Second Chances

[Papas1982]

Well I'd suggest you and others on this thread find out what the definition of rape is. The OED states it is.

unlawfulsexualintercourseoranyothersexualpenetrationofthe vagina,anus,ormouthofanotherperson,withorwithoutforce,bya sexorgan,otherbodypart,orforeignobject,withouttheconsentof thevictim

And whilst the word force is mentioned, it also states rape can be committed without force. And the words consent and unlawful are probably more relevant in this case. Saying it not really/proper rape unless it is not violent is both naive and insulting. IMHO.

Thats fair enough. But by her OWN admission she hasnt said she didn't give consent. Unfortunately I believe this case was judged more on opinion than fact. I respect the sentence. But it's innocent until proven guilty, not innocent until found guilty.

Either way, he's served his time. Remorse or not, which I think he should have shown. He's now out, either criminals are allowed back into society or they're not.

 

[JustOne]

IMO being drunk and having unforced sex with someone should not be deemed as rape. Did she say yes, or did she say no. From what I read she can't really remember but is sure she did not want sex with Evans. Did Evans get her to consent, from what I read no. But on the other hand she did not tell him no.

So Evans has been convicted in my eyes because he took advantage of a girl that was drunk and not in any fit state to make sound decisions.

But in the eyes of the law is being drunk a sound excuse? If I got into a car, drunk, crashed into a kids playground and killed 10 of them I would be getting hung, drawn and quartered. Even though I was not in a fit state because of my level of intoxication to make a sound decision, it was my choice to get drunk in the first place which led to my subsequent actions. If I was a witness to a crime, but I was too drunk to really remember what happened, the defence would get my testimony thrown out in an instant. But in the case of a woman accusing a man of rape, even though she was too smashed to consent, he can be found guilty even though there are no other witnesses.

Good post.

 

[Papas1982]

I read a comment piece this week that stated that Ched Evans doesn't know what rape is. Neither, it appears, do you. It doesn't have to be a violent assault.

I didn't state that I what he did wasn't rape. Merely that it conjured other thoughts. But as has been highlighted. Rape is sex without consent. Something she herself admits she doeset know if she did or didn't give. You, me, the spider on the wall or the jurors also don't know that either.

 

[MadAdey]

I read a comment piece this week that stated that Ched Evans doesn't know what rape is. Neither, it appears, do you. It doesn't have to be a violent assault.

But as I stated in an earlier post, that is where the problem is IMO. Like homicide rape should be dealt with on different levels. If they did you might actually find more people being brought to justice and being found guilty of the lesser charge.

Not trying to get into who says it was and who says it wasn't. But if you took a jury of people from this forum that covers a wide demographic, you would not get a unanimous verdict on the charge, with the right people he may have gotten a majority decision on not guilty. But if there was a lesser charge that covered this situation I think he would be found guilty every time, no matter who you asked.

 

[FairwayDodger]

But as I stated in an earlier post, that is where the problem is IMO. Like homicide rape should be dealt with on different levels. If they did you might actually find more people being brought to justice and being found guilty of the lesser charge.

I disagree. The sentence should take the individual circumstances into account but for the crime itself, rape is rape.

 

[Papas1982]

I disagree. The sentence should take the individual circumstances into account but for the crime itself, rape is rape.

Do you not feel that if there was a tier system then more convictions may be likely?

 

[FairwayDodger]

Do you not feel that if there was a tier system then more convictions may be likely?

I don't think the crime should be minimised. I don't want rapists getting off with a lesser charge because, for example, their victim chooses not to fight off a bigger, stronger attacker.

 

[Hacker Khan]

Do you not feel that if there was a tier system then more convictions may be likely?

Not really as it will nearly always come down to the question of consent and whether it was given or not. And no matter how many 'tiers' you have it will still not change.

I find it morally very difficult to categorise levels of rape. I am sure males could make a good argument for doing this, but as a female victim (and I know there is male rape but I am speaking in this case of male rape on females) I am not sure if the fact that you were drugged and raped or raped when you were drunk is much less of a offense. From the victims point of view, no matter how the perpetrator may feel about it.

