[dim view]

moondog, on 23 June 2016 - 09:01 AM, said:

McDonald's story

http://www.birmingha...-speaks-6788373

Also take a look at the CPS statement after his conviction, very happy to have secured such a high profile conviction


http://www.cps.gov.u...rape/index.html

I think the judge knew there was no case against McDonald, so he 'helped' with the prosecution of Evans.

So, thinking on....take McDonald out of the equation. Let's say he had gone for a pee. Evans is perfectly entitled to walk into his bedroom but he finds a stranger in his bed. Now the prosecution have to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that he raped her. There's no evidence unless the woman is unconscious or can't remember, so the judge says more drugs/alcohol could have been used to place her in that state.

Leave McDonald in the equation and there is an additional scenario - not only that drugs could have been used, but also that there could have been collusion between McDonald and Evans in which they COULD have planned the whole thing and that the woman COULD have been so terrified for her life when a third person, a stranger, entered the room that she agreed to sex.

So then the jury think 'bludddy hell, the scenarios are adding up and 1 of them might be right. Guilty'.

If the cases had been handled separately, McDonald's acquittal would have quashed the extra drug/alcohol theory of the judge.

Worr a mess. The interesting bit is that it is very difficult for Evans's lawyers to prove that my second scenario didn't happen, which is perhaps why the case hasn't been dropped by the CPS. There is no evidence that she was terrified, but it's easy to put up a powerful argument that she could have been.

[Tha Knows...]

His punishment possibly includes not being part of the Wales squad having a party at the Euros

[Misnomer]

Spire-Power, on 23 June 2016 - 09:53 AM, said:

His punishment possibly includes not being part of the Wales squad having a party at the Euros

Can you imagine how much he'd be spending on hotel rooms and rohypnols!

[moondog]

dim view, on 23 June 2016 - 09:41 AM, said:

I think the judge knew there was no case against McDonald, so he 'helped' with the prosecution of Evans.

So, thinking on....take McDonald out of the equation. Let's say he had gone for a pee. Evans is perfectly entitled to walk into his bedroom but he finds a stranger in his bed. Now the prosecution have to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that he raped her. There's no evidence unless the woman is unconscious or can't remember, so the judge says more drugs/alcohol could have been used to place her in that state.

Leave McDonald in the equation and there is an additional scenario - not only that drugs could have been used, but also that there could have been collusion between McDonald and Evans in which they COULD have planned the whole thing and that the woman COULD have been so terrified for her life when a third person, a stranger, entered the room that she agreed to sex.

So then the jury think 'bludddy hell, the scenarios are adding up and 1 of them might be right. Guilty'.

If the cases had been handled separately, McDonald's acquittal would have quashed the extra drug/alcohol theory of the judge.

Worr a mess. The interesting bit is that it is very difficult for Evans's lawyers to prove that my second scenario didn't happen, which is perhaps why the case hasn't been dropped by the CPS. There is no evidence that she was terrified, but it's easy to put up a powerful argument that she could have been.

Apart from a legacy of small traces cocaine & cannabis in her system from well before the day of the event, drugs played no part. It was down to how pissed she was, she said she didn't drink more than she normally would on such a night out and a drink must have been spiked, this was inconsistent with her blood alcohol reading of 2.5 times the drink drive limit, there was no evidence of alcohol in the room instead her and McDonald got straight down to it.

I still don't see how a terrified person could possibly have no memory at all of such an ordeal.

[moondog]

Misnomer, on 23 June 2016 - 09:38 AM, said:

I don't interpret it like that at all; it is very matter of fact rather than 'happy'...

As for the MacDonald piece, what's his dad, Rod, got to do with it....'who also played for Walsall'...yeah, and? You can feel the writers stance. It's this kind of opportunity where he could have said something like: I've learned from this experience, I had no idea who she was, it was 4am and she'd clearly had too many; it would have been better to put her in a taxi and send her home rather than take her to my hotel, (which me and Ched had purposely booked for this particular eventuality and which I had no intention of staying in whatsoever) for a shag and text Ched to specifically inform him I'd got a 'girl' for us to use like a piece of meat. I now have more respect for women and my moral behaviour has vastly improved.

Well they've not reported the conviction being quashed, which is a matter of fact


http://www.cps.gov.u...news_and_views/

[dim view]

moondog, on 23 June 2016 - 10:13 AM, said:

Apart from a legacy of small traces cocaine & cannabis in her system from well before the day of the event, drugs played no part. It was down to how drunk she was, she said she didn't drink more than she normally would on such a night out and a drink must have been spiked, this was inconsistent with her blood alcohol reading of 2.5 times the drink drive limit, there was no evidence of alcohol in the room instead her and McDonald got straight down to it.

