"the fact remains that he still took advantage of a hopelessly inebriated woman"

But isn't the point that he does not accept that he did because he is saying that she consented and was not hopelessly drunk. And in fact what footage there is available does not suggest she was as hopelessly drunk as portrayed.

Some people can drink a lot and still be coherent and lucid. people have different tolerances. We do silly things when we are drunk. Probably most on here have pulled or even slept with someone we wouldn't normally due to the old "beer goggles" and regretted it the next day. Were we all sexually assaulted? Judgment on both sides can go out the window.

The point though about the apology is really IF he genuinely believes he's innocent then he is not going to apologise. If he did apologise just to be allowed to play again then it would be pretty meaningless anyway.

He's going down the one route left to him to try and clear his name. Everyone should let that process run its course and then make a decision. Ultimately the decision to be made is whether we as a society believe there are certain serious criminal offences that are so serious that, as well as the sentence imposed on the offender by the court, they should then be precluded from holding certain jobs/public roles forevermore. Or should they only be prevented from doing so if they issue a quick apology? Personally i think it should be a matter of choice for the employer in these circumstances and they will then have to live with the consequences of their decision.

Posted By: Jim on November 18th 2014 at 13:12:37

Message Thread

Reply to Message

In order to add a post to the WotB Message Board you must be a registered WotB user.

If you are not yet registered then please visit the registration page. You should ensure that their browser is setup to accept cookies.

Log in