Ulster Team Talk Thread III: Les Miserables SEE MOD WARNING POST #1924 + #2755

prawnsambo

prawnsambo wrote: »

Standing back a bit from it, there are a number of issues that have arisen from this. Firstly the lack of anonymity for the accused, something that happens here. Then there's the abysmally low conviction rate in rape cases. This case has just highlighted some of these issues and if you asked people what they were up in arms about, you could take your pick of a number of issues that are definitely worrying.

And of course you'd get a fair cross-section of uninformed opionions. Like you'd get anywhere tbh.

The marches were entirely about #ibelieveher which is exactly the same as calling the defendants rapists despite them being cleared. That is also the 80,000 tweet trending hashtag from during the week. That's what #ibelieveher means, it means you believe the accusation and think the jury are wrong.

I agree with regards to the lack of anonymity, Ian Paisley Jnr is suggesting that it's going to be looked at and I'd imagine this case will be a catalyst for some change.

Someone posted it yesterday but worth repeating. If Jackson is completely innocent which he might well be, can you imagine going through the ordeal of accusation, destruction of your career, trial by media, massive loss of wealth and earning and a horrendous 9 week battle where you are repeatedly shamed and embarrassed. A period of time in your life where you are embarrassed to go to the shop and you would rather remove your own face than live with it.

All to be finally cleared and then have the world decide you are guilty anyway and march against you.

Look, the victim could equally be in a terrible way having had the accusation fall on deaf ears if true - but it's worth considering the effect on both sides.

bilston

I've only seen Addison a few times but I remember thinking a province should be sniffing after him as he has looked good anytime I've seen him. So a reasonable signing.

launish116

Most comments so far have been good about Addison. Said he featured heavily in the Aviva’s Highlights from Sunday.

A’s match being lived stream on Ulster site tomorrow. Might be worth a watch to see our academy players.

errlloyd

[Deleted User] wrote: »

If Jackson is completely innocent which he might well be, can you imagine going through the ordeal of accusation, destruction of your career, trial by media, massive loss of wealth and earning and a horrendous 9 week battle where you are repeatedly shamed and embarrassed. A period of time in your life where you are embarrassed to go to the shop and you would rather remove your own face than live with it.

All to be finally cleared and then have the world decide you are guilty anyway and march against you.

Well to be fair, he could make it easier for himself. he should have made a statement like Oldings. He should have removed pictures of him dressed as a slavery era black African from his twitter. And he shouldn't ****ing sue someone in a case he definitely won't win!

Interested Observer

errlloyd wrote: »

Well to be fair, he could make it easier for himself. he should have made a statement like Oldings. He should have removed pictures of him dressed as a slavery era black African from his twitter. And he shouldn't ****ing sue someone in a case he definitely won't win!

A total guess but I doubt they have any intention of actually suing, more to knock any other high profile politicians having to deal with the hassle of even being contacted by one of his legal representatives.

But even at that, he's been found not guilty in the courts. If someone then goes and says he is guilty then surely they are defaming him?

Buer

errlloyd wrote: »

Well to be fair, he could make it easier for himself. he should have made a statement like Oldings. He should have removed pictures of him dressed as a slavery era black African from his twitter. And he shouldn't ****ing sue someone in a case he definitely won't win!

Is this the case against the BBC? I'd have thought they've a very strong claim here. The case was taken a year ago but couldn't proceed until the criminal case was completed.

EDIT: Sorry, just saw this is a case against a politician in ROI. He's absolutely right to fire a shot in this case although I would be shocked if it ever saw the inside of a courtroom. This is a well known politician taking a populist swing at him from behind the cover of a keyboard. He lost his seat in the last election and is looking to hitch his wagon to whatever he can to gain momentum. He should be checked for it. I'm glad to say he's in my constituency and has just guaranteed that he won't be getting any preference from me.

jr86

Interested Observer wrote: »

A total guess but I doubt they have any intention of actually suing, more to knock any other high profile politicians having to deal with the hassle of even being contacted by one of his legal representatives.

