Protests about rape today in Ireland

Appledreams15

There are protests about rape cases failing women

Today at 12.30 to 13.30
In Dublin(at the Spire)
Limerick
Cork
Carlow
And Belfast.

Is anyone going? I think it will be a really good day to shine a spotlight on this and get the government to make changes.

LeinsterDub

Appledreams15 wrote: »

There are protests about rape cases failing women

Today at 12.30 to 13.30
In Dublin(at the Spire)
Limerick
Cork
Carlow
And Belfast.

Is anyone going? I think it will be a really good day to shine a spotlight on this and get the government to make changes.

What kind of changes would you like the government to make?

Uncharted

Appledreams15 wrote: »

There are protests about rape cases failing women

Today at 12.30 to 13.30
In Dublin(at the Spire)
Limerick
Cork
Carlow
And Belfast.

Is anyone going? I think it will be a really good day to shine a spotlight on this and get the government to make changes.

A spotlight on what exactly?

baby and crumble

I think bringing attention to the issue of consent, ongoing consent and victim blaming is a good thing.

People are, however, forgetting that this trial happened in another country, technically. From a legal standpoint this is a case that happened in the UK. So our government can't do anything on this particual trial issue.

That's not to say I don't think anything in the Irish system needs to change. I'm just explaining that getting angry with our government here is not the correct reposnse to something that happened in the UK.

meeeeh

While I agree some discussion is needed I see no benefit in knee jerk reaction. They were found innocent and personally I don't see some glaring miscarriage of justice here and I think a lot of people might have similar opinion. We might not like the men or their attitude but likeability should not be the measure of guilt and their guilt should be proved beyond reasonable doubt. I don't think it was, others might disagree but it certainly isn't clear cut. I think the protests are mistake and just an opportunity for some to update their status on social media. It's vain and stupid and it will only divide people more.

_Dara_

I agree, these protests are a knee-jerk, emotive response. And the objectives are unclear.

Caranica

I was there, and close to tears for most of it. The strong feeling of empathy and a determination that attitudes, and the legal process need to change.

Read the tweets of the soccer player and GAA player who tweeted horrendous things yesterday. Life is not a game and women are not things.

The case yesterday was in a different jurisdiction but the conviction rate for sexual assault here is woeful. Read the stories of those who've gone through it.

I've never been to a protest before, but was so glad I went today.

Macha

meeeeh wrote: »

While I agree some discussion is needed I see no benefit in knee jerk reaction. They were found innocent and personally I don't see some glaring miscarriage of justice here and I think a lot of people might have similar opinion. We might not like the men or their attitude but likeability should not be the measure of guilt and their guilt should be proved beyond reasonable doubt. I don't think it was, others might disagree but it certainly isn't clear cut. I think the protests are mistake and just an opportunity for some to update their status on social media. It's vain and stupid and it will only divide people more.

I think the protests are about issues beyond the verdict itself, including the fact that in Northern Ireland rape trials are open to the public (which i think also does the defendants no favours) and that the complainant didn't have the right to separate legal representation.

Proving beyond reasonable doubt is the standard legal threshold but it is so difficult because in rape cases, it comes down to what was in someone's mind at a certain period of time. How the hell do you deal with that while also wanting to actually improve the statistics on rape cases being brought to trial?

It's also a protest against the rape culture that results in the attitude towards women (sluts) and men (shaggers) that helps contribute not only to incidents of rape but victim-blaming, etc.

And finally I think it was simply an expression of sympathy - quite probably many women present have found themselves in similar situations - for a woman who has gone through a hellish few weeks.

sullivlo

meeeeh wrote: »

While I agree some discussion is needed I see no benefit in knee jerk reaction. They were found innocent and personally I don't see some glaring miscarriage of justice here and I think a lot of people might have similar opinion. We might not like the men or their attitude but likeability should not be the measure of guilt and their guilt should be proved beyond reasonable doubt. I don't think it was, others might disagree but it certainly isn't clear cut. I think the protests are mistake and just an opportunity for some to update their status on social media. It's vain and stupid and it will only divide people more.

I think that the jury found them “not guilty” rather than innocent. They couldn’t be found guilty as there was reasonable doubt. The inconsistencies in all of the testimonies. The lack of physical evidence.

Nobody knows what happened. I can only form an opinion based on what I have read, what I have heard, and my experiences as a woman. She had injuries inside her vagina. She left crying. Regardless of the issue of consent - what kind of person thinks it’s okay to have sexual inter course with someone to the point of them bleeding and having injuries and then saying goodbye at the door when she was crying? And as a female, the absolute mortification of having her knickers shown in court, and her personal life being called into question. The language being used. Slut. The bragging about it. The spit roast. The victim blaming by some. The hero worshiping by some. I saw a tweet sympathising with the victim yesterday and a man replied with a dick pic.

I think that that’s what the protests were about. The inequality. The victim blaming. The victim shaming. It goes beyond the trial up north.

meeeeh

sullivlo wrote: »

I think that the jury found them “not guilty” rather than innocent. They couldn’t be found guilty as there was reasonable doubt. The inconsistencies in all of the testimonies. The lack of physical evidence.

Nobody knows what happened. I can only form an opinion based on what I have read, what I have heard, and my experiences as a woman. She had injuries inside her vagina. She left crying. Regardless of the issue of consent - what kind of person thinks it’s okay to have sexual inter course with someone to the point of them bleeding and having injuries and then saying goodbye at the door when she was crying? And as a female, the absolute mortification of having her knickers shown in court, and her personal life being called into question. The language being used. Slut. The bragging about it. The spit roast. The victim blaming by some. The hero worshiping by some. I saw a tweet sympathising with the victim yesterday and a man replied with a dick pic.

I think that that’s what the protests were about. The inequality. The victim blaming. The victim shaming. It goes beyond the trial up north.

And those are all valid reasons (and by the way I felt exactly the same about it), I just think the protests will do more damage than good. If nothing else they are putting pressure on juries to decide certain way or the crownds will be on the streets. Anyway it's perfect expression of today's society. The discussion is happening on Twitter limited to 280 characters and with slogans on the streets. There is a lot of shouting and very little nuanced discourse.

ted1

Today’s protest was nothing more than a lynch mob. The guys were found innocent.

Before you start, you are innocent till proving guilty and they were found not guilty.

While there is a genuine case for a March. Targeting these individuals whose careers and life’s are ruined is not the way to do it.

TBH. I wouldn’t be surprised if one if the lads commit sucide and I’m sure many if the marchers also campaign against cyber bullying.

1 example of today’s misinformed is giving out about the short time the jury returned a verdict. The individuals must not have realised that the jury have been listening to the case for the past few weeks

ted1

Caranica wrote: »

Read the tweets of the soccer player and GAA player who tweeted horrendous things yesterday. Life is not a game and women are not things.

.

Let’s put it in perspective 2 tweets from complete idiots vs thousands of abusive tweets and matches againest 4 people found not guilty

Caranica

ted1 wrote: »

Let’s put it in perspective 2 tweets from complete idiots vs thousands of abusive tweets and matches againest 4 people found not guilty

Marches were in support of her, and sexual assault victims down here and a cry for the updating of procedures around sexual assault cases. I saw one placard against one of the four, yet hundreds saying "I/we stand with her".

ted1

Caranica wrote: »

ted1 wrote: »

Let’s put it in perspective 2 tweets from complete idiots vs thousands of abusive tweets and matches againest 4 people found not guilty

Marches were in support of her, and sexual assault victims down here and a cry for the updating of procedures around sexual assault cases. I saw one placard against one of the four, yet hundreds saying "I/we stand with her".

But yet a judge and jury of both men and women who witnessed all the evidence and a girl who witnessed the alleged act don’t think that there is anything to stand with her with.

ted1

ted1 wrote: »

Caranica wrote: »

ted1 wrote: »

Let’s put it in perspective 2 tweets from complete idiots vs thousands of abusive tweets and matches againest 4 people found not guilty

Marches were in support of her, and sexual assault victims down here and a cry for the updating of procedures around sexual assault cases. I saw one placard against one of the four, yet hundreds saying "I/we stand with her".

But yet a judge and jury of both men and women who witnessed all the evidence and a girl who witnessed the alleged act don’t think that there is anything to stand with her with.

By all means match against sexual abuse , but don’t use these individuals who have been trialled as your scapegoat goats

splinter65

Caranica wrote: »

Marches were in support of her, and sexual assault victims down here and a cry for the updating of procedures around sexual assault cases. I saw one placard against one of the four, yet hundreds saying "I/we stand with her".

But there must have been some suggestions how procedures could be “updated”.
What were the suggestions?

