Convicts who've served their time.

DEFTLEFTHAND

I see the rags are making a big deal out of Rape convict Ched Evans (26) being released from prison and trying to repursue his career as a pro footballer, there's a bunch of social media groups out there putting pressure on Sheffield United not to take him back.

There used to be a saying that you're square with the house once you do your time, obviously the circumstances of the crime influences people's opinion but I believe that he should allowed to continue his career.

Paulownia

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

I see the rags are making a big deal out of Rape convict Ched Evans (26) being released from prison and trying to repursue his career as a pro footballer, there's a bunch of social media groups out there putting pressure on Sheffield United not to take him back.
Sees
There used to be a saying that you're square with the house once you do your time, obviously the circumstances of the crime influences people's opinion but I believe that he should allowed to continue his career.

I know nothing of the circumstances here but I would question whether it might not be inappropriate that he should be facilitated to resume a high profile career so unquestionly

Timberrrrrrrr

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

I see the rags are making a big deal out of Rape convict Ched Evans (26) being released from prison and trying to repursue his career as a pro footballer, there's a bunch of social media groups out there putting pressure on Sheffield United not to take him back.

There used to be a saying that you're square with the house once you do your time, obviously the circumstances of the crime influences people's opinion but I believe that he should allowed to continue his career.

Is a convicted rapist a good roll model for kids (yeah yea won't someone think of the kiddies ) but seriously, he goes back playing, i could honestly say if i was a Sheffield fan i wouldn't go to see him play and if my team were playing Sheffield away i wouldn't travel to that ground.

Buona Fortuna

Paulownia wrote: »

I know nothing of the circumstances here but I would question whether it might not be inappropriate that he should be facilitated to resume a high profile career so unquestionly

Like you I'm similarly ill-infomed - never stopped me commenting on an AH thread though

I think if he's not allowed to continue his career, society has punished him twice.

Rash generalisation but footballers usually are not the sharpest pencils in the box. It's not like he can go back to the medical career. If he'd been a banker, no one would have batted an eyelid.

Dozen Wicked Words

A convicted rapist would struggle to get back in to many careers. Unsurprisingly employers might not look on it as a positive to have a sex offender working for them. I think there is a difference between this type of crime and others. I think a convicted sex offender banker would struggle to get a job also.

Having seen football's moral compass shift by how good a player you are, he'll still get a good career out of football somewhere.

tigger123

Says a lot about Sheffield Utd and the people who are running it if they do take him back. He's shown no remorse for what he did either. Real classy bunch of people.

Timberrrrrrrr

Buona Fortuna wrote: »

Like you I'm similarly ill-infomed - never stopped me commenting on an AH thread though

I think if he's not allowed to continue his career, society has punished him twice.

Rash generalisation but footballers usually are not the sharpest pencils in the box. It's not like he can go back to the medical career. If he'd been a banker, no one would have batted an eyelid.

Would you hire Larry Murphy?

Buona Fortuna

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Would you hire Larry Murphy?

I've no great need for a carpenter at the moment.

However these two cases are at different ends of an unpleasant spectrum. Whether I would or would not doesn't take away from the point that I made.

Paulownia

Buona Fortuna wrote: »

I've no great need for a carpenter at the moment.

However these two cases are at different ends of an unpleasant spectrum. Whether I would or would not doesn't take away from the point that I made.[/
The fact that someone has served a prison sentence does not mean that we, Joe Public, are not entitled to have an opinion. I imagine that, leaving the tabloid press aside, the supporters of the club might find his return hard to stomach, even if he turned out to be a star

Timberrrrrrrr

Buona Fortuna wrote: »

I've no great need for a carpenter at the moment.

However these two cases are at different ends of an unpleasant spectrum. Whether I would or would not doesn't take away from the point that I made.

That didn't answer the question

Would you hire Larry Murphy?

tigger123

Buona Fortuna wrote: »

Like you I'm similarly ill-infomed - never stopped me commenting on an AH thread though

I think if he's not allowed to continue his career, society has punished him twice.

Rash generalisation but footballers usually are not the sharpest pencils in the box. It's not like he can go back to the medical career. If he'd been a banker, no one would have batted an eyelid.

He probably should have given that more consideration before he raped someone.

mikemac1

tigger123 wrote: »

He's shown no remorse for what he did either.

Of course not, he has always claimed he is innocent. He is hiring a private detective to try to clear his name

Lucy and Harry

He has never said sorry or admitted he did anything wrong yet was found guilty in a court of law.I think he should not play football for any team but some teams have no morals and will take him back.A private detective will not clear his name if his high costing legal team could not do it nobody can.