But even at that, he's been found not guilty in the courts. If someone then goes and says he is guilty then surely they are defaming him?

Exactly what I think aswell

wp_rathead

bilston wrote: »

I've only seen Addison a few times but I remember thinking a province should be sniffing after him as he has looked good anytime I've seen him. So a reasonable signing.

He is quality. I didn't realize he was IQ as he played u20s for England.

Burkie1203

Interested Observer wrote: »

A total guess but I doubt they have any intention of actually suing, more to knock any other high profile politicians having to deal with the hassle of even being contacted by one of his legal representatives.

But even at that, he's been found not guilty in the courts. If someone then goes and says he is guilty then surely they are defaming him?

I don't know. Jackson could reclaim some of the high legal fees by going after some of the "social media solicitors". 9 weeks could cost him 250k.

errlloyd

Buer wrote: »

Is this the case against the BBC? I'd have thought they've a very strong claim here. The case was taken a year ago but couldn't proceed until the criminal case was completed.

No this is the case against Aidan O Riordhan the labour td.

Can't quote the above. But the tweet he's suing over is AOR saying "I beleive her" which doesn't defame Jackson in any way.

Now in Ireland and the UK I am fairly sure legally if I think he's a rapist, and I can prove I've grounds to think he's a rapist. I'm allowed to call him a rapist.

The act of raping someone is what makes him a rapist. Not the court convicting him of rape. A criminal court clearing your name does nothing.

For Jackson to win that case he would have to prove that he's not a rapist, he'd also have to prove than AOR knew that he wasn't a rapist. And that AOR specifically said something he knew to be untrue just to defame him.

Buer

errlloyd wrote: »

Now in Ireland and the UK I am fairly sure legally if I think he's a rapist, and I can prove I've grounds to think he's a rapist. I'm allowed to call him a rapist.
.

What?! :eek:

Do you want to see what happens to a post on this thread if I call someone a rapist? The mods would have scorch marks on their fingers from clicking the infraction and delete buttons so fast.

joseywhales

errlloyd wrote: »

Buer wrote: »

Is this the case against the BBC? I'd have thought they've a very strong claim here. The case was taken a year ago but couldn't proceed until the criminal case was completed.

No this is the case against Aidan O Riordhan the labour td.

Can't quote the above. But the tweet he's suing over is AOR saying "I beleive her" which doesn't defame Jackson in any way.

Now in Ireland and the UK I am fairly sure legally if I think he's a rapist, and I can prove I've grounds to think he's a rapist. I'm allowed to call him a rapist.

The act of raping someone is what makes him a rapist. Not the court convicting him of rape. A criminal court clearing your name does nothing.

For Jackson to win that case he would have to prove that he's not a rapist, he'd also have to prove than AOR knew that he wasn't a rapist. And that AOR specifically said something he knew to be untrue just to defame him.

wait, so I can call anyone a rapist because nobody can prove that they have never committed rape at any time in their life and they cannot prove that I dont believe that they are rapists either? I would literally have to be witnessed saying "I don't really think he is a rapist, i'm just saying that he is to defame him"

Bridge93

Yeah that can't be correct. A not guilty verdict gives you a legal entitlement to the presumption of innocence. You can't go around calling innocent people rapists unless you've got proof surely?

joseywhales

I really want that to be true because my next post will be entertaining.

prawnsambo

Yeah, doesn't sound right to me either. However, saying "I believe her" isn't the same thing as accusing him either. It doesn't specify what you believe.

Interested Observer

The tweet didn't just say 'I believe her'.

RuMan

prawnsambo wrote: »

Yeah, doesn't sound right to me either. However, saying "I believe her" isn't the same thing as accusing him either. It doesn't specify what you believe.

Post also mentions middle class boys win again, suggesting some deficient court process. Suspect Amadan will apologise!

Interested Observer

RuMan wrote: »

Post also mentions middle class boys win again, suggesting some deficient court process. Suspect Amadan will apologise!

