Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Viking Chat => Topic started by: One_Matty_Lucas on April 21, 2016, 09:39:14 am
-
And he will face a new trial.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-36099522
-
Waste of Public Money
-
Waste of skin
-
Waste of skin
Why's that?
-
Waste of Public Money
Public money was used to wrongly convict him so he has the right to his appeal.
-
Not really.
On the basis of the evidence put forward at the time, he was convicted.
New evidence has since come forward which was not considered in his original trial.
This may or may not outweight the other evidence. We shall see.
-
The initial evidence was also nonsense, made a bit of a mockery of the jury system
-
Waste of skin
Why's that?
Incredulous as it may be - I actually agree with Frost. Bloke, convicted without full evidence being available - now has opportunity of a re-trial with new evidence included...
-
The initial evidence was also nonsense, made a bit of a mockery of the jury system
Not having a go but were you at the trial? How can you call the evidence nonsense?
As it stands, the conviction is quashed so technically Evans may still be innocent - yet he may be proven guilty. That is the legal process taking its course. The issue should really be why it has taken so long to sort this out and why the "new" evidence took so long to emerge.
IMHO we all need to wait until the re-trial - everything else now is speculation, again.
-
New Evidence ????? Maybe that the co - accused is now used as a witness which can be the case. If there are evidence that somebody lied then perjury charges should stand, Do you not think that the woman will have been grilled beyond belief before it got as far as Crown Court...Is he facing another charge of Rape or a lesser charge of Indecent Assault. No body has said anything yet, other than the first conviction is quashed.
Certainly a threesome did take place, with or without consent is the question. NO is NO as lads we should all have understood that. it is not a case of NO < WELL MAYBE IN A WHILE
-
Of course it is possible that there will not be a retrial. The case will now go back to the CPS. If they decide that the new evidence means a conviction is now unlikely, they may not proceed further.
The key elements here are that the Court of Appeal quashed the conviction and did so on the basis of new evidence rather than a mis-trial or other procedural error.
As for Evans, I doubt any club would sign him as a player while the possibility of a re-trial is hanging over him. However it could open the door for him to train with a club.
-
Get him training with us now
-
Get him training with us now
I like to think that our owners have got higher principles than that.
-
Get him training with us now
Behave Vicar.. Hound has light heartedly joked that HMP Moorland who Johnson will be playing for next year could loan him to us. That would be the end of Family Club Status . Joking apart though, who would want them. Particularly Johnson. Both mail excuses for manhood have exploited their profession as being above the law, well now they know they have not. I wonder if Evan's bird is so forgiving, where is the trust there.
-
I have just read this on dfp.
The sister of football paedophile Adam Johnson has congratulated fellow player Ched Evans after his conviction for rape was quashed yesterday.
The former Wales and Sheffield United striker now faces a retrial after his guilty verdict was overturned by the Court of Appeal.
And Faye Johnson, sister of the fallen England and Sunderland star, jailed for six years for child sex offences, took to Facebook to express her delight for Evans, 27.
On the Adam Johnson’s Appeal Fight page she wrote: “Great news on Ched Evans winning his appeal. Let’s hope he gets justice thsi time! Good luck to you and your family.”
Johnson is serving his sentence at Doncaster’s Moorland Prison after he was found guilty earlier this year of sexual activity with a 15-year-old girl.
He was switched to the Category C jail last week from Leeds’ tough Armley Prison.
Evans meanwhile, was found guilty of raping a 19-year-old woman at a hotel near Rhyl, North Wales.
But the case was referred to the Court of Appeal after new evidence emerged and yesterday judges allowed the appeal and ordered a retrial.
He was released in October 2014 after serving half of his five year
Read more: http://www.southyorkshiretimes.co.uk/news/local/sister-of-football-paedophile-adam-johnson-sends-good-luck-message-to-ched-evans-as-rape-conviction-quashed-1-7869348#ixzz46XvIbdvb
I rest my case. Utter trash
-
Get him training with us now
No. Re-trial first. There is still a chance he could be found guilty again, isn't there?
