Ch5HD news just reported Live
the club has now signed him.
But it may not go Live until tomorrow
and many sponsers are leaving - which is why there is a delay

A bold move.For the club and for him.He will have to endure abuse from away fans every time he enters the pitch and every time he touches the ball.He will here things like 'touch of a rapist' and constant booing and hissing every time he makes a pass or accepts the ball.Even if he did commit this offence it's time to let him get on with it imo.He's served his time now.The witch hunt should end.He will be walking into the lions den every match now wether he is cleared of these allegations or not.This will have scarred him for life.

Your views are perfectly valid, just not in this instance, in my opinion. They'd be spot on if we were discussing a totally different rape case, but not this one. Rape is not simple. Rape is complicated, rape is upsetting, rape is life ruining. Rape is also not a word with a simple definition. Ched Evans is a rapist because a jury found him guilty of having non-consensual sex with an inebriated girl while he himself was inebriated and while his colleague was in the room, who had just had consensual sex with said girl. Richard Ramirez is a convicted rapist because he broke into married couples' homes, murdered the husbands and brutally raped the wives while the husbands were dying. I don't have much respect for anyone who can look me in the eye and say that these two men are equally as bad or equally as guilty as one another. They're just not. Ched Evans hasn't said sorry because he doesn't believe he did anything wrong. Saying sorry would be an admission of guilt - evidently he doesn't think he's guilty of anything and having read more about the "evidence" that sparked his trial, I don't think he's guilty of anything either.

I was sexually assaulted when I was 20 years old. I got really drunk, thrown out of a nightclub and was taken into a taxi by someone I vaguely knew, taken back to a flat and molested on a bathroom floor. That wouldn't have happened if I hadn't gotten so drunk. It was my fault for getting myself into a state where I could have been taken advantage of so easily. I don't remember if I consented or not - and how many people even ask the question "do you consent to me having sexual relations with you?" before they begin?! It's nonsense.

I can make some sense of how this came about - they left her in the hotel room where she presumably fell asleep, woke up without any of her possessions or any recollection of how she got there, called the police to see if her things had been handed in, spoke to officers who looked into it, spoke to the night porter, hauled in Evans and McDonald who freely admitted they had sex with her because they had no reason to think they'd done anything wrong and the police led the girl into believing she was a rape victim and to pursue legal proceedings against the two; the jury somehow finds Evans guilty and not McDonald on the really shaky evidence at their disposal, perhaps believing that the shaky evidence meant that the players were guilty because it does look bad on paper, and here we are now.

As for the "cushy job" part - he's playing football at a League One level, he's hardly earning Premier League wages. Maybe the police responsible for turning this into a rape trial are Sheffield Wednesday supporters :shrug:

..well whether he's actually guilty or not..(obviously he's been found guilty..)..but if he did know he hadn't got consent then he's served his sentence and should now be entitled to live his life without being hounded by the media and be employed in what he does and if he did feel he had consent, then it's the right thing that he's playing football again anyway because he's spent two years wrongly imprisoned..so I think either way, it's the right decision by Oldham...

:clap2:

well said Z and sorry for your horrible experience

What a brilliant and eloquently written post Z. I am sorry to hear what happened to you, but must say I agree with what you have to say on this case:

I have analysed as much of the available documentation on this case as I can find and I agree totally with you, Nedusa and others that the verdict ‘stinks to high heaven’. There are so many anomalies and unaired flaws in the crown’s evidence that I feel sorry for Evans.

I will not go into all of the discrepancies I believe I have discovered because it will take another long post which I know people are fed up of from me, but I will air just a couple of points.

Drugs and alcohol are mind-altering substances. Excessive intake of either alters the physiological state of the brain to such a degree from its normal state that ‘temporary insanity’ can occur, yet I do not know of one instance where any judge has conceded this fact in any criminal case or allowed it as a mitigating factor when sentencing a male who committed a crime whilst ‘drugged up’ or ‘pissed out of his brains.

Yet the judiciary have no problem at all in determining that when a female in a rape trial is drugged or drunk from self administered drugs and drink, it affects her mental capacity to such a degree that it renders her; “in no position to form a capacity to consent to sexual intercourse”.

In this particular case, the same ‘complainant’ who was deemed to be so drunk that she was incapable of consenting to sex - even when the only testimony was that she had indeed consented – could eat pizza from a box at sometime after 3 am, and sometime after 4.15 am she had the spatial awareness to know that she was in an hotel room, and the lucidity of mind to ask McDonald "You're not going to leave me, are you?"

