coldel Posted April 21, 2012 Share Posted April 21, 2012 ...bit of a strange one this, I just dont understand how one got off whilst the other got five years? Her testimony in short said she remembers nothing from leaving the club to waking up alone after the deed was done. Both players claimed she consented but the jury found that she consented to one but not the other? Not doubting the woman, completely, but struggling to see how they have found one guilty but not the other. http://news.sky.com/home/uk-news/article/16212826 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarnie Posted April 21, 2012 Share Posted April 21, 2012 What I don't understand, is that if she has NO memory, how can she bring charges? Surely, not remembering is not equal to not giving consent. If so, there could be a lot a guys waking up next to a woman this weekend in danger of being accused of rape if she doesn't explicitly remember giving consent Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manphibian Posted April 21, 2012 Share Posted April 21, 2012 Guess without hearing all the evidence in the court, it's hard to make the call. Does seem odd though, as it seems the one that got off (saw him play at Walsall btw) Was the one who took her back, then phoned the other one, so he could 'have a go' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coldel Posted April 21, 2012 Author Share Posted April 21, 2012 Yeah if anything McDonald was the most culpable as he saw her in a shocking state and took her to a hotel. Mind you it brings all sorts of questions up, like where were her friends? Nice of them to leave her in that state in a kebab shop or if they were with her nice of them to let her be taken off by a complete stranger. Despite my general dislike of footballers attitudes I am struggling with this one - like sarnie says not remembering does not mean she didnt consent - I have seen a phone cam vid of me coming back to my flat mates flat many years ago after an alldayer (those were the days eh) and speaking quite coherently laughing and joking about, I didn't remember half of that in the morning though... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwanageDave Posted April 21, 2012 Share Posted April 21, 2012 Sad as it is that someone has to go to prison and someone raped..but if this had happened 6 weeks ago sheffield wednesday could have been in automatic promotion spot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rancer Posted April 22, 2012 Share Posted April 22, 2012 Does seem odd though, as it seems the one that got off (saw him play at Walsall btw) Was the one who took her back, then phoned the other one, so he could 'have a go' You've probably answered the question there. Guesswork time. If she consented to going back with one bloke (a) for sex, then fair enough, crack on. That doesn't mean she consented to another bloke ( joining in though. And if she didn't consent to the other bloke joining in, then thats rape. No if's, no but's, no maybe's. It's rape. If she is then being raped by (, she is unlikely to still be consenting to (a) having sex with her, at which point (a) is raping her too. Legally, rape is very easily defined. Consent however is very difficult to pin down. I may be biased here, but knowing the Police and the CPS, since this got to court, I reckon there must be a lot of truth to it. Rapes with 'dodgy' accusations can often result in arrests, but very rarely make it to court. There is still a massive stigma around rapes and going to court with them. I took an initial account a few months back where a young girl had consented to sex with one bloke, but not with his seven or so pals.. She later declined to give a statement etc when CID were involved. I still believe her. On the flip side, the fact that the accussed were footballers / public figures will have played a part with the bosses in the Police and CPS. Wrong, but true. Personally, i'd happily take a Gene Hunt approach to anyone like that. Scum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coldel Posted April 22, 2012 Author Share Posted April 22, 2012 ...but if she doesnt remember leaving the club how can she have consented to McDonald and not to Evans? Where are they getting the evidence to say that she consented to McDonald? They said she was in no state to consent to sex when she staggered out the kebab shop, so how on earth has McDonald got off when Evans hasn't? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoogyRev Posted April 22, 2012 Share Posted April 22, 2012 With a name like "Ched" he should have been locked up at birth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricey Posted April 22, 2012 Share Posted April 22, 2012 Mistake 1......went out in rhyl. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MK-Ultra Posted April 22, 2012 Share Posted April 22, 2012 With a name like "Ched" he should have been locked up at birth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glrnet Posted April 22, 2012 Share Posted April 22, 2012 Is it just me, why does the penalty for rape seem to be so low? I believe he got 5 years, if it runs true to form he'll be out in 2.5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rancer Posted April 22, 2012 Share Posted April 22, 2012 ...but if she doesnt remember leaving the club how can she have consented to McDonald and not to Evans? Where are they getting the evidence to say that she consented to McDonald? They said she was in no state to consent to sex when she staggered out the kebab shop, so how on earth has McDonald got off when Evans hasn't? Does she remember consenting? Were there 3rd party witnesses? Did she say, "Yeah I likely would have consented to sex with 1 guy, but no way would I ever consent to a second joining in - especially since I had met him earlier" etc etc: Without seeing the court transcripts there's no way to know. Or maybe she said she didn't consent to either but there was enough evidence to cloud the issue and make a conviction unlikely. Maybe the jury liked one bloke more than the other. Maybe... etc: As I say, consent is the hazzy area legally. Drunk people can consent and not remember it - there is still ongoing battles over that being true consent though. If drunk people 100% could not consent, then how many relationships are based on rape? Or a woman sexually assaulting a man? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rancer Posted April 22, 2012 Share Posted April 22, 2012 Is it just me, why does the penalty for rape seem to be so low? I believe he got 5 years, if it runs true to form he'll be out in 2.5 That is an easy question to answer. The judicial system in this country is f**ked up. I regularly meet people with 100+ arrests / court convictions. All court sentances are lies. Divide by two and thats the real sentance, and even then most won't serve that much unless they constantly re-offend in prison. The government needs to build more prisons. Simple. Argue all you want about prison not being an effective deterent, but the simple truth is that recidivist offenders cannot burgle your house if they are in prison. There are certainly social issues that lead to criminal behaviour, we see 6 yr olds smiling and waving at the pandas. Give it a few years and they will be "saluting" and spitting instead. Sad, but true. Those issues will take generations to fix, if ever. In the mean time, protect the victims and lock-up the bad-uns. The police could fill new prisons spaces very quickly. Rant over. Now read this story and weap.. http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/woman/real_life/4268174/Familys-agony-at-the-early-release-of-happy-slap-killers.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squee Posted April 22, 2012 Share Posted April 22, 2012 Mistake 1......went out in rhyl. ..But Rhyl girls don't say 'no' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coldel Posted April 22, 2012 Author Share Posted April 22, 2012 Sounds to me like Mr Evans went down on what statisticians in times of confusion call a guesstimate ...but if she doesnt remember leaving the club how can she have consented to McDonald and not to Evans? Where are they getting the evidence to say that she consented to McDonald? They said she was in no state to consent to sex when she staggered out the kebab shop, so how on earth has McDonald got off when Evans hasn't? Does she remember consenting? Were there 3rd party witnesses? Did she say, "Yeah I likely would have consented to sex with 1 guy, but no way would I ever consent to a second joining in - especially since I had met him earlier" etc etc: Without seeing the court transcripts there's no way to know. Or maybe she said she didn't consent to either but there was enough evidence to cloud the issue and make a conviction unlikely. Maybe the jury liked one bloke more than the other. Maybe... etc: As I say, consent is the hazzy area legally. Drunk people can consent and not remember it - there is still ongoing battles over that being true consent though. If drunk people 100% could not consent, then how many relationships are based on rape? Or a woman sexually assaulting a man? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.