Ched Evans back in football. Yes or No ?

So this is a moral debate here.

Not sure if people here are familiar with his case or not, but before that night in 2012, He was a young Promising championship striker and had got caps with Wales NT as well.

then in 2012, one day he and one of his mates go out......yada yada yada....a 19 year girl wakes up naked in a hotel room. Claims she was drinking and then has no memories of last night...and police investigate and find out she had sex with both footballers. The other guy gets cleared, while Ched Evans gets convoked as a rapist by jury. He just got out of jail last week after serving 2.5 years. He still insists that he was innocent and is filing for miscarriage of justice court to clear his name.
rape verdict came as the girl says she doesn't remember a thing, so that goes under category of "being too drunk to consent". Weird that Evans' friend who slept with the girl first wasn't known guilty. From what I read, both sexual intercourses happened almost consecutively, not sure what the legal explanation is there. Anyways...

It appears his former club (before prison and the incident), Sheff Utd, may be keen to re-sign him. Some fans are creating a petition with 150k to not make it happen.
I've seen people say, just like any other criminal, he's served his time, and should be allowed to get back to his profession. On the other hand, to walk back to his celebrity status after such a serious crime doesn't look good for the society, does it ?


Just want to hear people's opinions. 10 EPL players got back to playing in PL after serving jail time, but none was for rape (Which in my opinion is worse than murder). In case you want to read the case in detail, feel free to google it.


EDIT: The victim changed her name and emigrated from the city because of the abuse she was getting off Evans' fans after the verdict, and just to be able to live normally again. but sadly it appears that her new identity has been leaked according to tomorrow's papers.

Yes. It's not been proven that he raped her.

Yohan Modric wrote:Yes. It's not been proven that he raped her.

He was convicted. A jury found him guilty.

An important piece of information missing from the OP is that she was already wasted when she stumbled into Ched Evans and his friend and there is video evidence of her being unable to walk straight. It's not like she met them for drinks and they all got gradually drunk together.

He was convicted, but that's just the jury's decision. The player's denying it and there's no concrete evidence showing he raped her.

Difficult one. I think it comes down to whether they believe it was a once off offence or do they think he'll be a repeat offender.

If it's the former, he should be allowed, not all footballers are angels. If it's the latter, no way.

At the end of the day, if the club want to take him on, why not?

Yohan Modric wrote:He was convicted, but that's just the jury's decision. The player's denying it and there's no concrete evidence showing he raped her.

If a jury convicts someone of rape then they must be reasonably sure. They cannot be reasonably sure without evidence.

BarrileteCosmico wrote:

Yohan Modric wrote:He was convicted, but that's just the jury's decision. The player's denying it and there's no concrete evidence showing he raped her.

If a jury convicts someone of rape then they must be reasonably sure. They cannot be reasonably sure without evidence.

well it's not like people have never been wrongly convicted by juries before

In a perfectly legal sense:

There is no reason a convicted felon could not hold a job after serving their time.

In a moral sense:

This is somewhat shaky case. First, this is not "rape", its statuary rape which is still reprehensible, and a crime.
Second, there is the fact his friend went completely free, and the fact that he only served 2.5 years. If there were actual strong evidence on him, it would have been more.

On Juries:

Juries have, do, and will always manage to, convict innocent people. In the same vain, they do release guilty people as well. Being convicted of crime does not necessarily mean you actually "done" it, nor doe being found not guilty actually means O.J. did not kill his wife.

On western society:

If, ex-criminals will not be provided the same rights as everyone else, why not lock them up or kill them outright. It does not make sense to discriminate against ex-cons if the rules society put in frees them after they serve their time.

Absolutely he should be allowed back in the game if there just are clubs willing to offer him a contract.

"_____ signs convicted rapist"

Yeah, that will look awesome in the newspapers. That's an entire saga of bad publicity all clubs can do without

Surprised no one has asked if the guy is any good yet

I mean if he plays great then you'll get the crowd going "This lad is innocent ffs" but if he is scrubbing it it'll be like "I knew that mofo was guilty "

Strictly speaking the dude served his time under a conviction by a jury (whether or not a jury should even be allowed to make that decision is another debate) so he should be allowed to re-enter society.

The real question from a club's standpoint is whether or not he's worth the trouble.

If he at least attempted to appear sorry I would think he deserves a fair shake back in Football, but he won't even admit that much.

Of course he was guilty, and the jury saw to that.

Why would he appear sorry though? According to him he didn't do it and if he really believes that and he was innocent then his conviction means nothing,

He gave 2.5 years of his life he'll never get back because of one night. Most people would feel rage as opposed to regret considering the circumstances.

Zealous wrote:Why would he appear sorry though? According to him he didn't do it and if he really believes that and he was innocent then his conviction means nothing,

He gave 2.5 years of his life he'll never get back because of one night. Most people would feel rage as opposed to regret considering the circumstances.

He admitted having sex with her, and she was in no place to consent. He gave up those years by his own actions, they were not taking from him.

