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

riffmongous

johnpatrick81 wrote: »

Of course not! But witnesses can usually be more factual. I think she was unnecessarily biased towards the lads based on the evidence she gave. It just seemed like an unnatural bias. Perhaps she should have been discounted as a witness as a result.

She was essentially suggesting she was a mind reader FFS.

And didn't her testimony disagree with Jacksons? I thought she said she saw people having sex while Jackson claimed he only used his fingers?

FrancieBrady

johnpatrick81 wrote: »

Of course not! But witnesses can usually be more factual. I think she was unnecessarily biased towards the lads based on the evidence she gave. It just seemed like an unnatural bias. Perhaps she should have been discounted as a witness as a result.

She was essentially suggesting she was a mind reader FFS.

She was looking a scene, and the girl looked at her. She didn't need to read minds, her impression was there was nothing she could see that showed the girl was distressed.

johnpatrick81

FrancieBrady wrote: »

She was looking a scene, and the girl looked at her. She didn't need to read minds, her impression was there was nothing she could see that showed the girl was distressed.

But also nothing to show she had consented. Yet she was far more inclined to sway towards defending the lads.

We’ll never know pretty much.

davidmarsh

cloudatlas wrote: »

Just read a load of comments on this thread saying that evidence was crucial, I didn't feel it was.

Also she said paddy was having sex with her he said he wasn't, blane said he was in the room paddy said he wasn't... Who is lying?

The main issue was 'consent' though and her evidence would have been central to everything I would have thought.

The witness told the court that she heard a female making moaning noises and that what she saw in the room seconds later looked consensual.

I think she was actually a witness for the prosecution originally (to say PJ was having sex with the girl) but on cross examination she said what she saw appeared consensual? I read that she turned away giggling to her friends in the hall at the time, "I've just seen a threesome".

You'd have to wonder how the case ever made it to court. It looked like a slam dunk defeat for the prosecution from Day 1, knowing the evidence (or lack of) they had, witness accounts, inconsistencies in the girl's own account.

Muahahaha

cloudatlas wrote: »

How would you know by looking through a door briefly if sex was consensual or not surely you'd have to be in the room for quite a considerable amount of time.

I have been wondering about that aspect myself. If, as the complainant claims, that she completely froze up when Jackson was penetrating her then I am not sure at all if a witness who had a brief view of the sex would even be able to tell if the sex was consensual or not. In Dara Florances testimony she said she was 100% certain that it was consensual. But really if the girl is frozen how would you be able to tell ? I dont think you can personally. Now maybe there is more to her testimony that the media havent reported (eg what sexual position they were in, if the girl was on top then you could certainly claim it was consensual). But as things stand from what we know I really cannot see how Dara Florance can say with any degree of certainty if it was consensual or not. I never heard the prosecution challenge her on that either.

josip

brooke 2 wrote: »

And Jackson does not seem to have learned anything, going by his twitter tonight in which he is celebrating, inviting people back to his gaff afterwards - 'if you dare. lol!' How can he be so lacking in emotional intelligence? What a prick!! :mad:

Exactly.
And Trump's doing a great job too. :rolleyes:

c.p.w.g.w

spookwoman wrote: »

How? if someone has had many partners are they more at fault for being sexually assaulted? They may have more of a chance of meeting a rapist but that doesnt mean the rapist is free to rape them
That's like saying if I drive down the same road more often its my fault if a drink driver hits me.

Not all rape trials are cases of violent rapes, many of them are now dealing with issues around consent. So if in many cases two people are kissing and leading to sex, the male(as males are the only people who can legally be charged with rape)may think consent is a sure thing because the complainant has a history of many sexually partners, unless she expressly states "no", then she is up for sex.

It certainly implies a number of prejudices on both parties, many very negative on women i admit. But that's the society we live in. It can boil down to people not accepting women having many sexual partners is fine, or that women may like to engage in 3-ways, 5-ways, or what not. But we as society judge people for this carry on, which there is nothing wrong with. And women are themselves to blame for slut shaming other women at times.

Smart phones & Social media are only making these things worse, who make a mistake or do something embarrassing it may be captured and shared around the world to.

spookwoman

johnpatrick81 wrote: »

Of course not! But witnesses can usually be more factual. I think she was unnecessarily biased towards the lads based on the evidence she gave. It just seemed like an unnatural bias. Perhaps she should have been discounted as a witness as a result.

She was essentially suggesting she was a mind reader FFS.

Witnesses can mis remember things their own personality etc can influence how they see things. it's why you will more than likely get 10 different witness reports from 10 people at an accident. I didn't follow the case to closely but this witness was she asked how much she had to drink and how much time she spent in the room looking at them.

