Irish Rape Rugby Players Cleared as #IBelieveHer trends Twitter worldwide

[Crimson Dynamo]

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/newpix/2018/03/28/12/4AA1F5D100000578-5553801-image-m-4_1522237367995.jpghttp://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/newpix/2018/03/28/12/4AA1F71000000578-5553801-image-a-5_1522237374431.jpg


Irish rugby players Paddy Jackson and Stuart Olding were both cleared of rape
The stars had denied raping a woman following a night out in Belfast in 2016
After the verdict, #IBelieveHer was trending on Twitter to support the woman
Several protests will now take place across Ireland after four men were cleared


Protest rallies will be carried out across Ireland today after the #IBelieveHer hashtag trended on Twitter in support of the woman at the centre of a rugby rape trial.

Irish internationals Paddy Jackson and Stuart Olding were cleared of rape yesterday following a nine-week trial at Belfast Crown Court.

They were accused of sexually assaulting a woman when they went back to Jackson's flat after a night out in the capital city.

The court heard the pair were in a WhatsApp group which discussed having a 'spit roast' and said sex with the woman was 'like a merry-go-round'.



http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/newpix/2018/03/28/14/4AA1EDDB00000578-5553801-Ireland_and_Ulster_rugby_player_Paddy_Jackson_cent re_arrived_wit-a-44_1522245485843.jpg

The Belfast rally has been organised by Reclaim the Night Belfast, which is a group which is campaigning against harassment and gender-based violence.

On Facebook, the group wrote: 'The feminist movement is calling a rally in response to the impact of the recent rape trial in Belfast.

'There is a lot of anger and upset among women who have observed the treatment of the [woman] in this case and found it harrowing and re-traumatising.'



The jury was told that Olding allegedly wrote 'we are all top sh****rs, before adding: 'It was like a merry-go-around at a carnival.'

He also wrote: 'There was a bit of spit roasting going on last night fellas,' the court heard.

It is also alleged that Jackson replied on the same WhatsApp messaging service: 'There was a lot of spit.'

Messages in their group included jokes about 'pumping birds' and a photograph was shared with the caption 'Love Belfast s****.'

In one message, McIlroy posted a picture of himself and three girls who had been at the after party where the rape was alleged to have happened.

In another message also read out, McIlroy boasted: 'Pumped a bird with Jacko on Monday, roasted her, then another on Tuesday night.'

The hashtag #IBelieveHer was trending in the UK, Ireland and worldwide on Twitter just hours after the verdicts were returned.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5558019/Protest-rallies-planned-Ireland-IBelieverHer-trends-Twitter.html

[arista]

Yes he got lucky

[Niamh.]

#ibelieveher

[Vicky.]

This story has disgusted me for a while now. The result was just the icing on the cake. She spent days and days being cross examined, her knickers were passed round court, videos of her genitals were shown to the court...it was as if it was her on trial, not them. But this tends to be the case in rape trials. More focus on the victim than the ones who committed the crime. And no, I won't say allegedly in this case, as I am positive they did do it. Even their own testimonies trip them up at times. Disgusting pigs.

#ibelieveher

[Crimson Dynamo]

I guess it all depends on what they mean by rape in this case

sounds a bit like Ched Evans again?

[Nicky91]

#ibelieveher

[Niamh.]

I guess it all depends on what they mean by rape in this case

sounds a bit like Ched Evans again?

Not really, the one who was accused of perverting the course of justice, brought her home in a cab, the taxi driver said she was distressed and he was trying to calm her, then on the way back was having a coded sounding conversation with one of the men saying stuff like "it doesn't look good" etc

#ibelieveher

[Niamh.]

anyway what they are guilty of beyond reasonable doubt is being absolute disgusting, disrespectful scumbags who clearly view women as objects for their amusement and for that alone I hope the IRFU make the right call and don't ever let them play Rugby with Ireland again

[Cherie]

Didn't know anything about this case but from what Niamh said it sounds like they are guilty as hell

[arista]

anyway what they are guilty of beyond reasonable doubt is being absolute disgusting, disrespectful scumbags who clearly view women as objects for their amusement and for that alone I hope the IRFU make the right call and don't ever let them play Rugby with Ireland again



Men like that the World Over
they won in the Court of Law
Northern Ireland

[Niamh.]

Men like that the World Over
they won in the Court of Law
your nation,

It was a British court Arista, Northern Ireland but the men play for Ireland as Rugby is an All Ireland sport

[Crimson Dynamo]

Didn't know anything about this case but from what Niamh said it sounds like they are guilty as hell

guilty of what?

rape? no

treating a girl like a blow up doll and humiliating her? probably yes

[user104658]

It's a tough one because what is likely to be true and what can actually be proven in court are two separate things, and sadly any sexual assault is very difficult to prosecute if there are no other witnesses. The same goes for an absolute tonne of these historic sexual assault cases where the accused walks out of court without charges; "not found guilty" is not the same as "proven innocent".

anyway what they are guilty of beyond reasonable doubt is being absolute disgusting, disrespectful scumbags who clearly view women as objects for their amusement and for that alone I hope the IRFU make the right call and don't ever let them play Rugby with Ireland again

I also agree with that, they should face personal consequences for their conduct alone, even without the rape allegations.

[arista]

It was a British court Arista, Northern Ireland but the men play for Ireland as Rugby is an All Ireland sport



Yes it was a British Court

Sorry my Error,

[Niamh.]

guilty of what?

rape? no

treating a girl like a blow up doll and humiliating her? probably yes

It's not as similar to the Ched Evans case as you make out tbf LT. She didn't forget the night or anything, she was obviously upset that night as reinforced by the cab driver who would have no vested interest. She confided in her friend the next morning, she turned down an offer of money to shut up about it by one of mens father, the medical examiner found bleeding in her vagina etc etc

[Niamh.]

It's a tough one because what is likely to be true and what can actually be proven in court are two separate things, and sadly any sexual assault is very difficult to prosecute if there are no other witnesses. The same goes for an absolute tonne of these historic sexual assault cases where the accused walks out of court without charges; "not found guilty" is not the same as "proven innocent".



I also agree with that, they should face personal consequences for their conduct alone, even without the rape allegations.

Yes unfortunately cases like this are virtually impossible to prove, it comes down to one persons word against another (in this case one persons word against 4 others) I think the way the victims of abuse are treated in court though is appalling and it's no wonder the vast majority of rapes/sexual assaults go unreported.

[Crimson Dynamo]

It's not as similar to the Ched Evans case as you make out tbf LT. She didn't forget the night or anything, she was obviously upset that night as reinforced by the cab driver who would have no vested interest. She confided in her friend the next morning, she turned down an offer of money to shut up about it by one of mens father, the medical examiner found bleeding in her vagina etc etc

How did she get into their hotel room 3 on 1?

[Niamh.]

How did she get into their hotel room 3 on 1?

You obviously no very little about the case considering you don't even know where it happened so I'm going to leave the conversation here with you.

[Crimson Dynamo]

You obviously no very little about the case considering you don't even know where it happened so I'm going to leave the conversation here with you.

I know what the article tells me and it does not say. I take it they did not kidnap her so Id expect its pertinent to the case and to why they were let off :shrug:

[Niamh.]

I know what the article tells me and it does not say. I take it they did not kidnap her so Id expect its pertinent to the case and to why they were let off :shrug:

Oh I forgot you can't be raped unless you're kidnapped, silly me. It wasn't a hotel by the way, if the article says it is, it's an error

[Crimson Dynamo]

Timeline of events


Monday 27 June, 2016

16:30 BST - Paddy Jackson, Stuart Olding, Blane McIlroy and Rory Harrison meet up at Blane McIlroy's house in south Belfast to watch football.
Image caption The men went to the VIP area in Ollie's nightclub in Belfast city centre

19:00 BST - They go to Cutter's Wharf pub

23:00 BST - They go to VIP area in Ollie's nightclub in the city centre. The Northern Ireland football team is also there.
Tuesday 28 June, 2016

02:30 BST - they go back to Paddy Jackson's house in two taxis with four young women, including the 19-year-old woman at the centre of the case.

03:04 BST - the woman texts a friend. It reads: "Am back at Paddy Jackson's."

04:27 BST - Inside the house, Blane McIlroy texts Paddy Jackson. It reads: "Is there a possibility of a threesome?"

05:00 BST - The woman shares a taxi home with Rory Harrison. She is upset.

09:51 BST - The woman at the centre of the case texts a friend "worse night ever, so I got raped."
Image copyright PA/Press Eye
Image caption Paddy Jackson and Stuart Olding have both been capped for Ireland

10:08 BST - She texts another friend saying she'd been raped by "Ulster rugby scum."

12:04 BST - Rory Harrison texts her. It reads: "Feeling better today?"

13:10 BST - She texts back: "I know you must be mates with those guys, but I didn't like them. And what happened was not consensual which is why I was so upset".

14:00 BST - She goes to the Brook Clinic, a sexual health centre in Belfast

19:00 BST - She goes to The Rowan, Sexual Assault Referral Centre in Antrim
Wednesday 29 June

09:47 BST - She contacts the police for the first time, by ringing 101
Thursday 30 June

10:45 BST - Police conduct first detailed interview with woman

Afternoon - Police contact Ulster rugby. Paddy Jackson and Stuart Olding told to go to Musgrave police station where they are arrested. Police take a witness statement from Rory Harrison.

Evening - Blane McIlroy arrested.
Friday 1 July
Image caption Police took statements from Dara Florence, who appeared in the witness box during the trial

Police take a witness statement from Dara Florence, a woman who briefly went into Paddy Jackson's bedroom on the night in question.

She said she did not think it looked like a rape.

Tuesday 4 October

Police interview Rory Harrison as a suspect not a witness. Police re-interview Paddy Jackson and Stuart Olding.
Tuesday 25 July, 2017

The Public Prosecution Service says there is "sufficient evidence to prosecute four individuals".

Wednesday 15 November

Paddy Jackson appears in court and pleads "not guilty" to charges of rape and sexual assault.

Blane McIlroy denies a charge of exposure. Rory Harrison denies withholding information and perverting the course of justice.
Image copyright Pacemaker
Image caption Rory Harrison and Blane McIlroy also denied the charges against them

Friday 17 November

Stuart Olding appears in court. He pleads "not guilty" to two charges of rape.
Friday 22 December

One of the rape charges against Stuart Olding is dropped.

Monday 29 January, 2018

The trial begins.

Wednesday 28 March, 2018

All four defendants are found not guilty of all the charges against them.

[Crimson Dynamo]

To me it looks like she got herself in a situation she regretted, was humiliated and cried rape and I guess that is what the trial also showed, hence they got off?

Its not to excuse the oiks who used her but justice has been carried out in this specific accusation.

[Vicky.]

To me it looks like she got herself in a situation she regretted, was humiliated and cried rape and I guess that is what the trial also showed, hence they got off?

Its not to excuse the oiks who used her but justice has been carried out in this specific accusation.

That makes absolutely no sense. If you regret something, you just would not drag it out for months and put yourself through invasive medical exams, have your bits shown to a court room and such. You would just try to forget it.

Try to imagine being in a situation with someone you regret sleeping with. Like, would you then decide to 'cry rape' or would you just try to pretend it never happened at all? Would you go through loads of police questioning, medical exams, have your underwear passed round so strangers can see it...then spend days and days under intense cross examination? This just never makes any sense to me, tbh.

[Crimson Dynamo]

That makes absolutely no sense. If you regret something, you just would not drag it out for months and put yourself through invasive medical exams, have your bits shown to a court room and such. You would just try to forget it.

Try to imagine being in a situation with someone you regret sleeping with. Like, would you then decide to 'cry rape' or would you just try to pretend it never happened at all? Would you go through loads of police questioning, medical exams, have your underwear passed round so strangers can see it...then spend days and days under intense cross examination? This just never makes any sense to me, tbh.

Well having heard and seen much more evidence than we have it appears the jury disagree with you

[Vicky.]

Well jurys usually do in rape cases tbh

Also the jury did not decide she 'cried rape' either. They decided there was not evidence beyond all doubt. Its very different.

[Niamh.]

Thanks for the timeline LT, but unlike you I've been following this case very closely all the way through so it's unnecessary

@Vicky, I know right? It makes zero logical sense to say she felt humiliated so then decides to draw as much attention to it as possible.......weird logic indeed

[Crimson Dynamo]

This comment from a member of the public who was at the trial..

"I was in the public gallery with work purposes for the most of the duration of this trial. While I wasn't comfortable with a lot of the treatment the complaint had during the trial, on hearing all of the evidence the verdict was correct. I'm going to guess all the #IBelieveHer supporters didn't hear every single detail of this case otherwise they'd have the same conclusion as the jurors. I think while these men have shown how they speak about women is disgusting on many levels, it isn't against the law and they should now be left alone. I'd also like to add I went in to report on this case wanting to believe this woman and to an extend I did, but after the 10 weeks I couldn't upon hearing everything."


From the DM article

[ethanjames]

#ibelieveher my heart breaks for the victims </3

[smudgie]

#scumbags either way.:fist:

[Underscore]

#ibelieveher

[Niamh.]

#scumbags either way.:fist:

indeed, lets hope the IRFU make the right call and drop the scumbags

[AnnieK]

Having sat through a rape trial of a close family member, the treatment they get really is what makes rape reports so low. In my case she knew the guy, went back to his willingly and was trying to leave when he raped her. She had slept with him before, was single and a fun loving girl. On this night, she did not want to sleep with him. He forced her. I was called on the night, saw her covered in bruises and in obvious pain down below. Went through the trial (oh and the delightful threats from his friends and family before the trial), the defence brought up her sexual past but the prosecution were unable to bring up he had previous charges against him for similar. He got found not guilty.....no way he didn't do it but not enough evidence as his word against his. This girl has now said she would never recommend anyone reports a rape - it near on destroyed her.
#ibelieveher

[Niamh.]

