Debate: Convicted rapist plans to return to football - how do you feel about this?

[PorkChop]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/29656157

Back in 2012, a footballer named Ched Evans was convicted of raping a woman in a hotel room with another footballer. The other guy was acquitted, but Evans was imprisoned for rape, for five years. He has now been released, having served half that sentence, and Sheffield United (the club he was contracted to before his conviction) are reportedly interested in re-signing him.

This is causing a fair bit of debate in the UK, about whether he should be able to return to the sport. There's a good article here about the whole furore. Some people don't want him returning to the sport as he may act as a role model for children to emulate and they feel he doesn't deserve that stature, whilst others believe he has served his punishment, and it's now well within his right to return to football. What do you think?

I'll preface my opinion by saying I don't condone of his actions at all, but I believe it's within his right to return to football and that shouldn't be infringed. I said in another thread that if Evans was a bricklayer and was returning to that occupation, no one would care or stand in his way for doing so - but I think the fact that he's a footballer and will receiving several thousands of pounds per week upon his return escalates matters. Nobody wants to see a convicted rapist earning more money in a month than they do in a year, and understandably so. However, I don't think that he should be prevented from playing football again because of his conviction.

I can understand people standing in his way if Evans was a paedophile trying to get a job in a school, or a fraudster trying to get a job in a bank - but he isn't. I despise what he's done, but I don't think there should be any restrictions on him returning to football.

EDIT: Just read that he's preparing to release a statement to the media, most likely about his professional intentions. There's also a poll here about whether he should be able to return to football - and at the moment, it's pretty even.

[Everlong]

It's a different crime than the Michael Vick case in the NFL, where he had the illegal dogfighting ring and went to prison for a couple years, but it's the same sort of situation for me. I think that if he went to prison and did his time, he should be allowed back into the sport.

It's an understandable concern for parents to not want their kids looking at him as a role model, but this isn't exactly a reputation that he's going to escape. For as long as he remains in the public eye, he's going to be known as the rapist soccer player. So, I wouldn't exactly be concerned about people considering him a role model. But there has to be a point where if people have gone through the justice system, he's free to come back and restart his life.

[AkydefGoldberg]

I think rape is one of those crimes - alongside murder, paedophilia - that conjures up strong emotions hence why this case is a tough one to call.

Personally, always believe that if someone is remorse and wants a second chance then that person should be given that chance. He's insistent he hasn't done anything wrong and slightly uncomfortable with the website (apparently he's releasing a video next week with some comments from him) but I'd probably say I wouldn't re-hire him. That feels the right decision than re-hiring him but difficult to describe why. (Maybe the emotions of those against him are over-riding my thoughts atm)

But typically all politicians needing an easy subject to talk about, namely Clegg - absolutely detest and cringe when I hear politicians on football related issues - just feels like they talk on sporting issues because they cba talking about the more tougher talking points.

[prophet]

[War Daddy]

I know the fans overseas are hugely passionate about their sport but goddamn man.

[Hanley!]

I don't think he should be disallowed from competing in the future. He has served his time, and at least from a legal standpoint, we should treat former convicts as reformed. Or at least acknowledge that they've already served their punishment.

But that's from a legal standpoint. You can't put a number on the real life consequences somebody will suffer as the result of this kind of crime. He's going to have a rough time dealing with some people for the foreseeable future, and you really can't legislate for that. He's going to be at a disadvantage when it comes to certain areas of his life and while that might not seem fair, there's really no way to stop it from happening.

@Porkchop said that if this guy was a brick-layer then nobody would care about him going back to his old job. That's not actually true. This story has received more attention because of the man involved being something of a celebrity. That'll make things a little worse for him (although better in some ways ... at least he might be able to make some money out of some of the publicity this has attracted). But anyone who goes to prison for rape is going to have trouble finding a job. Many job agency application forms ask whether you have a criminal record and if you do, then the chances of you being hired over other applicants is slim.

It's even less likely that someone incriminated for this kind of crime would be welcomed back to his last job. People wouldn't want to work with someone that they had known when he had been arrested for rape. In that respect, if Sheffield hired him back that would be pretty weird. That would almost definitely not happen to the brick-layer, unless his boss was related to him or something. He could probably shop around and eventually find a new job where people don't know of his past indiscretions.

Long story short, I think he should be allowed to play again, but I think it would be a little weird for Sheffield to hire him back. How is he going to integrate with his old team mates and management now after they know what he's done? It just seems like a dodgy decision to me. No matter what team hires him back, they'll be subject to some criticism, and there's nothing necessarily wrong with that.

