Accused rapist Ched Evans to be released from prison

[belboid]

Read the transcript that's been posted.

Or just fuck off. Moron.

You're part of the problem

 

[1%er]

Yes. It says what I just did i.e. that capacity goes to the first limb - whether or not she did in fact consent.

I'm not sure if you are making a point or not, I said "indeed" which was agreeing with you and just added the remainder of the text from the transcript

 

[Raheem]

Unfortunately, when the alleged victim has no recollection and there are no other witnesses, I think it makes it extraordinarily difficult to secure a safe conviction. As we've seen here.

That sounds a little different from what you suggested above.

In this case, there were other witnesses, and other evidence such as CCTV footage.

Presumably, though, you're agreeing that the alleged victim's lack of recollection should not, in itself, be a bar to prosecution?

 

[Spymaster]

You're part of the problem

Yeah. Like you're part of the solution.

 

[redsquirrel]

Who would that be ?

It'd include you.

The misogyny and sexism that you come out with feeds into the environment that allows filth like Evans to get away with rape

Looks like the Iranians will release the groundsheet anyway .

 

[Casually Red]

Stupid little man

 

[belboid]

Some men have argued for decades about how it's often all but impossible to 'prove' rape because it's just one persons word against another's. It seemed like we'd moved on from that a little over the last decade or so. But now we're heading right back again, leaning over backwards to be 'fair' to abusers and predators, making shitty distinctions between rape and bad sex. I've never really been keen on the phrase 'rape culture' but it's starting to look like it's all too accurate.

 

[Spymaster]

Presumably, though, you're agreeing that the alleged victim's lack of recollection should not, in itself, be a bar to prosecution?

Not in itself. But the weight of other evidence needs to be appropriately compelling. A jury decided that it wasn't here.

Do you believe (assuming that you've read the transcript), beyond a reasonable doubt, that Evans could not have reasonably thought that the woman was consenting?

 

[Pickman's model]

.

 

[bluescreen]

Some men have argued for decades about how it's often all but impossible to 'prove' rape because it's just one persons word against another's. It seemed like we'd moved on from that a little over the last decade or so. But now we're heading right back again, leaning over backwards to be 'fair' to abusers and predators, making shitty distinctions between rape and bad sex. I've never really been keen on the phrase 'rape culture' but it's starting to look like it's all too accurate.

Oddly enough, I can imagine the police congratulating themselves on this case before it came to trial, because it wasn't merely a case of her word against his. It must have looked fairly compelling at the time. They thought they had plenty of independent evidence, an admission by the defendant that intercourse had taken place, and they seem to have believed that as X had no memory of events and stuck by that, she couldn't have consented.

The case has exposed some false assumptions.

 

[Pickman's model]

Some men have argued for decades about how it's often all but impossible to 'prove' rape because it's just one persons word against another's. It seemed like we'd moved on from that a little over the last decade or so. But now we're heading right back again, leaning over backwards to be 'fair' to abusers and predators, making shitty distinctions between rape and bad sex. I've never really been keen on the phrase 'rape culture' but it's starting to look like it's all too accurate.

By being fair you mean a whole gamut of agencies have fucked up, including - but not limited to - the ccrc and court of appeal, who should have known the new evidence was tainted, and indeed the retrial judge who Orang Utan says should have thrown out the new testimony.

 

[bimble]

making shitty distinctions between rape and bad sex.

If you can be arsed please read this.
The Pressure to Never Have Unwanted Sex
I love it, made me cry the first time.
She teaches consent and sex education in Canada and is a hero of mine.

 

[Casually Red]

Some men have argued for decades about how it's often all but impossible to 'prove' rape because it's just one persons word against another's. It seemed like we'd moved on from that a little over the last decade or so. But now we're heading right back again, leaning over backwards to be 'fair' to abusers and predators, making shitty distinctions between rape and bad sex. I've never really been keen on the phrase 'rape culture' but it's starting to look like it's all too accurate.

I certainly don't see that happening here . I think Evans is scum, a predator and even if he is innocent in this instance..which I'm not even convinced of.. I've no sympathy for the fact he served a jail sentence . Fuck him . I've believed him to be guilty since the start of this thread . Proving it though is another matter. I've no doubt at all he's a predator and a menace . and I don't see anyone at all here saying anything different on that score .

Pointing out the case against him was a difficult one to prove doesn't even remotely equate to a belief in his innocence . pointing out where..under points of law..he managed to get his conviction quashed..doesn't even remotely amount to a single ounce of sympathy for him or any other predator .
It's nothing more than pointing out what actually happened in the court and what the law says should happen as a result . Nothing more . There's absolutely no need to turn that into something it definitely isn't .