-
Get him training with us now
I like to think that our owners have got higher principles than that.
And if he's found not guilty I wouldn't see the issue of him playing
-
Is the vicar hoping for a mėnange å trois with his missus and Ched?
Dirty old sod!
-
Get him training with us now
I like to think that our owners have got higher principles than that.
And if he's found not guilty I wouldn't see the issue of him playing
He'd still be a bell end, but the club would still not be able to claim the moral high ground we've had players who have killed people play for us before. I'd feel uncomfortable cheering him on, and whoever signs him will have their clubs name dragged through the mud. Rather steer clear to be honest.
-
Rigo.
Don't think so, he accepted the decision of courts
-
as of yesterday he has done nothing wrong, just had sex with a woman, are we all not guilty of that sometime in our lives
-
The only evidence that sexual intercourse had taken place was offered by Evans and McDonald.
The 19 yr old woman claimed she had no recollection of what happened.
There was no forensic proof of there having been sexual activity.
If the lads had raped her why would they have admitted to having had sex with her.
They were obviously very confident that the jury would have understood what they were saying was the truth.
They were probably poorly advised by their lawyers because had they said they had not had intercourse then there would not have been a case to answer.
-
That's quite true hound - if you ignore the evidence of the hotel porter listening at the door and Evans' two friends filming on their mobile phones through the window - which you appear to have done.
-
No I haven't but I didn't think the fact that someone filmed the sex proved that a rape took place.
-
as of yesterday he has done nothing wrong, just had sex with a woman, are we all not guilty of that sometime in our lives
I think there are a few on here that have never seen a vagina in action live.
-
No I haven't but I didn't think the fact that someone filmed the sex proved that a rape took place.
Have a look at the opening sentence in your post 22 again.
There was a court case to 'prove' whether or not a rape took place. Now there is going to be another one.
-
Ok, I accept that but even so it still doesn't prove that she was raped does it?
The other thing I wondered about is why one person was convicted and the other , McDonald, was not.
I suppose someone can explain that to me.
-
at the original trial the girl caimed she was too drunk to remember.the judge in his wisdom stated that she was too drunk to consent,the reason McDonald got off it was proved she went back to the motel with him presumely for a game of monopoly
-
Get him training with us now
No. Re-trial first. There is still a chance he could be found guilty again, isn't there?
then he goes bet you have never done awt wrong same as most on hers, you will al have egg on your face when he proves he did nothing wrong
-
Get him training with us now
I like to think that our owners have got higher principles than that.
And if he's found not guilty I wouldn't see the issue of him playing
He'd still be a bell end, but the club would still not be able to claim the moral high ground we've had players who have killed people play for us before. I'd feel uncomfortable cheering him on, and whoever signs him will have their clubs name dragged through the mud. Rather steer clear to be honest.
So just tell me why he will be dragged through the mud for doing nothing
-
as of yesterday he has done nothing wrong, just had sex with a woman, are we all not guilty of that sometime in our lives
I think there are a few on here that have never seen a vagina in action live.
i can assure you that in nearly 60 years watching the Rovers I have seen a few in Rovers shirts.
Not too sure if they were all live though.
-
Get him training with us now
I like to think that our owners have got higher principles than that.
And if he's found not guilty I wouldn't see the issue of him playing
He'd still be a bell end, but the club would still not be able to claim the moral high ground we've had players who have killed people play for us before. I'd feel uncomfortable cheering him on, and whoever signs him will have their clubs name dragged through the mud. Rather steer clear to be honest.
So just tell me why he will be dragged through the mud for doing nothing
I never said his name would be dragged through the mud. I said the club who signed him would have theirs dragged through the mud.
Do you honestly believe football fans will not give him and which ever club he plays for the dogs abuse. It would be very naive to believe that other teams fans would say 'well he got found not guilty, we won't mention that at all.'