I still don't see how a terrified person could possibly have no memory at all of such an ordeal.

I agree, but one of the appeals was definitely based on the Judge's unprofessional comments about the possibility of more drink being consumed in the room.


What do you think swayed the jury?

[clarevoyant.]

NovakWasASpireite, on 20 June 2016 - 01:45 PM, said:

Whos ready for the "EVANS IS A RAPIST NANANANANA" chants?

Well Notts County fans (yes there are a few)tried giving me grief at work but a quick mention of Lee Hughes had them crawling back under their administration stone

[dim view]

clarevoyant., on 23 June 2016 - 10:36 AM, said:

Well Notts County fans (yes there are a few)tried giving me grief at work but a quick mention of Lee Hughes had them crawling back under their administration stone

If Evans is cleared, it raises the interesting question of whether clubs will have to issue warnings to their fans about the danger of the club or individuals being prosecuted for slander. What a great way for CT to raise money.

[moondog]

dim view, on 23 June 2016 - 10:34 AM, said:

I agree, but one of the appeals was definitely based on the Judge's unprofessional comments about the possibility of more drink being consumed in the room.


What do you think swayed the jury?

I share the view it appears they were swayed by the judge.

Interesting that he surprisingly suddenly retired in June 2014 with no comment, not long after Evans application to the CCRC

http://www.thefreeli...nt.-a0366070154

[Cheshunt Spireite]

My interpretation of the transcript is that it all could hinge on the status of consent when drunk/ under the influence of drugs. It's pointed out that she may have given consent due to her state at the time that she might not otherwise have given. This is seemingly a grey area of law; assaulting someone while drunk is still assault as you're deemed responsible for your own actions, but when the victim is inebriated other factors come into play such as was she given stronger drinks to get her into a state where she wouldn't be able to make reasoned decisions.

The medical tests done after the act only offer so much evidence, as they can't account for her tolerance or metabolism.

There's also a difference in interpretation of right and wrong. Evans believes he did nothing wrong and several members of this board agree with him, but his lack of knowledge of sexual offence and consent law means that he genuinely doesn't understand what he did was wrong. An example (though not remotely comparable) is jaywalking; in this country you can walk across the road where you want without breaking the law, but in other countries you would be charged with an offence. Not knowing/ understanding that law doesn't give protection to you breaking it.

His actions before the incident weren't illegal but do show a man with very poor morals and respect for other people. Running out of the window when he had been given an entry key by a porter suggests he knows he'd done something wrong, but again nothing illegal. He's apologised for the effects of the event but not the event itself, which is further evidence that he's not a particularly nice person. Also even if you're a footballer the idea of going out with the intention of cheating on your girlfriend is an unbelievably disgraceful act and there's no defence for it.

My belief is that he was correctly convicted, but can see him getting off on a technicality based on the ability to give consent when drunk. It will be interesting to hear more of his state at the time comes out- I've seen nothing to suggest he was drunk, and if he wasn't you can expect his conviction to stand as it will be deemed taking advantage.

I'm a big fan of giving people second chances. I've worked with released prisoners and know that many do genuinely feel remorse and want to be better people. That said Evans hasn't been remorseful so he's learnt nothing. If he were to come out and say "I maintain my innocence of rape, but what I did was a truly horrendous thing, I carry the guilt of what happened to that girl everyday and I am going to do everything in my power to make sure I'm not that person again" then there's no issue with him joining. Until he does I will oppose it on moral grounds. Not boycotting but certainly won't cheer for him.

In footballing terms I'm mixed. Hasn't played or trained with a squad of any sort for 4yrs. Physical fitness is easy, match sharpness is an entirely different thing. A player out for 6 months can take weeks to get back to form. However he's said to be on a cheap deal so could be worth a shot. Sponsors haven't as yet been leaving in droves but if that starts to happen might be worth cancelling the contract.

[Bankrobber]

Phil V 72, on 22 June 2016 - 07:32 PM, said:

It's just brilliant ain't it? In-fighting and divisions after just 48 hrs - people choosing sides, calling that girl horrible names. All brought on wilfully by those running the club.

Exactly the reason why i'm considering withdrawing my own support. The atmosphere around the club now stinks to high heaven. Thanks a lot Dave, Ashley & Chris.

[dim view]

Cheshunt Spireite, on 23 June 2016 - 12:18 PM, said:

My interpretation of the transcript is that it all could hinge on the status of consent when drunk/ under the influence of drugs. It's pointed out that she may have given consent due to her state at the time that she might not otherwise have given. This is seemingly a grey area of law; assaulting someone while drunk is still assault as you're deemed responsible for your own actions, but when the victim is inebriated other factors come into play such as was she given stronger drinks to get her into a state where she wouldn't be able to make reasoned decisions.

but surely the fate of both defendants would be the same, if that were the case ?

