R v Evans
| R v Evans and McDonald | |
|---|---|
 |
|
| Court | Crown Court |
| Full case name | Regina v Chedwyn Michael Evans and Clayton Rodney McDonald [2012] EWCA Crim 2559 |
| Decided | 20 April 2012 |
| Case history | |
| Subsequent action(s) |
|
| Court membership | |
| Judge(s) sitting | Merfyn Hughes |
R v Evans and McDonald was the criminal prosecution of two footballers, Ched Evans and Clayton McDonald, who were jointly accused of the rape of a woman. On 20 April 2012, Evans was convicted and sentenced to five years imprisonment. McDonald was acquitted. Several people were later fined after naming the woman on Twitter and other social media websites.
Evans served two and a half years in prison. After his release, his conviction was overturned on appeal, and he was subsequently found not guilty in a retrial.
On 30 May 2011, Wales international and Sheffield United player Ched Evans and another person were arrested on suspicion of the sexual assault of a woman in Rhyl, Denbighshire, following an incident at a Premier Inn in Rhuddlan on the same day. On 26 July 2011, Evans and another professional footballer, Clayton McDonald, were charged with rape, which they both denied.
On 8 August 2011, McDonald and Ched Evans appeared before Prestatyn Magistrates' Court charged with rape. The defendants were released on bail and did not comment on the matter, but McDonald told Port Vale's website that he "strongly refute[d]" the allegation. Evans also issued a statement on Sheffield United's website stating that he "strenuously denie[d] the charge". McDonald and Evans entered pleas of not guilty at the Crown Court at Caernarfon on 14 October, and were remanded on bail.
The trial took place at the Crown Court at Caernarfon in April 2012. The woman, a 19-year-old waitress, said she had drunk two glasses of wine, four double vodkas with lemonade, and a shot of sambuca. As a result, she told police she "felt tipsy but not out of control". However, she woke up naked and confused in a hotel bed with no memory of anything since leaving a dancing session with friends the previous night. She suspected that her memory loss was due to a spiked drink. Samples taken the following day showed no alcohol, although the prosecution argued this was due to normal elimination over time. The samples did show traces of cocaine and cannabis, which she denied taking on the night of the incident. The prosecution argument was that the woman was too intoxicated to have consented.
...
Wikipedia