oh good...

[JJ Sefton]

In fairness dazzler. I remember a Friday a couple of years back when the verdict was coming in, you thought ol ched was going to get off based on the evidence given.

I remember my suggestion of life terms for child killers being attacked for being unfair on the killers.

It's a funny old world.

 

[Darren]

Why should he if he doesn't believe he is guilty ? That is almost like admitting hes done wrong (legally) and don't you think the feminists will jump all over that ?

It's not an admission of guilt and I think it will disarm the feminists.

A lot of their shtick is that he is an unrepentant rapist. I think it would help him with the general public if he emphasised he is against rape in all it's forms. I mean, I assume you and I are against rape and we might even donate to rape charities Saying i and doing this is not admitting to anything

 

[Darren]

In fairness dazzler. I remember a Friday a couple of years back when the verdict was coming in, you thought ol ched was going to get off based on the evidence given.

Indeed I did and I think it was a very dodgy conviction, based on the evidence I knew. I am not sure what the relevance of saying that is now. The fact is that he was convicted and is very likely to remain convicted and these are the facts we have to deal with.

 

[Darren]

What do you think the words 'F.C.' in Sheffield United F.C. stand for?

Well for a start it's not a "club" within the legal meaning of the term. It's a limited company. Also It does not unite Sheffield. So I think any argument based on the club's name is a non starter really.

 

[JJ Sefton]

Well for a start it's not a "club" within the legal meaning of the term. It's a limited company. Also It does not unite Sheffield. So I think any argument based on the club's name is a non starter really.

The 'United' bit actually comes from the United Management Committee which was founded to run Bramall Lane when it was built. Still.

 

[Darren]

The 'United' bit actually comes from the United Management Committee which was founded to run Bramall Lane when it was built. Still.

The original idea, in 1889, though was that SUFC would get all the best players from Sheffield and thus indeed form a "Sheffield United" team. Wednesday and other local clubs were not having that so nothing came of it. See Denis's Clarebrough's books.

I mean Charlton Athletic don't do athletics and Bolton Wanderers don't wander very much.

 

[JJ Sefton]

The original idea, in 1889, though was that SUFC would get all the best players from Sheffield and thus indeed form a "Sheffield United" team. Wednesday and other local clubs were not having that so nothing came of it. See Denis's Clarebrough's books.

I mean Charlton Athletic don't do athletics and Bolton Wanderers don't wander very much.

Neither do they exist to stamp out white slavery.

 

[Rollerball]

As for knowing crims. I know loads, given my line of work. Lovely people on the whole.

So by her thinking you are trivialising every crime these people have committed and every person convicted of every crime should be ostracised and not allowed to try and piece together their lives?
I'm not saying he is innocent or guilty, tho a court of law has said he is, but Darren you in particular must know of people convicted even tho they were innocent, the British judicial system is NOT perfect nor infallible, have you never had a case you knew was wrong but for whatever reason could not prove guilt or innocence?
Many miscarriage's of so called justice have occurred some many many years after the case have been proven wrong or am I wrong with that statement Darren or any other law hound?

 

[JJ Sefton]

So by her thinking you are trivialising every crime these people have committed and every person convicted of every crime should be ostracised and not allowed to try and piece together their lives?

No, it's just him and just Sheffield United.

 

[Darren]

So by her thinking you are trivialising every crime these people have committed and every person convicted of every crime should be ostracised and not allowed to try and piece together their lives?
I'm not saying he is innocent or guilty, tho a court of law has said he is, but Darren you in particular must know of people convicted even tho they were innocent, the British judicial system is NOT perfect nor infallible, have you never had a case you knew was wrong but for whatever reason could not prove guilt or innocence?
Many miscarriage's of so called justice have occurred some many many years after the case have been proven wrong or am I wrong with that statement Darren or any other law hound?

There have been convictions that have been overturned, obviously, but for reasons that have been explained at length elsewhere, unless they can get some evidence from the victim admitting she lied, this is very unlikely to be the case for Evans.

The fact is then that, in law, he will almost certainly always have a conviction for rape. We can all have our opinions as to whether he should have been convicted, but don';t we have to accept, in a civilized society, the verdict of the Courts

 

[JJ Sefton]

There have been convictions that have been overturned, obviously, but for reasons that have been explained at length elsewhere, unless they can get some evidence from the victim admitting she lied, this is very unlikely to be the case for Evans.

