Really interesting story out of the England. http://www.theguardian.com/football/201 ... -rape-case Cliff Notes version: Talented young soccer player and his teammate have sex with a drunk girl they met out. Court deems she was too drunk to give consent, one player, Ched Evans, is convicted and given a 5 year sentence, the other player is acquitted. He served half his sentence and was released. Now he's being offered a new contract by his former club, Sheffield United. Naturally, people are in an uproar. Its interesting for a lot of reasons. First, obviously we have plenty of criminal cases involving athletes in the US, but most don't serve substantial prison time, and if they do, they are often released after a point in which their skills have diminished/past their prime. Evans is still 25, in the prime of his career athletically. Also, would this uproar be occurring if he was in jail for those 2.5 years due to assault in a bar fight or the like? Is the sex crime nature of his record the main reason for moral outrage? The stickiest portion of it all is the inconsistencies within the trial and conviction itself. He had sex with the victim, separately, after his teammate had sex with her, yet the teammate was not found guilt of rape. Witness testimony from hotel staff had deemed the girl drunk but coherent and making logical statements. Her initial foray to the police was due to her reporting her purse stolen and an inability to remember portions of the night. FOCUS: Discuss the situation. Having served his time, should he be able to pursue his career again? MODS, I dont want it to get too contentious as rape discussions often do, but there have been thoughtful editorials around the unfortunate nature of it all and how, right or wrong, situations like this occur with no bad intent all the time without prosecution.