And the bloke is a bellend I'd rather not be involved with our club. If he's found not guilty he's still a bloke who was in a serious relationship who shagged some lass he met in a nightclub, when his missus (who for some inexplicable reason, hasn't f**ked him off!) sits at home. Blokes an arsehole, don't need a court to convict him of that!
-
as of yesterday he has done nothing wrong, just had sex with a woman, are we all not guilty of that sometime in our lives
No - as of that day his conviction was quashed due to "new" evidence being available that wasn't at the first trial. Therefore the appeal court has ordered a re-trial.
So Evans may have done nothing wrong, but as he is facing a re-trial he is still facing charges. Let's wait until this has happened before we conclude if he has done anything wrong or not.
You have made your judgement - I'll leave mine to the judge and jury!
-
Get him training with us now
No. Re-trial first. There is still a chance he could be found guilty again, isn't there?
then he goes bet you have never done awt wrong same as most on hers, you will al have egg on your face when he proves he did nothing wrong
Why would I have egg on my face if Evans is found not guilty at his re-trial?? Why??
I have made no judgement - I accepted the first trial verdict and will accept the re-trial verdict. I have no opinion either way whether I believe he is innocent or not, as I have not been party to ALL the evidence!
As for never done awt wrong, well I have had a speeding ticket yes, and I have a couple of parking tickets, yes. I even had a bollocking from a copper for riding a backy on a moped for a hundred yards with no helmet as a teenager - yes to all of those and I admitted all.
I have never been accused of rape or sexual assault. If you think you compare me to Evans' case, then you can rightly go and f**k yourself.
We all have different opinions and life would be boring if we didn't, but you disqualify yourself (IMHO) when you make statements like that, so do us all a favour and piss off???
-
The question for any football club considering signing him is this - would you sign a player with a serious charge (not necessarily rape) hanging over him? I suspect in most cases the answer would be no.
-
There are some cases of players coming back into the game after serving time for very serious offences though.
There was a keeper, at Plymouth, McCormick who had done a death by dangerous driving.
he was even made captain of the side.
I remember Lee Hughes did six years for D by DD.
I know they weren't accused of rape but what they did was probably (depending on your viewpoint) worse than that.
There is another ex Sunderland player who is currently abroad who has been accused of two rape charges in Gateshead recently.
-
at the original trial the girl caimed she was too drunk to remember.the judge in his wisdom stated that she was too drunk to consent,the reason McDonald got off it was proved she went back to the motel with him presumely for a game of monopoly
Yeah, right.
-
As I say, I think a club would be reluctant to sign anyone with a serious charge hanging over them.
If he is found Not Guilty, then we are in different territory. Some clubs may think he carries too much baggage, but it is more likely that someone will take a chance.
-
We would be a good attacking force with Evans leading the line and Adam Johnson on loan from Moorlands Sunday league team next season. !!!!
-
We would be a good attacking force with Evans leading the line and Adam Johnson on loan from Moorlands Sunday league team next season. !!!!
There's a couple of very bad football-related jokes I could make, but probably better not to go there. I am not Frankie Boyle.
-
i think i know what you may have said Baron.
-
Idont know if evans wants to resume his career in this country or not,but whilst hes on sexual register is travel abroad is limited.Remove that which they will do if hes cleared at a new trial then there would be a lot of teams abroad China,MLS,australia were he could make a good living.I don't think there will be another trial,if the girl in question thinks the evidence now to be produced shows her in more bad light she may not want to pursue.
-
Having been out of the game for so long I doubt he would be able to recapture the level of skill he had. Would probably struggle to be better than average Conference standard.
-
Could make a career in Scotland then.
-
Rigo
I think it might have been due to him being, until this week, a convicted rapist with an undischarged sentence, rather than some BBC plot.
-
Having been out of the game for so long I doubt he would be able to recapture the level of skill he had. Would probably struggle to be better than average Conference standard.
