[the truth]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-37560871

Mr Evans, 27, was found guilty of rape in 2012, but successfully appealed against his conviction in April.
On day two of his retrial, Cardiff Crown Court heard the woman felt "dead dazed" and "intoxicated" the next day.
The jury was shown DVDs of the complainant's interviews with police after the alleged sexual assault.
In the first interview, she said she had drunk two glasses of wine, four vodka and lemonades and a shot of Sambuca during the night.
She said the last thing she remembered was drinking in Rhyl's Zu Bar and then holding a piece of pizza in a takeaway restaurant late on 30 May 2011, after only a few drinks.
"The next thing I remember is waking up in the Premier Inn," she said during an interview on 31 May, 2011.
"I have tried to work out what must have happened. I just can't remember," she said.
She said she had to "look out of the window" to realise where she was and, later on that day, she felt "tender", having "wet the bed" in the hotel.


She told police: "I did not know why I had gone there or who I went there with."
In a second video interview with police, the alleged victim was told toxicology results taken after the alleged rape showed she had cocaine and cannabis in her system.
She said she had tried cocaine "on two or three separate occasions" over a few months, but not during the week before 30 May 2011.
During the interview, on 15 July, she also said she had tried cannabis "with friends", although not regularly.
'Very drunk'
The prosecution previously told the court the alleged victim met fellow footballer Clayton McDonald while he and Mr Evans were at the Zu Bar.
She was seen to be "very drunk", the prosecution said, saying she believed her drink was spiked - although not by Mr Evans or his friends.
Taking to the stand behind a screen, she was asked questions about CCTV footage which showed her leaving the Zu Bar in the early hours of 30 May.
The clips then show her walking through central Rhyl, staggering at points, before entering the Godfather takeaway shop and sitting at a table.
She identified Clayton McDonald - who is not accused of any wrongdoing - in the CCTV footage inside the takeaway and, when asked if she had met him before that night, she said: "No".
When asked if she had any "independent recollection" of the events on the screen she said no.
At 03:50 BST, footage shows her sitting in a doorway before walking around with a pizza and getting in a taxi with Mr McDonald.
The pair were then seen arriving at the Premier Inn at around 04:10. Again, when asked, she said she could not remember anything about the journey.
Mr Evans is accused of raping the woman after letting himself into the hotel room where she was having sex with Mr McDonald.
Mr McDonald, 27, previously of Manchester City and Port Vale clubs, was cleared of rape at the original trial.
Mr Evans then left the hotel "surreptitiously" via a fire exit, the prosecution has said.
The trial continues.

[arista]

Is it a secret pay off?

[LeatherTrumpet]

Looks like this has to be thrown out?

[the truth]

hard to know if shes lying because her face is hidden behind a screen...and she had cocaine and cannabis and a bucket load of alcohol in her system too, she cant remember a damn thing, not even when the cctv footage of her "staggering" into take away and getting in a taxi at 3.50 am and arriving at the premier inn hotel at 4.10am she stil cant remember anything...to think his life has been destroyed over this "evidence"?

[LeatherTrumpet]

Originally Posted by the truth

hard to know if shes lying because her face is hidden behind a screen...and she had cocaine and cannabis and a bucket load of alcohol in her system too, she cant remember a damn thing, not even when the cctv footage of her "staggering" into take away and getting in a taxi at 3.50 am and arriving at the premier inn hotel at 4.10am she stil cant remember anything...to think his life has been destroyed over this "evidence"?

Its wrong and unless they have some actual evidence I think he is entitled to be cleared

[LeatherTrumpet]

The prosecutor said: “It has been suggested that you were having consensual sex with Mr McDonald, you were taking the lead, you were asked if Ched Evans could join in and you agreed. Is that right?”

The woman said those claims were not correct.


-----------------


But she surely said she can remember f all that happened?


---------------------------------

"She said the last thing she remembered was drinking in Rhyl's Zu Bar and then holding a piece of pizza in a takeaway restaurant late on 30 May 2011, after only a few drinks.
"The next thing I remember is waking up in the Premier Inn,"

[Toy Soldier]

I think she probably did "agree to it", in so much as she probably slurred "yeah, ok"...

However TBQFH I have limited sympathy for the guys. They gangbanged with a girl neither of them knew, when she was quite clearly (by all accounts) off her face on drugs and alcohol. Played with fire. Got burned badly.

[LeatherTrumpet]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

I think she probably did "agree to it", in so much as she probably slurred "yeah, ok"...

However TBQFH I have limited sympathy for the guys. They gangbanged with a girl neither of them knew, when she was quite clearly (by all accounts) off her face on drugs and alcohol. Played with fire. Got burned badly.

