If he had served the entire 5yr sentence, then I may have had a different opinion, but seeing as out lenient joke of a justice system gave him early release, then he shouldn't be able to play until after after the original sentencing time has passed. Letting him back onto the pitch this early is just an insult to his victim.
He should be able to continue his job as a footballer if he wants too. I would imagine their could be a bit of abuse thrown his way and personally I don't think I would want to put myself back into the public after that conviction but good luck to him.
I agree with others, if Ched Evans was a plumber we wouldn't be discussing it. I don't see it as an insult to his victim either.
If he had served the entire 5yr sentence, then I may have had a different opinion, but seeing as out lenient joke of a justice system gave him early release, then he shouldn't be able to play until after after the original sentencing time has passed. Letting him back onto the pitch this early is just an insult to his victim.
The early release for good behaviour is already factored into the sentence. You don't think judges aren't aware of this?
As for the OP, he should be allowed to resume playing but the way that 5live have been ramping this up no club will employ him for PR reasons.
Had he been more talented, say Gareth Bale level, clubs would be all over him trying to get his signature.
Why is it a difficult 1? If it was Joe public who worked in a shop before conviction would anyone be saying he shouldn't be allowed to work in a shop again? Think its just jealousy towards the supposed millionaire lifestyle that all footballers supposedly lead.
As for his conviction in the first place I'm unsure if the details but have heard of plenty of footballers targeted with rape claims from gold digging women.
Perhaps you need reminding that he was found guilty by a jury,
Perhaps you need reminding that he was found guilty by a jury,
And in an almost identical case footballer David Goodwillie didnt even go to trial amid outrage by womens rights groups who were screaming for blood after he and teamate allegedly spitroasted some dame who later cried rape with the "mustve had my drink spiked" nonsense.
Numerous footballers have been victims to this, young star struck women willingly goes back to hotel in middle of the night. Agrees to 3 in a bed romp. realises in the morning she isnt going to be Hello magazines latest WAG so its on to the cops crying rape.
Chad evans going back to work isnt whats disrespectful, the disrespect istowards genuine rape victims
He could no longer be regarded as a role model, and many employed would be sacked so why shouldn't he
He was sacked. A plumber wouldn't be sacked and then told they would never be allowed to work as a plumber again, somebody who worked in a shop wouldn't be sacked and then told they could never work in a shop again.
The only jobs where a conviction should come into play are jobs that require Disclosure and Barring checks (formerly CRB checks) and as far as I'm aware a footballer isn't one of those.
Why is it a difficult 1? If it was Joe public who worked in a shop before conviction would anyone be saying he shouldn't be allowed to work in a shop again?
We've had discussions about this on the Football Forum. It's a strange case, not as clear cut as some people may think. If it was a straightforward rape case, I'd say he should never play again. But I'm far from convinced of his guilt after reading the evidence.
He was found guilty in a court of law. Unless you have read the entire court transcripts, which you haven't , then you can't possibly comment.
He was found guilty in a court of law. Unless you have read the entire court transcripts, which you haven't , then you can't possibly comment.
I think you'll find that people can and do comment. There seems to be this dogmatic approach to jury verdicts in that they must be infallible and therefore nobody must question them.
Personally I wouldn't want my club to employ him. He's a dirty scumbag, sure he should be allowed to work again but to be allowed to resume his multi millionaire lifestyle after assaulting and possibly ruining a woman's life? Nope
He played for Sheffield United, a club in the third tier of English football, multi-millionaire lifestyle , pull the other one.
I think you'll find that people can and do comment. There seems to be this dogmatic approach to jury verdicts in that they must be infallible and therefore nobody must question them.
You can comment if you want. But commenting on it unless you heard exactly what the jury heard is a bit ridiculous. How can you possibly say they got it wrong when you don't know what they heard?
If she too drunk / couldn't remember any of this encounter, how come she was considered to have given consent to one guy and not the other?
Because she agreed to go back with the first guy, so it was seen that he had a reasonable cause to presume consent. She couldn't prove that she hadn't.
Evans had no such excuse. He turned up later, when she was completely out of it, after his mate texted him to say that he'd pulled.
You can comment if you want. But commenting on it unless you heard exactly what the jury heard is a bit ridiculous. How can you possibly say they got it wrong when you don't know what they heard?
It doesn't what the jury heard, the sentencing report details the facts of the case as presented, and therefore based on that, I can comment, whether you consider that ridiculous or not.
And in an almost identical case footballer David Goodwillie didnt even go to trial amid outrage by womens rights groups who were screaming for blood after he and teamate allegedly spitroasted some dame who later cried rape with the "mustve had my drink spiked" nonsense.
