Ched Evans (1 Viewer)

[Otis]

Said that before and the court of appeals quickly said no.

The new evidence could simply be a technicality that the court of appeal will decide played no part in influencing the decision.

There are a lot of people who want a convicted rapist who admitted he slept with a girl without consent to be set free,

Is there? You sure about that? Where are all these people who want a convicted rapist set free?

The appeals board only grant 3.5% of all appeal requests, so if any are granted it surely must be because of significant evidence. Evans' team seem convinced he will have his conviction quashed.

Am assuming this new evidence must be something significant. Can't believe for a second that it is just a technicality. That sounds rather lame.

 

---

[David O'Day]

If only we all lived in your 'simple' world! Things are either black or white right?

Black or white? No you doofus Ched Evans admitted he slept with a girl without consent and that is rape under English and Welsh law.

Not balck or white just rape.

 

[skybluetony176]

If only we all lived in your 'simple' world! Things are either black or white right?

If you sleep with a girl who is incapable for what ever reason of giving consent that's rape. There is no grey area there.

 

[Otis]

Black or white? No you doofus Ched Evans admitted he slept with a girl without consent and that is rape under English and Welsh law.

Not balck or white just rape.

So, no appeal then.

Move along, nothing to see here.

 

[David O'Day]

Is there? You sure about that? Where are all these people who want a convicted rapist set free?

The appeals board only grant 3.5% of all appeal requests, so if any are granted it surely must be because of significant evidence. Evans' team seem convinced he will have his conviction quashed.

Am assuming this new evidence must be something significant. Can't believe for a second that it is just a technicality. That sounds rather lame.

The actual figure for the year is 9 granted 10 rejected for criminal case appeals.

 

[Samo]

Black or white? No you doofus Ched Evans admitted he slept with a girl without consent and that is rape under English and Welsh law.

Not balck or white just rape.

Wooosh! An appeal has been granted doofus.

 

[David O'Day]

So, no appeal then.

Move along, nothing to see here.

Who is denying a second appeal is taking place?

 

[Nick]

Said that before and the court of appeals quickly said no.

The new evidence could simply be a technicality that the court of appeal will decide played no part in influencing the decision.

There are a lot of people who want a convicted rapist who admitted he slept with a girl without consent to be set free,

He's been out a while?

 

[David O'Day]

Wooosh! An appeal has been granted doofus.

So a granted appeal automatically means you are inncoent?

Are you really this stupid Samo?

 

[David O'Day]

He's been out a while?

Figure of speech

Free of conviction

 

[Samo]

So a granted appeal automatically means you are inncoent?

Are you really this stupid Samo?

Oh the crushing irony! :facepalm:

 

[Otis]

Who is denying a second appeal is taking place?

No-one, but people keep saying he raped the girl and that's it, nowt else.

As it stands he is a convicted rapist. He has now however produced new evidence and the appeals board and they have looked at the evidence and believe it to be sgnificant enough to grant an appeal.

This is what Samo means about all black and white.

 

[SkyBlue_Bear83]

If only we all lived in your 'simple' world! Things are either black or white right?

By the way: Would you like to show me one post on this entire thread that suggests he should be freed?

The law is fairly black and white though, you can't partly or half rape someone. Is the law fair in that it doesn't consider grey areas? Maybe not but you need clear definitions for it to work properly.

 

[Otis]

The bottom line is, it was all done and dusted and now it's not.

He's still a rapist as it stands. Let's see what this new evidence is.

 

[Samo]

The law is fairly black and white though, you can't partly or half rape someone. Is the law fair in that it doesn't consider grey areas? Maybe not but you need clear definitions for it to work properly.

You do indeed, and eventually there will be a black or a white. But right now there is a way to go and we are still in varying degrees of grey until this whole sordid mess is finally resolved.

 

[David O'Day]

Appeals are granted for new evidence or failure of process.

As the case was simple i.e Evans testified he had sex with a girl too drunk to give consent and MacDonald backed this statement up. The fact the didn't know this was a crime has no baring on the case. As the were only three people there i.e MacDonald. Evans and the Girl it is unlikely there is a new witness. As the fact that evans had intercourse with the girl is not in dount then it is not DNA evidence. Unless in the unlikely event he girl has remembered that she did give consent or in the even more unlikely event it is claimed she told someone else she gave consent then it is unlikely to be new evidence.

Which leads to due process i.e the technicality that can mean that trial is restarted.

 

[David O'Day]

Oh the crushing irony! :facepalm:

You seem to have as much of a grasp of Irony as Alanis Morrisette

 

[Samo]

Appeals are granted for new evidence or failure of process.

As the case was simple i.e Evans testified he had sex with a girl too drunk to give consent and MacDonald backed this statement up. The fact the didn't know this was a crime has no baring on the case. As the were only three people there i.e MacDonald. Evans and the Girl it is unlikely there is a new witness. As the fact that evans had intercourse with the girl is not in dount then it is not DNA evidence. Unless in the unlikely event he girl has remembered that she did give consent or in the even more unlikely event it is claimed she told someone else she gave consent then it is unlikely to be new evidence.

Which leads to due process i.e the technicality that can mean that trial is restarted.

Gosh... are you a lawyer or something?

 

[Samo]

You seem to have as much of a grasp of Irony as Alanis Morrisette

Poor Alanis. No I think I understand it fine. You calling me stupid is a perfect example.

 

[Otis]

Gosh... are you a lawyer or something?

I thought he was one half of Dollar.

 

[David O'Day]

Gosh... are you a lawyer or something?

No just not stupid

 

[David O'Day]

Gosh... are you a lawyer or something?

So prove me wrong Samo, I dare ya

 

[Otis]

Let's just wait and see what the evidence is.

A lot of second guessing going on,, on here. None of us have any idea whether this is just down to a 'technicality' at all.

 

[Samo]

So prove me wrong Samo, I dare ya

But that's my point... It isn't over yet, there is yet to be a conclusion, there is no right, wrong, black or white yet. And I suspect that even when the legal system has been exhausted there will be doubts about this case. So you are certainly not wrong, not yet anyway, just a long way off being right.

 

[SkyBlue_Bear83]

Let's just wait and see what the evidence is.

A lot of second guessing going on,, on here. None of us have any idea whether this is just down to a 'technicality' at all.

And equally we don't know the evidence is significant either

 

[Otis]

I would say this case has been anything but simple. There have been debates across the land over it.

You only need to Google 'Ched Evans case' to see all the arguments and counter arguments and comment.

 

[Samo]

And equally we don't know the evidence is significant either

Talking of which, you chose not to answer my question, care to do so?

 

[Otis]

And equally we don't know the evidence is significant either

But it has to be significant enough to warrant an appeal doesn't it? The appeals board have said there is new evidence that aids the Evans defence.

If it wasn't significant, why would they grant an appeal?

 

[SkyBlue_Bear83]

But that's my point... It isn't over yet, there is yet to be a conclusion, there is no right, wrong, black or white yet. And I suspect that even when the legal system has been exhausted there will be doubts about this case. So you are certainly not wrong, not yet anyway, just a long way off being right.

That's the thing though, he is is in the black/wrong area at the moment. It was decided he was in the wrong, its up to him and his team to prove otherwise and until they can he remains in the wrong.

 

[David O'Day]

But it has to be significant enough to warrant an appeal doesn't it? The appeals board have said there is new evidence that aids the Evans defence.

If it wasn't significant, why would they grant an appeal?

Otis I've pointed out the facts behind the case. As it is unlikely to be a new witness and DNA is not a option it's either third party testimony or due process.

 

[Otis]

That's the thing though, he is is in the black/wrong area at the moment. It was decided he was in the wrong, its up to him and his team to prove otherwise and until they can he remains in the wrong.

Very true. Ched Evans IS a rapist and remains so.

 

[David O'Day]

Very true. Ched Evans IS a rapist and remains so.

And in the balance of probabilities will remain so.

 

[Samo]

That's the thing though, he is is in the black/wrong area at the moment. It was decided he was in the wrong, its up to him and his team to prove otherwise and until they can he remains in the wrong.

Yes... 'at the moment'. It's half time pal!

 

[Samo]

And in the balance of probabilities will remain so.

Ooooh a statistician as well as a lawyer! How so?

 

[Otis]

And in the balance of probabilities will remain so.

Well, we will see won't we. Evans' team seem very confident of the conviction being quashed.