Least surprising news of the year

[Burney]

True. But either way it was always a decision which seemed to me to be very unclear, it could have gone either way as what is or is not, consent, is rather nebulous.

Given that, I was shocked at how vehement the condemnation of young Chad was given that an appeal process was underway and he seemed to have a very strong argument. It's almost as though some small-minded muppets quite liked the chance to jump up on their soapbox and come across all holier than thou.

I think it's more that he was one of the few high-profile(ish) footballers to actually be convicted of rape in this type of case, which meant he became the go-to case when people wanted to condemn the extremely dubious sexual attitudes and behaviours that appear to exist among some footballers.

Personally, I would be extremely wary of anyone who chooses to get on their high horse in his defence, since I suspect their agenda quite as much as I suspect the agendas of those who lined up to condemn someone who was, in fairness, a convicted rapist.

[Sir C]

The Guardian are already pretty much saying the retrial was weighted in his favour

They're pretty much dismissing the verdict. Maniacs.

[Monty92]

Ched Evans, not guilty

Are we now allowed to call his accuser a lying slag without getting told off by feminists?

[Burney]

Are we now allowed to call his accuser a lying slag without getting told off by feminists?

Not really, no. Him being found not guilty does not axiomatically make her a liar.

[World's End Stella]

Or perhaps he had been found guilty and they thought it was OK to comment... seeing as he served 2 1/2 yrs for this I don't think his defence was that clear cut to begin with.

Good luck to him, still shocked his g/f stood by him no matter what he had done

I think his defence was very clear cut, he always said that she consented. Given that he always denied his guilt, that he had a reasonable defence, that the consent aspect of any rape conviction is a difficult one to prove and that an appeal process was underway; if I was going to 'comment' I would have held back a little on the sanctimony.

Many did. Many others did not. The latter now look a right set of muppets imo. I'm thinking primarily of those people who openly petitioned for him to not be signed by a professional football club even though his appeal was underway.

[Monty92]

I think it's more that he was one of the few high-profile(ish) footballers to actually be convicted of rape in this type of case, which meant he became the go-to case when people wanted to condemn the extremely dubious sexual attitudes and behaviours that appear to exist among some footballers.

Personally, I would be extremely wary of anyone who chooses to get on their high horse in his defence, since I suspect their agenda quite as much as I suspect the agendas of those who lined up to condemn someone who was, in fairness, a convicted rapist.

What about if that agenda is condemning the escalating trend of false rape accusations?

[Monty92]

Not really, no. Him being found not guilty does not axiomatically make her a liar.

Of course. But where would your money be?

[Pokster]

I think his defence was very clear cut, he always said that she consented. Given that he always denied his guilt, that he had a reasonable defence, that the consent aspect of any rape conviction is a difficult one to prove and that an appeal process was underway; if I was going to 'comment' I would have held back a little on the sanctimony.

Many did. Many others did not. The latter now look a right set of muppets imo. I'm thinking primarily of those people who openly petitioned for him to not be signed by a professional football club even though his appeal was underway.

Well until recently he was a convicted rapist... so not wanting your FC to sign him seems a normal thing to me.... would your company be happt to employ a convicted rapist if he was out on appeal?

[World's End Stella]

I think it's more that he was one of the few high-profile(ish) footballers to actually be convicted of rape in this type of case, which meant he became the go-to case when people wanted to condemn the extremely dubious sexual attitudes and behaviours that appear to exist among some footballers.

Personally, I would be extremely wary of anyone who chooses to get on their high horse in his defence, since I suspect their agenda quite as much as I suspect the agendas of those who lined up to condemn someone who was, in fairness, a convicted rapist.

What do you think is the agenda of those who defend him, exactly?

[Monty92]

Of course. But where would your money be?

I should probably add here that even if Evans' version of events is entirely true, I still consider that type of behaviour reprehensible.