bimble
floofy
It's their words against her 'I don't remember', not their words against hers, in this unusual case. Nobody (apart from total idiots) has said that she has lied about anything.
Accused rapist Ched Evans to be released from prison
- Thread starter Bahnhof Strasse
- Start date
It's their words against her 'I don't remember', not their words against hers, in this unusual case. Nobody (apart from total idiots) has said that she has lied about anything.
trashpony
Hag
Sorry - wrong turn of phrase.
Orang Utan
Psychick Worrier Ov Geyoor
no it isn't
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
Well that's the risk that you presume they've taken. It's possible that they have, but also possible that they are telling the truth.
If they're telling the truth there's a fair chance that the same happened with Evans. If that's the case he didn't rape her.
emanymton
A cat politely sat on the flaming gardener.
I've been on the jury for a rape trial. In the end me and 1 other stuck with guilty against 10 not guilty. But it really isn't easy to make a decision, it was fucking horrible in fact. To get a guilty verdict the evidence and argument must have been pretty compelling.
trashpony
Hag
Why is her saying that to one man who she chose to go home with the same as her saying it to another man who she may not have even known was in the room?
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
It's not.
But her replying "yes" when asked by one chap if the other could join in, isn't that.
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
I'd be pretty sure they would seek legal opinion before issuing any statements regarding the law. They're not just talking on an internet message board
ElizabethofYork
Old Crone
Fucking stupid and offensive thing to say.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
But beyond reasonable doubt? I'm not so sure.
ElizabethofYork
Old Crone
Are you privy to information not put before the jury?
MAD-T-REX
Well-Known Member
If the prosecution did suggest this to the jury, the judge would instruct them that they could not convict the defendant on this basis. A reasonable belief in consent cannot be invalidated by something that was unknowable at the time of the sexual activity.
Women Against Rape are Assange apologists, so I wouldn't assume that their statements are sanity checked by anyone.
trashpony
Hag
You're one too, given you said the same thing but in fewer words.
Urban Dictionary: Rape apologist
Evans was convicted, despite the complainant not making ANY COMPLAINT against him but on the strength of his and McDonald's own evidence to the court and jury.
He appealed and was turned down.
Existing witnesses suddenly remembered new evidence and it was allowed, overturning the conviction.
Money gets men off rape charges. This was a safe conviction but his money has bought his freedom.
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
quite possibly, Evans' girlfriends pressuring of witnesses and repeated offers of the money wasn't put to the jury - Victims' groups cry foul as footballer Ched Evans is cleared of raping a teenager after complainant's sexual history is put before court (see 3pm in particular)
1%er
Well-Known Member
Having now read the transcript of "appeal against conviction" (and I recommend others read it) it contains some "interesting evidence" and also the reasons behind why section 41 was allowed in this case.
I make no judgement against X but I do wonder why the CPS put into evidence some of the things they did, which allowed "previous sexual history" to be introduced in this case.
I make no judgement against X but I do wonder why the CPS put into evidence some of the things they did, which allowed "previous sexual history" to be introduced in this case.
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
End Violence Against Women aren't tho, they're a very sensible and wide ranging group of campaigners
bimble
floofy
But isn't that exactly what the prosecution case was? (that her not having any memory of the night means the sex was nonconsensual? )
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
1%er
Well-Known Member
Do you think that is why he was found not guilty?
Wilf
Slouching towards Billingham
I remember a phrase from the first trial, Evans friend ringing him from a taxi saying 'I've got a girl'. Evans then arrived at the hotel 15 minutes later - he stopped whatever he was doing and dived in a cab. Whilst rape clearly doesn't have to follow from that exchange, it's a clear statement to me of exactly what that night was about. Even in Evans own account, there was no discussion at that point (phone call in the taxi) with the victim about whether he could 'join in'. Who the fuck would turn up at the hotel room of a couple having sex on the off chance the woman would then have sex with you?
I'm not even getting into the rest of it, him hiding his face, blagging a key, leaving through the firedoor, changed statements. Just turning up on the assumption he was going to get sex from someone he had never met... what, he just managed to find someone who was so pissed, but not comatose, that she 'consented'? Don't think so.
I'm not even getting into the rest of it, him hiding his face, blagging a key, leaving through the firedoor, changed statements. Just turning up on the assumption he was going to get sex from someone he had never met... what, he just managed to find someone who was so pissed, but not comatose, that she 'consented'? Don't think so.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
Tbh being as one party to the case is anonymous it is not beyond the bounds of possibility they only realised their evidence might be germane later on. You're making it sound like everyone knew everything at the time, which isn't always how things happen.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
Cheers pa
Similar threads
