Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

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

Options
1…5556586061…316

Comments

  • Options
    #1712
    facehugger99
    Registered Users Posts: 7,264 ✭✭✭facehugger99


    mayolady14 wrote: »
    I was violently violated, I did not want to keep reliving it? Like Christ on a bike do people have no idea how horrific it is to have to relive a rape every day?

    I'm sure it is horrendous, but what can be done practically to change the current system and process?


  • Options
    #1713
    irishrebe
    Registered Users Posts: 612 ✭✭✭irishrebe


    mayolady14 wrote: »
    CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: »
    If a Garda says something unacceptable you go to a differenr Garda. It's not rape but I was hit by a car, no injuries more than bumps and bruises. I got lucky. Garda said I'm not reporting this there was no evidence you were hit by a car.

    I went to a different Garda.

    I was violently violated, I did not want to keep reliving it? Like Christ on a bike do people have no idea how horrific it is to have to relive a rape every day?
    The lack of empathy on here is astounding. I'm so sorry.


  • Options
    #1714
    mayolady14
    Registered Users Posts: 36 ✭mayolady14


    Basil3 wrote: »
    This really got me thinking. We have a member of our family around the age you were. I'd be shocked if she was raped and got up the courage to report to the guards but didn't tell us (or at least her Mum) as well.

    If the guards essentially told her to feck off, we would seriously kick up a stink.

    You had no support whatsoever? You just kept it to yourself?


    When the guard didn’t believe me, I thought no one would. My friend knew. I didn’t tell my sister as she is younger. I eventually went to the local RCC about a month later. They offered to go back to the guards with me but at that stage I just wanted to put my effort into getting through exams, work and getting better. I didn’t want to put my life on hold for a trial that would probably not give me justice anyway


  • Options
    #1715
    irishrebe
    Registered Users Posts: 612 ✭✭✭irishrebe


    seamus wrote: »
    irishrebe wrote: »
    We don't know if she was raped or not. We know that it couldn't be proven.
    Which means there was no rape.
    I don't know where you get the idea that the findings of the jury mean the rape categorically 'didn't happen'. No legal professional would put it in those words.
    The incident happened. The individuals involved engaged in sex, in which the matter of consent was questionable.

    But for all social and legal purposes, a rape did not occur. That's the point.

    Or to put it another way - if you say, "She was raped, but it can't be proven", then what you're doing is undermining the court. A finding of fact by a court that a rape occurred - in this instance - also requires that the accused is found guilty.
    I didn't say 'she was raped, but it can't be proven'. I said that you cannot categorically state that she wasn't raped or that 'no rape happened'. You are mistaken there. Do you have a legal background?


  • Options
    #1716
    C__MC
    Registered Users Posts: 3,079 ✭✭✭C__MC


    If anyone logically studied the case, it was an absolute farce. There was more holes in Swiss cheese than her story. Just a quick example, she give 3 different accounts of how mc ilroy entered the room. The judge even brought this up in her closing speech. Her story didn't add up. I could add a few more in but wont. Its very simple not rocket science yet we have social media mob saying, 'I believe her' Believe what? There was no consistency to any of her stories.

    The lads may have lied but they stuck to their stories from day 1. Jackson and Olding breezed through their cross examination emphatically. As for a big cover up, you are having a laugh. Two professional players going to plot a cover up for a rape in a cafe, really? All four took the stand under no obligation.

    The lads were no angels but there was no rape here, completely innocent.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1717
    Omackeral
    Registered Users Posts: 32,956 ✭✭✭✭Omackeral


    markodaly wrote: »
    We are going to have wall to wall coverage now on how the justice system is some sort of woman hating creation of the patriarchy.

    The irony is, women get much more lenient sentences than men do across the board for identical crimes.


  • Options
    #1718
    freshpopcorn
    Registered Users Posts: 30,401 ✭✭✭✭freshpopcorn


    MOD NOTE I had to close the thread for a few minutes. Somebody posted a personal story and it may have lead online mob of trying to figure out who it was.
    I left some of the persons post in place but don't mention the sport, club, area, etc.


  • Options
    #1719
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    irishrebe wrote: »
    I didn't say 'she was raped, but it can't be proven'. I said that you cannot categorically state that she wasn't raped or that 'no rape happened'. You are mistaken there. Do you have a legal background?
    You can't prove a negative anyway. So it's impossible to prove something didn't happen.
    No, I don't have a legal background.

    The point is that if you think that a rape did actually happen, this can only be for two reasons:

    1. Someone else was there that night who did rape her but wasn't accused of it
    2. The men involved raped her, contrary to the finding of the court

    You cannot say, "The court found them not guilty of rape, but that doesn't mean they didn't rape her", unless you have chosen to disregard the entire purpose of the court system. "Rape" is a specific legal term. If the evidence fails to support a finding of rape, then the accused did not commit rape. And where you have four people in a room having sex, it is not possible that one of those people has been raped, but none of the other 3 committed rape. If none of them committed rape, then the fourth person was not raped.

    You can throw in a million other terms here and say that she was injured, degraded, violated, humiliated. But "rape" is not one of those terms, because the evidence failed to support it.


  • Options
    #1720
    bloodless_coup
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,480 ✭✭✭bloodless_coup


    The planned protests are basically slander on the men found innocent. I heard a snippet on the radio of Ruth Coppinger cheer-leading on the protests "in support of rape victims".

    Absolutely disgusting.


  • Options
    #1721
    wexie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,480 ✭✭✭wexie


    seamus wrote: »

    You cannot say, "The court found them not guilty of rape, but that doesn't mean they didn't rape her", unless you have chosen to disregard the entire purpose of the court system. "Rape" is a specific legal term.

    What you can say though (and I think that is perhaps what Irishrebe means) is that 'the victim (for lack of a better term) believes a rape occurred.

    Which is fine, as already pointed out it's entirely possible (likely even) that the complainant believes a rape occurred and the accused believe it didn't.

    And like you rightly pointed out the courts decided which version we're going to go with and that's the version we should now accept.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1722
    yourdeadwright
    Registered Users Posts: 20,661 ✭✭✭✭yourdeadwright


    mayolady14 wrote: »
    yourdeadwright wrote: »
    Well if you don't report it your part of the problem .,Your getting people on both extremes here its the internet after all,The right road was taken and the evidence was presented and the guys where found not guilty, I'm not sure what more people want, ?  Do we return to the stone ages and stone people without evidence as they might be guilty ?You say things need to change ,what exactly would you like changed what happened in this case on the law side of things that should be changed ?It seems some people are up in arms as they did not get the verdict they wanted, even if the law took it course , If the guys where found guilty in the court we'd all have to accept that two,
    I reported it. Wasn’t believed by a female guard. No follow up. He still plays football for Galway and I have PTSD. No one is suggesting we stone anyone. But we have a serious problem with believing and supporting rape victims in this country. Forget the trial and the verdict for a second. The way this woman is being spoken about. That’s why I told my story on this post. Because if it had gone to trial, feck all of ye would believe me either. I’d be a drunk slut who loved it.
    Again as I said you get both extremes here, You have people talking nonsense about the women (wrongly)  but you also have people talking **** about the lads (no where found not guilty) its the internet it happens, I'm not going to say I believe you or not as iv never meet you , no idea what happened to you or what didn't , But if you had a issue with a Garda you should have taken it to the Garda Ombudsman they are there for situation like that and should be used , Any member of the public has the right to be listened to and have a compliant investigated,


  • Options
    #1723
    Murdoc90
    Registered Users Posts: 924 ✭✭✭Murdoc90


    doylefe wrote: »
    The planned protests are basically slander on the men found innocent. I heard a snippet on the radio of Ruth Coppinger cheer-leading on the protests "in support of rape victims".

    Absolutely disgusting.

    if you're so disgusted and outraged maybe you should set up your own march :pac:


  • Options
    #1724
    irishrebe
    Registered Users Posts: 612 ✭✭✭irishrebe


    seamus wrote: »
    irishrebe wrote: »
    I didn't say 'she was raped, but it can't be proven'. I said that you cannot categorically state that she wasn't raped or that 'no rape happened'. You are mistaken there. Do you have a legal background?
    You can't prove a negative anyway. So it's impossible to prove something didn't happen.
    No, I don't have a legal background.

