|
Post by atcham jack on Oct 16, 2014 9:37:43 GMT 1
Ched Evans leaves prison this month and his club Sheffield Utd are considering re employing him. whatever the crime, he has done his time, should Evans be playing again for Sheff utd? I have no problem seeing a former prisoner re settled.
|
|
|
Post by ssshrew on Oct 16, 2014 9:51:32 GMT 1
Agree in the main but it should surely depend on individual circumstances.
|
|
|
Post by ThrobsBlackHat on Oct 16, 2014 12:07:40 GMT 1
If he worked at the chippy we wouldn't begrudge him going back there
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Oct 16, 2014 12:09:43 GMT 1
Of course ex-prisoners should be resettled - if only to minimise the risk of re-offending. What else would we do with them?
Footballers are always a difficult case because they're in the public eye and public support (or hostility) is a factor. Football's what Evans does and, like any ex-con, he needs to be able to make a living. The unfortunate aspect is that he's able to go straight into a highly paid job in the public eye. But I don't think you could somehow ban convicted sportspeople from returning to their profession.
If he was a TV presenter or an actor then I imagine his future earnings would reflect his past - a lot of broadcasters and film companies would steer clear of him. I don't see why that should be different for football clubs except that some fans want success at any price at all and have no moral scruples about that. They should grow up, or their clubs should have the integrity to rise above that mentality.
The man's a convicted rapist and I'd never want him at my club but I don't think it'd be right to deny him his livelihood.
|
|
|
Post by calimero on Oct 16, 2014 12:36:18 GMT 1
I firmly believe lawfully there should be no hinderance but I do think clubs should consider the signals they send by employing a person in such a position of influence. I don't buy the 'denying someone their right to make a living' standpoint as there are plenty of opportunities to earn in unskilled jobs, to re-train in a new career etc. Criminalising people at a young age and locking them in to a life of crime is different from a club choosing not to sign a player because of the message it sends to fans.
|
|
|
Post by jamo on Oct 16, 2014 12:54:19 GMT 1
If he worked at the chippy we wouldn't begrudge him going back there Exactly. Society deemed it necessary to deprive him of his liberty for a prescribed period. Does it have the right to deprive of his liviehood for the rest of his life ?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2014 13:05:52 GMT 1
If he worked at the chippy we wouldn't begrudge him going back there Exactly. Society deemed it necessary to deprive him of his liberty for a prescribed period. Does it have the right to deprive of his liviehood for the rest of his life ? its not often i agree with you!!
|
|
|
Post by davycrockett on Oct 16, 2014 13:57:05 GMT 1
If he worked at the chippy we wouldn't begrudge him going back there Exactly. Society deemed it necessary to deprive him of his liberty for a prescribed period. Does it have the right to deprive of his liviehood for the rest of his life ? Would one of your members return to his job after a rape conviction? Or easily get a similar job with another council?
|
|
|
Post by jamo on Oct 16, 2014 14:08:35 GMT 1
Exactly. Society deemed it necessary to deprive him of his liberty for a prescribed period. Does it have the right to deprive of his liviehood for the rest of his life ? Would one of your members return to his job after a rape conviction? Or easily get a similar job with another council? Of course they wouldn't, mainly because they would have been dismissed at the point of conviction, as no doubt was Ched Evans. The queston of whether or not someone would be employed again by a local authority clearly rests with the recruitment process of that authority and whether or not they needed that particular persons services.
|
|
|
Post by eggyshrew on Oct 16, 2014 15:47:58 GMT 1
The opening post states Prisoners! Each on the offence surely. Should Rapists be allowed to have a good life straight away getting publicity that gains and bigs up his reputation earning him a big wage. Your fcuking kidding. Give them to the Ass bandits at layhill for the other 2 an 1/2 years let them get raped.
|
|
|
Post by Nath on Oct 16, 2014 17:43:37 GMT 1
The opening post states Prisoners! Each on the offence surely. Should Rapists be allowed to have a good life straight away getting publicity that gains and bigs up his reputation earning him a big wage. Your fcuking kidding. Give them to the Ass bandits at layhill for the other 2 an 1/2 years let them get raped. Of all the things that I have read on B&A I think this is the most shocking and most disgusting. You are openly supporting rape. Wow! I stated on a different thread, which was also to do with Ched Evans that football is not the same as different professions. It is an entertainment profession based on technical skill. No exams are sat, no qualifications are needed (obviously they have to maintain education standards in case career ends suddenly) and therefore it is not like a typical job that requires NVQs, GCSEs, a degree etc. The man has served the time given to him, although not the entire length, that is not his fault. The system have failed to enforce that he stays for the entire time so you cannot be angry at him for leaving when he is told he can go. Rape is an extremely touchy subject which is hugely misunderstood. For eggyshrew to support an act that is physically and psychologically damaging is truly disgraceful, whoever the person this wish is aimed at! I think prisoners should be allowed to re-settle into their community depending on the severity of the crime. If a rapist is to go back to their home town where they committed the crime, the victim will be unsafe and the psychological trauma would be unfair. The same goes for a murderer. It is really crime dependent.
