The Matthew Syed article from the Times yesterday

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

Fulwood Blade

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2009
Messages
8,188
Reaction score
12,093
Location
yes, Fulwood
I hope this doesn't give the forum/website any problems in terms of copywrite.

The original document is a scanned PDF, so not sure until "create thread" is pressed as to what will happen.

enjoy the read.

UTB
 

Attachments


Im
I hope this doesn't give the forum/website any problems in terms of copywrite.

The original document is a scanned PDF, so not sure until "create thread" is pressed as to what will happen.

enjoy the read.

UTB
I'm guessing this could cause potential copyright issues...
 
So he's basically making a very long winded point that people who have served their time should be given a second chance - regardless of their career. The same point that has been made by plenty of people throughout the whole Evans debate. I was expecting some fresh insight!
 
The comments about Joey Barton are interesting and put him in a different light.
 
So he's basically making a very long winded point that people who have served their time should be given a second chance - regardless of their career. The same point that has been made by plenty of people throughout the whole Evans debate. I was expecting some fresh insight!

Correct mate, except that Syed's message will reach a far larger audience and the ripple of this may cause abstainers or those in two minds to rethink their position. I agree completely that the same points have been made over and over, but I'd guess that many of these would be made on forums like this, which already speak to the converted. It can't do any harm for an article to appear in The Times that throws a spotlight on this issue. There'll be many who are either unaware, or partially aware, of this matter. If Syed's piece contributes to a more balanced discussion I can't see what harm it can do?
 
It certainly puts left wing politics into a dim light in this country if Joey is one our most influential left wing thinkers!

Bit like Jim Davidson (cunt) being the rights "go to" thinker.

Indeed. As I look at my shelf I see The Road to Serfdom, Anarchy, State and Utopia, and an old VHS of Sinderella.
 
Balanced article and correct to state that having served your time you should be able to return to your chosen profession.Cheds a footballer so let him, if good enough return to playing football!hopefully at Bramall Lane.
 
It certainly puts left wing politics into a dim light in this country if Joey is one our most influential left wing thinkers!

Bit like Jim Davidson (cunt) being the rights "go to" thinker.

Wasn't 'Sir Jimmy Saville' the rights "go to" thinker?
 

If Syed's piece contributes to a more balanced discussion I can't see what harm it can do?

I'd just read about this article in other threads and it was made to sound like an absolute epic, earth shattering piece. I'm exaggerating a bit, of course... I was just expecting it to bring something new to the table. But everything you say is completely true.
 
I'd just read about this article in other threads and it was made to sound like an absolute epic, earth shattering piece. I'm exaggerating a bit, of course... I was just expecting it to bring something new to the table. But everything you say is completely true.

Ah, point taken....sometimes exaggeration takes it's part in how a story is described.

This story is all over the media, and it will continue for some time I'm afraid. We have all the facts on here mate, and I've paid attention to Darren's take on how this has panned out. I think he's got it about right regarding Evans' likelihood of winning an appeal, unlikely it seems. On the assumption that Evans signs for the Blades (based on current potential, state of mind, how the rest of the squad take to the idea of having him on board etc) there are still stormy waters to be confronted, but that can wait. For now, this will run and run, and I hope that those around Evans have advised him of what awaits him. It won't be pretty, neither will it be comfortable, but this is the mess that's been waiting to happen.
 
Except that Evans could be issuing profuse apologies to all concerned. Telling us how much he has learned from the awful experience and that he wouldn't wish it on any one else. That he would be happy to do his bit to ensure that lads are very clear about their responsibilities through supporting work in schools etc. From now im a reformed character . I never thought at the time I could possibly be guilty of anything but the jury thought otherwise and that came as a complete shock. I'll still try to clear my name but I understand I have a lot of making up to do not least to my wonderful family and those who have stood by me etcetc
 
Except that Evans could be issuing profuse apologies to all concerned. Telling us how much he has learned from the awful experience and that he wouldn't wish it on any one else. That he would be happy to do his bit to ensure that lads are very clear about their responsibilities through supporting work in schools etc. From now im a reformed character . I never thought at the time I could possibly be guilty of anything but the jury thought otherwise and that came as a complete shock. I'll still try to clear my name but I understand I have a lot of making up to do not least to my wonderful family and those who have stood by me etcetc

Indeed. Facts not in dispute

Ched Evans, in an (apparently) monogamous relatoionship decided to go to an hotel room uninvited where he thinks his mate is having sex with a woman. He takes along other mates of his who he was (probably) aware were going to film the action (without the woman's consent). He goes into the room and precedes to have sex with a very drunk woman. I believe no condom was used so he also put the woman at risk of pregnancy and both her and his GF at the risk of an STD.

Plenty to apologise there for, I think, even if he did not rape her.
 
Indeed. Facts not in dispute

Ched Evans, in an (apparently) monogamous relatoionship decided to go to an hotel room uninvited where he thinks his mate is having sex with a woman. He takes along other mates of his who he was (probably) aware were going to film the action (without the woman's consent). He goes into the room and precedes to have sex with a very drunk woman. I believe no condom was used so he also put the woman at risk of pregnancy and both her and his GF at the risk of an STD.

Plenty to apologise there for, I think, even if he did not rape her.


Genuine question, how come they weren't prosecuted too?
 
Genuine question, how come they weren't prosecuted too?

No idea. They probably could have been done for voyeurism. Perhaps they were cautioned. It's the sort of thing you would get a caution for for a first offence, especially when the CPS have much bigger fish to fry.
 
They were certainly guilty of this:

Sexual Offences Act 2003
Section 67 - Voyeurism

(3) A person commits an offence if-
(a) he records another person (B) doing a private act,
(b) he does so with the intention that he or a third person will, for the purpose of obtaining sexual gratification, look at an image of B doing the act, and
(c) he knows that B does not consent to his recording the act with that intention.
 

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