Ched Evans becomes another promising and decent football player to throw his life away by letting fame and fortune get to his head and thinking because he is a international footballer, he can get away with anything.

He becomes another player, along with the likes of Marlon King to do time for a serious offense but i really hope that this time, Ched Evens is never allowed to play professional football again, unlike Marlon King who in my mine should never have been allowed to play prefessionally again after being conficted of sexual assault.

Lets hope this time lessons are learnt

Lets hope that sentences are not lessened

To bring in an ICT connection, our Owain has been in Wales squads with Evans.

And Adam Rooney has been in the bath with Marlon King.

What i dont understand is how his buddy Clayton McDonald got off scot free. As according to the reports both were comitting the dastardly deed.

Yes that puzzled me too, I couldn't see what the distinction was.

Perhaps one was consentual and the other decided to join in

Did Clayton MacDonald play yesterday and miss a penalty

Did Clayton MacDonald play yesterday and miss a penalty

If he did then its probably a good thing. If he had scored he would have probably celebrated by parading a t shirt showing his support for his best friend the convicted rapist which would have led to even more unnecessary coverage and an FA fine.

Seeing as it was Doofer who started this topic and he obviously feels so strongly about it, I thought I ought to find out what he was on about as I've been a bit out of touch with the news recently. I'll perhaps be a bit controversial here but I think Evans has a strong case for appeal and it would not surprise me to see him get acquited in due course.

For those who don't know, the story goes like this. (Children and those easily offended should stop reading now!)

Evans and friends of his, including another footballer, Clayton McDonald, booked a hotel room and went out seperately looking for a girl to take back there. They were not together at the time when a very drunk young woman literally fell out of a kebab shop into McDonald's path. McDonald seized the opportunity and took the 19 year old back to the hotel. He texted Evans to say he had "got a girl". McDonald then had sex with the girl whilst 2 other men watched and videoed the events through the window! Evans then arrived and claims he asked the girl if he could join in. He says she consented and McDonald backs that up. The girl says she can't remember what happened. McDonald then left and when he had finished with the girl, Evans left the room and then left the hotel by the fire escape. The girl awoke in the morning to find herself naked in the bed and with little recollection of what had happened during the evening. She was distraught and made her way to friends who encouraged her to go to the police.

Both Evans and McDonald were charged with rape. McDonald's verdict was announced first and he was acquited. Evans shared his friend's jubilation at the verdict but then was shocked to hear his own verdict of guilty and the judges sentencing of 5 years prison. Now, Evans is clearly a nasty peice of work and his behaviour on the night in question was dreadful, however, that does not stop us having some concerns about the conviction and sentence. Remember, that we live in a country where to be convicted the prosecution needs to prove a case "beyond reasonable doubt". There is no room in a legal decision to moralise about someone's behaviour.

Let's look at some facts here.

1. The girl could not remember whether she consented or not.
   
2. The girl was not physically harmed.
   
3. There was no witness to suggest that the girl did not willingly go to the hotel with McDonald.
   
4. Whilst she was clearly drunk, there is no suggestion that she was too drunk to speak or otherwise indicate that she did not consent to sex.
   

In sentencing Evans, the judge said that he should have been aware that the girl was too drunk to give consent. In other words he is saying that even though she may well have told Evans that it was OK for him to have sex with her, that does not actually constitute consent. And if there was not valid consent, then it must be considered as rape.

The judge may have considered Evans should have been aware that she was too drunk: but was he? Whilst Evans' behaviour is totally reprehensible, I cannot see how the evidence proves beyond reasonable doubt that the sex was non-consensual. How many vodka and cokes does it take for "yes" to mean "no" regardless of how willing the person appears to be? Even if the judge is correct on the matter of law and Evans' actions were technically rape, there is no evidence to suggest that Evans had any intention to do anything without what he understood to be her consent. In that case, a sentence of 5 years seems harsh to me when you consider similar sentences are handed out to criminals who set out to rape and deliberately hurt and terrorise their victims. Many perpatrators of vicious pre-meditated assults which leave victims disabled and scarred for life get sentences less than 5 years.

The bizarre thing here is that if Evans was guilty, then why was McDonald adjudged not to be? After all, he is the one who took advantage of the girl and helped her tottering back to the hotel. He, much more than Evans would have been aware of how drunk she was.

A further twist here is that Evans is white and McDonald is coloured. Just to add a little more controversy I wonder what the equalities groups would be saying if it had been Evans who had picked up the girl and McDonald was the one who got 5 years?

From a morality point of view you may think Evans got what he deserved - but have we got justice?

By the way - liked the joke Bauhaus!