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

py2006

Strazdas wrote: »

A false rape allegation would be some woman claiming they had sexually assaulted her even though she hadn't even been with them at all or anywhere near a bedroom.

or engaged in consensual sex but lied about that afterwards.

Mebuntu

How true those words by George Hook were. The ones that the PC Maniacs got him sacked for.

gerrybbadd

_Dara_ wrote: »

My sis and I were discussing the case. She said “I tend to believe women when they say they were raped”. “Always?”, I asked. “Always”. This is commonplace. I wonder would she be grand with her husband being falsely accused?

Not all feminists are like this though. I have a friend who is a feminist and she thought the men were innocent based on what she had read of the case.

Jesus, what a scary attitude to have.

I'm from a small town in the West of Ireland with a population of less than 3,000. I can personally recall 4 cases in the last 15 years where girls have cried rape, and were later found out to have lied

captbarnacles

Jimbob1977 wrote: »

The plaintiff's female friend damaged the Prosecution's case from the early days.

Stuck her head into the bedroom, but didn't see anything illegal.

If a female friend doesn't back you up, it's going to be a tough job to get a conviction.

Wasn't her friend though afaik but rather the lads which is a big difference.

_Dara_

storker wrote: »

I'm neither feminist nor mysogynist, nor a juror on the trial so I didn't hear all of the evidence, but from what I did hear and read, I'd say there was plenty of reasonable doubt, so the result seems a fair one.

Yes, the judge said that it had to be beyond a reasonable doubt. A fair decision.

Nerdlingr

eviltwin wrote: »

That's the right of the accused and I've no issues with that. I'm just stating my belief the length of time she was on the stand will have a negative impact on those who might be considering bringing a case against an abuser.

Yes but you're using this case as an example/benchmark for what someone might do in the future. A case where there were FOUR accused. Do you agree 8 Days is a reasonable time for FOUR different barristers?

AustinLostin

We still have no conclusion on what actually happened that night.

Mr.H

The worst thing about this is these men now have to live with the "what if's?" for the rest of their lives. They were found not guilty but a lot of people will still judge them.

It sounds bad but I hope she genuinely thought she was raped. Not because I wish harm on anyone, but, because if she made the whole thing up, that is the worst thing you could do to anybody.

Shefwedfan

Pelvis wrote: »

Speak for yourself.

Sorry but try reading back. The original point was saying because of a PRIVATE watsapp group and the messages in it that a player career should be affected

The messages where private and only out in public because of a false accusation.

The majority of the messages in the watsapp group was nothing....talking about the Northern Ireland team etc......about 1% of the message mentioned something about girls....that was it.....

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

retro:electro

py2006 wrote: »

Am I right in saying that the accuser didn't want that woman involved in the case at all? I thought I read somewhere?

I remember reading that she left her out of her original statement

SEPT 23 1989

Dublin Rape Crisis spokesperson says the verdict matters not its all about the justice system:rolleyes:

_Dara_

Omackeral wrote: »

I agree with you. They may have been right dickheads, arrogant and downright disrespectful but that’s not illegal. Feelings don’t come into it in a court of law. The jurors will have done well to keep all that in their minds. I’m sure the judge reminded them of their duty to do that too.

Yes, I think the jury are to be commended. These guys seem like knobs but, like I said, that’s not illegal.

It kinda seemed to me that she had next-day remorse.

coffee_cake

Mr.H wrote: »

The worst thing about this is these men now have to live with the "what if's?" for the rest of their lives. They were found not guilty but a lot of people will still judge them.

It sounds bad but I hope she genuinely thought she was raped. Not because I wish harm on anyone, but, because if she made the whole thing up, that is the worst thing you could do to anybody.

You hope she was genuinely raped because false accusations are worse than rape? For real?

GreeBo

Omackeral wrote: »

Thank Christ you’re not a juror.

From my experience, most jurors are idiots who dont understand exactly what it is they are being asked to do.

"sure they Garda wouldnt have arrested him if he didnt do it" was the wisdom shared with me by a fellow juror.

py2006

_Dara_ wrote: »

It kinda seemed to me that she had next-day remorse.

Not attacking you, but surely that does not equate to rape?

_Dara_

gerrybbadd wrote: »

Jesus, what a scary attitude to have.

I'm from a small town in the West of Ireland with a population of less than 3,000. I can personally recall 4 cases in the last 15 years where girls have cried rape, and were later found out to have lied

My sister was sexually abused as a child and I think she lets that colour her judgement too much. She can’t seem to be impartial because of it. I wonder if she was called up for jury duty, would she have to disclose that information?

.......

This post has been deleted.

meeeeh

I agree with the verdict, I don't think rape was proven. But I don't think there is anything to celebrate here. Their attitude to the woman (and other women) was disgusting, I don't think trial should be so public but at least women will know who to keep away from.

Gravelly

GreeBo wrote: »

From my experience, most jurors are idiots who dont understand exactly what it is they are being asked to do.

"sure they Garda wouldnt have arrested him if he didnt do it" was the wisdom shared with me by a fellow juror.

The old saying "I wouldn't want to put my life in the hands of 12 people who were too stupid to get out of jury duty" has a ring of truth to it (and yes, I'm aware it's our civic duty and all that).

Foxhound38

The reaction on social media has been interesting - a lot of unsurprising anger in the feminist quarters of course; a lot of it about believing the victim and such.

It made me think, was any outcome other than Guilty something they would be willing to accept from the outset? If they were on the jury of a rape or sexual assault case, would they even bother listening to the evidence or is the accusation enough to determine a guilty verdict? To those who adhere to that philosophy, is a trial in cases such as these even necessary or desirable?

gerrybbadd

_Dara_ wrote: »

My sister was sexually abused as a child and I think she lets that colour her judgement too much. She can’t seem to be impartial because of it. I wonder if she was called up for jury duty, would she have to disclose that information?

I'd imagine she would _Dara_. That being said, i'm just going on Courtroom experience and Jury selection from TV Shows and Movies!

Mr.H

bluewolf wrote: »

You hope she was genuinely raped because false accusations are worse than rape? For real?

not what i said

I said I hope she genuinely 'thought' she was raped.

Because yes a false accusation of rape is worse than rape.

These innocent men will have to live with doubters for the rest of their lives. Even though they are innocent.

So yes a false accusation is worse than rape.

I do hope she wasnt making a false accusation and she genuinely thought she was raped

py2006

To those kinda feminists the men were guilty before it went to trial. Any other verdict is unacceptable to them.

Berserker

GreeBo wrote: »

From my experience, most jurors are idiots who dont understand exactly what it is they are being asked to do.

How can you possibly come to that conclusion? Are you familiar with the jury selection process?

Icemancometh

From an Oireachtas member that's astonishing.

Strazdas

py2006 wrote: »

or engaged in consensual sex but lied about that afterwards.

Possibly, but that is only one possible scenario. A person could be involved in sexual activity and 'believe' they were raped or that it was non consensual even though the law says otherwise ie. they think it was non consensual but a court rules it was consensual.

Noveight

py2006 wrote: »

To those kinda feminists the men were guilty before it went to trial. Any other verdict is unacceptable to them.

Yep, the toys were always going to be fired out of the pram with the not guilty verdict. Rather childish carry on.

touts

The men were accquitted?? Wow!! I didn't think that was possible any more especially under the modern the court of public opinion known as the #MeToo campaign? Under that quasi-legal system guilt is pre-determined purely by gender. If a woman makes an accusation against a man it is automatically assumed to be proven and the man loses his job and public reputation. He then has to counter sue to prove his innocence.

But if today's case now shows that all men aren't sexual predators and all women might not be telling the truth how can the #MeToo campaign continue to convict men via twitter..........

But no doubt the feminists will just argue that today just proves that the #metoo campaign is the best way to handle such cases.

Mr.H

AttentionBebe wrote: »

Insufficient evidence to prosecute ≠ she lied

This is the biggest issue. That logic will always leave doubters and even if these guys are 100% innocent. They will always be tarnished. Their lives are ruined.