Anyone who can't see what the ramifications are for ordinary men and women everywhere should the legal principle of reasonable doubt be removed in criminal cases ...especially when legal aids being cut to the bone...seriously needs their head looked at .

 

[belboid]

Not in itself. But the weight of other evidence needs to be appropriately compelling. A jury decided that it wasn't here.

Do you believe (assuming that you've read the transcript), beyond a reasonable doubt, that Evans could not have reasonably thought that the woman was consenting?

Proving again you don't understand what was required of the jury.

 

[belboid]

By being fair you mean a whole gamut of agencies have fucked up, including - but not limited to - the ccrc and court of appeal, who should have known the new evidence was tainted, and indeed the retrial judge who Orang Utan says should have thrown out the new testimony.

A whole host do indeed seem to have fucked things up. One person/groups fuck ups don't absolve anyone else's, of course.

 

[trashpony]

Not in itself. But the weight of other evidence needs to be appropriately compelling. A jury decided that it wasn't here.

Do you believe (assuming that you've read the transcript), beyond a reasonable doubt, that Evans could not have reasonably thought that the woman was consenting?

The jury in the first trial believed it was. It seems you're pretty determined to believe it isn't.

Off you go into the rape apologist box. Ta rah

 

[Spymaster]

The Pressure to Never Have Unwanted Sex
if you can be arsed please read this.
I love it, made me cry the first time. She is a hero of mine and teaches consent and sex education in canada.

Don't ask Bellend to read stuff. He already KNOWS THE SCORE!

 

[Spymaster]

Off you go into the rape apologist box.

Silly.

 

[bimble]

Yeah, wasn't really aimed at him personally.
Anyone who says they are here because they care about women's agency in all this should read it. Aimed it at him because he said ' shitty distinctions between rape & bad sex"

 

[trashpony]

Silly.

No. You're an odious misogynist arsehole and I'm sick to the back teeth of you.

Poor fucking Chris.

 

[Spymaster]

Proving again you don't understand what was required of the jury.

You are magnifying your idiocy.

Do everyone a favour and stop posting.

 

[belboid]

If you can be arsed please read this.
The Pressure to Never Have Unwanted Sex
I love it, made me cry the first time.
She teaches consent and sex education in Canada and is a hero of mine.

An interesting piece. Taking part in 'risky' behaviour is not uncommon at all, for all sorts of reasons. Sadly, quite a few men know exactly how to take advantage of people who do so, and expose them to even more danger. It all too easily becomes sexual exploitation, abuse and rape.

 

[Spymaster]

You're an odious misogynist arsehole ...

Silly.

 

[Casually Red]

Silly.

Idiotic

 

[belboid]

Yeah, wasn't really aimed at him personally.
Anyone who says they are here because they care about women's agency in all this should read it. Aimed it at him because he said ' shitty distinctions between rape & bad sex"

If you don't think there are plenty of people who make precisely that pseudo distinction (hello George Galloway) you are very sadly mistaken.

 

[bimble]

An interesting piece. Taking part in 'risky' behaviour is not uncommon at all, for all sorts of reasons. Sadly, quite a few men know exactly how to take advantage of people who do so, and expose them to even more danger. It all too easily becomes sexual exploitation, abuse and rape.

Agree with that. But do you get her point that she is claiming the right to define her own experience not you.

 

[Raheem]

Not in itself. But the weight of other evidence needs to be appropriately compelling. A jury decided that it wasn't here.

Well, one jury decided it was, then one jury decided in wasn't, and the difference was new witness evidence that *may* have been financially induced.

Do you believe (assuming that you've read the transcript), beyond a reasonable doubt, that Evans could not have reasonably thought that the woman was consenting?

I haven't spent days straight sitting in a courtroom and a jury room hearing all the evidence and thinking about it, so I'm not going to gainsay the jury's decision. My only point is to object to reactionary and artificial reasons why the case should not have come to court.

 

[belboid]

You are magnifying your idiocy.

Do everyone a favour and stop posting.

You posted a false statement regarding what the jury needed to believe in order to find Evans guilty - that "Evans could not have reasonably thought that the woman was consenting?"

That is not what the law requires. Quite simple.

 

[belboid]

Agree with that. But do you get her point that she is claiming the right to define her own experience not you.

Good thing I'm not defining her experience then.

 

[Spymaster]

I haven't spent days straight sitting in a courtroom and a jury room hearing all the evidence and thinking about it, so I'm not going to gainsay the jury's decision. My only point is to object to reactionary and artificial reasons why the case should not have come to court.

Ok, you seem quite reasonable, but have you read the transcript that was posted earlier?