The fact is then that, in law, he will almost certainly always have a conviction for rape. We can all have our opinions as to whether he should have been convicted, but don';t we have to accept, in a civilized society, the verdict of the Courts

No we don't, apparently we have to accept the verdict of Ms Hatchet and her friends.

 

[Darren]

No we don't, apparently we have to accept the verdict of Ms Hatchet and her friends.

Eh?

She is not suggesting we ignore the verdict. She is making a political point that this should have certain consequances. Surely she is free to make that point, just as anyone else is free to make the opposite point?

 

[JJ Sefton]

Eh?

She is not suggesting we ignore the verdict.

Yes she is. The verdict did not say ...and when you get out you can't play for Sheffield United again".

 

[JJ Sefton]

She is making a political point that this should have certain consequances.

He got locked up.

 

[JJ Sefton]

Surely she is free to make that point, just as anyone else is free to make the opposite point?

Indeed. And we are free to ignore it.

 

[SwissBlade]

Indeed I did and I think it was a very dodgy conviction, based on the evidence I knew. I am not sure what the relevance of saying that is now. The fact is that he was convicted and is very likely to remain convicted and these are the facts we have to deal with.

As a man of legalness perhaps you could put ol jean right on a few things then...

 

[Darren]

Yes she is. The verdict did not say ...and when you get out you can't play for Sheffield United again".

So if he came for a job for SUFC and they said "we won't employ you because you have a conviction for rape", that would be wrong of them?

 

[Darren]

Indeed. And we are free to ignore it.

We're not doing a very good job of that....

 

[Darren]

As a man of legalness perhaps you could put ol jean right on a few things then...

She's making a political point, not a legal one, as have said 473 times.

 

[JJ Sefton]

Thought occurs; we need a striker, lets sign Tanni Grey-Thompson. It'll send a message about United's commitment to disabled people's rights.

 

[JJ Sefton]

So if he came for a job for SUFC and they said "we won't employ you because you have a conviction for rape", that would be wrong of them?

As you know, in my ideal world people would be free not to associate just as they would be to associate.

 

[sitwell]

So in a nutshell ,although you don't think he should have been found guilty of a crime, but he should say sorry and give a donation to someone who thinks he is guilty and not be able to work at his previous employment before he didn't commit the crime ?

 

[ChrisBlade]

Indeed. You will always get more people, in an abstract way, wanting to put the boot into crims rather than help them. Sad, but true.

That is correct but says nothing. You'll always get more people posting after a defeat than after a win. Same thing. Negative emotion is more readily expressed.

I'd want Ched back but would not be bothered to sign a petition saying so because I have no strong passion. I suppose most people loosely in favour of re-signing Evans would feel that way. Let's have him back - but if not, the sun will still set tomorrow and Bramall Lane will be where it's always been.

As to Jean Hatchet and her crew of online chancers, hardliners and other "put the boot inners", they should not influence the club's decision.

As so many press items in modern life, in the larger scheme of things, this is another "teacup in a storm" scenario that will quickly blow over anyway. The way the club's decision is viewed with retrospect will always be football-based. If he succeeds, few Blades will care about three to six weeks of bad press in autumn. Neither will the world at large who will shift their view and praise Evans as a case of successful rehabilitation.

If he happens to suck at footie, the ones against signing him will have shot their wad by Christmas and no longer care about the topic in May. The ones who favoured the signing, will feel they got it wrong and point to the whole hoohaa being largely in vein. I doubt anyone will truly change their moral compass either way. You feel what you feel about the issues involved. No petition or online discussion will greatly change those views.

If anything, press hysteria will create a camp mentality in some Blades who want Evans back for the sake of it and because they are told not to - reverse psychology at work.

The only really interesting thing in all of this for someone like me with a relaxed laissez-faire viewpoint somewhere in the middle has been how many extreme, deeply entrenched views the Evans affair has created or revealed. I am generally suprised why such a relatively trivial issue is build up to matter so much. He is only a footballer who returns to work, after all. He will, somewhere. Does it really make SUCH a huge difference whether that is at poxy Sheffield United, equally poxy Barnsley or, say, ever so slightly more glamorous Cardiff? I don't think so, frankly.

