If you don’t know who Ched Evans is, then in brief, he is a footballer who was convicted of rape and sentenced to five years imprisonment, being released last year. If you want more of an overview, then see here (with lots of associated links).
Mr Evans does not accept his guilt and, despite the Court of Appeal refusing his application for an appeal, is trying to persuade the CCRC to refer his case back to the Courts.
As part of his campaign to clear his name, he has set up a website to garner public interest (and, he says, to potentially find new witnesses).
One issue at the trial was whether the complainant was too intoxicated to give consent. To (in his view) counteract this, Mr Evans (or those acting on his behalf) posted CCTV footage from the hotel where the rape happened.
This triggered a complaint that it was breaching the anonymity granted to victims of sexual offences.
On 18th May 2015, the CPS concluded that there was not sufficient evidence for a prosecution. This was because “As the footage had been pixelated, and there was otherwise nothing sufficiently distinctive in the footage, it was deemed unlikely that a member of the public could identify the victim and for that reason it was decided that there was insufficient evidence to charge“.
They also considered “whether or not this CCTV, in conjunction with information about the victim that was already in the public domain, could lead to identification. It was decided that a member of the public would still be unlikely to identify the victim were they aware of both the CCTV and other information“.
The CPS decision would appear to be clearly right – the CCTV was pixellated for publication, and it is not possible to identify the victim. For that reason, a prosecution was never going to succeed.
On a separate point, it is important that those who say that they have been wrongly convicted have the opportunity to present their case to the public. Ched Evans is not someone deserving of sympathy, but hard cases make bad law etc. It would set a bad precedent for more deserving cases had action been taken against this website.