Having sat through a rape trial of a close family member, the treatment they get really is what makes rape reports so low. In my case she knew the guy, went back to his willingly and was trying to leave when he raped her. She had slept with him before, was single and a fun loving girl. On this night, she did not want to sleep with him. He forced her. I was called on the night, saw her covered in bruises and in obvious pain down below. Went through the trial (oh and the delightful threats from his friends and family before the trial), the defence brought up her sexual past but the prosecution were unable to bring up he had previous charges against him for similar. He got found not guilty.....no way he didn't do it but not enough evidence as his word against his. This girl has now said she would never recommend anyone reports a rape - it near on destroyed her.
#ibelieveher

That's awful Annie but unfortunately not at all surprising. I'm baffled that people still come out with the "oh she regretted it so cried rape" it just makes no logical sense what so ever

[thesheriff443]

Spit roasts have been going for years especially footballers and they get treated like gods.
These are not men but animals.

But a woman has to keep her wits about her going home with and a man you just met and to go with more than one man you have only just met is asking for trouble.

[thesheriff443]

That's awful Annie but unfortunately not at all surprising. I'm baffled that people still come out with the "of she regretted it so cried rape" it just makes no logical sense what so ever

The problem is Niamh women have been found guilty of crying rape.

[Niamh.]

The problem is Niamh women have been found guilty of crying rape.

Found guilty of crying rape, how many cases of that can you find?

[Niamh.]

Spit roasts have been going for years especially footballers and they get treated like gods.
These are not men but animals.

But a woman has to keep her wits about her going home with and a man you just met and to go with more than one man you have only just met is asking for trouble.

The problem is Niamh women have been found guilty of crying rape.

The vicious circle a woman gets trapped in - your responsibility to not put yourself in a position where you could get raped and also you're a liar if you say you are but you don't need safe spaces because not not all men are bad, why are you so paranoid?

[bots]

The problem is Niamh women have been found guilty of crying rape.

the problem is that many women have been raped and said nothing for fear of not being believed

[Vicky.]

Having sat through a rape trial of a close family member, the treatment they get really is what makes rape reports so low. In my case she knew the guy, went back to his willingly and was trying to leave when he raped her. She had slept with him before, was single and a fun loving girl. On this night, she did not want to sleep with him. He forced her. I was called on the night, saw her covered in bruises and in obvious pain down below. Went through the trial (oh and the delightful threats from his friends and family before the trial), the defence brought up her sexual past but the prosecution were unable to bring up he had previous charges against him for similar. He got found not guilty.....no way he didn't do it but not enough evidence as his word against his. This girl has now said she would never recommend anyone reports a rape - it near on destroyed her.
#ibelieveher

Thats awful, but not surprising.

I did not report when I was raped as I knew the guy, and I had also had a drink...literally one drink mind (which I suspect was spiked too) but even a tiny bit of alcohol makes it the womans fault. I knew there would be nothing came of it if I did report, I would just have to relive it over and over (the parts I could remember, which luckily was not very much) and be called a liar and such so **** that. I would also have been told that I had consented, whilst in and out of consciousness, and no doubt that I consented to the multiple injuries I was left with,. as women just like it rough right..rough enough to be left black and blue and in pain for days.

Was talking about this in the admin thread yesterday actually. I don't think I would even report it if it was what people view as a 'real rape'...violent and by a stranger in an alley. It would still be my fault, and no matter how much physical evidence, it would be disregarded as women just lie all the time in order to ruin mens lives of course. Even random men they do not know, coz women are just spiteful. Or I would be doing it for compensation, despite turning down cash offered in order to shush. Its always the womans fault, and when it cannot be blamed on her, then she is just lying :shrug:

I could not deal with reliving over and over. I could not deal with people deciding that because he was found not guilty, this means I lied. I could not deal with any of it and would rather internalize everything and just try to get past it tbh.

I did not realise until this case either, that videos of your vagina can be shown to the courtroom. Thats yet another reason to not report.

The vicious circle a woman gets trapped in - your responsibility to not put yourself in a position where you could get raped and also you're a liar if you say you are but you don't need safe spaces because not not all men are bad, why are you so paranoid?

Indeed..

[GiRTh]

The vicious circle a woman gets trapped in - your responsibility to not put yourself in a position where you could get raped and also you're a liar if you say you are but you don't need safe spaces because not not all men are bad, why are you so paranoid?Very true:thumbs:

[Withano]

Hardly any rape cases get justice, because how are you gonna compile the evidence. Rapists dont tend to choose a spot with witnesses, nor let the victim take photographic evidence during the act.

I dont have a solution, just a complaint.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Hardly any rape cases get justice, because how are you gonna compile the evidence. Rapists dont tend to choose a spot with witnesses, nor let the victim take photographic evidence during the act.

I dont have a solution, just a complaint.

like murders, muggings etc you mean?

[Crimson Dynamo]

Spit roasts have been going for years especially footballers and they get treated like gods.
These are not men but animals.

But a woman has to keep her wits about her going home with and a man you just met and to go with more than one man you have only just met is asking for trouble.

correct.

[user104658]

To be fair, the more I think about this, I am starting to find the hashtagging / twitter campaigning sort of worrying? It's not that I don't believe her, it's not that I don't think these guys are scumbags, but I do think it's part of a dangerous precedent. What will be the point of the justice system AT ALL if, when the verdict isn't agreed with, social media en-masse can simply carry out a new "trial", minus all of the evidence of an actual trial, and effectively "create a new result"? Isn't it all a bit dystopian? These guys may well be guilty, but how long until going to trial at all is as good as being found guilty of any crime, thanks to "viral justice"? How long before someone who is actually innocent, and whose case is thrown out of court on solid evidence, is nonetheless a victim of vigilante re-trial where that evidence isn't available or isn't widely seen?

I dunno. It just isn't sitting well. Our justice system isn't perfect but it's something that's been refined over centuries to try to get the right result at least MOST of the time... and for that system to go out the window in favour of Facebook and Twitter - the most emotionally unstable and dim-witted platforms in existence - presents a huge problem.

[Amy Jade]

I believe her. Disgusting outcome.

[Crimson Dynamo]

To be fair, the more I think about this, I am starting to find the hashtagging / twitter campaigning sort of worrying? It's not that I don't believe her, it's not that I don't think these guys are scumbags, but I do think it's part of a dangerous precedent. What will be the point of the justice system AT ALL if, when the verdict isn't agreed with, social media en-masse can simply carry out a new "trial", minus all of the evidence of an actual trial, and effectively "create a new result"? Isn't it all a bit dystopian? These guys may well be guilty, but how long until going to trial at all is as good as being found guilty of any crime, thanks to "viral justice"? How long before someone who is actually innocent, and whose case is thrown out of court on solid evidence, is nonetheless a victim of vigilante re-trial where that evidence isn't available or isn't widely seen?

I dunno. It just isn't sitting well. Our justice system isn't perfect but it's something that's been refined over centuries to try to get the right result at least MOST of the time... and for that system to go out the window in favour of Facebook and Twitter - the most emotionally unstable and dim-witted platforms in existence - presents a huge problem.
Precisely. It's mob justice at its worst

[Tom4784]

It's a complete travesty of a trial but indicative of how most rape trials go. Rape trials are just character assassinations of the victims where they are untrustworthy until proven otherwise, it's not wonder report rates of rape is so low, who would want to put themselves through that?

The way rape trials are handled must change because the way this and so many other rape trials were handled were beyond disgusting, these rugby players were not on trial, it wasn't a trial about rape, it was a trial determining how many ways the court could blame the victim for what happened.

[Crimson Dynamo]

It's a complete travesty of a trial but indicative of how most rape trials go. Rape trials are just character assassinations of the victims where they are untrustworthy until proven otherwise, it's not wonder report rates of rape is so low, who would want to put themselves through that?

The way rape trials are handled must change because the way this and so many other rape trials were handled were beyond disgusting, these rugby players were not on trial, it wasn't a trial about rape, it was a trial determining how many ways the court could blame the victim for what happened.

How many days were you there?

[thesheriff443]

the problem is that many women have been raped and said nothing for fear of not being believed

That's also true

[Tom4784]

How many days were you there?

I'm not going to debate with you if you don't even believe what you are saying.

[AnnieK]

How many days were you there?

Probably about as many as you

[Niamh.]

Probably about as many as you.

[Crimson Dynamo]

I'm not going to debate with you if you don't even believe what you are saying.

So no days. It's trial by a few articles.

A P.I. you aint

[Crimson Dynamo]

Probably about as many as you

The jury were there 9 weeks

What point are you making?
I'm not accusing the jury of incompetence

[Crimson Dynamo]

If anyone has extra information about this case the trial missed please add it here?

[Tom4784]

So no days. It's trial by a few articles.

A P.I. you aint

You heard it hear first folks, you can't comment on this story unless you were in the gallery!

Let's all gather round and listen to what LT has to say since he must have been present in that trial from start to finish.

[Crimson Dynamo]

You heard it hear first folks, you can't comment on this story unless you were in the gallery!

Let's all gather round and listen to what LT has to say since he must have been present in that trial from start to finish.

I think my point has been made

[AnnieK]

I think my point has been made

I don't think it has.

You know as well as I do, trials like this means the jury believe either the prosecution or defense lawyers when its one word against another (particularly joint defendants who have been able to get their heads together and stories straight).... at the end of the day it came down to whose legal team was better. As professional, well paid rugby players who can probably afford the best against a girl who probably couldn't afford anywhere close to the fees these "men" paid.

[Maru]

Close SD thread 2.0 since debate by article is cancelled?

But really, Trial by article. :laugh: I love that, LT. Well, I definitely prefer that to Trial by Social Media. Not a fan of social media. I've become a bit social media-phobic these past several months.

I think though because they were not convicted, doesn't necessarily mean they were innocent. But yes, sounds like they are a bunch of douche-bags... let's reward their behavior by feeding the outrage machine and pushing the bandwagon down the hill, because that makes the outrage machine's love of facts all the more credible.

I think it just creates a bigger smokescreen around the lessons that could be gleamed from such cases. Also... ironically, I think it enables the poor treatment of these women who report, when we all stoop to their level.

These are fairly serious allegations and they should be treated as such, and these women with dignity. But the defendants are also owed due process... but the "It's rape culture" fanatics need steam for their engine, so they have a penchant to over-rationalize these kinds of verdicts via social media to fit some darker interpretation... and social media has become the news, so the media picks this out straight away.

Did they televise this case? They do that here for some high profile cases and that does help nip some of that stuff in the bud... I think because most Americans like to see how our criminal courts are actually working, since most folk we will never usually have any reason to attend one for a large portion of their life (if ever). And usually jury summons are for things like civil cases. I watched the Casey Anthony trial most of the way through... very interesting. Especially when the jury would have to step away, we would hear the evidence, etc that would have to get knocked out, re-presented, inadmissible etc...

[Niamh.]

I don't think it has.

You know as well as I do, trials like this means the jury believe either the prosecution or defense lawyers when its one word against another (particularly joint defendants who have been able to get their heads together and stories straight).... at the end of the day it came down to whose legal team was better. As professional, well paid rugby players who can probably afford the best against a girl who probably couldn't afford anywhere close to the fees these "men" paid.OJ Simpson was definitely innocent too!

[user104658]

I don't think the issue is whether or not they still might be guilty, the point is more... like I said... where is society going if we start cheering on groups who see a court verdict and say "Meh, let's get 'em anyway!!". Is that not just the digital age equivalent of a lynch mob? And I'm sure lynch mobs DID hang plenty of guilty people... but that doesn't mean we should be in any rush to return to that brand of justice.

[Niamh.]

I don't think the issue is whether or not they still might be guilty, the point is more... like I said... where is society going if we start cheering on groups who see a court verdict and say "Meh, let's get 'em anyway!!". Is that not just the digital age equivalent of a lynch mob? And I'm sure lynch mobs DID hang plenty of guilty people... but that doesn't mean we should be in any rush to return to that brand of justice.No one has been hanged as far as I'm aware

[Marsh.]

It's not as similar to the Ched Evans case as you make out tbf LT. She didn't forget the night or anything, she was obviously upset that night as reinforced by the cab driver who would have no vested interest. She confided in her friend the next morning, she turned down an offer of money to shut up about it by one of mens father, the medical examiner found bleeding in her vagina etc etc

They tried to bribe her with money and a jury still found them not guilty? :umm2:

[Marsh.]

How did she get into their hotel room 3 on 1?

I know what the article tells me and it does not say. I take it they did not kidnap her so Id expect its pertinent to the case and to why they were let off :shrug:

:conf: Entering a hotel room is consenting to sex? **** me, I'm never going to Premier Inn again.

Well having heard and seen much more evidence than we have it appears the jury disagree with you

The jury aren't super human, the verdict lies on their opinion of the evidence presented. They aren't foolproof.

The problem is Niamh women have been found guilty of crying rape.

So...?
Men have been found guilty of rape too.

like murders, muggings etc you mean?

Murders leave more concrete evidence of a crime. A ****ing dead body to name one. :umm2:

[thesheriff443]

Found guilty of crying rape, how many cases of that can you find?

There will be a good number, there was a very recent one that made the news, text messages proved she agreed to sex.