You don't lose your skill, only your fitness.
-
Get him training with us now
No. Re-trial first. There is still a chance he could be found guilty again, isn't there?
then he goes bet you have never done awt wrong same as most on hers, you will al have egg on your face when he proves he did nothing wrong
Why would I have egg on my face if Evans is found not guilty at his re-trial?? Why??
I have made no judgement - I accepted the first trial verdict and will accept the re-trial verdict. I have no opinion either way whether I believe he is innocent or not, as I have not been party to ALL the evidence!
As for never done awt wrong, well I have had a speeding ticket yes, and I have a couple of parking tickets, yes. I even had a bollocking from a copper for riding a backy on a moped for a hundred yards with no helmet as a teenager - yes to all of those and I admitted all.
I have never been accused of rape or sexual assault. If you think you compare me to Evans' case, then you can rightly go and f**k yourself.
We all have different opinions and life would be boring if we didn't, but you disqualify yourself (IMHO) when you make statements like that, so do us all a favour and piss off???
point me to where i pointed the finger at you, did i not say most on here not you specifically now did i
-
Get him training with us now
No. Re-trial first. There is still a chance he could be found guilty again, isn't there?
then he goes bet you have never done awt wrong same as most on hers, you will al have egg on your face when he proves he did nothing wrong
Why would I have egg on my face if Evans is found not guilty at his re-trial?? Why??
I have made no judgement - I accepted the first trial verdict and will accept the re-trial verdict. I have no opinion either way whether I believe he is innocent or not, as I have not been party to ALL the evidence!
As for never done awt wrong, well I have had a speeding ticket yes, and I have a couple of parking tickets, yes. I even had a bollocking from a copper for riding a backy on a moped for a hundred yards with no helmet as a teenager - yes to all of those and I admitted all.
I have never been accused of rape or sexual assault. If you think you compare me to Evans' case, then you can rightly go and f**k yourself.
We all have different opinions and life would be boring if we didn't, but you disqualify yourself (IMHO) when you make statements like that, so do us all a favour and piss off???
point me to where i pointed the finger at you, did i not say most on here not you specifically now did i
In response to my post though. The inference is there...
-
Get him training with us now
I like to think that our owners have got higher principles than that.
And if he's found not guilty I wouldn't see the issue of him playing
He'd still be a bell end, but the club would still not be able to claim the moral high ground we've had players who have killed people play for us before. I'd feel uncomfortable cheering him on, and whoever signs him will have their clubs name dragged through the mud. Rather steer clear to be honest.
So just tell me why he will be dragged through the mud for doing nothing
I never said his name would be dragged through the mud. I said the club who signed him would have theirs dragged through the mud.
Do you honestly believe football fans will not give him and which ever club he plays for the dogs abuse. It would be very naive to believe that other teams fans would say 'well he got found not guilty, we won't mention that at all.'
And the bloke is a bellend I'd rather not be involved with our club. If he's found not guilty he's still a bloke who was in a serious relationship who shagged some lass he met in a nightclub, when his missus (who for some inexplicable reason, hasn't f**ked him off!) sits at home. Blokes an arsehole, don't need a court to convict him of that!
It worked for Hughes at Oldham and he killed someone, don't tell me this is worse that that cos that is CRAP
-
Having been out of the game for so long I doubt he would be able to recapture the level of skill he had. Would probably struggle to be better than average Conference standard.
In jail he would not have been able to practice nearly enough to maintain his skills at the same level. We all know how rusty we get if we stop doing something for an extended period. He won't get back to his former level.
You don't lose your skill, only your fitness.
-
Get him training with us now
I like to think that our owners have got higher principles than that.
And if he's found not guilty I wouldn't see the issue of him playing
He'd still be a bell end, but the club would still not be able to claim the moral high ground we've had players who have killed people play for us before. I'd feel uncomfortable cheering him on, and whoever signs him will have their clubs name dragged through the mud. Rather steer clear to be honest.
