# Ched Evans



## shewy (Apr 21, 2016)

I see he has had his conviction quashed, and a retrial is now on the cards.
Does that make him an innocent man now pending the outcome of the retrial?
Got to wonder what new evidence was shown for it to be quashed, were the police hiding past behavior from the victim? I know first hand that in a trial previous was not taken into account in a trial when it was the cornerstone of the trial and a miscarriage of justice took place.


----------



## Ethan (Apr 21, 2016)

I wonder if Theresa May ordered the quashing of his conviction to take away some of the front page coverage from the EU referendum, Panama Papers and collapsing NHS.


----------



## rosecott (Apr 21, 2016)

Ethan said:



			I wonder if Theresa May ordered the quashing of his conviction to take away some of the front page coverage from the EU referendum, Panama Papers and collapsing NHS.
		
Click to expand...

In what way does Teresa May come into it?

There were three judges sitting on the appeal and the decision was from them and them alone. 

Perhaps you do not believe in the independence of the judiciary.


----------



## Ethan (Apr 21, 2016)

rosecott said:



			In what way does Teresa May come into it?

There were three judges sitting on the appeal and the decision was from them and them alone. 

Perhaps you do not believe in the independence of the judiciary.
		
Click to expand...

Take a pill. It was a joke. The judiciary is not entirely independent, though, although I am sure politicians were not involved in this case.


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 21, 2016)

Ethan said:



			Take a pill. It was a joke. *The judiciary is not entirely independent,* though, although I am sure politicians were not involved in this case.
		
Click to expand...

Notwithstanding the 'joke' of your original post, it's absolutely essential that 'the judiciary' IS independent -  making rulings based purely on the evidence and their interpretation of the law as argued by each side's advocates - whether or not they actually 'like' the particular law, or the advocates arguments!

And that applies to every judge in every country, irrespective of the nature of the actual Government!

Any other way of working is totalitarianism or (other) corruption!


----------



## Rooter (Apr 21, 2016)

Ethan said:



			Take a pill. It was a joke. The judiciary is not entirely independent, though, although I am sure politicians were not involved in this case.
		
Click to expand...

I got it! i heard Ian Brady is due to be released 23rd June...


----------



## User62651 (Apr 21, 2016)

If he is innocent then the courts (or the accuser) have ruined his life and cost him tens/hundreds of thousands in lost earnings etc. Worrying that the conviction has been quashed and asks the question why could they not have analysed the evidence or whatever correctly the first time and if it was not conclusive why was he incarcerated?

More disturbed by the Norwegian verdict agreeing Breivik has been maltreated in jail by being isolated, the guy blew up some people then gunned down 70 odd kids when sane, he should be doing the hardest time there is. Something not right with 'justice' in so many countries but it's a difficult balance to find.


----------



## Ethan (Apr 21, 2016)

maxfli65 said:



			If he is innocent then the courts (or the accuser) have ruined his life and cost him tens/hundreds of thousands in lost earnings etc. Worrying that the conviction has been quashed and asks the question why could they not have analysed the evidence or whatever correctly the first time and if it was not conclusive why was he incarcerated?

More disturbed by the Norwegian verdict agreeing Breivik has been maltreated in jail by being isolated, the guy blew up some people then gunned down 70 odd kids when sane, he should be doing the hardest time there is. Something not right with 'justice' in so many countries but it's a difficult balance to find.
		
Click to expand...

There is no verdict of 'innocent' in UK law, just guilty or not guilty. The fact they have ordered a retrial suggests there was enough evidence to go to trial but that the case for a guilty verdict was not adequately proven. 

I am not disturbed by the Brevik case. The question of his rights, however defined, should not be dictated by the public revulsion for his crimes. He is going nowhere, will die in prison.


----------



## Stuey01 (Apr 21, 2016)

Ethan said:



			There is no verdict of 'innocent' in UK law, just guilty or not guilty. The fact they have ordered a retrial suggests there was enough evidence to go to trial but that the case for a guilty verdict was not adequately proven. 

I am not disturbed by the Brevik case. The question of his rights, however defined, should not be dictated by the public revulsion for his crimes. He is going nowhere, will die in prison.
		
Click to expand...

Breivik was sentenced to 21 years, and it can be extended only if he is still deemed a threat.  He is still a young man, I would say there is a very good chance he won't die in prison.  Though I do hope he never sees freedom again.


----------



## Ethan (Apr 21, 2016)

Stuey01 said:



			Breivik was sentenced to 21 years, and it can be extended only once, and only if he is still deemed a threat.  He is still a young man, I would say there is a very good chance he won't die in prison.  Though I do hope he never sees freedom again.
		
Click to expand...

OK, thanks for the correction. I doubt he will be paroled, then.

Edit: according to a well known online source, the sentence can be extended indefinitely.


----------



## Stuey01 (Apr 21, 2016)

Ethan said:



			OK, thanks for the correction. I doubt he will be paroled, then.
		
Click to expand...

I edited my post for accuracy, it can be extended multiple times, I misread that part.
I do hope they never deem him safe for release and continually extend his sentence, the man is a monster.


----------



## Kellfire (Apr 21, 2016)

I am glad this has gone to a retrial as, from all the evidence that the court was shown, there was no way guilt was proven in my opinion.


----------



## Pin-seeker (Apr 21, 2016)

Kellfire said:



			I am glad this has gone to a retrial as, from all the evidence that the court was shown, there was no way guilt was proven in my opinion.
		
Click to expand...

Totally agree. 
If found innocent it will be interesting to see how many public apologies he gets.


----------



## Ethan (Apr 21, 2016)

Pin-seeker said:



			Totally agree. 
If found innocent it will be interesting to see how many public apologies he gets.
		
Click to expand...

He can't be found innocent, only not guilty, which is not the same thing. 

Compensation for wrongful imprisonment is capped at half a million quid.


----------



## Kellfire (Apr 21, 2016)

Ethan said:



			He can't be found innocent, only not guilty, which is not the same thing..
		
Click to expand...

It's a de facto way of finding innocence as our legal system conforms to the Human Right of "innocence until proven guilty" means that not being found guilty equates to innocence. I know you're arguing the legal wording but I don't think that's what anyone here means.


----------



## Ethan (Apr 21, 2016)

Kellfire said:



			It's a de facto way of finding innocence as our legal system conforms to the Human Right of "innocence until proven guilty" means that not being found guilty equates to innocence. I know you're arguing the legal wording but I don't think that's what anyone here means.
		
Click to expand...

