Ched Evans - why was he found guilty of rape?

[Deleted User] · 18/10/14 - 06:36

It goes without saying that rape is a most horrific crime, and offenders are the lowest of the low. But after reading up about the Ched Evans case, the question of whether he is guilty of rape seems like such a grey area.

The victim was apparently completely drunk at the time, and couldn't remember anything that happened. Plus Evans' friend Clayton MacDonald had sex with her moments before and wasn't found guilty, which I don't understand at all.

Their behaviour was pretty vile - preying on girls for the sole purpose of a one night stand. But was it rape?

This article gives a good factual account of what happened on the night in question: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2794715/predatory-soccer-stars-drunken-girl-seedy-night-premier-inn-richard-pendlebury-revisits-disturbing-events-led-rape-trial-ched-evans.html

CELT1987 · 18/10/14 - 06:44

Miss_Jones_982 wrote: »

It goes without saying that rape is a most horrific crime, and offenders are the lowest of the low. But after reading up about the Ched Evans case, the question of whether he is guilty of rape seems like such a grey area.

The victim was apparently completely drunk at the time, and couldn't remember anything that happened. Plus Evans' friend Clayton MacDonald had sex with her moments before and wasn't found guilty, which I don't understand at all.

Their behaviour was pretty vile - preying on girls for the sole purpose of a one night stand. But was it rape?

This article gives a good factual account of what happened on the night in question: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2794715/predatory-soccer-stars-drunken-girl-seedy-night-premier-inn-richard-pendlebury-revisits-disturbing-events-led-rape-trial-ched-evans.html

Evans shouldn't have been in the position of taking advantage of someone drunk. He also cheated on his girlfriend. No sympathy for him at all from me.

floyd3592 · 18/10/14 - 06:58

I'm sure that 12 people are invited to review conflicting stories of an incident and then decide if the person accused of unlawful or illegal behaviour did or din't carry out what was alleged.

somerset fox · 18/10/14 - 07:44

Simples. Sex requires consent, and in Law, a drunk person cannot be deemed to have given concert, due their drunken state, so it is classed as rape. The question being, would that person have consented if sober?

kampffenhoff · 18/10/14 - 07:51

I don't understand from reading this why McDonald wasn't found guilty as well.

Slarti Bartfast · 18/10/14 - 07:55

somerset fox wrote: »

Simples. Sex requires consent, and in Law, a drunk person cannot be deemed to have given concert, due their drunken state, so it is classed as rape. The question being, would that person have consented if sober?

That begs the question of why the other person wasn't also guilty of rape. It also begs the question, is every case of drunken sex rape?

reglip · 18/10/14 - 07:58

somerset fox wrote: »

Simples. Sex requires consent, and in Law, a drunk person cannot be deemed to have given concert, due their drunken state, so it is classed as rape. The question being, would that person have consented if sober?

Pretty sure you're wrong about that it is not at all as simple as that

Espresso · 18/10/14 - 08:04

somerset fox wrote: »

Simples. Sex requires consent, and in Law, a drunk person cannot be deemed to have given concert, due their drunken state, so it is classed as rape. The question being, would that person have consented if sober?

If it really was that simple, how did she get from sober enough to give consent to the first guy to too drunk to give consent to the second guy, in the intervening ten or fifteen minutes, I wonder.

Takae · 18/10/14 - 08:08

kampffenhoff wrote: »

I don't understand from reading this why McDonald wasn't found guilty as well.

She accompanied him to a hotel, which implies consent. Evans turned up after McDonald and the girl arrived in the hotel room.

In any case, why is there a new thread about this subject? What's wrong with the other two threads? This isn't the first time it happened either with so many duplicate threads this week. Is this a new form of attention-seeking or something?

Takae · 18/10/14 - 08:12

Espresso wrote: »

If it really was that simple, how did she get from sober enough to give consent to the first guy to too drunk to give consent to the second guy, in the intervening ten or fifteen minutes, I wonder.