What guy sees his mate have sex with a bird, then decides that same night he wants in on that? The same night....thats grimy. A falling over drunk girl covered in her own sweat and body fluids of his friend and he thinks: "Good, I'll have a go". This is a footballer already with a hot girl of his own, or even the ability to walk in any night club in the area, throw around his name and a few quid, and have a girl of his own and he decided to go for his mate's sloppy drunk seconds? Thats poor.

Betty La Fea wrote:What guy sees his mate have sex with a bird, then decides that same night he wants in on that? The same night....thats grimy.

Welcome to the real world

Anyways I think he should get to play, having sex with a drunk girl is not as bad as forcefully raping a chick like you see in movies and stuff.. I don't like blaming alcohol, she went back to their room right? She put herself at risk

LeSwagg James wrote:

Betty La Fea wrote:What guy sees his mate have sex with a bird, then decides that same night he wants in on that? The same night....thats grimy.

Welcome to the real world

Anyways I think he should get to play, having sex with a drunk girl is not as bad as forcefully raping a chick like you see in movies and stuff.. I don't like blaming alcohol, she went back to their room right? She put herself at risk

She went back to the room with Clayton McDonald and Ched showed up after she was already long past the ability to consent and raped her going by his own word. That is why Clayton was found not guilty of any wrong doing.

We live in a very different if your real world consists of guys raping a drunk chick, especially ones that just got done having sex with your mate that same night.

Betty La Fea wrote:

LeSwagg James wrote:

Betty La Fea wrote:What guy sees his mate have sex with a bird, then decides that same night he wants in on that? The same night....thats grimy.

Welcome to the real world

Anyways I think he should get to play, having sex with a drunk girl is not as bad as forcefully raping a chick like you see in movies and stuff.. I don't like blaming alcohol, she went back to their room right? She put herself at risk

She went back to the room with Clayton McDonald and Ched showed up after she was already long past the ability to consent and raped her going by his own word. That is why Clayton was found not guilty of any wrong doing.

We live in a very different if your real world consists of guys raping a drunk chick, especially ones that just got done having sex with your mate that same night.

I meant that guys sleep with girls right after their friends did ALL THE TIME.. BC said she stumbled on to both of them while drunk so I assumed she went back with both

LeSwagg James wrote:

Betty La Fea wrote:

LeSwagg James wrote:

Welcome to the real world

Anyways I think he should get to play, having sex with a drunk girl is not as bad as forcefully raping a chick like you see in movies and stuff.. I don't like blaming alcohol, she went back to their room right? She put herself at risk

She went back to the room with Clayton McDonald and Ched showed up after she was already long past the ability to consent and raped her going by his own word. That is why Clayton was found not guilty of any wrong doing.

We live in a very different if your real world consists of guys raping a drunk chick, especially ones that just got done having sex with your mate that same night.

I meant that guys sleep with girls right after their friends did ALL THE TIME.. BC said she stumbled on to both of them while drunk so I assumed she went back with both

The video shows her walking alone with Clayton to the room though, and they were clearly "together' for that night it seems. There was no reasonable expectation proved that was going to have sex with Ched at all.

She probably got pretty wasted with Clayton, and when she was out of it Clayton told his boy Ched how awesome it was and Ched wanted to hop in. Thing is, once she is gone, it is automatically rape no matter what. Anything but yes, or an "ok" by your spouse finally giving in after hours of begging, enters full on rape territory.

LeSwagg James wrote:
I meant that guys sleep with girls right after their friends did ALL THE TIME.. BC said she stumbled on to both of them while drunk so I assumed she went back with both

Video only showed her with the buddy, I just assumed he must have been nearby.

Ched Evans: Footballer found not guilty of hotel rape

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-37659009

Poor guy. Life ruined. Missed out on millions.

Trial for the girl now please, Its only fair. Unless the situation is lack of evidence.

Yea it's not really that he was found innocent, but that the jury couldn't find the evidence "beyond reasonable doubt"

He still shouldn't have found himself in that situation but there were a lot of inconsistencies with the girl's story.

Wait... the guy gets convicted of rape by a jury and people are saying that there's no evidence?  wtf is wrong with you people.  The people that get wrongfully convicted are those who can't afford a proper defense attorney and, since it's not a high profile case, the prosecutor/police don't spend a lot of resources and, in some very rare cases, don't do their job well.

But in a high profile case like this against a footballer who obviously can afford a good defense attorney... it's an outrageous and, frankly, irresponsible statement by you people.

GL community generally always takes the side of the man tbh, been this way for a long time.

Sometimes you are right to "side" with the man, because these things happen and sometimes there has been no rape, but there is always a jump to defend whatever man is up for trial tbh, even if the evidence means you can't really tell what happened (as in this case).

I'll respect the juries decision but the truth is that I do not know whether he raped her or not. It is the same for if he has been found guilty as if he has been found not guilty if the evidence is not clear--you must have some doubt.