115
116

Footballer Ched Evans cleared of rape in retrial | Football (theguardian.com)

mrleebob が 投稿

上位 200 件のコメント全て表示する 283
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]lomoeffect 65ポイント66ポイント  (27子コメント)

This is going to be a fun comment section.

[–]pikeybastard 47ポイント48ポイント  (0子コメント)

HANG THE CUNT WE DIDNT BREXIT FOR THIS

[–]DragonOnSteroidsGreater London 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

and Daily Mail headline tomorrow.

[–]SnowzeyYorkshireman in Reading 7ポイント8ポイント  (22子コメント)

The shit being said on Jessica Ennis' (I don't know if that is correct apostrophe usage there) twitter is pretty bad.

While she shouldn't have stuck her beak in, abusing her isn't the right call either.

[–]QuillRatYorkshire 13ポイント14ポイント  (5子コメント)

While she shouldn't have stuck her beak in

He was convicted of rape, and a club that was using her name employed him. Why shouldn't she say anything?

[–]driveldriveby 39ポイント40ポイント  (5子コメント)

Yes, let's not forget who the real victim of injustice is here. It's Jessica Ennis.

[–]SnowzeyYorkshireman in Reading -3ポイント-2ポイント  (4子コメント)

What she said/did was wrong, I agree.

I just don't think saying things such as "It should have been you who was raped" on her twitter is good either.

[–]Bell_WhiffLondon [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

What she said/did was wrong, I agree.

It wasn't, he was a convicted rapist at the time. She said she didn't want a stand named after her if a convicted rapist was playing for Shef United which is what he was, at the time.

[–]Eladriol [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

I'm sure Evans got inumerous tweets hoping he'd get raped in Jail. His girlfriend probably got deluged with hatred for daring to stand up to the circlejerk. Oh yeah and he lost his career, and spent two years of his life in jail for a crime he didn't commit. But yeah shes the real victim.

[–]shrewphysShropshire 15ポイント16ポイント  (4子コメント)

To be fair, at the time he was a convicted rapist. People had obviously formed their own opinions, and it seems now like the conviction was wrong, but at that time he had been proven guilty of rape in a court. So Jessica Ennis didn't want her name on the stands of a club he would be playing.

Even if now he's been proved innocent in a court, it's still Jessica Ennis' say whether her name is on the fucking stand. She'd be entitled to ask then to remove her name because she doesn't like the stadium beer if she wanted.

[–]Predicted [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Whats being said, I had a brief scroll and what I found was people calling for her to apologize, which isnt too agregious.

[–]aonomeEast Sussex [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

It's the justice system's fault, not hers. We all have a right to expect guilty verdicts to be accurate.

That being said she could apologise, not in a "what I did was bad" way, but a "I was mistaken" way.

[–]Riffler [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

She didn't "stick her beak in," she was asked how she would react if the club that had named a stand after her employed a convicted rapist. She answered honestly.

コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

    [–]Satz0r [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

    Called it!

    [–]IdiotsEverywhere_ [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

    Honestly think anyone who viewed the case objectively called it. Even the women is my office today were saying what a joke it was.

    [–]jong123Hampshire 32ポイント33ポイント  (28子コメント)

    He'd already done his time inside for this. The retrial is just to clear his name. I get the impression he probably wouldn't have tried to do that if he knew he was guilty. It's such a strange case though.

    I wonder what the victims former partners revealed to the court for them to change their mind?

    [–]tweedflatcap 8ポイント9ポイント  (26子コメント)

    I wonder what the victims former partners revealed to the court for them to change their mind?

    I recall reading about a piece of evidence or a witness that wasn't called at the original trial that would have helped to clear him. Was it something one of her former partners said?

    [–]34MbitBristol 23ポイント24ポイント  (14子コメント)

    Let's not forget the evidence found by a NYC firefighter, who dug up an archived copy of the woman's Twitter, where she bragged about having sex with Ched and 'buying all her friends Minis'.

    [–]agonexx 8ポイント9ポイント  (0子コメント)

    from a technical standpoint these tweets seem very dubious

    [–]tweedflatcap 5ポイント6ポイント  (8子コメント)

    Is this for real?

    [–]Digging_For_OstrichExpat 21ポイント22ポイント  (7子コメント)

    Ched Evans is currently in the process of rightfully appealing the verdict after more damning evidence has come to light — In particular a series of tweets from the victim she sent to her inner circle of friends about how she would spend when she ‘won big’ five months prior to Ched Evans conviction, presumably referring to the compensation she would be receiving from the now “disgraced” footballer

    ‘Remind me never to tell @XXXXXXX when I win big!….. She’s going to kill me! #scaredformylife! Haha!’

    ‘@XXXXXXX I will get us matching pink Mini Coopers! Haha! Just seen them pictures on Facebook, I forgot bout XXXXXXX! Haha! X’

    ‘@XXXXXXX I’ll make all your dreams come true XXXXXXX haha.’ ‘@XXXXXXX aww,well obvs I’d treat us to an amazing holiday x’.

    Supporters of the girl claim these tweets never existed, and it was only due to the hacking skills of a New York based fire fighter interested in the civil liberty aspect of the case who unearthed the only remaining copies in the cached copy of her account on a French Twitter server.

    Taken from http://sonarz.com/is-ched-evans-innocent/

    Another link which discusses it, but the link to the source it provides is now broken. I presume because of legal reasons. https://viewfromanobody.wordpress.com/2015/01/10/more-on-ched-evans/

    [–]34MbitBristol 10ポイント11ポイント  (4子コメント)

    It's incredible the jury was never shown this stuff. Why Twitter was never asked for the archives of these tweets baffles me.

    [–]hoffi_coffi 10ポイント11ポイント  (3子コメント)

    It wouldn't be admissable evidence in a million years, it was out of context and after the event.

    [–]agonexx 5ポイント6ポイント  (2子コメント)

    and the source is very dubious

    [–]34MbitBristol 4ポイント5ポイント  (1子コメント)

    I don't thin anyone is suggesting redacted 3rd party copies-of-copies be used as evidence, but rather direct-from-Twitter logs.