[Twister]

I despair

I agree with Hanley, it would be weird if Sheffield United rehired him. Not many convicts come out of prison and get to walk back into the job they were doing before they went down, I kind of feel like he should have to start from scratch and find a new club. I don't really agree with him playing professionally, acting as a role model and what not, but football isn't exactly a beacon of morality and it wouldn't be the first time, nor will it be the last time a convict has been allowed back into the game after facing a conviction & jail sentence. That's just the way football is these days, corrupt and driven by money. I'm not sure what can be done to change that at this point.

[AkydefGoldberg]

So Evans is training with Sheff United. Ambassadors have resigned. Clegg's had his say.

What I'm amazed about is how quickly Sheff United accepted the request from not the FA, but the PFA!

Surely, they could have said "sorry, he's not under contract to us and yes he was our former player but we don't wish for him to train with us". I don't see what reasons they said yes. Sure he'll be an extra man in training but I imagine, deep down, some of his team mates might harbour some negative feelings towards him.

They should have said no. He's not their player but considering they paid his wages whilst he was in prison apparently, not surprised they said yes to such a request.

[Romo]

So Evans is training with Sheff United. Ambassadors have resigned. Clegg's had his say.

What I'm amazed about is how quickly Sheff United accepted the request from not the FA, but the PFA!

Surely, they could have said "sorry, he's not under contract to us and yes he was our former player but we don't wish for him to train with us". I don't see what reasons they said yes. Sure he'll be an extra man in training but I imagine, deep down, some of his team mates might harbour some negative feelings towards him.

They should have said no. He's not their player but considering they paid his wages whilst he was in prison apparently, not surprised they said yes to such a request.

I doubt it, EVERYBODY who has properly seen the case and read the case and know all the facts which I'm in doubt the players of the team would have would most definitely side with Ched being not guilty and would most likely support him in trying to clear his name and return

[PorkChop]

I doubt it, EVERYBODY who has properly seen the case and read the case and know all the facts which I'm in doubt the players of the team would have would most definitely side with Ched being not guilty and would most likely support him in trying to clear his name and return

Eh... I'm not so sure about that. I read the case files last night and Ched Evans did some shady shit that evening.

[prophet]

It shouldn't matter whether he did or didn't do it at this point when the fact is he was convicted and has served his time. I personally think he should be allowed to play and whilst I completely understand why many are against the idea I certainly don't think the witch-hunt that's still going on is fair to him at all - what's the point in him going to prison if he's not allowed to get on with his life again afterwards?

He's always going to be known as a convicted rapist and that'll follow him round wherever he goes for the rest of his career/life, isn't that further punishment enough in addition to the time served? Granted it pales in comparison to what he was was convicted or putting that young girl through but still, he can't be forced to live in exile for the rest of his life.

Jess Ennis has released a statement saying she'll want her name removed from the stand dedicated to her if they re-sign him in addition to employee's leaving and sponsors severing ties with the club so I'm pretty sure they won't sign him. Football is a fickle industry though and I'm sure the Sheffield fans wouldn't have a problem in the slightest if they brought Evans back and his goals fired them up the leagues, I know I wouldn't.

[PorkChop]

I'm just surprised that the issue has escalated to such heights - Sheffield United had Marlon King on their books after he was jailed for sexual assault and placed on the sex offender's register, and I don't remember that getting anywhere near the amount of press that the Ched Evans situation has.

There's also the Plymouth goalie Luke McCormick who killed two kids when drink driving. He did his time in prison and has since returned to Plymouth, and nobody really cared. It wasn't on the national news like Ched Evans is every evening.

I'm not trivialising rape, nor saying I feel sorry for Ched Evans - but I'm stunned at the disparity of media attention between the Evans case and the McCormick case in particular.

[Romo]

Many people will have had an experience where they needed to contact the police over a relatively trivial matter. Nuisance neighbours, something nicked from the garden, the gang of youths at the end of the road causing mischief. Many will also have experienced the long list of excuses the Police have at hand as to why they can’t do anything, try keeping a diary, we have limited resources and a few more to boot. Heck, even burglary rarely gets a visit from the local constabulary these days.

So let’s forward to the very beginning of a case where a young woman enters a Police station to report a stolen handbag. A handbag which the young woman believes was stolen from a hotel room she was in the night before. The Police have a lead and contact the hotel to find out who booked the room and question them about the handbag. Realistically, they need not even have gone that far as CCTV would have shown that she didn’t have the handbag on entering the hotel. This instantly clears the occupants of the hotel room of any guilt.

At this stage, we have no reason to suspect the occupants of the room and no need to question them either. Case closed.