At the most basic, there are witnesses to the girl and McDonald being together from a street to a hotel via a taxi. And there's no one but McDonald and Evans to witness the girl giving consent in the hotel room, even though both don't remember hearing her consenting. Both assumed she gave consent to one of them.

Hardstyler · 18/10/14 - 08:14

sexual consent - hmm I never ask my girlfriend if i can have sex with her we just do it.... is that rape as i dont have her signed confirmation?

I did ask once to which she replied "why are u asking"

even if u was to ask every time how do u prove in court u got a yes? its just ur word against a female?

Takae · 18/10/14 - 08:18

Hardstyler wrote: »

sexual consent - hmm I never ask my girlfriend if i can have sex with her we just do it.... is that rape as i dont have her signed confirmation?

I did ask once to which she replied "why are u asking"

even if u was to ask every time how do u prove in court u got a yes? its just ur word against a female?

Let's suppose this scenario - you're having fun with your girlfriend who's been drinking, and you call your friend to let him know you have a girl in your room. He turns up with a couple of pals. He proceeds to have sex with your girlfriend while his pals try to film him and your girlfriend having sex. Do you believe that by having sex with him, she's given consent? How would your girlfriend react when she finds out next day that she had sex with your friend?

Espresso · 18/10/14 - 08:23

Takae wrote: »

At the most basic, there are witnesses to the girl and McDonald being together from a street to a hotel via a taxi. And there's no one but McDonald and Evans to witness the girl giving consent to Evans in the hotel room, even though both don't remember hearing her consenting. Both assumed she gave consent to one of them.

That's fair enough.

Really though. I was just wondering why anyone repeats the simplistic idea that drunk = incapable of giving consent in a case like this where there are two men involved, when one has been judged to be a rapist and one has not.

It is certainly not as simple as sober vs drunk in a case where the woman in question was no more drunk or sober in the first case of sex than she was in the second instance of sex.

Hardstyler · 18/10/14 - 08:25

Takae wrote: »

Let's suppose this scenario - you're having fun with your girlfriend who's been drinking, and you call your friend to let him know you have a girl in your room. He turns up with a couple of pals. He proceeds to have sex with your girlfriend while his pals try to film him and your girlfriend having sex. Do you believe that by having sex with him, she's given consent? How would your girlfriend react when she finds out next day that she had sex with your friend?

my point is do people actually ask "can I have sex with you" ? as i dont.... have once to which my reply was why are u asking" lol even with my ex of 7 years I never asked if i could **** her nor non of the one nights I've had over the years - who actually asks a girl "can i have sex with you" so if u dont ask how do u get a consentual yes?

What name?? · 18/10/14 - 08:30

Espresso wrote: »

Really though. I was just wondering why anyone repeats the simplistic idea that drunk = incapable of giving consent in a case like this where there are two men involved, when one has been judged to be a rapist and one has not..

Because agreeing to have sex with one man doesnt give his pals the right to pile in.

Espresso · 18/10/14 - 08:32

What name?? wrote: »

Because agreeing to have sex with one man doesnt give his pals the right to pile in.

Who said it did?

kampffenhoff · 18/10/14 - 08:33

Espresso wrote: »

That's fair enough.

Really though. I was just wondering why anyone repeats the simplistic idea that drunk = incapable of giving consent in a case like this where there are two men involved, when one has been judged to be a rapist and one has not.

It is certainly not as simple as sober vs drunk in a case where the woman in question was no more drunk or sober in the first case of sex than she was in the second instance of sex.

So, she went when drunk to a room with a guy and they had sex, so, despite the fact that she was so drunk she couldn't remember the incident the next day, this is OK. However, when a second guy has sex with her in the same room just afterward this is rape becuase she was too drunk to give consent. That is just a bit strange. According to the case, she gave consent to the first sex but not to the second, otherwise both men would have been convicted of rape. She was filmed going with the first guy into the Hotel so that meant she gave consent to sex and therefore it wasn't rape. Er, not convinced of that myself.

