Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

The way women are trying to shame Ched Evans is despicable (and sexist) watch

    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Birkenhead)
    Is Ched Evans' conviction to be upheld because you think rape is more common than convictions for rape? I doubt you've even acquainted yourself with the case notes, and are just glad that someone had been convicted of rape, regardless of the likelihood of their guilt.
    That statement was not in reference to what Ched Evans did or didn't do. All I said was that rape is, sadly, quite frequent.

    Rape is more frequent than convictions for rape because rape victims often don't report rape as they feel they can't tell anyone about it. There are also quite a few rapists that have gone to court and haven't been convicted which is quite alarming.

    I would also like to say that I would not be happy with an irrational conviction of rape, or any other crime for that matter. Why would I be happy about that? Wrongly accusing and punishing someone for something they most likely didn't do is unjust and amoral.

    And you're right, I haven't acquainted myself with the case notes, which is why I haven't said whether I think Ched Evans is guilty or not, and the arguments that I have posted on this thread have not stated my opinion on him, or at least were not intended to do so.

    I hope that cleared up any misunderstandings, and don't jump to conclusions about people.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by Messiah Complex)
    In this case they could as Ched and McDonald admitted to it.
    Yep.

    It may be they didn't deny it because they weren't sure that the other one wasn't going to say 'Yes, we both ****ed her, so what?' In the end, they both effectively said that.

    In any case, I bet they have both often regretted it!
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by unprinted)
    Yep.

    It may be they didn't deny it because they weren't sure that the other one wasn't going to say 'Yes, we both ****ed her, so what?' In the end, they both effectively said that.

    In any case, I bet they have both often regretted it!
    True. Plus if they both claimed to not having sex and the courts proved that they did or at least one of them did then they are guilty of lying under oath. A member of staff heard sex taking place and this could have left them screwed.

    They both ****ed her. Evans couldn't prove consent. McDonald was lucky that he went back with her and that his argument was accepted.

    Its entirely possible that Evans didn't actually rape her but because of the law and the reverse burden of proof, he did in the eyes of the law - which brings the entire laws into question. It's basically his word vs hers but the burden of proof is on him to provide evidence of consent and he can't. Therefore he is deemed guilty. The conviction is solid under the current implementation of the law but he may still not have actually raped her.

    I think this case has thrown the whole credibility of the laws surrounding rape into question.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    I do feel that there is a double standard surrounding rape where alcohol is concerned, and think it is unfortunate that intoxication is considered to be justification for females to be unaccountable for their actions, whilst men are expected to remain accountable - perhaps partly because it is generally the male that penetrates the female and is therefore considered to be the active partner.

    I do not know enough about the Evans case, although the fact that the woman was picked up off the street does not bode well. Having said that, if a man is 'drunk', and a 'drunk' woman appears to consent to sex with him, why should he be expected to have a level of awareness to reject that consent as being invalid?

    Evidently there are degrees of intoxication, and if the woman is clearly 'out of it' in the sense of being total unaware of her surroundings, losing control of her body, being physically ill, or being completely passive, that is a different matter - and equally if a man were drunk to that extent he would be unlikely to be physically capable of penile penetration.

    That aside, it does seem to me that intoxication is sometimes used as a catch-all get-out clause by regretful women.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by unprinted)
    I doubt that it's "almost all" - I don't know many friends of any gender who get so drunk they piss themselves while passed out and don't wake up - but lots of them have. Not all of them were raped by someone who then told police that they'd had sex with her without asking her first though.

    Can I ask if you've ever had sex with someone who was "extremely drunk"?
    yes. and they didn't wake up the next morning and cry rape.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Username unknown)
    Hundreds of women probably ARE raped the every Friday and Saturday evening. That sentence was perfectly accurate.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    And if it comes about in the nature which I described, it is only their fault.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    But it's not just women is it, the fact is a tonne of MALE sponsors & patrons have threatened to go from the numerous clubs he's tried to get into if he got fired. But onto the main point, the fact he cant admit he's sorry, and if you listened to his defence it was one of the worst defences ever, everyone know's he's guilty, even he does - he deserves to be shamed frankly, all he needs to really say is he's sorry for the damages he caused
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chlorophile)
    If you have sex with someone who is not in the mental state to consent, that is rape. You are taking advantage of someone who is not in control of their actions. You can argue whether or not it's right for that person to have put themselves in that position in the first place but whether or not you agree with that, this was undeniably a case of rape and there is nothing in the slightest bit unfair about his conviction. What you essentially seem to be arguing is that drunken people are fair game for assault, which is just disgusting. If that wasn't bad enough, the victim's identity was leaked and she received further abuse over the internet, forcing her to get a new identity. Her new identity was also leaked and she got even more abuse, forcing her to change her identity again. Her life has been completely ruined because of this footballer. You can make a case that she should not have got that drunk in the first place but Evans is overwhelmingly at fault here and it is not her fault in the slightest that he took advantage of her. That is his fault and his fault alone.

    The worst part out of all of this is that Evans shows no remorse. If he showed that he understood what he did was wrong, I'd have some sympathy. But not only has he not done this, he hasn't spoken out at all about the further abuse the victim received because of the disgusting behaviour of his fans. He clearly hasn't been rehabilitated in the slightest and doesn't seem to have learned anything from his conviction.

    There is nothing remotely sexist about this. She should not have got so drunk in the first place but that does not make her fair game for abuse. He raped her - that is totally undeniable as far as the law is concerned - and she is not responsible for that. He has showed no remorse for this and has not spoken out about the abuse his victim received at the hands of his fans. Evans does not deserve to be a free man as far as I'm concerned and he certainly does not deserve to be playing for a football team where he will be seen as a rolemodel for many children.
    So when she went back to the hotel with the first guy she was sober enough at that point to give consent, but half an hour later she was too drunk to give consent with Evans? Surely if the argument you're using is that Evans took advantage of somebody who was "not in the mental state to consent" then you must also believe that McDonald raped her too, as in the time between incidents her sobriety wouldn't have been able to change enough to mean that she was capable of consenting initially but unable to consent the second time.

    As for the role model argument, that's utter tripe. Footballers are footballers, role models are whoever people choose to follow. The job of a footballer is to kick a ball and win matches, they're job is not to be a role model. If people choose to make a footballer their role model then that's fine, but there are thousands of professional footballers in this country alone, so if you insist on having a footballer as your role model then pick one that is actually a role model.
    Also if you want to say that he shouldn't be a professional because all footballers can be seen as role models then how come you don't have an issue with the footballers who are all over the tabloids most weeks having been caught cheating, or shagging prostitutes, or drink driving, all acts which I don't think you particularly want your kids aspiring to, but of course you don't have an issue with any of that...
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by le_darkhorse)
    yes. and they didn't wake up the next morning and cry rape.
    There is a telling comment by someone that the reason some men are adamant that Evans is innocent is that if he's guilty of raping someone, so are they.

    In this case, she didn't. She woke up, having pissed herself while unconscious, with no memory of what had happened after about 3am - over an hour before meeting McDonald. Thinking someone had stolen her handbag etc, she went to the police about that.

    (Original post by le_darkhorse)
    And if it comes about in the nature which I described, it is only their fault.
    "Although it is men who perpetrate rape, it is women who are urged to modify their behaviour by abstaining or drinking less, and thus accommodate the danger posed by predatory men."

    Do you want to bet that the CCRC send his case back to the Court of Appeal and they decide the original verdict was unsafe?
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by mackemforever)
    So when she went back to the hotel with the first guy she was sober enough at that point to give consent, but half an hour later she was too drunk to give consent with Evans? Surely if the argument you're using is that Evans took advantage of somebody who was "not in the mental state to consent" then you must also believe that McDonald raped her too, as in the time between incidents her sobriety wouldn't have been able to change enough to mean that she was capable of consenting initially but unable to consent the second time.
    It is unclear at exactly what point she crossed the line between being "extremely drunk" (per every independent witness) but having the capacity to consent and "extremely drunk" and not having it.

    The jury are very unlikely to have decided that it was between when McDonald finished having sex with her (having been disturbed by Evans turning up, uninvited, unexpected and unwanted in the room and distracted by the sound of Evans' brother and the other man outside trying to film everything without the consent of either McDonald or the woman) and Evans starting to have sex with her - that's at most a few minutes.

    So that means that, yes, McDonald had sex with someone who lacked capacity, even though he was unanimously acquitted of rape. Evans continues to think this is a sign that something is wrong with his verdict. However McDonald had had contact with her outside the room - they'd spoken, they'd gone to the hotel together etc. He'd also left as if nothing was wrong. It was open to the jury to conclude that he could have had a reasonable belief in her consent to sex. Given that reasonable doubt, they had to acquit him.

    There aren't any similar grounds for that doubt with Evans: the only contact Evans he had had with her before he arrived in the room turned out to be when he'd stepped over her lying on the floor in the kebab shop. Both men had given evidence on oath that they didn't ask her if he could have sex with her, and he left as if he knew he'd done something wrong. He had said, when first interviewed by police, that as a well known footballer, if he wanted to have sex with a girl, there were plenty of opportunities for him to do so... but that doesn't amount to a reasonable belief that any particular woman wants to have sex with him.

    Do you want to bet that the CCRC send his case back to the Court of Appeal and they decide the original verdict was unsafe?
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: January 11, 2015
Poll
Who is your favourite TV detective?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.