|
|
Post by greyman on Dec 12, 2014 17:02:48 GMT
I was there. Lived in Peterborough at the time. My ex who was with me still claims her feet have never been colder than they were that night. Off to pub after to meet Posh mates and they weren't happy
|
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Dec 10, 2014 23:47:55 GMT
I hope the directive excludes people like John Terry, otherwise it would start to look as though refs make decisions solely on the basis of what they see rather than who they see doing it. We can't have that.
|
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Dec 6, 2014 22:29:58 GMT
It was a penalty. No question
|
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Dec 6, 2014 7:59:09 GMT
True
|
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Dec 5, 2014 14:23:07 GMT
From what I can tell, it's only old farts who do use Facebook these days. Anybody who wants to be down with the kids like momo is grooming talking to them on Snapchat or some such.
|
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Dec 5, 2014 12:55:41 GMT
Who?
|
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Dec 5, 2014 8:43:57 GMT
That many people who have looked into the case in any detail can't believe the guilty verdict. The most important people - the twelve who heard every piece of evidence (not just the Daily Mail or Ched Evans blog versions) and the Judge who subsequently refused his appeal (who had access to all the evidence and is legally trained to the n'th degree) - don't agree. True. What is also true is that he's now a free man and allowed to make a living. Don't you agree? Or do you think the law is wrong on that score but right about the conviction? |
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Dec 2, 2014 18:11:25 GMT
PotterLog
I am engaging honestly. Our legal system assumes that we are innocent until proven guilty. If you conflate the names of people who have never been found guilty of anything with those of some seriously unpleasant bastards, you're going to be the one misleading people.
There are two sides to this. One is that more rapes need to be prosecuted and more women feel comfortable making those accusations. But at the same time, we cannot work on the basis that an accusation of rape is all it takes to send someone down. Whether you like it or not, that is the agenda being pushed on the back of the case of Ched Evans. The people doing it are using the fact they can play it out in the media as a way of having rape seen as a special case charge 'because women don't lie'.
They're not even interested in what Ched Evans does next. In my view he's not only free to choose how he earns a living - it is up to employers to decide if they want him to represent them - but he's far better as a footballer than say a plumber or whatever else they think he'd do. They've done a great job of hijacking this case but if they get their way, there'll ultimately be a backlash from men.
To be honest though, I'm ashamed to be seen in the company of some of the comments on this thread. Not yours obviously but that one up there is a disgrace.
|
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Dec 2, 2014 17:25:22 GMT
You missed Roman Polanski, whose case is one of the worst of those. Certainly far worse than the grim gropings of DLT. I see you've included unproven accusations against John Leslie and Freddie Starr, which suggest that you still think that an accusation is the same as a conviction. Thank Christ you're not in charge of the legal system. We've not assumed guilt since the Middle Ages, but here you are going back to the Dark Ages. I think you ought to consider a username change from 'greyman' to 'strawman'. I don't think so mate. You're the one including the names of innocent men in a list of rapists, paedophiles and gropers. You're just proving my point for me. You think 'accused' and 'guilty' are the same thing. |
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Dec 2, 2014 15:25:07 GMT
I still don't think he did anything wrong. Some bint who has form for crying rape has just fucked up a young lads career and future in the name of cash and fame. How he got convicted yet the other lad didn't is beyond belief. How there can be no reasonable doubt in this case is also beyond belief. If he was good enough I would be happy to see Evans in a Stoke shirt. Bloody shocking state of affairs. Ah yes, the old "cash and fame" chestnut. The world is awash with normal people made rich and famous by being sexually assaulted isn't it. To put this to the test, here is a quick list (a very small sample) of famous people who've been accused or convicted of sexual assault of some description: Bill Cosby Mike Tyson Jimmy Savile Stuart Hall Tupac Shakur Jonathan King Anthony Kiedis Dave Lee Travis Freddie Starr Rolf Harris Marlon King John Leslie Jody Morris Jermaine Pennant A good selection there. Presumably, given the fortune and fame that comes with accusing somebody of these crimes, the names of the women who made the complaints in these cases will trip easily off your tongue? One of them even? Now now, no googling - away you go. You missed Roman Polanski, whose case is one of the worst of those. Certainly far worse than the grim gropings of DLT. I see you've included unproven accusations against John Leslie and Freddie Starr, which suggest that you still think that an accusation is the same as a conviction. Thank Christ you're not in charge of the legal system. We've not assumed guilt since the Middle Ages, but here you are going back to the Dark Ages. |
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Dec 2, 2014 14:42:57 GMT
I still don't think he did anything wrong. Some bint who has form for crying rape has just fucked up a young lads career and future in the name of cash and fame. How he got convicted yet the other lad didn't is beyond belief. How there can be no reasonable doubt in this case is also beyond belief. If he was good enough I would be happy to see Evans in a Stoke shirt. Bloody shocking state of affairs. I am with you 100% !!!!! my thoughts precisely The maxim in dubio pro reo must have been thrown into the rubbish bin in this case The court doesn't agree and it knows more than you do. Even if he hadn't been convicted of rape, you can't argue he did nothing wrong. At best, he behaved like a scumbag that night. |
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Dec 2, 2014 13:02:36 GMT
Nick Conrad, Radio Norfolk presenter is now being investigated by Ofcom after saying that women who intentionally go out on the pull, get a bloke, take him home, strip off naked, then jump into bed with him and have sex, can't really then go out the next day and call that rape. This is fucking barmy. So if you go out now, get pulled, go back to her house, you have to print off some fucking consent forms to make sure it's all legal?