Has knocking down linesmen tainted us for good? Has the Battle of Bramall Lane? Has Tevezgate? Has Neil Warnock? Let's face it, we are both a very cool and exciting club that always has drama going on, and a club that to outsiders at least, is just a little too stubborn, a little too crude and never far from controversy anyway. Whatever we do, some will nail us for it. Whatever we do, Sheffield United will survive and be loved by those who have alwys loved them. The rest, as always, will use as as pantomime victims without deeply caring...

 

[Small Mendonca]

Has there ever in the history of S24SU been so many threads on the same topic/player/manager as Ched? I'm sure Nick Montgomery will run it close...

 

[Darren]

As you know, in my ideal world people would be free not to associate just as they would be to associate.

Fair point, so it would be ok for SUFC not to re-employ him because of the damage it might do to the "brand" even though that would effectively impose an extra punishment on Evans?

 

[Darren]

That is correct but says nothing. You'll always get more people posting after a defeat than after a win. Same thing. Negative emotion is more readily expressed.

I'd want Ched back but would not be bothered to sign a petition saying so because I have no strong passion. I suppose most people loosely in favour of re-signing Evans would feel that way. Let's have him back - but if not, the sun will still set tomorrow and Bramall Lane will be where it's always been.

As to Jean Hatchet and her crew of online chancers, hardliners and other "put the boot inners", they should not influence the club's decision.

As so many press items in modern life, in the larger scheme of things, this is another "teacup in a storm" scenario that will quickly blow over anyway. The way the club's decision is viewed with retrospect will always be football-based. If he succeeds, few Blades will care about three to six weeks of bad press in autumn. Neither will the world at large who will shift their view and praise Evans as a case of successful rehabilitation.

If he happens to suck at footie, the ones against signing him will have shot their wad by Christmas and no longer care about the topic in May. The ones who favoured the signing, will feel they got it wrong and point to the whole hoohaa being largely in vein. I doubt anyone will truly change their moral compass either way. You feel what you feel about the issues involved. No petition or online discussion will greatly change those views.

If anything, press hysteria will create a camp mentality in some Blades who want Evans back for the sake of it and because they are told not to - reverse psychology at work.

The only really interesting thing in all of this for someone like me with a relaxed laissez-faire viewpoint somewhere in the middle has been how many extreme, deeply entrenched views the Evans affair has created or revealed. I am generally suprised why such a relatively trivial issue is build up to matter so much. He is only a footballer who returns to work, after all. He will, somewhere. Does it really make SUCH a huge difference whether that is at poxy Sheffield United, equally poxy Barnsley or, say, ever so slightly more glamorous Cardiff? I don't think so, frankly.

Has knocking down linesmen tainted us for good? Has the Battle of Bramall Lane? Has Tevezgate? Has Neil Warnock? Let's face it, we are both a very cool and exciting club that always has drama going on, and a club that to outsiders at least, is just a little too stubborn, a little too crude and never far from controversy anyway. Whatever we do, some will nail us for it. Whatever we do, Sheffield United will survive and be loved by those who have alwys loved them. The rest, as always, will use as as pantomime victims without deeply caring...

Good post.

I'm in the middle about this as well. I can see both sides, so find myself defending the feminists here and Evans to non football supporters!

As I have said, in principle, I am in the "he has served his time and should not be further punished" camp. In practice, I don't think it's worth the hassle for United.

 

[Highbury_Blade]

Darren could you clear a legal point up for me?

https://www.crimeline.info/case/r-v-ched-evans-chedwyn-evans


When anyone refers to the sentencing remarks of the judge as proof that the victim was thoroughly incapacitated in this case i'm minded to tell them they're speaking complete horseshit, but i don't for fear of being caught out.

In grounds of appeal the first issue was the suggestion that the verdicts reached by the jury were inconsistent. Counsel for the applicant submitted that if the jury acquitted McDonald, there could be no sensible basis on which they could convict the applicant. The court noted in argument that it was not alleged that McDonald was a party to the rape of the complainant by the applicant. The verdict was not related to that count; he was acquitted of raping her himself. The court also noted that in his sentencing remarks the judge was satisfied that the complainant lacked the capacity to consent to sexual activity: “That was simply his view; he would not know how the jury had reached its own decision, but we must respect his analysis. But however it is examined, and assuming that he was wrong about the basis on which the jury reached its conclusion, we find nothing illogical or inconsistent about the verdicts”.