So how did the Police manage to arrest two people on suspicion of rape when the only complaint made was that of a stolen handbag which could be solved without even speaking to them? I would suspect that if the room was booked under the name of you or me, this is where the case would have ended. However, during the course of contacting the hotel, the Police officers involved identified that the person booking the room was a high profile character and I suspect that they seized the opportunity to try and make a name for themselves.

After questioning all three people, two of whom voluntarily admitted that they had intercourse consensually and one who states that she can’t remember what happened in the hotel room, save for the fact that she woke up there naked. She remembers vividly how much she drank, she notes that this is less than she would normally drink and that memory loss is not normally an issue. She therefore believes that her drink was spiked.

Now it has to be noted that even the most dim-witted of criminals around these parts don’t just waltz into a Police station and give self-incriminating evidence without duress. It’s reasonable to assume that these two people are giving an honest account of what happened and to all intents and purposes, their stories match up. Their version of events is not conducive to a crime being committed.

Despite this, the case ends up with the CPS, their key witness being a person who has no memory of the events of the hotel room, but remembers vividly how much they had drunk and that this amount is lower than her usual consumption on an evening on the town. Tests show that her drink was not spiked and even if it was, the two accused were never in the frame for this.

The CPS decide that there is sufficient evidence to try both the accused for rape based on evidence provided solely by the accused as the victim has no memory of the event. Remember at this stage that the accused have matching stories that confirm consensual intercourse and there is no evidence to suggest otherwise. There is still no allegation of rape from the victim. It’s impossible for there to be.

There are other intricacies around the case involving time and method of arrival and means of exit. The main one being that the victim travelled to the hotel with one of the accused in the same taxi and the second accused arrived shortly afterwards, separately. However, it’s important to remember that the CPS believe that both the accused have a reasonable chance of being found guilty, so we can suggest that the time and method of arrival is trivial and the case should only be about whether a young woman with no recollection of the events within the hotel room was able to give consent to intercourse.

I have been known to share a taxi with people on more than one occasion and I have never assumed anything more than the people sharing were heading in roughly the same direction. It seems that the CPS must agree with me on this. If sharing a taxi was seen in law as consenting to intercourse, one of the accused would never have stood trial and sharing a taxi would be akin to walking into a brothel.

Based on the CPS trying both the accused for the same crime, logic would suggest that the verdict must be the same for both. The sensible conclusion would be to acquit both the accused purely based on reasonable doubt. A more outlandish verdict would to find that both the accused had corroborated a story together, but were telling lies and find them both guilty. As long as the verdict is the same for both the accused, the majority of people would have been able to respect the decision of the Jury.

The absurd finding of the Jury that one of the accused is guilty and the other is not based on their matching evidence and no counter evidence is just plain crazy. Certainly, the transcripts and evidence presented are available and having looked through them and combined them with a couple of years education in law I cannot see how the Jury could possibly arrive at two different verdicts. Furthermore, in my opinion it would appear that with the lack of evidence presented by the prosecution, the accused were in a position where they had to prove their innocence and not in the default position of innocent until proven guilty. It’s a dangerous precedent to set. Given this judgement I would not want to be the innocent accused in a rape trial where the accuser claimed memory loss. Would you, if it didn’t matter what you said in court, the jury could still rule against you?

Having also studied psychology in some detail, I am convinced that the jury system can be easily manipulated by someone with the correct characteristics. I’m sure that Derren Brown as foreman of a jury could have had the jury arrive at any decision he saw fit.

With just a quick acknowledgement of basic Psychology such as Asch’s conformity experiment or Milgram’s obedience to authority it is not unreasonable to assume that people with reasonably normal personality traits could be swayed by someone who placed themselves in a position of authority. Indeed, the title Foreman of the Jury would likely be seen as authoritative to many people, especially if the foreman opted to take a leading role in the deliberation.

Two and a half years on and the guilty party has been released to resume his high profile career, while still maintaining his innocence and in my opinion, it’s not hard to see why.

The decision of the Jury on that day has sparked feminist groups launching petitions urging his employer not to accept him back into his previous role and people signing them based on tabloid headlines alone with little or no knowledge of the case in question. The question for me is that if they are so sure of guilt, why is there little reaction to the acquitted party? With any knowledge of the case, by agreeing the guilt of one party, you must believe that the acquitted party effectively committed rape and got away with it. Or if you are convinced of the acquitted party’s innocence then you must believe that there has been a miscarriage of justice, must you not?

Everybody will have their own moral compass based on past experiences and personal beliefs, however, to respect the justice system of the land these must be put aside. Our judicial system has principles which state that once a person has paid their debt to society, they are free to resume their life. While jealousy of the wages available to the convicted party could be a huge factor, there is no vehicle to prevent him from doing so and nor should there be. With the stigma attached to rape, a high profile job in the public eye will come with challenges which would not be afforded to a Joe Bloggs manual labourer. Whether the convicted party has broad enough shoulders to ride these challenges out remains to be seen.