Like I said, a lot of innocent young men are going to have their lives ruined in the next few months. Young men with bright futures will have their lives totally turned upside down by frivolous claims that the police are ever so keen to act on right now in this wave of political correctness. Parents, fathers, mothers, this could just as easily be your 18 year old son, finally old enough to go out and enjoy himself, have a few beers and pull a woman. Right now, I would be very tempted to warn any young male about the risks of going out and doing what should be considered a fairly normal thing. It's shit but it's just the society we live in now. Unfortunately that wouldn't be good enough. She could just claim she was too drunk to have given consent and so the consent forms would be null and void. You'd need some type of sobriety and drugs test, witnessed by a trusted third party to be water tight. Kind of removes the fun/romance don't you think? Just what chance has a bloke got? Things are going to get very ugly. The agenda now being formed on the back of the Ched Evans case and others is that an accusation of rape should be treated as a conviction. I know on some campuses in the US and Canada (and so coming here soon), young men will not have casual relationships with fellow students precisely because there's a reasonable chance they'll cry rape about it later. I'm not saying that is what happened in the Ched Evans case, just that it's been hijacked by people who want women to have the right to have a man convicted just on their say so. |
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Nov 28, 2014 8:30:14 GMT
Let's hope Stoke have nothing to do with these arseholes.
|
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Nov 24, 2014 6:13:17 GMT
In fairness, I said in the very first post that I'm not specifically complaining about Burnley and we're as guilty of doing it as anybody else. Absolutely everybody in world football does it now - that's the problem! We've started a trend  One thing we never did though was feign injury. Pulis wouldn't accept that. The feigning head injuries was pretty low To be honest, some of the stuff that Burnley did was just par for the course - including for us. But some of it went beyond gamesmanship into cheating. When Marney went down at one point and all the Stoke players decided to drag him to his feet I thought the ref had started to lose control of the game. Keepers buggering about at goal kicks is one thing but repeatedly feigning head injuries when another team is attacking then kicking the ball out as far down the pitch as possible from the drop ball? That's just beyond the pale. |
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Nov 23, 2014 21:53:13 GMT
Have we ever repeatedly feigned head injuries during games when other teams had the ball in our half then kept kicking it back into their corner of the pitch for throw ins?
|
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Nov 23, 2014 20:27:11 GMT
As well as the succession of head injuries that coincided with Stoke attacks were the number of times they kicked the ball out for throws deep into our own half afterwards. The ref should have booked somebody each time it happened. He almost lost control of the game because he wasn't dealing with this - let's call it for what it is - cheating.
