Former Sheffield United patron Charlie Webster has quit her role at the club after convicted rapist Ched Evans was invited back to train with the football team after being released from prison earlier this year.

Ched Evans / Credit: North Wales Police

Ched Evans / Credit: North Wales Police

In a controversial move the club have decided that Ched should be allowed back to work, and so Charlie has made the bold move to step down from her position, receiving huge support from women's rights campaigners.

As a survivor of sexual assault herself, Charlie has made public her disagreement with allowing Evans to play again, saying the football club had not acknowledged the extremity of his crime.

Speaking on Newsnight this week she said that her decision was made because she's of the opinion that Evans shouldn't be allowed to represent the community.

She explained: "He's not just going into a job, he's bandied as a role model and we cheer him on as a role model, and he's influencing the next generation of young men who are currently still making their decisions on how to treat women and what sexual mutual consent is".

Adding that she hopes her stepping down makes an impact, she went on to say: "I've spoken quite a few times now and now I'm here speaking to you. I'm trying to, I suppose, give victims of sexual abuse a voice because I think in this day and age, in 2014, we're a rich society - rich in education as well - and still there isn't an education on mutual consent."

Not alone in how she feels, over 150,000 people have signed an online petition demanding that Sheffield United refuse to sign him, but some fans have hit out at Charlie through social media after the news of her resignation broke.

One abusive tweeter said that Charlie was a "silly bitch" and another said "Women have no place in football".

Charlie did go on to tweet herself that the large majority of correspondence had however been positive, and noted she was "overwhelmed" because of it.


by for www.femalefirst.co.uk
find me on and follow me on


Tagged in



  1. by Andy Mac 12th Nov 2014 15:02

    "Women have no place in football" ? Surprised that muppet can write that with his knuckles dragging along the floor ?

  2. by Chudleigh 12th Nov 2014 15:53

    The words "mob justice" were used in reference to this matter. Whoever muttered them may turn out to be right. I'm interested to hear what happens with his appeal.

  3. by Winston Smith 12th Nov 2014 16:03

    The media lit the fuse with this one and then sat back and warmed their hands on the resulting firestorm. They created the story, asked people to be "outraged"...everybody duly obliged and it goes full circle because the story then feeds on itself and the media have more to report on. It was obvious right from the very start.

  4. by I am he 12th Nov 2014 17:04

    so lets never ever give anybody who has commited crime and been punished another chance

  5. by Red head mum 12th Nov 2014 17:42

    Forget for a moment he is famous and appealing the conviction and as much as i dont like rapists i fear this is setting a dangerous precedent where no conviction and sentence spent is no longer recognised and rehabilitation, remorse and rebuilding from either a drunken mistake to a premeditated act is permitted, where do we draw the line with guilt and unemployability with other offences? if we remove all hope from sexual assaults, bank robberies etc would the accused be as well just murdering all the witnesses as any perception of societies sense of fairness and or access to fair trial or appeal to conviction is removed?

  6. by I_Need_a_Girlfriend 12th Nov 2014 23:01

    I am he (FF Visitor) wrote:so lets never ever give anybody who has commited crime and been punished another chance



    Yeah, Gary Glitter has served his time people should go to his concerts :roll:

  7. by Red head mum 12th Nov 2014 23:08

    I_Need_a_Girlfriend wrote:
    I am he (FF Visitor) wrote:so lets never ever give anybody who has commited crime and been punished another chance



    Yeah, Gary Glitter has served his time people should go to his concerts :roll:

    He has had plenty of chances and shown he is not to be trusted perhaps sex crimes against children should be classed as a mental illness and detained in state hospitals such as Carstairs? but we must give others the chance to prove they are part of society again

  8. by I_Need_a_Girlfriend 13th Nov 2014 00:48

    A football club represents the community and you would not want a rapist representing your community.

  9. by C.G. 13th Nov 2014 01:05

    I feel more sorry for his victim than anyone else.

  10. by kinghelfer 13th Nov 2014 01:26

    I_Need_a_Girlfriend wrote:
    I am he (FF Visitor) wrote:so lets never ever give anybody who has commited crime and been punished another chance



    Yeah, Gary Glitter has served his time people should go to his concerts :roll:


    :clap: :wink:

  11. by Chudleigh 13th Nov 2014 03:55

    Here comes the mob again..... All paediatricians had better watch out.

  12. by Starshine 14th Nov 2014 06:17

    2 key issues about Evans here.

    He was convicted of a vile crime and sent to prison but he remains 100% un-repentant.

    How many of our male FF members who subscribe to this site, would, in similar circumstances have their job held open for them when they returned from prison?

  13. by Starshine 14th Nov 2014 06:22

    3 key issues about Evans here.

    He was found guilty in a court of law and convicted of a vile crime and sent to prison but he remains 100% un-repentant.

    How many of our male FF members who subscribe to this site, would, in similar circumstances have their job held open for them when they returned from prison?

    How many parents of youth team players would want their sons associating with a convicted rapist?

  14. by Chudleigh 14th Nov 2014 07:13

    Starshine wrote:3 key issues about Evans here.

