by Arthur Foxake
Ched Evans - convicted, did his time, why can't the Screeching Sisters' hate mob lay off.
Sheffield United footballer Ched Evans was charged with rape, convicted and served his time. Now certain elements of society, the left wing, feminist screechers, the mentally castrated metrosexual males of the public sector, academia and the media leading them, want to deny him a chance to return to the game he played at professional level, yet when we look at the details of his crime, while Evans clearly acted like the lowlife spawn of a pox whore's scab lice, whether what he did was truly rape begins to look very debatable. Does he therefore deserve the witch hunt treatment to which he is being subjected. Let's put the screeching hysteria of the left wing lynch mob aside and look at the facts as established in the trial and conviction of Ched Evans.
The problem now you see is the facts have been swamped by the screeching of the hate mob. Several lower league football clubs have already been subjected to such intense media bullying that had pulled out of negotiations aimed at giving Evans a route back into the game fearing a backlash have threatened to pull out if Convicted Rapist Ched Evans (the media have changed the footballer's name for him) is signed as a player by Oldham.
The first thing we should ask before proceeding to the actual rape is how many of those 20,000 signatures belong to genuine Oldham Athletic supporters. Very few, we suspect, if fact we would be willing to bet most have come from people who live in the London area, work in the media and have very little interest in football. The people campaigning against Evans probably are mostly of testicle - hating female Social Justice Warriors tendency who are more likely to shave their chins than their legs and like football about as much as they like UKIP, or metaphorically castrated male Social Justice Warriors.
These limp wristed fellows may have played football as boys but now, because they fear hairy legged, stubbly chinned plug ugly women, see it as a misogynistic, racist, disablist politically incorrect pastime played by Convicted Rapists, knuckle dragging thugs and wonderfully talented but unreconstructed African immigrants, watched by knuckle dragging, ignorant, working class thugs and a few women who only go to matches to
olge the black guys knobs admire the talents of the African players. Football is an illustration of why Britain such an threatening and intimidating environment for women, compared to enlightened societies like Somalia, Uganda, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan and Tanzania.
So that is a little background. Now we can move to the actual crime.
“Convicted Rapist” is the tag given to Ched Evans to suggest he was guilty of the very worst kind of sexual assault, the violent rape of a total stranger, perhaps even an under age girl. The facts paint a very different picture:
A few people in the media have been brave enough to risk the wrath of the screechers by actually referring to the facts (as recorded in court transcripts of the trial) Daily Telegraph columnist Allison Pearson (not a writer noted for support of the ISIS, The Taliban or other anti - feminist organisations). Pearson researched the case in forensic detail from the initial complaint to the trial and conviction. Here is an extract from her article:
"Sensitive readers should look away now. Footballer Clayton McDonald, a friend of Ched Evans, picked up a 19-year-old girl who was drunk at 4am, and went back to a hotel room with her. McDonald texted Evans: “I’ve got a bird.” McDonald and the girl then had sex. Evans turned up, and the court was told that the girl asked him to perform oral sex on her, which he did. Evans then had sex with the girl, whom he claimed was enjoying herself.
"A hotel porter said there was no sound of distress or cause for alarm. A few of the footballers’ charming mates showed up and filmed through a window. The next morning, Evans departed via an emergency exit. The 19-year-old awoke to find she was naked, with, she says, no memory of what had happened to her. That evening, she reported McDonald and Evans to the police."
If you think that is despicable behaviour on the part of Evans and his friend (who was not charged) I'd agree. The behaviour was appalling even to me, a man who had more that his share of casual sexual encounters (according to serious studies) when young. Sexual assault? Maybe, but rape? It rather depends on your definition of 'capable of giving consent'.
In another report the hotel night porter said the girl was very drunk and did not appear to know what she was doing on arriving but seemed to be enjoying herself. That is his personal opinion and probably a very sensible one. My point is a hotel porter is no more qualified than I or Evans to know if the girl was capable of giving consent, because there is no suggestion anywhere that she was screaming "HELP! RAPE!" as loudly as she could while any of the alleged acts were going on.
Personally, I’d hope, and experience suggests it is not a vain hope, that the 23 year old me would have thought in similar circumstances, "Hey, this isn't right, the girl's off her head." What I know for sure is that if one of my mates had phoned and said, "I'm in a hotel with a girl, d'you fancy coming round and we can give her a spit roasting," (look it up, the word plus 'sexual slang') call me old fashioned if you like possums, but I would not have been interested.
But then forty something years later, after four decades of the amoral, anything goes morality advocated by the 'progressive left' in the past, attitudes have changed. And footballers are no longer local lads with baggy shorts and brylcreemed hair who played for the team in the town where they had been born and where their family lived.
The killer detail for me is about the girl having no memory of what happened to her? So what evidence was there she was incapable of giving consent, having gone to a hotel room with a man she had met only a few minutes before.
Going back to Allison Pearson's article, she writes that on being asked, asked the girls in her local beauty salon weren't nearly so convinced as all the leftie screechers screaming for Evans’s to be crucified.
“Sounds to me like she woke up, realised she’d been dogging, felt really embarrassed about herself and called the police,” Hayley, aged 22 told Pearson. My wife, daughter and daughter - in - law agreed. Another commenter on the case said that lots of girls from her school went to posh London clubs to try and bag themselves the ultimate prize: a footballer, and would go to any lengths, even agreeing to a gang bang (footballers are fond of such group action, one sport psychiatrist has described it as sharing an erotic experience with team mates without compromising their macho credentials - it makes sense, I was never into team sports but all that bonhomie in the showers always seemed suspect to my mind).
Let's be honest, Ched Evans’s persecutors are not interested in facts, real justice, mitigating circumstances, or in points of moral principle. They just want a new target for their hatred of the working classes. A question that is bothering me however is: "Where was the moral outrage from the leftie screechers when the Jay Report into systematic abuse of under age girls in the local authority care system by Pakistani men was published? One girl victim of the gangs had her tongue nailed to a table as a warning not to tell anyone that she had been gang-banged and yet the screeching sisters seemed to go into collective denial, launching hate attacks on anyone who tried to raise the question of why the police, officials and the local council did not act.
No more have they raised a squeak in protest at the news from last month (December 2014) that in the past few years Manchester council has granted over two hundred taxi drivers' licences to men (overwhelmingly of migrant stock) with criminal records as sex offenders. In fact when one feminist MP was asked about the scandal she reportedly said that many of the convictions 'were historic'.
But if 'Convicted Rapist Ched Evans is to be denied the chance to return to his profession (which does not involve him being alone with women in his professional capacity remember) surely a convicted rapist should not be allowed to drave a taxi carrying loan women, possibly late in the night?
Apparently demanding justice for white working class people is racism in the warped minds of these politically correct lunatics.
Two Minutes Hate
The Tyranny Of Moral Relativism
The Threat To Free Speech From The Authoritarian Left
The importance of Free Speech in democracy
What is a liberal
Politically Correct Thought Police workPosts on political correctness
The Ched Evans Saga And The Problem With Feminist Fascism
Lessons we should draw from the Evans saga:
1. We have a real problem with vicious feminist zealots like "Jean Hatchet" who want to victimise people in order to "make an example" of them, for ideological purposes. We need to find a way to stop them exploiting victims and crimes for their emotional manipulation.
2. The treatment of rape by our police and courts is in the process of changing dramatically. When the older amongst us were young, a convicted rapist was a particularly nasty criminal. Now, he might just be an oafish and unlucky young man. This requires some major changes elsewhere to reflect this fundamental shift.
3. One change will occur inevitably - society will come to recognise that rape is not necessarily the heinously evil crime that it was formerly. The idea that it is, is a hangover from the old days, when by and large only real rapes were prosecuted successfully as rape, or even taken to court at all. It no longer reflects reality, and society will gradually come to recognise that truth. Well done, feminists.
4. Ideally, we would halt this process by detaching actions like those of which Evans was accused from the crime of real rape, by introducing an appropriate requirement for some sort of active violence or coercion into the legal definition of the crime of rape (which itself is only a few decades old). If we must criminalise such incidents of breaches of sexual etiquette between sexually active adults, then it should be under the heading of a completely separate crime fom rape. That these crimes are conflated is a gross offence against natural justice.
5. In the meantime, the most obvious and easy step is to amend the law and sentencing guidelines to remove any minimum sentence from the crime of rape and allow for more appropriate sentencing. It makes no sense whatsoever that Evans should get 5 years when the legal establishment approved sentence for Lewis Gill for the unprovoked killing of an innocent young man by attacking him in the street was only 4 years. This is purely because the sentencing has not properly changed to reflect the change in how rape is treated by the police and legal system, and is again a gross offence against natural justice.
6. We should reconsider the 1976 introduction of anonymity for rape complainants. Prior to that it was never the case, and people accusing others of serious crimes were routinely expected to do so honestly and in public, not while hiding behind a shield of anonymity. That had a heavy cost for some, of course. When anonymity was brought in for rape victims, it was still the case that rape convictions were usually for real rape rather than drunken misunderstandings. That, as can be seen from the Evans case, is clearly no longer going to be the case. In the new circumstances it seems likely there will be many more problems with false accusations or cases where the jury is essentially guessing about the participants' actions and condition, as in the Evans case, and so it's reasonable to argue that the costs versus benefits issue has shifted away from the situtation in which complainant anonymity was considered an appropriate compromising of natural justice.