 

[JustOne]

I disagree. The sentence should take the individual circumstances into account but for the crime itself, rape is rape.

I don't agree with that.

IMO Rape is rape when consent is categorically and undeniably not given, even more so when it's at a time when 'sexual activity' is not present rather than when someone is rolling half drunk with their pizza into a hotel room with someone from a night club. As someone pointed out earlier - if you can get off murder because there is reasonable doubt then THIS subject can fall into that category in this instance (IMO)

 

[Hacker Khan]

I don't agree with that.

IMO Rape is rape when consent is categorically and undeniably not given, even more so when it's at a time when 'sexual activity' is not present rather than when someone is rolling half drunk with their pizza into a hotel room with someone from a night club.

From the rapist point of view possibly true (and to be clear I am not saying you are a rapist before we go down that alley) , from the victims I am not sure.

 

[Foxholer]

So you'd not let your kids watch David Beckham as he is an adulterer?

Has that been proven/admitted?

Or are you merely repeating tabloid rumours?

 

[JustOne]

From the rapist point of view possibly true (and to be clear I am not saying you are a rapist before we go down that alley) , from the victims I am not sure.

Husband rolls in from the pub half drunk, rolls on the wife and she whispers 'not tonight dear' just as he penetrates... did he just rape her/sexually assault her?

 

[Papas1982]

Not really as it will nearly always come down to the question of consent and whether it was given or not. And no matter how many 'tiers' you have it will still not change.

I find it morally very difficult to categorise levels of rape. I am sure males could make a good argument for doing this, but as a female victim (and I know there is male rape but I am speaking in this case of male rape on females) I am not sure if the fact that you were drugged and raped or raped when you were drunk is much less of a offense. From the victims point of view, no matter how the perpetrator may feel about it.

Well I genuinely apologise if my thoughts have caused offence. I suppose if consent is the deciding factor then maybe it wouldn't change much. But from the facts shown in this case I would have thought it wasn't a clear cut case. One getting off etc. maybe it would be easier to get a guilty conviction if proving the victim was at a certain level of drunk hence unable to consent.

 

[JustOne]

Well I genuinely apologise if my thoughts have caused offence. I suppose if consent is the deciding factor then maybe it wouldn't change much. But from the facts shown in this case I would have thought it wasn't a clear cut case. One getting off etc. maybe it would be easier to get a guilty conviction if proving the victim was at a certain level of drunk hence unable to consent.

Would be interesting to know if they breathalised her to establish exactly how drunk she might have been the night before (as drunk as she was claiming to be).

 

[Papas1982]

Husband rolls in from the pub half drunk, rolls on the wife and she whispers 'not tonight dear' just as he penetrates... did he just rape her/sexually assault her?[/QU

More than enough time to hear no and stop.

 

[PhilTheFragger]

what will be interesting is IF The Criminal Case Review Board quash his conviction, How much public hate will still be present.

I dont like this trial by media whether it be newspapers or twitter, it fuels fires and people choose what details to believe, and then it becomes "fact" in their eyes

 

[Papas1982]

Would be interesting to know if they breathalised her to establish exactly how drunk she might have been the night before (as drunk as she was claiming to be).

The report said the tests they did showed she used drugs in the recent past and that the alcohol in her system would suggest that black outs unlikely. That doesn't mean it wasn't true on her part thiugh.

 

[PhilTheFragger]

Have edited a couple of posts that were needlessly graphic

Can we watch what we post please

Thanks

 

[FairwayDodger]

what will be interesting is IF The Criminal Case Review Board quash his conviction, How much public hate will still be present.

I dont like this trial by media whether it be newspapers or twitter, it fuels fires and people choose what details to believe, and then it becomes "fact" in their eyes

Thing is, Evans had his trial and was found guilty. It's the poor victim that's facing the trial by media, who has had to move and change her identity five times.

 

[JustOne]

what will be interesting is IF The Criminal Case Review Board quash his conviction

Indeed. The backlash against the 'rape system' would be huge! More news for the tabloids and the Government spin doctors.