|
|
|
Post by shrewsace on Oct 16, 2014 18:36:00 GMT 1
I think the problem with footballers who commit serious offences is that playing professionally comes with a certain amount of adulation, which people find difficult to stomach.
The bloke down the chippy doesn't slide on his knees and soak up the cheers of thousands of people when he serves up a particularly appetising fish supper.
Would most employers take back a convicted rapist once they'd served their sentence? I'm fairly sure quite a number of organisations would have a policy of not taking on people with criminal records - especially those found guilty of an offence as serious as rape.
On the other hand, he's served the sentence handed down by the court, and is now free to continue his life.
Perhaps there's a case that his sentence being too lenient, but once someone has served their time, I do agree they are entitled to rehabilitation and re-integration, within certain limits.
For example you wouldn't give a paedophile a job working with children or someone who abuses animals a stint helping out at the local vets.
Does Evans' right to go back into football trump the victims right not to see her attacker once more living a highly privileged lifestyle?
|
|
|
Post by atcham jack on Oct 16, 2014 18:44:47 GMT 1
there is no easy answer either way. in context, if it was a town player involved I would hope we would accept the return of our player. the same goes for sheff utd. the lad has done the proscribed time. why should we cast the first stone?
|
|
unclebob
Midland League Division Two
Posts: 128
|
Post by unclebob on Oct 16, 2014 19:34:38 GMT 1
I think it depends on the crime and upon the person. Evans wont admit any guilt and wont offer an an apology either. Could he be said to have learned by the experience of prison? based on his lack of contrision I dont think he has and therefore I wouldn't want him at my club. God knows how he can be considered rehabilitated if he hasn't even admitted his guilt!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2014 20:25:32 GMT 1
Regardless, he has served less than half his sentence for rape....a crime which is only second in vileness to child abuse.
2years hardly seems like punishment for such an offence.
|
|
|
Post by buryshrew on Oct 16, 2014 20:29:30 GMT 1
Acknowledge your guilt, show some remorse, apologise. Currently he's done none of these. So much for rehabilitation. As it stands I see no reason to wipe the slate clean. To me, without any of the above he should serve a full sentence.
|
|
|
Post by ThrobsBlackHat on Oct 16, 2014 21:16:32 GMT 1
Acknowledge your guilt, show some remorse, apologise. Currently he's done none of these. So much for rehabilitation. As it stands I see no reason to wipe the slate clean. To me, without any of the above he should serve a full sentence. He has certainly shown remorse about the situation, but how can he apologise for something he does not think he has done? He believes he was the victim of a miscarriage of justice. It is never quite as black and white as all that is it?
|
|
|
Post by ThrobsBlackHat on Oct 16, 2014 21:17:17 GMT 1
Regardless, he has served less than half his sentence for rape....a crime which is only second in vileness to child abuse. 2years hardly seems like punishment for such an offence. he served the time given him by the courts. Once they let him out he can't climb back in, however much people wish he would!
|
|
|
Post by ThrobsBlackHat on Oct 16, 2014 21:19:30 GMT 1
Does Evans' right to go back into football trump the victims right not to see her attacker once more living a highly privileged lifestyle? But the profile of someone's profession or earnings potential cannot define their right to go back to work. He is a footballer. He served his time. Someone somewhere will pay him to play football. Because he is a footballer. The only way i can see it mattering is if the role in question required either oversight of vulnerable people / young / old etc or if the role in question required a completely clean record such as police etc.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2014 21:22:19 GMT 1
Regardless, he has served less than half his sentence for rape....a crime which is only second in vileness to child abuse. 2years hardly seems like punishment for such an offence. he served the time given him by the courts. Once they let him out he can't climb back in, however much people wish he would! Not a problem with people doing time and then re-entering society. Just something about only serving half a very light sentence for rape doesn't sit right with me! And this would be the same if it was a L1 footballer or a binman.
|
|
|
Post by ThrobsBlackHat on Oct 16, 2014 21:24:46 GMT 1
Not a problem with people doing time and then re-entering society. Just something about only serving half a very light sentence for rape doesn't sit right with me! And this would be the same if it was a L1 footballer or a binman. I quite agree with that. But then you get into some desperately complex territory of defining different types of rape - which the judge clearly has in passing sentence - and having seen the newspapers recently I am not sure any of us want to go there.
|
|
unclebob
Midland League Division Two
Posts: 128
|
Post by unclebob on Oct 16, 2014 21:28:56 GMT 1
Acknowledge your guilt, show some remorse, apologise. Currently he's done none of these. So much for rehabilitation. As it stands I see no reason to wipe the slate clean. To me, without any of the above he should serve a full sentence. It is never quite as black and white as all that is it? Yes it is, he was proved to have done the things that were against the law, he may not like that but then I suspect most rapists dont! If he cant accept that he has done wrong, he has no right to be in our society. You can state and re state the facts asmuch as you want, we all understand the rules! But were giving opinions, what is yours? Was his sentence long enough in your mind? Would you want him to play for Shrewsbury Town?
|
|
|
Post by ThrobsBlackHat on Oct 16, 2014 21:35:47 GMT 1
The whole system of giving a sentence then serving half is counter intuitive and does not help the public have trust in the system. I don't think that 2.5 years seems long enough no. but the fact he "got five but only served half" definitely highlights that fact and makes it more controversial. I would not want to him to play for Shrewsbury no - mostly because I would be uncomfortable about the negative connotations for our reputation. But then if he had been a Shrewsbury player at the time of the events, known closely to many within the club, then I think I would be warmer to the idea. In the same way Luke Rogers being involved in a horrible situation was seen through different lenses by town fans than opposition fans. To them he had disfigured a girl for life through his own stupidity, to many town fans he had an accident while mucking around and then tried to help her himself.
|
|
|
Post by buryshrew on Oct 16, 2014 21:43:31 GMT 1
Acknowledge your guilt, show some remorse, apologise. Currently he's done none of these. So much for rehabilitation. As it stands I see no reason to wipe the slate clean. To me, without any of the above he should serve a full sentence. He has certainly shown remorse about the situation, but how can he apologise for something he does not think he has done? He believes he was the victim of a miscarriage of justice. It is never quite as black and white as all that is it? As far as the law is concerned though it is, isn't it? Found guilty of rape. Doesn't acknowledge he did anything wrong. No rehabilitation. Released after half sentence, apparently still believing his previous behaviour was ok. Summat wrong there to me!
|
|
unclebob
Midland League Division Two
Posts: 128
|
Post by unclebob on Oct 16, 2014 21:46:13 GMT 1
The whole system of giving a sentence then serving half is counter intuitive and does not help the public have trust in the system. I don't think that 2.5 years seems long enough no. but the fact he "got five but only served half" definitely highlights that fact and makes it more controversial. I would not want to him to play for Shrewsbury no - mostly because I would be uncomfortable about the negative connotations for our reputation. But then if he had been a Shrewsbury player at the time of the events, known closely to many within the club, then I think I would be warmer to the idea. In the same way Luke Rogers being involved in a horrible situation was seen through different lenses by town fans than opposition fans. To them he had disfigured a girl for life through his own stupidity, to many town fans he had an accident while mucking around and then tried to help her himself. Agree with most of that apart from the Rodgers incident which for me, isn't really that similar to a thought out crime like a rape. I know you are trying to draw a paralel tho. I did think Rodgers was a liability but as a kid I played with fireworks and was probably a breeze away from being in the same sort of trouble so would find it hard to criticize him too harshley.
|
|
|
Post by ThrobsBlackHat on Oct 16, 2014 21:56:50 GMT 1
His guilt or otherwise boils down to some very technical wording on consensual sex when someone is drunk. The point Finnigan was trying to make, however clumsily, is that there is a difference between that and someone hiding in the bushes at a local park and beating up an old lady before raping her. Of course any non consensual sex is a violence in itself, the physical act is violence, which is why Finnigan is being hounded because she worded it in such a poor way. If you're interested in the case this website is quite interesting and you can see the construct of the appeal which will eventually be heard I am sure www.chedevans.comThere is some reason to believe the conviction will be overturned eventually - which all adds to the situation. Is Ched Evans an evil man who won't repent or the victim of a miscarriage of justice fighting on? That is basically what is at stake and ultimately I have no idea. But if people hate the idea of him playing football because the courts deemed him to be a rapist then I don't think we can dispute the sentence given by the same court for the same crime. Otherwise we are standing by their decision in order to judge him ourselves then disagreeing with the rest of their decision in order to judge him more. It is such an uncomfortable subject. And I am absolutely certain the way the girl's dad and the way Ched's dad feel about it are polar opposites. That is the complexity - the courts say he was the perpetrator but he believes he is a victim. That's going to take a lot of iron out.
