Thanks for the feedback mate. I have never used the word "bribe" and that would be an unfair statement to make. I've widely read that his witnesses have been offered substantial sums of money. If thats wrong I'll happily take it back.
What I will say about the two new witnesses, is I have no idea why their evidence has even been admitted, never mind formed the basis of a re-trial. There is a law that prevents evidence being presented about past sexual behaviour accept in "exceptional circumstances". This is for good reason, not only does it lead to a horrible culture of humiliating women on the stand, but more importantly it has no relevance to the trial. I have no idea what the "exceptional" circumstances were to allow them to be heard, never mind be grounds for re-trial. It is unbelievable and I would love to know whoever granted grounds for the re-trials explanation on this basis and their explanation. I eagerly await this. At no point would I suggest they have been bribed, but it is legitimate to question said "exceptional circumstances".
I have had a look over some of the statements from the original trial. You are right to pick me up on that. I misrepresented that slightly. Evans didn't say he penetrated her while she was unconscious. He accepted that he penetrated her while not considering consent. This was the basis of the prosecution, not the woman in question.
I am very alarmed at some of the rhetoric in the aftermath of this. Evans has lost his ability to play football which has been awful for him. However we have seen people like Ennis being condemned on this site for refusing to "vilify" the woman in question. We should be under no illusions what is meant by the term "vilify" in this context.
The woman has had to move 5 times for threats of violence, rape and murder put towards her. This is because friends of Ched Evans decided to name her. Did he have anything to do with this? Social media is full of quotes saying "she deserves to be raped". For what? She is accused of lying, yet she couldn't have lied as she did;t remember what happened, he got convicted on the basis of his own statements.
So I put it back to you, you have quoted two of my posts which I have answered and clarified. I will ask you, what have you got against me challenging the sense in "vilifying" a woman. Do you think this is an acceptable course of action. Should my girlfriend be vilified because the police wouldn't pursue a case against the man who raped her and her little brother when they were children? What is it the lynch mob want?