But the point is that the verdict is based on whether there is enough evidence that he did it, in criminal cases beyond reasonable doubt (in civil on the balance of probabilities), and that leaves a lot of room for 'he did it, but we can't prove it'. Few people who have convictions overturned walk away with a perception of innocence unless someone else is proven to have done it, which is hardly likely here. May not be fair, but a lot of people will think he got away with it. If there had been insufficient evidence to go to retrial at all, I think people would maybe see him as more likely to be innocent. Although the police and prosecution may get their act together for the retrial and do a better job.


----------



## shewy (Apr 21, 2016)

So getting back to my original point and not wording, innocent until proven guilty, so in the eyes of the law is he now deemed innocent as the verdict of guilty has been quashed?


----------



## Tashyboy (Apr 21, 2016)

shewy said:



			I see he has had his conviction quashed, and a retrial is now on the cards.
Does that make him an innocent man now pending the outcome of the retrial?
Got to wonder what new evidence was shown for it to be quashed, were the police hiding past behavior from the victim? I know first hand that in a trial previous was not taken into account in a trial when it was the cornerstone of the trial and a miscarriage of justice took place.
		
Click to expand...

Shewy, listening to this on the radio coming back today and they said his legal team and Ched would be disappointed that he was found not guilty, and all charges dropped etc etc. 
At the same time they would be relieved that Ched and his team were vindicated in pursuing this case and the future trial would prove his innocence.


----------



## Papas1982 (Apr 21, 2016)

If found innocent (not guilty). Then how does the girl get perceived? 
To me it always seemed like he was out of line maybe taking advantage. But that it was no more than an encounter she felt ashamed of and went to trial to make her look better. 

Does she she get dealt with for miss use of police time? For crying wolf etc? Not prejudging her as he's not been found not guilty. Just curious of repercussions?

if it's rushed through he still has time to forge a career, if a club is strong enough to take a punt. Surely less clubs will fear sponsors leaving if he's deemed innocent.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Apr 21, 2016)

shewy said:



			So getting back to my original point and not wording, innocent until proven guilty, so in the eyes of the law is he now deemed innocent as the verdict of guilty has been quashed?
		
Click to expand...

I would say he's gone from being a convicted rapist, to a suspected rapist.
Only the retrial will clear it up.


----------



## Simbo (Apr 21, 2016)

Ethan said:



			But the point is that the verdict is based on whether there is enough evidence that he did it, in criminal cases beyond reasonable doubt (in civil on the balance of probabilities), and that leaves a lot of room for 'he did it, but we can't prove it'. Few people who have convictions overturned walk away with a perception of innocence unless someone else is proven to have done it, which is hardly likely here. May not be fair, but a lot of people will think he got away with it. If there had been insufficient evidence to go to retrial at all, I think people would maybe see him as more likely to be innocent. Although the police and prosecution may get their act together for the retrial and do a better job.
		
Click to expand...

That's half the problem with the law, everything gets twisted beyond belief when lawyers get a hold of it. If he's found not guilty then then this "he might have done it but we can't prove it" is nothing more than someone's opinion and guesswork. 
Is the "victim" still entitled to remain anonymous if he is found not guilty at the retrial???


----------



## Pin-seeker (Apr 21, 2016)

Simbo said:



			Is the "victim" still entitled to remain anonymous if he is found not guilty at the retrial???
		
Click to expand...

I would say so yes. 
Because you get the argument that it could stop other victims from coming foward.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Apr 21, 2016)

Simbo said:



			That's half the problem with the law, everything gets twisted beyond belief when lawyers get a hold of it. If he's found not guilty then then this "he might have done it but we can't prove it" is nothing more than someone's opinion and guesswork. 
Is the "victim" still entitled to remain anonymous if he is found not guilty at the retrial???
		
Click to expand...

The identity of the alleged victim is irrelevant, at the first trial part of Evan's defence was that she never claimed rape, she went to the police as she'd lost her handbag and couldn't remember anything from the night before, it would be best to let the retrial happen before we start a witch hunt.


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 21, 2016)

maxfli65 said:



			...
More disturbed by the Norwegian verdict agreeing Breivik has been maltreated in jail by being isolated, the guy blew up some people then gunned down 70 odd kids when sane, he should be doing the hardest time there is. Something not right with 'justice' in so many countries but it's a difficult balance to find.
		
Click to expand...

Are you after 'justice' - as defined by a humane/humanitarian society?

Or are you simply after revenge?!

From this article http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-36094575 it would seem that there were parts of his treatment where it was the latter!


----------



## Simbo (Apr 21, 2016)

pauldj42 said:



			The identity of the alleged victim is irrelevant, at the first trial part of Evan's defence was that she never claimed rape, she went to the police as she'd lost her handbag and couldn't remember anything from the night before, it would be best to let the retrial happen before we start a witch hunt.
		
Click to expand...

A witch hunt?? Really?
How is the identity of the victim irrelevant? I merely asked if she was still entitled to anonnimity. Are you saying she has never at any point accused him of raping her??


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Apr 21, 2016)

Simbo said:



			A witch hunt?? Really?
How is the identity of the victim irrelevant? I merely asked if she was still entitled to anonnimity. Are you saying she has never at any point accused him of raping her??
		
Click to expand...

Why is her name relevant if this time he is found not guilty, it was a jury that found him guilty. Are you really saying alleged victims shouldn't be allowed to remain anonymous unless you're 16 or 17 years old and have no experience of life I can't actually believe you're asking about anonimity in sexual offences, just like innocent people can be found guilty, guilty people can be found innocent,  if he's found not guilty and if the CPS decide she committed an offence she should be done,
He admitted having sex with the girl and she said she never consented, I'm happy to let our legal system run its course


----------



## ColchesterFC (Apr 21, 2016)

Ethan said:



			I am not disturbed by the Brevik case. The question of his rights, however defined, should not be dictated by the public revulsion for his crimes. He is going nowhere, *will die in prison*.
		
Click to expand...




Stuey01 said:



			Breivik was sentenced to 21 years, and it can be extended only if he is still deemed a threat.  He is still a young man, I would say there is *a very good chance he won't die in prison*.  Though I do hope he never sees freedom again.
		
Click to expand...

I think that there is a much higher chance of Brevik dying in prison if he is taken out of solitary and put in with the general prison population. I'd be fairly sure that there would be a number of other prisoners that would like to have an opportunity to have five minutes alone in the shower block with him and a snooker ball in a sock.