Not just the middle class boys, the well-connected middle-class boys. What are the implications of those connections? Your guess is as good as mine.

joseywhales

Is there some reason to attack the middle class instead of the upper class? I never got that. Surely whatever reasons one would hate the middle class for would only be magnified in the upper class?

Interested Observer

joseywhales wrote: »

Is there some reason to attack the middle class instead of the upper class? I never got that. Surely whatever reasons one would hate the middle class for would only be magnified in the upper class?

Are the upper class not the landed gentry types? Do we have an upper class in Ireland?

But any time an election comes around I'm sure you've notice that 'working class' becomes a badge of honour and everything else is somehow sleazy or dishonest or you've stamped on the downtrodden to get where you are, etc.

Buer

It is a borderline libellous Tweet from a public figure which he deleted very quickly...way to stick to your guns. It was moronic. Jackson has rattled his cage and there won't be much from other public figures on it now, I suspect.

joseywhales

Interested Observer wrote: »

joseywhales wrote: »

Is there some reason to attack the middle class instead of the upper class? I never got that. Surely whatever reasons one would hate the middle class for would only be magnified in the upper class?

Are the upper class not the landed gentry types? Do we have an upper class in Ireland?

I assumed it was based on income, no idea? I know there are pr*cks and nice people, maybe that should be our new class system. "those pr*cks are awful pr*cks"

Interested Observer

Buer wrote: »

It is a borderline libellous Tweet from a public figure which he deleted very quickly...way to stick to your guns. It was moronic. Jackson has rattled his cage and there won't be much from other public figures on it now, I suspect.

This is Aodhán Ó Ríordáin, the Senator who campaigned to abolish the Seanad while he was a TD. Once he got booted out of office the Seanad didn't seem so bad any more.

CIARAN_BOYLE

Interested Observer wrote: »

Not just the middle class boys, the well-connected middle-class boys. What are the implications of those connections? Your guess is as good as mine.

Edit never mind probably not a good idea to post that here

A more relevant question is what evidence of middle class connections come in here. Three of the four accused had to apply for legal aid during the case.

Buer

Pretty sure the mods are going to be in a padded cell after this thread repeating "They just wouldn't stop talking about it".

MJohnston

Addison's signing has got to be taken as a sign of the future of Olding at the very least.

joseywhales

Interested Observer wrote: »

Buer wrote: »

It is a borderline libellous Tweet from a public figure which he deleted very quickly...way to stick to your guns. It was moronic. Jackson has rattled his cage and there won't be much from other public figures on it now, I suspect.

This is Aodhán Ó Ríordáin, the Senator who campaigned to abolish the Seanad while he was a TD. Once he got booted out of office the Seanad didn't seem so bad any more.

Politician sample B:
Mike Pence, irish-american catholic democrat who became an evangelist republican, outed a party he attended at college to authorities for serving booze and whos is quoted as saying:
[font=Roboto, arial, sans-serif]"It is the greatest privilege of my life to [/font][font=Roboto, arial, sans-serif]serve[/font][font=Roboto, arial, sans-serif] as Vice President to @POTUS ;[/font][font=Roboto, arial, sans-serif]Donald Trump[/font][font=Roboto, arial, sans-serif] – a man devoted to American ideals"[/font]
We can put politicians in the pr*ck class under the new regime.

Completely unrelated to ulster rugby of course

Interested Observer

errlloyd wrote: »

Now in Ireland and the UK I am fairly sure legally if I think he's a rapist, and I can prove I've grounds to think he's a rapist. I'm allowed to call him a rapist.

This is not even nearly true. If you call an individual a rapist on Twitter for example and they sue you for defamation then you have to demonstrate that they are a rapist. Having grounds to think it is not good enough.

Dubinusa

Dennis Coulson available! Do it. Good pick up for Ulster.

irishbucsfan

Interested Observer wrote: »

This is not even nearly true. If you call an individual a rapist on Twitter for example and they sue you for defamation then you have to demonstrate that they are a rapist. Having grounds to think it is not good enough.