People need to understand the potential implications of their actions and situations they find themselves in.
If you get so drunk that you cannot remember things or fully control your actions then you have to understand that you are placing yourself in a tricky position.
The same goes for having a one night stand with a footballer - a profession that is known to have a fair bit of sexually promiscuous conduct.
These two things were both choices she made and thus she needs to understand the situation she put herself in.
Now I'm not saying enjoying yourself makes crime ok. But it does make it makes less likely you'll be able to have a say in stopping it if you have willingly diminished your senses.
The knock on effect of that is in cases like this where there is clear ambiguity, you also have to accept that further scrutiny will be needed (ie accounts from ex partners) to establish evidence. So if you want a fully functional justice system and you choose to live your life in a way where you diminish your ability to give evidence, then whatever method is needed to gather evidence is appropriate.
You can't live life "out in the open everywhere" then expect complete privacy when you accuse someone of a crime.
I actually think/hope this will make people realise that ignorance is not a defence and we have responsibility for our own lives and actions.
Evans is lucky he has the profile and money to mount such defences.
If he was poor I bet he'd still be banged up and also have a very tough time getting a job in the future - such is the downside of the rehabilitation of offenders act.
Sent from my Nexus 5X using
glory-glory.co.uk mobile app