----------



## Fish (Apr 21, 2016)

I don't care what the retrial produces, he _was_ a predator IMO, he groomed her, he knew her age and took (or tried to) take advantage with his celebrity (kind of) status, he's still guilty in my eyes whatever the new outcome, I just hope that if he _unfortunately_ gets off this he's not allowed to claim anything or sell any stories, but unfortunately being in a nanny state where the criminal is rewarded and the victims are made to feel guilty, that won't happen, will it!

And we wonder why so many crimes, especially one's like this go unreported!

Bloody lefty, tree hugging dogooders strike again, no doubt!


----------



## Papas1982 (Apr 21, 2016)

Fish said:



			I don't care what the retrial produces, he _was_ a predator IMO, he groomed her, he knew her age and took (or tried to) take advantage with his celebrity (kind of) status, he's still guilty in my eyes whatever the new outcome, I just hope that if he _unfortunately_ gets off this he's not allowed to claim anything or sell any stories, but unfortunately being in a nanny state where the criminal is rewarded and the victims are made to feel guilty, that won't happen, will it!

And we wonder why so many crimes, especially one's like this go unreported!

Bloody lefty, tree hugging dogooders strike again, no doubt!
		
Click to expand...

She was of legal age was she not?

How did he groom her. He met her once and had his way at a hotel. 

Are you thinking of Adam Johnson?


----------



## rosecott (Apr 21, 2016)

Ethan said:



			I wonder if Theresa May ordered the quashing of his conviction to take away some of the front page coverage from the EU referendum, Panama Papers and collapsing NHS.
		
Click to expand...




rosecott said:



			In what way does Teresa May come into it?

There were three judges sitting on the appeal and the decision was from them and them alone. 

Perhaps you do not believe in the independence of the judiciary.
		
Click to expand...




Ethan said:



			Take a pill. It was a joke. The judiciary is not entirely independent, though, although I am sure politicians were not involved in this case.
		
Click to expand...

That must be a very powerful pill to make me see and comprehend your jokes. Where can I buy them? Even if they work only on your posts, they would be invaluable.


----------



## Fish (Apr 21, 2016)

Papas1982 said:



			Are you thinking of Adam Johnson?
		
Click to expand...

Yes &#128542;


----------



## Pin-seeker (Apr 21, 2016)

Fish said:



			I don't care what the retrial produces, he _was_ a predator IMO, he groomed her, he knew her age and took (or tried to) take advantage with his celebrity (kind of) status, he's still guilty in my eyes whatever the new outcome, I just hope that if he _unfortunately_ gets off this he's not allowed to claim anything or sell any stories, but unfortunately being in a nanny state where the criminal is rewarded and the victims are made to feel guilty, that won't happen, will it!

And we wonder why so many crimes, especially one's like this go unreported!

Bloody lefty, tree hugging dogooders strike again, no doubt!
		
Click to expand...

Knew her age??? 
Either you're getting mixed up with Adam Johnson or you are just talking rubbish.


----------



## Fish (Apr 21, 2016)

Pin-seeker said:



			or you are just talking rubbish.
		
Click to expand...

Well you'd recognise that more than most!


----------



## Pin-seeker (Apr 21, 2016)

Fish said:



			Well you'd recognise that more than most!
		
Click to expand...

Meow Fishy &#128514;


----------



## Simbo (Apr 21, 2016)

pauldj42 said:



			Why is her name relevant if this time he is found not guilty, it was a jury that found him guilty. Are you really saying alleged victims shouldn't be allowed to remain anonymous unless you're 16 or 17 years old and have no experience of life I can't actually believe you're asking about anonimity in sexual offences, just like innocent people can be found guilty, guilty people can be found innocent,  if he's found not guilty and if the CPS decide she committed an offence she should be done,
He admitted having sex with the girl and she said she never consented, I'm happy to let our legal system run its course
		
Click to expand...

I'm not 16 or 17 and have plenty experience in life from the school of hard knocks, wind your neck in a bit.
 I asked a genuine question as I don't know whether she is entitled to remain anonymous I'd he's found not guilty. Don't see why she should.

She never said she didn't consent, she said she couldn't remember.


----------



## SteveJay (Apr 21, 2016)

Understand she was drunk and didn't, and legally couldn't, consent.

What I don't get is all this "his life and career is ruined"......that just bull......if his innocence is confirmed at the re-trial he will soon be back playing football and I can't see him actually noticing the temporary loss of earnings, such is the magnitude of players wages these days.


----------



## sev112 (Apr 21, 2016)

Kellfire said:



			It's a de facto way of finding innocence as our legal system conforms to the Human Right of "innocence until proven guilty" means that not being found guilty equates to innocence. I know you're arguing the legal wording but I don't think that's what anyone here means.
		
Click to expand...

No, that's a massive misunderstanding that is perpetrated by the Media. it is the individual statute (law) itself which deems what the burden or proof is.  Under , for example the Health & Safety at Work Act (which is also criminal law) the basis is guilty unless the duty holder can demonstrate that they met the requirement of the law.  completely the opposite and part of the reason for the substantial beaurocracy involved in businesses these days,


----------



## sev112 (Apr 21, 2016)

Ethan said:



			He can't be found innocent, only not guilty, which is not the same thing. 

Compensation for wrongful imprisonment is capped at half a million quid.
		
Click to expand...

That's interesting - does that preclude higher damages in the event of a subsequent civil action for example ?


----------



## Ethan (Apr 21, 2016)

sev112 said:



			That's interesting - does that preclude higher damages in the event of a subsequent civil action for example ?
		
Click to expand...

The Govt put this cap in around 3 or 4 years ago. If you have done more than 10 years inside you can claim up to Â£1million. 

I doubt you could take a separate civil action.


----------



## Slime (Apr 21, 2016)

maxfli65 said:



			More disturbed by the Norwegian verdict agreeing Breivik has been maltreated in jail by being isolated, the guy blew up some people then gunned down 70 odd kids when sane,* he should be doing the hardest time there is.* Something not right with 'justice' in so many countries but it's a difficult balance to find.
		
Click to expand...

Wrong ............................ he should be executed!


----------



## Val (Apr 21, 2016)

SteveJay said:



			Understand she was drunk and didn't, and legally couldn't, consent.

What I don't get is all this "his life and career is ruined"......that just bull......if his innocence is confirmed at the re-trial he will soon be back playing football and I can't see him actually noticing the temporary loss of earnings, such is the magnitude of players wages these days.
		
Click to expand...

