IF CHed Evans deserves to be hounded out of football because he did something bad, or is the wrong sort, or whatever then so do the rest. Except that it hasn't happened - because football fans and clubs alike are (a) as a group very stupid indeed and (b) hypocrites when it comes to signing someone to score goals for their club
Have you considered that perhaps Ched Evans has got the treatment that he has, in part as a reaction to the treatment of the victim.
She is entitled to anonymity - she has been named and targeted by Evans supporters and family. We should note that a member of Evans family tried to film the act that Evans was subsequently convicted of. The victim has had to move house and change house and lives in fear of her life.
Perhaps that has some bearing on why many supporters don't want him at their football club.
In addition, there is possibly less tolerance in these post-Saville days for rapists and for people who might be seen to have gotten away with it.
Hand on heart, if I was on the jury I'm not sure I'd have found him guilty.
This is why there is a court and jury system. The fact is that people like you heard all the evidence and came to conclusion he was guilty. And as has been pointed out, the case has been through the appeal system. So it is not as if no one has considered the facts until now. I has been through a trial and two applications for appeal.
My learned friend, Gideon, is incorrect when he suggest that there is a retrial. There is no retrial in process. The case is being reviewed by the CCRC. This will review to see whether there has been a miscarriage of justice. This review takes place because Evans has asked for it. He is entitled to this review just like any other guilty person. The CCRC in the past has recommended something of the order of 3% cases be retried. It seems unlikely that Evans will get a retrial.
So perhaps, Dustin, should ask yourself what point of law or evidence you have not considered that the jurors and the judges have considered in coming to the verdict.
As far as I know this is a reasonable summary of what was considered:
Jeez, you are as stupid as you look.
Re % of rapes - what level of education have you attained? I'm guessing you didn't get to college. So why should I start educating you? The fact I quoted a case whereby a policeman suppressed ACTUAL RAPE CASES could give you a clue that it might be possible to start to make estimates. I also quoted Rotherham. Did you read about that genius boy?
But don't worry. People with college degrees did studies. So feel free to disregard them cos you dunt loik the results.
Dear Genius, I never contended that accusation = guilt. You clearly did not read what was in the post
"No accusation = no guilt" where did you pull that from? That exists only in your world, not in civilisation. Did you think that through? Or did you just think you invented a loophole whereby you could rape babies without consequence?
That's really going full stretch for moron of the year.
But anyways. As I said you cant tell the difference between 'rape' and ''not rape'. You have not moved your position forward by as much as a scintilla from that point.