Much has been made of the effect that this has had on the victim. How she has been forced into an identity change and to relocate. While this is unfortunate and not something that she should have had to endure, we must not forget that the victim really had no need to assist the police with their inquiries into an event that she didn’t know happened. She retrieved her handbag and never accused anybody of rape, but chose to pursue the two accused all the same. Of course, the high profile of the characters involved would have made identifying the victim inevitable and she should have been advised of this. When premier league footballers pay crazy amounts for a super injunction only to hear their sordid encounters being chanted about on the terraces the following Saturday, it’s hard to imagine that the afforded anonymity in such high profile cases can ever be a reality.

Unfortunately, in this case I suspect that it was a risk she was prepared to take after her head was turned by the compensation on offer by securing a conviction. A fact that she is accused of alluding to on social media. She rolled the dice and lost. She still, however, made enough out of the compensation awarded through breach of anonymity to have paid off my mortgage. Whether that is just reward in hindsight can only be determined by the victim.

- http://blog.mikesimmons.co.uk/ched-evan ... d-verdict/

Great article on the whole situation

[PorkChop]

That article is absolutely horrific.

[AkydefGoldberg]

It was, as expected, discussed on Sunday Supplement this morning and has he really "done his time?"

He went down for five years or so, done two years so IMO, shouldn't be playing football until he has fully completed his licence and also completed the judicial appeal proceedings he is undertaking.

Surprised how badly Sheff United have handled this. Can assume they are not ruling out taking him back hence they've agreed to let him train and not explicitly said they won't be taking him back and won't have anything to do with him.

[AkydefGoldberg]

Oldham linked with Evans, but now possibly going back now after the inevitable threats from sponsors and a 20k petition.

I wonder if he'd have pursued this case to another appeal if he wasn't comfortable financially and happened to have a GF who was well off, doubt it.

But his continuing appeal suggests he's arrogant enough to think he hasn't done anything and buoyed by the people around him who are probably convincing him day by day he's innocent even if he did.

Oldham seemed on course to sign him, even calling a news conference but it seems with Evans, even the slightest hint of him training/joining a club begins the media outcry and petitions. How many of those 20,000 signatories on the petition were Oldham fans? I think fans of that club should be in a position to say whether they want him or not rather than a 20,000 petition that has probably been signed by some in various parts across the country.

[PorkChop]

https://www.change.org/p/simon-corney-c ... eated=true

Almost 50000 signatures

[Viazon]

I'm not sure how I feel about this.

Because at first, I feel like he should be allowed to play football. In my eyes, he committed a crime, he has done his time, he has the right to now go back and play football. It's unfair to him if no clubs will ever sign him again. He may never get to play football professionally again. What if football is all he has? What will he do for the rest of his life? I feel it should be OK for him to go back to playing football.

But then, once I really think it through, I think to myself, why the hell am I defending a rapist? Why am I feeling sorry for him? He made his bed, and now he has to lay in it.

Personally, I don't care if he does return to football. But whichever club wants to sign him will have a difficult time explaining why they would. No employer would want a rapist working for them.

[AkydefGoldberg]

Oldham/PFA to release statement tomorrow, more likely, confirming Evans to the club.

An Oldham statement has been delayed but as long as it's rumoured to be a statement alongside the PFA then all signals would point to it that they would sign him sooner rather than later. PFA will probably repeat "he's entitled to work" etc but still doesn't look good for them and Gordon Taylor.

Apparently also Mike Ashley, whose company sponsor Oldham in some shape or form, has been liaised with and he - as you would expect - is fine with it.

[prophet]

I don't feel sorry for him and I don't defend what he did but he's done his town and should be allowed to return to playing in my opinion. The only part of this I take exception with is his persistence to prove his innocence - fair enough you want to clear your name but the way he's gone about doing so was quite blunt and insensitive so it's no wonder people think he's shown no remorse for the crime he's been found guilty for.

I actually think people need to find better things to do with themselves then go so far out of their way to make sure one person can't earn a living. What is the point of the justice system if we don't support the rehabilitation of criminals who've done their time? Slight contradiction that I know but we shouldn't really be trying to ruin this guy any further - living with the tag of a convicted rapist will be horrible enough for him and his family and that's something that will stick with him until the day he dies, so get off his back and leave him alone.

Good for Oldham, I hope they do sign him and I hope he does well for them. He was a good player for Sheffield United - like I've said before, if he signs for them and scores the goals that keep them in the league/push them into the playoffs I don't think any of their fans will give a flying fuck what he's done, fickle is the nature of the beast that is football.