still an unpleasant little scroat

[d000hg]

It's the lead on the BBC at the moment.

Only took the jury 2 hours.

I wonder if the likes of Ennis will apologise for their pevious comments.

There's no need to if their comments were based on the conviction he previously had (were they?)

Somehow I doubt his career will be revived - I wonder if he will sue the courts/police/whomever for the very real damages to his career. What's the precedent here? Is an overturned conviction admission of fault?

[shaunbhoy]

Sounds like the little trollop was in the habit of getting bladdered and putting it around with gay abandon.

It said that two other men who had sex with the woman had described their encounters with her in highly specific terms that were virtually indistinguishable from Mr Evans's own account of what had happened.
One of the encounters occurred days before the alleged rape - and the other in the days that followed.
On each occasion the woman had been drinking heavily and the sex occurred in a very specific way - including the words she used to encourage her partner.
Each time she woke up saying she had no memory of what had happened.

I notice his missus stuck by him too.
No doubt there will be a whole raft of apoplectic Feminists wailing into their Prosecco tonight, but if he genuinely is innocent, as the jury of 7 women and 5 men have concluded, then he ought to be allowed to continue what is left of his career in peace. But I won't hold my breath.

[original PM]

"On each occasion the woman had been drinking heavily and the sex occurred in a very specific way - including the words she used to encourage her partner."

Apparently the words used were - round the back luv it's me bad week.

[vetran]

Sounds like the little trollop was in the habit of getting bladdered and putting it around with gay abandon.



I notice his missus stuck by him too.
No doubt there will be a whole raft of apoplectic Feminists wailing into their Prosecco tonight, but if he genuinely is innocent, as the jury of 7 women and 5 men have concluded, then he ought to be allowed to continue what is left of his career in peace. But I won't hold my breath.

Wouldn't you if you had struck a financial jackpot?

It did seem first time around it was a bit odd. scroat 1 does the business and is not a rapist, Scroat 2 does it and is a rapist because she was too drunk....

[SueEllen]

Wouldn't you if you had struck a financial jackpot?

It did seem first time around it was a bit odd. scroat 1 does the business and is not a rapist, Scroat 2 does it and is a rapist because she was too drunk....

Scroat 1 was witnessed by at least 2 people as acting reasonably.

Scroat 2 sneaked in the room and sneaked out again.

Also Scroat 2 used his and his fiancée's wealth to get a retrial. In doing so they dug up the woman's sexual history - this hasn't been allowed in other rape trials where the woman was drunk.

The fact is normal men (and women) can act very badly when they want sex e.g. linky and this can be hard for people especially their families to accept.

[vetran]

Scroat 1 was witnessed by at least 2 people as acting reasonably.

Scroat 2 sneaked in the room and sneaked out again.

Also Scroat 2 used his and his fiancée's wealth to get a retrial. In doing so they dug up the woman's sexual history - this hasn't been allowed in other rape trials where the woman was drunk.

The fact is normal men (and women) can act very badly when they want sex e.g. linky and this can be hard for people especially their families to accept.

Scroat 1 picked her up with the clear intent of sharing her, this was made very clear by his actions including the text.

The woman's sexual history is relevant, the accusation that her drink had been spiked was cast into serious doubt by her previous history so whilst you might not like it then its very clear it is important. She had done this before twice.So screwee-1 was obviously lying. I do wonder when one side is allowed a cloak and the other is stripped naked in public I'm all for complete disclosure.

Scroat 2 who is quite despicable was clearly not guilty of rape based on intoxication.

the reference to a person quite clearly suffering from mental illness but who has been abused by the law is a little worrying

[SueEllen]

Scroat 1 picked her up with the clear intent of sharing her, this was made very clear by his actions including the text.

The woman's sexual history is relevant, the accusation that her drink had been spiked was cast into serious doubt by her previous history so whilst you might not like it then its very clear it is important. She had done this before twice.So screwee-1 was obviously lying. I do wonder when one side is allowed a cloak and the other is stripped naked in public I'm all for complete disclosure.

Scroat 2 who is quite despicable was clearly not guilty of rape based on intoxication.

the reference to a person quite clearly suffering from mental illness but who has been abused by the law is a little worrying

There is a bigger issue than just this case of using past sexual behaviour.

Section 41 of the Youth and Criminal Justice Act was brought in to protect those who claim rape from being cross examined about their past sexual behaviour.

Now it means that anyone who rapes or sexually assaults someone over 13, if they are rich enough to pay the right lawyers can put the person's past sexual behaviour back in focus as the law ( as per usual for the UK) is not clear on a time limit.

[vetran]

There is a bigger issue than just this case of using past sexual behaviour.

Section 41 of the Youth and Criminal Justice Act was brought in to protect those who claim rape from being cross examined about their past sexual behaviour.

Now it means that anyone who rapes or sexually assaults someone over 13, if they are rich enough to pay the right lawyers can put the person's past sexual behaviour back in focus as the law ( as per usual for the UK) is not clear on a time limit.

Unfortunately there is no restriction on a mans past sexual behavior, now if you want equality....

[BrilloPad]

Proof the rich can hire the best lawyers and do what they want.

The removal of the footballer maximum wage was the worst thing to happen to the game.

[shaunbhoy]

Proof the rich can hire the best lawyers and do what they want.

Quite so. A Jury is simply a group of people brought together in Court to decide who has the best lawyer.