DerekFaulkner
New Member
Blimey, 14 pages of total drivel about a player that won't be signing for us.
Blimey, 14 pages of total drivel about a player that won't be signing for us.
Increase the number of posts you see per page in the settings.
I'm sure we had 40 page posts about our making the top 6 last season and that was never going to happen either.Blimey, 14 pages of total drivel about a player that won't be signing for us.
I'm sure we had 40 page posts about our making the top 6 last season and that was never going to happen either.
I did not support King joining & boycotted as he is clearly a very bad man. With one offence and doubt over consent I wouldn't boycott if he joined.
I did not support King joining & boycotted as he is clearly a very bad man. With one offence and doubt over consent I wouldn't boycott if he joined.
No party comes out of that night with any credibility.
No party comes out of that night with any credibility.
Blimey, 14 pages of total drivel
Astute, well there is a lot to consider and I don't want to make this thread any bigger than it is. Otis has alluded to some but to answer you on a couple: She went back to the hotel the next day to collect her handbag. The reception told her she was with two footballers last night (she did not know they were footballers the night before) Then she cry's rape. Also the night porter was outside the door listening at the room because he knew there were sexual stuff going on in the hotel and he says what he heard there were sounds of normal frivolity and sex but definitely no cry's of help or resistance. Blood test showed she was not so drunk that she would be off her head and not know what she was doing as she claimed later. There's a whole lot more but it should be said I don't support the guy playing for our club at this moment in time. If he clears his name then I will change my mind.
I find it truly astonishing that, after being tried in a court of law, and having also had appeals against that conviction thrown out, the onus is put onto the girl to prove her innocence and doubt is cast on her.
Actually, astonishing is not the word.
Welcome to the world. I could tell you things that would further curl your mullet
You been listening to Evans?
She didn't bring the prosecution. The police did. If there was as much doubt as you say he would have been found not guilty. The CCTV saw her helped into the room as she was too pissed to walk by herself. But you say she wasn't that bad?
Explain what he was doing there then. He didn't turn up with them. The text sent to him said she was legless.
The same CCTV footage showing her forgetting her bag and then going back for the pizzas?
I'm not suggesting CE is another Brian Banks. I don't know enough about the case. However, I think the number of false accusations (way over a hundred have been prosecuted in the last few years - a small drop compared to the number of offences that do not go prosecuted) and the way these cases are so poorly handled (the very fact people are debating it on here is testament to that!) It all detracts from the poor, frightened and vulnerable women who have never had people care about their case, who have never had their attacker convicted, who have never had the police push forward with prosecutions...at worst, have never come forward for fear of not being heard.
The system is more than flawed, just look at the cases of Stefan Kiszko or Michael Shirley to see that. So using that as an example is poor at best.
Cases like this, and tweets about holidays and pink Minis really set a serious cause back!
So CCTV showing her the next morning going back to the room for her handbag should have her in the same state as when she turned up pissed? :thinking about:
A small amount of people have doubt. A small amount of us would have him at our club if he finally managed to win one of his appeals. A small amount of people would have him at our club whatever as they are desperate for quality players. Most people see him as guilty until proved innocent by a court of law as a court of law and a jury has already found him guilty. Most people don't want him anywhere near our club. And it isn't just our club. It is the same at every club. That is why it is being debated.
OK shall we put it another way. You have a daughter. She meets someone and goes to a hotel with someone when she is intoxicated. Someone else turns up an hour or more and has sex with her. You won't mind as she walks out of the room the next morning and then goes back for her handbag.
So CCTV showing her the next morning going back to the room for her handbag should have her in the same state as when she turned up pissed? :thinking about:
A small amount of people have doubt. A small amount of us would have him at our club if he finally managed to win one of his appeals. A small amount of people would have him at our club whatever as they are desperate for quality players. Most people see him as guilty until proved innocent by a court of law as a court of law and a jury has already found him guilty. Most people don't want him anywhere near our club. And it isn't just our club. It is the same at every club. That is why it is being debated.
OK shall we put it another way. You have a daughter. She meets someone and goes to a hotel with someone when she is intoxicated. Someone else turns up an hour or more and has sex with her. You won't mind as she walks out of the room the next morning and then goes back for her handbag.
Wasn't the CCTV of the night time he is talking about when she got there?
Wasn't the CCTV of the night time he is talking about when she got there?
So she was sober enough to walk unaided but the staff saw her as being very unsteady on her feet?
Astute, well there is a lot to consider and I don't want to make this thread any bigger than it is. Otis has alluded to some but to answer you on a couple: She went back to the hotel the next day to collect her handbag. The reception told her she was with two footballers last night (she did not know they were footballers the night before) Then she cry's rape. Also the night porter was outside the door listening at the room because he knew there were sexual stuff going on in the hotel and he says what he heard there were sounds of normal frivolity and sex but definitely no cry's of help or resistance. Blood test showed she was not so drunk that she would be off her head and not know what she was doing as she claimed later. There's a whole lot more but it should be said I don't support the guy playing for our club at this moment in time. If he clears his name then I will change my mind.
Think the way to look at it is, she may have shown herself to not be of very good character in all this sutuation, but is STILL a victim and that is what is paramount to this sorry saga.She went to the hotel room with one man, Clayton. He (not the girl) invited Evans to join in via a telephone message. Evans then invited his brother and another man to flim them.
The girl was so drunk that she'd already fallen over in front of Evans, and had actually lost her handbag earlier in the night - it wasn't at the hotel. (This was actually why she went to the police in the first place, to report the loss of her handbag.)
She woke up in the hotel, naked, and covered in vomit and urine with no clear idea of what had happened to her. That should provide a pretty clear indication of how drunk she was or wasn't.
Here's the key point, which you and many others seem to be missing. The law states that consent from someone incapable of meaningful consent is not consent - this isn't about cries for help.
The same people here asking that we shouldn't 'judge' Evans are making judgements of the neutral judge and jury in both the original trial and the appeal, and also of the character of the victim here.
Look, I don't wish to get into this too much at all, the bloke was found guilty and that's that. Until he provides concrete evidence that shows the conviction was unsafe he remains guilty, it has been stated though by Evans' defence team that the girl's statement to the police was that she wasn't drunk, but was just tipsy.
Apparently his appeal application will be judged upon in the next couple of weeks, so we will see if he has any grounds at all for the conviction to be quashed.
Not naive Stu. His defence team say they have the police report that states she said she was tipsy and not drunk. They say they atually have the police report.Otis, I think you're being slightly niaive here. It's the job of Evan's defence to a) try and get him off, that's what he's employed them to do, and to do that thtipsyey b) have to try and discredit the main witness, who also happens to be the victim. So the defence team is going to say she was only tipsy, to discredit her statement and dismantle the main reason it was rape.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
Well said Duffer. I'm just staggered that you needed to point it out in the first place.
Not naive Stu. His defence team say they have the police report that states she said she was tipsy and not drunk. They say they atually have the police report.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?