Some thoughts on the Ched Evans saga.
I am going to presume you all know the ins and outs of the Ched Evans case and instead I’m going to skip to transcribing my feelings over the news of his acquittal.
It didn’t take long for me to find numerous messages on social media abusing and threatening the girl who made the claims that she had been raped by Evans. Why can she simply walk away from all this whilst Evans’ career, guilty or not guilty has been totally ruined? This is a perfect example of the horrible smog that surrounds rape culture in the modern age. The fact that Evans has been proved not guilty doesn’t not necessarily mean that the girl ‘lied’, the decision ultimately lay with a jury that made a decision in their own eyes as to what they deemed happened in that hotel room all those years ago. If a woman is unable to speak out about a crime for fear of hatred and abuse, then the criminal justice system is not doing its job to protect. She shouldn't have to hide behind a horrible background for fear of failing, regardless of whether the accused is in the public eye or not. What effect does the abuse of the claimant have on those that have suffered genuine horrors. For other women and girls who see the abuse directed at the girl in this trial, how disturbing it is to think that some of them out there may stay quiet over fear of being directed their own hatred, speaking out is the only way to move forwards, it remains difficult enough as it is.
This case has also thrown to the light the views of many who argue the criminal justice system is misogynistic, that women always come off second best, that Evans would always walk free. It is not my place to say whether or not these allegations are true, but it’s crucial to consider one of the most pivotal cornerstones of our jurisdiction, the idea that one is innocent until proven guilty. Therefore, the burden is on the victim to prove that the accused has committed the crime beyond any doubt. That is where the problem arises, rape or sexual offences for that matter, are often hard to prove, but there is really no other way to approach things. You cannot start proceedings by assuming guilt for that undermines the whole workings of the law. To punish the woman for lying in court and ruining the livelihood we must then also apply the same principle, can we categorically prove that everything she said surrounded the situation is a lie? Once again its difficult. For those that argue that if Evans is not guilty then she must be punished for false claims and the damage she has done to Evans and his career/ At this junction it is important to be aware that although sex took place the claimant may have construed it as rape whilst on the other hand Evans believed it to be consensual, again we cannot punish for a genuine and in her mind, honest legal challenge. Of course if it was possible to prove that she was fully aware of Evans' innonence the whole time and was simply out to ruin him then we should expect her to be sanctioned, this is exceptionally hard to prove without an admittance of guilt. Thus any established nation must do its part to ascertain whether the eyes of the law consider the actions to be legal or illegal, provided directed to consider the right questions and events by the judge then this decision lies solely with the jury.
The plot becomes thickened further when you read that the court took exception to the usual rule that they do not raise past sexual encounters in order to avoid humiliating the victims. However, this time the judges deemed that such previous encounters were so similar to that of the one with Evans that it be important they be raised. So now once again it appears that the fact that the woman has had sexual intercourse in the past and on a regular basis, there is no way she can have been raped because she is so promiscuous. This is a curious point and once again it seems to hint at the courts taking a sexist stance favouring the male party. Let’s remember though that’s there’s various legal areas where similar rules are raised to find out the truth and any decision to deploy such information is done so only if the judges (Lady Justice Hallett being one) deem it of the utmost most importance.
Yet, Evans’ career lies in ruin, he has missed some of his most pivotal years as a footballer. The truth is though the justice system makes mistake, Evans is not the first man to have served time in prison for something the law later decided they didn’t do, and he won’t be the last. The evidence and views of the jury were that they could prove a lack of consent at the first trial, and upon appeal, they couldn’t. The sad result of rape trials are that there are never any winners, both parties are forever guilty in the eyes of the media because that is the society we live in. The only logical step is to try and give the same confidentiality to the accused male parties in rape trials as the female claimants are awarded.
Once again though, the truth is that the powers of the media are such, that regardless of whether Evans’ name was kept secret it would never have remained so throughout proceedings and would have definitely come to light when he was first condemned as guilty. The current situation is a fair one, and the brutal reality of living in a democratic society is that people can make allegations and speak their mind. Remove the power to speak up and you lose the power of democracy.
It didn’t take long for me to find numerous messages on social media abusing and threatening the girl who made the claims that she had been raped by Evans. Why can she simply walk away from all this whilst Evans’ career, guilty or not guilty has been totally ruined? This is a perfect example of the horrible smog that surrounds rape culture in the modern age. The fact that Evans has been proved not guilty doesn’t not necessarily mean that the girl ‘lied’, the decision ultimately lay with a jury that made a decision in their own eyes as to what they deemed happened in that hotel room all those years ago. If a woman is unable to speak out about a crime for fear of hatred and abuse, then the criminal justice system is not doing its job to protect. She shouldn't have to hide behind a horrible background for fear of failing, regardless of whether the accused is in the public eye or not. What effect does the abuse of the claimant have on those that have suffered genuine horrors. For other women and girls who see the abuse directed at the girl in this trial, how disturbing it is to think that some of them out there may stay quiet over fear of being directed their own hatred, speaking out is the only way to move forwards, it remains difficult enough as it is.
This case has also thrown to the light the views of many who argue the criminal justice system is misogynistic, that women always come off second best, that Evans would always walk free. It is not my place to say whether or not these allegations are true, but it’s crucial to consider one of the most pivotal cornerstones of our jurisdiction, the idea that one is innocent until proven guilty. Therefore, the burden is on the victim to prove that the accused has committed the crime beyond any doubt. That is where the problem arises, rape or sexual offences for that matter, are often hard to prove, but there is really no other way to approach things. You cannot start proceedings by assuming guilt for that undermines the whole workings of the law. To punish the woman for lying in court and ruining the livelihood we must then also apply the same principle, can we categorically prove that everything she said surrounded the situation is a lie? Once again its difficult. For those that argue that if Evans is not guilty then she must be punished for false claims and the damage she has done to Evans and his career/ At this junction it is important to be aware that although sex took place the claimant may have construed it as rape whilst on the other hand Evans believed it to be consensual, again we cannot punish for a genuine and in her mind, honest legal challenge. Of course if it was possible to prove that she was fully aware of Evans' innonence the whole time and was simply out to ruin him then we should expect her to be sanctioned, this is exceptionally hard to prove without an admittance of guilt. Thus any established nation must do its part to ascertain whether the eyes of the law consider the actions to be legal or illegal, provided directed to consider the right questions and events by the judge then this decision lies solely with the jury.
The plot becomes thickened further when you read that the court took exception to the usual rule that they do not raise past sexual encounters in order to avoid humiliating the victims. However, this time the judges deemed that such previous encounters were so similar to that of the one with Evans that it be important they be raised. So now once again it appears that the fact that the woman has had sexual intercourse in the past and on a regular basis, there is no way she can have been raped because she is so promiscuous. This is a curious point and once again it seems to hint at the courts taking a sexist stance favouring the male party. Let’s remember though that’s there’s various legal areas where similar rules are raised to find out the truth and any decision to deploy such information is done so only if the judges (Lady Justice Hallett being one) deem it of the utmost most importance.
Yet, Evans’ career lies in ruin, he has missed some of his most pivotal years as a footballer. The truth is though the justice system makes mistake, Evans is not the first man to have served time in prison for something the law later decided they didn’t do, and he won’t be the last. The evidence and views of the jury were that they could prove a lack of consent at the first trial, and upon appeal, they couldn’t. The sad result of rape trials are that there are never any winners, both parties are forever guilty in the eyes of the media because that is the society we live in. The only logical step is to try and give the same confidentiality to the accused male parties in rape trials as the female claimants are awarded.
Once again though, the truth is that the powers of the media are such, that regardless of whether Evans’ name was kept secret it would never have remained so throughout proceedings and would have definitely come to light when he was first condemned as guilty. The current situation is a fair one, and the brutal reality of living in a democratic society is that people can make allegations and speak their mind. Remove the power to speak up and you lose the power of democracy.
Comments
Post a Comment