    The point is that if you think that a rape did actually happen, this can only be for two reasons:

    1. Someone else was there that night who did rape her but wasn't accused of it
    2. The men involved raped her, contrary to the finding of the court

    You cannot say, "The court found them not guilty of rape, but that doesn't mean they didn't rape her", unless you have chosen to disregard the entire purpose of the court system. "Rape" is a specific legal term. If the evidence fails to support a finding of rape, then the accused did not commit rape.

    You can throw in a million other terms here and say that she was injured, degraded, violated, humiliated. But "rape" is not one of those terms, because the evidence failed to support it.
    Well, I do have a legal background. Someone being acquitted of a rape does not mean a rape didn't happen. You cannot put it in those terms, legally.


  • Options
    #1725
    Tsipras
    Closed Accounts Posts: 493 ✭✭Tsipras


    Sidebaro wrote: »
    Tsipras wrote:
    Why would they say it?

    Why wouldn't they? Equally dumb question.
    A woman Garda most likely from outside the county. No chance. 
    Plenty of fantasists coming out of the woodwork now.


  • Options
    #1726
    wexie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,480 ✭✭✭wexie


    doylefe wrote: »
    The planned protests are basically slander on the men found innocent. I heard a snippet on the radio of Ruth Coppinger cheer-leading on the protests "in support of rape victims".

    Absolutely disgusting.

    I'm somewhat curious quite how open to legal repercussions a lot of these people going on about 'rapists' etc. etc. are leaving themselves.

    I'd imagine that the four lads probably have little stomach for more legal proceedings at the moment but I wonder what the legal standpoint is on referring to people who have literally just been found not guilty of rape as rapists?

    Anyone?


  • Options
    #1727
    Omackeral
    Registered Users Posts: 32,956 ✭✭✭✭Omackeral


    The good thing about this #IBELIEVEHER thing and notifications about these solidarity marches is that you can use it to hide any eejit on your Facebook feed. It's a decent idiot filter.


  • Options
    #1728
    ShowMeTheCash
    Registered Users Posts: 2,651 ✭✭✭ShowMeTheCash


    mayolady14 wrote: »
    Considering I’m no law student, I don’t know exactly what would be the best way, but don’t you think that any crime with a conviction rate of 1-2% needs to be looked at seriously?

    I remember listening to a chief investigator in the USA talk about rape cases.
    He talked about the conviction rates but also talked about the difficulties with rape.
    He went onto explain when it comes to assault or other crimes there is usually no case whereby someone can or will consent to say getting stabbed or consent to getting shot or consent to getting punched.
    The main issue for investigating rape is people do consent to sex.
    So the evidence of the act does not always help the case.

    Based on all physical evidence consensual and non-consensual sex can be very difficult to differentiate.


  • Options
    #1729
    mayolady14
    Registered Users Posts: 36 ✭mayolady14


    Tsipras wrote: »
    A woman Garda most likely from outside the county. No chance. 
    Plenty of fantasists coming out of the woodwork now.


    I really wish it was a fantasy, trust me. It seems to me that we’d prefer to presume women are lying than admit the truth-more men than we are comfortable with are rapists.


  • Options
    #1730
    baylah17
    Closed Accounts Posts: 790 ✭✭✭baylah17


    doylefe wrote: »
    T I heard a snippet on the radio of Ruth Coppinger cheer-leading on the protests "in support of rape victims".

    What would you expect from a pig but a grunt!


  • Options
    #1731
    irishrebe
    Registered Users Posts: 612 ✭✭✭irishrebe


    wexie wrote: »
    doylefe wrote: »
    The planned protests are basically slander on the men found innocent. I heard a snippet on the radio of Ruth Coppinger cheer-leading on the protests "in support of rape victims".

    Absolutely disgusting.

    I'm somewhat curious quite how open to legal repercussions a lot of these people going on about 'rapists' etc. etc. are leaving themselves.

    I'd imagine that the four lads probably have little stomach for more legal proceedings at the moment but I wonder what the legal standpoint is on referring to people who have literally just been found not guilty of rape as rapists?

