Ched Evans

[XM5ER]

Halb said:

Took me a while to recall which raper footaller this one was.
What with that other current fella.

Think of him as the sloppy seconds rapist.

[PurpleTurtle]

Judgement reserved until mid April, but prosecution going for a retrial if his conviction is overturned:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3505761/Ch...

[irocfan]

photosnob said:

But I am interested in how this turns out. And I want to know what evidence has come out.

this ^^^ staggering really given how long it's been going on that 'new evidence has come to light'

[mgreenwood]

Conviction overturned but must face re-trial

[Trevatanus]

mgreenwood said:

Conviction overturned but must face re-trial

The only sensible outcome IMHO.

[agtlaw]

mgreenwood said:

Conviction overturned but must face re-trial

Rape conviction quashed. Plea hearing must be within 2 months. Trial some time thereafter (unless the CPS decides otherwise).

Reporting restrictions remain in place - the complainant is entitled to lifelong anonymity.

[hornetrider]

Well well well. Who knew eh?

Will the guy who got off be subject to retrial?

I feel sorry for the Daily Mail. They'll no longer be allowed to write 'CONVICTED RAPIST CHED EVANS' in every gossip story about his mrs going down to the shops.

[PurpleTurtle]

Well well well.

'relevant and admissable evidence has come to light that was not available at trial and undermines the safety of his conviction'

http://news.sky.com/story/1682660/ched-evans-wins-...

[CAPP0]

I do hope that if this is all finally put to bed, all the yelpers who were quick to put him down, threaten to withdraw support etc etc will have the backbone to stand up and apologise. but I won't hold my breath.

[Halb]

hornetrider said:

I feel sorry for the Daily Mail. They'll no longer be allowed to write 'CONVICTED RAPIST CHED EVANS' in every gossip story about his mrs going down to the shops.

Poor DM.

[agtlaw]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

I can't see that 'claim' getting very far. Presumably against the relevant police force for malicious prosecution?

[Cie]

Halb said:

hornetrider said:

I feel sorry for the Daily Mail. They'll no longer be allowed to write 'CONVICTED RAPIST CHED EVANS' in every gossip story about his mrs going down to the shops.

Poor DM.

That was my first thought.

[irocfan]

agtlaw said:

anonymous said:

[redacted]

I can't see that 'claim' getting very far. Presumably against the relevant police force for malicious prosecution?

What about the restraint on trade since his release and the lynch mob on ttter?

[PurpleTurtle]

irocfan said:

agtlaw said:

anonymous said:

[redacted]

I can't see that 'claim' getting very far. Presumably against the relevant police force for malicious prosecution?

What about the restraint on trade since his release and the lynch mob on ttter?

Paddy Hill of the Birmingham Six got £1m compo, but only after doing 16 years bird then having to negotiate for TEN years to get it, in what is arguably the most memorable miscarriage of justice case in our lifetimes.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2002/jun/09/no...

Much as I have sympathy for Evans' trial by media, and I would emphasise that he still faces a retrial and needs to be found innocent, before any compensation could be considered. I doubt he'll get too far with a compo claim of that magnitude. It will be a 'sorry son, we didn't have the (new) evidence, so we did what we thought was right at the time'.

[anonymous-user]

agtlaw said:

anonymous said:

[redacted]

I can't see that 'claim' getting very far. Presumably against the relevant police force for malicious prosecution?

Perhaps his original defence are looking in thethe bottombottom drawer of their desk for their PI cover.

Is he using the same bunch this time?

[Halb]

Unless the original judge didn't allow the 'new' evidence to validate Ched's presumed innocence, I don't see how compensation should be forthcoming? From whom?

[Halb]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

If I was innocent I'd be out for blood. I'd be most angry at why my defence didn't have this evidence.

[PurpleTurtle]

^^^^ whilst I don't disagree with any of that, who would he be claiming against? The Police, the CPS, his original Defence brief, the complainant?

I think the crux of this is the exact nature of the 'new evidence'. Only when it becomes public at retrial will we know why it wasn't available at the original hearing.

[anonymous-user]

Halb said:

If I was innocent I'd be out for blood. I'd be most angry at why my defence didn't have this evidence.

Would be even worse if they had it and didn't use it!

[anonymous-user]

If he's found NG in the re-trial it'll be a bit of a travesty since this has written off so much of his career.

PurpleTurtle said:

^^^^ whilst I don't disagree with any of that, who would he be claiming against? The Police, the CPS, his original Defence brief, the complainant?

Exactly. It's ok saying, "He'll sue for £20 million", but that needs to translate into reality. Both in terms of who he'll be taking the money from and the law / mechanisms for doing so.