[user104658]

No one has been hanged as far as I'm aware

It's a metaphorical hanging, obviously. Like I said I'm not saying THESE guys don't deserve it - just that if it's a route that society goes down, it's only a matter of time before people who really aren't guilty are in the line of fire.

[thesheriff443]

The vicious circle a woman gets trapped in - your responsibility to not put yourself in a position where you could get raped and also you're a liar if you say you are but you don't need safe spaces because not not all men are bad, why are you so paranoid?

I'm not at all paranoid, a woman being raped is disgusting!
A woman crying rape after happily consenting is disgusting!

I don't seek to make women look bad and to make men look good.

[thesheriff443]

If a woman walks around with her arse cheeks showing and her tits hanging out on a night out, men will say excitedly look at that.

If women see the same woman, they would say look at that slapper.

[Maru]

I don't seek to make women look bad and to make men look good.

And from that, I don't think anybody looks good that are involved in these types of cases. That's probably the only real deterrent. Hey, don't want your face on a mug shot?... don't act stupid and do things that will get you falsely reported.

If women are supposed to be mindful of putting themselves in situations that can lead to problems, then men must have the same standard applied to them as well.

That's part of the case that folk make for higher standards in our society... yes, binge drinking culture is generally bad for this. It creates cover for disgusting (and criminal) behavior, and no, because that person acted a fool while drunk doesn't dissolve them of all responsibility of their actions during those times... would be no different if it were any other crime, man or woman. If a person ran someone over or failed to operate their vehicle properly and wrecked their vehicle drunk, they can still be charged... but if two people get drunk and act stupid and something happens as a result of this that leads to a criminal case, that complicates things quite a bit... it's a bit of a grey area, because while both can be considered intoxicated, for some folk, consent to them individually is when you decide to go alone to a location (while not drunk) with someone and then getting drunk. That would be like, whatever happens from here would be the point of it. That does happen.

We can have a law that says two folk can't get drunk and have sex, but then that's overreaching because for some, that is the point, going out to get drunk and have one night stands... so that's where this is really difficult in the courts, because in some cases, all the facts are fuzzy. Yes, there's evidence they had sex and it was forceful, but when we have two people who can barely remember what actually transpired, it's hard to know the truth and maybe it's questionable if their "testimony" is even trustworthy...

Personally, I don't get drunk around people I don't know, in the rare case I do. I make sure I have a "caretaker" (usually my husband, but in the past it's been my boyfriends). I don't like the idea of being out of control, but because I know other people do it and that's what they enjoy... it's hard for me to sit back here and judge those people accordingly. However, that is what is happening... we are judging both the woman and the man for acting out of character... and the case when tried by social media/social justice I guess is to paint character assassinations in that direction, and not really an attempt to get to the real truth...? I guess is the argument for more reason.

[Marsh.]

There will be a good number, there was a very recent one that made the news, text messages proved she agreed to sex.

Men have been convicted of rape.

I'm not sure what relevance other cases have to this one?

But the text message thing is kind of fishy, I don't see how a text message proves consent? What if someone was to arrange a hook-up for sex on Tindr, then once they're round the flat gets raped? They change their mind or the other person forces them into doing something they're not into?

[thesheriff443]

Men have been convicted of rape.

I'm not sure what relevance other cases have to this one?

But the text message thing is kind of fishy, I don't see how a text message proves consent? What if someone was to arrange a hook-up for sex on Tindr, then once they're round the flat gets raped? They change their mind or the other person forces them into doing something they're not into?

If I remember rightly the text messages she sent to friends after they had sex, with no mention of rape.

All I'm saying is, every case is different, and if a woman says she has been raped that don't make that man a rapist until it's proven

In the same way a woman is not lying about being raped until it's proven that she is.

But at the end of the day it's based on evidence and who the jury believe.

I have a lovely friend who was raped two years ago by two men and was beaten up.

[thesheriff443]

I would like every one!, regardless of gender or race to live a long and happy life free from fear, pain and suffering but as we all know that is not possible.

[Marsh.]

If I remember rightly the text messages she sent to friends after they had sex, with no mention of rape.

All I'm saying is, every case is different, and if a woman says she has been raped that don't make that man a rapist until it's proven

In the same way a woman is not lying about being raped until it's proven that she is.

But at the end of the day it's based on evidence and who the jury believe.

I have a lovely friend who was raped two years ago by two men and was beaten up.

Oh, I quite agree BIB. But I think in this case people aren't just saying so based on her simply saying she was raped, but are interpreting the evidence to draw their conclusions either way. Similar way to the jury are asked to.

If they were saying they believe her, just because it's a simple case of we believe a woman and don't believe a man then I'd agree wholeheartedly.

[Maru]

Just pulled this... very interesting the judge's own specific instructions on "consent".

Source: https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/nicola-anderson-at-rugby-rape-trial-draw-a-distinction-between-consent-and-submission-jury-told-36740003.html

Nicola Anderson at rugby rape trial: 'Draw a distinction between consent and submission,' jury told

AFTER a lengthy delay in the morning for “technical reasons”, at last it was the turn of Judge Patricia Smyth to address the jury – but only on points of law.

“As far as the facts are concerned, they are for you to decide,” she told them.

Print-outs of her address were made available to jury, legal teams and even the media, distributed in business-like fashion by the court clerk, neatly stapled and still warm from the photocopier.

The judge’s words were carefully balanced as she explained each of the six counts on the indictment, what the prosecution has to prove and what the law means in respect of each.

Regarding count one, of rape, relating only to Paddy Jackson, Judge Smyth said that if the jury was sure that he did intentionally penetrate the alleged victim , it must go on and consider the second element of rape and they must ask themselves whether they were sure the woman did not consent.

“Consent has a particular legal meaning,” she pointed out. “A woman consents if she agrees by choice and has the freedom and capacity to make that choice.”

The young woman had told the jury she did not consent. Mr Jackson told them that not only did she consent to sexual activity, but that she had instigated it.

Then the judge warned them that when considering the issue of consent, it is important “to draw a distinction between consent and submission”.

“Consent in some situations may be given enthusiastically, whereas in others it is given with reluctance – but nevertheless it is still consent,” she said.

“Where, however, a woman is so overcome by fear that she lacks any capacity either to give consent or to resist, that woman does not consent but is submitting to what takes place.”

And she said the prosecution does not have to prove that a woman resisted physically or that she said she did not consent.

Here, Judge Smyth advised the jury to apply their “combined good sense, experience and knowledge of human behaviour and modern behaviour to all the relevant facts”.

Deep in concentration, the courtroom listened.

The entire three days on which the trial had sat this week had required concentration.

On Wednesday, Frank O’Donoghue QC, for Stuart Olding, gave an extensive analysis of the evidence relating to his client, listing more than 20 questions he said he would like to have asked the young woman at the centre of this trial.

“Why was she unable to resist, why did she not say ‘no’?” he asked.

“Why did she open her mouth – why didn’t she keep her mouth closed? Why didn’t she scream – the house was occupied. There were a lot of middle-class girls downstairs – they weren’t going to tolerate a rape or anything like that.”

Just days after Ireland’s euphoric Grand Slam win at Twickenham, the presence of the two Ireland internationals in the dock, by way of contrast, was even starker than usual.

Eight weeks in, an extreme form of general weariness had set in.

Mr O’Donoghue claimed the authorities had let down his client Mr Olding, whom, he claimed, should not have been on trial in the first place. He added they had failed to investigate the evidence against him in a proper way.

The complaint at the heart of the case had been “devoid of detail” – and that inconsistencies in the alleged victim’s account were not down to “trauma” but “wild exaggeration” and “downright false allegation”.

He said the woman’s evidence was of “hopeless quality”, adding that “the investigation, testing and evaluation of this complaint was at best poor – at worst virtually non-existent”.

Olding, he said, had told the truth throughout, “warts and all”.

He described his client as a “reliable historian” – despite the level of alcohol he had consumed that night. This had entailed eight cans of Carlsberg, four pints of Guinness, two gin and tonics, five vodka lemonades and three shots.

He said Olding had “acted the big lad, bragging to his mates on social media”, adding the sportsman was “not proud” of the messages, but that they were on “what he thought to be the privacy of his own phone” and that they had “rebounded and been used against him”.

Arthur Harvey, for Blane McIlroy, meanwhile, had claimed he had “not got his lines wrong” and his client had not, as the prosecution had claimed, given the account that had been delegated to Stuart Olding in a conspiracy.

In closing their case, the prosecution had asked “lads or legends, you decide”, he said. But that’s not the question they need to answer, he pointed out.

“They may be either, neither or both.”

The final word for the four defendants went to Rory Harrison’s lawyer, Gavan Duffy. His client had given evidence to the court in an “honest, straightforward and candid manner”, he said.

Mr Harrison was no weasel who had used “weasel words” to comfort the complainant, he claimed, describing him instead as kind and honest.

In reference to a character witness who had described how Mr Harrison had helped her with her suitcase onto a bus, Mr Duffy said, “You might ask: ‘So what? What does it matter?’” But it had mattered to the woman, he said – and it should matter to the jury, he claimed because it gave “a great insight into his character”.

[thesheriff443]

If a two men walked up to a woman in the street and said come back to our hotel they would tell them where to go and even call the police

And yet the same two men in a club with a bit of chat and a few drinks say come back to our hotel and that woman does.

It's a funny old world when you think about it!.

[Niamh.]

I'm not at all paranoid, a woman being raped is disgusting!
A woman crying rape after happily consenting is disgusting!

I don't seek to make women look bad and to make men look good.I wasn't calling you paranoid, it was a contradictory set of things said to women.

[lime]

On Wednesday, Frank O’Donoghue QC, for Stuart Olding, gave an extensive analysis of the evidence relating to his client, listing more than 20 questions he said he would like to have asked the young woman at the centre of this trial.

“Why was she unable to resist, why did she not say ‘no’?” he asked.

“Why did she open her mouth – why didn’t she keep her mouth closed? Why didn’t she scream – the house was occupied. There were a lot of middle-class girls downstairs – they weren’t going to tolerate a rape or anything like that.


What an ignorant pig......so if there was any lower than whats considered "middle class girls" they would have been fine with rape.

Having being following this case I most definetely beleive her.

Olding didn't ask the girl for consent...he asked Jackson could he join in..

Blood on her trousers that was visable for taxi driver to see and blood on accused duvet...visably distressed leaving the house and in the taxi home infact in one of the messages between the accused she was described as being hysterical,

Seems she has good family and friends around her so hope they are keeping a watchfull eye over her..Some of the accused fans are no doubt going to shout abuse at her if she walks out in public again...Sadly it's probably best for her and family to leave Belfast

[Niamh.]

If a woman walks around with her arse cheeks showing and her tits hanging out on a night out, men will say excitedly look at that.

If women see the same woman, they would say look at that slapper.Wtf are you even going on about now?

[thesheriff443]

Wtf are you even going on about now?

Calm down, I'm saying not all women are united when it comes to other women.

[Niamh.]

Calm down, I'm saying not all women are united when it comes to other women.I still have no idea where that fits into this discussion

[thesheriff443]

I still have no idea where that fits into this discussion

It fits in how some women view other woman, for some the idea of a woman going off with two blokes she only just met is disgusting.

[Niamh.]

It fits in how some women view other woman, for some the idea of a woman going off with two blokes she only just met is disgusting.You posted some really off things in here tbh, I think I'll leave it at that.

[thesheriff443]

You posted some really off things in here tbh, I think I'll leave it at that.

I'm sorry but that's my opinion, I think you are taking it personally when it's just a discussion.

[Niamh.]

I'm sorry but that's my opinion, I think you are taking it personally when it's just a discussion.You're opinion is that you think she's disgusting for going back to paddy Jackson's house (not just with 2 men btw) or your opinion is that some women might not approve? If it's the latter then what point are you actually trying to make? You're saying some hypothetical women might not be on her side? Umm ok?

[thesheriff443]

You're opinion is that you think she's disgusting for going back to paddy Jackson's house (not just with 2 men btw) or your opinion is that some women might not approve? If it's the latter then what point are you actually trying to make? You're saying some hypothetical women might not be on her side? Umm ok?

If you look at the start of the thread I called those men animals.
I have a mum three sisters a misses and many female friends so yes I know how they feel about going off with someone you just met.

Drive a car fast there is a good chance of getting a speeding ticket

Go off with strangers there is a good chance some thing bad will happen.

[Smithy]

Basically Niamh, the sheriff is blaming the victim :)

[Niamh.]

Basically Niamh, the sheriff is blaming the victim :)Yeah looks about the size of it

[thesheriff443]

Basically Niamh, the sheriff is blaming the victim :)

Thanks for you input smithy, I'm saying if my daughter went off with two men I would pissed of that she could be so irresponsible.

[user104658]

I don't know, there's a difference between victim blaming and pointing out the need for awareness of safety - which I think is what sheriff might ham-fistedly be trying to get at.

If someone is attacked, then the guilty party is the attacker. There's no question about that part. They are criminals with no respect for other humans, and fully deserve to be punished for that.

But aside from that it's important to recognise that those people are out there. They exist, and with the best will in the world, they will sadly always exist... There's no getting around that. And with that in mind, it IS important for people to be aware of risks and keep themselves safe. It IS important that young girls be wary of going home with strange men, it IS important to tell our sons that it's a bad idea to walk home through the roughest part of town at 2am. That's not about "blaming them" if they are attacked... Just about pointing out that the risks are very real.

Or, I suppose, remembering that just because something SHOULDN'T happen, doesn't mean it WON'T happen, and living life as if the world is as it should be (safe, respectful) instead of how it actually is (chaotic and sometimes ****ing scary) is ill advised.