Guy:Incognito

Lucy and Harry wrote: »

He has never said sorry or admitted he did anything wrong .

Would you if you didn't do it?


As for not playing football.Why shouldn't he? He has a fairly unique set of skills that's in demand. Should he go work in a shop for minimum wage instead or do you not want him having a job at all? Just vegetate on the dole for the next 60 years?

Lucy and Harry

The evidence said he did it.Convicted beyond a shadow of a doubt.With the legal team he had the best money can buy he would have got reasonable doubt and got away with it if he had a case.Also he cheated on his bird too.So a sneaky chap who has not even said sorry for that.Footballers think they can do what they want.They kick a ball and think they are gods.He is hurting his victim by denying it.

Guy:Incognito

Lucy and Harry wrote: »

the evidence said he did it.

Did it? As far as I remember it was 2 drunk people (there were others involved too) one says they had consensual sex, the other says they didn't)

.

Lucy and Harry wrote: »

Also he cheated on his bird too.So a sneaky chap who has not even said sorry for that..

Who should he apologise to for that, you?why?


Again, the question stands, if you didn't do it(and he maintains he didn't), would you apologise? (your apologising to someone whos falsely accused you of rape remember)

Paulownia

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Would you if you didn't do it?

If he clears his name it will be a different conversation but until he does he is a convicted rapist. The courts can get it wrong and he is entitled to take his stance but he must prove it in court as well.

Guy:Incognito

Paulownia wrote: »

If he clears his name it will be a different conversation but until he does he is a convicted rapist. The courts can get it wrong and he is entitled to take his stance but he must prove it in court as well.

That's not what was said. Its the "he hasn't even apologised" part we're discussing. Why would he apologise for something he didn't do and is trying to clear his name on?

sydthebeat

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

That's not what was said. Its the "he hasn't even apologised" part we're discussing. Why would he apologise for something he didn't do and is trying to clear his name on?

Wasnt he found guilty?

Where is the evidence that has convinced you that he didn't do it?

beks101

I think the fact that they'd consider taking him back shows how this kind of a crime is widely seen.

It was 'not a violent rape' causing 'no bodily harm', so it was not *really* rape, right? It it's not *really* rape unless it's a stranger in a dark alley holding a knife to a woman's throat and violently assaulting her and beating her forty shades of blue.

I think everything about this case is dismal and disturbing and this doesn't surprise me in the slightest.

Dempsey

I see no reason why he shouldnt continue his career. Whether he challenges his conviction and its overturned or not, he has served his punishment for that conviction. People are defending the system for the conviction he received but not the punishment. Seems to be a trial by media/mob going on and people want him punished twice. The irony of defending the system....

tigger123

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

That's not what was said. Its the "he hasn't even apologised" part we're discussing. Why would he apologise for something he didn't do and is trying to clear his name on?

Do you think Sheffield Utd are right to take him back?

Guy:Incognito

sydthebeat wrote: »

Wasnt he found guilty?

Where is the evidence that has convinced you that he didn't do it?

If you were convicted of something you said you didn't do would you apologise for it?

I'd imagine apologising would go against your case of trying to clear your name too.

sydthebeat

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

If you were convicted of something you said you didn't do would you apologise for it?

I'd imagine apologising would go against your case of trying to clear your name too.

You Didn't answer either question?

I don't care if he apologies or not, you've said he didn't do it. ... I just want to know what evidence you've seen to make that statement.

Guy:Incognito

tigger123 wrote: »

Do you think Sheffield Utd are right to take him back?

If they want the player then yes. He's been to jail and he's out. Do you think he should sit on the dole till he dies instead of working ad contributing to the economy? Would that really be a better solution?

Sunnyisland

A lot of people don't seem to have a problem with Mike Tyson

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Tyson#Rape_conviction.2C_prison.2C_and_conversion

imo if persons have served there time and are deemed to be no threat to society(been kept under supervision ) they should be allowed to integrate back into society, we must never forget what they done but we can't live in there past.

Timberrrrrrrr

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

If they want the player then yes. He's been to jail and he's out. Do you think he should sit on the dole till he dies instead of working ad contributing to the economy? Would that really be a better solution?

Same question to you

You own a company, you need a tradesman, the most qualified for the job is Larry Murphy. Would you hire him?

tigger123

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

If they want the player then yes. He's been to jail and he's out. Do you think he should sit on the dole till he dies instead of working ad contributing to the economy? Would that really be a better solution?

What he does for the rest of his life is of no concern to Sheffield Utd.

They're taking a convicted rapist and turning him into a local hero. It boggles the mind.

