Phill v Holly - Guest starring Ched Evans

[The Cat]

9 hours ago, CB Fry said:

His is indeed a paedo but Bill Wyman left the Stones 30 odd years ago so was absolutely nowhere near the band when they played Glastonbury.

So not entirely sure what point you're making? Keep the John Peel stage going because other people are Paedos as well so no point doing anything?

Fair enough, I forgot he left.

[Turkish]

29 minutes ago, The Cat said:

Fair enough, I forgot he left.

they should honour the strange achievement of being father in law to your ex mother in law though, not even Eastenders has managed a love triangle like that.

[sadoldgit]

On 04/06/2023 at 22:33, Lord Duckhunter said:

Your attitude was different when it was Ched Evans, you spent ages banging on about his guilt even after he was found innocent. What’s the difference, maybe it’s because Phil is gay and therefore good (in your woke head) or perhaps it’s because you’re anti Welsh or maybe think Ched is a Jewish name. 

Really Duckie? Stop to think for a minute. Ched Evans was found guilty of rape by a jury. He was found guilty of having sexual relations with a woman who was intoxicated and therefore not in a position to consent. As far as we know Schofield has not raped anybody or been charged with raping anybody and in this case, again as far as we know, two adults had consensual sex. If you can’t see the difference then you really do need to give up the weed. 😵‍💫

Just to recap, I kept banging on about the case because people like you were defending his actions. The reason he got off in the retrial was because his future father in law put up a reward for more “witnesses” to come forward. Two blokes did. Neither offered any evidence that had anything to do with Evans and his mate and the CPS asked for the evidence to be excluded from the retrial on the grounds that a victim’s sexual history has nothing to do with a current case. The judge disagreed. The facts remained the same. Evans’s mate picked up an intoxicated women and took her back to a hotel that he and Evans had booked for the night. After he had sex with her he contacted Evans who joined them , performed a sex act with her whilst their mates filmed them through the window and left via the fire escape. The woman was so out of it she had no recollection of what happened. The law is there to protect people in these situations and I bet you would be unhappy if this had happened to your daughter. Trying to pretend that the Schofield situation is the same is frankly pathetic.

[Wade Garrett]

Pip knew the lad when he was a nipper, got him in at ITV and then didn’t get sucked off until he was 20.

Make your own minds up.  I’m getting one word…..nonce.

[Lord Duckhunter]

20 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

Really Duckie? Stop to think for a minute. Ched Evans was found guilty of rape by a jury. He was found guilty of having sexual relations with a woman who was intoxicated and therefore not in a position to consent. As far as we know Schofield has not raped anybody or been charged with raping anybody and in this case, again as far as we know, two adults had consensual sex.
 

Trying to pretend that the Schofield situation is the same is frankly pathetic.

Ched is as guilty as the Birmingham 6, in other words innocent. You wouldn’t claim they were guilty because they were charged & then wrongly convicted, why do you continue to do so regarding Evens, who are you the judge, jury & executioner? He’s not Jewish, so don’t understand why you don’t accept he’s the victim here. 

 

It’s exactly the same, consenting adults having sex. 

[sadoldgit]

1 hour ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Ched is as guilty as the Birmingham 6, in other words innocent. You wouldn’t claim they were guilty because they were charged & then wrongly convicted, why do you continue to do so regarding Evens, who are you the judge, jury & executioner? He’s not Jewish, so don’t understand why you don’t accept he’s the victim here. 

 

It’s exactly the same, consenting adults having sex. 

If you want to talk about Evans why don’t you do it on that thread? But as you persist, I refer you yet again to the OJ Simpson trial when he was acquitted of committing a double murder by a jury. Yes he was found to be innocent in law by a jury but it doesn’t mean to say he didn’t do it. Evans was found not guilty by a jury in the second trial but that doesn’t mean that the people who studied law, all of the evidence in forensic detail and do this daily for a living no longer think that he raped the girl because of a jury acquittal.

