Thistle Bonnet Posted October 22, 2014 Share Posted October 22, 2014 I'm not sure the term "flirting" applies. My understanding is the girl passed MacDonald in the street, asked him where he was going, he told her he was getting a taxi to his hotel and she said "I'm coming with you". They hadn't previously met. When they got there, she went out to get a pizza, came back to the hotel and had sex with him. The two main legal issues were...was the girl so drunk that she was incapable of giving her consent? And even if she wasn't capable, did MacDonald and Evans nonetheless have a reasonable belief that she had given her consent? The evidence seems to have been that she was two and a half times the drink driving limit - I'd imagine that is pretty drunk but not necessarily in a stupor. The girl said she had no recollection of having sex with either of them. Both MacDonald & Evans said that she consented to sex with both of them, the girl said she didn't know if she gave consent and didn't remember anything about that part of the night. The night porter described hearing "playful" conversations among the three of them. My guess is the jury took the view that MacDonald had reasonable grounds for believing the girl was consenting - she invited herself to his hotel, left the room for her pizza and returned. Evans turned up after getting a text from MacDonald saying he had got a girl...maybe the jury thought that that was the behaviour of such a sleazy creep, that they weren't prepared to give him the benefit of any doubt about her consent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deky Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 So, the legal punishment is not enough? Daily Mail reader found. Aye, that's clearly where I get my opinions from. I'm scared to ask where the hell you get yours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom McB Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 Aye, that's clearly where I get my opinions from. I'm scared to ask where the hell you get yours. My opinion that he is guilty as he was found so by a jury? My opinion that he should serve his sentence in accordance with the law? My opinion that virtual lynch mobs do not and should not be mightier than the law? I think you would find that any liberal decent person would be in accord with those. Feel free to answer me, is the legal punishment not enough? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deky Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 My opinion that he is guilty as he was found so by a jury? My opinion that he should serve his sentence in accordance with the law? My opinion that virtual lynch mobs do not and should not be mightier than the law? I think you would find that any liberal decent person would be in accord with those. Feel free to answer me, is the legal punishment not enough? Lynch mob? Would you like a bigger knife to help you lay it on a bit thicker? He was found guilty, he served his sentence, he's free earn a living. I'm of the opinion (without the help of the Daily Mail) that the living he earns as a proffesional footballer is extreme. I think taking the average wage of a semi skilled worker (he played for Sheffield United ffs) and donating the rest to rape charities may be seen as nothing more than a gesture but the money would still benefit these charities. What's your problem with that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
williemillersmoustache Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 Lynch mob? Would you like a bigger knife to help you lay it on a bit thicker? He was found guilty, he served his sentence, he's free earn a living. I'm of the opinion (without the help of the Daily Mail) that the living he earns as a proffesional footballer is extreme. I think taking the average wage of a semi skilled worker (he played for Sheffield United ffs) and donating the rest to rape charities may be seen as nothing more than a gesture but the money would still benefit these charities. What's your problem with that? It's arbitrary, ad hoc, knee-jerk, popularist, nonsense. Apart from that well done, good spelling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deky Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 It's arbitrary, ad hoc, knee-jerk, popularist, nonsense. Apart from that well done, good spelling. No it's not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom McB Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 Lynch mob? Would you like a bigger knife to help you lay it on a bit thicker? He was found guilty, he served his sentence, he's free earn a living. I'm of the opinion (without the help of the Daily Mail) that the living he earns as a proffesional footballer is extreme. I think taking the average wage of a semi skilled worker (he played for Sheffield United ffs) and donating the rest to rape charities may be seen as nothing more than a gesture but the money would still benefit these charities. What's your problem with that? So you do want him punished beyond the punishment meeted out by the law. Standard Daily Mail shit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom McB Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 It's arbitrary, ad hoc, knee-jerk, popularist, nonsense. Apart from that well done, good spelling. Can't argue with fascists. They know that their ad hoc, knee jerk, populist pish is right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deky Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 So you do want him punished beyond the punishment meeted out by the law. Standard Daily Mail shit I don't see it as punishment, if you do, fair enough. Evans has been interviewed, talking about giving back. Let him put his money where his mouth is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deky Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 Can't argue with fascists. They know that their ad hoc, knee jerk, populist pish is right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DigOutYourSoul Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 The whole 'he should go out and do a real job as he should be a footballer anymore' is mental. He's served his time in the eyes of the law, and has been released early as he is not seen as a public threat - which I don't believe he is, he should be allowed to go back into employment the same as anyone else. The fact that he has a good job does not change that - if a plumber gets done for rape, served his time and was re-employed by his old employer there would be no media outrage. The question then becomes about the club and whether they want to take a risk of media outrage in giving him a contract. It just comes down to risk, is it worth it. Most will say probably not, but some will look at it and say 'in a couple of months this will all have blown over and we'll have ourselfs a good standard of worker on cheaper than we could have got him before'. I suspect that will be the case; a team will take a punt in the hope that the faux-outrage of the masses will move on to another case in a few weeks time - as is almost certian to happen, and they will be left with an international striker on the cheap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliche Guevara Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 The whole 'he should go out and do a real job as he should be a footballer anymore' is mental. He's served his time in the eyes of the law, and has been released early as he is not seen as a public threat - which I don't believe he is, he should be allowed to go back into employment the same as anyone else. The fact that he has a good job does not change that - if a plumber gets done for rape, served his time and was re-employed by his old employer there would be no media outrage. The question then becomes about the club and whether they want to take a risk of media outrage in giving him a contract. It just comes down to