Ched Evans

Predictable yes, draconian though? Why? The state have a wider duty to protect the public than to see an ex con find gainful employment. How can the probation services deem he is no longer a threat given he was released so recently?

There is some information here just so you can be sure he is not receiving any specially disadvantageous treatment.

http://hub.unlock.org.uk/knowledgebase/travelling-licence/


As a side note, I am sure you would have seen that the Prime Minister of Malta warned Hibernians the signing of Evans could damage their country's reputation. Is it possible that every one else might be right and you be wrong in this particular instance?

 

Yep that's entirely possible. Probably a regular occurence in fact! And draconian is probably the wrong choice of word. I had thought about amending it.

The guidance in your link is pretty much what I would have expected. But it does include the possibility that special permission could be granted including in the specific case study mentioned where the probation service seemed incapable of making up its mind coherently. If allowing him to play abroad smacks of special treatment then that's because it's a special case. What other ex-prisoner is denied earning a living in his own country, in a job that isn't denied him in law, because 160,000+ twitterati are on his case? And they've certainly not got rehabilitation in mind at all. Just unremitting retribution and damnation for evermore.

I'm not alone in the - he's done his time so let him move on - view anyway. Plenty of others think exactly the same way including the hierachy of Hibernians of Malta F.C. Sure the state/probation service has a responsibility to protect the public. So how would his being in Malta most of the time further endanger the public here then? He'd be in Malta! And the Maltese authorities would be well aware of his whereabouts given his profile. Besides, I wasn't suggesting he simply be allowed to bugger off to Malta. I was suggesting he continue to report back here which would be a pain for him and a continual reminder of the importance of that process.

This guy can't resume his chosen profession here due to continuing media coverage and busybodies sticking their oar in. He could continue it abroad, where he'd be less high profile, but now another obstacle is put in his way to deny him that too. He's 26, was in a profession from which he will have to retire at age 35ish anyway and the clock's ticking. Getting him back into football isn't the job of the probation service. But assisting in his rehabilitation via employment prospects is, rather than being obstructive in that process.

And as for the PM of Malta and MPs in this country for constituencies where he's been linked with football clubs. Well none of them are very brave are they? They all just trot out a line informed by what they perceive to be the public view even though it probably isn't because it's only the naysayers that are vocal. Straw men. It's all about image. None of them are statesmanlike and stand up and major on the value and importance of rehabilitation. It takes a spokesman for Hibernians of Malta F.C. to do that. So, if the PM of Malta is worried about his country's reputation, why doesn't he do the brave thing, put his money where his mouth is and say that Ched Evans should be declared persona-non-grata and denied entry to his country? Why put the emphasis on a decision that a football club makes who've already made their view perfectly clear anyway? He's the PM - if he doesn't like it, take charge!

I doubt that Ched Evans is any further danger to the public at all. But if they want to make him one then all the naysayers are going the very best way about delivering that result.

 

I think you are being a bit naive to think along the 'he's done his time, he's paid for his crime' lines. Many, probably most criminal convictions have some repercussions after the state punishment is all done and dusted. Drink driving obviously springs to mind, long after the 12 month ban.

I do get the need for rehabilitation of course...in fact prison has four stated purposes: protect the public; punish; deter others; rehabilitate. Their order of merit is important I think. Gainful employment is clearly part of that rehabilitation process, but most ex cons aren't usually in a position to pick and choose what exactly that employment is. Thus I don't believe Evans is being denied earning a living in his own country, just not his first choice of living (the same for most in other words). I am sure 'Orny might verify if local authorities and charities have some form of back-to-work schemes in place for recently released criminals.

I am uncertain why you dismiss the voice of public opinion so much. Is it any different to say people no longer buying Gary Glitter's records after his own conviction or has he also the right to a living selling his music? I get the subtle difference insofar as Glitter could still walk into a studio and produce a record at his own expense, whereas on the face of it Evans isn't being allowed to even get onto a football pitch but the difference is just in the detail really. Sheff Utd (or whoever) just realise that employing Evans would be detrimental to their own product...which would be the same reason EMI (eg) would not give Glitter a recording contract.

If your last sentence is suggesting that if Evans can't play football then he may well still be a danger to the public then I believe probation should monitor him even more. In any event, it is not up to you or I to decide what danger he is or isn't. There is no way after what, two months since his release, could anyone least of all those responsible for it, determine what sort of threat he is.

