Incoming? Ched Evans

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

So let me get to grips with this. People are suggesting we have a third party agreement with the player of another team in our league, whereby we pay some of his wages in order that he comes to play for us in January? This deal was also helped along by the other team's manager?

That would be much more dodgy than anything West Ham did with Teves and Mascherano. I'm sure I've just missed the joke, haven't I?
The joke is that the Blades, a club that most think can barely manage a one party transfer would be able to concoct a THREE PARTY agreement! :p
 

Whether it's true or not I can't see it happening IMO. Even though most would consider Ched to be better than the strikers we've already got what would then happen to Sharp and Clarke and what was the point in signing Lavery? (unless we've signed him as a wide player).

Maybe Clarke and Ched could play together but Billy isn't going to be happy sitting on the bench, or we sell him in January?

We've already got 2 strikers that can be goalscorers in this division so I can't really see us going out and signing a third, and even if we signed Ched it would certainly be no formality that promotion would follow.

As an infamous big nose Mr Wanker used to say "you can never have enough strikers".

I'd be well pleased with a front two of Clarke and Ched, they'd hammer this division. As for Billy's feelings, he'll have to make do with being a plan B from the bench (personally I'd currently play Clarke-Lavery with Sharp on the bench)
 
The joke is that the Blades, a club that most think can barely manage a one party transfer would be able to concoct a THREE PARTY agreement! :p

I don't think its been suggested United are party to any of this, whether it's true or not.
 
So let me get to grips with this. People are suggesting we have a third party agreement with the player of another team in our league, whereby we pay some of his wages in order that he comes to play for us in January? This deal was also helped along by the other team's manager?

That would be much more dodgy than anything West Ham did with Teves and Mascherano. I'm sure I've just missed the joke, haven't I?
Well it turned out all reyt for them dinnit?
 
We invited Ched tentatively back into the fold, on his release but soon showed him the door when the heat was on. Despite his circumstances having changed somewhat since, Chesterfield have been prepared to offer him a chance prior to the result of the upcoming trial. We had the chance to do the same. Chesterfield have shown some faith in him, why would he ditch them mid season to return to us ?. I also think that he has a working relationship to Wilson similar to the one between Clough and Brayford. Personally would love to see Ched back at the Lane, but it's not going to happen so, let it go quietly.
 
I believe Darren is a solicitor? He also went to the appeal hearing so knows more than most of us but given the reporting restrictions and the unpredictable nature of such a case I don't think he could shed too much light on the outcome.

Both parties’ representatives will be working on the case as it approaches trial. Preparing bundles, briefing Counsel, summoning witnesses holding pre-trial conferences to test the strength of their witnesses’ evidence under cross examination etc.



Very dear do all in all and increases the closer we get to Trial. If the CPS thought they had no chance, it wouldn’t have got this far. He may well be found not guilty but I’d be very surprised if it didn’t get to Trial.

The new evidence* is certainly not incontrovertible proof that he didn't rape her, it's just evidence that may have made the original jury come to a different verdict. If it was incontrovertible proof of his innocence, it wouldn't be going to a retrial.

*As you say reporting restrictions are in place so i can't say what it is**.

**The one and only time i'm likely to be ITK about matters relating to Sheffield United.
 
Sorry I can't find the Ched Evans forum....hate to start all this up again but heard from someone inside Chesterfield FC that he will be joining us in January....don't shoot the messenger.

if you can't find the ched forum. then i'm unsure anyone would trust you with such a rumour

Be fair SwissBlade, the forum entitled Ched Evans isn't easy to find is it? :rolleyes:

Ched_Forum_Location.png
 
Sorry I can't find the Ched Evans forum....hate to start all this up again but heard from someone inside Chesterfield FC that he will be joining us in January....don't shoot the messenger.

More chance of Lionel Messi signing.
He's paying his debt to the management team that showed him faith after he got sent down.
If he leaves chesterfield, it will be to the championship
 

Yes it was agreed at a recent lodge meeting with chairman of each club being on the square .

