Discussion
McClure said:
Blaster72 said:
epom said:
He has now served his time, and will continue to do so for a much longer time than people who have committed far more heinous and disgusting crimes (yet are not in the public eye).
I and hundreds of thousands of other workers in this country have to have regular CRB checks after which a crime like this would mean I would lose everything. My career would end and I'd never be able to work in most jobs again. To suggest he's going to be worse off because he's in the public eye is a little far fetched.
Edited by Blaster72 on Wednesday 12th November 13:21
I would lose the profession I've studied for and worked in since I was 18. He is free to learn to be a bricky, or plumber, or chippy, or any other vocation that other ex-cons do.
You aren't happy for him to be under the gaze of 20,000 people while he's at work, but going to a woman's house alone as a plumber is your idea of better?
irocfan said:
SpeckledJim said:
You haven't really thought that through.
You aren't happy for him to be under the gaze of 20,000 people while he's at work, but going to a woman's house alone as a plumber is your idea of better?
it's all because of the money innit - he's a crim & so should be poorYou aren't happy for him to be under the gaze of 20,000 people while he's at work, but going to a woman's house alone as a plumber is your idea of better?
If it was about protecting vulnerable women, working in the virtually all-male environment of a football club and performing in front of thousands is a perfectly reasonable occupation.
Most of the normal jobs suggested would give him far more access to women (whom we must apparently assume he will bundle up an alley and pounce on)
If, however, it is about punishing him beyond that deemed appropriate by the courts, then I can see that preventing him playing football for large amounts of money would hold some appeal.
Many are holding the first decision of the court as an absolute - "HE IS A RAPIST - THE COURT IS CERTAINLY RIGHT" but disregard the very next decision of the court - "HE HAS NOT BEEN SUFFICIENTLY PUNISHED - THE COURT IS CERTAINLY WRONG".
Efbe said:
and footballers are definately role models. without doubt. which other actual definate real people do children want to be which they can single out the person's name of. Named football shirts should surely be the best indication of this.
Parents get to control whose name goes on the back of their kids shirts. Why can't a parent say to a kid "you're not having that players name on your shirt, because although he's a good footballer, he's not actually a very nice human being and not the type of person you should be looking up to"? It's not Evans's fault if kids have crap parents who don't care. My kids were always made fully aware by me that some of the star players in our favourite team were not the kind of men to be admired, beyond their ability to kick a ball.
Several times in this thread the claim has been made that the jury convicted partially on the basis of contemporaneous video evidence from someone's phone.
I have read acres about this case, but found no reference to that (not saying it's wrong, I just haven't found any reference to it).
In one version there is a claim that people outside the room tried to film the goings on but that the resulting footage was too poor to yield any evidence of anything.
I have read acres about this case, but found no reference to that (not saying it's wrong, I just haven't found any reference to it).
In one version there is a claim that people outside the room tried to film the goings on but that the resulting footage was too poor to yield any evidence of anything.
Efbe said:
as has been posted numerous times before...
In many if not most other professions there are certain things you can do wrong that mean you can never return to this line of work, sentence passed or not.
I for one can never have a bad credit record, kill anyone, rape, steal, abh, gbh etc etc. and ever think of returning to my career.
and he will come into contact with hundreds of people, support staff, other players, youth team who have no say in any of this.
and footballers are definately role models. without doubt. which other actual definate real people do children want to be which they can single out the person's name of. Named football shirts should surely be the best indication of this.
And why should he get rehabilitated ito the same job? If my colleague raped someone, I wouldn't work with them, served their time or not. They can go and get another job, the types of which have been discussed before
Society seems very willing to forgive and forget a lot of celebrities when it suits them. For example:In many if not most other professions there are certain things you can do wrong that mean you can never return to this line of work, sentence passed or not.
I for one can never have a bad credit record, kill anyone, rape, steal, abh, gbh etc etc. and ever think of returning to my career.
and he will come into contact with hundreds of people, support staff, other players, youth team who have no say in any of this.
and footballers are definately role models. without doubt. which other actual definate real people do children want to be which they can single out the person's name of. Named football shirts should surely be the best indication of this.