[thesheriff443]

Yeah looks about the size of it

So would you be happy if your daughter went off with two men she had only just met?

[Tom4784]

Sheriff, you pretty much embody the reason why reports and conviction on rape are so low. Why would anyone want to come forward when they'll be met with countless people with attitudes like yours?

[user104658]

Sheriff, you pretty much embody the reason why reports and conviction on rape are so low. Why would anyone want to come forward when they'll be met with countless people with attitudes like yours?If people are being mocking / aggressive, or suggesting the perpetrators don't deserve punishment for this reason, then I agree, but I also think it should be possible to point out risky behaviour whilst still sympathising with the victim. The problem otherwise is that you are implying that "this ISN'T risky" which makes others less likely to consider it a risk in future.

And again... It clearly IS a risk. It shouldn't be one, rapists shouldn't exist, but it is, and they do, and always will. Shouldn't happen doesn't = won't happen, or even is unlikely to happen.

[Niamh.]

I don't know, there's a difference between victim blaming and pointing out the need for awareness of safety - which I think is what sheriff might ham-fistedly be trying to get at.

If someone is attacked, then the guilty party is the attacker. There's no question about that part. They are criminals with no respect for other humans, and fully deserve to be punished for that.

But aside from that it's important to recognise that those people are out there. They exist, and with the best will in the world, they will sadly always exist... There's no getting around that. And with that in mind, it IS important for people to be aware of risks and keep themselves safe. It IS important that young girls be wary of going home with strange men, it IS important to tell our sons that it's a bad idea to walk home through the roughest part of town at 2am. That's not about "blaming them" if they are attacked... Just about pointing out that the risks are very real.

Or, I suppose, remembering that just because something SHOULDN'T happen, doesn't mean it WON'T happen, and living life as if the world is as it should be (safe, respectful) instead of how it actually is (chaotic and sometimes ****ing scary) is ill advised.

Of course but it just annoys me that rape or sexual assault seems to be the only crime where that's constantly pointed out after the fact and therefore comes across as blaming the victim

[thesheriff443]

If people are being mocking / aggressive, or suggesting the perpetrators don't deserve punishment for this reason, then I agree, but I also think it should be possible to point out risky behaviour whilst still sympathising with the victim. The problem otherwise is that you are implying that "this ISN'T risky" which makes others less likely to consider it a risk in future.

And again... It clearly IS a risk. It shouldn't be one, rapists shouldn't exist, but it is, and they do, and always will. Shouldn't happen doesn't = won't happen, or even is unlikely to happen.

Thanks ts.

[Niamh.]

So would you be happy if your daughter went off with two men she had only just met?

I'm not very comfortable speaking about my daughter in this context tbqh but it certainly wouldn't cross my mind in this situation because it would come across like I was blaming her instead of the rapist.

[Cherie]

I guess the issue here is that they weren’t “strangers” as such and at 19 she was maybe a bit starsruck, she didn’t travel back to the house on her own as other females were going as well, so in terms of risk it wasn’t up there wth going home on your own with two joe bloggs

[user104658]

I'm not very comfortable speaking about my daughter in this context tbqh but it certainly wouldn't cross my mind in this situation because it would come across like I was blaming her instead of the rapist.I guess the question is though (and yeah I hate imagining my own kids in these scenarios, too) not how would you react if something DID happen to them but... If nothing happened? Like you know they're home safe and sound and nothing bad happened, and then their friend is like "She went off with random people in a car at one point". Like even if those people were actually totally on the level... I'd still be a bit like "Wtf why would you do that?"

[Niamh.]

I guess the question is though (and yeah I hate imagining my own kids in these scenarios, too) not how would you react if something DID happen to them but... If nothing happened? Like you know they're home safe and sound and nothing bad happened, and then their friend is like "She went off with random people in a car at one point". Like even if those people were actually totally on the level... I'd still be a bit like "Wtf why would you do that?"

Oh yeah of course, you want your kids to be safe always but equally can you imagine something like this happening and getting annoyed with your child rather than the rapist? of course not because it would sound like you were giving some of the blame to them which would be very wrong

[Tom4784]

If people are being mocking / aggressive, or suggesting the perpetrators don't deserve punishment for this reason, then I agree, but I also think it should be possible to point out risky behaviour whilst still sympathising with the victim. The problem otherwise is that you are implying that "this ISN'T risky" which makes others less likely to consider it a risk in future.

And again... It clearly IS a risk. It shouldn't be one, rapists shouldn't exist, but it is, and they do, and always will. Shouldn't happen doesn't = won't happen, or even is unlikely to happen.

There's risk in everything, we don't say 'well, this person got murdered but he didn't think of the risks before he got killed so...'

Like Niamh said, she was young and starstruck. She wasn't just going off with random strangers, she was going off with well known people and she probably felt safer for it. The problem here isn't her lack of judgement but the fact that these people abused the trust she had in them, as misplaced as it might be.

Rape goes unreported and unpunished far too much because most victims don't want to be put on trial when they are already in a vulnerable position. Even mentioning the risks she took takes blame away from her attackers. The courts, in these cases, need to focus less on the victim and how they can blame her for what happened and more on establishing whether consent was given or if the victim was even in a position to give consent.

Everything else is just noise.

[smudgie]

Friends and partners can rape you, more likely than a stranger I reckon.

[user104658]

Oh yeah of course, you want your kids to be safe always but equally can you imagine something like this happening and getting annoyed with your child rather than the rapist? of course not because it would sound like you were giving some of the blame to them which would be very wrongWell no, and I do think that's part of the problem especially on social media etc (and news website comments... Those are the absolute worst) where it really does come across as a "well, what do you expect?" in the sense that the attackers shouldn't even be blamed or were "encouraged" or similar. But then I do think it can go too far the other way to the point where people are enabled or almost encouraged to engage in risky behaviour because "it SHOULD be fine to do these things and not have to feel at risk". Which is true; it should be fine... But it isn't... It is risky. Its almost like the message is "do it anyway" as a sort of protest move? But the idea that we can push and protest and change things, or educate people, to the point where these situations are "safe" is madness. The reality is that the world is full of dangerous individuals who will take advantage of and harm others for their own gain and enjoyment, and we can and obviously should punish them if they are caught doing that, but there will always be more of them in waiting.

[Niamh.]

Well no, and I do think that's part of the problem especially on social media etc (and news website comments... Those are the absolute worst) where it really does come across as a "well, what do you expect?" in the sense that the attackers shouldn't even be blamed or were "encouraged" or similar. But then I do think it can go too far the other way to the point where people are enabled or almost encouraged to engage in risky behaviour because "it SHOULD be fine to do these things and not have to feel at risk". Which is true; it should be fine... But it isn't... It is risky. Its almost like the message is "do it anyway" as a sort of protest move? But the idea that we can push and protest and change things, or educate people, to the point where these situations are "safe" is madness. The reality is that the world is full of dangerous individuals who will take advantage of and harm others for their own gain and enjoyment, and we can and obviously should punish them if they are caught doing that, but there will always be more of them in waiting.

I suppose, there's a time and a place for it and imo saying it (and it gets said sfm around rape cases) in conversations around rape cases makes it sound like victim blaming (and a lot of times its very purposefully victim blaming)

[user104658]

There's risk in everything, we don't say 'well, this person got murdered but he didn't think of the risks before he got killed so...'

Like Niamh said, she was young and starstruck. She wasn't just going off with random strangers, she was going off with well known people and she probably felt safer for it. The problem here isn't her lack of judgement but the fact that these people abused the trust she had in them, as misplaced as it might be.


Tbf I've kind of veered off into talking about this sort of situation in general rather than this specific case, it sounds like a fairly unusual situation, and I also think the issue of real consent in general in these situations becomes quite murky - people who are "starstruck" or if it's with an individual who holds some power, they might even verbally consent to something they don't actually want to do or are uncomfortable with, out of fear of what happens if they don't. Is that even real consent then? But how do you legislate for those issues?


Rape goes unreported and unpunished far too much because most victims don't want to be put on trial when they are already in a vulnerable position. Even mentioning the risks she took takes blame away from her attackers. The courts, in these cases, need to focus less on the victim and how they can blame her for what happened and more on establishing whether consent was given or if the victim was even in a position to give consent.

I do agree with that, there needs to be some sort of major overhaul of how sexual assault cases are put through the courts in general so that it's handled sensitively and considerately no matter what the outcome is. Victims privacy needs to be respected whether the accused is found guilty or otherwise, the potential damage to the mental health of a victim is absolutely massive, even if there is a conviction, and it's little wonder that people don't want to put themselves through it.

On the flipside - whether people want to believe it or not - there ARE false allegations made sometimes, and the lives of innocent people can be ruined off the back of them even if it all comes out. Mud sticks, so to speak.

If it was all handled with more of a sense of decency and privacy in the first place, many of those problems could be tackled.

[Crimson Dynamo]

The victims were 2 lads who got accused of rape falsely

Thank God we have decent law to stop their lives being ruined

[Kizzy]

Spit roasts have been going for years especially footballers and they get treated like gods.
These are not men but animals.

But a woman has to keep her wits about her going home with and a man you just met and to go with more than one man you have only just met is asking for trouble.

Victim blaming, have you seen that vid about tea they show to kids?..... You should watch it.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Victim blaming, have you seen that vid about tea they show to kids?..... You should watch it.

Thankfully for the 2 lads it seems the jury also had watched it hence why they were cleared

[AnnieK]

The victims were 2 lads who got accused of rape falsely

Thank God we have decent law to stop their lives being ruined

And thankfully enough of the trial was covered so people have seen just what kind of "lads" they are.

[Crimson Dynamo]

And thankfully enough of the trial was covered so people have seen just what kind of "lads" they are.

yep, just because a rope says VIP it does not guarantee you a gentleman or a lady

[user104658]

yep, just because a rope says VIP it does not guarantee you a gentleman or a ladyUsually the opposite it seems, especially with sports stars, which is a shame really. Maybe inevitable though. Young people who have soared to fame and money (and with it power) very quickly and off of the back of a physical talent, not with brainpower. Leaves us with an awful lot of "lads" who believe themselves to be invincible and able to do whatever they want without consequences.

I guess cases like this, even with them not facing legal repercussions, at least send a message to other similarly minded individuals, that they are NOT invincible and can easily ruin their own careers at the very least with their actions. Which might stop as many girls ending up in, however you look at it, really dark situations like this one.

[Tom4784]

The victims were 2 lads who got accused of rape falsely

Thank God we have decent law to stop their lives being ruined

Work on coming up with better bait, this is weak.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Work on coming up with better bait, this is weak.

Yes and continually trying to shut down a debate by saying that again

is baiting


still as you are still a mod i doubt you care..

[Kizzy]

Is there any offence that won't be glossed over to save their careers?

[Tom4784]

Not a few pages back you were trying to shut me down by making out that I couldn't comment on the article without being in the courtroom. Keep track of what you post.

What you said was baiting, you know this is a sensitive topic, you know that we're talking about victim blaming yet you make a blatantly incendiary post making out that not guilty is the same as being falsely accused because you KNOW it'll get a reaction. It's what you do.

[thesheriff443]

I'm not blaming the victim in this case I'm saying she was reckless and so what If i was blaming her! I'm just as entitled to that opinion as anyone else's opinion.

As a parent I have raised my daughter to be aware of the dangers that are out there.

[Crimson Dynamo]

I'm not blaming the victim in this case I'm saying she was reckless and so what If i was blaming her! I'm just as entitled to that opinion as anyone else's opinion.

As a parent I have raised my daughter to be aware of the dangers that are out there.

The victim blaming thing is a pretty common shut down tactic, its bog standard in "debates" like this. It usually means you are making good points tbh

[Kizzy]

The victim blaming thing is a pretty common shut down tactic, its bog standard in "debates" like this. It usually means you are making good points tbh

Or... as seen here it was just actually victim blaming.

[Marsh.]

I'm not blaming the victim in this case I'm saying she was reckless and so what If i was blaming her! I'm just as entitled to that opinion as anyone else's opinion.

As a parent I have raised my daughter to be aware of the dangers that are out there.So what if you were?
Well the responsibility of the rape is always on the rapist. It is their crime and theirs alone no matter the actions of the victim.

Can you think the victim careless or irresponsible in putting themselves in harms way or leaving themselves vulnerable? Of course. Can they actually be blamed for the rape? No. Not at all.

[user104658]

Can you think the victim careless or irresponsible in putting themselves in harms way or leaving themselves vulnerable? Of course. Can they actually be blamed for the rape? No. Not at all.

Surely the issue there though, is that a lot of people would brand the former as the latter? i.e pointing out that someone has engaged in risky behaviour is seen as "victim blaming" when it isn't actually assigning blame in any way.

[Marsh.]

Surely the issue there though, is that a lot of people would brand the former as the latter? i.e pointing out that someone has engaged in risky behaviour is seen as "victim blaming" when it isn't actually assigning blame in any way.Oh in that case I don't see that as victim blaming at all. It's pointing out stupid irresponsible actions IMO.

It's like leaving your door wide open and getting robbed. Are the thieves entirely to blame for the whole crime no matter what? Yes. Did the victim deserve to get robbed? No. But did they make a ****ing stupid idiotic mistake? Yes. [emoji23]

I responded to sheriff though because they did say "so what if I'm blaming them" suggesting they were but oh well.

[Kizzy]

Surely the issue there though, is that a lot of people would brand the former as the latter? i.e pointing out that someone has engaged in risky behaviour is seen as "victim blaming" when it isn't actually assigning blame in any way.

No someone ''blaming victims'' is ''victim blaming'' that's why people accuse them of ''victim blaming'' especially when they admit they ''blame the victim''

[user104658]

No someone ''blaming victims'' is ''victim blaming'' that's why people accuse them of ''victim blaming'' especially when they admit they ''blame the victim''But pointing out basic safety precautions e.g. staying in groups, not going off with relative strangers, not walking home alone or through secluded areas etc. is often lumped in as "victim blaming". I'm not saying that's happening here, but it does happen? A common reply being "people shouldn't have to do those things because people shouldn't rape!"... Which sort of goes without saying. Obviously rape and other assaults should never happen... But they do happen... And therefore, taking as many precautions as is feasible is important.

[Brillopad]

But pointing out basic safety precautions e.g. staying in groups, not going off with relative strangers, not walking home alone or through secluded areas etc. is often lumped in as "victim blaming". I'm not saying that's happening here, but it does happen? A common reply being "people shouldn't have to do those things because people shouldn't rape!"... Which sort of goes without saying. Obviously rape and other assaults should never happen... But they do happen... And therefore, taking as many precautions as is feasible is important.

Does that include how they dress - it is a fine line! Women in rape trials have always had their characters’ questioned? Par for the course.

Some cultures ostensibly ‘protect’ women by keeping them virtual prisoners in the home and not allowing them a voice. If they break the ‘rules’ the consequences can be severe. Victim blaming of women is rife across the board.

[Crimson Dynamo]

No someone ''blaming victims'' is ''victim blaming'' that's why people accuse them of ''victim blaming'' especially when they admit they ''blame the victim''

you have failed to understand TS point

[Kizzy]

But pointing out basic safety precautions e.g. staying in groups, not going off with relative strangers, not walking home alone or through secluded areas etc. is often lumped in as "victim blaming". I'm not saying that's happening here, but it does happen? A common reply being "people shouldn't have to do those things because people shouldn't rape!"... Which sort of goes without saying. Obviously rape and other assaults should never happen... But they do happen... And therefore, taking as many precautions as is feasible is important.

This happened in a group.. parties often contain people you don't know, how in this context is she in any way culpable?

Your foreshadowing of what could happen isn't relevant here.

[Kizzy]

you have failed to understand TS point

ok

[thesheriff443]

Do members know about the good2go ap for consenting to sex?

Should this ap get world wide coverage and send out a message to men and woman that this ap is just as important as using a condom when having sex with some you have just met.

What do you lot think?

[Marsh.]

Stupid idea that is 5 years old anyway and didn't really catch on.

What's next? Signing a contract as part of foreplay?

What if one of them changes their mind after using the app? What if he proceeds to hurt her and refuse to stop?

Apps don't work when it comes to oversimplifying life.

[thesheriff443]

Stupid idea that is 5 years old anyway and didn't really catch on.

What's next? Signing a contract as part of foreplay?

What if one of them changes their mind after using the app? What if he proceeds to hurt her and refuse to stop?

Apps don't work when it comes to oversimplifying life.

It sets out the rules of consent in the ap, Something need to be done to give both men and women protection.

Before everyone shoots me down in flames! Does any one else have any ideas.

[thesheriff443]

Should professional sports men that are found to of had spit roast sex be heavily fined or sacked because they should have a moral duty to up hold.

[Marsh.]

It sets out the rules of consent in the ap, Something need to be done to give both men and women protection.

Before everyone shoots me down in flames! Does any one else have any ideas.But... It doesn't.

Rape can happen after "consent" and no silly "agreement" beforehand changes that.

How do they prove the agreement was broken anymore than they prove they said no?

It doesn't work in the slightest.

[Vicky.]

Paddys lawyer is threatening to sue anyone who tweets '#Ibelieveher'

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/rugby-rape-trial-libel-me-and-ill-sue-you-warns-jackson-36760750.html

Mr Jackson's lawyers said they were "monitoring everything", including social media commentary, WhatsApp, Google searches and the protests that have taken place in Belfast, Londonderry and across Ireland;
People using the "IBelieveHer" hashtag were warned it was defamatory, meaning every one of the thousands who have shared it on Twitter is at risk of being sued;
Belfast solicitor Kevin Winters said they were "setting down a marker" and would not hesitate to issue proceedings;
Sources close to the legal teams said they were monitoring online content at all times;
It emerged a juror had posted an online comment on the verdict, and could face arrest and contempt of court proceedings.

How on earth are they monitoring whatsapp, its private and encrypted :laugh:

Can't find the jurors comment

Anyway, in response, over 4000 peeople have tweeted #SueMePaddy

https://twitter.com/hashtag/SueMePaddy?src=hash

What an idiot, they must know that this will inflame things further and a threat of being sued is just not going to make people shut up about something they feel passionately about anyway.

(Yes, I have tweeted both hashtags)

[Vicky.]

Sorry 16k tweets with the suemepaddy hashtag. Was 4k last i checked :laugh:

[user104658]

This is a mess and if things like this keep happening, it's going to lead to justifications for massive crackdowns on freedom of speech, social networking, and the free and open Internet in general. It's mob rule, not justice.

[Vicky.]

It is completely usual for people to comment on high profile cases, and to speculate/discuss even after the outcome, not sure why this should be different in rape cases. I followed this case fairly closely and in all honesty, I do believe her, else I would not have tweeted that. I think they were very lucky to get off with it, and tbh Paddys behaviour since the verdict has been utterly disgraceful and I cannot feel sorry for him at all. Notice the rest of them are not getting grief (besides the Ibelieveher stuff, if that counts as grief rather than support for the 'alleged' victim) and...to use a popular rape myth thats actually right in this case.. his behaviour and the behaviour of his legal team has brought this on himself. Also given he did not explicitly loudly say no, or scream, clearly he is enjoying this. Thats how is goes, right?

The whatsapp chat alone kind of shows that they were aware that she was distressed. They even said this, whilst joking about how much of a mess she was in ffs.

[Tom4784]

If he tried to sue people for posting a hashtag it would likely get thrown out of court.

I don't think a spoiled misogynist throwing his toys out of the pram will lead to the destruction of freedom of speech and a free internet.

[Vicky.]

If he tried to sue people for posting a hashtag it would likely get thrown out of court.

I don't think a spoiled misogynist throwing his toys out of the pram will lead to the destruction of freedom of speech and a free internet.

I think it would go very very wrong for him. I may be understanding things wrongly but as far as I know, there is a lower burden of proof for civil cases. So if by some miracle his case was heard, he would have to prove that the tweet was false and basically go through the case again but with a lower burden of proof.

Funny how the victim was accused of being after cash (despite turning down cash for dropping the case...) and the first thing this dickhead does is start threatening to sue all over the place. He is welcome to sue me if he wants to, I have like minus 4 quid in the bank and maybe 20k worth of debt he can take half of :laugh:

[Vicky.]

979812400001142791

Also look at the behaviour of the general public during the trial man...****ing ridiculous.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/laughter-jeers-and-scoffs-from-public-gallery-at-woman-were-shocking-36761337.html

[Kizzy]

This is a mess and if things like this keep happening, it's going to lead to justifications for massive crackdowns on freedom of speech, social networking, and the free and open Internet in general. It's mob rule, not justice.

Throughout history there have been protestations this is just one... what do you suggest those who feel this is tantamount to injustice do sit down and shut the feck up?
Is that what kept Worboys inside?

I don't understand your passive 'all hail the establishment' conformism.

[user104658]

I don't understand your passive 'all hail the establishment' conformism.

I'm hardly a conformist I just find the idea of twitter / Facebook based mob justice absolutely terrifying. Like outsourcing trial outcomes to a poll in The Sun. In fact, is there anything MORE conformist than a hashtag bandwagon? Maybe that thing where everyone changes their Facebook profile picture to the same thing or pattern to show everyone how politically engaged they are. Urgh.

[Marsh.]

I'm hardly a conformist I just find the idea of twitter / Facebook based mob justice absolutely terrifying. Like outsourcing trial outcomes to a poll in The Sun. In fact, is there anything MORE conformist than a hashtag bandwagon? Maybe that thing where everyone changes their Facebook profile picture to the same thing or pattern to show everyone how politically engaged they are. Urgh.Yeah, the actual sheep calling others followers. :joker:

Most people using the hashtag won't have even read up on any details.

[Vicky.]

Excuse me, I have followed this trial the whole way through. Niamh brought it to my attention in the early stages :hmph:

And I have not seen anyone call anyone else a follower either. I have not read through all the tweets obviously as there are so many of them, but those I did read, it was pretty clear that they DID know about the case. The ones posting 'Ibelieveher' and nothing else..or totally irrelevant nonsense, I suspect may have been doing it for followers in most cases, as is the case with most trending hashtags.

Again though, I do not understand why everyone is supposed to just shut up when its a rape trial once a verdict is reached, when its fine to talk about other publicized cases :shrug:

[Marsh.]

I wasn't talking about you. :nono:

I said most of the sheep on social media.

You see it all the time. Something starts trending so they follow and put the filter on their profile picture or retweet something and they haven't the foggiest about the story behind it.

[user104658]

Excuse me, I have followed this trial the whole way through. Niamh brought it to my attention in the early stages :hmph:

And I have not seen anyone call anyone else a follower either. I have not read through all the tweets obviously as there are so many of them, but those I did read, it was pretty clear that they DID know about the case. The ones posting 'Ibelieveher' and nothing else..or totally irrelevant nonsense, I suspect may have been doing it for followers in most cases, as is the case with most trending hashtags.

Again though, I do not understand why everyone is supposed to just shut up when its a rape trial once a verdict is reached, when its fine to talk about other publicized cases :shrug:It's not that people are supposed to shut up, or "supposed" to do anything really, I'd just rather see considered dialogue than spammed twitter crap.

For example... I don't buy the official line on the McCann case at all and I don't have any issue seeing it discussed. But I'm not on Twitter spamming "HASHTAG IT WUZ GERRY!"

It grumbles my goose. Because its for thick people. Basically.

[Kizzy]

It's not that people are supposed to shut up, or "supposed" to do anything really, I'd just rather see considered dialogue than spammed twitter crap.

For example... I don't buy the official line on the McCann case at all and I don't have any issue seeing it discussed. But I'm not on Twitter spamming "HASHTAG IT WUZ GERRY!"

It grumbles my goose. Because its for thick people. Basically.

If all it is is spammed twitter crap then how will that equate to a crackdown on freedom of speech, social networking and the internet in general as an outcome?

Why would the govt care if some doofi posted a hashtag...or changed their profile picture for a day. it's hardly highly organised civil disobedience is it?

[Vicky.]

https://www.belfastlive.co.uk/news/belfast-news/823-alleged-rapes-reported-northern-14477973

****ing hell, thought our 6% conviction rate was bad :umm2:

If we use the PSNI’s own 2016/17 figures , it would suggest rape reports now have a 1.8% chance of resulting in a guilty verdict – when, if Home Office calculations are to be believed, 96% of victims are telling the truth.

[Kizzy]

https://www.belfastlive.co.uk/news/belfast-news/823-alleged-rapes-reported-northern-14477973

****ing hell, thought our 6% conviction rate was bad :umm2:

1.8%.... Holy feck! That's shocking, makes you wonder why women bother reporting attacks at all :(

[thesheriff443]

A new rape alarm needs to be made that can be activated while the rape/sexual assault is happening, gps tracking once activated it records sound with dedicated officers assigned to go to the scene.

Because unless the woman gets beat to pulp, the figures of conviction rates speak for them selves.

[Niamh.]

https://www.belfastlive.co.uk/news/belfast-news/823-alleged-rapes-reported-northern-14477973

****ing hell, thought our 6% conviction rate was bad :umm2:May as well be legal ****ing hell

[Vicky.]

May as well be legal ****ing hell

Pretty much is really, especially if you can make sure your victim has even just a drop of alcohol beforehand, or pick them well...if she is not a virgin, there is a good chance you dragging her sexual history up in court will get you off. its pathetic. Absolutely pathetic.

[user104658]

I actually think the "silent rape alarm" is a brilliant idea? It's been kind of proven that personal attack alarms aren't all that effective, but something along the same lines that could be pulled that immediately starts recording audio (and preferably uploads it to a secure remote location).

Would go a long way to proving lack of consent in court, surely?

[kirklancaster]

I actually think the "silent rape alarm" is a brilliant idea? It's been kind of proven that personal attack alarms aren't all that effective, but something along the same lines that could be pulled that immediately starts recording audio (and preferably uploads it to a secure remote location).

Would go a long way to proving lack of consent in court, surely?

A really great idea T.S. It WOULD actually.

[Vicky.]

Anything that would maybe get conviction rapes up is a good idea

However I can already see the defenses for it and the accusations of lying still. All it would be would be the likes of 'we were roleplaying'. Etc. There will always be a lie. And it will be accepted near every time too. Many people freeze when raped/attacked and the ability to speak is gone totally (apparently the majority mammal reaction) so even if they could move to get the alarm thing, it would just be the sounds of one person having sex (or more if mutiple attackers) and it could be claimed that the victim just did not make a sound during a consensual encounter. Or sometimes, the sounds made when in pain/trying to get away sound fairly similar to those in pleasure too D:

Edit. Though connecting automatically to the local police station (and the police to actually respond) could be a good help actually, if such a device could be made. Could help in many cases too, the likes of 'normal' assaults, muggings maybe, an such.

What would help, would be to stop allowing defence teams to bring in irrelevant stuff such as the victims previous sexual history, when the victims team is not allowed to bring up anything about the accused life, even the fact that they have previous convictions for rape! Its just disgusting that this girl spent 8 days being cross examined where the actual accused people got a few hours. Who exactly was on trial here?

