| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! 11:12 - Jan 8 with 26050 views | ApeShit |
According to SSN. |  | | |  |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 17:42 - Jan 9 with 1498 views | SkewenJack |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 17:38 - Jan 9 by reddythered |
Dear god.
So nobody has ever been proven guilty of any crime whatsoever based upon that logic.
Let's have no prisons, no prisoners just a Mad Max-esque wasteland because nobody can ever be proven of anything to the satisfaction of some. |
Not at all, thus is the importance of evidence.
If the evidence presented is that in a drunken state, one an said he aske but the other said he asked, but both agree consent was given, were as she cant remember either way.... then I assure you this would not be given as a guilty verdict by every jury, maybe not even half. |  | | |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 17:43 - Jan 9 with 1506 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 17:35 - Jan 9 by controversial_jack |
This is as unsafe a conviction as you will see anywhere! It happened to a friend of mine, one persons word against another and then the obligatory 5 year sentence was handed out. It was quashed on appeal, not until he had lost everything. Be under no illusion British courts are convicting people without any evidence whatsoever. There is little to choose between our justice system and that of any third world country |
well if it happened to a friend of yours and he was subsequently found to be innocent then that's dreadful and I hope that he received compensation (not that it could be adequate).
But that doesn't mean that every case is unsafe - they have already appealed on 4 issues, all of which have been turned down, so you see, it's not the same thing at all is it?
And given that the overall rape conviction rate is 7% (or so it is said) then it follows that they really aren't convicting people without any evidence. | | | |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 17:45 - Jan 9 with 1485 views | SkewenJack |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 17:38 - Jan 9 by perchrockjack |
Its unsafe ion your eyes.
Ive seen fellas walk free from court after being pulled from the burning wreck they has stolen and crashed.
Denied being in it and walked free so it works both ways..
Its weird that on our site Evans has so much support |
So what you have said there is you have seen jurys get it wrong often.
surely then you can understand why people would like to see the evidence themselves and not take the decision as proving the fact either way? | | | |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 17:49 - Jan 9 with 1487 views | reddythered |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 17:42 - Jan 9 by SkewenJack |
Not at all, thus is the importance of evidence.
If the evidence presented is that in a drunken state, one an said he aske but the other said he asked, but both agree consent was given, were as she cant remember either way.... then I assure you this would not be given as a guilty verdict by every jury, maybe not even half. |
Your point was that a case is only proven to the satisfaction of a jury, not proven absolutely.
Ergo you cannot prove any court case; that's the logical conclusion of your point.
Much like Parlay, you are focusing purely upon one point in total isolation as if that proves/disproves the case. It doesn't one iota, something Parlay failed to grasp since he didn't read the f***ing transcripts.
The one point, in combination with Ched's actions that night, established guilt to the satisfaction of a jury. It was proven to the standards of the legal system in this country.
Yet others seem to want a higher burden of proof. | |
| |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 17:53 - Jan 9 with 1483 views | monmouth |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 17:42 - Jan 9 by SkewenJack |
Not at all, thus is the importance of evidence.
If the evidence presented is that in a drunken state, one an said he aske but the other said he asked, but both agree consent was given, were as she cant remember either way.... then I assure you this would not be given as a guilty verdict by every jury, maybe not even half. |
1.You do understand that Evans was an uninvited third party, yes?
2.You do understand that the Jury considered all of the evidence that you haven't seen, yes?
3.You do understand that one party was found not guilty and one party was found guilty thus proving that the jury were quite capable of discriminating between the two, yes?
4.You do understand that your uninformed opinion is worth nothing, yes?
5.You do understand that that's what juries are for, yes?
6.You do realise that given the profile of this case if there is any doubt he will be granted appeal even though so far he has been turned down on numerous occasions, yes?
Still, it's your opinion that counts more? |  |
| |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 17:53 - Jan 9 with 1474 views | SkewenJack |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 17:49 - Jan 9 by reddythered |
Your point was that a case is only proven to the satisfaction of a jury, not proven absolutely.
Ergo you cannot prove any court case; that's the logical conclusion of your point.
Much like Parlay, you are focusing purely upon one point in total isolation as if that proves/disproves the case. It doesn't one iota, something Parlay failed to grasp since he didn't read the f***ing transcripts.
The one point, in combination with Ched's actions that night, established guilt to the satisfaction of a jury. It was proven to the standards of the legal system in this country.
Yet others seem to want a higher burden of proof. |
And it is a point I still stand by.
Perchrockjack has just proven that. did you read his testimony?
You keep saying Cheds actions, but im failing to see any actions which sates he raped someone. | | | |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 17:58 - Jan 9 with 1469 views | reddythered |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 17:53 - Jan 9 by SkewenJack |
And it is a point I still stand by.
Perchrockjack has just proven that. did you read his testimony?