    He was found guilty in a court of law and convicted of a vile crime and sent to prison but he remains 100% un-repentant.

    How many of our male FF members who subscribe to this site, would, in similar circumstances have their job held open for them when they returned from prison?

    How many parents of youth team players would want their sons associating with a convicted rapist?


    I am not a personal supporter of this man but from the outset I have felt that this has been fuelled by visceral spite and envy rather than reason.
    He is a footballer, not a social worker.
    He has served his sentence, at what point are we going to suggest that he has repaid his debt to society. Or should we have a new rule for people like him?
    He has maintained his innocence and an appeal is to be heard. If that appeal finds in his favour, then the band will play.
    If I believed I was innocent, wild horses wouldn't drag an apology out of me, not to the end of time.

    King Mob.

  15. by I_Need_a_Girlfriend 14th Nov 2014 10:53

    Chudleigh wrote:
    Starshine wrote:3 key issues about Evans here.

    He was found guilty in a court of law and convicted of a vile crime and sent to prison but he remains 100% un-repentant.

    How many of our male FF members who subscribe to this site, would, in similar circumstances have their job held open for them when they returned from prison?

    How many parents of youth team players would want their sons associating with a convicted rapist?


    I am not a personal supporter of this man but from the outset I have felt that this has been fuelled by visceral spite and envy rather than reason.
    He is a footballer, not a social worker.
    He has served his sentence, at what point are we going to suggest that he has repaid his debt to society. Or should we have a new rule for people like him?
    He has maintained his innocence and an appeal is to be heard. If that appeal finds in his favour, then the band will play.
    If I believed I was innocent, wild horses wouldn't drag an apology out of me, not to the end of time.



    You are naive Chuds

    A professional footballer has a role in society, his crimes brings the game into disrepute.
    He should have been sacked immediately, sued by his club for and be banned by FIFA. A similar think would happen I was convicted of such a crime by my workplace.
    Maybe he can get a job in ASDA stacking shelves and build a career out of that or any other career where he will not be supported by the public and held up as a role model to kids.

    The fact is he is a convicted rapist and until that changes we will deal with those facts.

    :roll:

  16. by kinghelfer 14th Nov 2014 11:41

    Chudleigh wrote:
    Starshine wrote:3 key issues about Evans here.

    He was found guilty in a court of law and convicted of a vile crime and sent to prison but he remains 100% un-repentant.

    How many of our male FF members who subscribe to this site, would, in similar circumstances have their job held open for them when they returned from prison?

    How many parents of youth team players would want their sons associating with a convicted rapist?


    I am not a personal supporter of this man but from the outset I have felt that this has been fuelled by visceral spite and envy rather than reason.
    He is a footballer, not a social worker.
    He has served his sentence, at what point are we going to suggest that he has repaid his debt to society. Or should we have a new rule for people like him?
    He has maintained his innocence and an appeal is to be heard. If that appeal finds in his favour, then the band will play.
    If I believed I was innocent, wild horses wouldn't drag an apology out of me, not to the end of time.


    I admire the strength of your convictions Chuds but who would employ a convicted rapist? How many jobs could you just go back to? How would that be seen by the public.? Few other crimes can elicit such a powerful, emotional response. I think the mob will win on this, hopefully it will be the media/public mob because if it isn't, It'll be the mob in a bar late one night when he is living the footballer lifstyle.... :|

  17. by C.G. 14th Nov 2014 12:13

    It is part of the punishment, whether you approve or not. If I was convicted of anything I would lose my business and probably have to take any work I could get on my return from prison. Yes he is appealing and if his conviction is over turned, fair enough. But it hasn't been get, and if he truly is guilty, what he is putting his victim through by talking to the media and appealing makes him even worse.

  18. by kinghelfer 14th Nov 2014 12:29

    I wonder why he didn't appeal while he was in prison....? I mean - why serve a jail term and then appeal when you get out...:whistle:

  19. by WTF? 14th Nov 2014 18:18

    I'm surprised his personal web site is allowed to say the things it does:

  20. by I_Need_a_Girlfriend 14th Nov 2014 19:25

    WTF? wrote:I'm surprised his personal web site is allowed to say the things it does: It is called freedom of speech.

  21. by Aqua 14th Nov 2014 23:48

    Just spent some time looking at the website. She didn't look very drunk in the CCTV footage :?

  22. by WTF? 15th Nov 2014 01:01

    Aqua wrote:Just spent some time looking at the website. She didn't look very drunk in the CCTV footage :?

    I know... God knows what the truth of the matter is. But he was convicted,

  23. by C.G. 15th Nov 2014 01:06

    If she wasn't that drunk, does it make it worse or better....... :?:

  24. by Aqua 15th Nov 2014 01:08

    Make what worse or better?

  25. by I_Need_a_Girlfriend 15th Nov 2014 01:09

    Aqua wrote:Just spent some time looking at the website. She didn't look very drunk in the CCTV footage :?



    What I don't get if she can't remember, how is their sufficient evidence to convict

  26. by C.G. 15th Nov 2014 01:11

    Aqua wrote:Make what worse or better?

