Belfast rape trial - all 4 found not guilty Mod Note post one

The trial is over. The people charged and acquitted should be able to return to their jobs.

“Should”. However this isn’t always the case as seen in a recent high profile where one of the accused (subsequently found not guilty) had his employment terminated by rendering his position redundant.

I would hope that all concerned in this sordid nights actions have learned a lesson. Mainly in respect for themselves and others.

spurious

You'd want to be some PR guru to dress the authors of those texts up in a way to make them palatable to most sponsors.

This won't go away. If they play on, I'd say it will be abroad.

Tell me how

spurious wrote:

You'd want to be some PR guru to dress the authors of those texts up in a way to make them palatable to most sponsors.

This won't go away. If they play on, I'd say it will be abroad.

Given how governing bodies haven't issued any indication so far, I think what a previous poster said about waiting until the end of season to carry out the review is what's going to happen and ultimately they will continue in their contracts. Irish panel selection will be based on performance after that.

It mightn't be liked by some very vocal groups but the alternative, paying them off and every minor discretion of every player in future being said to be enough to repeat the practice and fire said player, would be bigger issue.

Now, they might find their performance is subjectively deemed to be poorer than that of others which might limit their chances.

tigger123

spurious wrote: »

You'd want to be some PR guru to dress the authors of those texts up in a way to make them palatable to most sponsors.

This won't go away. If they play on, I'd say it will be abroad.

There's no way a sponsor is gonna pay all that money to have it's name emblazoned across the chest of Paddy Jackson.

goz83

Notorious wrote: »

Don’t patronise me. I’m not referring to every case, just this one. That metaphor fits the bill here. A woman agreed to having sex with six men? The very fact that they use this as a defence is laughable.

Saying “there’s no smoke without fire” is a generalised statement and one of my most despised generalisations.

Were you a witness to the scenes of the woman having sex with six men? I think not...so your generalisation infers guilt when in fact you know nothing about the circumstances. The woman may well have consented to having sex with six men, or maybe it was five....or perhaps none. You don’t know....I don’t know. It certainly wouldn’t be the first time a woman, or man had multiple partners at one time.....so not exactly laughable as a defense.

More social media trials to begin here. Some people never learn :rolleyes:

We all have suspicions and feeling about a persons guilt or innocence, but some of us are a bit mire restrained and wait until evidence is heard before condemning others.

goz83

tigger123 wrote: »

There's no way a sponsor is gonna pay all that money to have it's name emblazoned across the chest of Paddy Jackson.

A sponsor only cares about money, so if it’s profitable to sponsor Ulster with PJ on the team, they will do so.

tigger123

goz83 wrote: »

A sponsor only cares about money, so if it’s profitable to sponsor Ulster with PJ on the team, they will do so.

I get that. The point I'm making is that, on balance, what sponsor would potentially damage their brand by having it associated with Paddy Jackson?

There's other teams, other sports, and other sponsorships available.

Muahahaha

spurious wrote: »

You'd want to be some PR guru to dress the authors of those texts up in a way to make them palatable to most sponsors.

This won't go away. If they play on, I'd say it will be abroad.

Yeah I am finding it very difficult to see any avenue for Jackson & Olding to play for Ulster again.

Jacksons apology yesterday spoke of his "family values". Interestingly Ulster Rugby have their values posted on their website
http://www.ulsterrugby.com/branch/values.php

Ulster Rugby values and traditions work to make Kingspan Stadium one of the best places in Europe to watch live rugby.
We are proud that a night at the home of Ulster Rugby is a safe, enjoyable, inclusive experience for people of all ages.

Here are our Ulster Rugby values and we ask all our fans to support them throughout the season:

- We are passionate in our support of the Ulster team
- We are silent during kicks at goal by both teams
- We respect the match officials' decisions
- We drink responsibly
- We are mindful of our language, especially when there are children and young people near us
- We do not tolerate sectarian, homophobic or derogatory language
- We respect the opposition players, supporters, management and officials.