|
|
|
Post by shrewsace on Oct 17, 2014 0:26:03 GMT 1
Does Evans' right to go back into football trump the victims right not to see her attacker once more living a highly privileged lifestyle? But the profile of someone's profession or earnings potential cannot define their right to go back to work. He is a footballer. He served his time. Someone somewhere will pay him to play football. Because he is a footballer. The only way i can see it mattering is if the role in question required either oversight of vulnerable people / young / old etc or if the role in question required a completely clean record such as police etc. I don't disagree, my post was more a case of just mulling over my thoughts on the subject than coming to any absolute conclusion. I believe in rehabilitation and I believe in compassion for victims. The difficult thing is reconciling those two principles. It would be interesting to know how many organisations automatically preclude those with convictions for serious offences from consideration for employment, though. If Evans was, say, a civil servant or council worker would he be able to pick up where he left off? Unlikely I'd have thought. I would agree that you can't legislate on grounds of profile/earnings, but surely you would also agree many people would find the sight of Evans soaking up the applause of a crowd as unpalatable. Out of interest, how would you feel about a convicted rapist turning out in a Town shirt? Full support having served his time, or slightly uncomfortable?
|
|
|
Post by ThrobsBlackHat on Oct 17, 2014 8:55:42 GMT 1
As said previously, I'd be really uncomfortable.
Not least because of the danger of misrepresentation.
Think of what's happened to Finnegan's daughter over some poorly thought out wording. I wouldn't want the Twitter police all over everything the football club did.
|
|
|
Post by eggyshrew on Oct 17, 2014 13:08:21 GMT 1
The opening post states Prisoners! Each on the offence surely. Should Rapists be allowed to have a good life straight away getting publicity that gains and bigs up his reputation earning him a big wage. Your fcuking kidding. Give them to the Ass bandits at layhill for the other 2 an 1/2 years let them get raped. Of all the things that I have read on B&A I think this is the most shocking and most disgusting. You are openly supporting rape. Wow! I stated on a different thread, which was also to do with Ched Evans that football is not the same as different professions. It is an entertainment profession based on technical skill. No exams are sat, no qualifications are needed (obviously they have to maintain education standards in case career ends suddenly) and therefore it is not like a typical job that requires NVQs, GCSEs, a degree etc. The man has served the time given to him, although not the entire length, that is not his fault. The system have failed to enforce that he stays for the entire time so you cannot be angry at him for leaving when he is told he can go. Rape is an extremely touchy subject which is hugely misunderstood. For eggyshrew to support an act that is physically and psychologically damaging is truly disgraceful, whoever the person this wish is aimed at! I think prisoners should be allowed to re-settle into their community depending on the severity of the crime. If a rapist is to go back to their home town where they committed the crime, the victim will be unsafe and the psychological trauma would be unfair. The same goes for a murderer. It is really crime dependent. How am i supporting Rape Windsor? your not reading it correctly at all Windsor? please read again and send me my sorry after. After all your know accusing me of supporting a horrible crime.
|
|
|
Post by QuorndonShrew on Oct 17, 2014 14:33:33 GMT 1
Sick of hearing this same argument churned out by non-football people and Loose Women that just because someone earns a lot of money doing what they do, they should be burdened by guilt for the rest of their lives and denied the right to rehabilitate because society unfairly pins them down as `role models`.
Ched Evans earns a lot of money because he is good at what he does in a very lucrative industry. Dont hate the player, hate the game and all that.
Given the nature of the crime, there is unlikely to be anyone within a football club that Evans would pose an immediate threat to. I could understand reservations if he was reapplying for a job working in an all girls grammar school for example, but there was no link between what he did for a job and the crime he committed so I don't see why he should be denied continuing to make a living.
Ben Flower will return to rugby league in six months time with the full backing and support of his club despite showing absolutely no regard for a fellow professional on the rugby pitch and potentially endangering their life. People are falling over each other giving character witnesses saying that he `wasnt that type of person`and defending it as `a moment of madness` but I think there there's more more of a rational argument against Flower returning to his profession than there is Evans.
As mentioned above, if we were talking about someone who worked a chippy we wouldn't be having this argument.
|
|