Accused rapist Ched Evans to be released from prison

[Joe Reilly]

That is your opinion but not shared by everyone, including the judge in the first trial, clearly, who spoke in his sentencing statement of the CCTV footage showing how drunk she was as key to the whole argument that she could not have given meaningful consent, to either of them.

That's my point. Without her involvement it all becomes subjective. The judge has one opinion. Yet the jury clearly had another one. Which shows he was only half right at best. And then another jury contradicted the first jury, which left his honor with even more egg on his face...and so on.

 

[Orang Utan]

That's my point. Without her involvement it all becomes subjective. The judge has one opinion. Yet the jury clearly had another one. Which shows he was only half right at best. And then another jury contradicted the first jury, which left his honor with even more egg on his face...and so on.

It's not subjective when the players admitted to what they'd done.

 

[Spymaster]

Rizzle Kicks know what's what:
Rizzle Kicks blast Ched Evans rape case as f***ing vile during epic Twitter rant

"That insinuates that if a girl likes sex then she can't be raped??"

Idiots.

 

[Spymaster]

It's not subjective when the players admitted to what they'd done.

Did they admit to rape?

 

[Treacle Toes]

So yes, its problematic, but in this specific case also correct.

Problematic and correct at the same time?

 

[equationgirl]

That's my point. Without her involvement it all becomes subjective. The judge has one opinion. Yet the jury clearly had another one. Which shows he was only half right at best. And then another jury contradicted the first jury, which left his honor with even more egg on his face...and so on.

Do you actually understand how a court works? The judge is neutral, he or she is not supposed to have an opinion on the verdict, only to pass sentence if there is a guilty verdict.

Please explain 'another jury contradicted the first jury, which left his honour with egg on his face'.

 

[Orang Utan]

Did they admit to rape?

Yes, though they thought they didn't

 

[Pickman's model]

Do you actually understand how a court works? The judge is neutral, he or she is not supposed to have an opinion on the verdict, only to pass sentence if there is a guilty verdict.

Please explain 'another jury contradicted the first jury, which left his honour with egg on his face'.

not to mention his honour was in fact her honour

 

[Orang Utan]

Idiots.

Why? They're spot on.

 

[Spymaster]

Yes, though they thought they didn't

Where did they do this? Link?

 

[Treacle Toes]

Did they admit to rape?

No. What they did admit to though was enough for the police to pursue them further. I don't imagine many rapists actually willingly admit to it.

 

[Orang Utan]

Where did they do this? Link?

Have you not been paying attention? Their testimony led to Evans' conviction.

 

[Spymaster]

Why?

Because the new evidence in this case has absolutely nothing to do were her "liking sex" and nobody in their right fucking mind would suggest that a woman who likes sex can't be raped.

 

[Spymaster]

Have you not been paying attention? Their testimony led to Evans' conviction.

Oh, ffs.

You haven't been reading the thread have you?

What do you believe that means?

 

[Pickman's model]

Because the new evidence in this case has absolutely nothing to do were her "liking sex" and nobody in their right fucking mind would suggest that a woman who likes sex can't be raped.

isn't it nearly time for dinner, pa?

 

[Orang Utan]

Because the new evidence in this case has absolutely nothing to do were her "liking sex" and nobody in their right fucking mind would suggest that a woman who likes sex can't be raped.

It's what has been insinuated throughout the case.

 

[Orang Utan]

Oh, ffs.

You haven't been reading the thread have you?

What do you believe that means?

I have. And the same stuff is being said over and over again. You don't think such behaviour is rape, but many of us do.

 

[Spymaster]

What they did admit to though was enough for the police to pursue them further.

This is correct. It's a massive leap to then say they admitted rape, as OU said.

 

[Orang Utan]

This is correct. It's a massive leap to then say they admitted rape, as OU said.

What they admitted led to Evans' conviction. I didn't mean they said they had raped her. They clearly think they didn't, but they're wrong.

 

[Spymaster]

It's what has been insinuated throughout the case.

Oh my god. Do you really think this????

That the insinuation has been "she liked sex so it wasn't rape"?

If so you should disqualify yourself from any further part in this thread. Fuck me. Wow!

 

[Pickman's model]

What they admitted led to Evans' conviction. I didn't mean they said they had raped her. They clearly think they didn't, but they're wrong.

let's see what you said

Yes, though they thought they didn't

 

[equationgirl]

not to mention his honour was in fact her honour

Indeed. Shouldn't be surprised at the inherent gender bias really.

 

[Orang Utan]

Oh my god. Do you really think this????

That the insinuation has been "she liked sex so it wasn't rape"?

If so you should disqualify yourself from any further part in this thread. Fuck me. Wow!

It's been all over the press and social media

 

[Orang Utan]

let's see what you said

I should have been clearer. They gave themselves away, which is tantamount to admission, even if they didn't mean to.

 

[planetgeli]

That's my point. Without her involvement it all becomes subjective.

Er...without her involvement (in the consenting process) it all becomes rape doesn't it?

Chuck in bribes of £50000 (and at least one refusal), the exceptional allowance of a woman's past sexual history (but not a man's past predatory behaviour, coz that would 'influence' the jury right?) and it all becomes a bit...vomit inducing.

Or have I missed something?

 

[Spymaster]

It's been all over the press and social media

Only by outright morons on the internet.

 

[bimble]

It's not subjective when the players admitted to what they'd done.

They admitted to being sleazy opportunist arseholes who had sex with a drunk woman but stated that they both thought it was consensual.
I honestly would like to know what makes you so certain that they were lying about that.
You said pages ago that you do not know what drunken consent looks like, so maybe that's what it is, you understand that she was really drunk and you think that anybody who has sex with someone who is very drunk is a rapist.
Which is fair enough but lets be clear, that goes for M as well as Evans.
Otherwise I have to assume that you are passing some sort of moral judgement that says 'nobody could reasonably consent to having sex with some guy that just walked into a hotel room where you're having a private time with his mate.' Is that what it is?

 

[Orang Utan]

They admitted to being sleazy opportunist arseholes who had sex with a drunk woman but stated that they both thought it was consensual.
I honestly would like to know what makes you so certain that they were lying about that.
You said pages ago that you do not know what drunken consent looks like, so maybe that's what it is, you understand that she was really drunk and you think that anybody who has sex with someone who is very drunk is a rapist.
Which is fair enough but lets be clear, that goes for M as well as Evans.
Otherwise I have to assume that you are passing some sort of moral judgement that says 'nobody could reasonably consent to having sex with some guy that just walked into a hotel room where you're having a private time with his mate.' Is that what it is?

Hmm, don't think so. I think there's more to it than that. I think they did lie as far as they didn't care whether she consented or not.

 

[Orang Utan]

Only by outright morons on the internet.

But these morons have influenced the outcome of the case.

 

[Spymaster]

But these morons have influenced the outcome of the case.

How?