Last I heard fans at Sheffield Utd had signed a petition that had reached 150,000 signatures asking that he not be signed. It tells you were the fans are at with it.

I'm a huge football fan, and this whole thing disgusts me.

What if he was a child molester and he'd served his time? Would you be ok with that?

Guy:Incognito

sydthebeat wrote: »

You Didn't answer either question?

I don't care if he apologies or not, you've said he didn't do it. ... I just want to know what evidence you've seen to make that statement.

The discussion is running from people saying he should apologise and we're talking about it from his point of view. He believes he's innocent, so why should he appologise

Buona Fortuna

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

That didn't answer the question

Dead right.

I'm not actually here to answer your questions.

I hope that doesn't come as any great surprise.

tigger123 wrote: »

He probably should have given that more consideration before he raped someone.

Agreed. From the little I know, I don't think there was a great deal of consideration of fore thought from anyone.

Timberrrrrrrr

Buona Fortuna wrote: »

Dead right.

I'm not actually here to answer your questions.

I hope that doesn't come as any great surprise.



Agreed. From the little I know, I don't think there was a great deal of consideration of fore thought from anyone.

So from your reply i will take it that there is no way that you would hire Larry Murphy, even though he has served his sentence

But you said

I think if he's not allowed to continue his career, society has punished him twice.

The double standards on here never cease to amaze me

bop1977

Look at lee Hughes and Luke McCormick both of these fellas killed people by drink driving yet both of them played football on their release from prison.

Football teams only care about getting results and won't let a thing like having a convicted rapist in the team get in the way.

Buona Fortuna

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

So from your reply i will take it that there is no way that you would hire Larry Murphy, even though he has served his sentence

But you said



The double standards on here never cease to amaze me

The fact that I would not sit down for a cup of tea with this guy does not detract from the point.

If society deems the punishment for a crime is a jail term and then a life on the dile because no one will employ you, so be it - but it doesn't.

You seem to saying that do a crime, do a sentence and when you get out the rest of us can take a bit too.

The Oak Tree

Lucy and Harry wrote: »

The evidence said he did it.Convicted beyond a shadow of a doubt.With the legal team he had the best money can buy he would have got reasonable doubt and got away with it if he had a case.Also he cheated on his bird too.So a sneaky chap who has not even said sorry for that.Footballers think they can do what they want.They kick a ball and think they are gods.He is hurting his victim by denying it.

How do you know he didn't apologise to his girlfriend for cheating?

Hitchens

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2798410/patrick-collins-ched-evans-release-prison-football-stuck-moral-rut-victim.html

just about sums up the whole thing for me

ctrl-alt-delete

He will want to resume his career as a professional footballer, and he believes he is innocent. I have no doubt he will find someone from some club who will take him on.

As mentioned already Lee Hughes had no problem finding a club and he was responsible for death.

Sheff Utd will be under pressure from both sides. They have shelled out serious money on him and by all accounts continued to pay him for a period of his sentence.

He has walked free after half of the sentence so has he really even served his time?

Kenny Logins

He could get a job with Jamie Oliver perhaps?

Guy:Incognito

ctrl-alt-delete wrote: »

He has walked free after half of the sentence so has he really even served his time?

He wasn't released under some special footballer clause. He was eligible for release like many others. The merits or otherwise of those rules are irrelevant to this specific case and if people want it changed they should try do that.

ctrl-alt-delete

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

He wasn't released under some special footballer clause. He was eligible for release like many others. The merits or otherwise of those rules are irrelevant to this specific case and if people want it changed they should try do that.

Oh I know he has received no special treatment, just a case where you are denied appeal and still only serve half the time baffles me but that is a whole different discussion as you say.

As it is he is free to find employment, and I have no doubt he will which makes what Sheff Utd will do interesting.

Fr_Dougal

Hitchens wrote: »

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2798410/patrick-collins-ched-evans-release-prison-football-stuck-moral-rut-victim.html

just about sums up the whole thing for me

You're probably better off using this:

https://www.crimeline.info/case/r-v-ched-evans-chedwyn-evans

Rough Sleeper

tigger123 wrote: »

Last I heard fans at Sheffield Utd had signed a petition that had reached 150,000 signatures asking that he not be signed. It tells you were the fans are at with it.

Does it? I think the petition to which you're referring is an open one on change.org, started by Jean Hatchet, whose twitter account describes her as a "Radical Feminist. Sister not Cister. Lesbian. Swearer. In charge of uniforms and armour for the WDL. Mansplainers go to @SadMansplainer."

You don't even have to know who Sheffield Utd. are to sign it, never mind be a fan.

markfinn

Sentence : 5 years, given in 2012. He's out now. He hasn't served his time.