Caranica

Legal representation for the complainant is a very basic thing. The woman in Belfast was cross examined by four different legal teams, with nobody there to stand up for her. She was just a witness.

Ivana Bacik wrote a brilliant article on the differences in our legal system from NI and what needs to change https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/district-court/how-rape-trials-in-republic-differ-from-those-in-north-1.3443644

At the end of the day, I went to the protest because I felt it was the right thing to do. I'm not a SJW, I've never been to a protest before.

You might disagree, that's the beauty of boards. Diverse opinions. Respect.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Shanowen Shakedown

Macha wrote: »

It's also a protest against the rape culture

What rape culture?

splinter65

Caranica wrote: »

Legal representation for the complainant is a very basic thing. The woman in Belfast was cross examined by four different legal teams, with nobody there to stand up for her. She was just a witness.

Ivana Bacik wrote a brilliant article on the differences in our legal system from NI and what needs to change https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/district-court/how-rape-trials-in-republic-differ-from-those-in-north-1.3443644

At the end of the day, I went to the protest because I felt it was the right thing to do. I'm not a SJW, I've never been to a protest before.

You might disagree, that's the beauty of boards. Diverse opinions. Respect.

What do you mean there was no one there to stand up for her?
Do you think that there should be someone appointed to prevent the defense solicitors from exploring her version of events in any kind of a probing way?

Caranica

Caranica wrote: »

Marches were in support of her, and sexual assault victims down here and a cry for the updating of procedures around sexual assault cases. I saw one placard against one of the four, yet hundreds saying "I/we stand with her".

It's disappointing that a number of people don't understand that people can believe her while also accepting there wasn't enough evidence to convict.
It's disappointing that these protests are being so protested, but not the "jail the lying slut" comments. A lot of people on reddit eg seem to think believing her means we all want people to be automatically locked up

That irish times article is interesting. I know only that we have more anonymity for both parties which i think is important.
Did anyone see the change iceland has just made about active consent?

splinter65

splinter65 wrote: »

What do you mean there was no one there to stand up for her?
Do you think that there should be someone appointed to prevent the defense solicitors from exploring her version of events in any kind of a probing way?

Was the article correct that was she was alone without legal rep in court? I thought she did have someone who was making the closing arguments

bucketybuck

meeeeh wrote: »

And those are all valid reasons (and by the way I felt exactly the same about it), I just think the protests will do more damage than good.

I have long had a lot of time and sympathy for a lot of the issues women face on a daily basis, but hearing the reactions to this this case both before and after the verdict I have to admit to thinking "who could be bothered with this ****e". And while my opinion doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things, people would do well to consider the wider impact of some of the attitudes being expressed and fostered here.

Marches and protests in Dublin because a Belfast jury followed due process and reached a decision? Would they ever cop on. Personally I think its very dangerous to make it clear to men that if accused of a sexual assault that they will be considered guilty regardless of what the justice system decides. Thats the sort of attitude that will cost a lot of support going forward.

splinter65

bluewolf wrote: »

It's disappointing that a number of people don't understand that people can believe her while also accepting there wasn't enough evidence to convict.
It's disappointing that these protests are being so protested, but not the "jail the lying slut" comments.

That irish times article is interesting. I know only that we have more anonymity for both parties which i think is important.
Did anyone see the change iceland has just made about active consent?

Is nobody interested in exploring why women aren’t far fussier then they currently are about who they’ll exchange any kind of intimacy with?
None of these guys paid her any attention at all in the club but she let Paddy Jackson stick his tongue down her throat?!? Why? What was she going to get out of it?
Boorish drunken loud mouth louts? Why do people put such a low value on themselves?

splinter65

splinter65 wrote: »

Is nobody interested in exploring why women aren’t far fussier then they currently are about who they’ll exchange any kind of intimacy with?
None of these guys paid her any attention at all in the club but she let Paddy Jackson stick his tongue down her throat?!? Why? What was she going to get out of it?
Boorish drunken loud mouth louts? Why do people put such a low value on themselves?

Maybe she wanted a snog? Maybe she didn't know what arseholes they turned out to be from the whatsapps?
Genuinely confused where you are coming from here?

splinter65

bluewolf wrote: »

Maybe she wanted a snog? Maybe she didn't know what arseholes they turned out to be from the whatsapps?
Genuinely confused where you are coming from here?

I don’t know how you can be confused. She was in the VIP section with them. None of them were interacting on a one on one level with her. When did it become a “thing” that you’d have a desire to snog a total stranger who has been ignoring you?

