Going to a hotel to have sex is not a criminal offence. And you are also forgetting that at no time did the girl say she was raped. It was the Police who decided to prosecute for some inexplicable reason.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pearcey3
Printable View
Going to a hotel to have sex is not a criminal offence. And you are also forgetting that at no time did the girl say she was raped. It was the Police who decided to prosecute for some inexplicable reason.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pearcey3
The girl didn't even claim it was rape apparently.
The police forced this.
No DNA evidence. No crime scene.
Just guesswork based off drinking. That is it.
Well done Ched. I always stuck up for you bruv.
Facking slag trying it on.
INNOCENT
So many people on here were very very harsh and I hope they stand up and admit they were wrong. It doesn't make Ched a good man but he is an innocent man.
Thick, ignorant and sexist. Living up to your usual reputation at leastQuote:
Originally Posted by nugent
Innocent has connotations to suggest that he's done nothing wrong. Ched has been found not guilty but has also been called callous and said to acted with serious contempt for another human.Quote:
Originally Posted by the leader
I am saddened to see a number of people commenting by (looking at wider platforms) insulting the woman involved in this.
Fuk sake.Quote:
Originally Posted by nugent
"Ched Evans was wrongfully convicted we must fight this injustice"
"Ched Evans was found innocent by a court so thats that"
I take it you're firmly in option 2?
I bet LC is devastated.
Ennis has offered to name her next kid after Ched as way of an apology.Quote:
Originally Posted by EadosEados
Hats off to her.
He may be innocent but he's still a deeply depraved individual who I will still hold in contempt. People rejoicing like this is some kind of victory for themselves and Wales are cringeworthy.
AgreedQuote:
Originally Posted by Bluebird since 1948
People having a go at Jessica Ennis but when she had a go he was a convicted rapist
THIS IS THE WORST CASE OF ITS KIND EVER.
HE CAN NEVER GET HIS TIME IN JAIL BACK.
The fact he is now not guilty will never repair the injustice he has suffered.
The STNUC thaT CONDEMNED HIM SHOULD HANG THEIR HEADS IN SHAME TONIGHT.
WE KNOW WHO YOU ARE!
I am fascinated to see whether the press are as keen to now identify his critics tomorrow... Ennis and Co. ......as they were to condemn HIM.
He's not whiter than white here BUT never a rapist.
Justice has been done.
Now get Blackman out of prison!
rubbish pal. he is guilty as ****.Quote:
Originally Posted by AlwaysAway2
The "new" witness statements were both updated statements in 2015 - both first given in 2011. The 2011 statements contained nothing about language the woman may have used. The 2015 versions both contained the same language / variations of that language that Ched claimed was used.Quote:
Originally Posted by kingbillyboy
Prosecution were blocked by the trial judge from persueing those obvious discrepencies. It's amazing how two purported independent witnesses conveniently manage to remember similar language four years after their original statements.
Evans' partner directly approached a key prosecution witness after the first trial, asking if he had any additional evidence that could clear Ched - mentioning the 50k reward. After he didn't reply, she contacted him again berating him.
Prosecution were blocked by the trial judge from mentioning this event, which looks like a clear attempt to persuade a key witness to alter testimony.
The problem a jury has is we can now see how hamstrung the prosecution was when questioning this new evidence. I'd say that if the jury had known the above the verdict would probably have been different.
This is worth a read
https://thesecretbarrister.com/2016/...ed-evans-case/
"Secret barrister" fails to address the new issues re witness statements that came out after the legal restrictions on the case were lifted.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomm
:thumbup:Quote:
Originally Posted by tomm
"we know who you are" - Jeez ..get over yourself. You will give yourself a black eye from your jerking knees.Quote:
Originally Posted by AlwaysAway2
As per your own wording, CE has not proven that he is 'innocent' as such.
We must accept the outcome of the court - that he could not be found guilty.
We , and he , should move on, and he should be allowed to.
Nobody need 'hang their heads in shame' for having an opinion during a highly complex case that remains absolutely full of holes, and to which nobody outside the court was fully privy to the evidence - and where the defendant was not exactly 'exonerated'.
Your posts are invariably highly reactionary and volatile. Have a day off. Celebrate your mans 'win'. :ohwell:
Seriously, how insecure are you? :hehe:Quote:
Originally Posted by blue matt
In the end we had two verdicts. If they had occurred the other way round (which is plausible), you would now not be 'right all along'. I certainly hope justice has been done but I agree with TH63, we'll never know what really happened in the room. You have a small group of drunk people recalling events many years later - the human memory makes it impossible to be sure.
Whatever happened, some young lives have been irretrievably ruined and I don't think this is the time to gloat about how smart you are.
Do you know anything about this case?Quote:
Originally Posted by Vimana.
Do you know that the woman involved has never claimed she was raped?
Not at the time nor subsequently.
An exceptional case involving three very young people that escalated into an absurd conviction.
The original trial result was not anticipated by anyone involved.
Do your own research.
Cheds statement yesterday speaks volumes for his maturity and resignation on what has happened to him.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlwaysAway2
Read this. It was posted by tomm above. Its worth reading.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomm
Even better reading.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/...omen-reporting
The decisions of the trial judge hampering the prosecution seem baffling.
The reason she never claimed she was raped is because she wasn't.
It's the most fooked up case I've ever heard of.