Our thanks to Nigel for this. He writes:
“A combination of factors where feminism, gynocentrism and plain prurience combine to mean men never recover. Long after his first trial, his years in prison and exonerating retrial Ched Evans name sells because “rape” (put in quotes so the paper can’t be sued seeing as legally it wasn’t rape.) and “damsels in distress” sells. The fact someone spend time in prison for a crime he didn’t commit never prevents it popping up every couple of years.”
If you’d like email notifications of our new blog pieces, please enter your email address in the box near the top of the right-hand column and click ‘Subscribe’.
We shall shortly be posting this piece on our X channel.
Our YouTube channel is here.
Justice for Men & Boys 
Much is made about the complainants name being revealed on social media. Yet it is possible that without this the other men who were able to give evidence that corroborated the account given by Evans and Clayton McDonald. Clayton McDonald was acquitted at the first trial and Evans convicted, itself an odd result. He always supported Evans in his innocence. Evans received a settlement of £800,000 from the law firm that defended him at the first trial, suggesting they had not been the best. Evan’s conviction was quashed. And a retrial meant a Jury of 7 women and 5 men acquitted him.
I do actually have some sympathy for the woman because she tried to withdraw from the case early on. However this case followed the Police Force there being criticised in an inspection report for its performance in sexual offences. It was clear a case involving two relatively well known footballers was an important “political” case to succeed in for the Chief Constable to demonstrate the criticism wrong.
The case demonstrated the “political” nature of sexual offences. With the Police wanting a high profile success in a key political area of their work. The way in which the complainant can be railroaded into a prosecution when not wanting to proceed(in fact she was referred to as a poor witness in accounts of the first trial which played a role in McDonald’s acquittal) The way in which complainant anonymity may prevent other witnesses for the defendant from coming forward. The other evidence from the other men was allowed by the judge specifically because it matched McDonald’s and Evans’ accounts exactly, it wasn’t the case any sexual history was included as women’s groups claim. Overall the ways in which defendant’s are already on the back foot, with further rules likely to make this worse. And of course that despite being subject to three trials (first trial, appeal and retrial) the man is still associated with “rape” long after innocence had been pretty definitively established.
LikeLike