Muahahaha

Joe.ie did a very good synopsis of all the text messages between the four defendants. It is quite a long read but very interesting. I will just quote some of it, the entire text conversation is here
https://www.joe.ie/life-style/anatomy-of-a-night-out-read-the-whatsapp-and-text-messages-sent-by-jackson-olding-mciiroy-harrison-and-others-as-heard-by-the-jury-618032?utm_content=bufferf0a76&utm_medium=Social+organic&utm_source=Twitter&utm_campaign=Buffer

The content of WhatsApp and text message evidence put before the trial to date is reproduced here:

At 2:28am on the morning of 28 June, the complainant called Rory Harrison's phone. At 2.28am she added him as a phone contact and as a WhatsApp contact.

At 2:36am, the complainant attempts to FaceTime Harrison after he attempted to FaceTime her.

At 2:39am, McIlroy makes a call to a cab company.

At 3:04am, the complainant messaged a friend of hers that she had been out in Ollie’s nightclub with to say, “I’m back at Paddy Jackson’s". Her friend replied, “haha, how and why?” The complainant did not reply for almost seven hours.

At 3:32am, there was a message sent from Paul Jackson to his brother Paddy Jackson saying “need to keep it down a wee bit cos of the neighbours and it’s Monday”.

At 3:33am, a photo was taken on Dara Florence’s phone of the guys at the party dancing. Florence would later give evidence in court to say she had walked in on Paddy Jackson, Stuart Olding and the complainant in Jackson’s bedroom and said to her friend who was behind her, “Omg I’ve just seen a threesome."

For eight minutes between 3:34am and 3:42am, Blane McIIroy took selfies in Jackson’s house and then published these in a WhatsApp group he was a member of.

At 3:48am, Paddy Jackson took photos of Blane McIlroy on the sofa with three girls, none of whom were the complainant. Two minutes later, Dara Florence took photos of Paddy Jackson.

At 4:09am, Rory Harrison started to dial a number but deleted it. Then he called Value Cabs, then a minute later he called Value Cabs again.

At 4:27am, there was a WhatsApp message from McIlroy to Jackson asking, “Is there a possibility of a threesome?”

At 4:52am, there was a 54-second call from Blane McIlroy’s phone to Rory Harrison's phone.

At 4:58am, Rory Harrison calls fonaCAB.

The content of two text messages sent from Rory Harrison to two different numbers, one at 4:59am and one at 5am, were unavailable to the police.

There was a message from Blane McIIroy to Rory Harrison saying, “What’s happening, you coming back here?”

Then at 5:09am, a voice call from Harrison's mobile to McIlroy lasting two minutes and nine seconds.

At 5:15am, there is CCTV footage from outside of the complainant’s home of Rory Harrison walking her to her front door.

At 5:16am, Rory Harrison sent a message to the complainant saying, “Keep the chin up you wonderful young woman.” She replies to say, “Thank you so much for leaving me home, I really appreciate it Rory, you've been far too kind.”

Rory Harrison then replies, “My pleasure...have you earphones close?”

Rory Harrison then sent a media file to the complainant, the content of which was not available to the police. When he was questioned in October 2016, he told the police he couldn’t recall what song he sent the complainant.

There is then a break in communications between all parties until the following morning.

At 9:13am, a WhatsApp message was sent from Jackson to Olding, the content of which is unavailable, then a call from Jackson to Olding which is missed, as is a FaceTime from Jackson to Olding, and again a voice call from Jackson to Olding which is missed at 9:15am.

At 9:51am, the complainant messages the same friend she told she was back at Paddy Jackson’s house to say, “worst night ever, so I got raped."

At 10:08am in response to Rory Harrison's message about the earphones, the complainant replies “yea, why? lol."

In the same minute, the complainant messaged another friend to say, “So I got raped by 3 Ulster ****ing rugby scum brilliant ****ing night.”

At 10:10am, a friend of Stuart Olding’s messaged him to ask, “How was she?”

In the interlude before Olding replied to his friend, the complainant was messaging the first friend she told, further explaining what happened. These messages were not read out in court in full this week, as they had been heard in detail by the jury previously.

The messages did appear on the timeline of digital evidence that Toby Hedworth was reading from and so they are reproduced here. The two girls were messaging over a period of hours, but their messages are grouped together below.

The complainant: “I feel sick.”

The friend continued: “I’m so sorry.”

And in a series of texts the complainant said: “I was entirely fine going back to that afters.”

“So went back to their house. There were three other girls too.

“Good fun for a while then the girls started to get slutty.