|
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Nov 21, 2014 15:27:18 GMT
'Sadly' eh? The logic of the ducking stool and what I'd expect from somebody who obviously would happy clap us into the world of Kafka. Fortunately our legal system - in theory at least - assumes you are innocent in the first place so you can't be 'found' innocent. I know you and the mob would clearly like to see this reversed in the case of rape at least but tough luck. The rest of us would prefer not to see people banged up for years and have their lives ruined just because somebody has said something to the police about them. Especially when we know there's a pretty good chance it's all been made up. The mob in this case are led by those who believe all men are rapists in the first place so any chance to put them away has to be seized regardless of anything they may or may not have actually done. Don't believe me? Go read. Or wait until the appropriate people in the generation that thinks like this leave school and university and enter the workplace. Coming soon. As for Ched Evans. He was guilty and did his time. But that's not enough for you and the rest of your mob. Now you want him burnt. It would be nice if you'd stop telling me what I want. It's not very conducive to discussion. All the evidence (surveys and research, organisations like Rape Crisis, online testimonies, the BBC scandal, experiences of women we all know etc) suggests that rapes and sexual assaults are massively under-reported and even more massively under-convicted. You only have to look at this thread to see why women would be reluctant to report - even in the fraction of cases that actually result in a conviction, people cast doubt on it. The victim gets called all the names under the sun, her character is called into question and in this case she's had to move house because of the amount of abuse and threats she's received. Why would anyone willingly put themselves through all that? I believe it is plainly obvious that the number of convicted rapists is tiny compared to the number of rapes that happen, and I think it is a problem. I don't know what the solution is, but I think a start would be society taking a position of believing what women say rather than treating them with scorn and suspicion from the outset. It is partly that attitude that allowed the likes of Jimmy Savile and Stuart Hall to hide on plain sight for years. Clearly I don't think the answer is "banging someone up because somebody said something to a police officer" - but you already knew that. You seem to take the opposite view. That what is actually the problem in our society is some growing epidemic of false rape claims. I find it astonishing that you could conclude that, given what we know. The evidence presented so far seems to be one jumpy video of a woman screaming "get your hand off my breast" and a few vague imperatives like "go read". I'm not suggesting that malicious false accusations don't happen, but surely you can see that the stories of men who've been through this nightmare are simply dwarfed by the number of women who have been raped in their lives and whose attacker, generally speaking, walks free. The internet is full to the brim with them. If you don't believe me, go read. Now you're telling me what I think. I know from the evidence and from talking to female friends that the vast majority of rapes and assaults go unreported and we need to do more to encourage people to come forward and prosecute effectively. At the same time I also know there is a smaller epidemic of women using the false rape claim either as a way of balancing things out as some feminists see it or as an easy way to get some attention or to do a man over, knowing full well they can do it without consequence or even being named. Unlike you I don't see this as a minor issue nor do I believe that two wrongs make a right. What I'm also aware of is that this Ched Evans case is being hijacked to distort the way the law operates and you're going along with it hook line and sinker. If women are going to lie about rapes and assaults - and many do, minority or not - then we shouldn't just take accusations at their word, even assuming that wasn't an essential part of our justice system in the first place. We're on a dangerous path here and it seems to me that some women want it all their own way. Thank God our justice system doesn't work like that yet. You'll recall the case of Rhiannon Brooker earlier this year who had her boyfriend charged with multiple cases of rape to excuse her failure at exams. The UK's main rape campaign group wanted the charges against her dropped. In fact such charges are rare because according to a report into false accusations by the CPS, out of 1,400 demonstrably false allegation cases, only 35 women were prosecuted. Anyway, Andy Coulson has been released from prison today so as an ex-felon he needs to be hounded out of work and to an early grave. Go get him along with the hundreds of others who've been set free. I'm sure Jean Hatchet and her ilk will be busy calling for them all to be driven on to the streets. |
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Nov 21, 2014 11:30:53 GMT
Dutch Metalhead and Greyman you've made my point for me. All these celebrities/feminists have jumped on a bandwagon purely because of the media attention. First Ched Evans, then Dapper Laughs, and now that American PUA who's been denied entry to the country. Before we know it flirting will be sexist. I have a lot of sympathy for Ched Evans, because he's being denied a human right to work by the media and not the law. I think most football fans feel the same way. Dapper Laughs was an idiot and - worse - not very funny. The place to see all this shit played out is on University campuses. In some of the studies I've seen flirting would be categorised as assault or even rape. Some male students now refuse to have anything to do with trying to get off with female students because they're literally asking for a rape charge. Hating men is already mainstream for a lot of women. Watch this and imagine the same group of women discussing a case of a man carving off a woman's breasts and throwing them out. Watch the audience |
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Nov 21, 2014 10:46:01 GMT
Why didn't all these patrons quit when they signed Marlon King last year? Sheffield United should hang their heads in shame ...because they are ignorant, moronic, hypocritical, do gooding wankstains. As I've said, the issue at stake here is not about Ched Evans, role models, the victim or any of that stuff. If it was, we'd have heard a lot more about Luke McCormick, Lee Hughes, Marlon King, Nile Ranger and whoever. It's about a wider argument that some people want to have about men and the ability of women to have them convicted and then hung out to dry for the rest of their lives on nothing more than an accusation of rape, which by the definition of some feminist groups can be based on nothing more than a feeling of regret or a belief that all men deserve to be punished for something. If you don't believe that, you really need to look at some of the things these people believe. What really pisses me off about this is how some men are also buying into it, as we have seen on here. |
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Nov 21, 2014 6:11:13 GMT
'Sadly' eh? The logic of the ducking stool and what I'd expect from somebody who obviously would happy clap us into the world of Kafka. Fortunately our legal system - in theory at least - assumes you are innocent in the first place so you can't be 'found' innocent. I know you and the mob would clearly like to see this reversed in the case of rape at least but tough luck. The rest of us would prefer not to see people banged up for years and have their lives ruined just because somebody has said something to the police about them. Especially when we know there's a pretty good chance it's all been made up.