Perhaps but it's not rape or all that goes with it

[the truth]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

I think she probably did "agree to it", in so much as she probably slurred "yeah, ok"...

However TBQFH I have limited sympathy for the guys. They gangbanged with a girl neither of them knew, when she was quite clearly (by all accounts) off her face on drugs and alcohol. Played with fire. Got burned badly.

idiotic mistake by the men and the woman everyone was off their face but is it rape?

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

Perhaps but it's not rape or all that goes with it

Originally Posted by the truth

idiotic mistake by the men and the woman everyone was off their face but is it rape?

I'm inclined to say "probably not"... but then I'm also inclined to not give a **** what happens to any of them

[Shaun]

I'm not sure about extending the grey area between "consensual sex" and "rape". If she was too drunk to care and could legitimately change her mind about it the morning after then it's just obviously a stupid decision to go ahead with it.

[the truth]

if I went out and took crack, blow and a load of liquor then staggered around without knowing what I was doing then went back to a hotel at 4am in a taxi with 2 gay men then woke up with no memory but just a pain in the anus. I'd blame myself

[Livia]

I've always thought Ched Evans got a raw deal. Does this woman remember anything about the rugby players she gang-banged previously?

While I absolutely uphold that a prison sentence should be handed out for rape, having read what happened I think there were far too many grey areas in this case for a man to have lost everything because of it.

[Vicky.]

I don't remember this case too well, but I think I did say at the time it seemed harsh. People get pissed and shag others, it happens. Yes there is a bit of a grey area with the whole 'could they consent in that state' thing but if both are out of their heads I see no reason at all why one should be blamed while the other is a victim just for regretting it the next day. I would say it was wrong for a totally sober person to shag someone who was so pissed they couldn't stand, and yes that would be rapey to me. But this doesn't seem to be the case here at all...

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

I don't remember this case too well, but I think I did say at the time it seemed harsh. People get pissed and shag others, it happens. Yes there is a bit of a grey area with the whole 'could they consent in that state' thing but if both are out of their heads I see no reason at all why one should be blamed while the other is a victim just for regretting it the next day. I would say it was wrong for a totally sober person to shag someone who was so pissed they couldn't stand, and yes that would be rapey to me. But this doesn't seem to be the case here at all...

Yeah I agree with that. If a sober person is taking advantage of someone who is obviously off their face then that's a pretty clear "assault" to me... but if BOTH individuals are equally intoxicated then how can there have been a crime committed? What if both regret it the next morning? Have they raped each other? Should BOTH be charged with assault? That seems an odd sort of road to go down.

I guess (not to venture into Truth territory...) that there is a bit of gender inequality here when it comes to the idea of consent and intoxication; in that it seems (mostly) that the idea of a drunk male being unable to consent isn't "a thing", or perhaps commonly, the idea that getting an erection implies consent which really is utter bull****. In my younger days (teen / Uni) I can think of plenty of examples of girls deliberately staying relatively sober and watching / waiting for the guy they liked to get drunk enough to "give in" and have sex with them when they KNEW that the guy would regret it the next day. Where does that fall on the consent spectrum? Is it any different to a guy taking advantage of a drunk female?

[Vicky.]

Its not different really but I think a woman raping a bloke would come under sexual assault and not rape? I *think* our laws state its only rape if a penis is involved. Though I do know its hard for men to be taken seriously over issues like this because of the 'men are always up for it' attitude.

Man on woman rape though I guess I class as more 'serious' if we are playing some twisted version of top trumps. As the woman can end up pregnant where the bloke cant. However I did read of some horrendous case a few months back where a woman 'raped' a bloke and got pregnant then he got stung for child support for the result of said rape

[the truth]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

I don't remember this case too well, but I think I did say at the time it seemed harsh. People get pissed and shag others, it happens. Yes there is a bit of a grey area with the whole 'could they consent in that state' thing but if both are out of their heads I see no reason at all why one should be blamed while the other is a victim just for regretting it the next day. I would say it was wrong for a totally sober person to shag someone who was so pissed they couldn't stand, and yes that would be rapey to me. But this doesn't seem to be the case here at all...

Yes this is clearly a cultural mess with all sorts of double standards and grey areas...Debate on the matter is in effect banned, rape is rape is rape demand the radical feminists? I wonder whether the woman being able to stay anonymous here and the man being a famous rich footballer, changes the thinking of the alleged victim.

[the truth]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Yeah I agree with that. If a sober person is taking advantage of someone who is obviously off their face then that's a pretty clear "assault" to me... but if BOTH individuals are equally intoxicated then how can there have been a crime committed? What if both regret it the next morning? Have they raped each other? Should BOTH be charged with assault? That seems an odd sort of road to go down.