Addle

bluewolf wrote: »

Maybe she didn't know what arseholes they turned out to be from the whatsapps?

Are people really that surprised about the whatsapp conversations?
Do you think those guys are unique in the way they communicated?
How naive/ignorant are people?

Being an arsehole does not make you guilty of rape.

Regretting the events of the night, and consequently the repercussions, does not make you guilty of rape.

Maybe I'm naive, but the prevalence and acceptance of porn has a lot to do with the awful mentality some people seem to have now.

And I agree with the above, that the marches are more about social media updates than genuine support of a cause.

Addle

Addle wrote: »

Are people really that surprised about the whatsapp conversations?
Do you think those guys are unique in the way they communicated?
How naive/ignorant are people?

So what if she was naive? Is that a crime?

Being an arsehole does not make you guilty of rape.

Cool, who said it did?

Regretting the events of the night, and consequently the repercussions, does not make you guilty of rape.

Cool, who said it did?

Maybe I'm naive, but the prevalence and acceptance of porn has a lot to do with the awful mentality some people seem to have now.
.

Uh... What?

Addle

bluewolf wrote: »

So what if she was naive?

I'm not calling the victim naive, I'm saying everyone who is so shocked at the messages is.

splinter65

bluewolf wrote: »

So what if she was naive? Is that a crime?

Cool, who said it did?

Cool, who said it did?


Uh... What?

All of the parties in this case have had the capacity to have access to smart phones since mid teens.
Porn Hub and X Videos at your fingertips 24 hours a day to teach both sexes that spit roasts are perfectly normal and girls are gagging for it. Oh girls also looovvee giving blowjobs while having their face slapped . Didn’t you know that?

ted1

bluewolf wrote: »

splinter65 wrote: »

What do you mean there was no one there to stand up for her?
Do you think that there should be someone appointed to prevent the defense solicitors from exploring her version of events in any kind of a probing way?

Was the article correct that was she was alone without legal rep in court? I thought she did have someone who was making the closing arguments

Wasn’t it the CPS bringing the case , so therefore she wouldn’t have legal rep.

splinter65

ted1 wrote: »

Wasn’t it the CPS bringing the case , so therefore she wouldn’t have legal rep.

As a witness she didn’t need legal representation.

meeeeh

splinter65 wrote: »

As a witness she didn’t need legal representation.

As someone who spent 8 days being questioned she should have the option. Unless it's your intenton to intimidate main witnesses as much as possible so they will not press charges.

bucketybuck

meeeeh wrote: »

As someone who spent 8 days being questioned she should have the option. Unless it's your intenton to intimidate main witnesses as much as possible so they will not press charges.

Respectfully though, when you see the vehement reactions certain people have had to this case, it just makes me relieved that questions are asked even if it is uncomfortable for the witness.

As to the point made, it seems fair to ask why a witness would need legal representation. They are there to tell what they know and explain their facts, what would the lawyer be for if not to change what they intend to say?

meeeeh

splinter65 wrote: »

I don’t know how you can be confused. She was in the VIP section with them. None of them were interacting on a one on one level with her. When did it become a “thing” that you’d have a desire to snog a total stranger who has been ignoring you?

Right promiscuous women deserve to be basically battered during sex, make cry and the next say the whole situation to be described as hilarious? Why would you not advise men (or women) to treat their sexual partners with a bit of decency.

splinter65

meeeeh wrote: »

As someone who spent 8 days being questioned she should have the option. Unless it's your intenton to intimidate main witnesses as much as possible so they will not press charges.

You think everyone called as a witness in a trial should have a solicitor/barrister? Who would pay for this? What would the solicitor or barristers role be?
Some trials have dozens of witnesses. Where would all these solicitors/barristers sit?
I don’t understand your “intimidate” remark as the accused were charged months ago by the CPS. Can you enlarge on that?

meeeeh

bucketybuck wrote: »

Respectfully though, when you see the vehement reactions certain people have had to this case, it just makes me relieved that questions are asked even if it is uncomfortable for the witness.

As to the point made, it seems fair to ask why a witness would need legal representation. They are there to tell what they know and explain their facts, what would the lawyer be for if not to change what they are going to say?