If that's the case then why wasn't his co-accused found not guilty when he was (if you pardon the expression) first on?


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Apr 21, 2016)

Simbo said:



			I'm not 16 or 17 and have plenty experience in life from the school of hard knocks, wind your neck in a bit.
 I asked a genuine question as I don't know whether she is entitled to remain anonymous I'd he's found not guilty. Don't see why she should.

She never said she didn't consent, she said she couldn't remember.
		
Click to expand...

With so much life experience have you genuinely ever heard of any victim of sexual offences being named? 
Why should she be named if he's not guilty? Apart from some sort of public humiliation or embarrasment.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Apr 21, 2016)

Val said:



			If that's the case then why wasn't his co-accused found not guilty when he was (if you pardon the expression) first on?
		
Click to expand...

The girl and the co-defendant left the kebab shop, were they met, in a taxi together back to the hotel, Evans followed in a taxi, the lad who was cleared and the girl were in the room alone with Evans and a hotel porter listening through the door, Evans then went in to the room, afterwards Evans left the room by climbing out of the window via a fire escape.
The jury decided because she had left with the one found not guilty, alone, it was likely she understood what was going on with him,


----------



## Val (Apr 21, 2016)

pauldj42 said:



			The girl and the co-defendant left the kebab shop, were they met, in a taxi together back to the hotel, Evans followed in a taxi, the lad who was cleared and the girl were in the room alone with Evans and a hotel porter listening through the door, Evans then went in to the room, afterwards Evans left the room by climbing out of the window via a fire escape.
The jury decided because she had left with the one found not guilty, alone, it was likely she understood what was going on with him,
		
Click to expand...

IMO the girl all be it drunk knew exactly what was going on. Ched Evans is guilty of taking advantage of a situation but not rape IMO. I don't believe he took advantage of her as such because she was drunk. I believe an opportunity presented itself with this girland he took it.

I will add that some of you may remember I know people from that area that know Ched Evans and know the girl involved. I'm basing my opinion on what they have told me.


----------



## Simbo (Apr 21, 2016)

pauldj42 said:



			With so much life experience have you genuinely ever heard of any victim of sexual offences being named? 
Why should she be named if he's not guilty? Apart from some sort of public humiliation or embarrasment.
		
Click to expand...

Maybe my life experience doesn't extend to scouring the news for the victims of sexual abuse cases. 
What about the guy???


----------



## Stuart_C (Apr 21, 2016)

I can't think of anything worse than being found guilty of something you know you've not done, and having to do the time. Then not being allowed to carry on with your job once you've served the punishment.

Unfortunately he'll always be known as a rapist.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Apr 21, 2016)

Val said:



			IMO the girl all be it drunk knew exactly what was going on. Ched Evans is guilty of taking advantage of a situation but not rape IMO. I don't believe he took advantage of her as such because she was drunk. I believe an opportunity presented itself with this girland he took it.

I will add that some of you may remember I know people from that area that know Ched Evans and know the girl involved. I'm basing my opinion on what they have told me.
		
Click to expand...

Unfortunately only 3 people know the truth and even Evans couldn't explain some of his actions, personally I'm simple enough to believe in our judicial system and it's the same system that having finding him guilty may now clear his name.
I see the argument of all people being given anonimity until cases are finished, however it's a fine line, if there was a suspected sex offender living in my street I'd like to know for the safety of my family who they were.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Apr 21, 2016)

Simbo said:



			Maybe my life experience doesn't extend to scouring the news for the victims of sexual abuse cases. 
What about the guy???
		
Click to expand...

Until yesterday he was a convicted sex offender, all that has happened is that verdict has been set aside and there's a retrial, If he's innocent, goid luck to him, but we have to wait and see. Prisons are full of innocent people!


----------



## SteveJay (Apr 21, 2016)

Stuart_C said:



			I can't think of anything worse than being found guilty of something you know you've not done, and having to do the time. Then not being allowed to carry on with your job once you've served the punishment.

Unfortunately he'll always be known as a rapist.
		
Click to expand...

But thats my point....he will be allowed to carry on his job, and will soon be earning mega bucks so his time in prison will hardly dent his finances or his career. Only thing he will have to endure is abuse from opposing fans......hardly a lot to put up with in return for a pampered lifestyle of a pro footballer.


----------



## Simbo (Apr 21, 2016)

pauldj42 said:



			The girl and the co-defendant left the kebab shop, were they met, in a taxi together back to the hotel, Evans followed in a taxi, the lad who was cleared and the girl were in the room alone with Evans and a hotel porter listening through the door, Evans then went in to the room, afterwards Evans left the room by climbing out of the window via a fire escape.
The jury decided because she had left with the one found not guilty, alone, it was likely she understood what was going on with him,
		
Click to expand...


Didn't She said she "had a vague recollection" of being in the kebab shop, and can't remember anything about meeting the co-defendant, had no idea how she got to the hotel or who she went with. Couldn't remember whether or not she had consented or not.
How can a jury find some guilty beyond all reasonable doubt if she herself doesn't know beyond all reasonable doubt what actually happened?


----------



## Simbo (Apr 21, 2016)

pauldj42 said:



			Until yesterday he was a convicted sex offender, all that has happened is that verdict has been set aside and there's a retrial, If he's innocent, goid luck to him, but we have to wait and see. Prisons are full of innocent people!
		
Click to expand...


Agreed:thup:


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Apr 21, 2016)

Simbo said:



			Didn't She said she "had a vague recollection" of being in the kebab shop, and can't remember anything about meeting the co-defendant, had no idea how she got to the hotel or who she went with. Couldn't remember whether or not she had consented or not.
How can a jury find some guilty beyond all reasonable doubt if she herself doesn't know beyond all reasonable doubt what actually happened?
		
Click to expand...

I've not once said I believe he is guilty or innocent, as Val said he put himself in a situation that he shouldn't of, she didn't bring the charges the CPS did, maybe his legal team was crap and the prosecution great, but we can only trust in the process of a Jury of 12 people.


----------



## Stuart_C (Apr 21, 2016)

SteveJay said:



			But thats my point....he will be allowed to carry on his job, and will soon be earning mega bucks so his time in prison will hardly dent his finances or his career. Only thing he will have to endure is abuse from opposing fans......*hardly a lot to put up with in return for a pampered lifestyle of a pro footballer.*

Click to expand...

Being called a rapist isn't "a lot"?? Are you sure?

He done his time and still wasn't allowed to carry on with his job so his career has already been smashed to pieces! 