Evans wasn’t the one who was taken to a hotel room with men that she had never met before, was sexually used despite being completely intoxicated and filmed by their friends watching through the window and then left on her own. Perhaps you need to rethink your definition of victim here but I expect that you think that  incapacitated women are fair game.

Evans was found guilty of rape by a jury based on what was proved to have happened on that night. He was acquitted by a jury based on evidence presented by the defence that had nothing to do with what happened to her that night and according to the CPS should not have been allowed to be presented according to the rule that a rape victim’s previous sexual history should not be used against her.

You might recall that High Court judges refused him leave to appeal when he was doing his time for rape based on the evidence on what occurred on that night too.

If you are going to persist on these baseless jibes about anti-semitism please provide evidence to back them up.

Getting back on topic, it would appear now that a “nonce” is someone who has consensual sexual relations with a 20 year old. I guess that means many of us here are now nonces?

A question for you Duckie. As you are so hung up on the Evans case and his innocence, how come you are not on  here fighting Schofield’s case against him being found to be a paedophile by the mob despite no charges being brought by the police and no evidence that he has had sexual relations with an under age person?

The speech read out by Holly the other day was beyond bizarre. Are you ok? FFS no one has died. We haven’t declared war on Russia. All that has happened is that a presenter on a morning TV light entertainment show lied to a few people about having a consensual sexual relationship with a younger man yet somehow this has become major news for some time now. Unless there is a lot more to this story, a man has had his life turned upside down over lying about a relationship. We have an ex PM who lied to us daily and even lied to the Queen but no witch hunt, cancellation and eternal damnation for him. We really need to sort out our priorities. 

Edited 7 June, 2023 by sadoldgit
Added text

[aintforever]

1 hour ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

It’s exactly the same, consenting adults having sex. 

Do you think it's fair to label Ched a nonce as well then?

[cloggy saint]

15 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

Getting back on topic, it would appear now that a “nonce” is someone who has consensual sexual relations with a 20 year old. I guess that means many of us here are now nonces?

The speech read out by Holly the other day was beyond bizarre. Are you ok? FFS no one has died. We haven’t declared war on Russia. All that has happened is that a presenter on a morning TV light entertainment show lied to a few people about having a consensual sexual relationship with a younger man yet somehow this has become major news for some time now. Unless there is a lot more to this story, a man has had his life turned upside down over lying about a relationship. We have an ex PM who lied to us daily and even lied to the Queen but no witch hunt, cancellation and eternal damnation for him. We really need to sort out our priorities. 

Exactly, it's a complete non-story that's been blown out of all proportion because everyone loves a 'scandal' and a derisory label.

[sadoldgit]

3 hours ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

 

It’s exactly the same, consenting adults having sex. 

Under the current law you cannot legally consent to sex if you are under the legal age of consent or if you are incapacitated by drink or drugs.

As far as we know at the moment, Schofield has done nothing illegal. On the other hand Evans and his mate both had sexual relations with a women who was proven in court to be incapacitated by either drink or drugs and was, therefore, not in a state to consent to what transpired.

In your world it appear that the incapacitated woman was fair game, but not in the eyes of the law. Just to spell it out for you so that you fully understand. The court was shown CCTV footage of her barely being able to walk. She lost some possessions including her handbag. She had no recollection the next day of what had transpired. She believed that she might have been drugged at some point. If this is your idea of a consenting adult then God help any women in the same state that you come across. It beggars belief how you can conflate that and the Schofield relationship.

[Lord Duckhunter]

2 hours ago, aintforever said:

Do you think it's fair to label Ched a nonce as well then?

Where have I labelled PS a nonce? 

[AlexLaw76]

1 hour ago, sadoldgit said:

Under the current law you cannot legally consent to sex if you are under the legal age of consent or if you are incapacitated by drink or drugs.

As far as we know at the moment, Schofield has done nothing illegal. On the other hand Evans and his mate both had sexual relations with a women who was proven in court to be incapacitated by either drink or drugs and was, therefore, not in a state to consent to what transpired.

