Manchester United Message Board
It seems he's being questioned about the alleged rape.I sincerely hope he's cleared of any charges.But if proved guilty i utterly condemn his actions and he should be sacked.This topic is deleted.
I'm not disputing that if they lied they should be punished Ian.
The underlying principle in determining guilt, or lack of guilt, is "reasonable doubt" not 100% certainty.
Our criminal legal system operates on an adversarial basis using burden of proof/reasonable doubt as the basis for judgement - not 100% certainty. Therefore a not guitly verdict (whereby the prosecution has not proved that the defendant is guilty beyond all reasonable doubt) is not the same as saying "he didn't do it".
In fact, as far as I'm aware, only in Common Law (case law where legal precedents are set and used as guides in reaching a verdict) is innocence actually "certified" by a court.
In 2003 it was also established that people can be re-tried for Criminal Offences when there is "new and compelling evidence".
I'm not advocating or saying any of it is fair. But that's the way it is.
I agree - whoever lies should be punished - but it doesn't always work out like that. I'll say it again... it's a grey area.
If you still find issue... take it up with the Law Society.
I think that accuser is probably after money and attention, and her BF is probably a jealous twit. Think they do need to be locked up.
IThe Times has reported Fergie has now banned all Christmas parties in the wake of this incident. What do you think of that. A soucre at the club apparently told the paper that as far as the gaffer is concerned, the sort of night thay had on Wednesday will be a thing of the past. What do you guys think?
Sorry ian...After reading my post again, it does sound a little confusing. but what is the law if not confusing..
An acquittal is an end judgement which releases the accused....The opposite of an acquittal is a conviction.
So you are correct..When found not guilty, you are acquitted.
There is a minute difference between the acquittal verdicts of "not guilty" and "not proven". .
With the not proven verdict, the acquittal does not give rise to the double jeopardy rule, which means that the accused can be re tried at a later date
if new evidence comes to light.....
With the not guilty verdict , the acquittal (The judgment) does evoke the double jeopardy rule, protecting the accused from further trial for the same crime in the same level of court.....
I believe i left out some important terminology in my original post which resulted in some confusion..
Hope this clears things up....
If the law states that an accused is innocent until proved guilty, then a not guilty verdict must carry with it the presumption of innocence, otherwise every person charged with a crime would always have the stigma of the public thinking they were guilty, but the prosecutors just could not prove it conclusivley...
Not guilty is a judgement which presumes innocence, due to lack of evidence to prove guilt... you can be tried again for the same crime if new evidence comes to light, and can be found guilty..
However, if you are acquitted of a crime, it does not state guilt or innocence, furthermore, you cannot be tried again for the same crime....
TODAYS PAPER REPORT STATES THAT EVANS HAD A SCUFFLE WITH THE WOMANS BOYFRIEND AND THAT SHE WENT TO A ROOM WITH EVANS AFTER SHE HAD DANCED WITH HIM WHEN HE POUNCED. why would a 26 year old woman go to a room with a 19 year old lad whom she had just danced with, knowing that her boyfriend was in the same hotel and had indeed had a scuffle with evans. wont take long for detectives to work out i think. chances are she got caught and cried rape to cover up. if im wrong i will apologise sincerely but i think its a case of cry wolf.
Hi MU. I wasn't referring to this specific case but criminal law in general – there seems to be some confusion here as some people think that being found “not guilty” is the same as being proven to be innocent. I'm certainly not assuming Evans' guilt and I hope that the lad is genuinely innocent (for all concerned). However, no one is ever found to be "innocent" in English Criminal law. And that can be damaging to one's reputation as many will assume that there is no smoke withut fire...
There's no "innocent" verdict delivered by a jury, only “not guilty”, which isn't always the same thing…
Also,rape is a very difficult crime to prove, beyond reasonable doubt, and 94% of rape prosecutions result in a not guilty verdict – I doubt however that 94% are “innocent”.
Like a said, a grey area.
- View More Messages