Being a league 1 footballer I doubt he's on much more than 3k a week.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Apr 21, 2016)

Stuart_C said:



			Being called a rapist isn't "a lot"?? Are you sure?

He done his time and still wasn't allowed to carry on with his job so his career has already been smashed to pieces! 

Being a league 1 footballer I doubt he's on much more than 3k a week.
		
Click to expand...

He was 20 Grand a week when he was convicted, big fuss about Sheff Utd paying him that for the first 3 months of his sentence before they cancelled his contract.


----------



## Stuart_C (Apr 21, 2016)

pauldj42 said:



			He was 20 Grand a week when he was convicted, big fuss about Sheff Utd paying him that for the first 3 months of his sentence before they cancelled his contract.
		
Click to expand...

I very much doubt he'd command that sort of money now.

He's completed his time and hasn't been allowed to carry on with his profession.

Let's be honest, for his conviction to be squashed and a retrial ordered, there must be some overwhelming evidence  that he was not guilty.

But his career and reputation has already been smashed to pieces.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Apr 21, 2016)

Stuart_C said:



			I very much doubt he'd command that sort of money now.

He's completed his time and hasn't been allowed to carry on with his profession.

Let's be honest, for his conviction to be squashed and a retrial ordered, there must be some overwhelming evidence  that he was not guilty.

But his career and reputation has already been smashed to pieces.
		
Click to expand...

The new evidence only gives doubt if it's that overwhelming they can bin the retrial and not proceed, I think the CPS have 2 months to recharge or drop the charges.
Can I ask if you think Adam Johnson should be allowed to play again once he's out?


----------



## Stuart_C (Apr 21, 2016)

pauldj42 said:



			The new evidence only gives doubt if it's that overwhelming they can bin the retrial and not proceed, I think the CPS have 2 months to recharge or drop the charges.
Can I ask if you think Adam Johnson should be allowed to play again once he's out?
		
Click to expand...

You can.

No he's a nonce, he deserves to be tortured.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Apr 21, 2016)

Stuart_C said:



			You can.

No he's a nonce, he deserves to be tortured.
		
Click to expand...

In the eyes of the law, before yesterday, both are/were on the sex offenders register.


----------



## SteveJay (Apr 21, 2016)

Stuart_C said:



			Being called a rapist isn't "a lot"?? Are you sure?

He done his time and still wasn't allowed to carry on with his job so his career has already been smashed to pieces! 

Being a league 1 footballer I doubt he's on much more than 3k a week.
		
Click to expand...

Abuse from fans comes with the territory irrespective of the truth.....................................................................Â£3k a week (I suspect a lot more actually), but anyway, how will he possibly manage financially....my heart bleeds for him.


----------



## Stuart_C (Apr 21, 2016)

pauldj42 said:



			In the eyes of the law, before yesterday, both are/were on the sex offenders register.
		
Click to expand...

You cannot compare Evans to Johnson.


----------



## USER1999 (Apr 21, 2016)

Stuart_C said:



			You cannot compare Evans to Johnson.
		
Click to expand...

No, one is an idiot with the morals of an alley cat, and one is a reprehensible pervert.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Apr 21, 2016)

Stuart_C said:



			You cannot compare Evans to Johnson.
		
Click to expand...

Unfortunately mate, putting our revulsion to one side, no different in the eyes of the law once on the sex offenders register, you can't pick and choose which sex offenders are ok and which are not.


----------



## Stuart_C (Apr 21, 2016)

Stuart_C said:



			You cannot compare Evans to Johnson.
		
Click to expand...




pauldj42 said:



			Unfortunately mate, putting our revulsion to one side, no different in the eyes of the law once on the sex offenders register, you can't pick and choose which sex offenders are ok and which are not.
		
Click to expand...

I didn't use the sex offenders list to back my opinion up.

Johnson admitted to grooming a child. 

Evans's accuser can't remember whether she agreed to sex or not. 

Massive difference.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Apr 21, 2016)

Stuart_C said:



			I didn't use the sex offenders list to back my opinion up.

Johnson admitted to grooming a child. 

Evans's accuser can't remember whether she agreed to sex or not. 

Massive difference.
		
Click to expand...

Stu, totally agree from a morale position, but this was raised in connection about him going back to work, both would be no different in the eyes of the law so you couldn't say it's ok for one and not the other, that's one of the reasons no one has took him on.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Apr 21, 2016)

Stuart_C said:



			You cannot compare Evans to Johnson.
		
Click to expand...

Sure you can, both lowlife scumbags.


----------



## Stuart_C (Apr 21, 2016)

pauldj42 said:



			Stu, totally agree from a morale position, but this was raised in connection about him going back to work, both would be no different in the eyes of the law so you couldn't say it's ok for one and not the other, that's one of the reasons no one has took him on.
		
Click to expand...

is there a particular job just for people on the SO register then?


----------



## Sweep (Apr 22, 2016)

Ethan said:



			But the point is that the verdict is based on whether there is enough evidence that he did it, in criminal cases beyond reasonable doubt (in civil on the balance of probabilities), and that leaves a lot of room for 'he did it, but we can't prove it'. Few people who have convictions overturned walk away with a perception of innocence unless someone else is proven to have done it, which is hardly likely here. May not be fair, but a lot of people will think he got away with it. If there had been insufficient evidence to go to retrial at all, I think people would maybe see him as more likely to be innocent. Although the police and prosecution may get their act together for the retrial and do a better job.
		
Click to expand...

If he isn't guilty, he is innocent and even you can't blame the Tories for that.


----------



## Fish (Apr 22, 2016)

Stuart_C said:



			is there a particular job just for people on the SO register then?
		
Click to expand...

Kamikaze pilots :smirk:


----------



## Pin-seeker (Apr 22, 2016)

Personally I think Evans was stupid,nothing more.


----------



## Ethan (Apr 22, 2016)

Stuart_C said:



			I very much doubt he'd command that sort of money now.

He's completed his time and hasn't been allowed to carry on with his profession.

Let's be honest, *for his conviction to be squashed and a retrial ordered, there must be some overwhelming evidence  that he was not guilty.
*
But his career and reputation has already been smashed to pieces.
		
Click to expand...

No, there was insufficient evidence that he was guilty - different thing. If there was overwhelming evidence he was not guilty, the verdict would be set aside, i.e.  revoked.


----------



## ger147 (Apr 22, 2016)

Ethan said:



			No, there was insufficient evidence that he was guilty - different thing. If there was overwhelming evidence he was not guilty, the verdict would be set aside, i.e.  revoked.
		