“There was one guy I really didn’t like and I was like right I’m going to go now.

“Went to get my shoes but my clutch was upstairs.

“Went to get it and Paddy Jackson came up behind me.

“He’d already tried it on earlier and I firmly told him where to go.

“The next thing I’m bent over the bed.

“I have bruising on my inner thighs. I feel like I’ve got bruising literally on my fanny. They were so rough I’ve got my period a week earlier.”

The friend asked: “Were there more than one?”

The complainant responded: “Two and then a third tried to get involved. I was crying."

The friend told her: “I’m so sorry.”

The complainant then told her friend that a “really nice guy” brought her home.

When her friend tried to call her, she replied, “I can’t take a call. I don’t want anyone to hear."

The friend told her that she needed to “get swabbed right now” and that she needed to tell the police.

The complainant replied: " I’m not going to the police. I’m not going up against Ulster Rugby. Yea because that'll work”

The friend said: “I’m never leaving you on your own again.”

The complainant replied: “I was crying and saying, ‘at least use a condom’ and Paddy Jackson said, ‘I am."



The complainant told her friend that a fourth man got her into a taxi and brought her home.

The complainant told her friend, “I was bawling the whole way home.”

When her friend asked if she was going to report to the police, the complainant replied, “I’d report it if I knew they’d get done but they won’t.”

The friend said the complainant should go to a Rape Crisis centre and get the morning-after pill.

The complainant said to her friend: “Like I hadn’t even shaved my legs...had only tanned the bottom of them and my arms. I wasn’t up or ready for ****ing anything."

Her friend messaged back: “This does not define your life from now on. You need counselling. You just cannot deal with this on your own. You need to get a full screening. This is beyond serious now".

At the same time, these messages were going on between the two friends, the defendants in the case were messaging their own friends and each other about the previous night.

Just before 11am, Olding responded to his friend who’d asked how the complainant was to say, “she was very very loose."

Olding then responded to a friend who asked “Any tips or stories Simon?”

To which Olding replied, “Went to Cutters, Ollies, then after-party”

The friend then asked, “Any sluts get ****ed?” To which Olding replied, “precious secrets....”

At 11:16am, another friend of some of the defendants and one of the participants in the JACOME WhatsApp, a group including Stuart Olding, Paddy Jackson and Blane McIlroy, posted, "I said tonight is your lucky night."

At 11:17am, Olding responds to the JACOME WhatsApp group to say, "we are all top shaggers” and “there was a bit of spit roasting going on last night fellas."

Jackson adds, "There was a lot of spit roast last night."

Olding says, "It was like a merry go round at the carnival."

Another member of the group, referred to in court as 'JE' then asks, "who?”

Blane McIlroy then sends Harrison a WhatsApp message saying "What the **** was going on. Last night was hilarious."

The complainant at this point is messaging another friend of hers to say, “They are scum. It's that schoolboy rugby attitude times a million."

Back in the JACOME WhatsApp group, JE, as he was referred to in court, asks, "Who?"

Jackson then posts photos to the group of the images taken the night previously of Blane McIlroy sitting on the sofa with three girls, none of whom are the complainant.

JE in JACOME asks, “Who are they, brassers?”

McIlroy responds, “Aye."

JE replies, “****ing Fantastic.”

McIIroy says, “Just a sample of how loose JACOME will be."

Jackson tells the group, "Whole NI squad were out last night."

JE replies, "Deece, where you do, Ollies?"

At 12:01pm, Harrison responds to the complainant’s earlier reply about the music to say, “Ha, it was a song to calm you down before bed, never mind," followed by another message, "feeling better today?"

Two minutes later, there is a message exchange between McIlroy and Harrison. Some of these messages were later deleted and not recovered by the police. The messages referred to in court were:

McIlroy -“Really, **** sake, did you calm her, where does she live?”

Harrison - “Mate no jokes she was in hysterics, wasn't going to end well.”

At 12:06pm, McIIroy reverts to the JACOME group to respond - "the whole squad."

Then Harrison in a deleted message to McIlroy said, “Aye, just threw her home then went back to mine."

Back in the JACOME WhatsApp group:

The WhatsApp group member referred to in court as JE comments “he's seven foot and he plays the flute.”

There is then a message that was deleted from McIIroy to Harrison.

At 12:15pm, the complainant responds to Harrison about the music he was going to send her, to ask what song it was, and then says, “To be honest no, I know you must be mates with those guys but I don't like them and what happened was not consensual which is why I was so upset. Again, thank you for taking me home. That was really appreciated.”

Rory Harrison replies five minutes later to say, “Jesus” and then, “I’m not sure what to say."

There is then a series of exchanges between Harrison and McIIroy which were subsequently deleted, and at 1:05pm, Harrison says “I have to pick my dog up at 2.30” and then “mate the scenes last night were hilarious."

To which McIIroy replies, "It was a good night, I loved it."

Harrison then says, "Walked upstairs and there were more flutes than the 12th of July."

More here https://www.joe.ie/life-style/anatomy-of-a-night-out-read-the-whatsapp-and-text-messages-sent-by-jackson-olding-mciiroy-harrison-and-others-as-heard-by-the-jury-618032?utm_content=bufferf0a76&utm_medium=Social+organic&utm_source=Twitter&utm_campaign=Buffer

RabbleRouser2k

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

in fairness, that was a very different (consensual) threesome between two players and their lady friend, one of whom has a grand slam to his name.
the other has not.

Yeah, it was-but their blocking their names on twitter afterwards, despite it being consensual, was noteworthy.

c.p.w.g.w

clairewithani wrote: »

How do courts work? By not pre-judging people as you have above. Says a lot about you really.

Full time feminists offer nothing to society. Genuine feminists go out in the world and lead by example by having a job, generating an income, try and advance the rights of women through action...The current wave of feminists as i termed them full time feminists are typically unemployed and have a blog and just give out about all the ill's of the world and how the world is out to get women, while doing nothing to rectify the situation.

If i was on a jury i would take on board all the evidence and follow the direction of the court.

josip

In case anyone's looking for Aodhan O'Riodain's now-deleted tweet. (This one's real)

https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:Fir9DiDZCyoJ:https://www.trendsmap.com/twitter/tweet/978958200639754240+&cd=4&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ie&client=firefox-b

TheValeyard

josip wrote: »

In case anyone's looking for Aodhan O'Riodain's now-deleted tweet. (This one's real)

https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:Fir9DiDZCyoJ:https://www.trendsmap.com/twitter/tweet/978958200639754240+&cd=4&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ie&client=firefox-b

:eek: Does he think before he types? :eek:

johnpatrick81

johnpatrick81 wrote: »

That’s not the point I was making. The witness wasn’t there for the point at which the complainant said she made her lack of consent clear. Just because she was passive when she witnesses it shouldn’t be in any way a sign of consent.

It would have been much more honest if she had said “I can’t possibly know if consent was given, I couldn’t see any signs of a struggle though but could also not get any clear indication the girl was actively taking part or enjoying herself”

If you're asked a question on the stand you're supposed to answer it.

spoonerhead wrote: »

If you are a women/man and you get raped. It’s not so important if you where raped, it’s more important who you where raped by. That’s all this case has shown really. Girl was 100% raped, look at the texts for crying out loud. If these lads (who gave four different accounts of the event) where innocent yet they where asking each other “was she okay” or “panicked”?

I’ve had lads brag to me about getting laid but if I seen a message like that I’d know exactly what happened. Lots of people commenting on this thread think they know the court system of the UK/Ireland inside out. Yet few have any real sense of how many cases get off on the smallest of things.

Huh? Can you show me the messages where the lads show any indication that what happened was anything other than a bit of craic til yer man told them otherwise? I see nothing before the "Really? **** sake." message.

Only 7% of rape cases get a guilty verdict. I see it so much where I live with drug dealers, shop lifters and petty criminals. Law favours the criminal. Them lads are rapist scum, if they where soccer players they’d be found guilty on day one (eg Ched Evans case)

Really dunno where you're going with that. Is Ched Evans a rapist? I could be wrong but I thought in that case there was no proper complaint made but the cops ran with it anyway.

Roger Hassenforder

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

Yeah, it was-but their blocking their names on twitter afterwards, despite it being consensual, was noteworthy.

cant imagine any of them being proud of the incident.
not good for the image rights etc.

http://www.thepotato.ie/2013/08/conor-murray-and-simon-zebo-didnt-engage-in-threesome/

c.p.w.g.w

Deleted User wrote: »

If you're asked a question on the stand you're supposed to answer it.


Huh? Can you show me the messages where the lads show any indication that what happened was anything other than a bit of craic til yer man told them otherwise? I see nothing before the "Really? **** sake." message.


Really dunno where you're going with that. Is Ched Evans a rapist? I could be wrong but I thought in that case there was no proper complaint made but the cops ran with it anyway.