Respectfully though that is not the point, prosecution is not representing her, they are prosecuting the men.

meeeeh

splinter65 wrote: »

You think everyone called as a witness in a trial should have a solicitor/barrister? Who would pay for this? What would the solicitor or barristers role be?
Some trials have dozens of witnesses. Where would all these solicitors/barristers sit?
I don’t understand your “intimidate” remark as the accused were charged months ago by the CPS. Can you enlarge on that?

Which part of 'main witness' didn't you understand? Main? She is also a victim.

splinter65

meeeeh wrote: »

Right promiscuous women deserve to be basically battered during sex, make cry and the next say the whole situation to be described as hilarious? Why would you not advise men (or women) to treat their sexual partners with a bit of decency.

How did you get any of this from my post?!?
I wouldn’t let a stranger stick their tongue down my throat in Tesco in Monday morning. Would you? Then why would you even suggest that I’d actually like a stranger to do it anywhere else at any time?
I have several times said that both sexes need to have respect for one another and respect for themselves.
I don’t see any of that in this case.
Tell me if you do.

splinter65

meeeeh wrote: »

Which part of 'main witness' didn't you understand? Main? She is also a victim.

For the purpose of this trial she is a witness.
She would only have been a “victim” if the men had been found guilty.
You cannot be a victim of a crime that hasn’t been proven.
She wasn’t a victim during the trial and she’s still not a victim.
So you would assign her a solicitor.
What role would this solicitor in court have?

splinter65

meeeeh wrote: »

Respectfully though that is not the point, prosecution is not representing her, they are prosecuting the men.

What is your point? She was not on trial. They were.

Addle

splinter65 wrote: »

both sexes need to have respect for one another and respect for themselves.

This is so important.
And I think it's like consent. It's something that should be inherent, not taught in a classroom.

bucketybuck

meeeeh wrote: »

Respectfully though that is not the point, prosecution is not representing her, they are prosecuting the men.

Your words were:

meeeeh wrote: »

As someone who spent 8 days being questioned she should have the option.

Its a simple point, why does a witness need legal representation?

They tell what they know, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so why do they need a lawyer?

Addle

bucketybuck wrote: »

Your words were:


Its a simple point, why does a witness need legal representation?

They tell what they know, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so why do they need a lawyer?

Why does anyone need representation if they're telling the truth, as they claim?

meeeeh

splinter65 wrote: »

What is your point? She was not on trial. They were.

My point is that when someone who had before no experience of courts, is allegedly a victim and is put under significant preassure, should have someone in their corner to advise them and make sure their wellbeing isn't too damaged by process. If nothing else to ask for recess when needed or to offer legal advice. Accused have the right to attorney even when questioned by the police.

meeeeh

bucketybuck wrote: »

Your words were:


Its a simple point, why does a witness need legal representation?

They tell what they know, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so why do they need a lawyer?

How would you feel if you had to answer 8 days of questions where all sorts of things are alleged about you. Do you think you would just brush it off and continue with your life. If your interest is to make sure very few of rape victims come forward then your approach is excellent. If not there certainly are improvements to be made that will not affect the rights of alleged perpetrators.

splinter65

Addle wrote: »

This is so important.
And I think it's like consent. It's something that should be inherent, not taught in a classroom.

It’s horrific to be honest.
Our sense of personal safety/self preservation has never been so acute. But when it comes to sexual intimacy or even just interactions between the sexes it appears that all that flies out the window.
Both sexes are happy to both violate or be violated in any way in a sexual way.
Where is your dignity ?
What is all this about?

bucketybuck

meeeeh wrote: »

How would you feel if you had to answer 8 days of questions where all sorts of things are alleged about you. Do you think you would just brush it off and continue with your life. If your interest is to make sure very few of rape victims come forward then your approach is excellent. If not there certainly are improvements to be made that will not affect the rights of alleged perpetrators.

Thats not the question, how I feel is irrelevant. Why do witnesses need legal representation?

splinter65

meeeeh wrote: »

How would you feel if you had to answer 8 days of questions where all sorts of things are alleged about you. Do you think you would just brush it off and continue with your life. If your interest is to make sure very few of rape victims come forward then your approach is excellent. If not there certainly are improvements to be made that will not affect the rights of alleged perpetrators.

But what “improvements” are you suggesting ?

bucketybuck

Addle wrote: »

Why does anyone need representation if they're telling the truth, as they claim?

You think there is no distinction between a witness and a defendant?

LLMMLL

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Just to clarify here when further questioned that witness characterised the "moans" as male grunting. She did not hear female noises at all.