Some may recall very famous footage of David Hasselhof being so drunk that he couldn’t talk, stand up to eat pizza, or even find his mouth with the pizza. I am sure this constitutes being very drunk – far more drunk than the complainant was on the night in question (who could walk, talk and stand up and eat pizza) - but I am certain that even in his advanced state of drunkenness, Hasselhoff would certainly had known had someone tried to bugger him or perform oral sex on him.

So how drunk does someone really have to be, in order not to be aware that someone is performing non-consensual oral sex on them, or full intercourse with all the penetration, bumping and grinding, and grunting and groaning involved, before screaming out or fighting the ‘rapist’ off?

I would say virtually comatose.

Yet the complainant here was clearly not comatose according to the evidence, and she bore no traces of physical injury or other marks consistent with being forcibly raped or fighting off her attacker. Nor did she scream, cry out, or fight off any attacker, because in his evidence, Burrough - the Night Porter - was directly outside the door while Evans was having sex with her , but testified only to hearing the sounds of sexual intercourse and nothing else to concern him.

Much has been made of the fact that the sexual activity was ‘filmed’ by two friends of Evans and I believe this was viewed as particularly degenerate by both judge and jury, as indeed by most on here, but I am more interested in whether the film was produced in court as evidence by either side because surely it would at the very least give some idea of the circumstances under which the sex was occurring.

I am even more interested in the fact that the filming occurred only until “the room curtains were closed”, and I’d like to know who closed them and why, because it destroys any contention that the two filmed at Evans’ behest or with his awareness, because he would hardly close the curtains or allow them to be closed if he was complicit in the filming.

If only there was the space for more.

Anyway Z, I applaud you. :clap1::clap1::clap1:

Why are you so hellbent on attempting to ram your point home to me? I have my view and you and your cockeyed perception of what you consider to be the correct version of events is inconsequential to me.
Just stop, I'm happy with the verdict and happen to think it was entirely correct thank you.

she has every right to state the facts and her opinion. you clearly dont know the facts and therefore fail totally to debate with a superior intelligence. the fact youre mind is made up without knowing the facts is pure ignorance and bigotry

Because you keep replying to my posts with rather vague and circumstantial points that do not answer the main points of law needed to prove a rape case.

I understand you think he is a rapist and that he went out that night to rape a young women. He did not he went out that night to have a few laughs and maybe get off with a woman . Given his fame, money and good looks he probably has no trouble achieving this. However this time the situation resulted in him being convicted of raping a young women.

Did he force himself on her , maybe

Did she consent ? Maybe not but given all the points raised in my previous texts I cannot see how any jury can say beyond a reasonable that he did indeed rape her??

Fact is you cannot... But this jury thought they could and that I and many people on this forum find hard to understand.

Let's leave this thread alone now.... Neither of us have any more to add.




.

I agree with you 100% nedusa...the case has more holes than the hull of the titanic.

Just a small point but he's earning £2k a week reportedly... a £104k salary is pretty bloody cushy :laugh:

If he is deemed good enough to play then he should be offered a contract and Oldham obviously feels that he is. His sentence is over with. As ****ed up as th legal system may be, it is all about "Rehabilitation" no? Besides he wouldn't be the first convict out of jaill to continue his decent life once outside.

The only real fact is the case was proven and a conviction for rape was achieved wasn't it?
Whatever you or I feel is the right or wrongs of the case.

the decision was an opinion , an opnion is not fact. the facts have been laid clear , you havent done your homework.. there is no proof of any rape , there is no proof sex took place at all.

It's better than fact, it's the law :)

again youre wrong, is a sentence its not the law. the facts are there is no proof of any sex taking place nor any rape whatsoever. a retrial is a must. in the meantime he has every right to resume his career working as do all former inmates

What's that expression.........beating your head against a brick wall. Lol






.

He was lawfully found guilty of the crime of rape, that was the finding of the judge based on the evidence.
I'm not wrong that's what happened.

And the move to Oldham is off.

:clap1:

If my opinions confuse or frustrate you so much don't read or comment on them Nedusa.

Threats were made to club staff and their families apparently, what a disgrace

ah well that's not right

Oldham Athletic are poised to pull out of the deal to sign convicted rapist Ched Evans after intolerable pressure from sponsors and fans even extended to threats to staff.

One board member told the BBC that a supporter had sickeningly told them they knew where their daughter worked and that she would be raped should the club follow through with plans to sign him.

The League One club are preparing a statement which is believed will call an end to a saga that started on Sunday when news first emerged that Evans was due to sign for a team.


What on earth