Vocal Voices

We must all know by now of the rape conviction, jailing and release of Ched Evans, a footballer.

To paraphrase one saying "He has done the crime, and he has done the time" yet nobody, but nobody, is prepared to allow him to be rehabilitated. Quite the opposite, he cannot get work anywhere, not even overseas, the terms of his release prevent that. People are falling over themselves with righteous indignation that he should not even be allowed to train with any club to keep his fitness up in the hope that he may one day be allowed to do the only job he knows - play football. He is effectively being denied any chance of rehabilitation.

It is all rather odd and flies in the face of the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 and Offender Rehabilitation Act 2014.

Yes, he committed the crime. Yes, he spent time in jail. Yes, he has maintained his innocence, as is his right. Yes, his crime is one of the worst that can be committed, but where is his chance of rehabilitation? We can do it for murderers, those committed of manslaughter, violent robbers, fraudsters, drug dealers...... but not for this one man. It is all a bit strange.

Completely agree with you Frank. I was saying just the same to Tim last night. His view is that footballers are looked up to by youngsters, but how often do we read of bad behaviour by premiership footballers. Most of the time alcohol and drug fuelled, yet back they come playing for top clubs and idolised.

It is a difficult one. I can see both sides of this. Rehabilitation of offenders who have served their time ought to be standard. I feel that he ought to be given his chance like anybody else. Yet, I can see the point of the objectors too. Footballers are looked up to by young people as role models, and this was an objectionable crime - assuming of course that he definitely was guilty. They can't afford to have young lads thinking that they could do similar can they? Another factor in this whole mess is that he doesn't seem to have openly apologised or shown any remorse, and that for some people is quite a major factor. Something else to consider is that it stands as a warning to other up and coming footballers.

I don't see any way out of it for him. I think he has lost his job for good, and (assuming again that the verdict was the right one and he definitely was guilty) then he has no-one to blame but himself.

He was found guilty of a crime, but he has shown no remorse and continues to protest his innocence. On the other hand, he was not allowed an appeal, but I see that now now the Criminal Cases Review Commission is investigating the conviction as the request of his legal team.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-29679563

I think perhaps one needs to wait and see if there was, in fact, a miscarriage of justice. If there was, then he would have a strong case to resume his footballing career.

But if there was no miscarriage of justice, then I would side with those who think he should not be allowed to play professionally again. As things stand, Evans is on the Sex Offenders list, indefinitely. Teachers convicted of sex offences are barred from the classroom. The guy who avoided £43K worth of train fares with an Oyster card scam, or whatever it was, was barred from working in the City again by the Financial Regulator. A doctor who was convicted of stalking the model Abi Titmuss was struck off Medical Practitioners Register. So why should Evans be allowed to resume an (overly) well-paid career in which he could, as Rodo has said, be deemed to be a role model for a generation of impressionable teens?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... again.html
http://www.theguardian.com/business/201 ... an-burrows

Or as the BBC and Sky news refer to him every time "Convicted Rapist Ched Evans". Every time. The conviction was dubious, contradictory and based on a bad law imo, but he is going to be made to pay for the rest of his life.
Has anyone ever heard the BBC refer to Mike Tyson as "Convicted Rapist Mike Tyson"? Why not? He is.
Or footballer John Hartson as "Drink driver John Hartson"? He's admitted that he's done it.

There is a very nasty tone to the hounding of this man, because hounding is what it is, and I'm saying this and I don't even like him.

TheOstrich wrote:He was found guilty of a crime, but he has shown no remorse and continues to protest his innocence.

I think this is the crux. Yes he was found guilty, but it's not unknown for people to be found guilty when in fact they're not. He may have shown no remorse, but if he protests his innocence, what has he to show remorse for?

Here is the case in point.

Personally I feel the conviction had a lot to do with the location of the court and the age of the jury. Personally, reviewing the evidence, I would not have convicted even if it was my own daughter. I'm not joking here. Any girl who gets into that state and acts that way, over the legal age of consent, should not be complaining unless some particularly nasty events of brutalisation or non consensual bizzarre sex, out of the norm, occurred.

Not only that, but they did not get her drunk. She was already drunk and she was aware enough to want to go back to the hotel with one of them. There is not even the case where they plied her with alcohol and drugs for the specific purpose of having sex with her.

To make a case that it was "rape" because these guys were "preparing to find some woman to have sex with", beggars the mind. Guys all over Britain do that every night. Girls too. This is 2014, not 1914.

As for the "role model" thing, people might want to consider this. He's been in prison, he's a marked man. He's "never" going to go out on the town and get blasted. He's "never" going to drive around like a maniac, he's "never" going to act in any way which is likely to send him back to prison again. In fact, he would be "exactly" the role model they need. Someone who was acting in an irresponsible manner, who was convicted of a crime he might, or might not, have committed and has reformed completely and acts as a model citizen.

Personally I'd rather see that than a bunch of irresponsible idiots getting wild drunk and causing mayhem all over the place and acting as if the law does not apply to them.

As for the BBC and others calling him "that rapist.....". It makes him sound like he dragged some totally sober woman off the street and raped her in a park....

To me it sounds like a girl who wanted some fun who was so drunk that she disgraced herself in her sleep and woke up to find that nobody had stayed to "look after her". It looks a hell of a lot like fear and spite to me. She worked next door, gossip was bound to go round when the cleaners saw the mess. Easier to cry "rape" methinks.

But, of course, "footballer gone bad" is a wonderful byline isn't it. As is "showed no remorse". Remorse? Apart from the fact that I would never be so damned stupid as to try for a threesome with a drunk girl, were it me, I wouldn't show any remorse. Blind Fury maybe. Both at myself for being such a fool as to put myself in such a position and at her for doing what she did.

I have three daughters and two granddaughters. I would not have convicted on this evidence.....

Suff wrote:Personally I feel the conviction had a lot to do with the location of the court and the age of the jury.

In one sense, that's a pretty strong indictment of the current state of justice in this country, and one I can identify with, as I also think that the "trial by jury" system is an outmoded farce and not fit for purpose. We need "professional" jurors, as I believe they have in France, not 12 reluctant citizens frogmarched into court.

But on the other hand, Evans's conviction is going through an appeals process. As I said before, I think one needs to see what the result of that is before judging further ......

maybe if the guy were to ask his "followers" on social media to leave the girl alone and stop hounding HER,she has been forced to change location 5 times i believe.

if his conviction is reversed -then fine,but maybe a bit less arrogance would'nt be amiss

Did he ask his followers to attack her? I doubt it. Unlikely. If they feel the way I do and are boneheaded enough to think that the Internet is "free speech", then I doubt anything he says will stop them.

But, of course, he'll get the blame for that. He's convicted of a crime.

What I do wonder is what will happen if he is exonerated??? His fans will have a field day, she'd be better of changing her name.....