|
African AIDS cum posted:What did the video show, what positions, did she take on both dudes at once? Who is asking the important questions here? Ched licked her out after she'd taken a pounding from his powerful friend.
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 23:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 12:23 |
|
|
reminder i dont know or care whether she consented or didnt
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 23:20
|
|
|
stickyfngrdboy posted:reminder i dont know or care whether she consented or didnt Rapist.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 23:21
|
|
|
sassassin posted:Rapist. yeah but i got away with it it's really easy to get away with rape and you have to be well guilty and an idiot to get done
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 23:21
|
|
|
sassassin posted:Ched licked her out after she'd taken a pounding from his powerful friend. He ate the creampie? Ugh gross. No wonder he went to prison, if I was on the jury or whatever they have in England probably people in white wigs dressed all weird, I'd have voted to convict as well. Disgusting.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 23:22
|
|
|
stickyfngrdboy posted:lol omfg you're mental, please tell me what I'm missing. here I'll sum up what I got How, when the victim said she was too inebriated to give consent to either man, did the jury determine that she was lucid enough to give consent until the exact moment when Macdonald stopped having sex with her and Evans started?
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 23:24
|
|
|
blue footed boobie posted:How, when the victim said she was too inebriated to give consent to either man, did the jury determine that she was lucid enough to give consent until the exact moment when Macdonald stopped having sex with her and Evans started? Its cool that you work in law lol should have quoted this
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 23:25
|
|
|
blue footed boobie posted:How, when the victim said she was too inebriated to give consent to either man, did the jury determine that she was lucid enough to give consent until the exact moment when Macdonald stopped having sex with her and Evans started? yes
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 23:25
|
|
|
Weren't they tried separately? That's not a distinction each jury would have to make.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 23:27
|
|
|
blue footed boobie posted:How, when the victim said she was too inebriated to give consent to either man, did the jury determine that she was lucid enough to give consent until the exact moment when Macdonald stopped having sex with her and Evans started? They have hosed up weird laws there. No wonder the Pilgrims left. Completely arbitrary.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 23:27
|
|
|
blue footed boobie posted:How, when the victim said she was too inebriated to give consent to either man, did the jury determine that she was lucid enough to give consent until the exact moment when Macdonald stopped having sex with her and Evans started? Because it implies consent that she sought out McDonald at a kebab shop and willingly followed her to a hotel room. Remember Ched Evans showed up later, and we only have biased witnesses words that she said yes to him. She following McDonald ensures that McDonald had belief to think she consented, not that she did consent. Ched Evans showing up and starting to gently caress her means that he has no right to believe she had given consent. *going full D&D with bolding and cursive, mmm*
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 23:28
|
|
|
Hegay posted:Because it implies consent that she sought out McDonald at a kebab shop and willingly followed her to a hotel room. Remember Ched Evans showed up later, and we only have biased witnesses words that she said yes to him. She following McDonald ensures that McDonald had belief to think she consented, not that she did consent. Ched Evans showing up and starting to gently caress her means that he has no right to believe she had given consent. he works with law and still doesnt' get it lol
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 23:30
|
|
|
blue footed boobie posted:How, when the victim said she was too inebriated to give consent to either man, did the jury determine that she was lucid enough to give consent until the exact moment when Macdonald stopped having sex with her and Evans started? get this, they didn't determine any of that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 23:30
|
|
|
Hegay posted:Because it implies consent that she sought out McDonald at a kebab shop and willingly followed her to a hotel room. Remember Ched Evans showed up later, and we only have biased witnesses words that she said yes to him. She following McDonald ensures that McDonald had belief to think she consented, not that she did consent. Ched Evans showing up and starting to gently caress her means that he has no right to believe she had given consent. JaClayton should have known she was too drunk to consent to a kebab.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 23:30
|
|
|
Jose posted:he works with law and still doesnt' get it lol does bfb actually work in law and if so did he represent ched evans and if so well it obvious why he got done
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 23:31
|
|
|
stickyfngrdboy posted:does bfb actually work in law and if so did he represent ched evans and if so well it obvious why he got done he's american so unlikely but i'm pretty sure his job is something involving lawyers
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 23:32
|
|
|
Jose posted:he's american so unlikely but i'm pretty sure his job is something involving lawyers Oh I didnt realise he was even american sorry bfb.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 23:32
|
|
|
Either Ched Evans showed up and got enraged at seeing his fellow athletic team mate with a white girl, or he got *starts sniggering* cucked
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 23:34
|
|
|
Jose posted:he's american so unlikely but i'm pretty sure his job is something involving lawyers I'm an actual lawyer but tbf I don't think the analysis that Hegav posted is applicable under US law. The question in this situation for us is only whether the person was too intoxicated to give consent.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 23:36
|
|
|
blue footed boobie posted:I'm an actual lawyer but tbf I don't think the analysis that Hegav posted is applicable under US law. The question in this situation for us is only whether the person was too intoxicated to give consent. Well the only evidence made public is that shew was according to the jury
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 23:37
|
|
|