I guess (not to venture into Truth territory...) that there is a bit of gender inequality here when it comes to the idea of consent and intoxication; in that it seems (mostly) that the idea of a drunk male being unable to consent isn't "a thing", or perhaps commonly, the idea that getting an erection implies consent which really is utter bull****. In my younger days (teen / Uni) I can think of plenty of examples of girls deliberately staying relatively sober and watching / waiting for the guy they liked to get drunk enough to "give in" and have sex with them when they KNEW that the guy would regret it the next day. Where does that fall on the consent spectrum? Is it any different to a guy taking advantage of a drunk female?

welcome to truth territory

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by the truth

Yes this is clearly a cultural mess with all sorts of double standards and grey areas...Debate on the matter is in effect banned, rape is rape is rape demand the radical feminists? I wonder whether the woman being able to stay anonymous here and the man being a famous rich footballer, changes the thinking of the alleged victim.

This is always a problem. Look at how many people crawled out of the woodwork (anonymously of course) to accuse celebs of stuff after the Saville scandal broke. I still think to this day that some (not all) did it just for a compensation grab and because they know they can't be proved wrong after so long. I think papers and such are beyond irresponsible splashing **** like this on the front pages tbh, especially before a case has even been taken to court or a conviction made.

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Its not different really but I think a woman raping a bloke would come under sexual assault and not rape? I *think* our laws state its only rape if a penis is involved. Though I do know its hard for men to be taken seriously over issues like this because of the 'men are always up for it' attitude.

Man on woman rape though I guess I class as more 'serious' if we are playing some twisted version of top trumps. As the woman can end up pregnant where the bloke cant.

It can't be that simple, surely... if that were the case, then a sterile male raping a woman would be "less serious" than one with a sky high sperm count doing it.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

It can't be that simple, surely... if that were the case, then a sterile male raping a woman would be "less serious" than one with a sky high sperm count doing it.

I don't know the reasons behind it. But honestly, sterile males are not very common. So its majority rules really. The pregnancy thing makes sense to me..its the only way I can make sense of male on female rape being treat as more serious. Besides the common 'guys are always up for it' way of thinking (usually mainly by other guys), but that has no place in law :S

Edited. And maybe because the average bloke could overpower the average woman, whereas its unlikely the other way around. A long with years of repression for females by males (before you start truth, I do not believe this happens now very often, but it can't be denied that it did in the past). Kind of like how racism is taken seriously when its against oppressed groups whereas if someone is 'racist' towards a white person its brushed off.

[Northern Monkey]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

I don't remember this case too well, but I think I did say at the time it seemed harsh. People get pissed and shag others, it happens. Yes there is a bit of a grey area with the whole 'could they consent in that state' thing but if both are out of their heads I see no reason at all why one should be blamed while the other is a victim just for regretting it the next day. I would say it was wrong for a totally sober person to shag someone who was so pissed they couldn't stand, and yes that would be rapey to me. But this doesn't seem to be the case here at all...

Totally agree :kirk clappy hands: i mean

[Niamh.]

Wasn't Ched Evans sober though and wasn't there other people outside the window filming it? or am i thinking of someother case altogether?

[Northern Monkey]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Yeah I agree with that. If a sober person is taking advantage of someone who is obviously off their face then that's a pretty clear "assault" to me... but if BOTH individuals are equally intoxicated then how can there have been a crime committed? What if both regret it the next morning? Have they raped each other? Should BOTH be charged with assault? That seems an odd sort of road to go down.

I guess (not to venture into Truth territory...) that there is a bit of gender inequality here when it comes to the idea of consent and intoxication; in that it seems (mostly) that the idea of a drunk male being unable to consent isn't "a thing", or perhaps commonly, the idea that getting an erection implies consent which really is utter bull****. In my younger days (teen / Uni) I can think of plenty of examples of girls deliberately staying relatively sober and watching / waiting for the guy they liked to get drunk enough to "give in" and have sex with them when they KNEW that the guy would regret it the next day. Where does that fall on the consent spectrum? Is it any different to a guy taking advantage of a drunk female?

I once got absolutely hammered on my Birthday and passed out while having sex.The lass was on top and next morning she told me i passed out while she was riding me.She said she kept going for abit but it did'nt feel right so she got off.I told her she should've just kept going if the Mr was still willing(which it apparently was)

[smudgie]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Wasn't Ched Evans sober though and wasn't there other people outside the window filming it? or am i thinking of someother case altogether?

Yes, and didn't his mate text him that the woman was there.
If you are too drunk to give consent then it is rape.
Heaven forbid that ever changes.