In your world it appear that the incapacitated woman was fair game, but not in the eyes of the law. Just to spell it out for you so that you fully understand. The court was shown CCTV footage of her barely being able to walk. She lost some possessions including her handbag. She had no recollection the next day of what had transpired. She believed that she might have been drugged at some point. If this is your idea of a consenting adult then God help any women in the same state that you come across. It beggars belief how you can conflate that and the Schofield relationship.

How did Ched get off then?

[Lord Duckhunter]

1 hour ago, sadoldgit said:

Under the current law you cannot legally consent to sex if you are under the legal age of consent or if you are incapacitated by drink or drugs.

On the other hand Evans and his mate both had sexual relations with a women who was proven in court to be incapacitated by either drink or drugs and was, therefore, not in a state to consent to what transpired.

In your world it appear that the incapacitated woman was fair game, but not in the eyes of the law. Just to spell it out for you so that you fully understand. 

Believe it or not, you are not the arbiter of what is legal and what is illegal. Although you seem to think you are, pontificating from the moral high ground, you are actually only a bloke with an opinion. Luckily for us, people like you don’t decide somebody’s guilt, a court does. A court decided Evens and his mucker weren’t guilty and therefore 3 people indulged in consensual sex that night.
 

“Just to spell it out to you”, sending innocent men to prison because they’re Welsh, black, Jewish, white, or because you don’t like them,  is not the way a civilised country behaves. It’s 2023 FFS….

[cloggy saint]

1 hour ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

It’s 2023 FFS….

Says the man straight out of 1974  😂

[Weston Super Saint]

6 hours ago, aintforever said:

Do you think it's fair to label Ched a nonce as well then?

Not sure he knew the girl long enough for any kind of grooming to happen....

[Weston Super Saint]

3 hours ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Believe it or not, you are not the arbiter of what is legal and what is illegal. Although you seem to think you are, pontificating from the moral high ground, you are actually only a bloke with an opinion. Luckily for us, people like you don’t decide somebody’s guilt, a court does. A court decided Evens and his mucker weren’t guilty and therefore 3 people indulged in consensual sex that night.
 

“Just to spell it out to you”, sending innocent men to prison because they’re Welsh, black, Jewish, white, or because you don’t like them,  is not the way a civilised country behaves. It’s 2023 FFS….

Errrrrr....  I think you'll find the guy who was in charge of ordering paper and typing ribbons for the typing pool at the CPS is definitely qualified to be the arbiter of what is legal and illegal.

[Holmes_and_Watson]

4 hours ago, AlexLaw76 said:

How did Ched get off then?

It is from wiki, but...

"When the appellant [Ched Evans] was first asked what happened in room 14, he described in graphic detail the sexual behaviour of a woman who, on the prosecution case, would have been incapable of behaving in that way. If the jury rejected his account of her sexual behaviour, he had no defence. Two other men have described specific instances of her behaving in a very similar fashion with them, in the days before the alleged rape and in the days that followed. On each occasion she had been drinking, she is said to have instigated certain sexual activity, directed her sexual partner into certain positions, and used specific words of encouragement."

Details of a complainant's sexual history are not usually admissible, but there is an exception, reiterated (upheld) on appeal in the Law Reports, for evidence which is "so similar [to the defence's account] that the similarity cannot reasonably be explained as a coincidence"

Although I'm sure SOG wasn't influenced by it, the entry does say that The Guardian were not convinced, suggesting the new witnesses were fed information and that there were financial incentives for them. These claims were rejected by the jury.

[cloggy saint]

5 hours ago, AlexLaw76 said:

How did Ched get off then?

By fucking a drunk woman and have his mates film it.

[sadoldgit]

12 hours ago, Holmes_and_Watson said:

It is from wiki, but...

"When the appellant [Ched Evans] was first asked what happened in room 14, he described in graphic detail the sexual behaviour of a woman who, on the prosecution case, would have been incapable of behaving in that way. If the jury rejected his account of her sexual behaviour, he had no defence. Two other men have described specific instances of her behaving in a very similar fashion with them, in the days before the alleged rape and in the days that followed. On each occasion she had been drinking, she is said to have instigated certain sexual activity, directed her sexual partner into certain positions, and used specific words of encouragement."

