So.....

Ade is nearing full fitness eh?

442 today yeah, Lennon right, Townsend left?

One or the other for me, against the fodder anyway

Andros had a cracking game against Chelsea

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Well indirectly they are, it's a point of fact whether you agree with it or not.

Apologies for any offence caused ladies.

comment by Bãlès (U3582)
posted 1 minute ago
Well indirectly they are, it's a point of fact whether you agree with it or not.

Apologies for any offence caused ladies.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's your misinterpretation of our points - nobody here is defending Evans or rapists in general, simply questioning the conviction based on the lack of evidence. To be called a "rape defender" is offensive and inaccurate.

Several of us are of the opinion that it is a dangerous precedent that someone can not be sure, and that another can be accused and convicted of rape beyond reasonable doubt. I don't give a shít about Evans, but it does irk me to know that someone (anyone, but Evans in this case) can be convicted not because she definitely said "no" but because she can't remember if she said yes or not.

"Supporter of convicted rapist" ?

No... again, you are misinterpreting: there is no "support" for a convicted rapist, no "backing" of his actions. Simply a question mark on the conviction and the evidence used to reach the conviction of this type of incident in general, but with this case used as a relevant and current reference.

You are supporting him though in that he's protesting his innocence. It's not as if he's just been sent down and there were major doubts, a High Court judge found the ruling safe.

Yes there may be technicalities missed but I doubt it'll be enough to see him cleared of all charges suddenly. That is just my opinion though.

I don't disagree with your opinion, this is what you are still not getting.

None of us are protesting his innocence, just questioning how a beyond-reasonable-doubt-guilty-verdict can be reached with such a lack of evidence. There is no confirmed or real evidence that she said "no". She forgot.

So, again, none of us are "Ched fans", "rape supporters", "supporters of convicted rapists" etc etc... if anything, I'd say that we are interested in UK Law and it's application.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Yeah, sorry boys - I know you all said "let's move on etc." but it annoys me to that Bales is calling us "rape supporters" which simply isn't the case. It's funny because this week the notable "guilty"ers (Robbing, Robb, Weare, Bales and Cal) all seem to not actually get the viewpoint of us just questioning the conviction - not defending rape or Ched.

I think I read somewhere that the review could take up to 12 months to reach a conclusion.

Seems a long time to analyse the facts of the case.

Maybe they are just going to keep asking her "did you say yes or no?" until she remembers

Thant should conclusively sort the job out

I bet some would still beg to differ though

Convicted Vandal Weare would be top of the list "I trust a jury to get it right, except when it was me "

I can't believe he was reeled in on that so easily, I saw what was coming from miles away.

Hook, line and sinker!

Haha, I didn't see it unfold but catching up the next day I was píssing myself

I didn't twig at first, reading his story I was like "oh right, yeah ok..." then the next comment it was like BOOM!

He seems to have kept a low profile on this thread since.

Regrets, I've had a few .......

I've seen him pop up on a few other threads since and addressed him with his new title, which has got some good reactions

Genius whoever asked the question.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Yeah I've always found him alright too

Hope you lose at Palace

comment by Robben #20 (U1145)
posted 3 minutes ago
Yeah I've always found him alright too

Hope you lose at Palace


----------------------------------------------------------------------
I will be supporting Newcastle until 5 pm