Ched Evans saga.........

Quoted from ginnywings

So, a wealthy young man, who earned in the region of a million pounds a year and could afford the best legal representation, still gets convicted of rape by a jury, based on ALL the evidence and some still say he is innocent based on articles on a website paid for by his girlfriends wealthy father, which tells only one side of the story. No-one knows what was said or happened in that room except those that were there.

He may be innocent or not but that "evidence" shows nothing for me.

If there was sufficient real evidence that a miscarriage of justice had taken place, then he would be granted an appeal.

He wasn't...................................

Ginny i think there was a porter that let Evans into the hotel room  and was listening to what was going on and all he heard was sexual activity.   I read this document that my mate showed me off Facebook.  After reading it i can see why so many people are doubting conviction so many gray areas and so many pieces of evidence that was just simply ignored for some reason.  

Quoted from Meza

Ginny i think there was a porter that let Evans into the hotel room  and was listening to what was going on and all he heard was sexual activity.   I read this document that my mate showed me off Facebook.  After reading it i can see why so many people are doubting conviction so many gray areas and so many pieces of evidence that was just simply ignored for some reason.  

If she's passed out drunk or far too drunk to give consent she's not likely to be making a racket is she? Rape doesn't necessarily mean it has to be a struggle, I don't think some people realise this.

Quoted from Meza

Ginny i think there was a porter that let Evans into the hotel room  and was listening to what was going on and all he heard was sexual activity.   I read this document that my mate showed me off Facebook.  After reading it i can see why so many people are doubting conviction so many gray areas and so many pieces of evidence that was just simply ignored for some reason.  

Ah Facebook! Bedrock of the British legal system for........

Quoted from WOZOFGRIMSBY

Just been discussing this over a few pints this afternoon.

If mike Tyson was to make a come back, would everyone forget he was a rapist?

Well....I might not remind him to his face.....

Quoted from Meza

Ginny i think there was a porter that let Evans into the hotel room  and was listening to what was going on and all he heard was sexual activity.   I read this document that my mate showed me off Facebook.  After reading it i can see why so many people are doubting conviction so many gray areas and so many pieces of evidence that was just simply ignored for some reason.  

All of which would have been scrutinised at the trial, so it's nothing new.

Quoted from ginnywings

So, a wealthy young man, who earned in the region of a million pounds a year and could afford the best legal representation, still gets convicted of rape by a jury, based on ALL the evidence and some still say he is innocent based on articles on a website paid for by his girlfriends wealthy father, which tells only one side of the story. No-one knows what was said or happened in that room except those that were there.

He may be innocent or not but that "evidence" shows nothing for me.

If there was sufficient real evidence that a miscarriage of justice had taken place, then he would be granted an appeal.

He wasn't...................................

Yeah 12 people with no background of law or anything along them lines, how many women was on the jury? How many of the jury think that football players are "overpaid dickheads" like a lot of people do?

Not for me these jurys, heard so many stories of them getting it wrong and for me they've done it again here.. I've seen a video of this girl walking into the hotel and she certainly wasnt walking like she was suffering from alcohol inflicted memory loss..

The defence called for an expert to analyse how much alcohol she would of had in her system at 4am (when it took place) and this was his verdict:
The expert called by the defence calculated that the complainant's likely blood-alcohol level
at about 4am would have approximated to something like 2½ times the legal driving limit. He
gave evidence that she would have suffered from slurred speech and unsteadiness of gait, but he
would not have expected any memory loss. It was an essential part of his expert evidence that
there were significant doubts about the claim made by the complainant that she had suffered a
memory loss. In effect, it was suggested that her assertion was false.

This can also be backed up by another doctor who found out the following:
She was examined by a doctor and various samples were taken. As a result of an
examination of the samples, at that stage, notwithstanding the direct evidence that she had had a
good deal to drink the evening before, no alcohol was detected. That may have been the
consequence of its elimination over the course of time. Expert evidence sought to reconstruct
the amount of alcohol she had consumed at an earlier stage. The doctor found no injuries to the
complainant. The tests also revealed traces of cocaine and cannabis. The evidence was
consistent with cocaine and cannabis having been ingested some days earlier.

The girl also got found out for bragging about what she was gonna spend her money on "when she wins big" not something u do if you've just been raped surely?

Lets be honest she wasn't going back to the hotel to drink coffee was she, she was going back there for one thing and one thing only, she got it and then see her big chance to "win big"

Quoted from Neilo83

Yeah 12 people with no background of law or anything along them lines, how many women was on the jury? How many of the jury think that football players are "overpaid dickheads" like a lot of people do?

Not for me these jurys, heard so many stories of them getting it wrong and for me they've done it again here.. I've seen a video of this girl walking into the hotel and she certainly wasnt walking like she was suffering from alcohol inflicted memory loss..

