Evans Conviction overturned (ed. signs for Chesterfield)

Mametz said:

ElfsborgAddick said:

Mametz said:

I should say at the beginning of this post that I have always believed that he has served his time and should be allowed to play again. However I respect the opinions of those who disagree with me.

Leaving the crime aspect to one side, professional footballers are young men, many of them have vast amounts of money and are seen as glamorous. It is hardly surprising that a fair percentage of them get involved in morally questionable activities and you can be pretty certain that virtually every league club, including ours, contains a few individuals who, or would if given a chance, indulge in what many people might consider dubious sexual activities. I wonder if the people who would protest about Evans playing football again because of his morals would refuse to buy or listen to music from any individual or band that had indulged in such behaviour.

There are at least two ex Charlton players who were fairly well known to be wife beaters and who are regularly described as legends on this forum.

Can you confirm Fortune and Humphrey are not either.

Neither of those are the people I was thinking of.

Good.

My hero worship remains!

Arsenetatters said:

I remember a Sunday paper many years ago having its front page devoted to Shirtliff pushing his wife's face onto an electric oven ring. I think it was the news of the world. So it's not him then.

Never put you down as a NOTW reader!

red_murph said:

willieduff said:

I live in Chesterfield. I will be going down to my local tonight to watch the England v Slovakia game. It will be interesting to gauge the opinions of Spirites who will be in there.

Had a look on their forum, seemed half and half.

Most of them were not happy at all. Blamed Charlton for getting Novak.

Arsenetatters said:

ElfsborgAddick said:

Arsenetatters said:

I remember a Sunday paper many years ago having its front page devoted to Shirtliff pushing his wife's face onto an electric oven ring. I think it was the news of the world. So it's not him then.

Never put you down as a NOTW reader!

My Dad used to get the Telegraph and when I was young I had no idea that other papers were available until I started work in a newsagents. Was delighted to find that there were papers that dealt entirely in gossip and general smut. A whole different world.

@ElfsborgAddick - out of interest what paper did you think I read?!

Sunday sport.

"Freddie Starr ate my Hamster" was a sun Headline.

The Sunday sport turned it down because of the lack of sex involved.

"Freddie Starr shagged my Hamster" would have been the headline they were after.

The latter if followed by the former would certainly have left a bad taste in the mouth of any Pet eating person.

Was going to say Telegraph.

ElfsborgAddick said:

Was going to say Telegraph.

Too right wing for me.

Please do tell me how a man can not be raped (or whatever the correct term is for a wom

legaladdick said:

To those who ask whether if both are drunk either could be prosecuted for rape the answer is clear:-

The statutory definition of rape is as follows:
Rape

(1)A person (A) commits an offence if—

(a)he intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of another person (B) with his penis,

(b)B does not consent to the penetration, and

(c)A does not reasonably believe that B consents.

Therefore unless the 'woman' is in fact a bloke, the likelihood of 'her' penetrating the man with 'her' penis seems a tad remote.

So what is the term for when a woman takes advantage of a drunk man's male reflex that he cannot control?

Dazzler21 said:

Please do tell me how a man can not be raped (or whatever the correct term is for a wom

legaladdick said:

To those who ask whether if both are drunk either could be prosecuted for rape the answer is clear:-

The statutory definition of rape is as follows:
Rape

(1)A person (A) commits an offence if—

(a)he intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of another person (B) with his penis,

(b)B does not consent to the penetration, and

(c)A does not reasonably believe that B consents.

Therefore unless the 'woman' is in fact a bloke, the likelihood of 'her' penetrating the man with 'her' penis seems a tad remote.

So what is the term for when a woman takes advantage of a drunk man's male reflex that he cannot control?

A miracle... If I've had that much beer that Im out and can be "taken advantage" of and she can manage to get it going she deserves a medal not a shag

That's actually well worth a punt.

ForeverAddickted said:

Odds will probably drop yet I'd wait until after October before betting on Evans.

Isnt a bad shout though and wouldnt surprise me in the slightest

Great shout if he doesn't get convicted

ForeverAddickted said:

CAFCsayer said:

ForeverAddickted said:

Odds will probably drop yet I'd wait until after October before betting on Evans.

Isnt a bad shout though and wouldnt surprise me in the slightest

Great shout if he doesn't get convicted

Dont think its a case of him being convicted again is it?

I thought October was just a case of working out whether his appeal is successful, if yes then Ched Evans has every right to continue as a Footballer, if its rejected and its upheld then Chesterfield have the right to sack him and he disappears from the English game

As far as I am aware, it is a retrial. So, it's the case being heard once more.

ForeverAddickted said:

NornIrishAddick said:

ForeverAddickted said:

CAFCsayer said:

ForeverAddickted said:

Odds will probably drop yet I'd wait until after October before betting on Evans.

Isnt a bad shout though and wouldnt surprise me in the slightest

Great shout if he doesn't get convicted

Dont think its a case of him being convicted again is it?

I thought October was just a case of working out whether his appeal is successful, if yes then Ched Evans has every right to continue as a Footballer, if its rejected and its upheld then Chesterfield have the right to sack him and he disappears from the English game

As far as I am aware, it is a retrial. So, it's the case being herd once more.

Yet if he's Guilty he doesnt go back to prison, i.e. He's already served his sentence for the crime... Despite it being a world where people are let out early

Would it not depend on the sentence handed down, if found guilty? Time served would, obviously, be taken into account, but he would still have to have met the tariff (as I understand it, he had not yet served the time when the retrial was allowed - admittedly, I could be wrong).

I'm no lawyer, but I wouldn't expect him to have to go back to prison.

He's already served 2.5 years of a 5 year sentence and was released on licence.

If you were sentenced to more than 12 months in prison, you may be released early on licence. You will also have a licence if you're out of prison on a home detention curfew (on a tag). Being on licence means that you are still serving a prison sentence but you can live in the community instead of being in prison.

If he's appealed because of fresh evidence, I shouldn't imagine his punishment would increase.

https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/judgments/r-v-chedwyn-evans/

Two more goals tonight, that is four in three games to take Chesterfield top