Numerous footballers have been victims to this, young star struck women willingly goes back to hotel in middle of the night. Agrees to 3 in a bed romp. realises in the morning she isnt going to be Hello magazines latest WAG so its on to the cops crying rape.
Chad evans going back to work isnt whats disrespectful, the disrespect istowards genuine rape victims
Going to bed with someone and finding later that his mates have turned up too - one joining in and two filming - sounds very suspect to me. As does leaving by the fire exit while friend leaves by the front door.
However, that's not the point of the thread. No club can possibly damage its image by taking him on, I would hlpe.
Because she agreed to go back with the first guy, so it was seen that he had a reasonable cause to presume consent. She couldn't prove that she hadn't.
Evans had no such excuse. He turned up later, when she was completely out of it, after his mate texted him to say that he'd pulled.
She couldn't prove that she hadn't when Evans turned up either, because she said in equal measure "I don't remember" (She said she didn't remember going back to the hotel let's not forget) It was offered to the court that a lack of memory later does not equal not consenting at the time.
It doesn't what the jury heard, the sentencing report details the facts of the case as presented, and therefore based on that, I can comment, whether you consider that ridiculous or not.
Does it detail the directions the judge gave the jury on the law as it stands? Does it contain all the information only heard by the jury and not publicly available?
Comments
If a PRIVATE business wishes to employ this man, be it on them the consequences fall. But it is their choice.
I agree with others, if Ched Evans was a plumber we wouldn't be discussing it. I don't see it as an insult to his victim either.
The early release for good behaviour is already factored into the sentence. You don't think judges aren't aware of this?
As for the OP, he should be allowed to resume playing but the way that 5live have been ramping this up no club will employ him for PR reasons.
Had he been more talented, say Gareth Bale level, clubs would be all over him trying to get his signature.
Perhaps you need reminding that he was found guilty by a jury,
He was sacked.
And in an almost identical case footballer David Goodwillie didnt even go to trial amid outrage by womens rights groups who were screaming for blood after he and teamate allegedly spitroasted some dame who later cried rape with the "mustve had my drink spiked" nonsense.
Numerous footballers have been victims to this, young star struck women willingly goes back to hotel in middle of the night. Agrees to 3 in a bed romp. realises in the morning she isnt going to be Hello magazines latest WAG so its on to the cops crying rape.
Chad evans going back to work isnt whats disrespectful, the disrespect istowards genuine rape victims
He was sacked. A plumber wouldn't be sacked and then told they would never be allowed to work as a plumber again, somebody who worked in a shop wouldn't be sacked and then told they could never work in a shop again.
The only jobs where a conviction should come into play are jobs that require Disclosure and Barring checks (formerly CRB checks) and as far as I'm aware a footballer isn't one of those.
I'm sure plenty of people would.
He was found guilty in a court of law. Unless you have read the entire court transcripts, which you haven't , then you can't possibly comment.
Yes it has. He was convicted and despite having a wealth of lawyers at his disposal hasn't even managed to find grounds to appeal 5 years later.
True I suppose. Mind you, plenty of people are stupid
I think you'll find that people can and do comment. There seems to be this dogmatic approach to jury verdicts in that they must be infallible and therefore nobody must question them.
He played for Sheffield United, a club in the third tier of English football, multi-millionaire lifestyle
He was only convicted in 2012, and I believe that his defence are preparing to submit fresh evidence which they hope is grounds for an appeal.
You can comment if you want. But commenting on it unless you heard exactly what the jury heard is a bit ridiculous. How can you possibly say they got it wrong when you don't know what they heard?
Because she agreed to go back with the first guy, so it was seen that he had a reasonable cause to presume consent. She couldn't prove that she hadn't.
Evans had no such excuse. He turned up later, when she was completely out of it, after his mate texted him to say that he'd pulled.
It doesn't what the jury heard, the sentencing report details the facts of the case as presented, and therefore based on that, I can comment, whether you consider that ridiculous or not.
Going to bed with someone and finding later that his mates have turned up too - one joining in and two filming - sounds very suspect to me. As does leaving by the fire exit while friend leaves by the front door.
However, that's not the point of the thread. No club can possibly damage its image by taking him on, I would hlpe.
She couldn't prove that she hadn't when Evans turned up either, because she said in equal measure "I don't remember" (She said she didn't remember going back to the hotel let's not forget) It was offered to the court that a lack of memory later does not equal not consenting at the time.
Does it detail the directions the judge gave the jury on the law as it stands? Does it contain all the information only heard by the jury and not publicly available?
Didn't think so.