Hucknall Ram Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 Should off the field matters determine on a award that based on on the field matters? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McRamFan Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 Don't the players pick the PFA team though so its not really the PFAs fault Yeap the players pick them Febuary, however it would have saved some embarassment for the PFA if they choose the runner up. I would assume there are a few players that are gutted that they picked him. More breaking news, Sky News outed the girl live on TV this morning.....I'm sure Leveson would be interested in that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bris Vegas Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4275560/Football-rapist-Ched-Evanss-girl-Free-him-now.html Is his missus just plain stupid? Is she not even hurt by the fact he openly cheated on her with a random drunken lass... I'm pretty sure I'm not alone in saying that if my partner cheated on me I there is nothing they can do or say to make me stay with them.. 1 chance, that's all you get.. Not like these WAGS these days, they all stay despite their husbands playing away.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McRamFan Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 [url=http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4275560/Football-rapist-Ched-Evanss-girl-Free-him-now.html]http://www.thesun.co...ee-him-now.html Is his missus just plain stupid? Is she not even hurt by the fact he openly cheated on her with a random drunken lass... I'm pretty sure I'm not alone in saying that if my partner cheated on me I there is nothing they can do or say to make me stay with them.. 1 chance, that's all you get.. Not like these WAGS these days, they all stay despite their husbands playing away.. Its the nice houses and shopping trips and never having to lift a finger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luce86 Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 I just don't like the idea of if I was on a night out, after drinking heavily and I take a girl back we get into a situation where she passes out and then the next day the police knock on my door and I end up spending 5 years in prison, it's a sickening and worrying thought. It's not a case of "passing out", it's a case of a victim being too drunk to consent.... ie even if a person said "yes" the law does not consider them in a fit state for the victim to consent. Are you saying that, as in the case of the victim, if a girl you had just met was staggering around p***ed out of her head and slurring her words you would consider it acceptable to sexually penetrate her? If yes, it is your attitude that is "sickening and worrying". Horrific and disturbing attitude. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TigerTedd Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 I'm probably going to get stoned for this, but I'm on ambitious side here. If exactly the same thing happened to a bloke, and he cried rape, his mates would tell him to stop being an idiot. Are their different rules for guys and girls? Yes. But with the laddette culture, your just as likely to get a girl waking up groggy and thinking it was a bloody good night. That's the terrifying thing about being a bloke, if you pull a drunk girl, you flip a coin about whether or not they're going to wake up in the morning and cry rape. It's a very fine line, and its a hard one to call, especially if the guy's as drunk as the girl. Women are hard enough to read at the best of times. I've got a mate who was accused of rape, by an obsessed girl. Everything was in her favour by default, until it finally went to court and was thrown out in a heartbeat, because she was clearly just nuts. It's a scummy thing Evans did, jumping in on his mate, but people are getting considerably less than 5 years for murder, and I think its totally wrong how much power women have in these cases. <finds somewhere to hide before the inevitable backlash for being controversial> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ambitious Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 It's not a case of "passing out", it's a case of a victim being too drunk to consent.... ie even if a person said "yes" the law does not consider them in a fit state for the victim to consent. Are you saying that, as in the case of the victim, if a girl you had just met was staggering around p***ed out of her head and slurring her words you would consider it acceptable to sexually penetrate her? If yes, it is your attitude that is "sickening and worrying". Horrific and disturbing attitude. I wouldn't but how can someone get 5 years in prison for that? if I was that drunk and someone had took advantage of me, which lets face it... happens, I remember a couple of years ago where i was out (was young) and got completely out of my head drunk, and the next day I woke up to my mates telling me how some fat girl (their words not mine) had been trying to drag me out of the club, and despite throwing up over myself a lot and losing items of clothing, they all watched as I pushed her off.. I remember nothing, I do remember that being the night where I woke up in a random house, in a random village (fully dressed) went downstairs to an old couple that asked how I was and they found me... It is possible to be that drunk, if that girl got her way with me... would i thought of ringing the police, not a chance... it'd of just ended up being a story that I would tell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McRamFan Posted April 25, 2012 Share Posted April 25, 2012 I think some clarification is required: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/contents http://www.rapecrisis.org.uk/Definitionofrape2.php The above is the new law on what rape is, so a man cannot be raped by a women, that is classed as causing sexual activity without consent. 2nd link fills out the meaning more. The Morgan defence is here, and this is probably why Evans has been convicted, he thought she wouldn't mind, however he wasn't sure and she did mind. Basically consent has to be given and not assumed. http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2002/nov/20/ukcrime.prisonsandprobation3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 25, 2012 Share Posted April 25, 2012 I wouldn't but how can someone get 5 years in prison for that? if I was that drunk and someone had took advantage of me, which lets face it... happens, I remember a couple of years ago where i was out (was young) and got completely out of my head drunk, and the next day I woke up to my mates telling me how some fat girl (their words not mine) had been trying to drag me out of the club, and despite throwing up over myself a lot and losing items of clothing, they all watched as I pushed her off.. I remember nothing, I do remember that being the night where I woke up in a random house, in a random village (fully dressed) went downstairs to an old couple that asked how I was and they found me... It is possible to be that drunk, if that girl got her way with me... would i thought of ringing the police, not a chance... it'd of just ended up being a story that I would tell. Without going into to much detail, its a lot easier to prove a bloke giving consent with a woman than the other way round. So I ask you, how about though if it was a male who took advantage of you, would you still be telling your drunk story, or would you be upset ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastKentRam Posted April 25, 2012 Share Posted April 25, 2012 It's not a case of "passing out", it's a case of a victim being too drunk to consent.... ie even if a person said "yes" the law does not consider them in a fit state for the victim to consent. Are you saying that, as in the case of the victim, if a girl you had just met was staggering around p***ed out of her head and slurring her words you would consider it acceptable to sexually penetrate her? If yes, it is your attitude that is "sickening and worrying". Horrific and disturbing attitude. To be honest, if i was p*ssed up as well i'd do her. Surely this law is very controversial if it's based on how drunk somebody is. What if the bloke is out of his head as well? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Butthead Posted April 25, 2012 Share Posted April 25, 2012 how do they know how drunk a woman is for it to be rape, especially if it's reported the following day? do they breathalyse them and when? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luce86 Posted April 25, 2012 Share Posted April 25, 2012 how do they know how drunk a woman is for it to be rape, especially if it's reported the following day? do they breathalyse them and when? There is a significant amount of cctv footage of this woman too p***ed to walk, including footage of her falling over in a club and being too drunk to get up, with Evans staring at her, which he was questioned on in court. His defense was that he didn't realise it was the same woman in the hotel as he "was looking at her legs, not her face." We also don't know eg what the mobile phone footage contained, and other things the jury might have seen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randombc Posted April 25, 2012 Share Posted April 25, 2012 top lad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackNwhites Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 Reading between the lines but, sounds like it was premeditated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leeds Ram Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 I'm probably going to get stoned for this, but I'm on ambitious side here. If exactly the same thing happened to a bloke, and he cried rape, his mates would tell him to stop being an idiot. Are their different rules for guys and girls? Yes. But with the laddette culture, your just as likely to get a girl waking up groggy and thinking it was a bloody good night. That's the terrifying thing about being a bloke, if you pull a drunk girl, you flip a coin about whether or not they're going to wake up in the morning and cry rape. It's a very fine line, and its a hard one to call, especially if the guy's as drunk as the girl. Women are hard enough to read at the best of times. I've got a mate who was accused of rape, by an obsessed girl. Everything was in her favour by default, until it finally went to court and was thrown out in a heartbeat, because she was clearly just nuts. It's a scummy thing Evans did, jumping in on his mate, but people are getting considerably less than 5 years for murder, and I think its totally wrong how much power women have in these cases. <finds somewhere to hide before the inevitable backlash for being controversial> Please give an example of someone receiving a sentence of less than 5 years when they are convicted of the charge of murder in a court. Also slight misrepresentation of what ambitious said and what everyone else has said, ambitious said if they had passed out not just extremely drunk but if they had passed out. I presume you understand the difference. Now it should be use of common sense, if someone is so drunk out of their mind that they cannot walk then they obviously cannot consent, and if you aren't drunk in my mind that is taking advantage of someone in a vulnrable state. If you are both drunk and agree no-one can really complain in my view unless there is a big difference between how drunk. However to condone sex while someone has passed out is vile and morally and ethically repugnant. It stinks the most dirty stink which makes the sewer look clean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leeds Ram Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 I think one needs to be controversial, however there is a difference between being a contrarian standing up for rightous causes and just spouting nonsense, misrepresenting arguments and stating 'facts' which the daily mail coin up without a shred of evidence e.g "murderers receive considerably less than 5 years". This quite simply is not true, if you murder someone i.e you are charged with it and the trial comes to a guilty verdict of murder you will receive a minimum of around 13 years Iam led to believe. For under 18's it is only 12 years that is the minimum they can give. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sage Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 I can't believe some of the rape apologists on here. It's like going back to Neanderthal times. It appears that some people think if you stumble upon a semi-conscious girl/woman it's ok to have sex with her. Should men be able to have sex with women in comas? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ladyram Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 Reading between the lines but, sounds like it was premeditated. I thought the same thing and that they thought they wouldn't have any recriminations because they're well paid footballers and 'who'd believe her over us anyway, she's too p*ssed to know owt'. As for him sneaking out the fire exit in case his girlfriend rang him, I bet he couldn't get out quick enough! - what an absolute low life, and she's supporting him and standing by him? Has she no self respect? She should drop him, right in the gutter where he belongs - for his infidelity for a start, never mind what he's done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shake n Bake Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 Can't believe his Mrs is supporting him after he cheated on her in such a way. She probably needs his wages to carry on her lifestyle though. She's also quite fit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ladyram Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 Sky are in the dog house too for showing the victims name on the screen, this comes after police on the case about twitter first revealing it. The Home Secretary has said police will make arrests of guilty twits. In their defence Sky have apologised for this and the incident came about after 'heavy redaction and it was only on the screen for a second'. First off, they obviously haven't redacted enough seeing as they left the most crucial bit in there - and it was there for only a second.. Well that's alright then is it? And now, surprise surprise, she's getting all kinds of abuse. This beggars belief - and if the twitter mongs are to be believed, Ched Evans's sister continues to shout about his innocence and is planning (via fb I think) to hold a minutes applause for him at the match on Saturday. Yeah right, that'll go down well. It's astonishing that people can defend a convicted rapist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.