[calvin plummers socks]

shaun1866, on 23 June 2016 - 09:06 AM, said:

FYI my interrogation lasted 23 hours the last time I did it, my hamstrings held up well

no point fighting something that you have no chance of winning

What have your hamstrings got to do with anything?

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

dtp, on 23 June 2016 - 08:17 AM, said:

Which folk have claimed players were sold against DA's wishes, Chris?

I've heard all sorts of reasons as to why players were sold - but not that one!

Regarding Evans - I have heard that DW has kept in contact with him, even visited him in prison, and wanted to give him a second chance.

When he had served his sentence I was against signing him but, now, I have mellowed. There is a reason the ruling in his case was quashed. There are reasons why his fiancé and her father have stood by him. He has served his sentence (rightly or wrongly) and if he wasn't a high profile footballer that is the last we would have heard of it. I really hope he does well with this second chance.

My point was and is that Dave Allen is an extremely strong minded individual who does nothing unless he chooses to and to Hell with anyone who disagrees.

The same Dave Allen who repeatedly stated an intent to sell players to recoup his loans.

As for Evans, IF he can ignore the media circus that'll no doubt surround him, IF he can overcome any protests that might appear, IF he can rediscover some kind of form after four years out the game, IF he can remain fully focussed during his re-trial, IF he's then found not guilty, IF he can dispel the image held by many of a selfish and arrogant young man abusing his position, and of course IF he can score enough goals to off-set the loss of supporters and sponsors (is the removal of the HTM signs a result of this deal or have they pulled out for other reasons?) then maybe this might prove a worthwhile signing.

But that's a great many ifs, and IF any of them don't stack up the arrival of a Welshman with a questionable record could prove disastrous for the second successive season.

This post has been edited by MDCCCLXVI: 23 June 2016 - 02:08 PM

[dtp]

MDCCCLXVI, on 23 June 2016 - 02:03 PM, said:

My point was and is that Dave Allen is an extremely strong minded individual who does nothing unless he chooses to and to Hell with anyone who disagrees.

The same Dave Allen who repeatedly stated an intent to sell players to recoup his loans.

As for Evans, IF he can ignore the media circus that'll no doubt surround him, IF he can overcome any protests that might appear, IF he can rediscover some kind of form after four years out the game, IF he can remain fully focussed during his re-trial, IF he's then found not guilty, IF he can dispel the image held by many of a selfish and arrogant young man abusing his position, and of course IF he can score enough goals to off-set the loss of supporters and sponsors (is the removal of the HTM signs a result of this deal or have they pulled out for other reasons?) then maybe this might prove a worthwhile signing.

But that's a great many ifs, and IF any of them don't stack up the arrival of a Welshman with a questionable record could prove disastrous for the second successive season.

Fair comment Chris, but you did originally say words to the effect that "yet folk still claim players were sold against DA's wishes".

I took that to mean what you said!

Regarding the Evans situation people will have their own opinions but from a legal point of view it might be best that they are very careful in what they actually say.

[moondog]

Been running 10k a day for the last month according to the sun


https://www.thesun.c...eld-fc-signing/

[calvin plummers socks]

moondog, on 23 June 2016 - 05:08 PM, said:

Been running 10k a day for the last month according to the sun


https://www.thesun.c...eld-fc-signing/

If he's doing 10k runs dailythat's a terrible way to train for a return to football.
Doubt he is doing that if he is that's bad advice!

[azul]

Bankrobber, on 23 June 2016 - 12:29 PM, said:

Exactly the reason why i'm considering withdrawing my own support. The atmosphere around the club now stinks to high heaven. Thanks a lot Dave, Ashley & Chris.

It will be worse when he trial starts

One nightmare scenario is that he is found guilty again, but as he has served much of his sentence he may get off with a very short or suspended or no sentence.

I wouldn't be surprised on little bit if DA has factored that in. That will be a totally new argument although clear cut

[Westbars Spireite]

azul, on 23 June 2016 - 06:17 PM, said:

It will be worse when he trial starts

One nightmare scenario is that he is found guilty again, but as he has served much of his sentence he may get off with a very short or suspended or no sentence.

I wouldn't be surprised on little bit if DA has factored that in. That will be a totally new argument although clear cut

If he's cleared, as the club fully expect, they will feel completely vindicated in the decision to sign him.

You can't really argue with it either. How dare they sign an innocent man?

[Cheshunt Spireite]

dim view, on 23 June 2016 - 12:30 PM, said:

but surely the fate of both defendants would be the same, if that were the case ?

It's a fair comment, and my guess would be that the CCTV and number of consistent witness stories suggests that there was consent viewed by others. There's no CCTV of Evans and no direct witnesses, only a porter outside the room.