The mob in this case are led by those who believe all men are rapists in the first place so any chance to put them away has to be seized regardless of anything they may or may not have actually done. Don't believe me? Go read. Or wait until the appropriate people in the generation that thinks like this leave school and university and enter the workplace. Coming soon.
As for Ched Evans. He was guilty and did his time. But that's not enough for you and the rest of your mob. Now you want him burnt.
|
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Nov 20, 2014 23:08:32 GMT
From what I've read - and I am a lawyer - I can't see how the case was proved against him beyond reasonable doubt whilst the other guy who also had sex with the girl who was apparently much the worse for drink was acquitted. Rape is rape but then again one must give a bearing to the circumstances; if a girl is walking down the street minding her own business and a guy pounces on her and rapes her, I'd hang him from the gallows. On the other hand if a girl is pissed out of her brain and willfully goes with two guys to a hotel room, then that's a completely different kettle of fish For a lawyer you are not brilliant with the facts. 1. If a girl is pissed out of her brains, as you put it, she might not be capable of willfully doing anything 2. She went to the hotel room with 1 gentleman not 2 -the 2nd gentleman turned up un-invited raped her and climbed down the fire exit after doing so Are we now pretending to be lawyers to condone the rapist - just how low are we going to go It's no longer anything to do with the law. He's been subject to that and done his time. What we're now dealing with is a lynch mob, of which you're part. Don't even get me started on the idea that people are condoning rape. Talk about a straw man |
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Nov 20, 2014 21:23:55 GMT
Cant have it both ways logger. Most on here are after Ched's bollocks on the basis he was found guilty in a court of law and yet you seem to be making out that the courts can be wrong? How can that be? Well, since you ask... A guilty verdict means that the defendant has been *proven* to be guilty of the crime, i.e. that there is enough evidence to conclude that s/he is guilty beyond any reasonable doubt. A not guilty verdict does not prove anything. It simply means that the evidence was not conclusive/extensive enough to declare that the defendant is guilty - there is some reasonable doubt as to whether the defendant committed the crime or not. The very fact that one verdict allows for no doubt, while the other verdict means there is some doubt, means that obviously the court is far, far more likely to be "wrong" when it acquits than when it convicts. Medieval thinking. "If the court finds you guilty, then you're guilty. If the court finds you innocent, you're still guilty." So you think any man accused of rape on nothing more than the say-so of a woman is guilty whatever the court decides, whatever evidence does or doesn't exist and whatever the likelihood - between 8 and 40 percent - the woman is making it all up out of spite, mental illness, greed, sadism, revenge, regret, misandry or attention seeking, the man is a rapist because all men are and this one has just been caught out. This is the outcome the likes of Jean Hatchet want. Shame people like you are buying into it. As for Ched Evans, Sheffield Utd shouldn't have had anything to do with him. Not because it's wrong for a released felon to earn a living but because we now are giving in to mob rule, especially when it comes to issues such as rape. This issue has been hijacked and for decent men to go along with it - to try to avoid an association with a scuzzer like Evans - that just beggars belief. We all lose because our justice system is very clear. You are innocent until proven guilty and when your punishment is over, you are free once more. |
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Nov 20, 2014 17:34:20 GMT
It might come from this. It took me 30 seconds to find it
Rape
GD
and that report states itself that the higher figure is simply based on the number of women that withdraw charges..withdrawing charges could be done for any number of reasons (it could be a family member so the woman is scared of the mess it will create, fear for her safety, not wishing to go through the ordeal again etc. etc.) and in no way should be used as a stat to back up the number of "False rapes" reported. the only important fact in that report is that no-one knows full stop! add to that the fact that number of "False rapes" reported add literally nothing to the Ched Evans debate and i think it's best for all concerned to get off the topic of stats anyway. it adds nothing whatsoever to the Ched Evans discussion What it does do is highlight what is going on with the public debate about Evans. As men we all need to fear where this is taking us because what some people would like if for an accusation of rape to be as good as a conviction. That is the agenda now. |
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Nov 20, 2014 17:21:00 GMT