Serving half of a ridiculously lenient sentence is not "doing your time".

galwaylad14

Ched Evans is a free man. He's perfectly entitled to pursue any career that he wants (well maybe there are certain careers that convicted sex offenders can't do but a footballer isn't one of them)

He served his time and if a company want to hire him ( which they do) and he wants to work for this company, which it seems like he does then he's perfectly entitled to do it.

Otherwise if we say he can't do this job then are we not in a way giving him a life sentence?

Also people saying he should apologise to the victim are being obtuse. He says he didn't do it. Yes he was convicted and we can legally call him a rapist etc but in his own mind he's an innocent man, so by apologising it would be him admitting he has done something wrong.

Would any of you apologise to someone who falsely accused you of something, cost you your dream job, caused you to serve jail sentence and forever sullied your name in the eye of the public? I'm not saying she made it up but I'm saying this is how Ched Evans views it so of course he won't apologise as if he did he would be admitting that he did something wrong.

I was listening to discussion on sky about this yesterday and some woman was saying that for his own sake he shouldn't return to the public eye by going back playing football. This is also a very stupid opinion. I don't know anything about the man but I presume he doesn't have a university education or anything. He maybe has 7 years of pro football left where he can earn more in a probably a month than he would in a year in virtually any other job he would be able to get. He'd be very irrational not to try get back playing football as quickly as possible.

This post probably reads as though I'm defending him. I'm not, I think he probably did it to be honest, but I'm just saying he's now a free man and thus entitled to restart his career, he's not going to apologise to someone he believes wrongly ruined his life, and he's not going to choose a career with a small fraction of the earning power of a footballer.

Manach

Ex-Convicts have served their punishment. There is a traditional viewpoint that once service has been complement for their sins, then they are forgiven and can again re-enter the community with a fresh slate. Unfortunately in this never to be forgotten age of data, whatever mistakes that had been made are now forever tagged to a person.

Laois6556

It's sick that he can not only go back to his high profile, high paying job but people actually support it.

BrokenHero

beks101 wrote: »

I think the fact that they'd consider taking him back shows how this kind of a crime is widely seen.

It was 'not a violent rape' causing 'no bodily harm', so it was not *really* rape, right? It it's not *really* rape unless it's a stranger in a dark alley holding a knife to a woman's throat and violently assaulting her and beating her forty shades of blue.

I think everything about this case is dismal and disturbing and this doesn't surprise me in the slightest.

Total nonsense.

Society has no time for rapists. They are seen in a poorer light than murderers.

Sure, date rape is not looked on as badly as a woman being raped with a knife to her throat and that has been beaten "forty shades of blue" but so it shouldn't be.

Many crimes are looked on as less severe when they don't have an element of such extreme violence attached, rape is not unique in that regard.


In any case, I don't think for one second that Ched raped this girl. The "evidence" was a joke and before someone says 'well, he was found guilty': so was Barry George and not since that case had I got such a sense that a miscarriage of justice was taking place.

Incidentally, the man who helped free Barry George, Don Hale, also believes that Ched is innocent:

“When I studied the paperwork, I found it quite staggering that several key points were not presented in court.

“The victim said she had no memory at all of the previous night and claimed her drinks had been spiked. I don’t understand how the claim escalated from a potential drink spike to a rape charge – it should never have even got to court."

Cienciano

bop1977 wrote: »

Look at lee Hughes and Luke McCormick both of these fellas killed people by drink driving yet both of them played football on their release from prison.

Football teams only care about getting results and won't let a thing like having a convicted rapist in the team get in the way.

Football is a business. If you think other companies wouldn't hire people with a past if they thought it would make the money, your wrong

GarIT

There are a lot of people equating this with a violent attack of rape. In my opinion there is a massive difference between when somebody is forced to do something sexual they don't want and when somebody hasn't explicitly consented that they wanted to do it but hasn't objected either.

As far as I'm concerned no matter what the laws say if you haven't been told no (before the event) it's not rape.

Guy:Incognito

Laois6556 wrote: »

It's sick that he can not only go back to his high profile, high paying job but people actually support it.

For the 3rd or 4th time now, what should he do instead, collect £50 a week on the dole till he dies?

B0jangles

GarIT wrote: »

There are a lot of people equating this with a violent attack of rape. In my opinion there is a massive difference between when somebody is forced to do something sexual they don't want and when somebody hasn't explicitly consented that they wanted to do it but hasn't objected either.

As far as I'm concerned no matter what the laws say if you haven't been told no it's not rape.

Wow.

GarIT

B0jangles wrote: »

Wow.

What?