 

Some very fair points. Of course Sheff Utd, Hartlepool (and apparently Tranmere and Oldham too) weighed up Ched Evans' value to them on the pitch against their perception of the harm to their reputations and commercial viability that employing him might entail. And then they made their decisions. They all seem to have made the same one. It's not worth it. But Hibernians of Malta made a different choice and were keen to employ him if they were able to and he accepted their offer. And that's for them to decide.

As for public opinion, well I don't think it's as one sided as some make out. It's just that the naysayers are the noisy ones. It's perfectly reasonable for Charlie Webster, Jessica Ennis and Paul Heaton to withdraw their patronage of Sheff Utd and say why. But presumably there are plenty of other patrons of the club who haven't distanced themselves. You just don't hear about them.

On Evans being dangerous. All I'm saying is that if he continues to feel hounded and denied opportunities (because he is) then that can only be detrimental to the process that he's being required to undertake. And those who wish to deny him aren't doing so because the crime he's committed is fundamentally at odds with being able to continue a football career. It's because they think it's 'privileged' (it isn't - he just has a particular skill), that there's a requirement to be a 'role model' (some footballers are better at that than others - but it's not a requirement - the requirement is to be good at football) and that he would get payed too much (tough - that's not his fault). Most of them imho are simply jealous and spiteful.

Where Evans hasn't done himself any favours is in not speaking out about other aspects of this saga. He obviously has a difficulty in exactly how he might express remorse given that he still continues to deny his guilt. But he could very easily have spoken out against the trolling of Jessica Ennis, against some of the stuff that rape denialists were misguidedly chanting in his favour from the terraces and against the hounding of his 'victim' by his supporters. That he's not done so has imho harmed his cause.

 

Moot point first: I am not sure he did accept their offer. The last I heard he was denying any contact had been made and that he knew nothing about any offer.

I don't understand or believe that all the 'noisy' ones should be the naysayers and all the quiet ones should be his supporters. You are not quiet so I am sure there are plenty of others in higher profiles able to publicly argue his case.

This is the paragraph I have most issue with. I think most people understand how footballers often fare as being role models and I think they understand his crime and chosen occupation do not clash in the manner that Rolf Harris being employed as a youth club leader would. The issue is that nowhere do you acknowledge that people may find rape a particularly abhorrent crime. More so than Deeney's, more so than the vast majority of crimes. I could count on one hand other crimes that I would expect a similar public backlash...leaving tens of thousands of crimes whereby most people wouldn't give a hoot what work he did after release. It's unfair and a little disingenuous to sweepingly claim most everyone's protestations are driven by jealousy or spite.

 

Yep. Evans and his representatives did deny all knowledge of the Malta offer. Maybe because they simply knew it was a non-starter and didn't want to make an issue of it? But the Hibernians' representative was very specific about having made contact with Evans' agent.

It's the twitter campaign I'm calling noisy. Not Webster, Ennis and Heaton's contributions which were all reasonable and considered. Are we now reduced to deciding on complex issues in deference to a noisy medium which, by definition, can only deal in soundbites?

Certainly rape is a particularly abhorrent crime. There are obviously degrees of severity (the Judy Finnegan line). Anyone who says there isn't, really does need to get out more. Evans' crime was at the lower end of the scale. There was no violence and no physical harm. In fact the 'victim' was unaware anything untoward had happened at all! Evans could have been sentenced to anything between 4-8 years and got five. So the judge considered it at the lower end of the scale too. If there isn't a range of severity then why would you need a range of prison terms? Five years sounds like a significant stretch to me though. In fact, for what he actually did, I'd call it excessive. The fact that he only served half of it is irrelevant. That's simply standard practice. However, anyone can argue for longer sentences for any crime including, and maybe particularly, rape or that full sentences without remission should be served, maybe particularly again for rape. It's interfering in the rehabilitation programme that I object to.

 

Ok, it wasn't clear you were referring only to the Twitter as 'noisy', although tbh I just thought it was a petition. (I don't do Twitter btw).

You are correct in saying that there are varying degrees of severity of any and every crime but it doesn't get away from the fact that it was still rape. That he didn't use a knife or whether he sent her flowers and chocolates afterwards doesn't make it less of a crime than that of rape.