risk, is it worth it. Most will say probably not, but some will look at it and say 'in a couple of months this will all have blown over and we'll have ourselfs a good standard of worker on cheaper than we could have got him before'. I suspect that will be the case; a team will take a punt in the hope that the faux-outrage of the masses will move on to another case in a few weeks time - as is almost certian to happen, and they will be left with an international striker on the cheap. No, anyone comparing the role of a footballer to that of a plumber is mental. I'm not saying you're wrong in your point of view but a guy fitting pipes for the council is different from somone running out at Dens, on the TV, with people potentially chanting his name, kids wanting his autograph, people sponsoring his strip and folk forking out £20 per head to pay for his wages. Maybe even then representing his Nation at what is supposed to be a sport. Again, I'm not making any comment on whether he should play high-profile football, or not, but to say it's the same as someone being a plumber is completely wrong. I would add another point, that if the guy did go back to his old job I'm not convinced he would be as welcomed by his former workmates as people on here seem to be suggesting. There appears to be a view that if he was a plumbing-rapist as opposed to a footballing-rapist the plumbing world would readily accept his re-employment. Maybe we are doing the plumbing world a bit of a disservice. People regularly ruin their careers through their criminal conduct - it's often an unavoidable consequence of the offence. Perhaps there is a danger that people are inadvertently looking for special treatment for Evans that 'ordinary' people wouldn't benefit from. edit to add: I wouldn't be so quick to write it off as faux-outrage either, as he has been convicted of rape which is an extremely serious crime (irrespective of whether the conviction seems fair or not). In times gone by he'd have been scared to show his face again in public after such a conviction, far less get paid handsomely (and I'm not saying that's right or wrong either) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
parsforlife Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 edit to add: I wouldn't be so quick to write it off as faux-outrage either, as he has been convicted of rape which is an extremely serious crime (irrespective of whether the conviction seems fair or not). In times gone by he'd have been scared to show his face again in public after such a conviction, far less get paid handsomely (and I'm not saying that's right or wrong either) its defiantly faux outrage, this will all die down quickly enough once somebody signs him( and somebody defiantly will, probably bellow his "natural" level ). Give it a month or two after he is signed and people will move on, and other than abuse from opposition fans it will hardly be mentioned. We've seen it before with king and others, i have little doubt evans will be earning his living from football soon enough(end of the season at the latest) As for the footballers are different argument, i simply can't agree. Things like him being on tv is irrelevant, as is the "fans pay his wages" stuff, unless theres something i'm missing i'm pretty sure customers of any business contribute to the wages of the staff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
throbber Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 People will cry about it on social media for about 2 weeks then it will be forgotten about. He's not doing anything illegal and is well within his rights to re enter employment so fair play to him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supras Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 The whole 'he should go out and do a real job as he should be a footballer anymore' is mental. He's served his time in the eyes of the law, and has been released early as he is not seen as a public threat - which I don't believe he is, he should be allowed to go back into employment the same as anyone else. The fact that he has a good job does not change that - if a plumber gets done for rape, served his time and was re-employed by his old employer there would be no media outrage. The question then becomes about the club and whether they want to take a risk of media outrage in giving him a contract. It just comes down to risk, is it worth it. Most will say probably not, but some will look at it and say 'in a couple of months this will all have blown over and we'll have ourselfs a good standard of worker on cheaper than we could have got him before'. I suspect that will be the case; a team will take a punt in the hope that the faux-outrage of the masses will move on to another case in a few weeks time - as is almost certian to happen, and they will be left with an international striker on the cheap. Every point you have made has already been addressed, in depth, why don't you read the thread before diving in two footed? Participating in the Entertainment industry is absolutely different. And the "baying mob with pitchforks" that have been referenced by other posters are the ones advocating he live a normal life away from public shame and abuse - whilst those who are desperate for him to return (after all, football is nothing without Ched Evans) are the exact same ones who will be shouting vile personal abuse at him from the stands. What a bizarre world we live in. Just what goes on in peoples heads? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supras Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 People will cry about it on social media for about 2 weeks then it will be forgotten about. He's not doing anything illegal and is well within his rights to re enter employment so fair play to him Yeah, and a bar hosting an Ian Watkins gig isn't doing anything illegal. And attending said gig isn't illegal. It doesn't mean any pub would host it, or anyone would attend it. Why is football different? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
throbber Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 Yeah, and a bar hosting an Ian Watkins gig isn't doing anything illegal. And attending said gig isn't illegal. It doesn't mean any pub would host it, or anyone would attend it. Why is football different? Well Ian Watkins raped babies on camera and Evens had sex with a woman of consensual age in a hotel room and all we have is her word against his so its a very different situation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Co.Down Hibee Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 People will cry about it on social media for about 2 weeks then it will be forgotten about. He's not doing anything illegal and is well within his rights to re enter employment so fair play to him To be honest I think the issue people would have is with anyone who employs him, not so much the fact he wishes to be employed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
throbber Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 To be honest I think the issue people would have is with anyone who employs him, not so much the fact he wishes to be employed. Well I'm not even sure about that, some fan are saying they didn't want him back at Sheff utd but then worried someone else will snatch him up. I think the opposing fans will be a big issues but how long would it go on for? Comparing it to Watkins case is absolutely ridiculous but apologies for spelling it out so harshly! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~~~ Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 Well Ian Watkins raped babies on camera and Evens had sex with a woman of consensual age in a hotel room and all we have is her word against his so its a very different situation Him being found guilty of rape You're bordering on rapist apolgists with that comment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.