The defence called for an expert to analyse how much alcohol she would of had in her system at 4am (when it took place) and this was his verdict:
The expert called by the defence calculated that the complainant's likely blood-alcohol level
at about 4am would have approximated to something like 2½ times the legal driving limit. He
gave evidence that she would have suffered from slurred speech and unsteadiness of gait, but he
would not have expected any memory loss. It was an essential part of his expert evidence that
there were significant doubts about the claim made by the complainant that she had suffered a
memory loss. In effect, it was suggested that her assertion was false.

This can also be backed up by another doctor who found out the following:
She was examined by a doctor and various samples were taken. As a result of an
examination of the samples, at that stage, notwithstanding the direct evidence that she had had a
good deal to drink the evening before, no alcohol was detected. That may have been the
consequence of its elimination over the course of time. Expert evidence sought to reconstruct
the amount of alcohol she had consumed at an earlier stage. The doctor found no injuries to the
complainant. The tests also revealed traces of cocaine and cannabis. The evidence was
consistent with cocaine and cannabis having been ingested some days earlier.

The girl also got found out for bragging about what she was gonna spend her money on "when she wins big" not something u do if you've just been raped surely?

Lets be honest she wasn't going back to the hotel to drink coffee was she, she was going back there for one thing and one thing only, she got it and then see her big chance to "win big"

Not the point though is it?

He was found guilty by a jury which is the way our system works. It's not about what people think after the trial.

I've no doubt he had a very decent, expensive defence team and they failed to establish his innocence at a trial. I've done jury service and the accused in our case was clearly guilty but the prosecution failed to prove that beyond a shadow of a doubt and we had to find him not guilty. The judge instructed us that if we were not 100% sure he had committed the crime, then we had to acquit. The defence team did a good enough job to cast that doubt in our minds, so he walked. I guess that Evans defence team failed to do that adequately.

Everyone goes into court with the presumption of innocence and the prosecution have to prove beyond a doubt that they are guilty. The Evans prosecutors obviously did that.

Why - it's not like every conviction is correct?

Quoted from Neilo83

Yeah 12 people with no background of law or anything along them lines, how many women was on the jury? How many of the jury think that football players are "overpaid dickheads" like a lot of people do?

Not for me these jurys, heard so many stories of them getting it wrong and for me they've done it again here.. I've seen a video of this girl walking into the hotel and she certainly wasnt walking like she was suffering from alcohol inflicted memory loss..

The defence called for an expert to analyse how much alcohol she would of had in her system at 4am (when it took place) and this was his verdict:
The expert called by the defence calculated that the complainant's likely blood-alcohol level
at about 4am would have approximated to something like 2½ times the legal driving limit. He
gave evidence that she would have suffered from slurred speech and unsteadiness of gait, but he
would not have expected any memory loss. It was an essential part of his expert evidence that
there were significant doubts about the claim made by the complainant that she had suffered a
memory loss. In effect, it was suggested that her assertion was false.

This can also be backed up by another doctor who found out the following:
She was examined by a doctor and various samples were taken. As a result of an
examination of the samples, at that stage, notwithstanding the direct evidence that she had had a
good deal to drink the evening before, no alcohol was detected. That may have been the
consequence of its elimination over the course of time. Expert evidence sought to reconstruct
the amount of alcohol she had consumed at an earlier stage. The doctor found no injuries to the
complainant. The tests also revealed traces of cocaine and cannabis. The evidence was
consistent with cocaine and cannabis having been ingested some days earlier.

The girl also got found out for bragging about what she was gonna spend her money on "when she wins big" not something u do if you've just been raped surely?

Lets be honest she wasn't going back to the hotel to drink coffee was she, she was going back there for one thing and one thing only, she got it and then see her big chance to "win big"

Firstly, why would a jury need to have experience of the law? The whole point of a jury system is that the jurors listen to the evidence put before them and decide on it on its merit. If there are technical issues with the trial these will be identified by the judge-who has all the legal know how required-and the jury will be directed accordingly.
As for the composition of a jury, when the jurors are identified the defence team have the power to object to any individuals inclusion on that jury. Do you honestly think that a defence lawyer in such a high profile case would allow anybody to sit who might be against the defendant pre-evidence?
As I recall there were problems during the trial with Evans supporters taking to social media in support of their friend....

Quoted from Meza

I read this document that my mate showed me off Facebook.  After reading it i can see why so many people are doubting conviction so many gray areas and so many pieces of evidence that was just simply ignored for some reason.  

Jesus flipping christ. Do people realise how information is fabricated, manipulated and distributed to suit an agenda? The internet is a fantastic development and the ability to share information and opinions is incredible, but people need to treat things with the same amount of skepticism as some random bloke in a pub coming out with something. Anyone can make a professional looking document.

Also, a lot of people here seem to have read "evidence" taken or regurgitated from the Ched Evans site, a site financed by someone with a hugely vested interest. The most fundamental thing people should learn in history classes in secondary school is to analyse different sources: who is saying it, and what bias or perspective they might come from...

Nobody was at the court case. The court system is not perfect, but unless we want to start blanketly doubting every single conviction, I guess we have to trust it to an extent: covicted by a majority of a jury.