Mr Evans has not been black balled , after being given a reference by his father in law and desperately wants to be a mason , as he has integrity .

Mr Evans now a tiler and will work his way up . The world is at his feet . Very intelligent bloke . Loves Blades . Said he would play for nothing due to the shame and damage done . We are out of order thinking he is a wanker , tosser

Must be true if deal done at the Grand Lodge .:p

Yes we will sign him when the heat dies down . Think 2020
Hope he doesn't start banging on about the 33rd parellel . ;)
 
But the CPS are handling so many cases that the individual cost of one case is a drop in the ocean.
The shit will really hit the fan if a Judge were to summarily dismiss it.
Not even sure if the CPS can present any new evidence?
But that's a risk the CP'S will have to consider.


But if they drop the case on the doors of Trial, it’s also likely they will be responsible for the Defendant’s wasted costs of preparing the case for Trial (or at least that’s how it works with Civil Litigation. I’m not 100% certain whether the CPS are bound by the same rules). I just can’t see any benefit to them to let it run and then drop it before trial.


The CPS don’t necessarily have to produce any new evidence. The quashing of the conviction doesn’t mean that the new evidence is conducive to a not guilty verdict. It merely means that with that evidence taken into consideration the jury might have reached a different verdict. The CPS could present their case in the same manner again (save for having to address the Defendant’s new evidence) and there’s a chance that they could convict again.


Given that I don’t know what the new evidence is, I can’t give any indication as to how likely that scenario is though.
 
The new evidence might not even have a bearing on the outcome anyway. The fact that it's being held in Cardiff not Mold might be more significant.
 
isn't the new evidence something like, they found traces of coke in her system (not the fizzy kind) and that she was fine enough to go and get the pizza she ordered between the times each guy had a go on her?

I could be way off the mark like, just what ive heard people going on about.
 
isn't the new evidence something like, they found traces of coke in her system (not the fizzy kind) and that she was fine enough to go and get the pizza she ordered between the times each guy had a go on her?

.
The traces of Coke was mentioned in the original trial and the CCTV footage showed her bringing her pizza into the hotel (i think)

The 'new' evidence should not be on a forum and we will have to wait for the new trial. Whilst he is now innocent until proven guilty, I find it difficult to believe that the trial will be 'fair' too either party as it is surely going to be difficult to find a jury who doesn't already have a pre-conceived impression of what happened( due to media exposure) and who was to blame
 
isn't the new evidence something like, they found traces of coke in her system (not the fizzy kind) and that she was fine enough to go and get the pizza she ordered between the times each guy had a go on her?

I could be way off the mark like, just what ive heard people going on about.

No it's not
 
isn't the new evidence something like, they found traces of coke in her system (not the fizzy kind) and that she was fine enough to go and get the pizza she ordered between the times each guy had a go on her?

I could be way off the mark like, just what ive heard people going on about.

Well, the coke evidence would not assist Ched's case one jot and the second bit was before the original jury.

The test is 'fresh' evidence, not 'new' evidence. It's not a second chance to adduce evidence you could have used first time round, but chose not to. It has to be something coming to light since the original trial and of real substance to give rise to a CCRC referral and a Court of Appeal quashing of a conviction.
 
isn't the new evidence something like, they found traces of coke in her system (not the fizzy kind) and that she was fine enough to go and get the pizza she ordered between the times each guy had a go on her?

I could be way off the mark like, just what ive heard people going on about.

Eh? She didn't go and order a pizza between having sex with Macdonald and Evans.
 
Well, the coke evidence would not assist Ched's case one jot and the second bit was before the original jury.

The test is 'fresh' evidence, not 'new' evidence. It's not a second chance to adduce evidence you could have used first time round, but chose not to. It has to be something coming to light since the original trial and of real substance to give rise to a CCRC referral and a Court of Appeal quashing of a conviction.

potato patato or somthing
 

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom