THE NEED TO FORGIVE

Paul Ince - saved by football

The now retired footballer Paul Ince once said that, if it had not been for football, he would have probably ended up in prison. He came from a deprived background, ran with a rough crowd and, being black, he could not have expected favourable treatment from the justice system. Football, however, gave him direction and kept him straight.

Good for football, most people would think. People of colour often find that they stand their best chance of succeeding in life through sport because, being largely a meritocracy, they suffer less from discrimination than in other areas where prejudice holds them back. There is no shortage of racism in football but coaches who select teams simply cannot afford to be racist because so many top players now are black. Black former players are now moving into coaching, as Ince has done, albeit with painful slowness.

 

I use Ince as an example because any crimes he might have been tempted to commit would probably have been financial – robbery, drug dealing, burglary, etc – and not of a sexual nature. I am not saying that he is a saint in sexual matters. Like most young footballers he was probably tempted and may have fallen once or twice.

 

Other footballers have been tempted and caught taking advantage of their position as alpha males. Their crimes are unsavoury and I have no intention of defending them. What I think, however, is that they need to be allowed to re-enter society once they have served their punishment. If they do the crime they have to do the time but, once that has been completed, they have the same right to rebuild their lives as those found guilty of stealing money from old ladies or breaking and entering. 

 

Yet forgiveness seems to be in short supply when it comes to sexual crimes. Partly because it is such a horrible act and partly because it has been (and still is) so easy to get away with, rape is seen as the unforgivable crime. Those deemed guilty of it are cast into outer darkness and cannot be admitted back into normal society.

 

I have said before that one of the main reasons that it is so hard to gain a conviction for rape is that it is a crime that, almost by definition, takes place without witnesses who can corroborate one person’s story. Therefore, it tends to come down to one person’s word against another’s. That introduces doubt into the process and, inevitably, the accused tends to be given the benefit of this doubt. Add the sheer horror of undergoing cross-examination in court and many women are reluctant to even report instances of rape. 

 

This has resulted in the rise of settlements of the type used by Prince Andrew and his team of lawyers when he was accused of sexual exploitation by Virginia Guiffre (then Roberts, one of the many young women groomed by the sex offender Jeffrey Epstein and offered up as gifts to men like Prince Andrew, whom he wanted to cultivate with “free’ sex.

 

This sex, of course, turned out to be anything but free. The prince denied even meeting his accuser but was not willing to go to trial. He was probably advised that she would be the one to benefit from any doubt around this case. The temptation to give a bloody nose to a privileged British royal might have been overwhelming for a jury in republican America so he settled and is now supposedly in the clear as a result.

 

Except that 'the clear' is anything but from now for a man accused of rape or sexual exploitation and who chooses to settle. A Scottish footballer called David Goodwillie was ordered to pay a woman who had accused him of raping her. He was not convicted of any crime but she sued him in a civil action and the judge ordered him to pay her the not inconsiderable sum of £100,000. That may seem like loose change for a big-time player but not for a lesser one like Goodwillie.

 

The incident in which he was accused of rape took place in 2011 when he would have been about twenty one. That is not an excuse – both accused and accuser were above the age of consent – but it does show how mistakes you make as a young man can come back to haunt you years later. The writer Val McDermid, who supports Raith Rovers, withdrew her sponsorship of the club after they signed Goodwillie.

 

McDermid said that the sight of Goodwill playing for her team made her 'sick to the stomach'. This seems to say that there is no way back for a man deemed to be a rapist. His previous club Clyde had said that he was entitled to rebuild his life after the court had ordered him to pay for what he had done to the woman who accused him. He had a good career there and was mostly left alone until he signed for Raith and McDermid had her say. Then all hell broke loose.

 

Men accused of rape do not help themselves by failing to show remorse for their acts. However, showing remorse is akin to admitting guilt in the eyes of a lawyer and they are probably discouraged from doing so as a result. This reluctance to admit guilt is probably increased by the intransigence of women like McDermid who seem determined to deny them a chance to rebuild their lives. They act as though Goodville and his like should be cast into outer darkness forever. 

 

Yet, if we are not to condemn all men deemed guilty of rape to a life sentence without parole, they have to return to society sooner or later. I use the word 'deemed' deliberately, as Goodwillie was never convicted of a crime, but judged responsible for a rape by a judge. Whatever happened with him and with Ched Evans, with Prince Andrew and Marvin Greenwood (who also faces charges of rape) there does not seem to be any way back for them once “deemed” guilty.

 

But every criminal who will be released needs to have the chance to rebuild their lives after they get out. Raith Rovers would surely not have cancelled the signing of Goodwillie if he had been found guilty of burglary, had gone to prison and then gone straight. Why should sexual crimes be treated differently to other ones? 

Edwin Lerner

My other blog is diaryofatouristguide.blogspot.com