That said, the discussion as you say is about his rehabilitation and I don't believe he is suffering unduly any more than any other recently released prisoner. I believe they all have hurdles to overcome once back in society, a major one being employment. I don't think he is necessarily being singled out here (on a like for like basis). If, as you believe he is just because of his fame and fortune that everyone else covets than that is just the other side of his particular coin: his rewards are greater being in the public conversely his fall from grace is further than most average Joe's. The gap is wider but the net effect is the same. People convicted of rape are pariahs. Both inside the prison system and subsequently after their release. It is incredulous beyond belief if he thought he could just trot out the tunnel at Bramall Lane as if the previous three years never happened.

 

So why are all the other criminal, ex-con footballers allowed to continue in their careers without a great media campaign against them? As I mentioned earlier, Luke McCormack who actually killed people not only is back in football, he is ****ing captain!

As for Ched Evans being able to do anything else - he is the evil, rapist Ched Evans - nobody is going to allow him to plaster their house, or do their accounts. Not for a long time anyway.

There are plenty of clubs who would employ him in a flash - they would be queuing up to do so if there wasn't a spiteful little witch hunt going on by b-list celebrities and irrelevent politicians casting judgements they have no right to make and using all the influence they can to stop clubs from employing him.

As I said earlier, you cannot pick and choose who you want to condemn for a crime - that is what is so wrong about this situation. It is not up to Jessicca ****ing Ennis to decide whose crime is serious enough to warrant exclusion from society.

 

He's signing for a League One club tomorrow apparently. Rumours on Twitter are Coventry, Barnsley or Oldham. Oldham have got previous with Lee Hughes, my money is on them.

 

BBC confirms it's Oldham. http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/30671692

 

Apparently R4's the World at One has got some big interview about this.

 

Glad to hear it, good luck to him!

 

Very glad to hear that.

Guilty or innocent, he should be allowed to get on with his life now that he has been released. The e-witchhunters are an example of the worst of social media as far as I am concerned.

 

Oldham it is then. Well, if it happens with so many false starts so far. If the Evans team were aware that this was in the pipeline, it's hardly surprising that they denied all knowledge of the potential Malta deal. A return at the same level would be so much better for him anyway. Given Oldham's previous with Lee Hughes let's hope they have the cojones to carry through on this and face down the inevitable flak. The local Oldham MPs are Michael Meacher and Debbie Abrahams. Expect interventions from one or both of them. Boundary Park is in the former's constituency I think. He's an excellent parliamentarian with an independent mind though so we may get something more than the bog standard drivel from him. But don't hold your breath.

The twitterati are up and running again I see, pressing their little button and swapping their simplistic soundbites. Stuff 'em. COYLatics.

 

What e-witch hunt are you referring to? The petition do you mean? Yeah you may be right - petitions being an obvious example of the worst of social media. It was probably even one of the things about the internet Abe Lincoln warned us about.

Witch hunt or not people have as much right to be disgusted with his crime as you have to be as supportive of it or him as you wish. What about the witch hunt perpetrated against the victim after her identity was leaked? Your obvious lack of any mention of it suggests it is of no importance to you.

Granted it may be a hackneyed question but I wonder how strong your support would be if it was your teenage daughter he raped. Would you offer him employment then and hope he gets on with his life?

It might be a trivial and inconsequential crime to you but I would venture the majority of decent minded people are appalled by his deed and believe he is the architect of his own misfortune. If his experience should make others think first about taking advantage of a girl in this manner his current difficulties would be very worthwhile.

 

With reference to your #462 Philippine which doesn't seem to have been copied in for some reason.

OK. No, I didn't make my view clear regarding 'noisyness'. But my criticism is only of the Twitterati. Jessica Ennis has every right to make her views known, not because she's a celeb., but because she's associated with the club and has her name on the stand. She shouldn't be hounded for expressing her view any more than Evans is being hounded. If we looked like signing a bloke who'd just come out of jail following da homophobic assault, I'd defend Sir EJ's right to protest and say that, if we signed this guy, he'd want his name taken off the new stand. I'd disagree with him but would respect his view. I don't use twitter either b.t.w. You can probably tell! How the hell could I work with140 characters? I do admire the skill that some have in saying something succinct within those parameters though.

I think we'll just have to agree to disagree that rape should be treated differently from other crimes. It's an extremely severe crime. That's why it attracts severe prison sentences and post custodial monitoring. So that's where it's dealt with then. Not by the persecution of an individual on release. If critics want to campaign to add certain high profile jobs in the media, sporting world etc. to those already proscribed like policing, teaching and health care then they are free to do so. Most of those jobs are in the public sector of course which makes it easier to control and monitor but I presume it applies to private sector teachers and medics too. Anyway, as the law currently stands, being a footballer isn't proscribed.

I've no idea what Evans expected on his release. Neither have you. I'd bet he didn't simply anticipate plain sailing though as the campaign against him was building before his release. He obviously wanted to play football again and his old club was also obviously his first port of call. The PFA backed him to resume training. Then there was a media circus, various false starts and he is where he is today. Hopefully ready to put pen to paper with the Latics in a few hours time!

P.S. The Latics have lost their last four games on the trot (including going out of the Cup at Doncaster). Conceded 14. Scored 1. If they've had a 'change of heart', I wonder if that might have something to do with it!

 

It was a petition with the usual odious diatribe as is the new one. They can have their petition if they like. Everyone else is free to ignore it.

And spare us this "majority of decent minded people" stuff. How entirely subjective, unsubstantiated and arrogant. Defining "decent minded people" is pejorative and like trying to catch a cloud. Or did you just mean people who think like you?

Much of your post is regressive. I thought we'd moved on to rehabilitation and the whole point of the law is that it removes subjective intensity and replaces it with objective detachment.

P.S. Disliked your post in error AGAIN. It's a complete embarrassment. I'm beginning to think that thumb amputation might be the only answer.

 

But, unfortunately, it looks like Oldham aren't.

 

Well it looks like they MIGHT not be. There's a petition with 20,000 names on it. So what? What were they expecting? How many of those 20,000 have got anything to do with Oldham Athletic F.C. or football in general? This is a nation of 60m plus souls. What's the average attendance at a full weekend's football fixtures across four divisions? 700,000? Who the eff cares what 20,000 irrelevances with no locus think? What percentage of them are females who dislike men and football in general?

Cojones time. Face them down.

Anyway, Gordon Taylor said he couldn't attend a Press conference today. He didn't say he wouldn't attend one at all. He should do and show some support in person.

What I would love more than anything is for this guy to win his latest appeal. Then he can sue the twitterati mob for lost earnings. A fiver each should cover it.

 

A 20,0000 petition. Do Oldham get that many supporters or it is unaffected people just wanting to stick their oar in.

He was found guilty, he's served his time. He should not be prevented from working again unless the crime is pertinent to the job. ie don't let a kiddie fiddler become a teacher and don't let a burglar become an estate agent.

The crime needs to be assesses, it looks to me on the information released that it was a one off and there is still some query over it. As such he should be able to ply his trade as a footballer without issue.

Repeat offenders on the other hand have used up their chance in my opinion. Marlon King for example should never kick a ball professionally again.

 

Listening to people's views calling in on LBC this morning put me in a worse mood than the first day back at work has done anyway.

 

I'm not sure why Oldham would possibly be surprised by a 20,000 online petition? What did they expect to happen?

 

If all these clubs would stop advertising their intentions in advance it might help. Sign the bloke and then announce a press conference to present a fait accompli.

 

A fair point but in this case did Oldham advertise it? I get the impression it leaked...although that in itself may have been deliberate to test the water.

 

Petitions these days are normally worthless. The fact 20,000 people who know nothing about the situation other than a tweet and news headlines felt so strongly they filled a fake email on a web page shouldn't be taken with anything other than courteous acknowledgement.

 

Both entirely possible. But if they're testing the water I really wish they'd spare us the faux surprise.

 

Ye gods - Miliband now involved!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30680239

 

Replied elsewhere. But you're right. Having said that, I guess he does have to respond to a question when asked. He didn't get pro-actively involved as others with no locus have done.

 

I'm going to put together a petition calling for petitions to be taken seriously.

 

You clearly have no idea what you're talking about given that:

a) you don't even know what I'm referring to, by your own admission
b) you are making ridiculous assumptions about what I feel on unrelated items
and
c) are making statements about how I feel about certain crimes based on nothing whatsoever.

In short, your post is nothing more than assumption, straw men and emotional hand wringing presented as fact.

 

I'm surprised MP's and Minister's are butting in, especially with an on going appeal - couldn't Ched Evans argue that his appeal could be damaged by such quotes? It's one thing a club patron or a sponsor kicking off a fuss but someone working in the Government?

 

Maybe. Those sticking their oar in are only talking about the prospects of employing him as a convicted rapist. They're not talking about his appeal against his sentence. But you could argue that all these unwarranted interventions by all and sundry might compromise his appeal case too.

 

Also had GMP making a statement today.

 

Who's next? GFZ?

 

There is no ongoing appeal. Or, to be more precise, no court hearing is currently scheduled or intended to be.