[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?

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

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.

[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.

[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]

Originally Posted by 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?

what kind of position is that

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Cherie

what kind of position is that

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

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

[Crimson Dynamo]

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

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

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

So?

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

So?

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

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

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

[Vicky.]

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crim...nday-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.]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crim...nday-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

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

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

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.]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

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]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

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

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.]

Originally Posted by 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...?...

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

[Jamie89]

Originally Posted by 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...?...

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.

[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

[Vicky.]

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crim...aled-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?

[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?!

[Niamh.]

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

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

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

Justice has already happened in the court

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

Justice has already happened in the court

Nah