Sorry couldn't find the origin topic.
He's not playing as he is working on his fitness or is it that the retrial is at the start of Octber. Chesterfield must really believe in the lad.
https://www.theguardian.com/football/ched-evans
He's playing away already and scoring too.
http://www.bbc.com/sport/football/37017987
A few other clubs wanted to sign him before he got cleared, but dropped out when the online mob got on the case and the clubs started losing sponsors. They were financial rather than moral reasons for pulling out of the deal.
The retrial is in October. It's very hard to see anything other than a not guilty verdict, given that it was referred to the Court of Appeal by the Commission for Miscarriages of Justice on the basis of new evidence(or maybe old evidence that was wrongly deemed inadmissable???). Either way there are no winners here. Just two lives messed up by the police and CPS, who were so influenced by the hysteria around sex crimes that they pressed charges, in the absence of any concrete evidence or even an accusation. The same authorities who thought it would be a good idea to call the BBC before they searched Cliff Richard's home, so the event could be televised.
http://www.irishexaminer.com/examviral/celeb-life/cliff-richard-feared-he-would-die-due-to-stress-caused-by-police-probe-406098.html
Guilty until proven innocent.
Hopefully justice will be done and he's convicted again and all his supporters can go back under their rocks.
Hopefully the jury will be open-minded enough to consider the evidence (new and old) before deciding on a verdict.
Hopefully sense will prevail this time and he will get a 'Not Guilty' verdict. I'd expect Jessica Ennis and your sky glamour doll to offer him a public apologie too.
Quote from: nrico2006 on September 26, 2016, 08:32:11 AM
Hopefully sense will prevail this time and he will get a 'Not Guilty' verdict. I'd expect Jessica Ennis and your sky glamour doll to offer him a public apologie too.
That's a bit stupid of you.
It is like a Greek tragedy. Hopefully he doesn't become Roscommon manager.
Quote from: gallsman on September 26, 2016, 08:59:12 AM
Quote from: nrico2006 on September 26, 2016, 08:32:11 AM
Hopefully sense will prevail this time and he will get a 'Not Guilty' verdict. I'd expect Jessica Ennis and your sky glamour doll to offer him a public apologie too.
That's a bit stupid of you.
Why's that?
Quote from: nrico2006 on September 26, 2016, 10:38:00 AM
Quote from: gallsman on September 26, 2016, 08:59:12 AM
Quote from: nrico2006 on September 26, 2016, 08:32:11 AM
Hopefully sense will prevail this time and he will get a 'Not Guilty' verdict. I'd expect Jessica Ennis and your sky glamour doll to offer him a public apologie too.
That's a bit stupid of you.
Why's that?
Because I'd imagine there's more chance of either of them sucking you off than apologising. That's certainly not going to happen so expecting an apology is a bit daft.
Some evidence given yesterday that didn't sound good for Evans.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/ched-evans-rape-trial-woman-crying-hysterically-hotel-victim-latest-a7349276.html
Jurors heard the police statement of takeaway owner Sohail Aslam, who described the woman as being drunk and "falling over" when she came in at 3.10am.
Hotel night receptionist Gavin Burrough described the woman as being extremely drunk.
He told the jury: "She was unsteady on her feet.
"Her eyes were glazed over and she had a vacant expression on her face. She didn't seem to realise I was there. She seemed to look straight through me.
"I did ask if she was OK. Did I get a reply? No."
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
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.
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!
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.
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.
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.
Yes, you've called me out. My secret shame exposed at last. Well done.
I doubt it was ever a secret. ;)
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.
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.
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?
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.
Quote from: No wides on October 07, 2016, 04:06:03 PM
I doubt it was ever a secret. ;)
You're not wrong there
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.