Originally Posted by Russ (Post 35749208)

That is without question.

However the basis of his conviction seems to be the fact that she was "too drunk" to give consent. I'm not disputing that as the reason for a rape conviction however the footage of her going in to the hotel seems to show she was capable of walking easily enough.

Then there's the question of what she meant by "winning big", and treating her friend to a holiday and a Mini Cooper. Those messages were not available at the time of the trial, in fact NWP denied they existed.

I'd say questioning her credibility would be sensible in this instance.

Originally Posted by Russ (Post 35749219)

From what I've seen in the case at no point did she claimed they carried on drinking. In fact it seems she suggested they just "got on with it".

Originally Posted by Top banana (Post 35749221)

You clearly think he is innocent, what do you think of him as a roll model for young football fans. Forget the conviction for a moment, it's a fact that while he had a girlfriend, he turned up watched his mate having sex with a young girl and than had sloppy seconds, after that he snuck out the backdoor of the hotel.

Nice bloke, his girlfriends parents must be so proud of him

Originally Posted by Russ (Post 35749222)

Oh I clearly do, do I?

Originally Posted by Top banana (Post 35749223)

Ok, you seem to think

Originally Posted by Russ (Post 35749224)

A better climb-down.

No I do not think he's innocent - the court found him guilty therefore he's guilty.

Do I think he's a "rapist"? If the whole thing occurred as discussed in court then yes, of course.

My issue is that it appears not all relevant evidence was seen in court. If at his appeal it's all presented and they still find nothing wrong with the conviction then he will forever be a rapist.

Originally Posted by Russ (Post 35749227)

Really?! If my partner was (in my opinion) wrongly convicted of something I'd move Heaven and Earth to get it overturned.

Originally Posted by Russ (Post 35749216)

I'm glad you're unlikely to be on his jury.

Originally Posted by Russ (Post 35749227)

Really?! If my partner was (in my opinion) wrongly convicted of something I'd move Heaven and Earth to get it overturned.

Originally Posted by Top banana (Post 35749229)

Even though you knew they had had it off with someone else, whatever the circumstances?

Originally Posted by Pierre

Well you appear to be erring towards the point he may be wrongly convicted, but until he has another trial, if indeed he gets one, he's guilty, despite what some dodgy website says , including this one.

Originally Posted by Pierre

What makes you think he was wrongly convicted?

Originally Posted by Russ (Post 35749224)

My issue is that it appears not all relevant evidence was seen in court. If at his appeal it's all presented and they still find nothing wrong with the conviction then he will forever be a rapist.

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35749234)

It's a judge who decides what is and is not admissible in court. There is oftentimes decent legal reasons as to why something isn't revealed in court and it appears to only be the Chad Evans campaign site that is suggesting it should be seen.

Originally Posted by Russ (Post 35749236)

Well yeah, they have a vested interest in this. But there's also the guy who discovered the messages too.

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35749237)

According to them. We have little idea of the authenticity, context, meaning or legal admissibility of the messages.

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35749237)

We're talking about people with no to little legal knowledge trying to interpret information from a biased source about a case we didn't sit in on. It's quite dangerous.