    [–]agonexx 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

    all I am saying is that without Twitter logs these tweets are very dubious in origin

    コメントをもっと表示する (4 返事)

      [–]oljackson99Donny 6ポイント7ポイント  (10子コメント)

      Yes he basically said she was a bit of a sex manic and was basically promiscuous. It tied in with Evans' argument that she was willing, rather than the prosecutions argument that she just a sweet innocent girl who drunk too much and was raped by a brutish footballer.

      [–]lolihull 20ポイント21ポイント  (4子コメント)

      I really hate when people use 'but the victim is promiscuous!' as evidence as to why someone may not have been raped. Even the most promiscuous person could be raped, someone's sexual history or how much they enjoy sex shouldn't count against them if they get sexually assaulted.
      I'm not saying that in relation to this story though, just your comment. I think it's a shame that someone could get raped but their ex could come forward and say 'Yeah but he loved sex and was always sleeping around so y'know!'.

      [–]cricketerJohn 17ポイント18ポイント  (2子コメント)

      The evidence wasn't that she was promiscuous. It was that she on, on multiple occasions, couldn't remember sex the previous morning. It was this rather extreme similarity which opened the s 41 (2) gateway.

      It was that evidence which undermined the initial conviction, and, presumably, led to the jury returning a "not guilty" verdict.

      [–]lolihull 4ポイント5ポイント  (1子コメント)

      Interesting! I'm glad to hear it wasn't quite like how the person I'd replied to put it.

      [–]cricketerJohn 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

      The threshold for evidence of sexual activity with a third party is very high. Generally it has to be very similar circumstances and highly probative. You can't just throw mud at a complainant to attack his/her credibility.

      Similarly, a lot of this case appears to have turned on the "reasonable belief in consent" part of the law, very little of which has been discussed or reported. Of course, press reports aren't particularly fond of legal nuance.

      [–]oljackson99Donny 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

      Totally get this. I didn't mean that meant she could not have been raped, it was just one of many reasons the case against Evans was poor. He should never have been found guilty in the first place, irregardless of the girls sexual behaviour.

      [–]G_MorganWales -2ポイント-1ポイント  (1子コメント)

      Being promiscuous doesn't actually mean you can't be raped. A sweet innocent girl might consent in otherwise suspicious circumstances. The promiscuous girl can be raped. It has no baring on the case at all.

      [–]oljackson99Donny 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

      Well it clearly did as that was the new evidence which was not presented before, and now he is a free man. No one is saying a promiscuous girl cannot be raped but in this case the main argument against Evans was he must surely have raped her as she couldn't remember anything and therefore could not have consented, but the new evidence suggested she had a history of having wild sex when drunk and one ex commented that frequently she would not remember her sexual actions the next day. It's all about context and in this case it was very important evidence.

      [–]hoffi_coffi -4ポイント-3ポイント  (2子コメント)

      rather than the prosecutions argument that she just a sweet innocent girl who drunk too much and was raped by a brutish footballer.

      I don't think her character was brought into it, whether she was sweet and innocent or not - they argued she was too drunk to consent hence rape. Why this has changed now they heard she used phrases with previous (willing) sexual partners isn't quite clear. Dangerous precedent really.

      [–]easy_pie 3ポイント4ポイント  (1子コメント)

      It was just that she hadn't remembered previous sexual encounters despite appearing to not be too drunk. Hence, her not remembering was irrelevant. Though it was irrelevant anyway, just need something to give to the jury I suppose.

      [–]hoffi_coffi 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

      That makes sense, thanks.

      コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

        [–]Leeham721 38ポイント39ポイント  (7子コメント)

        I'm sure this decision will be given equal weight and value as the former.

        [–]HisHasknessOver the wall 14ポイント15ポイント  (6子コメント)

        Why? This decision completely supersedes the former, and the former one carries no weight whatsoever now.

        [–]Digging_For_OstrichExpat 20ポイント21ポイント  (0子コメント)

        I think he was being sarcastic and you missed it. He is saying that the tag of rapist will hang over his head for the rest of his life.

        [–]JayDeeIsIWarwickshire 10ポイント11ポイント  (2子コメント)

        "Ched Evans is an acquitted innocent who was formerly a rapist" just doesn't have the same ring to it when being sung by a fat 43 year old bloke from Sheffield from the stands

        [–]HisHasknessOver the wall 3ポイント4ポイント  (1子コメント)

        "ex-rapist" is short and snappy with an internal rhyme. I'm sure it will fit into plenty of chants.

        [–]SnowzeyYorkshireman in Reading 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

        How about - The footballer formally convicted of rape Ched Evans

        [–]obadetonaEngerland 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

        It was sarcasm. Saying that people will still call him a rapist.

        [–]hybridtheoristLeeds, YORKSHIRE [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

        In all fairness, there were plenty of people saying he was innocent before, even though he was found guilty.

        You're right, maybe not the same weight of people on either side, but it's not a one way street either.

        [–]britcowboyShropshire Lib Dem 62ポイント63ポイント  (74子コメント)

        Despite being found innocent by a jury of his peers, there will be those in this comment section that will still call him a rapist and refuse the believe the verdict.

        [–]RhllorTheLordOfLight 24ポイント25ポイント  (1子コメント)

        Like everything related to rape these days it gets turned into a "feminist vs non-feminist" argument. Most of us here, including me, haven't done our due diligence re: the facts, were not present to hear both the prosecution and defendant counsel's arguments and have largely been fed information through third party sources. I'm not saying people shouldn't have opinions, but that verdict was reached by people in a far better position to assess Evans' guilt (or lack thereof) than us.

        [–]pickled-egg [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

        Yep. High profile rape cases like this tend to just be a shitshow from both 'sides'.

        I'm browsing the fallout on twitter and it ain't pretty. Regardless of the verdict though this is what happens, a man is either a vicious rapist who deserves to rot or he's an innocent man set up by an evil woman - nothing in between.

        [–]salamanderwolf 18ポイント19ポイント  (5子コメント)

        Despite being found innocent by a jury of his peers, there will be those in this comment section that will still call him a rapist and refuse the believe the verdict.

        this made me lol. Go back to any of the original threads and you had people still calling him innocent and not beleiving the orignal ruling.

        People are going to beleive what they want to believe.

        [–]bearjuaniAberystwyth 7ポイント8ポイント  (1子コメント)

        That would probably be because courts aren't supposed to decide if people are innocent or guilty, they are supposed to decide if someone is definitely guilty or not. You can absolutely commit a crime and be found not guilty in court, by design.

        [–]Jak-HererAberdeen 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

        e innocent or guilty, they are supposed to decide if someone is definitely guilty or not. You can absolutely commit a crime and be found not guilty in court, by design.

        "It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer" - William Blackstone, and the foundation on which our justice system is based.

        Not that it particularly stands in this case though, since Evans did serve time.

        [–]rotherssDurham 32ポイント33ポイント  (34子コメント)

        His behaviour that night was sketchy as fuck.

        [–]Bosola 18ポイント19ポイント  (25子コメント)

        You seem to be implying this makes him guilty.

        Care to elaborate?

        [–]Jak-HererAberdeen 14ポイント15ポイント  (13子コメント)

        His fiance was at home, pregnant I think? And he get's a text from a mate saying he's got this sexy girl in a hotel room and Evans should come round. Evans goes to the hotel, gets a keycard from reception, goes into the room. It's pitch black. He seems some friends at the window, filming from outside. He puts his finger to his lips and shushes them. His friend who is having sex with the girl asks if his mate can join in. The girl says yes. Evans begins to perform oral on the girl.

        When Evans has had enough, he leaves and goes home, leaving the girl and his friend in the hotel. The lights were never turned on and he never spoke to the girl.

        He later told police that he "can get any girl I want", and "I'm a footballer, I have money, girls love that."

        He's been found not guilty of rape by a jury, but guilty of being a privileged unpleasant footballer by the public. "Sketchy" isn't the word I'd use, but certainly you could say his behavior towards his fiance that night was sketchy.

        [–]Bosola 5ポイント6ポイント  (9子コメント)

        "Sketchy" isn't the word I'd use, but certainly you could say his behavior towards his fiance that night was sketchy.

        We want to put people in prison for adultery, now? Someone call up Stephen Hawking quick, we've warped to fucking 1599!

        [–]QuillRatYorkshire 13ポイント14ポイント  (5子コメント)

        No. They didn't say that.

        Also lack of evidence is not equatable to not guilty. I'm not going to go around saying Ched Evans raped someone, but I'm also not convinced that he didn't.

        [–]Jak-HererAberdeen 5ポイント6ポイント  (2子コメント)

        We want to put people in prison for adultery, now?

        I don't think anyone said that. However, any public figure who behaved in the way Evan's did that night is going to find themselves the subject of scorn from the British public. The law is the law, and morality is a much more fluid concept. I'm sure there are a lot of adulters out there who would happily join in water-cooler conversation about how disgusted they are by certain high-profile cases of adultery without ever comparing it to their own.

        Ultimately, it is the decisions Evans made that night that people find disgust in.

        [–]Bosola 4ポイント5ポイント  (1子コメント)

        Ultimately, it is the decisions Evans made that night that people find disgust in.

        Really? Because none of the headlines I've seen have mentioned anything about adultery. They talk about rape. But you mean to tell me that those football chants (She said no, Ch-e-ed! She said no!), the online petition demanding he be blacklisted from football ("Ched Evans was convicted of rape... To even consider reinstating him is a deep insult to all women who have suffered at the hands of a rapist."), all the sound and fury on social media - you are telling me that, despite all appearances, these were not about sexual assualt, but 'really' about cheating, in some implicit, covert way? You will have to go quite some way to convince me.

        [–]Jak-HererAberdeen 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

        You understand that he was convicted of rape? It is only today he was found not guilty of the same crime.

        all the sound and fury on social media - you are telling me that, despite all appearances, these were actually about cheating, not sexual assault? You will have to go quite some way to convince me.

        In relation to his conviction for rape, of course not. It was about rape. As he was a convicted rapist. And I've never said it's all about cheating. Sketchy means dishonest. His behavior was dishonest towards his fiance, as she testified in court.

        I said it is about his character, which goes beyond the scope of cheating on his fiance. It is to do with the way he behaved that night and what he said to the police. People disagree with his attitude, many vehemently disagree.

        [–]PM_ME-YOUR_SECRETS 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

        Evans goes to the hotel, gets a keycard from reception, goes into the room. It's pitch black. He seems some friends at the window, filming from outside. He puts his finger to his lips and shushes them. His friend who is having sex with the girl asks if his mate can join in. The girl says yes. Evans begins to perform oral on the girl. When Evans has had enough, he leaves and goes home, leaving the girl and his friend in the hotel. The lights were never turned on and he never spoke to the girl.

        source?

        [–]Jak-HererAberdeen 7ポイント8ポイント  (0子コメント)

        The trial. All of the above were established, agreed upon facts by both sides.

        The prosecutions argument was that the girl was too drunk to consent therefore her saying "yes" was irrelevant. They also made point that she said yes to the person she was having sex with, and never spoke to Evans, alluding to the idea that she really did not know what she was saying yes to.

        コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

          [–]lomoeffect 5ポイント6ポイント  (10子コメント)

          No they're implying that although the legal outcome is not guilty, it grossly oversimplifies very public details of the case.

          [–]Bosola 4ポイント5ポイント  (9子コメント)

          I do not know these details. And I do not need to - because I do not presume to be able to judge the law better than a trial of peers. Do you?

          [–]lomoeffect 3ポイント4ポイント  (8子コメント)

          I wonder if you made a comment like that after the outcome of the original trial...

          [–]Bosola 6ポイント7ポイント  (4子コメント)

          I did!

          I hope you didn't engage with me thinking that I was just some kind of closet misogynist who sits waiting for rape acquittals only so I might burst out with my bug-eyed, frothy-mouthed, poorly defined MRA agenda. Because you will struggle to make that strawman out of me.

          [–]RyannnnnnNorthumberland 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

          That comment was made so much about the case actually.

          After having read all the details of the case myself, I was left wondering how they came to the verdict they did. But kept trust in the system.

          [–]TipTop10 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

          You may have read all the details but you were not there to listen to hours of evidence.

          12 men and women were and decided that he was not guilty.

          [–]RyannnnnnNorthumberland [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

          Should've been clearer. I was actually talking about the initial conviction.

          [–]coldlymph 21ポイント22ポイント  (4子コメント)

          Describe him however you want, I'm sure he doesn't give a fuck. He's not guilty. Out of all the possible outcomes this was by far the best for him.

          [–]obadetonaEngerland 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

          Please elaborate

          [–]RyannnnnnNorthumberland 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

          So was the evidence against him.

          [–]NAFI_SSurrey [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

          Creepy, pervy, but not illegal.

          [–]Pantisocracy 2ポイント3ポイント  (11子コメント)

          That is the main crux with these issues, as National Treasure wonderfully showed these feelings of reasonable doubt attached to character unnecessarily continue. We feel once a claim attached there is no smoke without fire unfairly even when others weigh in.

          [–]hoffi_coffi 3ポイント4ポイント  (7子コメント)

          His behaviour was pretty dodgy, as was the trial - they used the victim's sexual history as evidence, this after his own website offered £50,000 for information from people. He may be innocent in the eyes of the law, but people are naturally going to make their own minds up here if they have followed from the beginning. I doubt people are exactly going to warm to him now or see him as a stand up chap!

          [–]CainedbutableBuckinghamshire 1ポイント2ポイント  (6子コメント)

          I doubt people are exactly going to warm to him now or see him as a stand up chap!

          No one is expected to.

          He should not be called a rapist when he has been found innocent of rape though.

          [–]Jak-HererAberdeen 4ポイント5ポイント  (4子コメント)

          Just a tidbit because people keep bandying the word innocent about:

          If the judge or jury are not convinced beyond a reasonable doubt, then they must deliver a verdict of not guilty. This does not mean that the defendant is innocent. It means only that the prosecution did not convince the judge or jury beyond a reasonable doubt.

          [–]TipTop10 0ポイント1ポイント  (3子コメント)

          Yes so he's innocent.

          The opposite of guilt is innocence.

          The finding is one of not guilty but essentially he can claim to be innocent of the crime and be 100% factually and legally correct.

          [–]hoffi_coffi 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

          People are still going to hate him, and they will probably try and get at him by calling him a rapist regardless. It isn't going to stop.

          [–]paranoia-account [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

          Tbh I just want to know more. I've never known what to think about this one and I still don't have a clear version of events.

          My understanding - the girl in question was out with one of cheds team mates. They go back to his hotel. They shag and team mate leaves. Ched then goes in and shagged her during which time she claims she was passed out. He then leaves through a fire escape. Any advances on this? and I could swore the initial version had Ched as not even drinking that night?

          I'm open minded about it. I was conscious it felt like victim blaming but now I really don't know where I stand on it.

          [–]Jak-HererAberdeen [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

          The team mate never left, Ched "joined in" the sex. She has no recollection of the night so doesn't claim to have been awake or passed out. He did leave the hotel through a fire escape, but his friend was still with the girl at the time. Ched had not been drinking that night. His friend had text him inviting him to come over and have sex with the girl.

          [–]LanceyGreater London [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

          People either refuse to accept the judgement of the court (which is hypocritical because they were willing to accept the verdict of the original trial which was shown to be flawed), or they accept the verdict but would prefer it if he had raped somebody instead of being innocent.

          When people wonder why MRAs exist, it's because of this kind of attitude. When a man is accused of rape he is either proven guilty or just assumed probably guilty but let off on a technicality.

          [–]Riffler [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

          He was found "Not Guilty." That's not the same as innocent.

          [–]124876720The North -1ポイント0ポイント  (1子コメント)

          "Not guilty" means nothing more than a jury didn't see enough evidence to send him to jail. It is not an divine finding that he didn't do it. I take no position on Evans's guilt or innocence, but the idea that a not guilty verdict should be the end of discussion forever is ridiculous. Imagine saying "despite the Birmingham Six being found guilty by a jury of their peers, there will be those who deny they are bombers and will refuse to believe the verdict."

          It was found today that there is not enough evidence to send Ched Evans to jail. Nothing more or less. Take from that what you will, but don't try to say that others have no right to an opinion on the court's decision.

          [–]britcowboyShropshire Lib Dem 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

          I don't have a problem with people debating the court decision, but it's not fair to trial a man by media/forum/reddit, when we aren't privy to all the details.

          [–]postingcrap 0ポイント1ポイント  (2子コメント)

          Nailed it. Within just a few comments 'but the justice system isn't perfect, wahh'. Fuck these people.

          [–]BristolBudgieSomerset 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

          Same applies to those who claimed he was innocent when he was convicted right?

          [–]Eladriol 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

          Given that the entire evidence against him apparently rested on the woman not remembering things and him not staying around after the sex, surely you can excuse those people who had doubts about the original conviction.

          [–]jonzaaa 23ポイント24ポイント  (13子コメント)

          I saw him play a month ago against AFC Wimbledon, the things people were shouting actually made me feel sorry for him. Wonder what this means for his claim for lost wages, he was arguably a very talented footballer before the whole event.

          [–]geniice 7ポイント8ポイント  (0子コメント)

          Wonder what this means for his claim for lost wages, he was arguably a very talented footballer before the whole event.

          Civil actions would be balance of probability rather than beyond reasonable doubt.

          He's not guiltly beyond reasonable doubt. Balance of probability? thats a seperate question.

          [–]jptocLebanon 5ポイント6ポイント  (6子コメント)

          He was immense. Definitely was destined for greater things than League One, whether with Sheffield United or elsewhere.

          [–]StretsilWagonFenian 3ポイント4ポイント  (5子コメント)

          Easily could have played in Premier League and been a regular international for Wales.

          [–]PoliceMachineDenbighshire 1ポイント2ポイント  (3子コメント)

          Was on loan from Man City wasn't he? Bags of potential

          [–]TheresPainOnMyFaceDee Dar in Mancland 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

          Nope. Sheffield United bought him for a couple million. He was crucial to the promotion push for us to get out of that league that season. When he got convicted it all went down the bog.

          [–]Il_Gigante_BuonoCynon Valley 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

          There has been calls for him to be called up to the squad if found not guilty

          [–]G_MorganWales 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

          Wonder what this means for his claim for lost wages

          There is no chance of that. British courts only pay compensation if you can demonstrate a conviction was made based upon an incorrect procedure or interpretation of law.

          コメントをもっと表示する (4 返事)

            [–]oljackson99Donny 41ポイント42ポイント  (2子コメント)

            Good. The conviction was ridiculous. The more you read into the case the more crackers it seemed. The victim never even claimed rape at any stage, the police made that accusation after she said she couldn't remember anything.

            The jury very nearly convicted McDonald of rape too, which would have been a catastrophic miscarriage of justice.

            It was actually quite scary to think that you could be convicted of rape based on the evidence presented. Does restore some faith in the justice system that finally it's been quashed.

            [–]postingcrap 6ポイント7ポイント  (0子コメント)

            Sounds similar to the case in the US, with a guy spending decades in prison based on nothing by the word of the victim. http://www.businessinsider.com/james-bain-exonerated-after-35-years-in-prison-2013-10?IR=T

            [–]MDMA-zing [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

            The victim never even claimed rape at any stage, the police made that accusation after she said she couldn't remember anything.

            I've followed this case and it seems she does think she was raped. She never claimed it during sex but the argument (which I think is dodgy as fuck) is that she was so drunk that she couldn't consent, which equals rape. I don't think she's never claimed rape at any stage.

            [–]deerkiller201Hertfordshire 18ポイント19ポイント  (5子コメント)

            https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/oct/14/campaigners-fear-evans-case-will-stop-women-reporting?CMP=share_btn_tw

            Jesus Christ a man gets cleared of rape but it's a bad thing. Never change Gaurdian

            [–]I83RAnEUP1 [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

            Why don't you try actually reading it and thinking about their concerns?

            Evan's family offered monetary compensation, people known to Evan's happened to offer testimony remarkably similar to exactly what Evan's said based upon prior encounters.

            His conviction doesn't seem to have been overturned on the basis of the events of that night but rather because the defendants sexual history has been used against her to paint her as the kind of woman who probably would consent.

            This ruling is absolutely going to set back victims rights in this country, maybe we'll get to return to the fun days where 13 year old girls were quizzed about their masturbation habits to justify sexual abuse.

            [–]Wrathuk [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

            I'm being funny but of course her past behaviour is used in this way it sets up a pattern of behaviour for which the jury can judge.

            it's not going to set back victims right in anyway it's simply the case that this country has a high threshold to met for a conviction as it should.

            the fact is when drinking and sex is involved and a rape claim is made it's always going to be a bit murky.

            [–]StezzerLolzDerbyshire [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

            maybe we'll get to return to the fun days where 13 year old girls were quizzed about their masturbation habits to justify sexual abuse.

            I was kinda' following you there, and then you went all slippery slope.

            [–]hoffi_coffi 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

            Even if justice is ultimately done, cases can set dangerous precedents for the future. We may think nothing of it now, but do we want every rape case delving into the sexual history of victims?

            They are just looking for a different angle, they actually cover the whole thing pretty well the Grauniad.

            [–]famasfilms 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

            Yep, usual Guardian columnists in outrage on Twitter e.g. Everyday sexism

            [–]Bardorba 25ポイント26ポイント  (27子コメント)

            In court, Evans admitted he lied to get the key for the hotel room and did not speak to her before, during or after sex. He left via a fire exit. It also emerged that Evans’ younger brother and another man were trying to film what was happening from outside the room.

            What kind of people do this?

            [–]mrleebob[S] 23ポイント24ポイント  (5子コメント)

            He's clearly a bit of a cunt, regardless of the verdict. It isn't normal behaviour.

            [–]langleyiGreater London 3ポイント4ポイント  (1子コメント)

            did not speak to her before, during or after sex.

            I'm confused - how could she have consented if there was no verbal communication between them?

            [–]Hey_Im_REDDIT [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

            Technically she was replying to the other guy who asked her the question...

            [–]3Form 14ポイント15ポイント  (9子コメント)

            Yeah this is the thing, even if it wasn't rape it was pretty fucking scummy and to refuse to apologise for his behaviour at all was even scummier.

            [–]quizically 9ポイント10ポイント  (3子コメント)

            Yeah, this is my opinion. Rape or not rape is something for the courts to decide. But morally what happened was not good. At the very least it sends a message that if you go around doing shit that could be seen as rape then you're going to get dragged through he dirt for it. Which isn't a bad thing. Don't have sex with people who can't consent and nothing bad will happen. Simple.

            [–]driveldriveby -2ポイント-1ポイント  (2子コメント)

            Yeah, nothing bad can come from falsely accusing innocent men of rape because your arbitrary standards define it hysterically.

            It's a brilliant idea!

            Jesus fucking christ.

            [–]pairyhenisLondon, Hampshire, Wiltshire 5ポイント6ポイント  (1子コメント)

            She didn't accuse him, she always said she had no memory.

            [–]easy_pie 3ポイント4ポイント  (1子コメント)

            He apologised for his behaviour, and acknowledged it was not good. Who told you he refused?

            [–]3Form 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

            I remember one of his videos at the time, I'll dig for it later, where he essentially said

            I'm innocent, I haven't done anything wrong, I don't need to apologise to anyone except my fiancé.

            [–]Woesly 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

            Why should he apologize to someone who falsely accused him of rape? The only person he should have had to apologize to is his fiancee for cheating on her, and he already has.

            [–]NAFI_SSurrey [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

            She never accused him, she couldnt remember what happened. the police accused him

            [–]CainedbutableBuckinghamshire 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

            and to refuse to apologise for his behaviour at all was even scummier.

            I assume after she falsely accused him of rape, he wasn't too willing to come forward with an apology for being a bit of a slimeball.

            [–]draaakjeLondon 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

            He told the jury McDonald was having sex with her when he walked into the hotel room. He claimed the pair looked at him and McDonald asked the woman: “Can my mate join in?” Evans said the woman replied: “Yes.”

            Or this?

            It all sounds sketchy as fuck but guess we'll never know what exactly happened.

            [–]ForensicIzScotland -3ポイント-2ポイント  (1子コメント)

            Yeah, that's incredibly fucked up, especially as she couldn't remember anything that had happened the next day. He obviously knew what he was doing and was in full control of his actions; she wasn't.

            That they justified it with 'well, she hasn't been able to remember sex with people before' is revolting.

            [–]easy_pie 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

            The fact that she didn't appear to be too drunk on those occasions is what the evidence was, not that she'd had sex before. Not remembering it is irrelevant anyway

            [–]duffkingEast Sussex 15ポイント16ポイント  (2子コメント)

            Guilty or not, it's concerning that they allowed the accuser's sexual history to be used as evidence. That's normally off limits in these cases for obvious reasons.

            [–]easy_pie 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

            Because in this case it was very relevant. There were specific similarities with previous sexual partners. Not remembering having sex yet appearing to not be too drunk and certain phrases used that corroborated her consenting.

            [–]DopeyLabrador 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

            And it seems the two ex-partners of the woman are eagerly eyeing up the £50,000 put up for information that leads to his acquittal!

            There was also arguments put forward that they had been coached by the defence.

            The whole case stinks: they have railroaded through legislation that stops the victims previous sexual behaviours being used as evidence.

            [–]Jak-HererAberdeen 15ポイント16ポイント  (27子コメント)

            His original conviction was quashed when the appeal judges were brought "fresh evidence."

            During his time in jail, and thereafter, Evan's legal team offered a financial reward to anyone who could help overturn his conviction. Sure enough, ex partners of the girl came forward to say she regularly could not remember their sex sessions.

            With these new testimonies from her ex partners (or ex-partner, I think it was one persons testimony in particular that carried weight) Evans could not be proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt of rape.

            [–]JoeyJo-JoJnrShabadoo 9ポイント10ポイント  (24子コメント)

            Is this actually what happened? Surely there's a law on offering financial reward in exchange for witness testimony?

            Seems very dodgy ground if someone rich enough can get out of cases by buying witnesses.

            [–]HisHasknessOver the wall 11ポイント12ポイント  (3子コメント)

            You'd better get crimestoppers off the air then because they do that for anyone charged.

            https://crimestoppers-uk.org/give-information/rewards/

            [–]crzylgs 6ポイント7ポイント  (16子コメント)

            Not dodgy at all. The same girl was back at the same club within two weeks, being taken home by another guy. Having same type of sex while drunk. She has not denied this. Does that behavior strike you like someone who was raped two weeks earlier? I have no first hand experience of rape by I'd imagine there would be emotional distress that would prevent these kind of actions.

            Feel sorry for the bloke. Career and reputation in tatters due to public outcry following the shambles of the first trial.

            [–]Jak-HererAberdeen 11ポイント12ポイント  (0子コメント)

            The girl never did say she had been raped, it was the prosecution who pushed the charge of rape.

            The girl always maintained she could not remember the events of the night.

            [–]rotherssDurham 9ポイント10ポイント  (11子コメント)

            Ermm... is there a set of rules saying how a girl should behave after being raped? Maybe you think she should cry and be withdrawn for a while, how long do you think it should be?

            I'm just asking incase I'm ever raped so I can know how I should behave.

            [–]randomcallsignMiddlesex | Poortugeezer 3ポイント4ポイント  (8子コメント)

            Ermm... is there a set of rules saying how a girl should behave after being raped?

            Not the point

            [–]lomoeffect -1ポイント0ポイント  (4子コメント)

            It is exactly the point. Previous experiences of sex/sexual attitudes have absolutely no bearing on being raped.

            [–]randomcallsignMiddlesex | Poortugeezer 4ポイント5ポイント  (2子コメント)

            Two identical situations. With two different people. One is a footballer and the other is a random guy.

            A - says a crime happened
            B - nothing happened at all

            What is wrong with this picture?

            [–]hoffi_coffi 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

            She never claimed a crime happened. She awoke without memory and without her bag, so went to the police to find out what happened. She offered no evidence, it was all done by the admission of the footballers, CCTV, and those present.

            [–]lomoeffect 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

            Now I'm confused. What is your point?

            コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

              コメントをもっと表示する (3 返事)

                [–]crzylgs -4ポイント-3ポイント  (1子コメント)

                I specifically said I have no first hand experience of rape. However, this behavior paints a picture of someone who likes going out every weekend to same club and going home with someone. Nit that of someone who was raped. I'm not judging those life choices she can do whatever she chooses. I'm saying the jury were terrible to convict of rape in first place.

                [–]Jak-HererAberdeen 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

                The issue is that rape covers a broad range of circumstances and acts.

                I know where you're coming from but in this case, the accusation of rape was someone else joining in to consensual sex without receiving consent from both partners. The alleged victim had no memory of the event, and admitted that she regularly had casual sex. Since there was no memory of the event, and no mental or physical pain, and no allegation of rape from the victim, it's unlikely that there would have been a broad change in her behaviour in the following weeks.

                this behavior paints a picture of someone who likes going out every weekend to same club and going home with someone. Nit that of someone who was raped. I'm not judging those life choices she can do whatever she chooses.