Click to expand...

What I read was there was new evidence presented at the appeal and that is why the appeal was successful. As it's subject to reporting restrictions no-one knows what that new evidence is yet.


----------



## PhilTheFragger (Apr 22, 2016)

ger147 said:



			What I read was there was new evidence presented at the appeal and that is why the appeal was successful. As it's subject to reporting restrictions no-one knows what that new evidence is yet.
		
Click to expand...

And it's probably best that we don't speculate on that, at least not here


----------



## SteveJay (Apr 22, 2016)

Pin-seeker said:



			Personally I think Evans was stupid,nothing more.
		
Click to expand...

Wonder if his wife thought that, and whether yours (if you have one) would also call it stupid if you cheated with a drunken young girl.


----------



## Pin-seeker (Apr 22, 2016)

SteveJay said:



			Wonder if his wife thought that, and whether yours (if you have one) would also call it stupid if you cheated with a drunken young girl.
		
Click to expand...

My Mrs would chop my bits off.


----------



## PhilTheFragger (Apr 22, 2016)

Pin-seeker said:



			My Mrs would chop my bits off.
		
Click to expand...

You'd have to sew them back on first


----------



## richy (Apr 22, 2016)

Pin-seeker said:



			Personally I think Evans was stupid,nothing more.
		
Click to expand...

I think he's a sex pest no matter of the new verdict


----------



## Pin-seeker (Apr 22, 2016)

PhilTheFragger said:



			You'd have to sew them back on first  

Click to expand...

ðŸ˜‚ TouchÃ©


----------



## Pin-seeker (Apr 22, 2016)

I can't understand why his Mrs as stood by him.


----------



## SteveJay (Apr 22, 2016)

Pin-seeker said:



			I can't understand why his Mrs as stood by him.
		
Click to expand...

Probably something to do with his bank balance and potential future earnings once he was released or cleared. Footballers wives aren't generally that blessed in the IQ department!!!


----------



## Pin-seeker (Apr 22, 2016)

SteveJay said:



			Probably something to do with his bank balance and potential future earnings once he was released or cleared. Footballers wives aren't generally that blessed in the IQ department!!!
		
Click to expand...

Her Father is minted,so it's not for the money.


----------



## ger147 (Oct 14, 2016)

ger147 said:



			What I read was there was new evidence presented at the appeal and that is why the appeal was successful. As it's subject to reporting restrictions no-one knows what that new evidence is yet.
		
Click to expand...

Found Not Guilty at his re-trial.


----------



## Tashyboy (Oct 14, 2016)

So the daft lad has been found not guilty to tape after a lengthy period of conviction and retrial. At last justice is seen to be done.
There are several things about this case that I found odd.
1, his fiancÃ©es dads money has helped clear his name, how would someone without the financial clout fared.
2, He was castigated before the full judicial system had been completed.
3, He is still a plank for putting himself in that situation.


----------



## spongebob59 (Oct 14, 2016)

Not guilty of rape, but still a nasty piece of work.


----------



## Val (Oct 14, 2016)

Tashyboy said:



			So the daft lad has been found not guilty to tape after a lengthy period of conviction and retrial. At last justice is seen to be done.
There are several things about this case that I found odd.
1, his fiancÃ©es dads money has helped clear his name, how would someone without the financial clout fared.
2, He was castigated before the full judicial system had been completed.
3, He is still a plank for putting himself in that situation.
		
Click to expand...

Correct on all accounts.


----------



## adam6177 (Oct 14, 2016)

What, if anything, should now happen to the accuser?


----------



## Kellfire (Oct 14, 2016)

Wasn't the CPS the accuser? I don't think it was the girl. 

But yea, justice at least. There was clearly no evidence from the start.


----------



## Papas1982 (Oct 14, 2016)

Can he claim for loss of earnings?

is their A cap to what he can get?

wasnt a premiership player but still had a massive effect on career. He seems to have coped well with it. Obviously a nob for doing the dirty but having a drunken one nighter isn't illegal. At least not anymore apparently.


----------



## ScienceBoy (Oct 14, 2016)

Papas1982 said:



			having a drunken one nighter isn't illegal. At least not anymore apparently.
		
Click to expand...

It's still a very risky thing to do and we need more education out there about it.

I'm not just taking from the legal side but it's now a bigger factor than most think.


----------



## Papas1982 (Oct 14, 2016)

ScienceBoy said:



			It's still a very risky thing to do and we need more education out there about it.

I'm not just taking from the legal side but it's now a bigger factor than most think.
		
Click to expand...

Personally I think they're decreasing (drunken one nighters) With social dating apps now, it seems easier to line someone up so to speak than go to down and "pull" the old fashioned way. 

RE the legal side, the original trial was IMO just in its intention, but came to the wrong conclusion.


----------



## Pin-seeker (Oct 14, 2016)

spongebob59 said:



			Not guilty of rape, but still a nasty piece of work.
		
Click to expand...

Why is he a nasty piece of work?


----------



## Grogger (Oct 14, 2016)

spongebob59 said:



			Not guilty of rape, but still a nasty piece of work.
		
Click to expand...

Why? For getting his leg over? Not like he raped anyone.


----------



## Papas1982 (Oct 14, 2016)

He admitted walking in to her room and joining in without asking or talking to her at all before, during or after. Whilst his mates tried to video it. All whilst having a missus at home. 

Legal or or not he's classless.


----------



## Pin-seeker (Oct 14, 2016)

I can't believe his Mrs stood by him & her father helped him clear his name.


----------



## spongebob59 (Oct 14, 2016)

Pin-seeker said:



			Why is he a nasty piece of work?
		
Click to expand...

#92 sums it up nicely. You think this is the act of a decent man ?


----------



## Tashyboy (Oct 14, 2016)

Having followed this case from the beginning with interest, I was a bit dismayed to hear him being slagged off for being a rapist before the trial. Don't know if that was me being old fashioned re " innocent til proven guilty " etc. 
I had made my mind up about him as a person, but that was my personal view.
But, what has been said this time in his retrial that was not said at his initial trial?
Above all else, I just have a gut feeling the public are not being told something about this case.


----------



## Papas1982 (Oct 14, 2016)

Tashyboy said:



			Having followed this case from the beginning with interest, I was a bit dismayed to hear him being slagged off for being a rapist before the trial. Don't know if that was me being old fashioned re " innocent til proven guilty " etc. 
I had made my mind up about him as a person, but that was my personal view.
But, what has been said this time in his retrial that was not said at his initial trial?
Above all else, I just have a gut feeling the public are not being told something about this case.
		
