Accused rapist Ched Evans to be released from prison

[belboid]

His evidence seems to be that his friend persuaded a drunk woman into a hotel room. He then went into the room and fucked her without saying a word then left. It seems like he was specifically asked by the police if he had made any attempt to gain her consent and he said that he hadn't.

I'm not saying that's open-and-shut, but it was enough for the first jury.

It's the behaviour of a sexual predator. Even if you accept he genuinely believed he had consent, it comes from an appalling attitude that doesn't really know or care what consent really means.

 

[Orang Utan]

I agree that's where the interesting bit is. And that's what the case as presented to the jury was all about:
What does 'beyond consent' mean?

too drunk to consent. i doubt it even crossed their minds. they just didn't care.

 

[Spymaster]

I think what we SHOULD be focussing on here is whether Evans knew or cared if his victim was beyond consent or not, not whether the victim blacked out or not. It's clear from his and his fellow beast that neither did.

It's not clear is it though. The question is, did he believe she was consenting. If she said "yes" to his mate and asked him to fuck her harder, it's not unreasonable to believe that she was.

 

[Spymaster]

Even if you accept he genuinely believed he had consent, it comes from an appalling attitude that doesn't really know or care what consent really means.

It does. But it also means that you accept that he's not guilty of rape.

 

[Orang Utan]

It's not clear is it though. The question is, did he believe she was consenting. If she said "yes" to his mate and asked him to fuck her harder, it's not unreasonable to believe that she was.

weren't the 'fuck me harder' statements about separate incidents that the witnesses who came forward described?

 

[Spymaster]

It might not be in dispute that he said it. It has absolutely not been proven that she actually did say it tho.

Or that she didn't. Reasonable doubt.

 

[bimble]

too drunk to consent. i doubt it even crossed their minds. they just didn't care.

What does 'too drunk to consent' look like?
We all know that someone who is semi- conscious / unable to talk properly etc is too drunk to consent. If you have sex with someone in that state you are a rapist.
This case was built entirely on her not remembering anything in the morning.
That is all we know for sure.

The only two people to have come here to say that they have had blackouts like this have both been accused of being rape apologists.

That is shit.

 

[Spymaster]

weren't the 'fuck me harder' statements about separate incidents that the witnesses who came forward described?

She's also said to have said the same thing to Evans, which is why it became relevant.

 

[Orang Utan]

She's also said to have said the same thing to Evans, which is why it became relevant.

by them

 

[Casually Red]

this result is significant way beyond the case mind. rapists know it's open season on pissed girls they can paint as slags.

I think you've got to be very careful indeed with this type of emotive language . That'll only serve in itself to dissuade victims from coming forward . There's been legal opinion posted here that it's not a return to the dark ages. Personally I don't know , I'm not a lawyer .

 

[belboid]

Or that she didn't. Reasonable doubt.

So 'not in dispute' is not an accurate reflection of the actuality

 

[Spymaster]

by them

Yes.

 

[killer b]

I think you've got to be very careful indeed with this type of emotive language . That'll only serve in itself to dissuade victims from coming forward . There's been legal opinion posted here that it's not a return to the dark ages. Personally I don't know , I'm not a lawyer .

fuck off.

 

[Orang Utan]

Yes.

I don't believe them for a second

 

[Spymaster]

I don't believe them for a second

The jury couldn't say that, beyond reasonable doubt.

 

[Casually Red]

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.

Or more accurately a reasonable doubt can be inferred .

 

[Casually Red]

fuck off.

Illuminating .

 

[belboid]

It does. But it also means that you accept that he's not guilty of rape.

The phrase 'accept he genuinely believed' would imply that, yes. Although isn't the test actually of whether a 'reasonable person' would entertain such a belief, rather than Evans himself.

 

[Spymaster]

So 'not in dispute' is not an accurate reflection of the actuality

Yes it is. It was not disputed by anyone.

Who could dispute it?

 

[Orang Utan]

The jury couldn't say that, beyond reasonable doubt.

they did the first time.

 

[belboid]

Yes it is. It was not disputed by anyone.

Who could dispute it?

Jesus, really? That is utterly illogical. It is one person's word, a person with a good reason to lie about it. I think we can be pretty certain the CPS lawyer disputed it, probably quite forcefully.

 

[Spymaster]

they did the first time.

... having not heard the subsequent evidence.

 

[bimble]

they did the first time.

Yes. Then they apparently believed the 'new evidence' which told them that she has several times had no memory of having had enthusiastic sex the night before.
Whether that new evidence was truthful or not is another thing.

 

[bluescreen]

Jesus, really? That is utterly illogical. It is one person's word, a person with a good reason to lie about it. I think we can be pretty certain the victims lawyer disputed it, probably quite forcefully.

The victim didn't have a lawyer. She was a witness for the prosecution.

 

[Orang Utan]

... having not heard the subsequent evidence.

which is tainted as fuck and should have been thrown out imo.

 

[belboid]

... having not heard the subsequent evidence.

just like the recent jury didn't hear all the evidence about Evans' girlfriend trying to bribe witnesses

 

[belboid]

The victim didn't have a lawyer. She was a witness for the prosecution.

fair point.

 

[bimble]

Orang Utan We know what definitely too drunk to consent looks like. What does drunken consent look like?

 

[Spymaster]

I think we can be pretty certain the victims lawyer disputed it, probably quite forcefully.

Really?

On what basis?

All X was able to tell anyone is that she had no memory of the event.

The only witnesses declared that she was an enthusiastic participant. So how did they go about disputing what they said she said?

 

[Spymaster]

which is tainted as fuck and should have been thrown out imo.

But clearly not in the jury's (beyond a reasonable doubt)..