The footballer’s barrister, however, tells jury it is not their job to judge whether he was ungallant or immoral, but whether he raped a woman

The international footballer Ched Evans has been accused of treating a 19-year-old waitress he is alleged to have raped with “a callous, self-centred indifference essentially indistinguishable from utter contempt”.

In his closing speech at Evans’ retrial, Simon Medland QC, prosecuting, claimed the wealthy, successful sportsman felt he was entitled to have sex with the woman and did not care what she wanted.

Medland told the jury at Cardiff crown court that the woman, who woke up with no memory of what had happened to her, was so intoxicated she did not have the capacity to consent to sex.

But Evans’ barrister, Judy Khan QC, said the prosecution was built around a myth – that if the alleged victim could not remember she must have been incapacitated. “That is a myth,” she said. “It’s utterly unrealistic.”

She told the jury there could hardly be a more sensitive case than this and asked the panel to put any strong emotions to one side. “You need to keep your feet on the ground,” she said.

Khan said Evans had admitted in court to having a “threesome” before the alleged rape and was cheating on his girlfriend that night. “None of that makes him a rapist,” she said.

Evans, 27, who has played for Wales, Manchester City and Sheffield United, was convicted in 2012 of raping the woman at a hotel in Rhyl, north Wales, in 2011 but cleared on appeal.

During his retrial the jury has been told that the woman went back to a hotel with Evans’ friend and fellow footballer Clayton McDonald.

Later Evans lied to get a key card to the room the pair were in and walked in without knocking. Evans claims McDonald asked her: “Can my mate join in?” and she agreed. He had sex with her before leaving by a fire exit. Evans maintains the woman consented to sex and denies rape.

Medland told the jury: “Evans said he would never hurt a girl.” But he added: “He treated [her] with a callous, self-centred indifference essentially indistinguishable from utter contempt.”



The barrister continued: “At the end of the 19th century, the poet and writer Oscar Wilde was moved to remark that everything in life is about sex apart from sex itself, which is about power.”

He conceded Wilde was a “long way removed” from room 14 in the budget hotel where the alleged rape took place. But he said: “You may think considering this case that was one of his more insightful comments.”

The prosecutor continued: “We suggest the defendant couldn’t have cared less whether [the complainant] wanted sex with him or not. This wealthy, successful young footballer felt entitled to have her and did so regardless of what she wanted and in doing so we submit to you this was rape and not consensual sex.”

He said Evans “blagged his way” into the hotel and “scuttled off” through the fire exit. “Why go to these lengths if he had done nothing wrong?” he asked.

Medland said Evans did not ask the woman if she would like to be intimate with him – and in fact had not spoken to her at all. He said she had “no idea at all” what happened to her in the hotel room.

“Did she even know that this defendant had even come into that room? Did she know that Ched Evans was having sex with her?

“We submit you can be sure that [the woman] did not have the freedom and the capacity to consent to sex with Ched Evans. You can be sure any belief he had in [her] consent was not objectively reasonable.”

Khan, for the defence, said Evans was a man of good character, practically a household name. She said it was not the jury’s role to judge whether he had been ungallant or immoral. “He is charged with rape, not acting in an immoral way.”

The defence barrister also put a quote to the jury – John F Kennedy’s assertion: “The great enemy of truth is very often not the lie ... but the myth, persistent, persuasive and unrealistic.”

She claimed that “disinhibited through drink”, the woman did consent to sex. She said: “Drunken consent is consent.”

The barrister accepted the woman was “clearly intoxicated” earlier that night in a kebab shop but she was still rational. She pushed a man away in the shop and later she sent a coherent and correctly spelled text message to a friend. In the hotel reception she noticed she had lost her handbag.

Khan also reminded the jury Evans answered all the questions that police posed to him. It was Evans – not the woman – who told police they had had sex.

The trial continues.