Random footie

[Gingerfinch]

Excellent cross from Bale. 1-0.

[Gingerfinch]

http://www.theguardian.com/football/201 ... ched-evans

[sussexpob]

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/aug/13/petition-sheffield-united-re-sign-rapist-ched-evans

Personally, I hope that Ched Evans will one day be successful in clearing his name. Having read the full report and undisputed facts of the case, it is utter tosh that he was convicted in the first place.

[Gingerfinch]

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/aug/13/petition-sheffield-united-re-sign-rapist-ched-evans

Personally, I hope that Ched Evans will one day be successful in clearing his name. Having read the full report and undisputed facts of the case, it is utter tosh that he was convicted in the first place.

Mmm, I initially thought 'hang the bas.ard' but then read the article.

[Alviro Patterson]

These groups don't have the given right to judge Ched Evans and pressure him or the club to take a moral compass.

If Ched Evans is acquited, I'd love it if he sues those who have tarnished his name.

[SaintPowelly]

If hes acquited, thats one thing. But right now hes a convicted rapist and a club hiring him would be very poor in my opinion.

[budgetmeansbudget]

If hes acquited, thats one thing. But right now hes a convicted rapist and a club hiring him would be very poor in my opinion.

He will be, but he'll have served his time under the current parole rules, and the jury decision was dubious and a little surprising at the time imo. I wouldn't have signed the petition and I think Sheffield United supporters should give him a chance to rebuild his life.

[SaintPowelly]

If hes acquited, thats one thing. But right now hes a convicted rapist and a club hiring him would be very poor in my opinion.

He will be, but he'll have served his time under the current parole rules, and the jury decision was dubious and a little surprising at the time imo. I wouldn't have signed the petition and I think Sheffield United supporters should give him a chance to rebuild his life.

Its more a case of how victims of rape will feel watching this guy collect large paychecks after a small prison visit and their lives will never be the same.

A petition won't change anything, if Sheff United want him, they'll re-sign him regardless, but I don't think they should.

[SaintPowelly]

And before anyone says "hes entitled to earn a living like anyone else after released from prison" etc.

Football and society have never mixed, countless things happen on football pitches that are criminal offences and nothing is done about it, you can't compare the 2.

[Gingerfinch]

Where did sussex's post go?

[sussexpob]

Where did sussex's post go?

I removed it to rephrase it as it didnt make sense.

[sussexpob]

Powelly,

I remember the arguments from the time, but more has been shed on it since the law reports were released, I do trust that you read them too? I have, and I cant understand for the life of me the reasoning the judge and the jury take in order to justify the guilty verdict. Maybe you can explain it to me?

Lets take the crux of the case. A young women was raped. She doesnt remember she was raped, in fact the only thing she did remember was she didnt take drugs that night, but then the toxicology report actually proved she was lying, and that she had taken cocaine and cannabis..... our victim seemingly went to a hotel to recover her bag after going to work, not remembering anything, but not being drunk enough for any of her friends to notice that she was too drunk to stand (she was standing, and talking, and sending texts with perfect punctuation and spelling, and the taxi driver and night porter at the hotel didnt notice she was drunk either). When she gets there she is told she didnt leave the bag in the famous footballers room, the one that she had stayed in the night before.... at this point the "F" word triggers in her a sudden need to report to a police station. Before the trial her Twitter account is linked to comments of a "big pay out". Evidence that was not deemed admissable by the defence would have shown she had accused people of rape before, and that people close to her had made statements about how much sex she had with strangers.

There is subsequently no forensic evidence that proves she has been raped. The victim hasnt mentioned it. The two footballers are dragged to the police station to shed light on why the girl ended up there, both seperately explain the same story (that would also seemingly hold up to cross examination in court), and on hearing they both say they had sex with her, charge her for rape without even interviewing the victim.

So the guilty have now, when confronted with no physical suggestion of rape, or of any substantive evidence, been charged with rape because they say they had consensual sex with her?? Any idea why? It gets better though.

So Defendant A, the Port Vale lad McDonald is found to have taken her back in a taxi. The girl had 2 glasses of wine, 6 vodkas and a shot. Not in the grand scheme of things a lot of booze. She is seen before seemingly willingly caught on CCTV approaching McDonald in a kebab shop for about an hour after leaving the club. They travel several miles to a hotel, where they have sex.

Defendant B turns up at said hotel and joins in after McDonald is finished.

In guiding the jury, the judge accepts the legal argument that they must decide if either had consent, and that her being drunk would invalidate that consent if she wouldnt have had the capacity to give it.

GET THIS..... McDonald, who had sex with her first, and in the absence of absolutely no proof that she had drunk since leaving a club 2 hours earlier, was not guilty. The girl was drunk, but not drunk enough to not have the capacity to say yes.

The only witness says he heard sex noises, men and women, seemingly enjoying themselves and no signs of a struggle. The women was therefore conscious at the time, and in absence of any evidence from the hotel worker and the absence of any signs of violent struggle, would add further weight to the rubbish decision.

Evans, who had sex with her after, was guilty. In the opinion of the jury, contrary to medical science and absolute common sense, the girl in question had become more drunk in 1 minute while they swapped positions, and was at the time Evans had sex with her, no longer able to give consent. Some cynics might say he was a more high profile footballer, but hey!!

Regardless of anything you can now say, the ONLY QUESTION the jury had to answer, and the ONLY GROUNDS for conviction was to prove she was too drunk.

HERES THE BEST PART... you know how they proved she was too drunk???? FROM CCTV FOOTAGE BEFORE SHE HAD SEX WITH MCDONALD!!!!

SO TO CONCLUDE.... THE JURY NI FACT SAID THAT SHE WAS DRUNK WHEN SHE GOT IN THE CAB, TOO DRUNK, THAT SHE SOBERED UP FOR A BREIF PERIOD TO HAVE SEX WITH SOMEONE AND THEN BECAME INSTANTLY DRUNK AGAIN TO HAVE SEX WITH SOMEONE ELSE

THAT IS UTTER *modded*!!

THE ONLY PETITION PEOPLE SHOULD BE SIGNING IS THE ONE THAT LEADS TO CHED EVANS' FREEDOM!!

[rich1uk]

don't know if this is true but found this on todays bbc footie gossip and was a bit gobsmacked by it ;

"Chelsea midfielder Eden Hazard, 23, has reportedly asked Google to erase references of his performance for Belgium against Argentina at this summer's World Cup under the European Union's recent 'right to be forgotten' ruling."

i'm fairly sure he wont be asking for any references to his good performances to be erased ...

[Gingerfinch]

Google will be hopping mad if Tom Cleverley asks a similar question.

[rich1uk]

Ashley young might keep his mouth shut more often after this

https://vine.co/v/M37F1mB5IzB