So just tell me why he will be dragged through the mud for doing nothing
I never said his name would be dragged through the mud. I said the club who signed him would have theirs dragged through the mud.
Do you honestly believe football fans will not give him and which ever club he plays for the dogs abuse. It would be very naive to believe that other teams fans would say 'well he got found not guilty, we won't mention that at all.'
And the bloke is a bellend I'd rather not be involved with our club. If he's found not guilty he's still a bloke who was in a serious relationship who shagged some lass he met in a nightclub, when his missus (who for some inexplicable reason, hasn't f**ked him off!) sits at home. Blokes an arsehole, don't need a court to convict him of that!
It worked for Hughes at Oldham and he killed someone, don't tell me this is worse that that cos that is CRAP
If you can't tell the differece between Evans and Hughes (and McCormick) it is pointless educating you. But here it is anyway
The difference with Evans was that Hughes and McCormick acknowledged the enormity of what they had done. “He accepts he has this scar on his history,” said the Plymouth chairman, James Brent, of his keeper. “He almost accepts the abuse.”
Hughes was sacked by West Bromwich minutes after the verdict was delivered at Coventry Crown Court and, upon release from prison, he joined Oldham.
Like McCormick, and unlike Evans, there was deep remorse. He had been in contact with the Graham family; he would speak at colleges and schools. “I hate myself every day,” he said. “I keep saying sorry but it is not enough. But it is my job and, if I were a plumber, I would go back to plumbing. I am not at Oldham to be a hero.”
http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/news-and-comment/from-lee-hughes-to-graham-rix-footballs-offenders-can-never-fully-remove-disgrace-9963957.html
-
Rigo
I think it might have been due to him being, until this week, a convicted rapist with an undischarged sentence, rather than some BBC plot.
But some clubs did want to sign Ched Evans - Sheff Utd, Hartlepool, Oldham, plus others who perhaps never let their interest get into the public domain.
What scuppered it was smear campaigns, stemming largely from social media, and the Jimmy Savile effect.
Certain feminists in senior positions wanted to set an example, because Ched Evans is a high-profile name, and that was to never let him play professional football again.
It's probably gone completely unnoticed to most 'Jean Hatchett' type figures that there's a paedophile footballer who has resumed his career (to an extent) in Scotland.
But is Craig Thomson a high-profile name?
Craig Thomson has not played professional football since he was sacked by Hearts - he plays for an amateur, junior league team, so in what way has he 'resumed his career'? His 5 years on the sex-offenders register are up this year so it will be interesting to see if anyone does want to employ him?
The rest of your post is rubbish - Evans is a convicted rapist who has admitted no remorse or apolgy for his crime. Perhaps he may be found totally innocent of all charges after the re-trial, but until then that is what he is, and its irrelevant who says it.
Aren't you supposed to be a journalist? I should leave out the stereotyped agenda and think a bit broader if I were you - unless you only want a job on the Daily Mail that is.
-
so you would acknowledged the enormity of what you had done it you had not done anything what a MUG
-
so you would acknowledged the enormity of what you had done it you had not done anything what a MUG
But the point is, it has yet to be proven (again) that Evans has or has not done anything wrong. He faces a re-trial so there are charges to answer presenting the new evidence. He may still be found guilty or not guilty.
Do you think that despite the guilty verdict at the first trial he did nothing wrong? There are also - I expect - plenty of folks found "not guilty" in court when they did actually commit the offence, due to lack of evidence etc.
Doesn't the Scottish legal system have a third verdict - "not proven"? That verdict in itself says a lot!
-
wilts rover
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but why the bloody hell would he want to apologise for something that he says he hasn't done?!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
What's it got to do with me, I'm not Ched Evans?
Who clearly has done something, booking a hotel room under a false name, leaving the premises by a fire exit, having your activities filmed by your mates through a window. Whether or not he had unconsenual sex and raped a drunk girl - that will be the subject of a trial and the reason why he should not be paid for playing football at this moment in time.