Click to expand...

Reading into the reports it would appear that they got some of her exs on the stand. I belive the main prosecution was that she was so drunk she couldn't have given consent. I imagine they exs confrimed that they frequently had drunk sex and therefor her act was more in character than she implied.


----------



## Norrin Radd (Oct 14, 2016)

so who is he going to sue for loss of wages now he has been cleared,


----------



## Pin-seeker (Oct 14, 2016)

spongebob59 said:



			#92 sums it up nicely. You think this is the act of a decent man ?
		
Click to expand...

Decent no,but not a nasty piece of work either.


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Oct 14, 2016)

Papas1982 said:



			Reading into the reports it would appear that they got some of her exs on the stand. I belive the main prosecution was that she was so drunk she couldn't have given consent. I imagine they exs confrimed that they frequently had drunk sex and therefor her act was more in character than she implied.
		
Click to expand...


The exes stated that virtually identical situations including the same words used during sex happened with them as they did with Evans. I think one of the instances was in the same week as the Evans happening. That was the gist of the new evidence, pretty key evidence as well.

As said, classless bloke but that isn't a crime.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Oct 14, 2016)

Tashyboy said:



			Having followed this case from the beginning with interest, I was a bit dismayed to hear him being slagged off for being a rapist before the trial. Don't know if that was me being old fashioned re " innocent til proven guilty " etc. 
I had made my mind up about him as a person, but that was my personal view.
But, what has been said this time in his retrial that was not said at his initial trial?
Above all else, I just have a gut feeling the public are not being told something about this case.
		
Click to expand...

Up until a retrial was ordered he was a convicted rapist, by a system we have to believe in if we now accept the not guilty verdict.
I believe as mentioned, the difference this time was the 2 ex's of the girl, one who claimed she was promiscious and the other said that when she drunk and they'd slept together she couldn't remember it the next day, didn't come forward until after the last trial.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Oct 14, 2016)

Lord Tyrion said:



			The exes stated that virtually identical situations including the same words used during sex happened with them as they did with 
Evans. I think one of the instances was in the same week as the Evans happening. That was the gist of the new evidence, pretty key evidence as well.

As said, classless bloke but that isn't a crime.
		
Click to expand...

The prosecution also asked them why they didn't come forward before and those words were on his website plus a reward of Â£20,000.00 for anyone with new information.


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Oct 14, 2016)

That doesn't sound good. Surely the CPS would highlight this?


----------



## USER1999 (Oct 14, 2016)

So she is a slapper, and he is at best classless, and at worst a rapist. 

And this conclusion has cost the tax payer how much?


----------



## Papas1982 (Oct 14, 2016)

Lord Tyrion said:



			The exes stated that virtually identical situations including the same words used during sex happened with them as they did with Evans. I think one of the instances was in the same week as the Evans happening. That was the gist of the new evidence, pretty key evidence as well.

As said, classless bloke but that isn't a crime.
		
Click to expand...

Well then unfortunately, as with all cases a witness or defendants character will be discussed and irrespective of how she felt she was treated. In the eyes of the law his lawyers probably had a relatively easy case in painting the image of her required to get the result they wanted.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Oct 14, 2016)

Lord Tyrion said:



			That doesn't sound good. Surely the CPS would highlight this?
		
Click to expand...

Some of the evidence was heard in court without the jury present, normally alleged rape victims are not allowed to be cross examined about their sexual history unless special circumstances, this was argued about again without the jury and the judge allowed it as he said there were to many similarities.
His girlfriend also sent a facebook message to the night porter offering him 50 grand if he had any new evidence after the last trial,  the prosecution claimed witness tampering, the defence claimed it was an act of desperation by a girlfriend, the jury never heard that.


----------



## bladeplayer (Oct 14, 2016)

What bothered me about this case from the start  was if it was rape why wasn't his mate found guilty of assisting or something , if there was a crime committed he facilitated it by the call & letting him in etc , why wasn't his mate charged 

There IMO was always something suspect about this whole case


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Oct 14, 2016)

bladeplayer said:



			What bothered me about this case from the start  was if it was rape why wasn't his mate found guilty of assisting or something , if there was a crime committed he facilitated it by the call & letting him in etc , why wasn't his mate charged 

There IMO was always something suspect about this whole case
		
Click to expand...

His mate didn't let him in, Evans had the other room key, his mate was also charged with rape and found not guilty first time as she had gone with him alone to the hotel in the taxi. and that was deemed consensual


----------



## bladeplayer (Oct 14, 2016)

pauldj42 said:



			His mate didn't let him in, Evans had the other room key, his mate was also charged with rape and found not guilty first time as she had gone with him alone to the hotel in the taxi. and that was deemed consensual
		
Click to expand...

That answers that , Thanks Paul


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Oct 14, 2016)

pauldj42 said:



			The prosecution also asked them why they didn't come forward before and those words were on his website plus a reward of Â£20,000.00 for anyone with new information.
		
Click to expand...

I believe it was brought up in the trial and the fact is that no money has been paid to any witness.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Oct 14, 2016)

MetalMickie said:



			I believe it was brought up in the trial and the fact is that no money has been paid to any witness.
		
Click to expand...

Never said it was mate, just the question put to one of them by the prosecution.


----------



## Tashyboy (Oct 14, 2016)

pauldj42 said:



			Up until a retrial was ordered he was a convicted rapist, by a system we have to believe in if we now accept the not guilty verdict.
I believe as mentioned, the difference this time was the 2 ex's of the girl, one who claimed she was promiscious and the other said that when she drunk and they'd slept together she couldn't remember it the next day, didn't come forward until after the last trial.
		
Click to expand...

Cheers me man, and unfortunately because the guys never came forward before, Mr Evans did a spell inside.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Oct 14, 2016)

Tashyboy said:



			Cheers me man, and unfortunately because the guys never came forward before, Mr Evans did a spell inside.
		
Click to expand...

Certainly looks that way.


----------



## Hobbit (Oct 14, 2016)

It's a tough one, and appears to be open to so many interpretations. Is it against the law to be promiscuous? Is it right to go into a room and have sex with someone who's judgement is highly questionable through drink?

There's no winners in this one. Even not guilty he's tarred... so sad for both of them.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Oct 14, 2016)

Hobbit said:



			It's a tough one, and appears to be open to so many interpretations. Is it against the law to be promiscuous? Is it right to go into a room and have sex with someone who's judgement is highly questionable through drink?

