Pre-emptive post: Next Ched Evans outrage...

I'm not offended by them, I just found your post patronising, which is a shame seen as it made some valid points.

 

I agree with all that. I think the point I was trying to make got lost by me not giving much thought to how I was writing it, in that this PFA lawyer is effectively saying that Evans rape wasn't that bad because at least he didn't duff her up, etc, which is trivialising what he did do. So I was trying to say that it was like saying that a murder wasn't bad because he only strangled her and didn't chop her up, etc. The end result is still someone being raped or murdered.

 

I think everyone understood what you was banging on about

 

As someone who has served his sentence Ched Evans should be allowed to return to his trade as a professional footballer.
However were he to sign for the team I supported my personal decision would be that I would NOT go to watch him because of the crime he committed.

 

That's true, but from the other end of the spectrum is exactly what the PFA solicitor is doing - he's making the point that 'sex with a drunken woman' is the same irrespective -he's saying what Evans has been found guilty of is therefore the same as a drunken shag - a deliberate attempt to play down this conviction and smooth the path for Evans return. That's not to say he shouldn't become a footballer again. But the solicitor's comments are a piss take for a man in his position.

 

I'm not an expert on the law but it sounds as though interpretation is is key.
IMO rape is rape and and any other crimes committed are additional.if a bloke goes out to rape someone and she resists and he uses force/threats why is it a different level is of rape to a woman who was either too afraid/unable to resist ? Just because the rapist didn't deem it neccessary to use violence/threats the outcome is the same violation on the person.
It should carry a long mandatory sentence on its own standings then other crimes added.