Are you working on the basis that two wrongs make a right like the misandrists do? ie just because one woman doesn't report a rape means that it's ok for an entirely different woman to make something up about an entirely different man? Just two wrongs, from what I can see. I understand that more women need to report rape and sexual assault, but equally the research shows that anywhere between 8 and 41 percent of rape accusations are unfounded or malicious. Where on earth are you getting 41% from? Around 1 or 2% is the most commonly cited figure, but I'll even give you 8% - the upper limit of the FBI's estimations - when you add in the number of rapes that go unreported (the majority), you're talking a tiny minority which are false claims. Read up a bit more because the 2 percent figure is a made-up number that feminists like to cite because it is equivalent to the number of false accusations of other crimes. Eight percent is still a lot of women making false accusations and they are doing women and men a disservice. Are you aware of just how poisonous an issue this already is in Universities both here and in America? A lot of women in these environments now view false accusations of rape and sexual assault as justified. Watch this. |
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Nov 20, 2014 15:55:10 GMT
quite a few according to the conviction rates  Ha, right yeah. *That's* what our pitiful rape conviction rates show. Are you working on the basis that two wrongs make a right like the misandrists do? ie just because one woman doesn't report a rape means that it's ok for an entirely different woman to make something up about an entirely different man? Just two wrongs, from what I can see. I understand that more women need to report rape and sexual assault, but equally the research shows that anywhere between 8 and 41 percent of rape accusations are unfounded or malicious. |
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Nov 20, 2014 9:10:55 GMT
Don't know if anyone mentioned the Liam Lawrence and Ben Alnwick so called rape! Apparently the video is available on some dodgy sites!if you have seen it, then its laughable that rape was ever used in conjunction with it. These footballer rape cases are nearly always dodgy. Not condoning rape b.t.w. Ched Evans is a convicted rapist. That is a fact. The only debate should be about whether he has the right to earn a living (he has) and how this whole issue has been hijacked by extreme views at either end. His appeal might work but only on the basis that he's a scumbag rather than a rapist. On the one side we have misandrists who want to use it to further a victim narrative about how men as a whole are either rapists or rape apologists, how rape is worse than anything else and rapists forgo any rights they might have. On the other we have misogynists who think she was asking for it. These are the voices that drown out everything else and it saddens me to see men on this thread siding with the first group. |
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Nov 19, 2014 10:41:34 GMT
I understand a woman who killed three children has just escaped a prison sentence. Let's await the outpouring of moral outrage and petitions about that. There are a few sanctimonious people on this thread who can get themselves worked up about it in the same way they have Ched Evans who actually was punished.
Remember that there is no context, no grey area and no mitigation. Just the fact she's a convicted child killer just like Evans is a convicted rapist.
|
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Nov 19, 2014 0:53:06 GMT
Of course it's not. How about this: Hungry Nun ?@baileychappell Oct 14 Totally agree with the campaign to castrate Ched Evans #castratechedevans How about this? Hryn Bolt ?@dr_Revus Nov 12 To anyone supporting Ched Evans attempt to play football once again, go hang yourself the guy should NEVER be paid to play again How about this? shay ?@jjunebuug Nov 12 someone could kill Ched Evans and i'd feel nothing There's nutters on both sides. Exactly. |
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Nov 19, 2014 0:43:34 GMT
Of course it's not. How about this: Hungry Nun ?@baileychappell Oct 14 Totally agree with the campaign to castrate Ched Evans #castratechedevans How about this? Hryn Bolt ?@dr_Revus Nov 12 To anyone supporting Ched Evans attempt to play football once again, go hang yourself the guy should NEVER be paid to play again How about this? shay ?@jjunebuug Nov 12 someone could kill Ched Evans and i'd feel nothing |
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Nov 18, 2014 23:13:21 GMT
Not really up against good opposition but better. Be interesting to see what happens with Smalling. Shawcross apparently dropped for poor performance against Zlatan so let's see what happens to Smalling for failing to deal with Hull's left back. It wasn't actually Smallings fault it was down to the tired little lamb (lazy little twat) Sterling not following Robertson leaving Clyne with 2 to mark. But Smalling was wank anyway and is there anyone slower than Jagielka playing at centre half in England at the moment? That comedy gold moment at the end where the ref felt sorry for him because the homeless crack head beat him all ends up was hilarious. Watch it again. Sterling doesn't do his job, for sure, but then Smalling doesn't make much of an effort to get across to cover then turns his back on the shot like a four year old. |
|