    OK, poorly phrased. What I am saying is, if he is guilty of ra/pe, and she wasn't actually that drunk, does that make the case against him worse or better? In that, if she wasn't consenting, and wasn't very drunk, presumably she actually said no and tried to resist and he did it anyway, as opposed to the fact that if she was very drunk and maybe unconscious and he just "took advantage"?

  27. by Aqua 15th Nov 2014 01:13

    It all seems quite bizarre...the more I read on the website, the less sure I am of his guilt. But then I suppose that's the purpose of the website.

  28. by C.G. 15th Nov 2014 01:13

    I_Need_a_Girlfriend wrote:
    Aqua wrote:Just spent some time looking at the website. She didn't look very drunk in the CCTV footage :?



    What I don't get if she can't remember, how is their sufficient evidence to convict

    Well that is a fair point too. usually I am guessing a woman can tell they have had sex with someone whether they remember it or not. But there remains the question of "who with". Not certain, but isn't there some third part evidence from hotel staff? :?

  29. by kinghelfer 15th Nov 2014 01:14

    I_Need_a_Girlfriend wrote:
    Aqua wrote:Just spent some time looking at the website. She didn't look very drunk in the CCTV footage :?



    What I don't get if she can't remember, how is their sufficient evidence to convict


    Torn clothes, torn tissues(bodily) and jizz...... :?:

  30. by Aqua 15th Nov 2014 01:17

    C.G. wrote:
    Aqua wrote:Make what worse or better?

    OK, poorly phrased. What I am saying is, if he is guilty of ra/pe, and she wasn't actually that drunk, does that make the case against him worse or better? In that, if she wasn't consenting, and wasn't very drunk, presumably she actually said no and tried to resist and he did it anyway, as opposed to the fact that if she was very drunk and maybe unconscious and he just "took advantage"?


    According to that website there shouldn't have been a case against him in the first instance.

    I think both your scenarios are equally as bad.

  31. by C.G. 15th Nov 2014 01:19

    Aqua wrote:
    C.G. wrote:
    Aqua wrote:Make what worse or better?

    OK, poorly phrased. What I am saying is, if he is guilty of ra/pe, and she wasn't actually that drunk, does that make the case against him worse or better? In that, if she wasn't consenting, and wasn't very drunk, presumably she actually said no and tried to resist and he did it anyway, as opposed to the fact that if she was very drunk and maybe unconscious and he just "took advantage"?


    According to that website there shouldn't have been a case against him in the first instance.

    I think both your scenarios are equally as bad.

    Yes, I see your point, but if it was me I would rather not remember it, if given the choice.

  32. by Aqua 15th Nov 2014 01:21

    C.G. wrote:
    I_Need_a_Girlfriend wrote:
    Aqua wrote:Just spent some time looking at the website. She didn't look very drunk in the CCTV footage :?



    What I don't get if she can't remember, how is their sufficient evidence to convict

    Well that is a fair point too. usually I am guessing a woman can tell they have had sex with someone whether they remember it or not. But there remains the question of "who with". Not certain, but isn't there some third part evidence from hotel staff? :?


    Both guys confirmed to the police they had sex with her.

  33. by I_Need_a_Girlfriend 15th Nov 2014 01:24

    kinghelfer wrote:
    I_Need_a_Girlfriend wrote:
    Aqua wrote:Just spent some time looking at the website. She didn't look very drunk in the CCTV footage :?



    What I don't get if she can't remember, how is their sufficient evidence to convict


    Torn clothes, torn tissues(bodily) and jizz...... :?:



    I don't think there was not physical damage, not sure about the clothes.

  34. by WTF? 15th Nov 2014 01:25

    What have I done?

  35. by Aqua 15th Nov 2014 01:34

    I_Need_a_Girlfriend wrote:
    kinghelfer wrote:
    I_Need_a_Girlfriend wrote:
    Aqua wrote:Just spent some time looking at the website. She didn't look very drunk in the CCTV footage :?



    What I don't get if she can't remember, how is their sufficient evidence to convict


    Torn clothes, torn tissues(bodily) and jizz...... :?:



    I don't think there was not physical damage, not sure about the clothes.


    It should be noted that neither of the accused had ejaculated during sex as a result of which the police had no forensic evidence to link either man to the sexual act, nor did the police have a complaint of r****. Regardless of this, both men gave a full account of their actions to the police. On 26th July 2011 the police charged both Clayton and Ched with r****.

  36. by C.G. 15th Nov 2014 01:48

    :lol:



    Every serious thread seems to be descending into humour tonight. :roll: :roll: :roll: :wink:

  37. by Chudleigh 15th Nov 2014 13:52

    Aqua wrote:It all seems quite bizarre...the more I read on the website, the less sure I am of his guilt. But then I suppose that's the purpose of the website.


    I was left with the feeling that he was being " made an example of". The noisiest protagonists baying for his blood default to the term "convicted rapist", this may yet be thrown out. Then we will have plenty of material for a heated debate on justice.