Details of a complainant's sexual history are not usually admissible, but there is an exception, reiterated (upheld) on appeal in the Law Reports, for evidence which is "so similar [to the defence's account] that the similarity cannot reasonably be explained as a coincidence"

Although I'm sure SOG wasn't influenced by it, the entry does say that The Guardian were not convinced, suggesting the new witnesses were fed information and that there were financial incentives for them. These claims were rejected by the jury.

I don’t recall The Guardian comment but was working for the CPS at the time and although the case was prosecuted by a different district there was concern mentioned amongst our lawyers about the £50,000 reward put up by Evans’s future father in law for “new evidence” and yes, that information about the incident may have been fed to the two people who came forward.

Interesting that the same people who are wielding pitchforks about consensual sex between two male adults are perfectly comfortable when two men pick up an incapacitated 19 year old woman from a kebab shop, take her to a pre booked hotel room, use her for sexual gratification for them and their mates watching through the window and then slink out the fire escape. Classy.

My question is, would they be so laid back if Schofield had picked up an incapacitated 20 year old man from a kebab shop, taken him to a pre booked hotel room, had sexual relations with him and then quietly disappeared out of the fire escape?

[AlexLaw76]

27 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

I don’t recall The Guardian comment but was working for the CPS at the time and although the case was prosecuted by a different district there was concern mentioned amongst our lawyers about the £50,000 reward put up by Evans’s future father in law for “new evidence” and yes, that information about the incident may have been fed to the two people who came forward.

Interesting that the same people who are wielding pitchforks about consensual sex between two male adults are perfectly comfortable when two men pick up an incapacitated 19 year old woman from a kebab shop, take her to a pre booked hotel room, use her for sexual gratification for them and their mates watching through the window and then slink out the fire escape. Classy.

My question is, would they be so laid back if Schofield had picked up an incapacitated 20 year old man from a kebab shop, taken him to a pre booked hotel room, had sexual relations with him and then quietly disappeared out of the fire escape?

So, Ched is innocent then

Glad we cleared that up

[aintforever]

18 hours ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Where have I labelled PS a nonce? 

I never said you did, just asked a question.

I only asked because many on here seem to think it's OK to label Scofield a nonce or compare him to Saville when as you said - It’s exactly the same as Ched, consenting adults having sex. 

Edited 8 June, 2023 by aintforever

[Weston Super Saint]

1 hour ago, sadoldgit said:

I don’t recall The Guardian comment but was working for the CPS at the time and although the case was prosecuted by a different district there was concern mentioned amongst our lawyers about the £50,000 reward put up by Evans’s future father in law for “new evidence” and yes, that information about the incident may have been fed to the two people who came forward.

Can you provide evidence for this - if not it makes your moaning for the past week and demanding evidence from everyone else look pathetic.  

[RedArmy]

42 minutes ago, aintforever said:

I never said you did, just asked a question.

I only asked because many on here seem to think it's OK to label Scofield a nonce or compare him to Saville when as you said - It’s exactly the same as Ched, consenting adults having sex. 

They are two completely different sets of circumstances, that might have something to do with it. 
 

Ched met the woman on a night out and slept with her the same evening. 
 

PS had known the lad since he was 11 and there is a possibility he was groomed. 
 

Not really that difficult to understand is it? 
 

 

[Lord Duckhunter]

1 hour ago, sadoldgit said:

 

My question is, would they be so laid back if Schofield had picked up an incapacitated 20 year old man from a kebab shop, taken him to a pre booked hotel room, had sexual relations with him and then quietly disappeared out of the fire escape?

It depends if a court decided it was consensual or rape. If it was consensual it would be none of my business & I couldn’t give a shiny shite what they got up to.
 

Provided it’s legal it’s up to individuals how they get their kicks. If a bird gets hers from letting a couple of blokes give her a good seeing to after a few bevies, that’s up to her. You seem to struggle with the difference between bad behaviour & illegal behaviour, which is surprising from a top dog at the CPS. No wonder the justice system is fucked if you’re the calibre of people working within it. 