Please remember, if you are attending a match at Kingspan Stadium and have an issue, contact your nearest steward. Following a game, you can email any observations or issues to standup@ulsterrugby.com.

Immediately you could say (or more to the point sponsors will say) that Jackson & Olding have broken 3 of Ulster Rugbys values- excessive drinking, language and derogatory comments.

And then you get to the sponsor page. One thing that struck me was how many of the sponsors are major companies, some national and others multi-national. There are many English Premier League teams who would love to have the sponsor line up that Ulster Rugby has.

A quick run down-

Kingspan
Bank of Ireland
British Telecom
Go Power
Subway
Ernst & Young
BMW Bavarian
A&L Goodbody
Dale Farm
Moy Park
Argento
Heineken
First Trust (AIB)
River Rock
Maxol
Deloitte
Dankse Bank
http://www.ulsterrugby.com/corporate/sponsors-and-partners.php

You look at those companies and 75% of them are multi-national companies with headquarters in countries other that Ireland/N.Ireland. So when Hans, the head of corporate comunications for Danske Bank in Copenhagen hears his brand is being negatively associated with rugby players who lost the run of themselves he is not going to care one bit about the trial verdict. Ulster Rugby themselves will be cogniscant of that and they wont even need a stern lecture from Hans to tell them, it is staring at them in flashing red lights.

Roger Hassenforder

jm08 wrote: »

Its not relevant in this instance what the complainant thought of the three girls behaviour ( "slutty") What is relevant is that the WhatApp group sent around a photo of Dara and her two friends referring to them as Belfast sluts.
[/I]

Theres a word for tolerating something when it suits, but rejecting the same thing when it doesnt:
Hypocrite

If you condemn their use you must condemn hers, not disregard it as "not relevant". Try and be consistent.

salmocab

So just to be clear its okay for the complainant to call those girls slutty but the whatsapp group calling the same girls belfast sluts is wrong?

Fann Linn

salmocab wrote: »

So just to be clear its okay for the complainant to call those girls slutty but the whatsapp group calling the same girls belfast sluts is wrong?

Yep. Lots on here very upset over that, I think its to do with the fact that the offenders are male.

Silentcorner

salmocab wrote: »

So just to be clear its okay for the complainant to call those girls slutty but the whatsapp group calling the same girls belfast sluts is wrong?

The context in both messages are worlds apart....

They were both sent the morning after....

They were both (the young lady and the 4 lads) in two very different states of mind...

This really shouldn't have to be spoon fed!

FrancieBrady

Muahahaha wrote: »

Yeah I am finding it very difficult to see any avenue for Jackson & Olding to play for Ulster again.

Jacksons apology yesterday spoke of his "family values". Interestingly Ulster Rugby have their values posted on their website
http://www.ulsterrugby.com/branch/values.php


Immediately you could say (or more to the point sponsors will say) that Jackson & Olding have broken 3 of Ulster Rugbys values- excessive drinking, language and derogatory comments.

And then you get to the sponsor page. One thing that struck me was how many of the sponsors are major companies, some national and others multi-national. There are many English Premier League teams who would love to have the sponsor line up that Ulster Rugby has.

A quick run down-

Kingspan
Bank of Ireland
British Telecom
Go Power
Subway
Ernst & Young
BMW Bavarian
A&L Goodbody
Dale Farm
Moy Park
Argento
Heineken
First Trust (AIB)
River Rock
Maxol
Deloitte
Dankse Bank
http://www.ulsterrugby.com/corporate/sponsors-and-partners.php

You look at those companies and 75% of them are multi-national companies with headquarters in countries other that Ireland/N.Ireland. So when Hans, the head of corporate comunications for Danske Bank in Copenhagen hears his brand is being negatively associated with rugby players who lost the run of themselves he is not going to care one bit about the trial verdict. Ulster Rugby themselves will be cogniscant of that and they wont even need a stern lecture from Hans to tell them, it is staring at them in flashing red lights.

When Paddy is popping them over in the ERC that can also be forgotten.

Sponsors will also be well aware what state Ulster Rugby is in and will know it will only get more negative if they lose players of that calibre.

It's a quandary and I think time will sort it out tbh. I would think there would be a huge roar of approval in Kingspan park when these lads take the field again.

jm08

salmocab wrote: »

So just to be clear its okay for the complainant to call those girls slutty but the whatsapp group calling the same girls belfast sluts is wrong?

The complainant explained at the trial what she meant by 'being slutty' (sitting on the lads laps, etc).

The WhatsApp group sent a photo (taken by PJ) around of the 3 girls captioned 'love Belfast sluts).

We've no explaination as to why the lads thought these were 'Belfast Sluts' which is rather surprising bearing in mind that Dara at least said 'no thanks' to at least two of them.

Using what the complainant called the girls isn't a great defence to justify what the WhatsApp group were calling Dara and her two friends.

jm08

FrancieBrady wrote: »

When Paddy is popping them over in the ERC that can also be forgotten.

Sponsors will also be well aware what state Ulster Rugby is in and will know it will only get more negative if they lose players of that calibre.

It's a quandary and I think time will sort it out tbh. I would think there would be a huge roar of approval in Kingspan park when these lads take the field again.

Well if he is popping them over in the Champs Cup next year, there is a very strong chance it won't be with Ulster.

BBDBB

Ssssh, respect the kicker

salmocab

jm08 wrote: »

The complainant explained at the trial what she meant by 'being slutty' (sitting on the lads laps, etc).

The WhatsApp group sent a photo (taken by PJ) around of the 3 girls captioned 'love Belfast sluts).

We've no explaination as to why the lads thought these were 'Belfast Sluts' which is rather surprising bearing in mind that Dara at least said 'no thanks' to at least two of them.

Using what the complainant called the girls isn't a great defence to justify what the WhatsApp group were calling Dara and her two friends.

Well I must be missing something because your saying the complainant saw them sitting on lads laps and thought that was slutty but the lads cant have drawn the same conclusion seeing the same thing? also I didnt use what she said about the girls as any defence or justification for anything.

FrancieBrady

jm08 wrote: »

The complainant explained at the trial what she meant by 'being slutty' (sitting on the lads laps, etc).

The WhatsApp group sent a photo (taken by PJ) around of the 3 girls captioned 'love Belfast sluts).

We've no explaination as to why the lads thought these were 'Belfast Sluts' which is rather surprising bearing in mind that Dara at least said 'no thanks' to at least two of them.

Using what the complainant called the girls isn't a great defence to justify what the WhatsApp group were calling Dara and her two friends.

If you had asked me before all this what the common meaning of 'sluts' was now, I would have said it was applied to girls who tease and play the game. It would not necessarily apply to a known history of promiscuous behaviour.

A bit like calling someone a 'hoor's mother'. It is not really saying that they are a mother of a prostitute, it is now a general insult.

Notorious

goz83 wrote: »

Were you a witness to the scenes of the woman having sex with six men? I think not...so your generalisation infers guilt when in fact you know nothing about the circumstances. The woman may well have consented to having sex with six men, or maybe it was five....or perhaps none. You don’t know....I don’t know. It certainly wouldn’t be the first time a woman, or man had multiple partners at one time.....so not exactly laughable as a defense.

Well the woman reported that she went back with one man, so I think I’ll take her word. Being reported online that one of the six has come clean and said she didn’t want it. Supposedly police also have a phone with a recording.

I think it’s a laughable defence in a rape case. You’re seem to have an agenda on this one, so I’m going to leave it there.