blue footed boobie posted:I'm an actual lawyer but tbf I don't think the analysis that Hegav posted is applicable under US law. The question in this situation for us is only whether the person was too intoxicated to give consent. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/section/1 s1(c) is the important bit. If she claims she didn't consent but McDonald has a reasonable belief that she did then it's not rape. It's up to the jury whether they feel the belief was reasonable given the full circumstances of the case.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 23:40
|
|
|
Jose posted:he's american so unlikely but i'm pretty sure his job is something involving lawyers This type of doxxing is not allowed. Enjoy your ban, alleged rapist.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 00:08
|
|
|
African AIDS cum posted:What did the video show, what positions, did she take on both dudes at once? Who is asking the important questions here? they did all the positions: on top, doggy, and normal
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 00:20
|
|
|
The appeal was already rejected. Its some other weird legal review(i dunno) that is ongoing. As people have rightly pointed out, the cases of the two dudes were considered separately by the jury, albeit as part of the same trial. The differences in terms of assumed consent seem to have decided the outcomes for the two defendants. What the appeal application seems to have suggested if nothing else is that the guy found not guilty of his own case of rape has basically escaped any censure for his part in the second rape. That is where the confusion/disconnect with a lot of people in this thread seems to be. Basically the logically impeccable version of this verdict would be one where the first dude remains not guilty of 'his' rape but guilty of aiding or whatever the term is of the second rape(which for all I know is just rape again anyway). Evans remains guilty. None of this is relevant to what to do now with a guy still found guilty of this offence. I'm not sure the law is up to date in terms of dealing with modern internet nonsense when it comes to cases of people in the public eye like this, for instance Chris Huhne and his wife's ability to return to their pre-sentence positions. Huhne has not legally, but effectively, been prevented from returning to his role in government. I grant there are differences but basically he knew/was advised it wasn't on (possibly also it legally wasn't?). Whereas Evans hasn't been given the headsup on loving off. In this case I hope the clubs or FA do it for him and tell him he isn't welcome.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 03:16
|
|
|
Palermo would hire him
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 04:40
|
|
|
sassassin posted:I don't think the people demanding he disappear forever from public life have the moral high ground, and are mostly just scaremongering idiots with no faith in the justice system or humanity in general. To be honest, do you really have that much faith in the justice system? Evans probably got a lighter sentencing than your average person would have gotten (maybe because of his ability to sign a good lawyer, maybe because of his status) and, with the rate of re-imprisonments the way they are, can anyone really say prison in itself is rehabilitating people?
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 05:02
|
|
|
Vinestalk posted:To be honest, do you really have that much faith in the justice system? Evans probably got a lighter sentencing than your average person would have gotten (maybe because of his ability to sign a good lawyer, maybe because of his status) and, with the rate of re-imprisonments the way they are, can anyone really say prison in itself is rehabilitating people? Your issues should be with the lawmakers and judges, and the prison wardens, then 
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 10:38
|
|
|
Vinestalk posted:To be honest, do you really have that much faith in the justice system? Evans probably got a lighter sentencing than your average person would have gotten (maybe because of his ability to sign a good lawyer, maybe because of his status) and, with the rate of re-imprisonments the way they are, can anyone really say prison in itself is rehabilitating people? Are you suggesting Ched is going to rape again?
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 13:03
|
|
|
He'll have the good sense to put on a Ryan Giggs mask this time.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 13:47
|
|
|
Eau de MacGowan posted:He'll have the good sense to put on a Ryan Giggs mask this time. It's not rape if it's with a consenting member of your own family.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 14:21
|
|
|
Shrapnig posted:It's not rape if it's with a consenting member of your own family. Phew, that's a load off my chest right there
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 15:51
|
|
|
dex_sda posted:Phew, that's a load off my chest right there more like a load on your chest
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 15:55
|
|
|
chuggo is BACK posted:more like a load on your chest well yes
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 15:57
|
|
|
chuggo is BACK posted:more like a load on your chest Ahaha
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 15:59
|
|
|
dex_sda posted:Your issues should be with the lawmakers and judges, and the prison wardens, then My issue is with them. I don't think I implied otherwise. Bogan Krkic posted:Are you suggesting Ched is going to rape again? No. I think he might do something similarly stupid like driving drunk or assaulting someone in a bar though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 16:08
|
|
|
Vinestalk posted:No. I think he might do something similarly stupid like driving drunk or assaulting someone in a bar though. Why? Because he's Welsh? This is some serious prejudice here.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 16:32
|
|
|
Vinestalk posted:My issue is with them. I don't think I implied otherwise. fair enough, you responded to a post that argued in the context of extrajudiciary punishment for evans so it looked like you were arguing for that. Sorry for the confusion
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 16:35
|
|
|
Bogan Krkic posted:Are you suggesting Ched is going to rape again? He hasn't shown any sort of remorse or guilt for what he has done.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 16:52
|
|
|
Pantsuit posted:He hasn't shown any sort of remorse or guilt for what he has done. Could that be because hes innocent OP?
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 16:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 12:23 |
|
|
Pantsuit posted:He hasn't shown any sort of remorse or guilt for what he has done. He apologized for adultery.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 16:59
|
|