[lostalex]

Originally Posted by arista

a Wise Woman just on SkyNewsHD
said Ched needs to tell people to not pick on the victim
she has had to move homes and change her name etc.

so why are you posting pictures if you want her to be safe and protected?

[arista]

Originally Posted by lostalex

so why are you posting pictures if you want her to be safe and protected?

Her face is not shown


the photo on the Far Right is his woman

[lostalex]

Originally Posted by arista

Her face is not shown


the photo on the Far Right is his woman

then what does she have to do with it and why are you posting more pics. you are a tabloid queen./ you are always a tabloid queen. you are no different then perez hilton around here.

You are our local Perez Hilton. our Tabloid QUEEN. yes QUEEn boy.

Queen Arista is your new name. because you act like a tabloid Queen.

[arista]

Originally Posted by lostalex

then what does she have to do with it and why are you posting more pics. you are a tabloid queen./ you are always a tabloid queen. you are no different then perez hilton around here.

You are our local Perez Hilton. our Tabloid QUEEN. yes QUEEn boy.

Queen Arista is your new name. because you act like a tabloid Queen.

A Great Deal
she has been on our TV News, just before this criminal was let out

Pictures are very important
you can ignore them

[lily.]

Originally Posted by arista

a Wise Woman just on SkyNewsHD
said Ched needs to tell people to not pick on the victim
she has had to move homes and change her name etc.

That is horrendous. Anonymous keyboard warriors terrorising the poor woman. I hate people sometimes..

[arista]

[arista]

Ched and his Woman

[lostalex]

you are being a hypocrite of the highest order.

[lostalex]

Queen Arista/ make sure to deposit your tampons in the appropriate bin, you cannot flush them in the toilet.

[arista]

No one wants You Banned again


Stay on Topic

[lostalex]

Originally Posted by arista

No one wants You Banned again


Stay on Topic

tampons in the toilet will back up the entire septic system bro. be wary/ the pipes are old.

[arista]

You must have had a bad night
8:51AM there

[lostalex]

Originally Posted by arista

You must have had a bad night
8:51AM there

52/

[arista]

[New Ched Evans Rape Inquiry Will Be Fast-Tracked]

Rich Dad gets his boy to the Front of the line

[A "substantive" investigation into Ched Evans' rape conviction
is expected to take place "within the next few weeks",
the Criminal Cases Review Commission has said.
The disgraced footballer, who continues to protest his innocence,
has had his case prioritised by the body,
which examines possible miscarriages of justice.]


http://news.sky.com/story/1355968/ch...e-fast-tracked

[Nedusa]

I have read some reports on this story and am a little confused as the Police arrested both Ched and Clayton at the Station, where they both had gone to discuss the events of the previous night.

They acknowledged that the only evidence that sexual activity had taken place was their own admission. There was no complaint of Rape, no forensic evidence, no injury and no complaint.

So how did this strange situation result in a young footballer being convicted of rape and sentenced to 5 years in prison, not withstanding the fact that the other man who also admitted to having consenual sex with this woman was aquitted ???

Also this young woman wanted to have sex with the footballer and even asked the other man (clayton) to ask Ched to come up to the room for sex. she even tweeted that she was involved with a professional footballer.

So how the hell was this ever proved as rape by the footballer in a court of law by a Jury when as stated above there was no complaint of rape no injury , no forensic evidence.

How could this be proved as RAPE...??

I'm pretty sure this conviction will be challenged and ultimately overturned. This young woman is partly to blame for this and although I do not condone the behaviour of both men I fail to see how one of them could be convicted of Rape.

Strange case.

[arista]

Originally Posted by Nedusa

I have read some reports on this story and am a little confused as the Police arrested both Ched and Clayton at the Station, where they both had gone to discuss the events of the previous night.

They acknowledged that the only evidence that sexual activity had taken place was their own admission. There was no complaint of Rape, no forensic evidence, no injury and no complaint.

So how did this strange situation result in a young footballer being convicted of rape and sentenced to 5 years in prison, not withstanding the fact that the other man who also admitted to having consenual sex with this woman was aquitted ???

Also this young woman wanted to have sex with the footballer and even asked the other man (clayton) to ask Ched to come up to the room for sex. she even tweeted that she was involved with a professional footballer.

So how the hell was this ever proved as rape by the footballer in a court of law by a Jury when as stated above there was no complaint of rape no injury , no forensic evidence.

How could this be proved as RAPE...??

I'm pretty sure this conviction will be challenged and ultimately overturned. This young woman is partly to blame for this and although I do not condone the behaviour of both men I fail to see how one of them could be convicted of Rape.

Strange case.

But she has Moved Home
and had to change her name


He was found guilty

[user104658]

I do have my reservations in cases like this, mainly because of something that happened at a party in my school year. A female friend of mine got very drunk at a party, woke up and err... "realised"... That a guy in our year lay next to her had had sex with her. She mentioned this to some people, quite horrified, saying that he had had sex with her when she had passed out drunk... Someone confronted him, He swore on his life that she was not passed out and that they were just BOTH equally drunk and it had all been consensual, and she in turn swore that she didn't / wouldn't have and all she remembers is going to the bedroom and must have passed out.

It then transpired that one of Her friends had also been in the room trying to sleep on the floor (... Classy...) And had witnessed the entire encounter, that she was awake, and that she had definitely explicitly consented.

I know the girl wasn't lying - her having huge memory gaps from nights out was pretty common so I fully believe that she couldn't remember any of it. But even she accepted that it must have been a consensual encounter after her friend described how it happened, and even started to then remember it in flashes and that she had, for want of a better phrase, been "up for it at the time", and was fine with it after that.

What does really worry me is that if there hadn't been someone else there to give an unbiased account of events, she was SO sure he had abused her in her sleep, that it could all have gone really badly.

Without another witness, when a lot of alcohol is involved, can anyone's recounting of events really be confirmed as totally accurate? Like I said it's not even about "lying". People just get things wrong.

[Kizzy]

Don't prosecutors have to prove beyond reasonable doubt to get a guilty verdict?
There must have been sufficient evidence or he wouldn't have been found guilty, twitter hate campaigns with these online vigilantes are really unnerving.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Don't prosecutors have to prove beyond reasonable doubt to get a guilty verdict?
There must have been sufficient evidence or he wouldn't have been found guilty, twitter hate campaigns with these online vigilantes are really unnerving.

Well that's the thing, people on Cheds side or (anti this girls side) seem to be saying it like she consented but changed her mind the next morning and he was found guilty of rape. There must have been more to it then just that for a jury to find him guilty of rape

[Nedusa]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Well that's the thing, people on Cheds side or (anti this girls side) seem to be saying it like she consented but changed her mind the next morning and he was found guilty of rape. There must have been more to it then just that for a jury to find him guilty of rape

Maybe.....Maybe Not


Sometimes even juries can get it wrong, plus we are now being told there is new evidence that was not presented at the trial.

All in All I think this may prove to be an unsafe conviction and subsequently overturned.





.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Nedusa

Maybe.....Maybe Not


Sometimes even juries can get it wrong, plus we are now being told there is new evidence that was not presented at the trial.

All in All I think this may prove to be an unsafe conviction and subsequently overturned.





.

Juries can but judges can't... either the evidence is there or it isn't.
'new' evidence sounds dodgy, but let's see what happens.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Don't prosecutors have to prove beyond reasonable doubt to get a guilty verdict?

Supposedly but this, then, assumes that innocent people don't go to prison which is unfortunately just completely false. There are undoubtedly plenty of innocent people in prison... no system is perfect, and our criminal justice system (whilst admittedly better than many other countries, even developed ones, *cough cough* South Africa *cough*) is a system that is FAR from perfect.

Originally Posted by Nedusa

Sometimes even juries can get it wrong, plus we are now being told there is new evidence that was not presented at the trial.

(Allegedly) something that couldn't be mentioned during the trial, as it pertained to a different case that was thrown out of court, is that she made the same accusation against two professional Rugby players at an earlier date... and they were both aquitted. Now, call me cynical, but if she really had been attacked by two Rugby players and that aquittal was wrong, would she really have then been putting herself into that situation again? And if the aquittal was right and no such attack occurred... would it not be logical to assume that she was simply "trying again"?

No one can say for sure, I suppose.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Supposedly but this, then, assumes that innocent people don't go to prison which is unfortunately just completely false. There are undoubtedly plenty of innocent people in prison... no system is perfect, and our criminal justice system (whilst admittedly better than many other countries, even developed ones, *cough cough* South Africa *cough*) is a system that is FAR from perfect.

Well as the point of a trial is to consider the weight of evidence to suggest that people go to prison when there is none... especially in a rape case is strange.
His friend was acquitted so there must have been some evidence on Mr Evans to tie him to the rape tight enough to secure a conviction?

[Kyle]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Well that's the thing, people on Cheds side or (anti this girls side) seem to be saying it like she consented but changed her mind the next morning and he was found guilty of rape. There must have been more to it then just that for a jury to find him guilty of rape

You mean like Ched's family, his girlfriend and Sheffield United fans?

On another note I thought his sister and girlfriend's undisputed appearance on this morning last week was a joke tbh. Have them on it's fine but at least have someone to dispute everything they Said.

[arista]

Ched is a rapist, says his aunt: Relative attacks footballer for not showing remorse and believes he deserved to go to prison

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz3H3tOPJHt