Also I think in sexual assault cases (and possibly all serious cases tbh) a panel of experts should be used rather than a jury. Tbh rape myths are far too widespread and repeated in the media and such on a regular basis and so many people believe them so its never going to be a fair trial. If a person does not act like 'the perfect victim' (ie. crying nonestop for a week afterwards, developing anxiety, etc) then they are automatically lying to many people.

[user104658]

Let's face it, if we had some way of ensuring impartiality, ALL cases would be better tried by panels of experts rather than random laypeople. The jury system is deeply flawed and far too often comes down to "who has the more experienced and more convincing representation".

[Kizzy]

Let's face it, if we had some way of ensuring impartiality, ALL cases would be better tried by panels of experts rather than random laypeople. The jury system is deeply flawed and far too often comes down to "who has the more experienced and more convincing representation".

Who would these rape experts be?
Does evidence of physical assault count as nothing then, she was bleeding everywhere for a start now to my mind that's a convincing representation of rape.
She was described as 'hysterical' by a taxi driver, She the next morning stated she had been raped and the encounter she had was not consensual.

My theory is that this meritocracy we live in has diverged into the justice system.

[user104658]

Who would these rape experts be?

I said ALL trials, as the outcomes would probably be more accurate if there was a jury of trained doctors, psychologists, sociologists etc. instead of Greg from Tesco and Samantha from the Chippy.

[Vicky.]

She was described as 'hysterical' by a taxi driver,

And by the guys' friend too.

[Kizzy]

I said ALL trials, as the outcomes would probably be more accurate if there was a jury of trained doctors, psychologists, sociologists etc. instead of Greg from Tesco and Samantha from the Chippy.

How feasible is it that 12 professionals will be available for every single trial?...
Come on TS get some perspective, and 12 peers whether they work at tesco or the chippy are perfectly capable of making a reasoned decision based on the facts, what kind of a society are you proposing that only doctors and psychologist are capable of making an informed decision based on evidence?

What could these people know that sam and greg don't? they are given the same information :/

[thesheriff443]

I do think people are forgetting at least half of the jury will be women!, who come to a conclusion based on the evidence they hear.

[thesheriff443]

Are rape cases a by product to the fact people are having more casual sex with more partners than before and sex is taken too lightly?

[thesheriff443]

I think an anti rape device could easily be intergrated with the fit bit watch.

[lime]

I do think people are forgetting at least half of the jury will be women!, who come to a conclusion based on the evidence they hear.

No you are wrong there Sheiriff which you continue to do about this case...the jury in this case consisted of 3 women and 9 men......you also claimed earlier in this thread that the girl in this case never mentioned rape originally wrong again..the first message from this girl was saying she was raped...she was however questioned for 2 days over why she never told those in the rape crisis centre she was orally raped.....over those 2 days she told them that she thought rape would mean anally or vagina "seems quite plauseable for me " she told them over those 2 days that she thought a penis being shoved her mouth was sexual assault

[thesheriff443]

No you are wrong there Sheiriff which you continue to do about this case...the jury in this case consisted of 3 women and 9 men......you also claimed earlier in this thread that the girl in this case never mentioned rape originally wrong again..the first message from this girl was saying she was raped...she was however questioned for 2 days over why she never told those in the rape crisis centre she was orally raped.....over those 2 days she told them that she thought rape would mean anally or vagina "seems quite plauseable for me " she told them over those 2 days that she thought a penis being shoved her mouth was sexual assault

Then I stand corrected on the jury being split equally, in my eyes the fact it was not is totally wrong.

I don't remember saying the girl in this case never mentioned being raped.

To be honest I have not read up on this case in details like other members have, I have touched on the wider picture and women in general going home with people they only just met.

[thesheriff443]

Are you coming in for coffer after a night out.

What do members associate this saying with?

[user104658]

How feasible is it that 12 professionals will be available for every single trial?...

Not very realistic but that doesn't mean it wouldnt be better.

Come on TS get some perspective, and 12 peers whether they work at tesco or the chippy are perfectly capable of making a reasoned decision based on the facts, what kind of a society are you proposing that only doctors and psychologist are capable of making an informed decision based on evidence?

There are many people in various jobs who are indeed capable. There are also many who lap up tabloid headlines and will be easily swayed by a lawyer's rhetoric. I'm not really interested in playing the "everyone in the world is actually intelligent and rational and how dare anyone suggest otherwise!" game. Some people are thick and easily lead, and they're more likely to have low levels of education or be in menial jobs. Doesn't mean that ALL are, and doesn't mean that ALL doctors etc. are better equipped, but that's why I said "if there was some way to ensure impartiality"

What could these people know that sam and greg don't? they are given the same information :/

Oh come on. Are you suggesting that your hairdresser has the same capacity to evaluate the statements of victims / witnesses / accused as a trained mental health professional or sociologist? What a bizarre thought. Why does anyone bother getting any education at all? That's like asking what your doctor could possibly know that your next door neighbour doesn't because "after all, they have Google!"

[Niamh.]

I agree a panel of experts would be better but you'd have to pay them really, you're not going to get a load of experts just volunteering their time either so probably not possible unless they pump more money in really

[Kizzy]

Not very realistic but that doesn't mean it wouldnt be better.



There are many people in various jobs who are indeed capable. There are also many who lap up tabloid headlines and will be easily swayed by a lawyer's rhetoric. I'm not really interested in playing the "everyone in the world is actually intelligent and rational and how dare anyone suggest otherwise!" game. Some people are thick and easily lead, and they're more likely to have low levels of education or be in menial jobs. Doesn't mean that ALL are, and doesn't mean that ALL doctors etc. are better equipped, but that's why I said "if there was some way to ensure impartiality"



Oh come on. Are you suggesting that your hairdresser has the same capacity to evaluate the statements of victims / witnesses / accused as a trained mental health professional or sociologist? What a bizarre thought. Why does anyone bother getting any education at all? That's like asking what your doctor could possibly know that your next door neighbour doesn't because "after all, they have Google!"

Explain to me why it would be better, actually don't bother because in your next highlighted comment you admit that not all doctors would be better equipped... wow that was a quick turn around wasn't it?

This meritocratic system based on academic superiority is flawed, as that is not what a democratic system is based on. I'm not playing any game I agree some people are as thick as lead, they may speak arbitrarily against someone due to their job or the clothes they wear that is true across the spectrum of society.

Yes that's what I'm saying, it's not a bizarre concept.. a jury of peers has been the cornerstone of our criminal justice system for centuries. It wasn't my idea.
People get an education to ensure competency in their specified area of expertise, it doesn't elevate you to consummate guru.

[Northern Monkey]

Well you do have to wonder what evidence all these #ibelieveher armchair feminists have that the jury didn’t?
Also why would she go home with a bunch of rugby players?
What did she want from them?
Obviously i know no more than anyone else but these are important questions.

[Marsh.]

But a doctor or mental health professional IS better equipped. When it comes to a he said/she said case anyway.

[Niamh.]

Well you do have to wonder what evidence all these #ibelieveher armchair feminists have that the jury didn’t?
Also why would she go home with a bunch of rugby players?
What did she want from them?
Obviously i know no more than anyone else but these are important questions.1.8% rape conviction rate for rapes in NI. So 98.2% of women are lying? Yeah seems likely.

[user104658]

Explain to me why it would be better, actually don't bother because in your next highlighted comment you admit that not all doctors would be better equipped... wow that was a quick turn around wasn't it?

This meritocratic system based on academic superiority is flawed, as that is not what a democratic system is based on. I'm not playing any game I agree some people are as thick as lead, they may speak arbitrarily against someone due to their job or the clothes they wear that is true across the spectrum of society.

Yes that's what I'm saying, it's not a bizarre concept.. a jury of peers has been the cornerstone of our criminal justice system for centuries. It wasn't my idea.
People get an education to ensure competency in their specified area of expertise, it doesn't elevate you to consummate guru.

Which would be fine if I'd suggested "a jury of random peers except they have to have a degree" but that's not what I said at all :think:. It would be a jury of professionals with some insight into the area of each specific case; so for example, doctors, psychiatrists and mental health professionals in a rape case... forensic psychologists and criminologists in a murder trial... economists and business analysts in large fraud cases, systems analysts and web experts in hacking cases, etc. etc.

[Marsh.]

Which would be fine if I'd suggested "a jury of random peers except they have to have a degree" but that's not what I said at all :think:. It would be a jury of professionals with some insight into the area of each specific case; so for example, doctors, psychiatrists and mental health professionals in a rape case... forensic psychologists and criminologists in a murder trial... economists and business analysts in large fraud cases, systems analysts and web experts in hacking cases, etc. etc.

But this doesn't work for the classist agenda. :fist:

[Vicky.]

Its not just feminists saying they believe her NM.

OJ was acquitted, was he innocent?

Whatever her reasons for going back with them, that does not mean she cannot be raped. Hell even if she went back wanting to have a huge gangbang, that does not mean they cannot rape her.

[Niamh.]

Yep ^^^

Also she didn't just go home with the 3 guys, there was a group went back including other women, presumably for a house party

[thesheriff443]

Most rapes are committed by people the victim knows.

But it's woman who should be looking at these rape cases and asking themselves do they want to risk being raped by going home with a stranger and if it did happen the likely chance of a conviction is so low

[Niamh.]

Imagine if we were talking about murder, "People should just make sure not to get murdered because the conviction rates are bad"

[Vicky.]

So women should avoid being anywhere with men ever. Including men that they know. Just, do not ever be anywhere with a man? Yeah, thats realistic.

Then it would be, women, why are you blaming all men for what happened. Thats unfair.

Basically, its always womens fault. Surprise.

[Vicky.]

Imagine if we were talking about murder, "People should just make sure not to get murdered because the conviction rates are bad"

Quite.

[thesheriff443]

Imagine if we were talking about murder, "People should just make sure not to get murdered because the conviction rates are bad"

But We are not talking about murder.

More women are getting raped, less rapist are getting convicted.

Logic tells us you are safer wearing a cycle helmet from head injury when you ride a bike.

So in tern you are safer not going home with strangers.

[Niamh.]

But We are not talking about murder.

More women are getting raped, less rapist are getting convicted.

Logic tells us you are safer wearing a cycle helmet from head injury when you ride a bike.

So in tern you are safer not going home with strangers.

Oh I know we're not, believe me I know

[Vicky.]

But We are not talking about murder.

More women are getting raped, less rapist are getting convicted.

Logic tells us you are safer wearing a cycle helmet from head injury when you ride a bike.

So in tern you are safer not going home with strangers.

But you are more likely to be raped by someone you know. So logic tells you to never live with a man, never go to male friends houses, infact never go out with male people as they could spike you...etc

Of course women DO modify their behaviour somewhat because of the behaviour of some men. But this woman did not randomly go back with a bunch of men she did not know. She went back in a group, with other women too, to a house party.

[Cherie]

In terms of risk what she did seemed pretty risk free tbh, they were household names and she was in a group.

The rape conviction stats are pretty grim.

[thesheriff443]

Oh I know we're not, believe me I know

That's good then!

[thesheriff443]

In terms of risk what she did seemed pretty risk free tbh, they were household names and she was in a group.

The rape conviction stats are pretty grim.

But at some stage she found herself in a bedroom?

[Niamh.]

In terms of risk what she did seemed pretty risk free tbh, they were household names and she was in a group.

The rape conviction stats are pretty grim.

NI seems really bad, Britain is a little bit better but not much (6% I think?) I can't figures for the Republic of Ireland but we do atleast seem to have a better way of handling rape trials here. Neither the accused or accuser are named and the public are not allowed to attend rape trials

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/district-court/how-rape-trials-in-republic-differ-from-those-in-north-1.3443644

[Cherie]

But at some stage she found herself in a bedroom?

okay so that wasn't so clever as she could have had a kiss and a cuddle without separating herself from the group, that said she should have the right to change her mind and certainly not have to participate in acts if she didn't want to

[Niamh.]

But at some stage she found herself in a bedroom?

She was using the bathroom in the bedroom and Paddy Jackson followed her in.

[Cherie]

NI seems really bad, Britain is a little bit better but not much (6% I think?) I can't figures for the Republic of Ireland but we do atleast seem to have a better way of handling rape trials here. Neither the accused or accuser are named and the public are not allowed to attend rape trials

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/district-court/how-rape-trials-in-republic-differ-from-those-in-north-1.3443644

That seems a much better system, I don't agree with naming people at all

[Niamh.]

That seems a much better system, I don't agree with naming people at all

No me neither

[Vicky.]

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/martina-devlin-twotier-morality-means-girls-face-an-impossible-list-of-dos-and-donts-36757069.html

another list of dos and don'ts.

[Vicky.]

Also possibly the best roundup of events I have seen yet

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/inside-court-12-the-complete-story-of-the-belfast-rape-trial-1.3443620?mode=amp

For anyone commenting without actually knowing anything of the case.

[thesheriff443]

Let's just clear this up, there is no way that I think a woman going home with a stranger gives him the right to rape her.

But women do need to think twice about going any where with someone they have just met.

I have also suggested a device to give women more protection when they are out.

At the moment the only real protection a woman has is to nog go home with strangers and this is based on this case!

[bots]

I haven't been following this case, so please forgive my ignorance of it.

I would just like to put this out there. Under what conditions should a woman be fearful of the potential for rape? In all my years, i've not experienced a single situation where a woman was ever in that danger, whether that be a night out at the pub, office party, train journey, even at strip clubs.

The danger doesn't come from the situation or the attire that a woman chooses to wear. It comes from predators, and predators can strike at any time and at any place.