Edited 8 June, 2023 by Lord Duckhunter

[The Cat]

I like the change of thread title. Is Ched Evans suddenly a left field replacement on the GMB sofa?

[aintforever]

1 hour ago, RedArmy said:

They are two completely different sets of circumstances, that might have something to do with it. 
 

Ched met the woman on a night out and slept with her the same evening. 
 

PS had known the lad since he was 11 and there is a possibility he was groomed. 
 

Not really that difficult to understand is it? 
 

 

It's Duckhunter that said they were the same, not me. Both were consensual sex between two adults.

One other difference was in the Ched Evans case one claimed they were raped, in the Scofield case no-one has claimed they were groomed.

 

[Lighthouse]

2 hours ago, The Cat said:

I like the change of thread title. Is Ched Evans suddenly a left field replacement on the GMB sofa?

They wanted Rolf but owing to circumstances beyond their control…

[egg]

5 hours ago, aintforever said:

One other difference was in the Ched Evans case one claimed they were raped, in the Scofield case no-one has claimed they were groomed.

 

But most right minded people think that's probably what happened. 

[aintforever]

7 minutes ago, egg said:

But most right minded people think that's probably what happened. 

Or just most people who think like you?

[hypochondriac]

4 minutes ago, aintforever said:

Or just most people who think like you?

I don't think it's for Schofield to decide if he groomed the lad or not, of course he's going to say it wasn't because it's in his interest to say that. Personally the imbalance of power and the friendly relationship when he was a boy and he was in his 40s and 50s is at the very least extremely creepy and does strongly suggest some form of grooming given that he'd got him a job working closely with him. 

Even if Schofield is entirely innocent of that charge, I think he's a bit of a narcissist and a scumbag given what he's subjected his wife to after being married to her for so long. 

[Turkish]

8 minutes ago, aintforever said:

Or just most people who think like you?

Yes right minded 

[egg]

8 minutes ago, aintforever said:

Or just most people who think like you?

Exactly, right minded people. Not the people quick to defend him, despite the bloody obvious. 

[aintforever]

4 minutes ago, egg said:

Exactly, right minded people. Not the people quick to defend him, despite the bloody obvious. 

People who prefer to actually see evidence before labelling him a peado or comparing him to someone who rapes kids you mean?

Edited 8 June, 2023 by aintforever

[egg]

1 minute ago, aintforever said:

People who prefer to actually see evidence before labelling him a peado or comparing him to someone who rapes kids you mean?

Not sure how that relates to me mate. Please copy and paste where I've labelled him a paedo, or compared him to anyone. Thank you. 

[Turkish]

5 minutes ago, egg said:

Exactly, right minded people. Not the people quick to defend him, despite the bloody obvious. 

Or people who regularly confuse themselves tying themselves up in knots all the time trying to keep up with what they think people want them to say

[Turkish]

2 minutes ago, egg said:

Not sure how that relates to me mate. Please copy and paste where I've labelled him a paedo, or compared him to anyone. Thank you. 

He keeps saying this but no one on here has called him that. Like I said, tying himself up in knots

[aintforever]

1 minute ago, egg said:

Not sure how that relates to me mate. Please copy and paste where I've labelled him a paedo, or compared him to anyone. Thank you. 

I didn't say you said it, it's been the general theme of this thread. Yet I get accused of defending the scumbag because I'm actually looking at the evidence and not part of the rabid lynch mob.

[egg]

3 minutes ago, aintforever said:

People who prefer to actually see evidence before labelling him a peado or comparing him to someone who rapes kids you mean?

The evidence is there if you open your eyes, ears and mind.

Met and friended him as a kid, got him the job he wanted, made the first move on him, went to all sorts of lengths to lie about it, and conceded that the lad is (and undoubtedly always was) vulnerable. 

Sure, the adult sex was consensual, but you've gotta be some sort of idiot to gloss over the events beforehand. 

[egg]

1 minute ago, aintforever said:

I didn't say you said it, it's been the general theme of this thread. Yet I get accused of defending the scumbag because I'm actually looking at the evidence and not part of the rabid lynch mob.