And why should he get rehabilitated ito the same job? If my colleague raped someone, I wouldn't work with them, served their time or not. They can go and get another job, the types of which have been discussed before
Roman Polanski - convicted of having sex with a 13 year old, never returned to the US to face the courts
Matthew Broderick - killed two people whilst driving on the wrong side of the road, fined $175
Tim Allen - served 2 1/2 years in jail for cocaine possession
Jay-Z - stabbed a man in the stomach
Cheryl Cole - ABH
Laura Bush (George W's wife) went through a stop sign and killed another driver, never charged
Chris Brown - beat Rihanna's face to a pulp, released a song called I Can Transform Ya
Bill Wyman - dated a 13 year old
Don King - stamped someone to death because they owed him $600
Duane Chapman (Dog the Bounty Hunter) - first degree murder
Vanilla Ice - several domestic assault charges and threatening a man with a gun
Mike Tyson - rape, assault
James Brown - theft, assault, firearm possession, domestic violence
Mark Wahlburg - attempted murder
Tupac Shakur - assault, sexual battery
Chuck Berry - armed robbery, sex wit a 14 year old
and that's before we even get in to the countless drug possession or drink driving charges, and people who it could be argued were found not guilty as opposed to innocent on serious charges (Michael Jackson, OJ Simpson, Snoop Dogg etc). Pretty much all of the above are well respected and could be argued to be role models, but still have careers
Negative Creep said:
Society seems very willing to forgive and forget a lot of celebrities when it suits them. For example:
Roman Polanski - convicted of having sex with a 13 year old, never returned to the US to face the courts
Matthew Broderick - killed two people whilst driving on the wrong side of the road, fined $175
Tim Allen - served 2 1/2 years in jail for cocaine possession
Jay-Z - stabbed a man in the stomach
Cheryl Cole - ABH
Laura Bush (George W's wife) went through a stop sign and killed another driver, never charged
Chris Brown - beat Rihanna's face to a pulp, released a song called I Can Transform Ya
Bill Wyman - dated a 13 year old
Don King - stamped someone to death because they owed him $600
Duane Chapman (Dog the Bounty Hunter) - first degree murder
Vanilla Ice - several domestic assault charges and threatening a man with a gun
Mike Tyson - rape, assault
James Brown - theft, assault, firearm possession, domestic violence
Mark Wahlburg - attempted murder
Tupac Shakur - assault, sexual battery
Chuck Berry - armed robbery, sex wit a 14 year old
and that's before we even get in to the countless drug possession or drink driving charges, and people who it could be argued were found not guilty as opposed to innocent on serious charges (Michael Jackson, OJ Simpson, Snoop Dogg etc). Pretty much all of the above are well respected and could be argued to be role models, but still have careers
yep, and maybe that isn't right either.Roman Polanski - convicted of having sex with a 13 year old, never returned to the US to face the courts
Matthew Broderick - killed two people whilst driving on the wrong side of the road, fined $175
Tim Allen - served 2 1/2 years in jail for cocaine possession
Jay-Z - stabbed a man in the stomach
Cheryl Cole - ABH
Laura Bush (George W's wife) went through a stop sign and killed another driver, never charged
Chris Brown - beat Rihanna's face to a pulp, released a song called I Can Transform Ya
Bill Wyman - dated a 13 year old
Don King - stamped someone to death because they owed him $600
Duane Chapman (Dog the Bounty Hunter) - first degree murder
Vanilla Ice - several domestic assault charges and threatening a man with a gun
Mike Tyson - rape, assault
James Brown - theft, assault, firearm possession, domestic violence
Mark Wahlburg - attempted murder
Tupac Shakur - assault, sexual battery
Chuck Berry - armed robbery, sex wit a 14 year old
and that's before we even get in to the countless drug possession or drink driving charges, and people who it could be argued were found not guilty as opposed to innocent on serious charges (Michael Jackson, OJ Simpson, Snoop Dogg etc). Pretty much all of the above are well respected and could be argued to be role models, but still have careers
Difference is with musicians, the customers directly have a choice, with sportspeople it's a bit different. When many/most supporters are so emotively linked to a club and have been for generations, you can't say to walk with their feet. When sponsors are tied into contracts they can't leave, when staff members are faced with no income they can't leave. But the decision is being made by a very small group of people on purely financial reasons.
as a side note, didn't know that about Mark Wahlburg, will have to read up on that one
Blaster72 said:
Bluebarge said:
3. you neatly side-stepped the point about the safety of his conviction;
4. our justice system is based on the principle of rehabilitation - not one of the opportunistic and emotional arguments surrounding Ched Evans is strong enough to over-turn that principle.
He already had two attempts at appeals quashed.4. our justice system is based on the principle of rehabilitation - not one of the opportunistic and emotional arguments surrounding Ched Evans is strong enough to over-turn that principle.
He has not been rehabilitated and still denies he did anything wrong.
McClure said:
irocfan said:
it's all because of the money innit - he's a crim & so should be poor
Yes. It's all because criminals should be poor. 
It irritates me a bit, like when scumbags win the lotto, but I won't lose any sleep over it.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
I think there's an element of truth in that. I think people are just furious that a convicted rapist who has shown no remorse will earn far more money than they will.
It irritates me a bit, like when scumbags win the lotto, but I won't lose any sleep over it.
