Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Back to forum list |
Back to The Lounge |
Jump to newest |
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So he is being investigated by the police for contempt of court with regards to his website. So for his apologists does this change your opinion? As many people seem to refer to that site as proof of his innocence. I've previously commented on why/how the CCTV is in the public domain and the general response is that it doesn't matter how it got there. Well inevitably it looks like it does" Seems perfectly reasonable for evidence that may throw doubt on a conviction to be buried and kept out of the public domain. We want him to be guilty and we don't want anyone thinking otherwise, especially by seeing video evidence of a woman supposedly mortal d*unk seemingly walking, stooping and lifting quite reasonably. Yep, good call - get the Police to investigate and bury the evidence. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So he is being investigated by the police for contempt of court with regards to his website. So for his apologists does this change your opinion? As many people seem to refer to that site as proof of his innocence. I've previously commented on why/how the CCTV is in the public domain and the general response is that it doesn't matter how it got there. Well inevitably it looks like it does Seems perfectly reasonable for evidence that may throw doubt on a conviction to be buried and kept out of the public domain. We want him to be guilty and we don't want anyone thinking otherwise, especially by seeing video evidence of a woman supposedly mortal d*unk seemingly walking, stooping and lifting quite reasonably. Yep, good call - get the Police to investigate and bury the evidence." In this country it is not the role of the Public at large to convict or acquit someone accused of a crime. This is what the courts are for. Ched Evans was convicted of Rape in a Criminal Court. How are we to know that what is published on this website represents all of the evidence available to the court at the time of the trial. Guilty or not, the public domain and the Internet is not the place for him to put his case - as he is likely to discover. There are correct ways of doing things. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So he is being investigated by the police for contempt of court with regards to his website. So for his apologists does this change your opinion? As many people seem to refer to that site as proof of his innocence. I've previously commented on why/how the CCTV is in the public domain and the general response is that it doesn't matter how it got there. Well inevitably it looks like it does Seems perfectly reasonable for evidence that may throw doubt on a conviction to be buried and kept out of the public domain. We want him to be guilty and we don't want anyone thinking otherwise, especially by seeing video evidence of a woman supposedly mortal d*unk seemingly walking, stooping and lifting quite reasonably. Yep, good call - get the Police to investigate and bury the evidence. In this country it is not the role of the Public at large to convict or acquit someone accused of a crime. This is what the courts are for. Ched Evans was convicted of Rape in a Criminal Court. How are we to know that what is published on this website represents all of the evidence available to the court at the time of the trial. Guilty or not, the public domain and the Internet is not the place for him to put his case - as he is likely to discover. There are correct ways of doing things." I suggest you look back at how other miscarriages of justice have been overturned and how it took ordinary people to find and publicise evidence. Take Hillsborough as the most high profile example of how the establishment protects itself. When justice is not being served, or seen to be being served it takes efforts by the public to turn things around. My guess is that the video was put up as a calculated gamble. The woman is not identifiable but the video evidence is pretty damning rebuttal of the claim that she was incapable of consenting to sex at that time. It is pretty hard to imagine how a person can walk, trot, kneel, lift and walk unaided but be incapable of telling a man that she did not want sex. In any event, this is just an investigation at the moment. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"surely the best place for any evidence is 'kept out of the public domain' until any level of appeal or case review is ended..? " The Guildford Four, Birmingham Six and the Hillsborough families might disagree. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"surely the best place for any evidence is 'kept out of the public domain' until any level of appeal or case review is ended..? The Guildford Four, Birmingham Six and the Hillsborough families might disagree. " pardon, yes your right about those examples.. worded my above poorly, disclosure to ones representatives by all means but not sure that anyone putting it on social media is acceptable.. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He gets more publicity than he deserves, and threads about him are giving it to him, book deal next I think" Yes I'm sure he loves all the publicity from the adoring public keeping his profile in the news. Which do you think he would prefer a book deal or to return to playing the professional sport he enjoys and gets paid handsomely for. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"2 things: Case in point it was RAPE. 1) It is VERY VERY difficult to get a conviction on somebody for a crime a serious as that. It's incredibly difficult to get a judge to even hear the case let alone a FULL trial and FULL conviction. 2) There were 2 men in the room..1 got convicted, the other didn't. Yet they both had sex with her. The other chap didn't even get to court = consensual sex. " You need to read up on the case. Both guys were on trial for the same offence of having sex with a woman who was unable to consent through intoxication - rape. One guy was found guilty and the other was found innocent. The judge fluffed his lines in the summing by making points that would incriminate both defendants despite the fact that one was walking free. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"2 things: Case in point it was RAPE. 1) It is VERY VERY difficult to get a conviction on somebody for a crime a serious as that. It's incredibly difficult to get a judge to even hear the case let alone a FULL trial and FULL conviction. 2) There were 2 men in the room..1 got convicted, the other didn't. Yet they both had sex with her. The other chap didn't even get to court = consensual sex. " McDonald was acquited - he definitely appeared in court | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"2 things: Case in point it was RAPE. 1) It is VERY VERY difficult to get a conviction on somebody for a crime a serious as that. It's incredibly difficult to get a judge to even hear the case let alone a FULL trial and FULL conviction. 2) There were 2 men in the room..1 got convicted, the other didn't. Yet they both had sex with her. The other chap didn't even get to court = consensual sex. McDonald was acquited - he definitely appeared in court" I wasn't sure. In my eyes that makes Ched Evans ultimate conviction rock solid then. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"2 things: Case in point it was RAPE. 1) It is VERY VERY difficult to get a conviction on somebody for a crime a serious as that. It's incredibly difficult to get a judge to even hear the case let alone a FULL trial and FULL conviction. 2) There were 2 men in the room..1 got convicted, the other didn't. Yet they both had sex with her. The other chap didn't even get to court = consensual sex. McDonald was acquited - he definitely appeared in court I wasn't sure. In my eyes that makes Ched Evans ultimate conviction rock solid then." | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
Post new Message to Thread |
back to top |