Chet evans resigns for chesterfield

No wides · October 07, 2016, 01:23:53 PM

Quote from: gallsman on October 07, 2016, 12:18:57 PM
Quote from: No wides on October 07, 2016, 12:09:47 PM
Quote from: haranguerer on October 07, 2016, 11:05:15 AM
Quote from: general_lee on October 07, 2016, 10:22:18 AM
Half a litre of wine and 8 vodka washed down with a shot of sambuca, but did not think she had drank excessively... instead suggested she was spiked... so much bullshit on both sides of this story

Over the course of a night? That doesn't sound excessive or even much to me, and I'm not a big drinker.

Gallsman probably thinks you have a major drink problem and need a good kick up the hole!

I just think you need a kick up the hole full stop.

Ah bless you don't like being called out for the dick you are.

gallsman · October 07, 2016, 02:17:03 PM

Yes, you've called me out. My secret shame exposed at last. Well done.

No wides · October 07, 2016, 04:06:03 PM

I doubt it was ever a secret.

general_lee · October 07, 2016, 04:44:57 PM

Quote from: haranguerer on October 07, 2016, 11:05:15 AM
Quote from: general_lee on October 07, 2016, 10:22:18 AM
Half a litre of wine and 8 vodka washed down with a shot of sambuca, but did not think she had drank excessively... instead suggested she was spiked... so much bullshit on both sides of this story

Over the course of a night? That doesn't sound excessive or even much to me, and I'm not a big drinker.

It's about 18 units which is four more than the recommended weekly intake for an adult.

Quote from: magpie seanie on October 07, 2016, 12:19:21 PM
This is a crappy episode at best. There are no winners here no matter which way it turns out in my view. I wouldn't like to be on the jury.

Why? I don't think he's guilty.

magpie seanie · October 07, 2016, 04:51:05 PM

Maybe not guilty of rape (who knows to be honest, reliability of most/all witnesses could be questionable) but he certainly hasn't covered himself in glory on what we know.

general_lee · October 07, 2016, 05:01:51 PM

Quote from: magpie seanie on October 07, 2016, 04:51:05 PM
Maybe not guilty of rape (who knows to be honest, reliability of most/all witnesses could be questionable) but he certainly hasn't covered himself in glory on what we know.

I know, he's a sc**bag. His gf is an idiot for standing by him (for him being a cheat) but I honestly don't think he raped the girl. I think he saw an opportunity to either c**k block his friend or join in and get some easy sex and he ended up with the latter. all three were drunk, how can consent be implied for one of the men but not the other?

grounded · October 07, 2016, 05:56:11 PM

Quote from: general_lee on October 07, 2016, 05:01:51 PM
Quote from: magpie seanie on October 07, 2016, 04:51:05 PM
Maybe not guilty of rape (who knows to be honest, reliability of most/all witnesses could be questionable) but he certainly hasn't covered himself in glory on what we know.
I know, he's a sc**bag. His gf is an idiot for standing by him (for him being a cheat) but I honestly don't think he raped the girl. I think he saw an opportunity to either c**k block his friend or join in and get some easy sex and he ended up with the latter. all three were drunk, how can consent be implied for one of the men but not the other?

I think it was explained (bear with me on this!) that the jury believed that ched evan's friend genuinely thought he had the girl's informed consent(even though with her alcohol intake they also believed that she could not possibly be sober enough to give this consent) whereas in Evans case they felt that he should have known the girl was too drunk for consent and therefore he raped her. It's a genuinely messed up and sad case.

Nigel White · October 07, 2016, 07:14:39 PM

Quote from: No wides on October 07, 2016, 04:06:03 PM
I doubt it was ever a secret.

You're not wrong there

Asal Mor · October 08, 2016, 05:19:23 AM

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/ched-evans-retrial-victim-asked-footballer-for-rough-sex-defence-claims-a3362091.html

From reading this piece it would seem that the "previously unheard evidence" which was the basis for the retrial is actually evidence that was wrongly deemed inadmissible at the original trial.

There is mention of the CCTV footage from the Premier Inn which shows the woman walking unaided and steadily, and which seems to contradict the hotel porter's evidence of her being unsteady on her feet.

Also, there's mention of testimony from previous sexual partners......

The court also heard two men had made statements describing sexual relationships they had with the woman, in which they allege she also asked for rough sex.
The woman replied: "No, I disagree with that."
Miss Khan suggested that with previous partners the woman had woken up the following morning and asked: "What happened last night?"

These testimonies were available before the first trial but deemed inadmissible.

The toxicology report shows she wasn't spiked(not new evidence afaik)

I'll be amazed if Evans is found guilty after this. This evidence raises way too much doubt. It seems to me that the police and CPS were over eager in getting a conviction in this case, and somehow managed to get extremely relevant and important evidence deemed inadmissable at the original trial. They managed to secure an unsafe conviction but I don't think they did the girl any favors.

Jim_Murphy_74 · October 10, 2016, 12:18:31 PM

Quote from: Asal Mor on October 08, 2016, 05:19:23 AM
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/ched-evans-retrial-victim-asked-footballer-for-rough-sex-defence-claims-a3362091.html

From reading this piece it would seem that the "previously unheard evidence" which was the basis for the retrial is actually evidence that was wrongly deemed inadmissible at the original trial.

There is mention of the CCTV footage from the Premier Inn which shows the woman walking unaided and steadily, and which seems to contradict the hotel porter's evidence of her being unsteady on her feet.

Also, there's mention of testimony from previous sexual partners......

The court also heard two men had made statements describing sexual relationships they had with the woman, in which they allege she also asked for rough sex.
The woman replied: "No, I disagree with that."
Miss Khan suggested that with previous partners the woman had woken up the following morning and asked: "What happened last night?"

These testimonies were available before the first trial but deemed inadmissible.

The toxicology report shows she wasn't spiked(not new evidence afaik)

I'll be amazed if Evans is found guilty after this. This evidence raises way too much doubt. It seems to me that the police and CPS were over eager in getting a conviction in this case, and somehow managed to get extremely relevant and important evidence deemed inadmissable at the original trial. They managed to secure an unsafe conviction but I don't think they did the girl any favors.

The campaign website his girlfriend and family had this CCTV showing her get out of taxi and head for lift. It's grainy but she seemed reasonably steady on her feet. It also had screenshots of facebook posts she allegedly made and deleted. In these she seemed to imply she had pulled a footballer and was going to make a few quid.

As soon as he got out and re-trial ordered site was pulled. I guess they hoped to get some of this in as evidence.

The video is far from conclusive but it could be used to question the testimony that she was out of it going into the hotel.

/Jim.

Maroon Manc · October 14, 2016, 03:29:20 PM

Found not guilty, £50,000 reward was offered for evidence that would help Evans and apparently an ex boyfriend of the girl came forward.

I just don't understand why Evan's girlfriend has stood by him.

imtommygunn · October 14, 2016, 03:32:26 PM

So that was why he came forward. I thought it said somewhere he felt bad. Reading his testimony if he was believed then it would have been curtains for her.

Asal Mor · October 14, 2016, 03:46:50 PM

Quote from: Maroon Manc on October 14, 2016, 03:29:20 PM
Found not guilty, £50,000 reward was offered for evidence that would help Evans and apparently an ex boyfriend of the girl came forward.

I just don't understand why Evan's girlfriend has stood by him.

That witness has said he would lose his job where he earns more than that per year and intends working for the next 20 years, if he took that reward. He has no previous record of anything and the prosecution were unable to undermine his credibility in any way. Do you seriously think that someone would perjure themselves and risk their career, freedom and future in a high-profile case for a sum of money which is less than their annual salary? He says he came forward because he felt Evans wasn't guilty. The girl never accused him of rape, she just couldn't remember what happened. The key witness' evidence corroborates Evans' account of what happened. There is no evidence that contradicts Evans' account but some people seem determined to believe the worst anyway.

Asal Mor · October 14, 2016, 03:51:48 PM

I thought Evans' statement outside the court(read by his solicitor) was good. He apologised for any hurt that his actions caused while maintaining that he was absolutely not guilty of the crime. Thar girl's life has been messed up, not by a man who had consensual sex with her, but by a system so influenced by hysteria that it buried any evidence that supported Evans' version of events.

Asal Mor · October 14, 2016, 04:10:50 PM

Quote from: Maroon Manc on October 14, 2016, 03:29:20 PM
Found not guilty, £50,000 reward was offered for evidence that would help Evans and apparently an ex boyfriend of the girl came forward.

I just don't understand why Evan's girlfriend has stood by him.

And by the way, it was 2 former partners who came forward to give evidence that supported Evans, not just one.