That's what you think, lol.Leftbank wrote:Sponsors threats. Jessica Ennis-Hill getting involved. Stick a form in him, he's done
Banter.Dante wrote:Good. The deal collapsing, not the threats obviously.
He needs to fornicate off, and concentrate on his appeal. If he wins it (which he won't), he's free to return to football.
Exactly.Glorio wrote:I'm sorry but I'm 100% with Martin here as you all know. If the courts say he's not guilty, then he's not. That's what you lot said, you can't just go with the court statement when you like. Not saying he's not an idiot by the way. It's just really difficult to believe that it wasn't consentual
Agree. Wonder if he'll get his job back?Glorio wrote:I'm sorry but I'm 100% with Martin here as you all know. If the courts say he's not guilty, then he's not. That's what you lot said, you can't just go with the court statement when you like. Not saying he's not an idiot by the way. It's just really difficult to believe that it wasn't consentual
My stance has always been that his words and actions rendered him guilty, not the verdict.Martin wrote:Evidence was irrelevant on here when I defended him. People were perfectly fine with "guilty in a court of law and that's that!" before. You just don't like the verdict. Well now he is not guilty, in a court of law.
He has had his conviction quashed and then been found not guilty.
The case is very similar to the R V BREE  case. In both cases the accused was convicted based on inconclusive evidence. And, more importantly, in both cases the Judge did not properly instruct the jury concerning the crux of the matter: the possibility of consent when under the influence of alcohol. In his appeal case, Evans' attorneys specifically complained that the Judge did not clarify that drunken consent is still consent. R V BREE is helpful in that matter because the Court of Appeal, in squashing the conviction specifically said that "[W]hen someone who has had a lot to drink is in fact consenting to intercourse, then that is what she is doing, consenting: equally, if after taking drink, she is not consenting, then by definition intercourse is taking place without her consent." (R v Bree  EWCA Crim 256 [a]). The Court also complained that no proper guidance have been issued to the jury on the issue of drunken sex. The Court made it clear that the decision was unsafe becauseRelly wrote:There are so many stories out there of two equal people, being at a bar or party, both drinking heavily and they end of having sex. There are tons of these situations that result in the guy getting charged with rape and never a situation where a girl is. If two people are in the same state why does one sex have all the responsibility to do the right thing? And the other is just a victim. If you drink yourself into a state where you aren't acting rationally you only have yourself to blame and should take responsibilty for your actions, no matter what sex you are.Carrick 5 Gerrard 0 wrote:See it's ridiculous comments like that trivialise it, so if a guy isn't forcing a girl down or using violence it's not rape. Yes she was drunk but if she was in no fit state to give consent then he raped her. The fact of the matter is two guys had sex with her, one was cleared, one wasn't. It wasn't a she said, he said story because she couldn't remember.So there must have been evidence against him, rape is one of the hardest things to get convictions against. If he said she gave consent and she said she didn't then it would have been thrown out, the jury in that case could not conclude that there wasn't doubt there.Relly wrote:Was this case with Evans real rape or just some drunk chick who fornicate a guy at a bar/party and regretted it the next day?
If she woke up the next day and regretted it, wouldn't she just want to forget it? Why would she go to the police? Go through that ordeal? The medical exam, the questioning, her name being dragged through the mud? Someone might say she wanted her name in the papers, to sell her story. They why would she go through the whole process as anonymous? She is a fornicate victim and yet she has been treated as the criminal by some people. How can he walk back to his high paying job and life while she has to suffer abuse and change her identity?
The question comes down to how good do you think the justice system is here? 12 people who don't know either person were presented with the facts of the case. They concluded it was rape, yes they do get it wrong sometimes but more times than not, they get it right. It has to be a majority verdict. So 10 people found him and not the other guy guilty beyond reasonable doubt. That has to be saying something.
Out of every 100 rapes, 40 get reported to the police, only 3 end up spending a day in prison. That's how hard it is to get a conviction and yet he was found guilty, he spent 2 years in prison, those who say he did his time, did he really? It was a 5 year sentence. He has shown no remorse at all, even if he believes he's innocent, the women couldn't remember what happened, she didn't make up a pack of lies against him and yet he doesn't say a word to his family and friends who are making her life a misery.
Playing football is his job but it is in the public eye. The way he has acted has shown young kids they can treat women like shit and expect to get their life back. He could have come out with a damning statement against rape and still protested his innocence but he hasn't, he has just added more fire against the victim.
: ‘A woman clearly does not have the capacity to make a choice if she is completely unconscious through the effects of drink or drugs, but there are various stages of consciousness from being awake to dim awareness of reality.
‘In a state of dim and drunken awareness you may, or may not, be in a condition to make choices. Was she in a condition in which she was capable of making any choice one way or another?
‘If you are sure that she was not, then she did not consent.
‘If on the other hand you conclude that she chose to agree to sexual intercourse, or may have done, then you must find the defendants not guilty.’
And again, after reading more details of this story, this doesn't really seem to be the case here, I would probably side with the girl in this case.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users