We are all criminals - just some of us got caught. If you think you have never broken the law, you are either deluded or have lived an incredibly boring life. It irritates me a bit, like when scumbags win the lotto, but I won't lose any sleep over it.
One act in time doesn't define a person, lots of acts don't. Look at who he is and the harm he is going to do in the future if you want to judge him. Realistically he will play football and have a reasonable life with his fiancé. The hate is simply sad little people with too much time on their hands.
Blaster72 said:
He's sticking to the story of it being consensual sex. The prosecution used evidence to prove the woman was intoxicated to such an extent that she couldn't consent and that she had in fact been raped.
This is what I find so unusual about the Ched Evans case. If she was so intoxicated as to not be able to give consent to Evans, then surely she was also too intoxicated to give consent to Clayton McDonald too, yet he walked? Not defending either here, but surely if one is guilty then both are, if the measurement of her ability to give consent is the girl's degree of intoxication?
This assumes that she was not subjected to further alcoholic consumption between, ahem, 'finishing' with McDonald and 'starting' with Evans. No such evidence was put before the Court. As a layman it seems the law is unclear in this case.
Efbe said:
yep, and maybe that isn't right either.
Difference is with musicians, the customers directly have a choice, with sportspeople it's a bit different. When many/most supporters are so emotively linked to a club and have been for generations, you can't say to walk with their feet. When sponsors are tied into contracts they can't leave, when staff members are faced with no income they can't leave. But the decision is being made by a very small group of people on purely financial reasons.
as a side note, didn't know that about Mark Wahlburg, will have to read up on that one
I can see your point, although I don't see many people boycotting the Rolling Stones because of what their drummer did, or Toy Story because Buzz is a drug dealer, so it seems when part of an ensemble it's easier to forgive.Difference is with musicians, the customers directly have a choice, with sportspeople it's a bit different. When many/most supporters are so emotively linked to a club and have been for generations, you can't say to walk with their feet. When sponsors are tied into contracts they can't leave, when staff members are faced with no income they can't leave. But the decision is being made by a very small group of people on purely financial reasons.
as a side note, didn't know that about Mark Wahlburg, will have to read up on that one
Matthew Broderick was the one that shocked me - who'd have thought Ferris Bueller killed two people and basically got away with it?!
. I think it's fair to say any team who do sign him will suffer a PR whiplash too.photosnob said:
We are all criminals - just some of us got caught. If you think you have never broken the law, you are either deluded or have lived an incredibly boring life.
One act in time doesn't define a person, lots of acts don't. Look at who he is and the harm he is going to do in the future if you want to judge him. Realistically he will play football and have a reasonable life with his fiancé. The hate is simply sad little people with too much time on their hands.
Possibly the most idiotic post I've ever read on PH. And believe me, there's plenty of competition.One act in time doesn't define a person, lots of acts don't. Look at who he is and the harm he is going to do in the future if you want to judge him. Realistically he will play football and have a reasonable life with his fiancé. The hate is simply sad little people with too much time on their hands.
He raped someone ffs! I've never raped anyone. I have been done for speeding, but I'm not convinced the two are comparable.
Using your logic, we may as well let Ian Huntley out. After all, one act doesn't define a person!
Christ, 50 million sperm and you were the quickest!
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Possibly the most idiotic post I've ever read on PH. And believe me, there's plenty of competition.
He raped someone ffs! I've never raped anyone. I have been done for speeding, but I'm not convinced the two are comparable.
Using your logic, we may as well let Ian Huntley out. After all, one act doesn't define a person!
Christ, 50 million sperm and you were the quickest!
I am deeply offended by your nasty comments. He raped someone ffs! I've never raped anyone. I have been done for speeding, but I'm not convinced the two are comparable.
Using your logic, we may as well let Ian Huntley out. After all, one act doesn't define a person!
Christ, 50 million sperm and you were the quickest!
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Using your logic, we may as well let Ian Huntley out. After all, one act doesn't define a person!
Er, we're going to let him out ONCE HE'S SERVED HIS SENTENCE, which is the whole point.Evans has served his sentence.
In your opinion how long should we carry on punishing him for? The Judge/Law said 'call it day at 2 1/2 years'.
NorfolkEnchants said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Using your logic, we may as well let Ian Huntley out. After all, one act doesn't define a person!
Er, we're going to let him out ONCE HE'S SERVED HIS SENTENCE, which is the whole point.Evans has served his sentence.
In your opinion how long should we carry on punishing him for? The Judge/Law said 'call it day at 2 1/2 years'.
He raped someone, so that act does define him. It defines him as a rapist. And despite my criminal past for speeding, I am entitled to judge him, and I judge him to be a rapist.
Gassing Station | Football | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff