Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
EMPTYING THE BINS of Colombia’s capital, Jose Alberto Gutierrez one day found a copy of the classic novel “Anna Karenina,” and kept it.
That was 20 years ago – and the garbage man continued to collect Bogota’s discarded books, amassing 25,000 in a free library, swelled by donations.
“I realized that people were throwing books away in the rubbish. I started to rescue them,” Gutierrez, a stocky, grey-haired man of 54, told AFP.
He never got past primary school as a student, but is now dubbed “The Lord of the Books,” in demand from schools across the country.
Epic undertaking
That first copy of Tolstoy was soon joined by “The Little Prince,” “Sophie’s World,” “The Iliad” and various novels by Colombian master Gabriel Garcia Marquez.
Gutierrez’s neighbors started coming round to borrow books to help their children with schoolwork.
There was a lack of them in our neighborhood, so we started to help.
Now a whole floor of his house, on a hill in the working class Nueva Gloria district of the capital, is taken up by stacks of books.
Along with wife Luz Mery Gutierrez and their three children, Gutierrez opened it as a free library in 2000.
Volunteers joined in, word spread, and the garbage man found himself invited to international book fairs in Santiago, Monterrey as well as in the capital.
Where once he supplied the library by rescuing books from the street, now most his stock comes from donations. Aside from donations, Gutierrez covers any further expenses from his own pocket.
“We have a blessed curse upon us,” he said. “The more books we give away, the more come to us.”
The collection got so big that they had to halt the children’s reading sessions they held in the house, for lack of space.
Instead they started traveling around the country to deliver free books to hundreds of poor and remote districts.
Books for peacetime
Gutierrez says his mother gave him a love of literature by reading cartoons to him in the country shack where he grew up.
“It was she who enlightened me,” he says.
Having not finished school as a boy, he is now, well into middle age, studying for his school leaver’s exam.
Among the people across the vast jungle nation who have contacted him to ask for books was a fighter in the FARC leftist rebel group.
Its 7,000 members are gathered in demobilization zones to disarm under a peace accord signed last year with the government.
The FARC member asked Gutierrez to send books for the fighters. They will have to learn and train for new jobs once they lay down their weapons and make the transition to civil life.
“Books transformed me, so I think books are a symbol of hope for those places,” Gutierrez said. “They are a symbol of peace.”
You’d think they’d just stay away from the whole debacle. Why would the Irish Players’ Association weigh in on a Welsh player playing in England anyway?
I’m not even going to bother getting into his points or how right or wrong he may be but what the fu*k is a solicitor from the PFAI wading into this for and if it’s to boost their own public profile why did the PFAI allow them to do this! A madness!
Because professional footballers are frequently propositioned by young women?
While I get what you’re saying, presumably this solicitor should be urging caution to his client (and their members) rather than critiquing the decision on the courts.
I would imagine the most sound legal advice would be “Avoid situations like this, or this might happen.”.
Sums up the PFAI it’s not the first time their solicitor has put his foot in it. He is not a journalist and should not be getting articles published on their web site. Completely disgusting comments
Only journalists should be allowed to write or be published David? Get a grip, lad.
But is the PFAI website the correct forum for an opinion piece from one of it’s solicitors, Joe? Even if you forget for a moment that Evans is not represented by the PFAI, I would say no.
I can totally see your point of view Andy. There’s definitely a question mark over whether the PFAI should be involving itself. However, David’s comment went well beyond that, so I objected to it.
Darren how do we know anyone is guilty of a crime? Its reported, evidence is collected, both sides present their evidence and the person is convicted by a jury of their peers based on the facts of the case. He was convicted and given how difficult it is for rape victims to get their rapist convicted I would presume those in that courtroom had evidence that convinced them he was.
Additionally, if a woman is too drunk to give consent your default position should be that she does NOT want to sleep with you, not well she’s too drunk to say no therefore she must mean yes. Too drunk to consent does not give you permission to do what you want to the girl. So if she is too drunk to remember it then she was obviously too drunk to consent and he should not have ‘joined in’. No wonder so many people are afraid to come forward about rape when idiots like you are victim blaming.
Before you go off on a rant Anne do a bit of research will you. There was no evidence to say she was unconscious or that she didn’t give consent, she simply couldn’t remember.
No one has said she was to blame so can we expect a retraction of the last line of your comment? Doubt it.
massive child abuse investigation, involving Westminster politicians, going on in Britain for months now. Has made headline news, almost on a daily basis, for months in Britain.
Senior Westminster politicians abused, and supposedly even killed children. UK police have this week launched homicide inquiries. Can’t understand why this major story is being COMPLETELY ignored by the Journal.ie and the rest of the Irish media.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/tory-mp-strangled-boy-to-death-at-sex-abuse-party-victim-claims-9864608.html
Anne your comments are very annoying to read. All you want is your own opinion accepted whilst I do agree with some of what you say not all of it is as extreme as you make it out to be and you should respect other people’s opinion instead of attacking them straight away as they are entitled to it even though it may not be in agreement with what you opine.
I cant comment on this until ive read the facts of the case. Just because he was convicted does not necessarily mean he is guilty, there has been many cases and one in the US recently where a man has been in jail the last 28 years for a murder he did not commit. So yes the law can be wrong and can be influenced by public opinion.
No you can’t Peter as I was replying directly to Darren who said ” , how does anyone know he was guilty. Didn’t the bird say she was too drunk & couldn’t remember the night the hairy ape allegedly happened. Typical spoofing woman.”
calling the victim a typical spoofing woman and saying she was too drunk is blaming.
Given that the conviction was on the basis that she was too drunk to consent I think its fairly clear it was a matter of consent. Maybe you need to do research.
Zoe – stop perpetuating this lie, I have provided you with links of reporting by the Irish media. Now please go away and stop trying to derail every other thread with your lies.
So you are saying the Westminster story is all lies, Paul?
Considering that this is such as massive story, probably the biggest political scandal in British history – it is strange how little the Irish media have covered it.
Would you prefer to see it not covered or reported upon?
I’m sorry Marc if you find my comments annoying. I just found it very annoying to hear someone call this woman a ‘typical spoofing woman’ that to me is not an opinion that deserves respect.
There is no evidence to suggest that she was too drunk to consent. I have seen friends(male and female) walking around and talking for hours while drunk and then not remember anything the next day.
That is the issue with this case because it opens a Pandoras box do men ie don’t sleep with any woman who seems even slightly drunk. Do you not agree?
Zoe – no, you are telling lies and persistently. The story is a big story and is being reported on by the Irish media. I have provided you with links previously, but you still persist in the lies.
Zoe , why don’t you email the journal and ask them yourself.
I don’t think it would do any good Joan. We shouldn’t have to be contacting a news website, asking them to report the news fairly and impartially.
That should be a given, in their job.
Zoe , I agree but its not really our job to be telling others how to do their job , there is the option to send them a news tip and its up to them if they want to use it .
He doesn’t really have a clue what happened either. Should probably take a walk to clear his head
I’m not sure what to make of this case. I have no sympathy for Evans if the chain of events are as described by the victim, but his family have released cctv footage which appears to corroborate his version of events. At the end of the day the only people who know exactly what happened are the two of them.
Why are the PFAI getting involved in this case?!
It’s also worth noting that Paul Heaton (Beautiful South and patron of Sheffield United) resigned from his position last night and gave a statement to the media, saying that Evans deserves a chance of redemption but not so shortly after letting down the club he represented.
Yes but in the same interview he also said he shouldn’t be thrown out of football but he doesn’t want him at his club. So that means it’s ok for him to play for someone else and be in the game but not at Sheffield. Little double standards there. Why isn’t the anger directed at the justice system? Why didn’t they keep him locked up for longer? No one will ever know what happened that night or exactly how it was but the blokes done what was asked of him and served his time.
I suppose if that rent-a-gob Katie Hopkins can voice an opinion on it, why not the PFAI.
Everyone has had their opinion and it’s been trial by media for the guy. I wonder, and here comes the red thumbs but if the girl had one less glass of wine could we be looking at a kiss and tell story for a few quid in the Sun. Just a thought
“it’s been trial by media for the guy” Except that it’s actually been trial by jury and he’s been convicted? Comments about “kiss and tells” about someone who was able to prove their story in court makes all kind of survivors hesitant about coming forward, Rouzert.
Disgusting comment Rouzert.
Sorry my opinion disgusts you. Is it possible a court gets a decision wrong by any chance?
It is possible a court gets a decision wrong, however the disgusting part of your comment is casting disrepute on the character of the girl by implying that she would just be sleeping with him to get herself five minutes of fame and a story in the sun and talking about if she had one less glass of wine. This is victim blaming and is not acceptable. She was far too drunk to consent and already with his friend – what made him think she would be only delighted for him to join in. The default position should be that a very drunk girl unable to consent does not want to sleep with you, not the opposite.
Out of interest how many convicted murderers/ people jailed for GBH are you also supporting as potentially it being the victims fault and maybe they didn’t do it at all? After all like you said courts can make mistakes but it seems in cases of rape men are far more happy to cast doubt on a conviction and on the victim than in other cases.
Sure. But juries also acquit guilty people (especially in rape cases, where it’s very hard to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. Evidence has to be pretty overwhelming to convict.) Somehow I doubt if he’d been acquitted, you’d be arguing that the court may have gotten it wrong.
The court has more information that you or I do, and the all-too-common spectre of a convicted rapist claiming the court got it wrong is not particularly convincing to most sensible people.
Why is it disgusting? As a football fan weekly there are girls who come out in papers and have kiss and tell stories so unfortunately there is no smoke without fire. Ever hear the story of people who cry wolf? Do you brand all this girls disgusting for their moment in the spotlight and a few quid? You seem to be very sure how intoxicated she was but if you look at the cctv I’m sure you’ll agree she doesn’t look too unsteady on her feet. Don’t get too upset love. This is the journal where people can express opinions and I’m sorry mine don’t match yours. I’ve not blamed any victim here I’ve just put forward a different side.
Have you actually read up on this case Nick. Absolute disgrace how he has been treated. I’m no fan of Ched or English football but the whole case is a mess. Court had it in for him from day one. Both Ched and his friend admitted straight away they had consensual sex with the girl and she never once said she was raped.
Of course he shouldn’t have been there as he had a girlfriend and that is a shameful act. Don’t people find it amazing that his friend was cleared of any wrongdoing… Even though they both did the exact same thing!
So because some girls come out in papers and have kiss & tell stories you presume this victim was the same? And now you are accusing her of crying wolf? He was convicted of her rape and yet you feel you can easily dismiss that conviction and try place the blame on her. Again you seem to consider yourself judge and jury. Because you think she looks steady on her feet he must be innocent?
Also don’t patronize me by calling me ‘love’. Thanks.
Anne K, have you seen the video evidence from the hotel. The girl was far from drunk! Yes she may have had a few drinks, but if you are going down that road where are you going to draw the line. It is well documented that the girl in question had a reputation for crying wolf on this issue before. Maybe someone needs to have a look at her instead.
“t is well documented that the girl in question had a reputation for crying wolf on this issue before. Maybe someone needs to have a look at her instead.” Because I’m sure his barrister didn’t even think of that line of reasoning! It’s only used in every rape case ever.
“Reading up on the case” gives you a small sample of biased information that is out there in the public arena. The court has information which you do not.
Sorry petal, but I’ve never claimed to be judge and jury. If you had read my post before the red mist descended did I not say it was just a thought. As in it would be a possibility? I’m sure the cctv made up a large part of the evidence so yes the fact she did look steady would indeed be a factor. If she was so intoxicated as not to consent surely she would be unsteady on her feet? Listen we’ve got difference of opinions but because mine isn’t the same doesn’t mean it’s disgusting so tie up that high horse of yours and have a nice cup of tea
Surely any information that they would have in court is public knowledge after the case. They couldn’t be hiding further info could they?
Pathetic.
So is your single mindedness. I’ve never once said during this whether I think he’s guilty or not. I’ve put forward a different side. What’s pathetic is jumping down someone’s throat and calling them names because they don’t agree with you. That’s pathetic!
All court transcripts are available to the public Nick..
“They couldn’t be hiding further info could they?” If by *hiding*, you mean that rape cases are held in camera, most people agree with that (except the trolls who exposed her name.) There’s no reason for the details to become public to random busybodies – it would be made available to the appeals court.
Most information in the public domain comes from Ched Evans’ publicity team – and it’s in their interest to try to make the survivor look as less satisfying as possible.
Rou , the girl never made a complaint that she was raped and she has had to move away and has been given a new identity so I don’t think , as you put it , was a kiss and tell .
She never made a report that she was raped? So did ched Evans walk into a cop shop and say I raped a girl? Secondly I asked if she had a glass of wine less would we be looking at a kiss a tell story. Hypothetical thought. Would help to read what I posted before trying to put words in my mouth
Rouzert , no she never said she was raped , maybe you should read up on the case .
Enlighten me then so
She said she couldn’t remember.. Big difference.
Rouzert , google it
Ok she didn’t got claiming rape in those words but in order with him to be charged she would have to proceed with the statement that got him the rape charge. Dress it up how you want but it’s the same thing whether she said he raped me or not. She said she couldn’t remember. So is it possible she doesn’t remember consenting?
alex de large…where can they be found??
the court transcripts that is??
Hey pathetic, why don’t you read up on the tweets about winning big from the trial buying her and her mate matching mini coopers after the trial. Sound like the tweets of an distraught victim?
Rouzert , who’s pathetic ?
Sorry Joan not you. Anne K started throwing insults around earlier and called me pathetic. Not aimed at you at all
The “alternative view” that you presented Rouzert, presumably was presented at trial, or at the very least the best possible version of events was (in so far as the defence saw it).
It was rejected to the point that the jury saw no reasonable doubt that he had raped this woman.
The tweets about making money from the trial were not released till after the case from a report I read. I’m not condoning rape but I do think that there is more to the story than meets the eye
Reports you read are not necessarily accurate. There are some people who are extremely credulous and willing to believe everything Evan’s family has said – but the jury had a higher standard of information.
So what your saying is the jury were given information that nobody else was in order to convict him? What about people in the public gallery and such. Were they asked before certain parts of the case to leave so this information could be used?
“So did ched Evans walk into a cop shop and say I taped a girl?”
Pretty much, yes. But he didn’t use the word rape, he just described the rape in his own words. His own description of events is what got him arrested, tried and convicted. And refused appeal.
Sounds like common sense to me. Not sure why the PFAI felt the need to stick their oar in, but a) he’s served his time, b) he maintains that he was wrongly convicted and is still working towards clearing his name, and c) the hysterical witch hunt of the last few weeks seems very much over the top. He’s no Larry Murphy.
Legally it’s not you know, if a person is too drunk to consent that having sex with that person is rape. It’s shocking to me how many people don’t realise that. Just because they don’t say no, doesn’t mean they said yes!
There’s no need to argue the case again. The man was found guilty by a court of law. People should accept that until he can manage to clear his name (if he can).
However what goes hand in hand with that is the acceptance that he had served his time for the crime. We may not ever like him but we certainly cannot deliberately discriminate against him. That just becomes a form of vigilantism.
As for the PFAI solicitor involving himself… Utterly crazy.
Of course we can discriminate against him. He is a convicted rapist! How would you feel if he raped a member of your family?
Now THATS ignorant.
Well ive seen it on the flip side with girls taking advantage of drunk lads. I wonder do they give consent?
@Michael – personally sure, go ahead.
We as a society cannot allow that though. What you are saying is that this man commited a crime, and was sentenced and that the sentence was not good enough… That is an issue with the legal system, and action outside of the legal system is vigilantism, which is a very very dangerous thing in society.
Build your objections into the legal system if necessary
So Dennis,
Would you contend that everyone convicted of a crime should be allowed to get their old job back after they are released?
@Sean, I didn’t say that. However should they specifically be barred from it? Prior convictions are just that… prior. At what point does punishment end? The usual stance would be that it ends at the termination of the sentence that is handed down, taking into account the rules your jurisdiction has for early release.
The fact of the matter is the main reason anyone cares is because he’s a footballer
My issue in all of this is the PFA saying that Evans was “rehabilitated”.
How can someone, found guilty of a crime, who pleaded innocence and continues to deny his crime, possibly be “rehabilitated”.
He either did it or didn’t, if he did he shouldn’t be allowed back in my eyes, it’s a public facing job, they risk losing sponsors, benefactors, fans because of this. Add to that he is going to be held up as a role model to thousands of young men and women, hardly the type of role model I would wish to expose young people to.
Equally, if he didn’t do it, how can he claim that he has been “rehabilitated”.
He can’t be innocent and rehabilitated. He’s either guilty and learned or innocent and still fighting.
No, it’s not a case of he either did it or he didn’t, because we all know he had sex with her, the question was, is consenting, even though your drunk, still consent.
So it’s more like, was she too drunk. Well, if say there’s no concrete evidence, so it’s just a guess.
Where do we draw the line , how do we measure too drunk, what it ched was equally as drunk?
There’s a legal standard for that and he crossed it as found by a jury.
I know little about the details of the court case but find the fallout from his release and attempted return to football very interesting. He has been found guilty and has served his time according to the law.
It seems to be more his return to football rather than the initial crime that has the public and celebrity moral compass swinging into overdrive. Is it the fact he is not showing remorse that is the problem or is it the act itself? Has football become the moral bastion that society now measures itself?
What makes this crime worse than say killing someone? Steve Finnan didn’t get this sort of media response after he killed a pedestrian when speeding. And the level of response seems less than that of Luke McCormick who killed two young boys when drink driving. Both were welcomed back into football without too much fuss.
He has been released on license so you can’t say he has served his time if they’re still monitoring him.
He has served his time in jail and is free to return to work was my point. I understand he has additional conditions such as monitoring and being a registered sex offender.
He was sentenced to five years and served half, now he’s out on license for remainder. Reaction of club patrons says it all.
So they should be attacking the justice system instead of the the man. Do you want him to tell the probation service he feels he hasn’t spent long enough inside?
How about looking at our own justice system here where a man can be convicted of rape and get out in six months while offering to pay compensation.. Disgraceful
Exactly. The man has served a punishment deemed fitting for the crime, regardless of whether people think it was too lenient. The public are only getting their knickers in a twist because he gets paid exorbitant amounts of money.
@Alex
You’re conflating several issues there, stick to the point.
Are you really criticising the club patrons whilst still supporting a convicted rapist? The mind boggles at some of the logic on here.
Steve Finnan never faced any charges let alone a conviction so you can take him out of the equation straight away.
I personally think Evans has a great change of having his conviction overturned on appeal…. That would be very interesting!
My issues with him returning to the club are pretty simple.
1. He is a convicted rapist and registered sex offender.
2. His presence at the club would be divisive.
3. Footballers are supposed to be held up as role models within the community, working with young people, in schools, youth teams, etc. – there are better role models.
4. He cannot claim to have been “rehabilitated” after a crime which he continues to protest, he did not commit.
5. At their base level, football clubs are also businesses, he will lose this business money. There is a clear business case for his not returning.
I have no problem with this man being reintroduced into society, but there is zero reason for giving him back a high profile job, in the public eye, with access to impressionable children who can and would see his resigning as an endorsement of his behaviour “ah yeah, rape someone, do yer time and it’ll be grand after”.
And the point still stands – what makes this different to the likes of McCormick who actually killed someone and was pretty much welcomed back with little fuss? Is it the fact celebrities are now outraged and social media is onboard?
Where I would draw the line is intent and admission.
McCormick was not intending to kill, and despite that he admitted it and plead guilty.
Whether he intended to or not, a court found that Evans raped. Equally, he has at no point accepted that finding.
Additionally, crimes of a sexual nature are dealt with/thought of differently. I’m not saying that McCormick should be back playing, but he at least admitted his crime and accepted his punishment. Those are the two basic criteria to rehabilitation in my eyes.
Hi Sean,
Ched Evans conviction for rape was upheld by the court of appeal in November 2012. There is no question that he was convicted of Rape.
The question now is should he be allowed to return to his chosen profession. Would we even be having this conversation if he worked in IT or was a Carpenter? Should people convicted of a crime be allowed to return to work after they have been released from prison, so long as they stick to the conditions of their release.
Gary,
That’s not the question at all.
The question isn’t whether or not he should be allowed, he is allowed.
The question is whether or not it is appropriate for the club to allow him to come back, into a position as a role model, being exposed to young people, influencing them, being held up as “If you work hard maybe you can be like Ched Evans”.
I have zero problem with him being allowed “to work”. My only issue is with the work he wants to do. Let him get a job elsewhere if he wants, just don’t give him a job that could influence young people to think “hey, he got away with it and still drives a porsche”.
I believe it’s the responsibility of the club, the FA and the PFA to think in these terms.
Hi Sean,
My point was should he be allowed to return to his chosen profession. So are we saying that society should be able to choose the work that those convicted of crimes are allowed to perform. Would it be OK if he did not earn such a large sum of money, what car should he drive.
From a personal point of view I believe that it is my job to teach my children right from wrong and not depend on footballers to do it.
Why should footballers be responsible for being role models any more than any other figure. Years ago they represented local communities, nowadays the vast majority are essentially mercenaries who will go where the money is. We don’t go round demanding that businesspeople, celebrities or heaven forbid even politicians should act as role models for young people, so why should footballers?
Gary, he should be allowed to apply to his chosen profession, it’s up to them if they take him. I’m not suggesting a legal remedy to prevent him from applying. I’m suggesting that from the club’s point of view he is not a good option for them.
I really don’t care if he earns a lot of money, if he works hard that’s totally fair. Thing is I don’t think that he should be held up as a role model, rightly or wrongly, like it or not, footballers are in the public eye.
The reason they should behave more responsibly is that they are in the public eye, Intallitarian. They choose that life, crave the fame and seek the public approval. It’s not like when they were training to be a professional footballer they thought that when they got there that they would live in a vacuum.
With the fame comes the responsibility. He failed in that responsibility which could make him infamous. I genuinely wish him no ill will. I do however think that his actions have made his position as a public figure untenable.
How can u défend a convicted rapist who, Even now has shown no remorse.Ban for life me says
Michael , he won’t show remorse because he believes he’s done nothing wrong
So Joan,
If asked if he were rehabilitated then he’d say no?
Sean , I would imagine that answer would be a no because he doesn’t believe he did anything wrong .
But the courts do. So who are we to believe?
Sean , I understand that that the courts found him guilty but this time I think there is more to this case .
Just goes to prove most lawyers are gobsh***s… .
Yeah, nothing like some anecdotal evidence to prove something…
He should be allowed play. It’s his job. Wasn’t Mike Tyson allowed to comeback & box.
Another thing is, how does anyone know he was guilty. Didn’t the bird say she was too drunk & couldn’t remember the night the hairy ape allegedly happened. Typical spoofing woman.
Somebody stuck a link up here last week which details the case for his appeal.
His case was that he came back to the pre-booked hotel where his friend and the girl were already having sex and he asked if he could join in. Apparently, at that point, she agreed but could not recall it the next day.
So no means no and yes can also mean no?
Used to be getting a girl pregnant was a guys biggest fear. Now you’re a rapist if the girl changes her mind?
Hakuin the girl was deemed too drunk to consent. In that case where a girl is horrendously drunk the presumption should be that she does NOT want to sleep with you . Obviously if he was found guilty in a court of law there is more to the case then ‘apparently she agreed’
That is his story. Obviously the jury believed differently, beyond a reasonable doubt. He’s hardly the most objective person on the issue.
“Apparently, at that point, she agreed but could not recall it the next day.”
According to whom?
According to the only people who could recall
Blood tests the next day found very little alcohol in her system Anne… Is that not a little strange?
So what is the legal definition for “too drunk”? If a girl is tipsy and says yes are you still in danger of going to jail for rape?
And if a guy wakes up in the bed of an absolute minger, or auld wan and he can’t remember how he got there, can he bring a case of rape against the woman, because he was too drunk to give consent?
You can have two parties, both drunk, neither of whom remember even how they ended up in bed together, and one of them, guess which gender, is now going to jail as a rapist if the other doesn’t want to be accountable for their actions and plays the victim card.
That may be the law, but how is that justice?
Unfortunately that is the way the justice system is skewed
Some how I doubt we will be hearing from Anne on that piece of logic Murphy. Well said
Yes if a man wakes up in the bed of a woman and does not remember what happened and feels that he was raped or violated then he can go to the police about it (I’m not sure why you are bringing the looks of the person into it?). The issue is that many men feel they will not be taken seriously in this situation which is another societal issue and one not helped by comments like yours that ascertain that they are just not being accountable to their actions.
I am not sure of the legal definition for “too drunk” however I am sure the qualified lawyers who fought this case that resulted in a conviction that the girl was too drunk to consent do know and used this in their case.
Again please stop victim blaming saying this girl was playing the ‘victim card’. Its no wonder we have such terrible rates of people coming forward to report rape when this is the attitude they are faced with even after a judge and jury believe beyond reasonable doubt that the person is guilty.
Anne seriously, you are the only one who is bringing up blaming the victim.
Peter seriously how is saying “the other doesn’t want to be accountable for their actions and plays the victim card.” or saying “she was too drunk to remember typical spoofing woman” not blaming the victim
The crime of rape requires penetration of the (male or female) victim by the man. Your hypothetical drunk man cannot be forced to penetrate the ‘minger’ or ‘auld wan’. He chooses to do so and there is no rape of him or her if she is capable of consenting and doesvactually consent.
Alex , plus her drink was not spiked either with any drugs , traces of coke was found but not taken on the night in question
Anne I’m not victim blaming.I have my own views on this case but my objections are not specific to this case it’s the principle that really concerns me. Basically it’s placing all responsibility on one gender. Both are party to a sexual encounter, both may be drunk, neither may remember giving consent but one can, for whatever reason, choose to frame it as rape and press charges and get the other convicted.
How would it sit with you if a man was able to go out, get drunk, sexually assault a woman and then claim innocence the next morning because he was too inebriated to know what he was doing, and the burden of proof was on the victim to show that he was not “too drunk” to be held accountable for his actions.
It’s madness
Anne, I just loved your replies, fair play to you and by the way I agree with you, he has shown no remorse because he feels like most sex offenders the victim asked for it, as for pfai why don’t they invite him to play here
True Joan.. There is too much to this case which doesn’t add up.
Alex , I agree that there seems to be more to it .
He’s not far off the mark.no body knows what really happened he might of been convicted but he could also be innocent at the same time.everyone seems to believe the girl in these situations.
Well he admitted thwy had to sex.
Its then a case of consent.
So drunk women aren’t capable of making a decision, by law.
Right, so we have to accept the law which says he’s guilty, but not the laws that allow early release and the right to work again.
So much emotional and lack of rational thinking and logic surrounding this case.
Welcome to the modern world of social media and very tom dick and Harrys high horses
Whether or not you consider what he did to be rape , the fact of the matter is , that at this point in time Ched Evans IS a convicted rapist. In any profession, if you end up getting convicted of rape or any other serious crime, it’s pretty much a dead cert, that you’re gonna get fired! If he was an accountant, doctor, garda etc, he wouldn’t get his job back. He brought his profession and club into serious disrepute which I think is valid grounds for giving him is marching orders.
Ex West Brom striker Lee Hughes was convicted on manslaughter for causing death by dangerous driving(drink driving)
Hes back playing. He served his custodial sentence. People serve a sentence to rehabilitate before being let back into society. I dont see any different why Ched Evans should be disallowed from trying to earn a living having served his time.
1. He can earn a living – just not as a public role model.
2. How can he have rehabilitated if he refuses to acknowledge that he did anything wrong?
1. But how do you define who is a “public role model”? As Charles Barkley once said: “I’m not a role model… Just because I dunk a basketball doesn’t mean I should raise your kids.”
2. Why would a man seeking to demonstrate his innocence admit to his own guilt?.
1. They are defined (as far as I’m concerned) by whether or not they are put out to the world by themselves or their employers and engage in PR activities. – I don’t think anyone can claim that footballers aren’t public figures. They have fans, followers, large online presences, personal and team sponsors… I really don’t think that you can make that claim.
2. Because he is also claiming (or it has been claimed by his representatives) that he has been rehabilitated. They are mutually exclusive terms. You can’t be innocent and rehabilitated.
Can I ask how come there was not a major outcry when mike Tyson went back to boxing ?
Feel free to ask, I personally don’t know.
I would have thought that potentially,
1. America is a different country
2. Mike Tyson was never a role model (or at least not since Holyfield)
3. There were protests (not huge) but there were.
4. Tyson boxed “for himself” not on behave of, representing or working for anyone else.
Some facts.
I am a man.
I have gotten drunk on a night out and not remembered how I got home or how.
My friends tell me I was “fine”, didn’t appear drunk at any stage.
I even won the spoof game whilst drunk, therefore appearing to have control of my faculties.
End of facts…and now conjecture.
I have had what I believe to be consensual sex in those circumstances.
Question.
Was I raped?
#hangemhigh
Unfortunately this whole story is a sad but accurate reflection on the values of association football. One only has to listen to the vile chanting from the terraces and the allegations of corrupt levelled at FIFA to realise that this is a sport with serious underlying social issues.
What he did wasn’t Rape. I have read the transcript if this case and it is a mind boggling, sexist miscarriage of justice. When has a woman ever been found guilty of rape when a guy has had too much to drink? In my view a jury has judged him morally not legally.
Grubby, yes. Rape, no.
She said YES Ched!
They should move him to another jurisdiction.
It is a colossal irony that Stuart Gilhooly would make these comments given his involvement as a Law Society representative in hearings involving Colm Murphy, a Kerry Solicitor who was never given a “chance at redemption” by either Mr. Gilhooly or the Law Society. He should look a little closer to home for the “miscarraige of justice”.
What a hypocrite. Gilhooly was part of that regime that had Colm Murphy struck off using perjured evidence and the word of two proven forgers and fraudsters. The Law Society refuses to re-examine the matter. Please see link:-
http://www.villagemagazine.ie/index.php/2014/02/questions-for-law-society-solicitor-struck-off-after-law-society-falsely-imputed-an-undertaking-and-relied-in-part-on-a-forged-document-and-evidence-from-a-fraudulent-solicitor/
Irrespective of whether his conviction was safe or not, Evans has made a huge mistake by not waiting until the appeals process has taken its course before attempting to get his career back.
It is a colossal irony that Stuart Gilhooly would make these comments given his involvement as a Law Society representative in hearings involving Colm Murphy, a Kerry Solicitor who was never given the “chance of redemption” by either the Law Society or Mr. Gilhooly. He should look a little closer to home for the “miscarriage of justice”.
have your say