You keep saying Cheds actions, but im failing to see any actions which sates he raped someone. |
Yes, I have read it. Parlay didn't.
I think it's fairly obvious you fail to see any actions. Maybe a trip to SpecSavers may help? | |
| |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 17:59 - Jan 9 with 1468 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 17:53 - Jan 9 by SkewenJack |
And it is a point I still stand by.
Perchrockjack has just proven that. did you read his testimony?
You keep saying Cheds actions, but im failing to see any actions which sates he raped someone. |
he had sex (by his own admission) with someone that the jury decided was not capable of giving consent.
That is rape.
You may not like it, but that is the law. And that's why he has been in prison and is still serving his sentence.
The problem with this thread is not that people genuinely believe that he is innocent under the law, it's that they don't understand the law or if they do understand it they don't agree with it. Well tough luck. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 17:59 - Jan 9 with 1461 views | controversial_jack |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 17:43 - Jan 9 by londonlisa2001 |
well if it happened to a friend of yours and he was subsequently found to be innocent then that's dreadful and I hope that he received compensation (not that it could be adequate).
But that doesn't mean that every case is unsafe - they have already appealed on 4 issues, all of which have been turned down, so you see, it's not the same thing at all is it?
And given that the overall rape conviction rate is 7% (or so it is said) then it follows that they really aren't convicting people without any evidence. |
No he didn't get compo. Cost his parents over 100 k.Lisa, you have hit upon the real issue here.There is a low conviction rate for these offences , so there is an agenda to improve them, hence dodgy decisions like this | | | |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 18:01 - Jan 9 with 1445 views | SkewenJack |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 17:53 - Jan 9 by monmouth |
1.You do understand that Evans was an uninvited third party, yes?
2.You do understand that the Jury considered all of the evidence that you haven't seen, yes?
3.You do understand that one party was found not guilty and one party was found guilty thus proving that the jury were quite capable of discriminating between the two, yes?
4.You do understand that your uninformed opinion is worth nothing, yes?
5.You do understand that that's what juries are for, yes?
6.You do realise that given the profile of this case if there is any doubt he will be granted appeal even though so far he has been turned down on numerous occasions, yes?
Still, it's your opinion that counts more? |
1. uninvited to what? the room? he paid for it didn't he? but maybe.
uninvited to the sexual intercourse? not one person there has suggested this.
2. No, evidence has been withheld from the transcripts?
3. Absolutely.
4. No, eveybodies opinion is worthy, otherwise what is the point in posting that even?
5. Yes. I also understand juries come to the wrong decision many times as shown on this thread alone.
6. No. on an appeal evidence must be given of innocence, in a case where seemingly there is no evidence either way, the appeal is a lot more difficult than the original trial.
ive not said my opinion counts more than anything. are you ok? | | | |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 18:02 - Jan 9 with 1453 views | Musical_Swan |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 17:53 - Jan 9 by SkewenJack |
And it is a point I still stand by.
Perchrockjack has just proven that. did you read his testimony?
You keep saying Cheds actions, but im failing to see any actions which sates he raped someone. |
Fuk me mate, no one takes notice of Perchie! 
 |  |
| |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 18:04 - Jan 9 with 1445 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 17:59 - Jan 9 by controversial_jack |
No he didn't get compo. Cost his parents over 100 k.Lisa, you have hit upon the real issue here.There is a low conviction rate for these offences , so there is an agenda to improve them, hence dodgy decisions like this |
well that's terrible.
But this would be the last case in the world that the police would choose to improve conviction rates.
Although given that this has ben mentioned before, let me tell you why exactly they wouldn't choose this one.
Because she didn't accuse the men of rape! And therefore, if the police hadn't taken action after hearing the testimony of the two men involved (who effectively implicated themselves) then it wouldn't have shown up as a rape without conviction because it would have never shown up in the figures as a rape in the first place. | | | |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 18:38 - Jan 9 with 1415 views | controversial_jack |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 18:04 - Jan 9 by londonlisa2001 |
well that's terrible.
But this would be the last case in the world that the police would choose to improve conviction rates.
Although given that this has ben mentioned before, let me tell you why exactly they wouldn't choose this one.
Because she didn't accuse the men of rape! And therefore, if the police hadn't taken action after hearing the testimony of the two men involved (who effectively implicated themselves) then it wouldn't have shown up as a rape without conviction because it would have never shown up in the figures as a rape in the first place. |
They didn't implicate themselves. They have always maintained they had consent, although a more streetwise would have given a no comment reply to the interview | | | |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 18:50 - Jan 9 with 1404 views | trampie |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 17:20 - Jan 9 by reddythered |
In your opinion.
Because if it was CLEARLY not proven then he would have been found not guilty or had his appeal upheld. |
The Darvell Bros, the Cardiff newsagents three, the Gurnos three, there was a well known case involving somebody from Wales who was innocent and they made a film about the killer called 10 Rillington Place.