There's no winners in this one. Even not guilty he's tarred... so sad for both of them.
		
Click to expand...

+1!

As a father of two sons now in their thirties I would be disgusted and ashamed if I thought that either of them had ever behaved like that. Equally, had I had a daughter I would feel similar disgust at her behaviour.

It would seem after this verdict there is only one victim, his fiancee, and yet she continues to stand by him.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Oct 14, 2016)

MetalMickie said:



			+1!

As a father of two sons now in their thirties I would be disgusted and ashamed if I thought that either of them had ever behaved like that. Equally, had I had a daughter I would feel similar disgust at her behaviour.

It would seem after this verdict there is only one victim, his fiancee, and yet she continues to stand by him.
		
Click to expand...

He made a mistake - he went out got drunk and got himself into a bad situation. He is also the father of her child and she obviously has forgiven him for sleeping for the girl. 

Whilst he is very much guilty of being stupid and cheating on his fiancÃ© he is also allowed to have a second chance with his fiancÃ©.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Oct 14, 2016)

Liverpoolphil said:



			He made a mistake - he went out got drunk and got himself into a bad situation. He is also the father of her child and she obviously has forgiven him for sleeping for the girl. 

Whilst he is very much guilty of being stupid and cheating on his fiancÃ© he is also allowed to have a second chance with his fiancÃ©.
		
Click to expand...

I was not aware that I had suggested he was not allowed a second chance.

Merely that I am amazed that she would stand by him after all that his abhorrent and reprehensible behaviour has brought upon her and her family.

Bordering on saintly to forgive him and have him back.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Oct 14, 2016)

MetalMickie said:



			I was not aware that I had suggested he was not allowed a second chance.

Merely that I am amazed that she would stand by him after all that his abhorrent and reprehensible behaviour has brought upon her and her family.

Bordering on saintly to forgive him and have him back.
		
Click to expand...

Many many people forgive their partners when they love them. Even more so when they have a child together


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Oct 14, 2016)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Many many people forgive their partners when they love them. Even more so when they have a child together
		
Click to expand...


And just as many would have told him to sling his hook!


----------



## Odvan (Oct 14, 2016)

Stuart_C said:



			You cannot compare Evans to Johnson.
		
Click to expand...




FairwayDodger said:



			Sure you can, both lowlife scumbags.
		
Click to expand...

So then, is he still a lowlife scumbag, comparable to a convicted peadophile?


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Oct 14, 2016)

Irrespective of them having a kid, I think Evans is very lucky that his partner decided to stay with him. Many wouldn't especially having to go through the whole thing twice. As for the outcome, he's been found not guilty although where that leaves his football career is not clear. I know he was a pariah after the first verdict but I wonder if anyone will offer him a chance. 

Whatever the rights and wrongs of the whole thing I hope he can get on with the rest of his life in a degree of peace


----------



## Beezerk (Oct 14, 2016)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Whilst he is very much guilty of being stupid and cheating on his fiancÃ© he is also allowed to have a second chance with his fiancÃ©.
		
Click to expand...

Aye but he's quite obviously a serial offender though. 
Either way, he'll always be known as a dirty whore gooser who allowed Sheff Wed to get promoted ðŸ‘


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Oct 14, 2016)

I think he is at Chesterfield now. He has lost his peak years, it will be tough for him to fully get back to his old level.


----------



## Beezerk (Oct 14, 2016)

Lord Tyrion said:



			I think he is at Chesterfield now. He has lost his peak years, it will be tough for him to fully get back to his old level.
		
Click to expand...

Rubbish &#128514;


----------



## Papas1982 (Oct 14, 2016)

HomerJSimpson said:



			Irrespective of them having a kid, I think Evans is very lucky that his partner decided to stay with him. Many wouldn't especially having to go through the whole thing twice. As for the outcome, he's been found not guilty although where that leaves his football career is not clear. I know he was a pariah after the first verdict but I wonder if anyone will offer him a chance. 

Whatever the rights and wrongs of the whole thing I hope he can get on with the rest of his life in a degree of peace
		
Click to expand...

He already has a club (chesterfield) signed for them once he was acquitted.


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Oct 14, 2016)

Papas1982 said:



			He already has a club (chesterfield) signed for them once he was acquitted.
		
Click to expand...

OK. Wasn't aware of that.


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Oct 14, 2016)

Beezerk said:



			Rubbish &#128514;
		
Click to expand...

Your Wednesday roots are coming through.


----------



## harpo_72 (Oct 14, 2016)

it might look like his relationship works now but only time will tell ... wonder if he will sue for lost playing time and loss of earnings (can he do that?)


----------



## Papas1982 (Oct 14, 2016)

harpo_72 said:



			it might look like his relationship works now but only time will tell ... wonder if he will sue for lost playing time and loss of earnings (can he do that?)
		
Click to expand...

Tbf is the other half has stayed with him whilst inside and suported all of his appeals I'd say they've as much chance as anyone else. 

Add to to that it was her dad that helped finance the appeal and it's not like she stuck around for the cash either.


----------



## Beezerk (Oct 14, 2016)

Lord Tyrion said:



			Your Wednesday roots are coming through.
		
Click to expand...

I must remember to dye my hair this weekend.


----------



## spongebob59 (Oct 14, 2016)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/football...just-how-sick-football-culture-in-britain-is/


----------



## harpo_72 (Oct 14, 2016)

Bit opinionated and needs more facts ... perilous comparison to Donald Trump, grammar okay spell checker worked ... 28% fail


----------



## Kellfire (Jan 17, 2017)

Another footballer rape case concluded today in the civil courts and this time ruled in favour of the accuser.


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Jan 17, 2017)

Bit more evidence backing the lady this time though. None of it comes across well for these young men however, guilty or innocent.


----------



## Val (Jan 17, 2017)

I know a cop who worked on this case and he alleges Goodwille was guilty as sin. Rat.


----------



## Simbo (Jan 18, 2017)

How come there is enough evidence for the civil courts to find them guilty but not enough to bring criminal charges?


----------



## Blue in Munich (Jan 18, 2017)

Simbo said:



			How come there is enough evidence for the civil courts to find them guilty but not enough to bring criminal charges?
		
Click to expand...

Criminal courts work on beyond all reasonable doubt as the required evidential standard, civil courts on balance of probabilities; two hugely different standards.


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Jan 18, 2017)

Same as the OJ Simpson case although obviously a different legal set up.


----------

