Not Guilty does not mean Innocent

Ched Evans this week had his conviction for rape over turned, proving at last he is an innocent man, wrongly accused, wrongly convicted, and wrongly imprisoned. Wrong.

What definitely did happen is Ched Evans, instead of going home to his girlfriend, got a text from his buddy, and went to a hotel room to have sex with a drunk girl he had never even spoken to before. Whilst the adulterous aspect isn’t relevant to the criminal outcome, it does give an indication to the calibre of this talented young man. Did Ched ponder over his decision to go meet his friend? No. Did they engage in a foreplay, for want of a better word, about the moralistic dilemma it would put them both in? No. He got a four-word text then jumped in a taxi with a semi-on. To me, this suggests that this is not the first time this has happened and again, whilst not relevant to the criminal outcome to the case, does once more, give a clear indication as to the moral fibre of this talented, young, wealthy, individual.

From what I’ve read, the girl involved doesn’t sound the classiest of women, in fact evidence that helped ‘free’ Ched Evans involves statements from two men who slept with her on consecutive evenings. These witnesses for the defence concurred that on both occasions the girl demanded them to bend her over and “fuck her harder” – a phrase Ched remembers well from that evening. This was used as evidence to suggest the girl had in fact consented. What’s missing from this sentence however is the name “Ched”. “Fuck me harder Ched”… she didn’t say that did she? Was she even aware who was behind her? Then did she deserve to be treated like a piece of meat then smeared on the internet by Ched’s fiancé’s family?

The fear is this will start a lot of victim-bashing about girls who cry rape and ruin lives. What should be made abundantly clear is this girl never once said she was raped by Ched Evans. Her story throughout this entire debacle is she woke up naked in a hotel room and has no recollection of the evening. Having investigated CCTV, the police and CPS decided that there was adequate evidence to suggest a rape had occurred and proceeded accordingly.

If Ched’s defence is 100% accurate and he came in the room, asked if he could join in, she said yes, he ‘fucked her harder’ then skulked out leaving her to literally pass out naked in and wake up in a strange hotel room, does this make him any less innocent? Not in my books.

I can accept the reasons why Ched’s conviction was overturned but being found not guilty does not mean he is innocent.


Note: check out The Secret Barrister for a good overview of the facts regarding his overturned conviction




Knox Knox… Part Two

Okay, so I said previously that I had seen a BBC documentary on Amanda Knox and thought she was totally guilty… well I’ve now watched the Netflix programme too. And my opinion hasn’t changed.

Whilst I can appreciate the reasons why her guilty verdict was overturned (the possible contamination of DNA evidence, the lack of organisation and professionalism of the Perugia investigation, the pressurised statements, the media witch hunt), I can’t help but still feel like this is murder equivalent of getting away with a speeding fine because the camera that caught you hadn’t been re-calibrated in a timely fashion – Knox’s solicitor is basically Mr Loophole.

I think she and Sollecito tried to get Kercher to have kinky sex and when she said no she encouraged Sollecito to kill her. Rudy Guede was having a massive shit during this and legged it when he came out and saw the scene. I don’t think he saw who did it but made up seeing Knox when it was clear she was involved.

Whilst I have never been pressurised by Italian police, I find it hard to believe that this would lead me to change my story when I know it to be the truth. Knox said she saw Lumumba when she probably saw Guede briefly after they had killed Kercher so thought she was setting him up perfectly. When she got this wrong she had to back track her story and say she wasn’t really there after all – despite Sollecito now saying Knox hadn’t stayed the night after all.

But the biggest thing that makes me doubt her innocence is the fact she claims she came home, saw her door wide open, possible break in, and instead of ringing the police, she jumped in the shower – ignoring the blood in the sink, the blood on the bath mat, and the massive dump in the toilet.

Will she kill again? No. Is she a threat to society? No, I don’t think so. Will her next boyfriend be found in a cupboard asphyxiwanking? Quite likely. The point I want to make, and one that I wish to evidence in my next post also, is not guilty does not mean innocent.

Amanda Knox is, once and for all, not guilty and I accept this. There were errors in her case, evidence against her is inadmissible, and there isn’t enough to prosecute her. However, this does not mean she is innocent. This will never be proven.