In my understanding of the law, the reasonable belief in consent covers both the reasonable belief in the capacity to consent as well as the reasonable belief in consent itself.

By virtue of the fact that Macdonald got acquitted, surely the victim cannot have been so incapacitated by alcohol that neither defendant could reasonably believe that she was capable of consent?

Therefore it strikes me that the judges sentencing remark of ....

""The complainant was 19 years of age and was extremely intoxicated. CCTV footage shows, in my view, the extent of her intoxication when she stumbled into your friend. As the jury have found, she was in no condition to have sexual intercourse. When you arrived at the hotel, you must have realised that."[

....is complete bollocks.

 

[JJ Sefton]

Fair point, so it would be ok for SUFC not to re-employ him because of the damage it might do to the "brand" even though that would effectively impose an extra punishment on Evans?

If I decided not to see my convicted mate again it would be imposing an additional penalty on him over and above his prison time, but I'd be well within my rights to do it. By the same token, I'd be well within my rights to ask him over to watch Spurs this weekend.

 

[axel smeets]

That is correct but says nothing. You'll always get more people posting after a defeat than after a win. Same thing. Negative emotion is more readily expressed.

I'd want Ched back but would not be bothered to sign a petition saying so because I have no strong passion. I suppose most people loosely in favour of re-signing Evans would feel that way. Let's have him back - but if not, the sun will still set tomorrow and Bramall Lane will be where it's always been.

As to Jean Hatchet and her crew of online chancers, hardliners and other "put the boot inners", they should not influence the club's decision.

As so many press items in modern life, in the larger scheme of things, this is another "teacup in a storm" scenario that will quickly blow over anyway. The way the club's decision is viewed with retrospect will always be football-based. If he succeeds, few Blades will care about three to six weeks of bad press in autumn. Neither will the world at large who will shift their view and praise Evans as a case of successful rehabilitation.

If he happens to suck at footie, the ones against signing him will have shot their wad by Christmas and no longer care about the topic in May. The ones who favoured the signing, will feel they got it wrong and point to the whole hoohaa being largely in vein. I doubt anyone will truly change their moral compass either way. You feel what you feel about the issues involved. No petition or online discussion will greatly change those views.

If anything, press hysteria will create a camp mentality in some Blades who want Evans back for the sake of it and because they are told not to - reverse psychology at work.

The only really interesting thing in all of this for someone like me with a relaxed laissez-faire viewpoint somewhere in the middle has been how many extreme, deeply entrenched views the Evans affair has created or revealed. I am generally suprised why such a relatively trivial issue is build up to matter so much. He is only a footballer who returns to work, after all. He will, somewhere. Does it really make SUCH a huge difference whether that is at poxy Sheffield United, equally poxy Barnsley or, say, ever so slightly more glamorous Cardiff? I don't think so, frankly.

Has knocking down linesmen tainted us for good? Has the Battle of Bramall Lane? Has Tevezgate? Has Neil Warnock? Let's face it, we are both a very cool and exciting club that always has drama going on, and a club that to outsiders at least, is just a little too stubborn, a little too crude and never far from controversy anyway. Whatever we do, some will nail us for it. Whatever we do, Sheffield United will survive and be loved by those who have alwys loved them. The rest, as always, will use as as pantomime victims without deeply caring...

Fabulous post. Can't disagree with a word of it.

 

[Darren]

If I decided not to see my convicted mate again it would be imposing an additional penalty on him over and above his prison time, but I'd be well within my rights to do it. By the same token, I'd be well within my rights to ask him over to watch Spurs this weekend.

You would be imposing a negative consequence on him because of your choice, just as SUFC would be on Evans because of their choice; SUFC having made their choice because of the wider implications of employing a rapist.

Given that, I can't see what is wrong with people asserting to SUFC that the negative consequences outweigh the positive in re-employing him and should not do so. It is up to SUFC if they listen to that.