try and rehabilitate and allow people to contribute to society.... The difference between trying to rehabilitate most offenders and Ched Evans is very different Young offenders I've worked with have criminal records at the age of 16 when they leave school (if they've actually been) which makes it almost impossible for them to get a job. No employer will touch them. That almost forces them back into the criminal justice system. Thats why the rate of reoffending in YOIs is about 95% Ched Evans on the other hand has had quite a few job offers. |
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Apr 25, 2017 9:44:08 GMT
I suppose I would be described as the PC Brigade (maybe?) and I certainly agree that if you serve your time you're entitled to earn a living (with obvious exceptions paedophiles working with children, farudsters working in the city etec etc) Might not be palatable at times (Luke McCormick at Plymouth) but it's the law and unless you subscribe to draconian measures of locking people up for life you have to try and rehabilitate and allow people to contribute to society.... The difference between trying to rehabilitate most offenders and Ched Evans is very different Young offenders I've worked with have criminal records at the age of 16 when they leave school (if they've actually been) which makes it almost impossible for them to get a job. No employer will touch them. That almost forces them back into the criminal justice system. Thats why the rate of reoffending in YOIs is about 95% Ched Evans on the other hand has had quite a few job offers. The major difference though is that Ched Evans is, in the eyes of the law, innocent. His time in jail was as a result of a conviction which has since been overturned. If he is "guilty" of anything it is of having sex as part of a threesome - which isn't a crime. You are right about the need for rehabilitation of young offenders - but Ched Evans is NOT an offender. |
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Apr 25, 2017 9:46:56 GMT
The difference between trying to rehabilitate most offenders and Ched Evans is very different Young offenders I've worked with have criminal records at the age of 16 when they leave school (if they've actually been) which makes it almost impossible for them to get a job. No employer will touch them. That almost forces them back into the criminal justice system. Thats why the rate of reoffending in YOIs is about 95% Ched Evans on the other hand has had quite a few job offers. The major difference though is that Ched Evans is, in the eyes of the law, innocent. His time in jail was as a result of a conviction which has since been overturned. If he is "guilty" of anything it is of having sex as part of a threesome - which isn't a crime. Exactly. If footballers couldn't find work because they were scumbags, there'd be a lot more of them on the dole. |
|
|
|
Post by leoncort on Apr 25, 2017 9:51:04 GMT
I live in Sheffield and know quite a few Blades fans, rumours have been for some time that there has been a long standing gentleman's agreement to re sign Ched when he was out of prison. Chairman visited him a few times. The feel is Wilder has recruited excellently and if he deems Ched good enough then they all want him back there. Very injury plagued season this time round in a poor Chesterfield side.
|
|