    Anyone?
    They could sue for slander.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1732
    1eg0a3xv7b82of
    Closed Accounts Posts: 996 ✭✭✭1eg0a3xv7b82of


    irishrebe wrote: »
    Well, I do have a legal background. Someone being acquitted of a rape does not mean a rape didn't happen. You cannot put it in those terms, legally.

    Where is your legal background from, Russia.
    Guilty people are never acquitted only the innocent


  • Options
    #1733
    Sidebaro
    Closed Accounts Posts: 178 ✭✭Sidebaro


    Tsipras wrote:
    A woman Garda most likely from outside the county. No chance. Plenty of fantasists coming out of the woodwork now.

    If you're accusing me of fantasy while using terms like 'most likely' in your reasoning then it's likely that you are the one guilty of it. Disbelieving a rape victims story is why so few come forward. Congratulations, you're part of the problem.


  • Options
    #1734
    Mokuba
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,690 ✭✭✭Mokuba


    I really wish they would sue some of the people on twitter still calling them rapists.

    People think they can say whatever they like and get away with it.


  • Options
    #1735
    mayolady14
    Registered Users Posts: 36 ✭mayolady14


    yourdeadwright wrote: »
    Again as I said you get both extremes here, You have people talking nonsense about the women (wrongly)  but you also have people talking **** about the lads (no where found not guilty) its the internet it happens, I'm not going to say I believe you or not as iv never meet you , no idea what happened to you or what didn't , But if you had a issue with a Garda you should have taken it to the Garda Ombudsman they are there for situation like that and should be used , Any member of the public has the right to be listened to and have a compliant investigated,

    I have no interest in reliving the matter any more, as I have moved on with my life. The point is that women are constantly being told to report their rapes, but when they do they aren’t believed. I have been repeatedly told that it would be my fault if my rapist rapes another woman. This is obviously exceptionally unfair


  • Options
    #1736
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    irishrebe wrote: »
    Well, I do have a legal background. Someone being acquitted of a rape does not mean a rape didn't happen. You cannot put it in those terms, legally.
    Ah, that's not what we're talking about though.

    As I say above, if you assert that she was raped, then the only logical outcome is that you believe someone else was in that room who did not appear in court.

    It is logically incongruous to say that she was raped, but none of the people who raped her are rapists.


  • Options
    #1737
    retro:electro
    Registered Users Posts: 21,039 ✭✭✭✭retro:electro


    The people marching and hashtagging - what exactly did they want the jury to base their guilty verdict on? Did they want them to disregard key witness evidence? Rule on emotion? Forget the apparent inconsistencies? I don’t get it?

    You can agree with the verdict handed down without slapping the backs of those involved. Like I said earlier at the worst these guys would have been rapists, and at the very best they’re foul mouthed pigs, nothing worth defending there, but I agree with the verdict.
    All the marching and hashtagging and meme-ing is fcuking cringe.


  • Options
    #1738
    Assetbacked
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,969 ✭✭✭Assetbacked


    irishrebe wrote: »
    Well, I do have a legal background. Someone being acquitted of a rape does not mean a rape didn't happen. You cannot put it in those terms, legally.

    Yeah, but it also doesn't mean something definitely did happen.


  • Options
    #1739
    mayolady14
    Registered Users Posts: 36 ✭mayolady14


    Mokuba wrote: »
    I really wish they would sue some of the people on twitter still calling them rapists.

    People think they can say whatever they like and get away with it.

    And men think they can rape and get away with it. Because they do. 98% of them.


  • Options
    #1740
    whisky_galore
    Registered Users Posts: 15,985 ✭✭✭✭whisky_galore


    Omackeral wrote: »
    The good thing about this #IBELIEVEHER thing and notifications about these solidarity marches is that you can use it to hide any eejit on your Facebook feed. It's a decent idiot filter.

    Yep. I've snoozed a few virtue signallers for 30 days.
    Nothing gained in engaging from a different viewpoint, application form for trouble if there ever was one.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1741
    irishrebe
    Registered Users Posts: 612 ✭✭✭irishrebe


    Assetbacked wrote: »
    irishrebe wrote: »
    Well, I do have a legal background. Someone being acquitted of a rape does not mean a rape didn't happen. You cannot put it in those terms, legally.

    Yeah, but it also doesn't mean something definitely did happen.
    Who said it did?


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement