Ched Evans

[spider]

I keep seeing the statement "he has served his sentence".

To be clear. He was sentanced to five years. He has been released on licence. He will remain on licence for the rest of his sentence, unless the MoJ have cause to recall him to prison.

Why is he treated differently from persons convicted of causing death by dangerous driving etc?

Because he has been convicted of a sexual offence and this is determined to be a more serious offence with all the baggage that carries (signing the sexual offences register, restrictions on taking up certain types of employment etc).

You may or may not agree with these laws, but I still do not understand how a professional football player is a special case.

If he had been a care worker, a heart surgeon, a cancer specialist with a track record for saving hundreds of lives, they still wouldn't be allowed to return to that job after a rape conviction.

The law may or may not be an ass, but I still do not understand why a professional football player is a special case.

[Essex Lad]

spider wrote:

> I keep seeing the statement "he has served his sentence".
>
> To be clear. He was sentanced (sic) to five years. He has been
> released on licence. He will remain on licence for the rest of
> his sentence, unless the MoJ have cause to recall him to
> prison.

Almost no one serves their "sentence" these days. The MoJ obv think that he is not a danger to the public.

>
> Why is he treated differently from persons convicted of causing
> death by dangerous driving etc?
>
> Because he has been convicted of a sexual offence and this is
> determined to be a more serious offence with all the baggage
> that carries (signing the sexual offences register,
> restrictions on taking up certain types of employment etc).

I'm sure death by dangerous driving would prevent you becoming a cabbie or a chauffeur...

I would argue that killing someone is more serious than raping them,
>
> You may or may not agree with these laws, but I still do not
> understand how a professional football player is a special
> case.

He isn't, which is why he should be allowed to go back to his job.

>
> If he had been a care worker, a heart surgeon, a cancer
> specialist with a track record for saving hundreds of lives,
> they still wouldn't be allowed to return to that job after a
> rape conviction.

Care worker probably not but unless the surgeon or cancer specialist raped a patient I don't see why not. What effect would that have on their ability to save lives? In any case, how do you know that has not happened?

[Sam Slater]

[quote]If he had been a care worker, a heart surgeon, a cancer specialist with a track record for saving hundreds of lives, they still wouldn't be allowed to return to that job after a rape conviction.[/quote]

He's not really being treated differently because he's a footballer. If he was a bricklayer he'd be allowed back, or a shelf stacker.......or steel worker etc etc..

I think that those jobs you mention the person would be required to work with other people on a much more intimate and personal level than, say, a salesman or factory worker. I don't think being a footballer has quite the same levels of intimacy with the fans as a care worker would do with someone they're treating.

[spider]

His sentence was five years. If he is not still serving his sentence how is it that the MoJ have stopped him travelling abroad to take up work?

Causing death by dangerous driving may stop you being a cabbie, it doesn't stop you playing professional football though.

He would be a special case if he were allowed to go back to football because he wouldn't be allowed to participate in any events that the rest of the team would be participating in if that event brought them into contact with young or vulnerable people.

With regard medical professionals. No impact whatsoever on their ability to save lives, but the sexual offences act would not allow them to return to their former jobs. Just like a school caretaker, who would no doubt continue to have the ability to still school caretake would not be allowed to return to his old job.

[David Johnson]

"You may or may not agree with these laws"

I cannot for the life of me understand why you keep saying this.

What you completely fail to address is that, to repeat myself, there is no legal reason whatsoever why he should not go back to work for a football team.

Do you think Sheffield Utd or Oldham do not have access to lawyers????
There is absolutely no legal reason why he should not go back to playing football, otherwise we would have heard that already from the Probation Service responsible for him on licence and various lawyers.

If you want a precedent, here is the case of one, Marlon King who was placed on the Sex Offenders Register, has a conviction list as long as your arm and went on to play with Coventry, Birmingham, Sheffield United and Jamaica! after being placed on the Sex Offenders Register.



Secondly, you completely fail to address how he is being treated as a "special case".

For him to go back to work in his chosen profession is what would happen in the overwhelming number of jobs out there. He would not be being treated as a "special case" to go back to playing football after release from jail for rape.

Thirdly, with regard to your comment about rape being a more serious offence, there is nothing different in terms of licence between those on the Sex Offenders Register and murderers (a more serious crime) on licence in that they both have varying restrictions on their licence.

[David Johnson]

If you re-read my initial post, you will see I refer to prison or jail sentence being served. I am fully aware that he is under licence which I reference elsewhere and understand that the reason he cannot play in Malta is because of his specific licence restrictions which tend to vary from case to case.

"Causing death by dangerous driving may stop you being a cabbie, it doesn't stop you playing professional football though."

Nor does a conviction for a sexual offence and being on the Sex Offences Register, see my other post re. Marlon King.

[dave756]

He has had his day in court and was found guilt of 'rape' which is a simple law to understand it is sex without the other person giving consent, his website protests his innocences but in court he failed to prove his innocences, he is a convicted rapist and can not return to an ordinary life and not being allow to take part in professional football not will destroy his life?

The people who are protesting against him being allowed to play football would like to see the same rules apply here to that of a teacher or Doctor that has been convicted of the same crime, adding the fact he only served half of his sentence is for them a real issue which lays the problem at the feet of authorities who released him, it is not helped by the fact he so strongly is protesting his innocence which he is allow to do. The mob are allowed to hold their views too and if you agree or not it seems they are being listen to and as for being different form other professions such say a policeman or doctor who would not be allowed to carry on working in their profession they believe pro footballers are admire, revere and love greatly so some rules should apply here giving a clear message. At the end of the day they'll keep on campaigning as long as he protests his innocences, which makes you wonder what these football clubs see in such a toxic player.

[spider]

"which makes you wonder what these football clubs see in such a toxic player"

I see at least two of Oldham's sponsor's (Mecca Bingo and Verlin Rainwater Solutions) have said they will walk if he is allowed to play for them.

The Criminal Cases Review Commission is conducting an investigation into Evans's conviction, which could take 35 weeks. If he is so convinced of his innocence why can't he wait until the summer for the outcome of this review?

My view is that he wants to get back to playing professional football before the review reports because if they uphold the conviction it will be even harder to get back to playing then.

DJ I know you are aware he is still serving his sentence under licence. I was responding to Mr Man's comment "Almost no one serves their "sentence" these days. The MoJ obv think that he is not a danger to the public."

Mr King, a nasty piece of work. What was the sexual offence he was convicted of was it rape?

My contention is that Mr Evans is being treated as a special case because I cannot think of any other job where after a conviction for rape, after serving half the sentence in jail, still being on licence and the sex offender register, you would be allowed to walk back into your old job.

The vast majority of employers wouldn?t want to take you back. Your continued employment would cause disharmony in the workplace and consequently impact on productivity. There would also be concerns regarding how your customers would react to that individuals? employment, especially if they were in a customer facing role. See potential sponsorship withdrawal detailed above.

You ask????.
?You may or may not agree with these laws"
I cannot for the life of me understand why you keep saying this.

I keep saying this because I can?t remember anyone starting a campaign for ?normal job? people to have their job back after a rape conviction. By that I mean for instance when was the last time people were campaigning for a school caretaker, a bricklayer or a steelworker to have their job back after a rape conviction (and with still two and a half years to serve on licence)?

[spider]

"which makes you wonder what these football clubs see in such a toxic player"

I?m guess that his book value in comparison with his playing ability is at rock bottom now.

Someone mentioned that football clubs employ lawyers. I bet they employ accountants as well. I also bet that at this very moment there are teams of accountants drawing up cost / benefit statements attempting to assess the impact on the club bottom-line if they employ him.

Which is no doubt the same reason that long list of other convicted criminals listed in this thread how been allowed to return to football.

All this outrage about ?he should be allowed to return to his profession?. The moral arguments / impact on his victim will have no input whatsoever to the cost / benefit analysis.

It?s all about money, money, money.

There has been a lot of talk about the issue of rehabilitation of offenders.
If this was a groundsman with a conviction for rape with another two and a half years to serve on licence, would Oldham be so keen to employ him?

Footballers are special cases because they can get away with appalling behaviour with minimal consequences. As proved by the long list of offenders already quoted in this thread. I guess that?s why many of them behave as they do.

Someone mentioned that footballers should not be considered role models. Why do they produce football shirts (with the player?s names on the back) in children?s sizes?

I?ve just had a look at Oldham?s website. It talks about their community trust and their work in schools. I guess that means school visits, schoolboy (and school girl) football training etc.

If Oldham were to employ Mr Evans, do you think any Head Teacher (who wanted to keep his job) would allow him to even step on to their school premises?

If Oldham were to employ Mr Evans can you see him running onto the pitch holding the hand of a school-aged child?

I can?t.

Anyone really interested in the Ched Evans controversy should read this.

[Sam Slater]

[quote]The people who are protesting against him being allowed to play football would like to see the same rules apply here to that of a teacher or Doctor that has been convicted of the same crime,[/quote]

Why treat him like a doctor or teacher? Why not a salesman or scaffolder?

I think that doctors, teachers, care workers and school caretakers are in positions where they are more intimate with, and have a far more personal relationship with the people they are treating/helping/servicing. They are in positions where power could be abused and innocents influenced a certain way which you wouldn't find with a shop assistant, plumber a telesales person. In this regard I think footballers do not have that same personal relationship with fans as a doctor or teacher would do with patients/pupils.

That, for me, is the difference.

As for the length of sentencing though...........I'm with you. 2 and a half years for possibly destroying a young girl's life isn't enough. Rape is serious stuff.