Cleopatra Posted April 26, 2012 Report Share Posted April 26, 2012 Two men both admit raping a drunken woman. One is found guilty and jailed for five years. The other is found not guilty. How can that be? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harry hayes Posted April 26, 2012 Report Share Posted April 26, 2012 Circumstances alter cases. Happy days Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted April 26, 2012 Report Share Posted April 26, 2012 If she was so drunk, how does she remember who she said yes or no to? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cleopatra Posted April 26, 2012 Author Report Share Posted April 26, 2012 Circumstances alter cases. Happy days What circumstances could alter this case Harry? Two men having sex with the same drunken woman? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cleopatra Posted April 26, 2012 Author Report Share Posted April 26, 2012 If she was so drunk, how does she remember who she said yes or no to? My thought exactly when I read the report. She said she had no memory of the incident let alone being too drunk to consent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eagle Posted April 27, 2012 Report Share Posted April 27, 2012 Two men both admit raping a drunken woman. One is found guilty and jailed for five years. The other is found not guilty. How can that be? One of them admitted that he had sex with the woman, the jury found him not guilty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cleopatra Posted April 27, 2012 Author Report Share Posted April 27, 2012 One of them admitted that he had sex with the woman, the jury found him not guilty. Evans' co-accused, Port Vale defender Clayton McDonald, 23, who also admitted having sex with the victim, was found not guilty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harry hayes Posted April 27, 2012 Report Share Posted April 27, 2012 Cleo. i have no real idea but trust the wisdom of the jury having heard the full facts. From what I read in the paper she was capable when SHE approached Mcdonald. What happened from there is not within my knowledge, other than Evans took advantage of an incapable woman. Circumstances alter cases. Not heard that the prosecution will appeal, which may be significant. Happy days Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdrianR Posted April 27, 2012 Report Share Posted April 27, 2012 Could be that she consented to the 1st and not the 2nd. Its when and how she says no thats the key in these cases. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cleopatra Posted April 27, 2012 Author Report Share Posted April 27, 2012 But how would they know who she could have said yes to and who she said no to when she herself said she has no memory of the event? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdrianR Posted April 27, 2012 Report Share Posted April 27, 2012 Consent in this context will be based on amongst other things, behaviour and evidence given at trial. if she cannot remember, this doesnt mean she consented. Without having actually been there and heard all the evidence or read the complete judgment (the judge is required to give reasons as to the aquital) then you cannot really understand why the aquital / conviction differred. I havent seen anything in the legal press which I would expect if the judge got it fundamentally wrong. if he did, the AG would be appealing and I havent heard that he has. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
disgusted Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 Cleo. i have no real idea but trust the wisdom of the jury having heard the full facts. From what I read in the paper she was capable when SHE approached Mcdonald. What happened from there is not within my knowledge, other than Evans took advantage of an incapable woman. Circumstances alter cases. Not heard that the prosecution will appeal, which may be significant. Happy days Consent in this context will be based on amongst other things, behaviour and evidence given at trial. if she cannot remember, this doesnt mean she consented. Without having actually been there and heard all the evidence or read the complete judgment (the judge is required to give reasons as to the aquital) then you cannot really understand why the aquital / conviction differred. I havent seen anything in the legal press which I would expect if the judge got it fundamentally wrong. if he did, the AG would be appealing and I havent heard that he has. He stated there was an appeal a couple of days ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harry hayes Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 Fatshaft, Are you saying the prosecution are appealing against the not guilty verdict, which is what I was referring to.(not Ched evans). Happy days Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 btw where's all the evidence come from in this case? Thought there were only three people in the room, so unless they had cctv in the rooms or one of them was filming on their mobile - we seem to have the word of a drunken female with no clear memory of the incident V two guys; unless one of the guys shopped the other? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.