Ched was found not guilty after a retrial https://www.theguardian.com/football/2016/oct/14/footballer-ched-evans-cleared-of-in-retrial

cloudatlas

Muahahaha wrote: »

I have been wondering about that aspect myself. If, as the complainant claims, that she completely froze up when Jackson was penetrating her then I am not sure at all if a witness who had a brief view of the sex would even be able to tell if the sex was consensual or not. In Dara Florances testimony she said she was 100% certain that it was consensual. But really if the girl is frozen how would you be able to tell ? I dont think you can personally. Now maybe there is more to her testimony that the media havent reported (eg what sexual position they were in, if the girl was on top then you could certainly claim it was consensual). But as things stand from what we know I really cannot see how Dara Florance can say with any degree of certainty if it was consensual or not. I never heard the prosecution challenge her on that either.

Exactly and the door could not have been open for long. I don't understand why the accused weren't questioned more extensively it was relatively short in comparison to the complainant. Blane's account is problematic as there are three different accounts as to where he was, he said he was by the bed, she said he was at the door exposing himself, the other lads said he wasn't there at all??? How'd the jury reconcile that. I thought Blane and olding would be found guilty for sure.

davidmarsh

cloudatlas wrote: »

Exactly and the door could not have been open for long. I don't understand why the accused weren't questioned more extensively it was relatively short in comparison to the complainant. Blane's account is problematic as there are three different accounts as to where he was, he said he was by the bed, she said he was at the door exposing himself, the other lads said he wasn't there at all??? How'd the jury reconcile that. I thought Blane and olding would be found guilty for sure.

If the very same witness told the court that she saw a girl getting raped, I've no doubt they would have been convicted and you wouldn't be questioning her testimony.

I'm hearing all day that we have to trust our women, whatever that message is supposed to achieve. Well.. trust this woman. I don't see why she would lie - she was originally a witness for the prosecution I believe.

Neon_Lights

This is what happens when groupies don't get promoted to long term status with their suitors.

brooke 2

The Talking Bread wrote: »

What are you talking about??? I read the messages and I maintain there is only a certain breed of men who speak about women like that. You clearly are in that bracket apparently

Faugheen wrote: »

Stuart Oldings statement through his solicitor outside court is a lot classier than a lot of comments here.

He apologised to the girl and acknowledged it was her perception. He doesn't agree with her perception, but it doesn't take away from the fact that he essentially admits nobody wins in this trial.

People need to get into their heads that, while the jury said not guilty, they did not return a guilty verdict to the complainant for lying.

I pray the posters here who make it sound so black and white never have a family member go through the same thing as the complainant.

It was also a lot classier than Jackson's solicitor's statement.

Noveight

My God the Twitter scutter is on full flow at the minute.

https://twitter.com/TrapQueenBee95/status/979070690744815616

RabbleRouser2k

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

cant imagine any of them being proud of the incident.
not good for the image rights etc.

http://www.thepotato.ie/2013/08/conor-murray-and-simon-zebo-didnt-engage-in-threesome/

Didn't do Ryan Gigg's much harm-got many a job, still used in advertising.

Neon_Lights

Noveight wrote: »

My God the Twitter scutter is on full flow at the minute.

https://twitter.com/TrapQueenBee95/status/979070690744815616

Yeah Xanax by name, Xanax needed by Nature

Neon_Lights

Why is everybody on twitter like Ireland Ey? It's in the UK, Northern Ireland....

Franz Von Peppercorn

Neon_Lights wrote: »

Why is everybody on twitter like Ireland Ey? It's in the UK, Northern Ireland....

The stupidity of posts on twitter regarding “this country” is astounding. We’ve been separated for 100 years. Might as well call France this country.

major bill

brooke 2 wrote: »

Absolutely. Can you imagine the complainant seeing that? Almost looks like he is gloating. Horrible person. :mad:

Kinda wish now he had been found guilty.

Chap is a bellend and I really hope he never pulls on the Green Jersey again.....has no respect for women and it would be an insult to the large female following that go to Rugby if he did!

I respect the decision but have no respect for that smuggy looking eejet

riffmongous

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

The stupidity of posts on twitter regarding “this country” is astounding. We’ve been separated for 100 years. Might as well call France this country.

Which country does Jackson play for again?

Neon_Lights

riffmongous wrote: »

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

The stupidity of posts on twitter regarding “this country” is astounding. We’ve been separated for 100 years. Might as well call France this country.

Which country does Jackson play for again?

Norn Iron

Franz Von Peppercorn

riffmongous wrote: »

Which country does Jackson play for again?

He doesn’t play for any country. He plays for the Ireland rugby team - which is transnational.

Not that that has anything to do with legal systems. Northern Ireland is part of the U.K.

(I feel though I should start with .. there’s this planet, right, called Earth..)

Franz Von Peppercorn

Jackson does come across as a prick alright. That said some of the #ibelieveher posts are on the edge of defamatory.