Rape at La Chambre

[alternageek 10]

Mod Note:

 

Please remember to check your quote tags when quoting multiple posts.

 

You can do this by choosing to preview a post before posting it, to see if your message will post correctly

 

All statements being quoted, should have the following wrapped around them:

 

[quote] example here [/quote]

 

Thank you.

[999tigger 10]

Originally Posted by thecypriot1 View Post

strange verdict as i understand the club is for swingers looking for sexual encounters? according to the star the women was there of her own accord and dressed provocativly and engaged in "activities" now "NO " should always mean "NO" but this must be a very grey area?

 

No always means no in 99.999% of cases. It is not a strange verdict at all if you understand what the rape law is? Do you? Everything revolves around consent and whether it was present.

 

There are various cases which clarify when consent is present and when it is not. These are useful in helping clarify to a jury major sign posts. There is no grey area in requiring the womans consent, but it does get more complex when the jury looks at whether the man had a reasonable belief consent was given, which looks at all the circumstances.

Some of the circumstances quoted, will have been considered, but not thought significant in enabling him to say he had a reasonable belief consent was given and thats why he was found guilty.

 

You see how it fits in?

[Huffty_500 10]

Voice for men is a hate group?

 

No I think you'll find "hate" is when you discriminate on race, sexuality, disability or gender identity. Anyway that's another great answer "oh its a hate group"

 

What's sad is that anyone who wants to question this issue and discuss this topic who doesn't tow the line, is somehow misinterpreted as saying "she deserved it", "rape is ok in la chambre" or God knows what else has been misconstrued by the "how dare you" brigade on here.

 

So ok, I have a question to all of those who say "the jury found him guilty" and thats it end of arguement brigade.

 

And that is... When Ched Evans gets out in October, will you be saying "well he's served his time and the judicial system has deemed he be released, so thats that let him go back to work" OR will you all be jumping up and down signing petitions, giving it the sermon on the soapbox and demanding he shouldnt go back to work?

 

My POINT is if you want to put a 100% faith into the judicial system then do so, but then shut the hell up when they make decisions you dont agree with. There's several on here (and i wont name names) that will be calling for his head, but why when the system you so swear by in this case has deemed ched's time has been done?

 

And just to make it really clear for some of you I'm not defending Ched ok lets make that crystal!!!! I am just saying I find the bashing of anyone who has questioned the credibility of this case uncalled for. Ofcourse we don't know ALL the facts but it's an open discussion on a public forum and I just wish some people would do simple things like answer direct questions etc

Edited August 13, 2014 by Huffty_500

[Halibut 12]

Voice for men is a hate group?

 

 

Yeah. Look at some of the stuff they say about women and feminists.

[Guest sibon]

 

So ok, I have a question to all of those who say "the jury found him guilty" and thats it end of arguement brigade.

 

And that is... When Ched Evans gets out in October, will you be saying "well he's served his time and the judicial system has deemed he be released, so thats that let him go back to work" OR will you all be jumping up and down signing petitions, giving it the sermon on the soapbox and demanding he shouldnt go back to work?

 

 

Ched should be able to apply for jobs in Tesco, HSBC or any other major company. I guess that he'd have the same success rate as most ex-cons, especially those on the sex offenders register.

 

He shouldn't be afforded a life of luxury as a professional sportsman. He's had his crack at that and failed. Massively.

[Tommo68 10]

Only things I'd expect at a swingers club is that as a general rule people would be better mannered, are less likely to take offence if propositioned and are far more likely to not have had too much to drink than they would be in more conventional nightclub.

.

.

[anywebsite 10]

Ched should be able to apply for jobs in Tesco, HSBC or any other major company. I guess that he'd have the same success rate as most ex-cons, especially those on the sex offenders register.

 

He shouldn't be afforded a life of luxury as a professional sportsman. He's had his crack at that and failed. Massively.

 

Of course he failed, he played for his country He's already spent some of what should have been the best years of his short career in prison, enough to satisfy the judge, so why doesn't that satisfy you?

 

He will have served his time in October, then he should be back at work, doing what he's best at, scoring goals. He's earned his position as a professional sportsman by being good at football, which is nothing to do with raping people.

 

Do you think nobody should be employed after they come out of prison? Maybe we could just send all the criminals to Australia like the old days?

Edited August 14, 2014 by anywebsite

[Bonzo77 13]

Ched should be able to apply for jobs in Tesco, HSBC or any other major company. I guess that he'd have the same success rate as most ex-cons, especially those on the sex offenders register.

 

He shouldn't be afforded a life of luxury as a professional sportsman. He's had his crack at that and failed. Massively.

 

Ched should be allowed to apply for any job he wants, including football. Sheffield United however, should not be employing ex rapists, nor should my other professional football club.

 

---------- Post added 14-08-2014 at 07:26 ----------

 

Voice for men is a hate group?

 

No I think you'll find "hate" is when you discriminate on race, sexuality, disability or gender identity. Anyway that's another great answer "oh its a hate group"

 

What's sad is that anyone who wants to question this issue and discuss this topic who doesn't tow the line, is somehow misinterpreted as saying "she deserved it", "rape is ok in la chambre" or God knows what else has been misconstrued by the "how dare you" brigade on here.

 

So ok, I have a question to all of those who say "the jury found him guilty" and thats it end of arguement brigade.

 

And that is... When Ched Evans gets out in October, will you be saying "well he's served his time and the judicial system has deemed he be released, so thats that let him go back to work" OR will you all be jumping up and down signing petitions, giving it the sermon on the soapbox and demanding he shouldnt go back to work?

 

My POINT is if you want to put a 100% faith into the judicial system then do so, but then shut the hell up when they make decisions you dont agree with. There's several on here (and i wont name names) that will be calling for his head, but why when the system you so swear by in this case has deemed ched's time has been done?

 

And just to make it really clear for some of you I'm not defending Ched ok lets make that crystal!!!! I am just saying I find the bashing of anyone who has questioned the credibility of this case uncalled for. Ofcourse we don't know ALL the facts but it's an open discussion on a public forum and I just wish some people would do simple things like answer direct questions etc

 

I do t get your point?!

[Suffragette1 10]

Ched should be able to apply for jobs in Tesco, HSBC or any other major company. I guess that he'd have the same success rate as most ex-cons, especially those on the sex offenders register.

 

He shouldn't be afforded a life of luxury as a professional sportsman. He's had his crack at that and failed. Massively.

 

I agree with this. He should not be lauded, allowed back into a club and feted on a high salary and held up as some kind of role model, as many footballers are. Many young people look up to footballers and his return to the club where he was before his conviction sends out a very damaging message. Furthermore, SUFC has remained silent and Evans continues to protest his innocence and is totally unrepentant.

 

There are already some appalling rape apologist and misogynistic chants erupting on Twitter which no doubt the fans will adopt if he plays for SUFC again.

[Intake Too 10]

Voice for men is a hate group?

 

No I think you'll find "hate" is when you discriminate on race, sexuality, disability or gender identity. Anyway that's another great answer "oh its a hate group"

 

What's sad is that anyone who wants to question this issue and discuss this topic who doesn't tow the line, is somehow misinterpreted as saying "she deserved it", "rape is ok in la chambre" or God knows what else has been misconstrued by the "how dare you" brigade on here.

 

So ok, I have a question to all of those who say "the jury found him guilty" and thats it end of arguement brigade.

 

And that is... When Ched Evans gets out in October, will you be saying "well he's served his time and the judicial system has deemed he be released, so thats that let him go back to work" OR will you all be jumping up and down signing petitions, giving it the sermon on the soapbox and demanding he shouldnt go back to work?

 

My POINT is if you want to put a 100% faith into the judicial system then do so, but then shut the hell up when they make decisions you dont agree with. There's several on here (and i wont name names) that will be calling for his head, but why when the system you so swear by in this case has deemed ched's time has been done?

 

And just to make it really clear for some of you I'm not defending Ched ok lets make that crystal!!!! I am just saying I find the bashing of anyone who has questioned the credibility of this case uncalled for. Ofcourse we don't know ALL the facts but it's an open discussion on a public forum and I just wish some people would do simple things like answer direct questions etc

 

Everyone deserves a second chance, Ched is no different. What i find distasteful are the blades fans who want to welcome him back with open arms likes some long lost prodigal son.

Also just imagine what the opposing fans chants are going to be like.

Football fans being dead from the neck up for the most part will certainly make use of the word rape in one of their pointless childish football 'chants'.

The blades are asking for trouble. Theyll get it too. I wouldnt be surprised if some feminist group pickets the lane when he comes back and who can blame them?

 

---------- Post added 14-08-2014 at 09:32 ----------

 

Voice for men is a hate group?

 

No its not. Not unless you are an insecure feminist or one of these right on yeah man dudes whos down with the chicks and calls him self a feminist.

[Chris_Sleeps 10]

It's not wrong for some people to want to discuss that because it raised interesting issues. Calling it nonsense to spend part of the discussion considering the evdience and looking at it from his point of view based on the case is perfectly normal.

Yellowperil was not looking at it from "his point of view" - he was attempting to wipe his guilt away. Unashamedly. Others have gone further and tried to blame the victim, to sickening length.

 

As to your personal input, I can't quite work out which position you do hold.

 

-----

 

As for Ched Evans, a convicted rapist and a man on the sex-offenders register won't be walking onto a football pitch holding hands with a 8 year old mascot anytime soon.

Edited August 14, 2014 by Chris_Sleeps

[yellowperil 10]

No i wasnt, if you read the post it clearly states "lets look at it from his point of view".

The only person who can say what i meant is me, not you.

Its quite clear if you can be bothered to actually read what i posted and not read what you thinki posted.

Clearly stated that im not apologising, just trying to ascertain facts and work out if the judgement was a sound one based solely on what has been reported.

Its worth debating as one day it could be a relative of yours or a friend of yours accused of a crime.

If that ever happens then i hope youre a bit more open to the fact that a judge and jury arent always right, or are you going to just believe that because theyve been accused and found guilty that the system was correct to find them as such?!

(the accused isnt my friend or relative by the way!)

 

In this case (apart from a couple of people) all ive seen is people questioning the verdict reached and stating that they hoped there was more evidence presented to gain a conviction than what was reported (myself included).

Stop foaming at the mouth and try to get some perspective.

Would you class a defence lawyer as a murder,rape,burglary or assault apologist? I doubt you would, they are there so that both sides are represented in the case,anyone questioning the case isnt an apologist, just representing one side of this case. My observation has been though that they have been far more levelheaded and willing to debate the issue than the people who have jumped on the thread and started with the "oh my god,how can you defend this act" mentality who have so far refused to see that what was being debated was the validity of the verdict, not the act itself.

 

Ive only dropped back on to clarify what i meant because you deemed that you knew better than me what i meant! And you were wrong.

 

I asked you a direct question earlier in the thread which you didnt answer as others with your stance havent answered either!

 

The jury gives the verdict and the judge passes sentance based on that verdict.

As a side issue i think the fact that the judge let the accused free from court to get his personal business in order may be an indication of his belief that the accused isnt deemed a danger to anyone else,if he thought so then he wouldnt have released him to return for sentancing would he? The judge sat through the evidence and has come to that conclusion based on what he has heard in evidence. Evidence which none of us has heard.

This was another reason i thought the verdict was worth debating, the judge doesnt always agree with the jurys verdict you know! And who knows if he did in this case.

As far as im aware its very rare to be let free to get things in order in a case like this so let that factor in your thinking.

We will only really know when sentance is passed wont we.

Ill be watching to see what happens in the case out of interest but as far as discussing it on here is concerned ill not bother, the one or two level headed posters ive come across i can always send a personal message.

 

As for the Ched Evans case,have you actually read the press reports damning him as well as looked at the website thats in his defence before youve come to your opinion? or have you just made a sweeping descision of his guilt based on one side of the case only or the judgement that was passed?

Edited August 14, 2014 by yellowperil