We can say that woman shouldn't put themselves in a vulnerable position, and to an extent that has some truth, but life is an organic thing, we don't pre-plan every moment of our lives in advance. What was a relatively safe scenario with 3 people in a location, can become an unsafe one if one person leaves, even for a minute. It's impossible to remain safe and secure from predators at all times.

For way too long women have been at a disadvantage, and if that means there needs to be some positive discrimination in their favour to offer them more protection, then it should be done. These predators need to be held accountable.

[Niamh.]

I haven't been following this case, so please forgive my ignorance of it.

I would just like to put this out there. Under what conditions should a woman be fearful of the potential for rape? In all my years, i've not experienced a single situation where a woman was ever in that danger, whether that be a night out at the pub, office party, train journey, even at strip clubs.

The danger doesn't come from the situation or the attire that a woman chooses to wear. It comes from predators, and predators can strike at any time and at any place.

We can say that woman shouldn't put themselves in a vulnerable position, and to an extent that has some truth, but life is an organic thing, we don't pre-plan every moment of our lives in advance. What was a relatively safe scenario with 3 people in a location, can become an unsafe one if one person leaves, even for a minute. It's impossible to remain safe and secure from predators at all times.

For way too long women have been at a disadvantage, and if that means there needs to be some positive discrimination in their favour to offer them more protection, then it should be done. These predators need to be held accountable.

:clap1:

It's good to hear that from a man BOTS, thanks.

[Niamh.]

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/martina-devlin-twotier-morality-means-girls-face-an-impossible-list-of-dos-and-donts-36757069.html

another list of dos and don'ts.

Yep she has it nailed. Just going through your other article now

[Tom4784]

A large number of women will experience sexual violence in their lifetimes, it's a ****ing epidemic and it has been for eons and acting like there's preventative measures is just wrong. Why should a woman have to live her life more cautiously just because, as a soceity, we don't tend to blame a rapist completely for their own actions and choices? 'Oh they committed rape but the woman shouldn't have done this or that!'.

Nothing will ever change while attitudes like that are prevalent in society.

[Crimson Dynamo]

In terms of risk what she did seemed pretty risk free tbh, they were household names and she was in a group.

The rape conviction stats are pretty grim.

and she was not raped

[Niamh.]

and she was not raped

An acquittal in a rape case does not of course necessarily mean that the jury did not believe the complainant, or believed the complainant did not consent, because the prosecution must not only prove lack of consent, but also prove the “mens rea” or mental state of the accused, beyond reasonable doubt.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/district-court/how-rape-trials-in-republic-differ-from-those-in-north-1.3443644

[Crimson Dynamo]

An acquittal in a rape case does not of course necessarily mean that the jury did not believe the complainant, or believed the complainant did not consent, because the prosecution must not only prove lack of consent, but also prove the “mens rea” or mental state of the accused, beyond reasonable doubt.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/district-court/how-rape-trials-in-republic-differ-from-those-in-north-1.3443644

Good as it would have ruined the lives of the lads, the jury over 9 weeks and all the evidence went with the evidence and that, is justice.

[Cherie]

and she was not raped

I guess only she and the accused will know this for sure

[Niamh.]

Good as it would have ruined the lives of the lads, the jury over 9 weeks and all the evidence went with the evidence and that, is justice.

Hopefully it already has, disgusting pigs

[Niamh.]

.

So to Paddy Jackson and Stuart Olding, Blane McIlroy and Rory Harrison, I say this: you may have been found not guilty of the charges brought against you, but you are all guilty of being utter scum. You are damned by your own words. “Spit roasting” women with your friends and later laughing about them as “sluts” and “flutes” doesn’t make you “top shaggers”. It makes you pathetic, inadequate misogynists who see women as nothing more than mere masturbatory receptacles. If you think leaving women bleeding, torn and crying is normal then you should not be having sex. I hope and expect that no woman will ever want to touch any of you after this case. You should not be wearing the jersey of any national sports team, regardless of the verdict.

https://www.stylist.co.uk/long-reads/ulster-rugby-trial-rape-not-guilty-paddy-jackson-stuart-olding-court-case-victim-sexual-assault-opinion/198518/amp?__twitter_impression=true

[Marsh.]

Let's just clear this up, there is no way that I think a woman going home with a stranger gives him the right to rape her.

But women do need to think twice about going any where with someone they have just met.

I have also suggested a device to give women more protection when they are out.

At the moment the only real protection a woman has is to nog go home with strangers and this is based on this case!You admitted earlier that most rapes are committed by men the women already know.

So... avoiding strangers isn't going to do much for rape statistics. Unless they are to avoid being alone with any man they know in their life?

[Marsh.]

"*He played CCTV footage from Ollie’s nightclub which appeared to show her briefly touching the knee of footballer*Kyle Lafferty*and momentarily holding onto the arm of his teammate Will Grigg. "

:umm2:

[Marsh.]

Kind of baffling that vaginal tears and profuse bleeding can be construed as "sex" but holding onto the arm of a rugby player in a nightclub is seen as consent to said sex. Wtf?

[Niamh.]

"*He played CCTV footage from Ollie’s nightclub which appeared to show her briefly touching the knee of footballer*Kyle Lafferty*and momentarily holding onto the arm of his teammate Will Grigg. "

:umm2:

I know right? :/

[Kizzy]

Which would be fine if I'd suggested "a jury of random peers except they have to have a degree" but that's not what I said at all :think:. It would be a jury of professionals with some insight into the area of each specific case; so for example, doctors, psychiatrists and mental health professionals in a rape case... forensic psychologists and criminologists in a murder trial... economists and business analysts in large fraud cases, systems analysts and web experts in hacking cases, etc. etc.

What... on a jury, not as an expert witness to give some insight into how the crime was committed?

The extension to all fields encompassing all crimes is a new one, again I don't see how a professional perspective on a case is collective enough to make a decision as to innocence or guilt on.

[Crimson Dynamo]

When my friend told me she'd been coerced into sex I believed her - but was I right? https://www.telegraph.co.uk/content/dam/Author%20photos/Rowan_Pelling-small.png

I brooded long and hard this weekend about #MeToo and the recent slew of rape trial scandals and the confusion they’ve inevitably sowed in female breasts. For most women the defenestration of Harvey Weinstein was a long-overdue sign that a certain form of sexual predation, involving using your professional status as a crowbar, would not be tolerated again. Who knows whether Weinstein will ever be found guilty in a court of law, but it’s fair to say the court of public opinion is firmly against him.

Then there’s the Belfast rape trial, involving Ulster rugby players who were eventually acquitted of any offence. The crude and debasing social media messages sent between defendants about the girl at the centre of the trial, not to mention the fact she suffered a bleeding vaginal lesion means many people, myself included, can’t help feeling there were offences against basic human decency.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/content/dam/news/2016/05/01/alisonsaunders_trans_NvBQzQNjv4BqpJliwavx4coWFCaEk Esb3kvxIt-lGGWCWqwLa_RXJU8.jpg?imwidth=1400

Pulling in another direction, there’s the resignation of the Director of Public Prosecutions Alison Saunders, whose term of office saw an alarming number of failed rape trials: prosecutions that collapsed after it became clear potentially exonerating evidence (such as flirty online messages following supposed rapes) had been withheld by the police. Cases that, it seems, should never have come to trial. Suddenly many a female heart was stricken with thoughts of a son or younger brother standing in the dock because an awkward sexual encounter had been misconstrued, or regretted.


Yesterday we learnt of a teacher who lost care of a child he’d just adopted because of false allegations of inappropriate sexual behaviour. We cannot avoid the truth that men can find themselves vulnerable too. That the truth may not be instantly or easily resolved – indeed, the truth may not be recoverable at all.



Rape is the hardest offence to prosecute because in almost all instances nobody witnesses the disputed sexual encounter and – unlike murder, GBH, burglary or fraud – it’s often impossible to say for certain an offence has even been committed. That’s really what the trial’s about. Yet we still act as judge and jury on the Twittersphere, expressing our convictions with an almost messianic sense of certainty. We stare at photos of those charged with sexual assault, read press reports and issue our own verdicts: happiest when our cherished social templates go unchallenged.

Yet it’s vital to bear in mind nice guys can and sometimes do behave in an uncharacteristically oafish fashion and that boorish rugger lads have plenty of consensual sex. However outraged I feel about the low rate of rape convictions, however dark my feelings about Weinstein and the Belfast defendants’ “spit-roasting”, there’s no doubt we must cling to the central tenet of justice: guilt must be proven beyond reasonable doubt. I know from personal experience how easy it is to let personal prejudice and dislike distort your better judgement.




Twenty-eight years ago I was an undergraduate in my final year of studies, discovering the joys of feminist theory and bohemian escapism. This largely meant that when I wasn’t devouring the works of Doris Lessing and Sylvia Plath, I was swimming naked in the Thames near Abingdon. My interactions with female intimates had a coven-like intensity, which included fomenting fierce dislikes for certain male contemporaries. So when a friend came to me in tears and said she’d been coerced into sex by a man who I was borderline allergic to, I accepted every word without question.

This youth seemed to me to suffer from a particularly toxic brand of condescension and aggression. I’d heard him openly boast of twisting female academics round his finger. My friend was reluctant to take the matter further, which I put down to her conflict-averse and somewhat fey nature. I was the bold, mouthy one in our friendship, so it was clear to me I should act as her champion.

Once resolved, I marched my friend off to lodge an official complaint with the women’s officer and dean, prompting her when she fell strangely silent about her ordeal. The offending student was duly put through disciplinary procedures, which included a period of rustication and instructions to live outside the college’s grounds.

I never felt more like a warrior queen than when I strode across the college lawns shortly after these admonishments and the man came up to me and lobbed a huge gobbet of spittle at my foot. I felt proud of my defence of truth and honour: like Joan of Arc and Boudicca merged into one.

And that’s how I continued feeling for a couple of years. By then I had moved into a flat in London with a group of women, including my assaulted friend from student days. As the months passed, I noticed my friend was inclined to be worryingly economical with the truth. She was also alarmingly flirtatious (and I approve of flirting on the whole) with any man who entered the apartment, sitting at their feet laughing and rubbing their legs. She had a boyfriend of her own who seemed to exist on a pitch of rampant jealousy and despair. He would phone asking where she was and the truth was we generally didn’t know.
"I will never know for sure what happened in that student bedroom three decades ago, but I now embrace my ignorance, uncertainty and the fact some sexual encounters are ambiguous"

Then a trusted mutual friend took me for a drink and revealed that my flatmate had told her boyfriend she’d been raped by a work colleague. I knew the man in question well and simply couldn’t believe it of him. More than that, it made no sense that she would only discuss the rape with her pathologically jealous boyfriend. I decided to quiz the work colleague concerned and after some gentle probing he admitted he’d been having a consensual affair with my flatmate for six months. He gave examples of their pillow talk that absolutely tallied with my friend’s vernacular and humour.

As we talked, a terrible realisation struck me. What if my certainty that my friend had been sexually assaulted during our university days was also open to question? Was that why I’d had to propel her before college authorities? And why the accused youth felt so angry he literally spat on my feet? The woman at the centre of this story is the only friend I’ve ever had to simply stop seeing: her relationship with the truth was simply too taxing. In mitigation, her childhood had been complicated and she had hinted at sexual abuse. Perhaps that was another fabrication, perhaps not.

I will never know for sure what happened in that student bedroom three decades ago, but I now embrace my ignorance, uncertainty and the fact that some sexual encounters are ambiguous. What a learned friend calls “two bad psychodramas colliding”.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/life/know-easy-let-personal-prejudice-distort-better-judgement-rape/

[Cherie]

Also possibly the best roundup of events I have seen yet

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/inside-court-12-the-complete-story-of-the-belfast-rape-trial-1.3443620?mode=amp


For anyone commenting without actually knowing anything of the case.

There are a few things in her statement that I can't make sense of

She said she froze as Jackson pushed her down on the bed and with her tight trousers caught at her knees, she couldn’t move. “I was face down on the bed and he was having sex with me.”
Jackson knew she did not want it to happen “but he kept going”, she said.
Then the door opened and Olding walked in. “My heart just sank. I knew what was going to happen. I looked Patrick Jackson straight in the eyes and said ‘please no, not him as well’.”

how could she look him in the eyes if she was face down on the bed
?

t this point the door opened and she heard a female voice. The jury would later hear this was Dara Florence, a key witness in the case.
The woman turned her head away because she feared, with all the photographs being taken downstairs, that she might be filmed. Jackson asked this other woman did she want to stay but Florence said no and shut the door.


When she heard the female voice why didn't she shout out, would your first thought be I don't want to be filmed and even with your head turned away you could still shout out..

but then the testimony from the taxi driver is very condemning..

its a difficult case for sure

[Vicky.]

Dara Florence thing is so odd. I mean, those believing the guys are using Florence as some kind of gotcha thing right. However Florence stated that she saw a threesome, with Paddy jackson with his dick in the complainant, thrusting from behind her.

But Jackson reckoned he did not have penetrative sex with the girl, only oral and he fingered her a little.

So if Florence is deemed a reliable witness..thats just one of many of Paddys lies he has been caught out on, right?!

But yes, the turning ones head to avoid photos is quite weird. I don't think the not crying out thing is though, its pretty well known that many people when attacked lose the ability to speak.

The being facedown thing, well, you could still turn your head surely?

[thesheriff443]

Sex took place between three people but there was clearly reasonable doubt for the men not to be convicted of rape or even a lesser charge of sexual assault.

It's not the first case of this kind and sadly won't be the last.

[user104658]

The being facedown thing, well, you could still turn your head surely?

And make direct eye contact with someone who is pinning you from behind? I suppose if you're in The Exorcist...