-
wilts rover
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but why the bloody hell would he want to apologise for something that he says he hasn't done?!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Bentley, try reading wot I rote, not what you think I wrote. I am explaining why Ched Evans is not playing football at this moment in time. If he believes he is innocent, good luck to him in the forthcoming trial.
-
Evans is a convicted rapist who has admitted no remorse or apolgy for his crime. Perhaps he may be found totally innocent of all charges after the re-trial, but until then that is what he is, and its irrelevant who says it.
Sorry to be pedantic but if his original trial conviction has been quashed on appeal, then Evans is no longer a convicted rapist? He still faces the charges and will be re-tried, but unless I have read it wrong he at the moment is not convicted?
-
I still disgaree, if you are not being paid it is not a career, he plays amateur football. Has Evans attempted to play for a non-league club? Would there have been such an outcry if he did?
There has been lots of coverage of Thomson in the Scottish newspapers - in which it is clear their cases are very different and why Evans has attracted greater national coverage.
-
"Evans is a convicted rapist who has admitted no remorse or apolgy for his crime"
Yep, read it again wilts like you advised, and this is what you said.
-
Irrespective of the level he's playing at, if Thomson can resume his 'career' why hasn't Ched Evans been able to?
I don't know the Thomson case - has the legal process finished ie has he served his sentence, no appeals or re-trials etc?
However the legal process in Evans' case has yet to conclude - that IMHO is why he isn't playing football at the moment.
-
And that's why I made those comments about your journalistic abilities. How about you write a list on the differences and similarties in their cases and you might come up with the answer I did earlier. Rather than saying because they are both footballers involved in court cases they can be judged to be the same.
-
"Evans is a convicted rapist who has admitted no remorse or apolgy for his crime"
Yep, read it again wilts like you advised, and this is what you said.
Read the rest of it then as I wrote a bit more than that. And the context it was written in and in answer to.
Or just keep picking bits of people's post out to be argumentative if you wish.
-
EVANS IS NOT A CONVICTED RAPIST. HIS CONVICTION WAS OVERTURNED.
-
so you would acknowledged the enormity of what you had done it you had not done anything what a MUG
But the point is, it has yet to be proven (again) that Evans has or has not done anything wrong. He faces a re-trial so there are charges to answer presenting the new evidence. He may still be found guilty or not guilty.
Do you think that despite the guilty verdict at the first trial he did nothing wrong? There are also - I expect - plenty of folks found "not guilty" in court when they did actually commit the offence, due to lack of evidence etc.
Doesn't the Scottish legal system have a third verdict - "not proven"? That verdict in itself says a lot!
SO NOWso you would acknowledged the enormity of what you had done it you had not done anything what a MUG
But the point is, it has yet to be proven (again) that Evans has or has not done anything wrong. He faces a re-trial so there are charges to answer presenting the new evidence. He may still be found guilty or not guilty.
Do you think that despite the guilty verdict at the first trial he did nothing wrong? There are also - I expect - plenty of folks found "not guilty" in court when they did actually commit the offence, due to lack of evidence etc.
Doesn't the Scottish legal system have a third verdict - "not proven"? That verdict in itself says a lot!
Yes i do think he is not guilty but that is my business not yours. so now answer my question what has he done wrong that is worse that what Hughs did
-
You didn't ask me about Hughes..
The legal process with Hughes is over, and he has shown remorse. Evans has not - he maintains his innocence so why would he - but his legal case is still ongoing.
What theirr respective crimes were/are is largely irrelevant.
You think Evans is not guilty - I take it you have seen all the evidence as presented to the jury??
-
A very basic difference between Hughes / McCormack and Evans is that neither of the first two made a concious decision to do what they did - Evans did.
