A couple of points...

1. She had been diagnosed with a mental illness and was receiving treatment, this alone should ring alarm bells in any investigation team, whether investigating her original complaint or the subsequent one against her.

2. The male is un-named, as he should be, but was he named during the original accusation and investigation, was the complaint known to anyone other than the police and him, were his employers informed, did he have to tell them because of absences due to the investigation. If the answers to all of these questions are "No" then his decision to press a private prosecution is ill advised as is the decision for the CPS to take it over - if he has suffered nothing less than anxiety over the accusation and no smear on his character has been publicly made then it should be dropped and written off as one of lifes experiences.

If he was named and arrested as part of an investigation where he was named even locally then that is the wrong doing and THAT is where the sympathy surrounding rape accusations falls down, you cannot falsely accuse someone of something for them then to be publicly shamed for even when its dis-proved or withdrawn then the mud will still stick.

For me a false rape claim is as serious a crime as a rape. Still destroys someone's life. However this is clearly more complicated than a simple false rape allegation. The other stuff is perhaps more severe and caused the whole scenario.

Correct.

The man in question may have been employed in a position (e.g. teacher, medic) where any such allegation could have destroyed his career and as such been advised by his legal representative to go for the private prosecution in order to officially clear his name. All this of course assumes that the initial rape allegation was false.

The CPS run a 2 stage test when considering prosecutions.

The first part is called Realistic Prospect of Conviction. It is basically an assessment of the evidence. In order for the case to proceed they have to feel the prospects of a conviction are 50% or above. If the case meets this test they go on to consider public interest in prosecuting, which is the second part of the test.

The fact the man in question was not prosecuted indicates that they thought there was not enough evidence to prosecute. This, combined with the fact they then took over the private prosecution, means they thought the complainant was a liar.

Many men have their live destroyed by false rape complaints. The stigma is still attached to them, even once decisions have been taken not to prosecute, or alternatively not guilty verdicts have been returned. Unfortunately, there is very little public appetite in prosecuting women who bring false complaints, because there is fear it will put genuine complainants off coming forward.

Partly a reason i won't be drawn on the Ched Evans case, i genuinely am not sure if he is guilty or a miscarriage of justice.
People have already made their minds up with that, meanwhile he fights to clear his name.
People have been wrongly convicted before and wrongly acquitted.

I don't know where I stand on the Ched Evans case. There are plenty of footballers who get themselves into those situations but at the same time there are plenty of women who are going to make something of it. Was it a case of cocky young footballer thinking he was above the law or was it a case of "Ooh, a footballer, kerching!". I suppose there are only two people who will ever know what really happened.

I know where I stand on the Ched Evans case.

Unless and until his conviction is overturned, he is a convicted rapist who, although he may have been released from prison, is still serving the remainder of his sentence on licence. He will have to sign the Sex Offender's Register for life (nature of offence and length of sentence), there will be restrictions on what work he can undertake, possibly barring him from working with anyone under 18. How would that fit with a pro-footballer and the academy?

He should be encouraged to seek another career and for those who say that's a restraint of trade. If Evans had been a schoolteacher, would you be happy with him teaching your daughter after his release?

Which career is acceptable for convicted rapists?

Having visited the hometown of the victim on many occasions, and spoke to many locals, I can safely say there is a lot more to the case than is 'officially' in the open.

Personally, from the many differing accounts of both the case and the characters involved, the only thing I'm pretty sure of, is that all involved were very naïve to have allowed themselves to be in the situation that lead to the eventual conviction of Evans.

whatever one he is allowed into. There must be plenty, I doubt every convicted rapist is unemployed

So what exactly did you mean when you said he should be encouraged to seek a different career?

The Ched Evans conviction has always had a huge question mark hanging over it. Read the evidence and arguments of the defence and Crown and the conviction is sketchy at best. The CCTV, toxicology and other expert evidence do very little to support the claim of rape. The girl was also shown to have lied in court.

But the real issue is it came down to their word against hers (even though she could apparently remember nothing), and whether she was capable of consent when Evans entered the room. Essentially she was deemed capable of consent for sex with McDonald (acquitted), but not with Evans a few minutes later.

As for his career, I don't see why anyone who has served their time according to the law should be persecuted. If we as a society decide Evans should be denied the chance to rebuild his career, do we do the same for all other crimes, or just those we find the most repellant? If his employer sees fit to take him back on, so be it.

I'm sure there are many lads on here who've had one night stands with extremely drunk partners, who may have been up for a bit of hanky panky under the influence and may or may not have woken to regret their actions. Could that constitute rape? Or poor judgement?

I have precisely zero love for footballers (and less for rapists), but this case has never sat well with me.