                You're not judging, but it reads to me like you are suggesting that a promiscuous person cannot be raped. Going out and getting drunk and going home with a different person every night is absolutely fine, if that's what you choose to do. A lot of his initial conviction rested on that the women had not even spoken to Evans, had never even met Evans before, and did not choose to go home with him.

                [–]hoffi_coffi -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

                Jesus Christ, I don't know where to start with this, whatever you think of him or the case in question.

                コメントをもっと表示する (2 返事)

                  [–]Jak-HererAberdeen 0ポイント1ポイント  (2子コメント)

                  Well the particular witness (by all accounts, a fuck buddy of the girl) was asked in court by Evan's defense team if he had been paid to come forward and he said no.

                  Now, that's not to say he won't be paid in the future i.e. after a not guilty verdict. But ultimately the prosecution should have challenged that information and they didn't.

                  Hey, he's been found not guilty. Unlikely the crown will appeal. I'm sure all parties very much regret what happened that night and I highly doubt Evans would repeat any similar incidents as to what he did that night. The girl has had the privilege of remaining anonymous throughout (unlike the underage girl who was molested by Adam Johnson) whereas Evans has had to live this through the public eye. With the sordid details of the night printed up and down the country, the public, rightly or wrongly, don't need a rape conviction to decide they think someone is a sexual deviant.

                  [–]draaakjeLondon 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

                  financial reward

                  Is this for real? How would such a witness be acceptable when they clearly have a motive?

                  [–]Jak-HererAberdeen 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

                  Not all witnesses are independent witnesses. Many, if not most, have a motive. Financial or otherwise.

                  You are either a witness for the defendant, a witness for the prosecutor, or an independent witness. The former two will have a motive.

                  [–]Bosola 10ポイント11ポイント  (4子コメント)

                  Aaaaand the Guardian almost immediately begins casting aspersions on his acquittal:

                  It can now be revealed that:

                  During the appeal case that led to the retrial, lawyers for the crown suggested the two new witnesses may have been “fed” information by those close to Evans. This claim was rejected by Evans’s side.

                  Evans’s fiancee, Massey, was accused in legal argument during the second trial of offering an “inducement” to a key witness. The prosecution said this had “the flavour of a bribe”. The trial judge disagreed with this description.

                  The appeal court judges, whose decision can be reported for the first time, expressed “a considerable degree of hesitation” before allowing in the new evidence of the former partners because it resulted in the complainant’s sexual behaviour being subject to forensic scrutiny – which is almost always banned.

                  The complainant continues to be named and abused on social media though the law gives her lifelong anonymity. The police are investigating one blog that identified her during the trial.

                  Is the Graun editorial team really that embarrassed for leading the charge against Evans' return to football? Very disappointing.

                  [–]DougieFFC 6ポイント7ポイント  (0子コメント)

                  What the Guardian is describing is typical behaviour for lawyers in such a case cross-examining a witness even when they don't have a shred of evidence to back it up. Most readers will be unaware of this, and would be misled into thinking the crown would make such suggestions without good reason. So yes, it's a shitty, possiby sinister framing of the details by the Guardian.

                  コメントをもっと表示する (3 返事)

                    [–]FMN2014Aberdeen 6ポイント7ポイント  (0子コメント)

                    He must of had a miserable time since the accusation, I mean, five years of his life was dominated by this.

                    [–]NQsDiscoPantsTyne and Wear 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

                    Awful case in so many different ways. What a mess.

                    [–]IdiotsEverywhere_ 7ポイント8ポイント  (0子コメント)

                    The only outcome. No one should be convicted on probability alone. The original case was a shambles.

                    [–]oddun [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

                    Twitter has gone into meltdown.

                    Seems that being found not guilty isn't enough for some people, while others are raging on about women lying all the time about these things.

                    ¯_(ツ)_/¯

                    Edit Why doesn't that look right?

                    [–]fulgaraverdeScottish Borders 6ポイント7ポイント  (2子コメント)

                    From what I understand, cases that have new trials ordered by the Court of Appeal have something like an 85% not guilty rate, so this was more or less expected.

                    Piercing the protections sexual assault victims have against their past behaviour being used to assault their character in court makes me very, very worried though.

                    [–]Tralfamadore13Warwickshire 4ポイント5ポイント  (3子コメント)

                    If the first trial was a fair one with the burden of proof on the prosecution, I doubt that the defence would have needed to scrutinise the complainant's sex life (it would have probably been thrown out). Unfortunately this may set a precedent where rape victims' sexual histories are fair game for cross-examination.

                    [–]Munchausen-By-Proxy 14ポイント15ポイント  (0子コメント)

                    All evidence should be subject to investigation. I'm reminded of a case from a few years ago, where a woman claimed she had been gang raped after meeting a man she knew online. The accused men had claimed that this was consensual but were ignored until late in the trial, when chat logs were discovered showing that she had previously agreed in principle to group sex with six Irishmen she didn't know. If WAR (and your) standards had been applied, those five innocent men would likely still be in prison.

                    コメントをもっと表示する (2 返事)

                      [–]TotalNyan 4ポイント5ポイント  (10子コメント)

                      The way in which it was overturned scares me. Using the victim's sexual history as evidence against rape seems so anecdotal and irrelevant to the issue at hand and I genuinely hope it doesn't set a legal precedent in this country. No matter whether or not you think the overturning is the "right" or "wrong" decision, this looks alarmingly bad on the courts.

                      [–]Munchausen-By-Proxy 8ポイント9ポイント  (7子コメント)

                      Reposting another comment, but:

                      All evidence should be subject to investigation. I'm reminded of a case from a few years ago, where a woman claimed she had been gang raped after meeting a man she knew online. The accused men had claimed that this was consensual but were ignored until late in the trial, when chat logs were discovered showing that she had previously agreed in principle to group sex with six Irishmen she didn't know. If WAR (and your) standards had been applied, those five innocent men would likely still be in prison.

                      [–]hoffi_coffi 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

                      People can have all sorts of kinks though, it doesn't mean they therefore consent to all group sex from that point on.

                      [–]Munchausen-By-Proxy 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

                      Of course not, that's why these cases are so difficult for juries, but that's no justification for hiding evidence from them.

