Raith Rovers sign David Goodwillie who was found to have raped a woman by Civil Court

[rpannier]

For those who follow Scottish Soccer, David Goodwillie has been signed to a contract by the Raith Rovers.
David Goodwillie has denied he raped the woman. But a Civil Court Senior Judged found him to be a rapist.
There was never any criminal prosecution because they felt they couldn't get a conviction
The signing itself set off a firestorm among Raith Rover supporters.

Famed crime author and lifetime Rovers supporter Val McDermid said she was sickened by the decision to sign him and has broken off contact with, and support for the team.
The other, and possibly more prominent lifelong Rovers supporter, former PM Gordon Brown has also expressed displeasure with the decision
Tyler Rattray, the women's captain has resigned from the women's Rovers team and the women's Rovers team will not wear the Rovers jersey for the rest of the season (The women's Rovers team is the oldest affiliated women's team in Scotland)
Two club directors, the employability officer for the club's community foundation and shirt sponsor have all ended their association with the club
Scotland's first minister Nicola Sturgeon condemned the decision.

In addition to the finding of Rape, in 2008, Goodwillie was fined £250 for punching a man in a Stirling nightclub, and four years later pleaded guilty to assaulting a man in Glasgow City Centre.

To compound the situation, the Rovers response, while... ahem... up front and...uhhhh... honest... has made the situation much worse:
"David is a proven goalscorer, and this will be his second stint with the club, having previously played for us on loan from Dundee United during season 2007-08,"
and
"As with all new signings, the club has carefully considered our position as a Community Club and we completely respect the differing views among fans and stakeholders, many of whom we have spoken to directly in the past 24 hours and are continuing to engage with."
and
"As David has previously played for Raith Rovers earlier in his career, we consider him to be part of Raith Rovers Football Club. The management team is familiar with David's career and background and -- in particular -- his footballing ability. That is our foremost consideration, and we believe that he will strengthen the Raith Rovers playing squad."
and
“While acknowledging the gravity of what happened 10 years ago, as a club we fully support and encourage rehabilitation, and many factors influenced our signing. But first and foremost, this was a football related decision.”

for articles with more detail:
https://www.espn.com/soccer/raith-rovers/story/4583976/scottish-club-raith-rovers-criticised-for-signing-convicted-rapist-david-goodwillie

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2022/feb/01/raith-rovers-womens-captain-resigns-amid-fury-over-david-goodwillie-signing

https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/david-goodwillie-rape-court-raith-rovers-b2005795.html

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/gordon-brown-val-mcdermid-labour-fife-nicola-sturgeon-b2005331.html

[HipChick]

1. Hope this does not turn out to be another case like Mason Greenwood

Another woman came forward as well

[rpannier]

2. What I find most baffling by the club

is that, even though Goodwillie denies he did it, the club seems to acknowledge he did it and they have basically said they don't care

[Roxi]

3. "This was a football decision."

Okay… I guess they don’t care about his crimes, just because he can score goals on the field.

Good luck with that.

Time will tell if hiring him was worth all the negative press.

[OneBro]

4. Judges and juries sometimes get it wrong.

How easily society forgets the many, many cases of wrongful convictions of rape. Cases which have a HIGHER standard of proof than civil judgments.

David Goodwillie has denied he raped the woman. How dare he! Are we back to “I believe her no matter what!”?

Yes, a Civil Court Senior Judged found him to be liable, but do we then just get to skip over the “there was never any criminal prosecution because they felt they couldn't get a conviction” part? Even if we assume the civil judge was unbiased and honorable, it is mind-numbing that people are so casually outraged and unwaveringly confident of his guilt.

I have no idea whether the allegations in this case are true, but I do know that outrage is cheaper by the dozen.

Is it really that difficult to protect our falsely accused sons with the same fervor as we protect our victimized daughters, or must we always commit to one side because it’s cheaper?