Notorious

goz83 wrote: »

Were you a witness to the scenes of the woman having sex with six men? I think not...so your generalisation infers guilt when in fact you know nothing about the circumstances. The woman may well have consented to having sex with six men, or maybe it was five....or perhaps none. You don’t know....I don’t know. It certainly wouldn’t be the first time a woman, or man had multiple partners at one time.....so not exactly laughable as a defense.

Well the woman reported that she went back with one man, so I think I’ll take her word. Being reported online that one of the six has come clean and said she didn’t want it. Supposedly police also have a phone with a recording.

I think it’s a laughable defence in a rape case. You’re seem to have an agenda on this one, so I’m going to leave it there.

jm08

salmocab wrote: »

Well I must be missing something because your saying the complainant saw them sitting on lads laps and thought that was slutty but the lads cant have drawn the same conclusion seeing the same thing? also I didnt use what she said about the girls as any defence or justification for anything.

The girls were sitting on the lads' laps allowing themselves to be photographed with the 'sluts' Does that make the lads 'sluts' as well?

Or is it one rule for women and another for men?

Muahahaha

jm08 wrote: »

The complainant explained at the trial what she meant by 'being slutty' (sitting on the lads laps, etc).

The WhatsApp group sent a photo (taken by PJ) around of the 3 girls captioned 'love Belfast sluts).

We've no explaination as to why the lads thought these were 'Belfast Sluts' which is rather surprising bearing in mind that Dara at least said 'no thanks' to at least two of them.

Using what the complainant called the girls isn't a great defence to justify what the WhatsApp group were calling Dara and her two friends.

Just to be clear on the "Love Belfast Sluts" thing. Jackson and Olding had no hand or part in it. The photo of Dara Florance and her two friends is of the three of them sitting on a sofa with Blaine McIllory (who studies in an US universty). The next day Blaine McIllroy sends a whatsapp message to a group of his university friends in America with the photo of the three girls on the sofa with him captioned "Love Belfast Sluts".

So it is not correct to label Jackson & Olding on the Love Belfast Sluts thing, it is entirely Blaine McIllroys doing.

FrancieBrady

jm08 wrote: »

The girls were sitting on the lads' laps allowing themselves to be photographed with the 'sluts' Does that make the lads 'sluts' as well?

Or is it one rule for women and another for men?

'Horndogs' would be the male equivalent up here in northern climes.

RuMan

Muahahaha wrote: »

Yeah I am finding it very difficult to see any avenue for Jackson & Olding to play for Ulster again.

Jacksons apology yesterday spoke of his "family values". Interestingly Ulster Rugby have their values posted on their website
http://www.ulsterrugby.com/branch/values.php


Immediately you could say (or more to the point sponsors will say) that Jackson & Olding have broken 3 of Ulster Rugbys values- excessive drinking, language and derogatory comments.

And then you get to the sponsor page. One thing that struck me was how many of the sponsors are major companies, some national and others multi-national. There are many English Premier League teams who would love to have the sponsor line up that Ulster Rugby has.

A quick run down-

Kingspan
Bank of Ireland
British Telecom
Go Power
Subway
Ernst & Young
BMW Bavarian
A&L Goodbody
Dale Farm
Moy Park
Argento
Heineken
First Trust (AIB)
River Rock
Maxol
Deloitte
Dankse Bank
http://www.ulsterrugby.com/corporate/sponsors-and-partners.php

You look at those companies and 75% of them are multi-national companies with headquarters in countries other that Ireland/N.Ireland. So when Hans, the head of corporate comunications for Danske Bank in Copenhagen hears his brand is being negatively associated with rugby players who lost the run of themselves he is not going to care one bit about the trial verdict. Ulster Rugby themselves will be cogniscant of that and they wont even need a stern lecture from Hans to tell them, it is staring at them in flashing red lights.

Lol rugby like golf attracts wealthy fans. These companies are interested in these fans not the likes of Coppinger. Ulster rugby supporters club has not received one complaint from all its members looking for PJ and Stu 2 be sacked

jm08

FrancieBrady wrote: »

If you had asked me before all this what the common meaning of 'sluts' was now, I would have said it was applied to girls who tease and play the game. It would not necessarily apply to a known history of promiscuous behaviour.

A bit like calling someone a 'hoor's mother'. It is not really saying that they are a mother of a prostitute, it is now a general insult.

So basically, you have a different understanding of what it means to the dictionary definition and most other people.

jm08

Muahahaha wrote: »

Just to be clear on the "Love Belfast Sluts" thing. Jackson and Olding had no hand or part in it. The photo of Dara Florance and her two friends is of the three of them sitting on a sofa with Blaine McIllory (who studies in an US universty). The next day Blaine McIllroy sends a whatsapp message to a group of his university friends in America with the photo of the three girls on the sofa with him captioned "Love Belfast Sluts".

So it is not correct to label Jackson & Olding on the Love Belfast Sluts thing, it is entirely Blaine McIllroys doing.

Well, have you every heard the phrase, lie with dogs you'll pick up fleas.

FrancieBrady

jm08 wrote: »

So basically, you have a different understanding of what it means to the dictionary definition and most other people.

Well, Yes I would.
I don't think all that many would be greatly insulted by it. Many words lose their venom over the years. 'Slut' would be one of them imo. You hear it often enough now, used by both sexes.

Muahahaha

FrancieBrady wrote: »

When Paddy is popping them over in the ERC that can also be forgotten.

Sponsors will also be well aware what state Ulster Rugby is in and will know it will only get more negative if they lose players of that calibre.

It's a quandary and I think time will sort it out tbh. I would think there would be a huge roar of approval in Kingspan park when these lads take the field again.

Im not so sure Francie. Of their 20 odd sponsors it will only take 2 or 3 of them to pipe up and threaten not to renew contracts. If that happens (which I expect it to) then apart from them losing sponsors finding new sponsors to replace that loss in revenue will be even more difficult. At that point the commercial director has a decision to make -do we lose x£££ and if so how will Jackson playing replace X£££? In the absence of the major prize money and TV money that the likes of the English Premier League has I would imagine sponsorship in rugby is pivotal towards paying players wages.

When you look at the list of sponsors I posted most of them are multi-national companies. Banks, big 5 consultancies, major food and drinks companies, etc. These are exactly the kind of sponsors that will run a mile from this kind of controversy. If Ulster were an English Premier League team sponsored by some Hong Kong based online casino then yeah the casino company probably wouldnt care less. But that is not the case, Ulster Rugby have blue chip sponsors and they will not be wanting to see their brands which are worth hundreds of millions (or billions in the case of Heineken, Subway, etc) sullied by being linked to this controversy.

Time will tell of course but IMO it is odds on that the sponsors will not tolerate a return to the pitch by Jackson. As companies and brands they have absolutely nothing to gain from it yet plenty to lose.

jm08

RuMan wrote: »

Lol rugby like golf attracts wealthy fans. These companies are interested in these fans not the likes of Coppinger. Ulster rugby supporters club has not received one complaint from all its members looking for PJ and Stu 2 be sacked

Tiger lost sponsorship of Accenture, AT&T, Gatorate, General Motors. Gillette and Tag Heuer dropped advertising campaigns that featured him. Golf Digest dropped his column.

Nike didn't drop him, but they reduced his sponsorship deal.

The companies don't care what rugby fans think. They are concerned what their existing and potential customers think. From the poll here, 20% don't agree with the verdict (and another 16% are not sure). No company can afford to annoy 36% of their customer base. Its not as if Ulster is pulling up trees performance wise either.

Muahahaha

jm08 wrote: »

Well, have you every heard the phrase, lie with dogs you'll pick up fleas.

So you are blaming Jackson & Olding for the "Love Belfast Sluts" thing even though it was all Blaine McIllorys doing