Ched Evans

[ExiledStirling]

Originally Posted by herts_palace

I agree if you're letting them out of prison then they should be allowed to work, preferably something that they are qualified to do. The problem I have with this is two fold: 1) The adulation/positive attention they might get - it seems wrong somehow- especially as it may not deter others from doing the same crime 2) the money they will receive.

To get round the first problem they could say no interviews with the press/media at all for 2 years say. After all who wants to see a convicted rapist talking on the TV?

I think I'd like to see football take a stance and Sheff Utd stipulate that 90% of his wages should go to victims of the crime he committed (for what time was remaining on his sentence) - in this instance rape. I realise that he has served his time (although he was let out early) but it shows contrition and would take a lot of flak away from him, his club and show footballers in a more positive light.

I doubt it will happen though.

Like you say doubt it will happen, but a great idea from you.

[cpfcfly]

Originally Posted by mjtheeagle

Oh look at you

What a truly awful excuse for a human being you are.

[biggus mickus]

I asked my other half about this.
What was she doing in a hotel room?
He has done his time.
If he was a builder, nothing else would be said.
Why such a small term?
I agree with my wife.

[Ade 70]

Originally Posted by Eddie McGoldrick's tash

That's pretty simplistic and inaccurate. The trauma as a result of rape and it's impact can be very different and the idea of a 'sliding scale' is a concern.

I used to work providing therapeutic support for victims of sexual abuse (childhood abuse and adult) and I think there are some dangerous assumptions implied in that idea of a 'sliding scale'.

So all rape and sexual assault is equally traumatic then?

Surely some circumstances are more traumatic than others - maybe involving violence, gang rape etc....you may disagree with me but I remain of the opinion that all such circumstances are bad, but some are even worse, and others worse still. I believe that the courts base sentencing on this assumption.

I'm not sure why you take so much issue with my use of the phrase "sliding scale" to try to illustrate this.


I'm very much aware that the impact on a victim will vary in a huge number of ways and will include variables such as whether they knew the offender, their age, their own psychological make up etc - no two people are exactly the same, and some people will need more support than others to deal with it.

What am I missing or (seemingly) trivialising?

[PauLo]

Try looking at it from the victims side of things. How do you think someone who suffers from severe anxiety, anguish and depression every day after they were date raped would feel if you said "yeah, but he wasn't violent towards you, so it's not as bad"? They're still a victim of rape no matter the circumstances.

[Ade 70]

Originally Posted by PauLo

Try looking at it from the victims side of things. How do you think someone who suffers from severe anxiety, anguish and depression every day after they were date raped would feel if you said "yeah, but he wasn't violent towards you, so it's not as bad"? They're still a victim of rape no matter the circumstances.

Well you simply wouldn't tell anyone with any sort of severe anxiety, anguish and depression that their situation wasn't as bad as someone else's - because someone suffering with those symptoms will most certainly not benefit from being told that - and that (I thought obviously) wasn't the point I was making. Rape is bad/traumatic/evil etc etc however it occurs....but


Should every rape carry exactly the same sentence for the offender? Should additional circumstances ever be taken into account?

If Ched Evans had beaten her round the head with a brick whilst raping her then wouldn't that have made things worse? Or would that be undervaluing the trauma experienced by some other victim who didn't get beaten up as well?

[Jason]

Originally Posted by Selhurst300

Was at Plymouth last night and their keeper has done time for his part in a road accident that resulted in fatalities.
Couldn't detect any concerns amongst the Green Army as to his criminal record.

I appreciate that many will disagree with me here, but despite the awful consequences of Luke McCormacks actions, there is imho no comparison bertween the two cases. McCormack's crime was effectively to make an extremely stupid decision. The consequences of that decision were tragic, and as someone else said, the worst part of mcCormacks punishment will be that he has to live with that decision for the rest of his life.

But, awful though those events were, there was no intent to cause harm. Just a stupid decision that had the wors tpossible consequences. His crime from an intent perspective wqas exactly the same as that of Tony Adams, and few objected to Adams continuing his career after serving his sentence. There is no comparison for me between that and a rapist. The latter is the far "worse" act morally, even allowing for the consequences of the former.

[Ade 70]

Originally Posted by Jason

I appreciate that many will disagree with me here, but despite the awful consequences of Luke McCormacks actions, there is imho no comparison bertween the two cases. McCormack's crime was effectively to make an extremely stupid decision. The consequences of that decision were tragic, and as someone else said, the worst part of mcCormacks punishment will be that he has to live with that decision for the rest of his life.

But, awful though those events were, there was no intent to cause harm. Just a stupid decision that had the wors tpossible consequences. His crime from an intent perspective wqas exactly the same as that of Tony Adams, and few objected to Adams continuing his career after serving his sentence. There is no comparison for me between that and a rapist. The latter is the far "worse" act morally, even allowing for the consequences of the former.

I agree with you - others won't and it's their opinion, and fair enough.

[palacea]

The whole case at the time seemed very strange, how the guy who was originally with girl had no jail time and yet the other guy goes to prison. Very odd indeed and stunk a bit imo.

[sheepy]

Originally Posted by Jason

I appreciate that many will disagree with me here, but despite the awful consequences of Luke McCormacks actions, there is imho no comparison bertween the two cases. McCormack's crime was effectively to make an extremely stupid decision. The consequences of that decision were tragic, and as someone else said, the worst part of mcCormacks punishment will be that he has to live with that decision for the rest of his life.