You have defended him. It's pretty obvious on the balance of probabilities what's happened here. 

[Turkish]

3 minutes ago, aintforever said:

I didn't say you said it, it's been the general theme of this thread. Yet I get accused of defending the scumbag because I'm actually looking at the evidence and not part of the rabid lynch mob.

10 times you said he hadn’t done anything illegal. 10 frigging times. If that’s not defending him what is?

[aintforever]

Just now, egg said:

The evidence is there if you open your eyes, ears and mind.

Met and friended him as a kid, got him the job he wanted, made the first move on him, went to all sorts of lengths to lie about it, and conceded that the lad is (and undoubtedly always was) vulnerable. 

Sure, the adult sex was consensual, but you've gotta be some sort of idiot to gloss over the events beforehand. 

There is no evidence out in the open that contradicts Shofield's version of what happened, most of what you said just explains how they met. The Other man is free to make a complaint and give his side if he was groomed as a child.

[egg]

4 minutes ago, Turkish said:

He keeps saying this but no one on here has called him that. Like I said, tying himself up in knots

 

3 minutes ago, aintforever said:

I didn't say you said it, it's been the general theme of this thread. Yet I get accused of defending the scumbag because I'm actually looking at the evidence and not part of the rabid lynch mob.

Apparently it's been said Del. I've just read the thread back and the posts must have vaporised 🤔

[Turkish]

4 minutes ago, egg said:

The evidence is there if you open your eyes, ears and mind.

Met and friended him as a kid, got him the job he wanted, made the first move on him, went to all sorts of lengths to lie about it, and conceded that the lad is (and undoubtedly always was) vulnerable. 

Sure, the adult sex was consensual, but you've gotta be some sort of idiot to gloss over the events beforehand. 

There is the answer…

[egg]

Just now, aintforever said:

There is no evidence out in the open that contradicts Shofield's version of what happened, most of what you said just explains how they met. The Other man is free to make a complaint and give his side if he was groomed as a child.

That's the point...his own version. Met him as a kid...friended him...got him a job (how sweet and selfless of him)...made the first move in the dressing room...called him 'vulnerable'.

That's a dot the dot that a blind man could connect. 

[aintforever]

Just now, Turkish said:

10 times you said he hadn’t done anything illegal. 10 frigging times. If that’s not defending him what is?

Just stating facts. I have said all along I think he is a scumbag and in the wrong. Just don't think comparing him to Saville and all the other shit is fair.

[egg]

6 minutes ago, aintforever said:

Just stating facts. I have said all along I think he is a scumbag and in the wrong. Just don't think comparing him to Saville and all the other shit is fair.

What do you mean by "in the wrong"? Having an affair, or more than that? 

Again, you're making up what people have said. What he's done doesn't need comparison - it's wrongful behaviour in its own right. 

[Turkish]

6 minutes ago, aintforever said:

Just stating facts. I have said all along I think he is a scumbag and in the wrong. Just don't think comparing him to Saville and all the other shit is fair.

In the real world where you have to think for yourself you’re often required to see beyond just stating facts to discern events. 

[aintforever]

Just now, Turkish said:

In the real world where you have to think for yourself you’re often required to see beyond just stating facts to discern events. 

Whereas in your world facts don't seem to matter.

[aintforever]

1 minute ago, egg said:

What do you mean by "in the wrong"? Having an affair, or more than that? 

Again, you're making up what people have said. What he's done doesn't need comparison - it's wrongful behaviour in its own right. 

Having an affair and having it off with someone junior to him at work.

Both wrong but both a million miles from raping kids.

[Turkish]

3 minutes ago, aintforever said:

Whereas in your world facts don't seem to matter.

Making stuff up again. Like I said, tying yourself up in knots.

[Weston Super Saint]

13 minutes ago, aintforever said:

Just stating facts. I have said all along I think he is a scumbag and in the wrong. Just don't think comparing him to Saville and all the other shit is fair.

Horseshit. You've said all along that he's done nothing illegal so he's well and truly in the clear, what a marvelous chap he is.