Other well known miscarriages that spring to mind without searching is Barry George wrongly done for the Jill Dando murder and of course the Guilford four and Birmingham six.
Don't hide behind the jury found him guilty therefore he is guilty, he is convicted but guilty who knows ?, particularly as it seems that the evidence to convict was weak and very few win their appeals. |  |
| |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 19:00 - Jan 9 with 1400 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 18:38 - Jan 9 by controversial_jack |
They didn't implicate themselves. They have always maintained they had consent, although a more streetwise would have given a no comment reply to the interview |
yes they did because they described a situation where the girl was found to be incapable of giving consent. I have posted a very long reply on the other thread so won't repeat it here. | | | |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 19:36 - Jan 9 with 1372 views | trampie |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 19:00 - Jan 9 by londonlisa2001 |
yes they did because they described a situation where the girl was found to be incapable of giving consent. I have posted a very long reply on the other thread so won't repeat it here. |
They you say, they !!!
Only one of them was convicted Lisa. | |
| |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 19:47 - Jan 9 with 1365 views | blueytheblue |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 18:50 - Jan 9 by trampie |
The Darvell Bros, the Cardiff newsagents three, the Gurnos three, there was a well known case involving somebody from Wales who was innocent and they made a film about the killer called 10 Rillington Place.
Other well known miscarriages that spring to mind without searching is Barry George wrongly done for the Jill Dando murder and of course the Guilford four and Birmingham six.
Don't hide behind the jury found him guilty therefore he is guilty, he is convicted but guilty who knows ?, particularly as it seems that the evidence to convict was weak and very few win their appeals. |
So therefore nobody can truly be guilty by that logic. | |
| |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 19:51 - Jan 9 with 1349 views | trampie |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 19:47 - Jan 9 by blueytheblue |
So therefore nobody can truly be guilty by that logic. |
Of course loads of convictions are nailed on safe and the guilty are well and truly guilty, but not all convicts are safe convicts, some people have been found guilty only to be proved to be innocent at a later date. [Post edited 9 Jan 2015 19:52]
| |
| |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 19:53 - Jan 9 with 1342 views | blueytheblue |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 19:36 - Jan 9 by trampie |
They you say, they !!!
Only one of them was convicted Lisa. |
You're not grasping the differences between the two are you?
Donaldson had reasonable doubt. Evans actions worked against him, reducing reasonable doubt to virtually nothing. | |
| |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 19:59 - Jan 9 with 1330 views | controversial_jack |
We are aware the jury found him guilty - how they arrived at that conclusion is beyond belief. The concern is that one persons word, who cannot even remember the event can lead to a conviction of 5 years in prison. | | | |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 20:00 - Jan 9 with 1333 views | skippyjack |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 19:53 - Jan 9 by blueytheblue |
You're not grasping the differences between the two are you?
Donaldson had reasonable doubt. Evans actions worked against him, reducing reasonable doubt to virtually nothing. |
The laws should be questioned though.. it's not clear.. it reminds me of the Fabianski Red card.. and the clear goalscoring opportunity.. but it's the courts perception of events that count. |  |
| The awkward moment when a Welsh Club become the Champions of England.. shh
The Swansea Way.. To upset the odds. | | Poll: | Best Swans Player |
| |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 20:07 - Jan 9 with 1319 views | trampie |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 19:53 - Jan 9 by blueytheblue |
You're not grasping the differences between the two are you?
Donaldson had reasonable doubt. Evans actions worked against him, reducing reasonable doubt to virtually nothing. |
The difference of being capable of consent one moment and apparently not the next you mean. [Post edited 9 Jan 2015 20:08]
| |
| |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 20:21 - Jan 9 with 1304 views | blueytheblue |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 20:07 - Jan 9 by trampie |
The difference of being capable of consent one moment and apparently not the next you mean. [Post edited 9 Jan 2015 20:08]
|
Wrong. You're not grasping the differences for whatever reason. That's your choice after all. | |
| |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 20:22 - Jan 9 with 1304 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 20:07 - Jan 9 by trampie |
The difference of being capable of consent one moment and apparently not the next you mean. [Post edited 9 Jan 2015 20:08]
|
no - I explained before why the jury found it different but you chose to twist that.
Anyway - I'm out of these threads - you have decided without any doubt i your mind that the court system is wrong. All that not seen all the evidence.
It's a waste of time. | | | |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 21:43 - Jan 9 with 1265 views | SkewenJack |
| Ched Evans to Oldham deal is off! on 19:53 - Jan 9 by blueytheblue |
You're not grasping the differences between the two are you?
Donaldson had reasonable doubt. Evans actions worked against him, reducing reasonable doubt to virtually nothing. |
What actions eliminates reasonable doubt he raped someone then?
If its the same action you stated on the other thread then that isn't evidence beyond reasonable doubt a bit, not even close. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