That's not to say that she wasn't attacked, still, as people's memories of these events can become muddled and confused, but it is definitely a contradictory statement. Either she turned around at some point, or she didn't make eye contact when she says she did.

[Vicky.]

Hmm maybe. I took facedown to be, well, facedown but with legs on the floor, so kind of bent over the bed rather than pinned facedown flat on bed?

[Cherie]

Hmm maybe. I took facedown to be, well, facedown but with legs on the floor, so kind of bent over the bed rather than pinned facedown flat on bed?

what kind of position is that :omgno:

[Crimson Dynamo]

the number of rape allegations has soared in the last 5 years

[Niamh.]

the number of rape allegations has soared in the last 5 years

So?

[Crimson Dynamo]

So?

that affects the conviction rate figures which are flat over a long period

[Niamh.]

that affects the conviction rate figures which are flat over a long period

Sorry for being stupid but I don't know what you mean :laugh:

[Vicky.]

what kind of position is that :omgno:

Imagine you are stood facing your bed.

Well like that, but bent over the bed.

Feels quite..wrong to be discussing this in this way but yeah, thats what I meant D:

So you could turn your head and look over your shoulder. Not like..pinned flat on the bed as in lying flat

[Vicky.]

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/media-application-to-lift-belfast-rape-trial-restrictions-to-be-heard-on-monday-1.3450089

Wonder what this is.

Northern Ireland’s Lord Chief Justice has ordered that a media application to lift reporting restrictions on the rape trial of Paddy Jackson and Stuart Olding be heard on Monday.

Following the completion of the trial last Wednesday, which saw all four accused acquitted, Judge Patricia Smyth ordered that there should be no reporting of the legal argument which took place during the trial in the absence of the jury.

The purpose of reporting restrictions on legal argument is generally to prevent a jury being prejudiced by material heard in its absence. Such restrictions typically fall away after a trial once a jury has been discharged.

After the verdict several media organisations, including The Irish Times, objected to Judge Smyth continuing restrictions post-trial. Judge Smyth refused to hear the application and postponed the matter until April 25th for a full hearing.

Following this adjournment, the media made an application for an expedited hearing date.

Today at the Court of Appeal in Belfast, Lord Chief Justice Declan Morgan said he appreciated the fact that “news is perishable” and said that Judge Smyth has now agreed to hear the matter on Monday, April 9th.

Chief Justice Morgan, who was sitting as a Crown Court judge, said that any objections to the order should be lodged by close of business on Friday. Counsel for Stuart Olding, Frank O’Donoghue QC, objected to this deadline saying it would not be possible to furnish objections by Friday.

He said he is due to go away this week and that his junior in the case is already abroad. Furthermore Arthur Harvey QC, representing co-accused Blane McIlroy, is currently in America, he said.

Mr O’Donoghue said he needed time to sit down and work out what information the media is seeking permission to report.

Outlining the objections to lifting reporting restrictions, counsel said two men in the case are facing disciplinary proceedings and two men have taken civil proceedings.

This is understood to be a reference to a review faced by Mr Jackson and Mr Olding by Ulster Rugby and the IRFU and a civil action taken by the two men against the BBC for breach of privacy.

Mr O’Donoghue said there is also a general concern that further publication of “prejudicial material” could undermine the not guilty verdict delivered by the jury. He said certain material has already appeared in the press which has not been respectful of the verdict.

The Lord Chief Justice told counsel any timetable problems can be raised on Monday with Judge Smyth.

Defense team seem to want it kept quiet, whatever it is.

[Niamh.]

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/media-application-to-lift-belfast-rape-trial-restrictions-to-be-heard-on-monday-1.3450089

Wonder what this is.



Defense team seem to want it kept quiet, whatever it is.

Ugh in a way I'd rather they didn't, would only make me more annoyed by it all, what we've seen is bad enough. I really want to know what that Juror posted though :laugh:

[Vicky.]

Ugh in a way I'd rather they didn't, would only make me more annoyed by it all, what we've seen is bad enough. I really want to know what that Juror posted though :laugh:

Yeah I kind of feel the same tbh.

Theres been a rumour doing the rounds for a few weeks now that there was a further whatsapp chat that was more incriminating but it was deemed inadmissible. Of course that could be absolute bollocks...but whats for sure is that its something on one+ of the guys involved, and not anything on the woman.

[Niamh.]

Yeah I kind of feel the same tbh.

Theres been a rumour doing the rounds for a few weeks now that there was a further whatsapp chat that was more incriminating but it was deemed inadmissible. Of course that could be absolute bollocks...but whats for sure is that its something on one+ of the guys involved, and not anything on the woman.

yeah sounds like it from that article alright

[thesheriff443]

Ugh in a way I'd rather they didn't, would only make me more annoyed by it all, what we've seen is bad enough. I really want to know what that Juror posted though :laugh:

Let's be honest Niamh, you are more angry than annoyed, and that anger has emotion has come out in the form of contempt towards me.

I'm the man that found a fourteen year old walking a country road at 230 in the morning made her call her mum and stayed with her until her mum came to pick her up, her mum was in bits and so greatfull.

I'm the man that tells bouncers to get drunk girls a taxi because men are going up to them trying to get them to go back with them.

I'm the man that found a girl on another country road in bits after a taxi driver tryed it on with her and I took her home

I'm a decent man, just because I'm not a nodding dig in this thread and come with a different view point don't make me an arshole.

[Ammi]

..I understand the awareness of ‘personal vulnerabilities’ in situations...but sadly in society that’s often placed placed and totally focused on the female..and rape trials especially are extremely difficult for ‘victims’ as we know...which is why many are not reported...or reluctant to report...but as a non guilty verdict was reached in this case...we as a society would assume the ‘victims’ to also be the rugby players...yet society still doesn’t say...’why did they put themselves in that position’...why is no focus seemingly placed on that aspect...the disrespect they appear to have for females aside...they became ‘vulnerable’, surely in their intentions for that evening ..to leave themselves so open in the whole vein of events...to being accused of rape and non-consensual sexual acts...?...no focus of ‘blame or vulnerability’..ever appears to be there though in how society views these things...?...

[Niamh.]

..I understand the awareness of ‘personal vulnerabilities’ in situations...but sadly in society that’s often placed placed and totally focused on the female..and rape trials especially are extremely difficult for ‘victims’ as we know...which is why many are not reported...or reluctant to report...but as a non guilty verdict was reached in this case...we as a society would assume the ‘victims’ to also be the rugby players...yet society still doesn’t say...’why did they put themselves in that position’...why is no focus seemingly placed on that aspect...the disrespect they appear to have for females aside...they became ‘vulnerable’, surely in their intentions for that evening ..to leave themselves so open in the whole vein of events...to being accused of rape and non-consensual sexual acts...?...no focus of ‘blame or vulnerability’..ever appears to be there though in how society views these things...?...

The thing about it is, that because of the whatsapp messages, those men while sober say they this is what they do, like they seek that kind of activity out, not during the day or when drink isn't involved, waiting to find a girl who they can take advantage of basically

[Nicky91]

not only with this case but usually it's the girl who is called irresponsible and unaware of the risks what social media brings


sorry to say this but it's these sort of sick men who are to blame, and perhaps many girls/boys want social media for relationships or sharing holiday pics, selfie's


these sick men just take advantage of social media stalking girls, pretending to be boys their ages sometimes


it is very easy to call the girl irresponsible while not all people on social media are evil



and back on topic, here it is Obvious the players are to blame for what they did

#IBelieveHer

[Ammi]

The thing about it is, that because of the whatsapp messages, those men while sober say they this is what they do, like they seek that kind of activity out, not during the day or when drink isn't involved, waiting to find a girl who they can take advantage of basically

...yeah that’s what I mean I guess..(...sorry my thoughts are a bit fuzzed this morning so that post was probably not well explained..)...but ..(..as it’s assumed not rape with this in the eyes of the law...)...society still often views it with some things I’ve seen as focus on the female’s vulnerability...but it could be said that their behaviour left them vulnerable as well...of ‘consensual’ being assured...their charges and trial were surely because of their own actions in what they ‘sought out’ that evening...and that’s why responsibility of ‘vulnerable’ should not be placed on the female...but it so often is...in fact mostly it is by society judgement...they sound pretty grim tbh, the rugby players...but their actions up to and through it all is what placed the ‘vulnerability’...not her actions...in my thoughts anyway...

[Vicky.]

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/belfast-rape-trial-the-legal-arguments-revealed-1.3458269

Legal arguments^ Some of that is pretty unbelievable tbh, but this..

Other evidence which could not be reported during the trial included the presence of Mr Olding’s semen on the crotch of the woman’s jeans. Instead, the jury was simply told the semen was found on the jeans, without being informed specifically where.

The evidence was kept from the jury as it was ruled to be overly prejudicial. Mr Olding had originally been charged with vaginal rape of the woman but this count was effectively dropped by the prosecution in 2017, leaving a sole count of oral rape against the accused.

Judge Smyth ruled that allowing evidence of the presence of his semen on the crotch of the jeans would be overly prejudicial give the absence of a vaginal rape charge.

Is just ridiculous that it was discounted..

[Marsh.]

How is the facts about where his semen was found prejudicial? :umm2:

[Vicky.]

Exactly. This is just vile tbh.

The other blood on paddys sheets too..leads me to believe he may have had 'consensual' sex with another victim who he tore in her vagina. As he would have just answered the question otherwise. And, is it a first for a judge to airbrush the evidence so that its not prejudicial?!

[Jamie89]

..I understand the awareness of ‘personal vulnerabilities’ in situations...but sadly in society that’s often placed placed and totally focused on the female..and rape trials especially are extremely difficult for ‘victims’ as we know...which is why many are not reported...or reluctant to report...but as a non guilty verdict was reached in this case...we as a society would assume the ‘victims’ to also be the rugby players...yet society still doesn’t say...’why did they put themselves in that position’...why is no focus seemingly placed on that aspect...the disrespect they appear to have for females aside...they became ‘vulnerable’, surely in their intentions for that evening ..to leave themselves so open in the whole vein of events...to being accused of rape and non-consensual sexual acts...?...no focus of ‘blame or vulnerability’..ever appears to be there though in how society views these things...?...

Exactly. Even if a woman wins a rape case there's still always talk of what she could have done to better protect herself from being raped. But there's never any talk of what men can do to protect themselves from being accused of being rape, men just aren't given that kind of responsibility. If you're going to have rough group sex with someone you hardly know that results in them being injured/bleeding, and then show no interest in her welfare afterwards and act the way they acted/spoke about her the way they spoke, then you could say that in terms of having a rape accusation thrown at them, they were "asking for it" - but of course that never gets said when it's the other way around. Peoples attitudes are completely imbalanced on the whole. Hopefully 'Ibelieveher' will make other men think about that and start taking more responsibility for their own actions.

Also, I actually think that rape trials should be handled differently and without the need for 'beyond reasonable doubt'. For example having a certain percentage of certainty perhaps, and leniancy in sentencing if someone is convicted with doubt.
I know that would probably never happen (and maybe it's a terrible idea idk) but if the conviction rate and number of people who don't even report is ever going to change then there needs to be some kind of overhaul on how cases are dealt with to reflect that it's practically impossible in most cases to know for certain if consent was given. It's completely different from things such as murder/robbery etc as it's not the act itself (sex) that's being questioned so the cases being handled differently would just be reflective of that too. And it'd mean bringing into question mens behaviours and actions much more than is currently the case, and the accused actually being on trial, rather than just the accuser.

[Niamh.]

Jackson and Oldings Ulster and International contracts with Ireland have been cancelled so some justice atleast

[Crimson Dynamo]

Jackson and Oldings Ulster and International contracts with Ireland have been cancelled so some justice atleast

Justice has already happened in the court

[Niamh.]

Justice has already happened in the courtNah

[thesheriff443]

Justice has already happened in the court

That does not count!, they where found guilty on this forum, after all we have the top experts in every department on here examining all the evidence.

[Beso]

That does not count!, they where found guilty on this forum, after all we have the top experts in every department on here examining all the evidence.



:clap1:

[Niamh.]

That does not count!, they where found guilty on this forum, after all we have the top experts in every department on here examining all the evidence.Looks like the IRFU agree :hee:

[thesheriff443]

Looks like the IRFU agree :hee:

More to do with sponsors than morals.

[Niamh.]

More to do with sponsors than morals.Either way justice is served :hee:

[thesheriff443]

Either way justice is served :hee:

If you say so.

[Niamh.]

If you say so.I sure do :)

[thesheriff443]

I sure do :)

I'm pleased for you :hee:

[Vicky.]

Jackson and Oldings Ulster and International contracts with Ireland have been cancelled so some justice atleast

Good news.

[Jamie89]

Jackson and Oldings Ulster and International contracts with Ireland have been cancelled so some justice atleast

"After rape trials, is the court of public opinion now trumping the law?"

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/apr/15/after-rape-trials-is-court-of-public-opinion-now-trumping-the-law

Great article on this ^

[Niamh.]

"After rape trials, is the court of public opinion now trumping the law?"

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/apr/15/after-rape-trials-is-court-of-public-opinion-now-trumping-the-law

Great article on this ^

It is a great read, cheers Jamie :love:

[Tom4784]

Normally I would respect the court's decision and when it came to wrong results, I'd place blame at the prosecution for not serving up a stronger case and letting down the victims but the more I read of this trial the more crooked it becomes. Having concrete evidence of rape struck off for flimsy reasons is unacceptable and throws the verdict into doubt.

They raped this girl, the evidence says as much, it's just that a lot of it was not allowed for illogical reasons.