A law firm has said that it will continue to sponsor Oldham Athletic if the club employs convicted rapist Ched Evans.

Evans has been in talks with Oldham Athletic after Sheffield United walked away from a deal when several of its patrons quit in protest (though not stand sponsor Kennedys). Two Oldham sponsors, a gutterer and Mecca Bingo, said they would cut ties with the club if it hired Evans. However north west firm CM solicitors, which boasts experience in "sports reputation management", said it would continue to sponsor the team's shirts "whatever the outcome".

    CM Solicitors, testing whether all publicity is good publicity

Evans maintains that he is innocent, although tens of thousands of people have signed petitions arguing that as a convicted rapist who is unrepentant he should not be employed as a footballer, where he could be seen as a role model. A website run by his family is currently under investigation by police for including CCTV footage of the victim entering the Premier Inn where the rape took place under the heading, "judge for yourself".

In a statement illustrated with a giant, furious-looking owl (Oldham's emblem), CM Solicitors said, "Whilst there are many difficult considerations with regards to the matter, we believe that this is solely a matter for the club and we are confident that they will make the right decision in all of the circumstances". It added, "Whatever the outcome we are and will remain proud sponsors of the club going forward".
Tip Off ROF

Comments

Anonymous 09 January 15 18:46

I guess that's what you'd expect from a firm which has no values on its website.

Anonymous 09 January 15 20:35

Perhaps they're hoping Mr. Evans will retain them to manage his reputation. They might start with that website...

Anonymous 10 January 15 15:50

Well done to them for showing some backbone. Evans is the victim of a witch hunt. Everyone should read the judgment before jumping to conclusions.

1. He's innocent IMO.

2. Even if he's guilty, whether the radfems like it not there are different levels/type of rape, not to mention:

a) this incident comes at the very bottom of the scale of seriousness when it comes to rape; and

b) he deserves a second chance, he's undergone his sentence.

Anonymous 12 January 15 01:23

Dear anon 15:50

I was intrigued by the concept of different levels/types of rape. Do please elaborate.

I would also be keen to know what makes you better placed than the courts to determine Evans's guilt; perhaps you have knowledge of some key facts of which the court was not made aware?

Anonymous 13 January 15 11:59

Anon, 15.50: What are the "different levels" of rape? I'm genuinely curious. Do let us know what "types" and "levels" of rape are acceptable. I was under the impression that all rape is an abhorrent crime and "radfems" means "radical feminists", rather than "the courts of law". Would like to know where I've gone wrong.

Anonymous 15 January 15 08:30

Careful anonymous 15.50, you've raised the ire of the thought police (who apparently think that infallible "courts" rather than fallible members of the public determine guilt or innocence).

Anonymous 15 January 15 11:37

One assumes Messrs RadFem and Thoughtpolice rape apologists haven't heard of the rule of law. God help us if they are actually lawyers.

Anonymous 16 January 15 02:25

Assuming that most of us are lawyers on the site I find it somewhat bizarre that the poster at 08:30 seems to think the courts are some kind of opaque, sinister and arbitrary body that claims to determine things like "guilt" and "innocence". Well yeah. That's what the courts are there to do. A person who is found guilty by the courts of England and Wales is legally guilty. That's a cornerstone of our justice system, not some kind of Kafkaesque nightmare in which you are appalled to find yourself judged by someone other than your mates (because your mates understand that you're a good bloke all in all, it's just that sometimes things just get a bit out of hands, eh lads?)