-
Didn't Hughes/McCormack make a concious decision to drink and drive? Didn't Hughes make a concious decision to run away from the scene of the accident, leaving his victim alone?
-
Evans still maintains he is innocent so that is why he won't apologise.
The other two have admitted their crimes, which are undeniable anyway, driving whilst over the drink and drive limit and causing death by dangerous driving.
-
They did indeed make those decisions which are against the law, however they were charged and found guilty of far more serious offences which they didn't set out to do but were a consequence of their actions.
Evans made a concious decision to take advantage of a girl who was unable to agree to the act he carried out on her - it wasn't a consequence of a lesser offence he committed that just resulted in her being raped.
-
The latest court ruling is that she wasn't raped.
-
Oh so she was raped then? Evans conviction being quashed is wrong, is it?
-
Forgive me, but wasn't the latest court ruling simply that the new evidence brought the original verdict into question and thence ordered a re-trial?
That does not yet mean the charges have been proven or not - in the eyes of the law and the court processes?
-
The conviction was quashed so now Evans is not a convicted rapist.
By definition, for now at least, the woman was not raped.
-
Isn't it quashed subject to a retrial meaning that eventually he could be found guilty again?
It's back to square one but with more evidence for the defence.
-
Has the law changed from being innocent until proved guilty?
-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-36099522 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-36099522)
The court quashed Mr Evans's conviction and declared: "The appellant will be retried on the allegation of rape."
That's it, nothing more and nothing less...
-
Isn't it quashed subject to a retrial meaning that eventually he could be found guilty again?
It's back to square one but with more evidence for the defence.
He could also be acquitted.
-
The conviction was quashed so now Evans is not a convicted rapist.
By definition, for now at least, the woman was not raped.
Don't be so stupid.
So by that logic, if someone is violently raped but the rapist hasn't yet been to court and been convicted - she hasn't been raped?
-
He could indeed but there is no difference at the minute declaring him innocent or guilty. Nobody knows but Evens although he is innocent until proven otherwise.
-
The conviction was quashed so now Evans is not a convicted rapist.
By definition, for now at least, the woman was not raped.
Don't be so stupid.
So by that logic, if someone is violently raped but the rapist hasn't yet been to court and been convicted - she hasn't been raped?
There's a difference between a situation where a crime has definitely been committed and the perpetrator has yet to be proven guilty, and a situation where the crime itself needs to be proven as having happened.
-
The conviction was quashed so now Evans is not a convicted rapist.
By definition, for now at least, the woman was not raped.
Don't be so stupid.
So by that logic, if someone is violently raped but the rapist hasn't yet been to court and been convicted - she hasn't been raped?
I am not stupid.
I am speaking about this particular circumstance, not a generalisation.
-
You didn't ask me about Hughes..
The legal process with Hughes is over, and he has shown remorse. Evans has not - he maintains his innocence so why would he - but his legal case is still ongoing.
What theirr respective crimes were/are is largely irrelevant.
You think Evans is not guilty - I take it you have seen all the evidence as presented to the jury??
all i want to know is killing a person not ad bigger crime than unlawful sex in your book if not then why cant evens get on with his job. I hope he wins his cace and shuts people like you and others on here the f**k up
-
You didn't ask me about Hughes..
The legal process with Hughes is over, and he has shown remorse. Evans has not - he maintains his innocence so why would he - but his legal case is still ongoing.
What theirr respective crimes were/are is largely irrelevant.
You think Evans is not guilty - I take it you have seen all the evidence as presented to the jury??
all i want to know is killing a person not ad bigger crime than unlawful sex in your book if not then why cant evens get on with his job. I hope he wins his cace and shuts people like you and others on here the f**k up
You need to ask that question to the victim's families...
As for Evans - you want him to win his case, even if he did it but the evidence can't prove it? Or just to give YOU some kudos on here?
I don't care either way about Evans - if he is found not guilty then so be it.
As for playing football, my opinion has, and always will be, stay under the radar until the case is over!