Ched Evans wins Appeal

[IDM]

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.

[wilts rover]

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.

[wilts rover]

"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.

[Bentley Bullet]

EVANS IS NOT A CONVICTED RAPIST. HIS CONVICTION WAS OVERTURNED.

[the vicar]

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 NOW

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!

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 

[IDM]

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??

[StocktonRover]

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.

[Bentley Bullet]

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?

[drfchound]

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.

[StocktonRover]

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.

[drfchound]

The latest court ruling is that she wasn't raped.

[Bentley Bullet]

Oh so she was raped then? Evans conviction being quashed is wrong, is it?

[IDM]

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?

[drfchound]

The conviction was quashed so now Evans is not a convicted rapist.
By definition, for now at least, the woman was not raped.

[idler]

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.

[Bentley Bullet]

Has the law changed from being innocent until proved guilty?

[IDM]

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...

[drfchound]

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.

[StocktonRover]

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?

[idler]

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.

[IDM]

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.

[drfchound]

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.

[the vicar]

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

[IDM]

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!