But, awful though those events were, there was no intent to cause harm. Just a stupid decision that had the wors tpossible consequences. His crime from an intent perspective wqas exactly the same as that of Tony Adams, and few objected to Adams continuing his career after serving his sentence. There is no comparison for me between that and a rapist. The latter is the far "worse" act morally, even allowing for the consequences of the former.

Not sure Evans could be described as setting out to cause harm.

From what I remember of the trial, it was as much a case as someone who made a terrible judgement call while under the influence of alcohol who wasn't thinking of the consequences of his actions or the hurt it would cause.

I'm not sure how you can distinguish the circumstances of this case and contributing factors behind it so harshly for Evans while at same times being so light on McCormack. I think the comparisons are fair considering the circumstances around both cases.

FWIW - I've no problem with either coming back to play football having served their time.

[Jason]

Originally Posted by sheepy

Not sure Evans could be described as setting out to cause harm.

From what I remember of the trial, it was as much a case as someone who made a terrible judgement call while under the influence of alcohol who wasn't thinking of the consequences of his actions or the hurt it would cause.

I'm not sure how you can distinguish the circumstances of this case and contributing factors behind it so harshly for Evans while at same times being so light on McCormack. I think the comparisons are fair considering the circumstances around both cases.

FWIW - I've no problem with either coming back to play football having served their time.

This is fair enough, and as per my original post, I appreciate that a lot of people will see it very differently to me. To answer your question, I suppose for me, rape is not a "judgement call", it's a clear and conscious choice, even when drunk. When a rapist commits that crime, there is no doubt as to what he is doing. The consequences are known in advance. That is what makes it so different to the McCormack case to me. McCormack took a stupid risk, and everyone involved was unlucky.

I don't believe anyone who says they've never done something stuipid and potentiallydangerous in their lives, even if not quite that stupid or dangerous (and Fwiw, I have never driven having had so much as one drink, so it's not a case of me thinking "there but for the grace of God" in respect of mcCormack's scenario, but i certainly did a couple of stupid things that could have ended badly given bad luck when I was much younger). But I would believe most people when they say that they'd never dream of raping anyone. It's not something you can do "by accident" and there's the difference.

[danpalace07]

Originally Posted by PauLo

Just not in a job where he will be looked upon as a hero by young children if he scores a winning goal. He's a rapist. Scum of the earth. Time in prison doesn't stop him being that. In no way whatsoever should he be allowed back on a football pitch.

I agree with this. Could you imagine if he was playing for Palace and scored to give us the win? Would feel pretty horrible idolising someone like that.

[FORZA SELHURST]

Well you know how it is. Christmas time, office parties, the girls having a drink or two and looking a bit tarty.

"I'd only had a few which I wouldn't do normally officer, she stepped out in front of me and I came over all rapey. I don't usually do this sort of thing but I didn't see her coming, honestly. I can only apologise for my lapse in judgment".

[danpalace07]

Some very worrying posts ITT really. Victim blaming is not on. If clear consent hasn't been given, it is rape.

[sheepy]

Originally Posted by Jason

But I would believe most people when they say that they'd never dream of raping anyone. It's not something you can do "by accident" and there's the difference.

Not sure about this. I think there is a clear line but things like alcohol and peer pressure can cloud it and make it difficult to step back and realise what you're doing.

This case demonstrates how blurry the line can get. The first bloke to have sex with her was found not guilty as the girl was conscious enough to consent. The argument with Evans was that by the time he had sex with her, she was no longer capable of consenting.

I really don't want to stick up for the guy as it was pretty disgusting but at the same time I can empathise to the extent that I can get over him still having a career as a paid professional footballer.

[FORZA SELHURST]

Yes, rape is a bit like being over the drink-drive limit.

[Crofty]

Originally Posted by FORZA SELHURST

Yes, rape is a bit like being over the drink-drive limit.

without all the fumbling for the key and trying to find the…..oh…I'll get my coat

[scro]

There are definitely some grey areas with this case. I thought she was deemed too drunk to give consent. So I assume from this she didn't say no explicitly. The other guy was deemed to have had consensual sex with the girl. So the problem was him joining in. Nasty stuff all around! However I suppose possible it could have happened without Evans being what many would consider a predatory rapist. It's clearly pretty grim but he may have not judged whether she was "fit to consent" appropriately. A mistake for all we know he may deeply regret.

Don't get me wrong. He shouldn't have got involved with a plastered girl his mate had pulled. However intended malice is key for me when judging the blokes character. Perhaps clough has gone through all this with him and actually takes the view the bloke has remorse and deserves another chance in life.

If this hasn't happened and he's a nasty bit of work that just happens to be a great footballer. Then the club should be ashamed of itself.

[Syph1979]

I would suggest that you give this a read: To view the link you have to Register or Login

That website is written by Ched Evans' partner who has long protested his innocence of the crime of rape, while excepting fully that he had cheated on her.

The statements that were not allowed as evidence paint a very different picture of the victim.

I can't say I have a view either way on this case, but I do believe that he has served his punishment he has the right to earn a living as much as anyone and if that means playing football, then so be it.

[jamie12]

Originally Posted by danpalace07

Some very worrying posts ITT really. Victim blaming is not on. If clear consent hasn't been given, it is rape.

^^^ the girl hasn't got to say 'no', it's rape if she's failed to said 'yes', regardless of what kind of state she's in or how many pricks have been in the dartboard.