Slarti Bartfast · 18/10/14 - 08:45

kampffenhoff wrote: »

So, she went when drunk to a room with a guy and they had sex, so, despite the fact that she was so drunk she couldn't remember the incident the next day, this is OK. However, when a second guy has sex with her in the same room just afterward this is rape becuase she was too drunk to give consent. That is just a bit strange. According to the case, she gave consent to the first sex but not to the second, otherwise both men would have been convicted of rape. She was filmed going with the first guy into the Hotel so that meant she gave consent to sex and therefore it wasn't rape. Er, not convinced of that myself.

Yeah that does seem to set a worrying precedent. If you went to a hotel with someone and they raped you they seem to have got a ready made defence.

soulboy77 · 18/10/14 - 08:47

His mate should of been found guilty as well. We often read that just because a girl agrees to go back home (or in this case a hotel) with a guy that alone doesn't mean she is consenting to sex. Yet the jury seem to of used this fact to find the first chap not guilty of rape, yet she was deemed too drunk without taking another drink to give consent to Ched. If she was drunk then then both bouts of sex were rape.

dee123 · 18/10/14 - 09:14

I still think "Chedwyn Evans" sounds like a character from Downton Abbey.

kampffenhoff · 18/10/14 - 09:17

soulboy77 wrote: »

His mate should of been found guilty as well. We often read that just because a girl agrees to go back home (or in this case a hotel) with a guy that alone doesn't mean she is consenting to sex. Yet the jury seem to of used this fact to find the first chap not guilty of rape, yet she was deemed too drunk without taking another drink to give consent to Ched. If she was drunk then then both bouts of sex were rape.

Yes. That's what I think, and they had evidence that she was very drunk before she even got into the Hotel room. Also Ched only went there because the innocent guy called him up and invited him. Presumably this made him guilty. It's all a bit odd. I think they were both guilty to the same extent.

cultureman · 18/10/14 - 09:27

somerset fox wrote: »

Simples. Sex requires consent, and in Law, a drunk person cannot be deemed to have given concert, due their drunken state, so it is classed as rape. The question being, would that person have consented if sober?

So that means that every woman that has ever 'pulled' a drunk man whom she fancies, is a rapist by that definition.

What name?? · 18/10/14 - 09:28

Espresso wrote: »

Who said it did?

Ched Evans - butty jury didn't agree

End-Em-All · 18/10/14 - 09:30

Slarti Bartfast wrote: »

Yeah that does seem to set a worrying precedent. If you went to a hotel with someone and they raped you they seem to have got a ready made defence.

This recent case mirrors the Evans/McDonald case in some respects:

A businessman accused of raping a drunken woman at a five-star hotel today has been acquitted after his lawyer claimed the woman got herself 'into a silly position'.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2797692/company-boss-accused-raping-woman-five-star-hotel-drunken-night-acquitted-lawyer-says-got-silly-position.html

The one whom the woman followed to the hotel room was acquitted of rape but another person was convicted of attempted rape.

What name?? · 18/10/14 - 09:31

kampffenhoff wrote: »

Yes. That's what I think, and they had evidence that she was very drunk before she even got into the Hotel room. Also Ched only went there because the innocent guy called him up and invited him. Presumably this made him guilty. It's all a bit odd. I think they were both guilty to the same extent.

I think they should have prosecuted the two videoing events too.

End-Em-All · 18/10/14 - 09:33

soulboy77 wrote: »

His mate should of been found guilty as well. We often read that just because a girl agrees to go back home (or in this case a hotel) with a guy that alone doesn't mean she is consenting to sex. Yet the jury seem to of used this fact to find the first chap not guilty of rape, yet she was deemed too drunk without taking another drink to give consent to Ched. If she was drunk then then both bouts of sex were rape.

Another jury reached a similar decision in this case:

A businessman accused of raping a drunken woman at a five-star hotel today has been acquitted after his lawyer claimed the woman got herself 'into a silly position'.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2797692/company-boss-accused-raping-woman-five-star-hotel-drunken-night-acquitted-lawyer-says-got-silly-position.html

Hey there!

Quick Links

Ched Evans - why was he found guilty of rape?

Comments