                      [–]TotalNyan 0ポイント1ポイント  (2子コメント)

                      It's tricky because the law is clearly inadequate for handling such cases and needs to be updated. However, I personally don't believe that a person's previous promiscuity should hold any particular relevance when discussing rape in a court of law. Especially coming from witnesses who may or may not have been offered money for their testimony (but that's an entirely different discussion).

                      In the example you cite, the evidence is not anecdotal, and seems to indicate that the victim may have given consent to the encounter - strong evidence to dismiss the conviction.

                      I don't know whether Ched was guilty or not, and I'm sure the jury had other evidence than this, but this being allowed as evidence alone just irks me slightly.

                      [–]numberoneloser 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

                      It's got nothing to do with the persons 'promiscuity' and everything to do with the details of that encounter.

                      If she says and does the exact same things during consensual sex as what Ched Evans claimed she did with him in his initial interview then he had no reason to believe she wasn't consenting right?

                      [–]easy_pie 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                      In this case it was very relevant. There were specific similarities with previous sexual partners. Not remembering having sex but appearing not to be too drunk, and certain phrases used that corroborated her consenting. It had nothing to do with promiscuity, that's just what mindless feminists want people to think it was

                      [–]TAOMCM -4ポイント-3ポイント  (1子コメント)

                      If they raped her they should be. Just because someone agrees online doesn't mean they agree at the time of the rape. People can withdraw consent.

                      [–]Munchausen-By-Proxy 6ポイント7ポイント  (0子コメント)

                      If they raped her then they wouldn't be innocent. Your comment has no substance, only obvious rhetoric. Yes, of course, people can withdraw consent.

                      The problem is this: five men were charged with rape. They need to prove reasonable doubt in order to go free. A big part of this question is how likely it is that a woman would consent to sex with five strangers having only just met one of them. By disallowing evidence, you are attempting to make it impossible for those men to show that consent was a reasonable possibility. In their case, as in Ched Evans', you may as well be arguing for automatic conviction.

                      [–]easy_pie 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                      It seems that way to you because you haven't looked at the facts. In this case it was very relevant. There were specific similarities with previous sexual partners. Not remembering having sex but appearing not to be too drunk, and certain phrases used that corroborated her consenting.

                      コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

                        [–]driveldriveby 1ポイント2ポイント  (15子コメント)

                        Excellent news. I felt so bad for the guy when I saw all the wankers who claim everything is rape were able to sink their claws into him. You could tell from the initial trial that the result was an absolute farce. The bloodthirsty "we're so pro women we ruin men's lives" crowd were out in force. This should put them back in their box.

                        He's a free man now, which is how it always should have been. Sanctimonious figures who claim that consensual sex is rape and that people like Evans deserve to have their lives ruined are an embarrassment.

                        Edit: Fair enough Bristolbudgie. Removed the tone. But to be honest, when you see a witchhunt like that it is very hard to sympathise with those leading it.

                        [–]hoffi_coffi 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

                        To be fair on Jessica Ennis, he was a convicted rapist and she was putting her name to a stand in a club sticking up for him. I'd be pretty concerned about that, even if the trial looked a bit dodgy. She has had quite an irrational amount of hatred towards her for some reason.

                        [–]BristolBudgieSomerset 1ポイント2ポイント  (13子コメント)

                        I'm looking at you, Jessica Ennis, and every other person who was as much of a shrieking asshole about this whole thing as she was.

                        What a nasty post. He was a convicted rapist in law. They were absolutely entitled to pass judgement on him and distance themselves from him.

                        [–]allcomplete [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                        Justice finally done. The idea that the woman could consent to sex with one man, sober up a bit in between and then be unable to consent to sex with another is and always was ludicrous.

                        The sad thing is that he'll be guilty in the eyes of British feminazis until time immemorial. This is why we call them feminazis I suppose. They're already at it on Twitter.

                        [–]aonomeEast Sussex [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                        The official twitter for women in Young Labour is not happy.

                        [–]Riffler [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                        He's served his time, he's missed out on his best years of having anonymous sex with near-comatose teenagers. Can't we just leave him to get on with it now? /s

                        [–]smashing3000United Kingdom 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                        I'm so relieved by this, he was clear never guilty of anything other than drunken bad judgement, just like the other party in this case.

                        I hope he can somehow put this horror behind him and rebuild his life.

                        [–]jptocLebanon -1ポイント0ポイント  (3子コメント)

                        I'm glad that the courts have finally put this to rest.

                        As a Sheffield United fan, however, I'm somewhat miffed as this situation derailed our 11/12 promotion campaign letting our city rivals pip us to promotion.

                        So on the one hand, well done. But on the other, couldn't this all have been sorted out 5 years ago so we could have gotten promotion?

                        On a serious note, I hope everyone involved is able to move on successfully now.

                        [–]Coles-CornerSHEFFIELD[🍰] 4ポイント5ポイント  (2子コメント)

                        Thing with Ched is, the only reason he stayed after relegation was this was hanging over his head. If none of this had happened then he would have been off in the summer transfer window.

                        [–]jptocLebanon 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

                        True, yes. Ah well. We'll bounce back eventually.

                        [–]Coles-CornerSHEFFIELD[🍰] [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                        Hope so, it's getting a bit tragic now :(

                        [–]i_am_that_human -4ポイント-3ポイント  (2子コメント)

                        Poor lad, hopefully he sues for loss of earnings.

                        [–]geniice 10ポイント11ポイント  (0子コメント)

                        Civil actions would be balance of probability rather than beyond reasonable doubt.

                        He's not guiltly beyond reasonable doubt. Balance of probability? Thats a seperate question.

                        Throw in the problem that there is no one he could reasonably sue that has any money and it becomes pretty pointless. If he wins he gets no money (minus lawyers fees) and if he loses well that doesn't look very good for him does it?

                        [–]hoffi_coffi 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                        Sue who? It was a fair trial and a fair retrial.

                        コメントをもっと表示する (9 返事)