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 discussion thread II

Options
1…9798100102103…108

Comments

  • Options
    #2972
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 67,141 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Faugheen wrote: »
    All wrong again.

    Where’s the proof she lied under oath and wasted police time?

    Like the rape...the 'evidence' is tested in a court. It is proved or not proved.

    There is on foot of the verdict at least a prima facie case that she lied.

    You will only have 'proof' after a case...not before.


  • Options
    #2973
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,228 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Like the rape...the 'evidence' is tested in a court. It is proved or not proved.

    There is on foot of the verdict at least a prima facie case that she lied.

    You will only have 'proof' after a case...not before.

    a case that will never happen so you can kiss that fantasy goodbye.


  • Options
    #2974
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 67,141 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Faugheen wrote: »
    If Jackson stepped back and thought “hold on, behaving like this might not be good for my image if I get caught,” we wouldn’t be having this conversation right now.

    If Jackson decided “maybe I should do what Stuart did and just apologise and keep my head down,” he wouldn’t be under the spotlight anywhere near like this.

    It’s you who has your head in the sand. Proper finger in the ears “la la la la” stuff from you.

    In other words, if Jackson had have performed for the mob whether he meant it or not, then we would back off.

    Speaks for itself what this is all about.


  • Options
    #2975
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,228 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    In other words, if Jackson had have performed for the mob whether he meant it or not, then we would back off.

    Speaks for itself what this is all about.

    People showing humility when they are exposed as absolute ****s?


  • Options
    #2976
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 67,141 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    a case that will never happen so you can kiss that fantasy goodbye.

    Of course it won't because we know in this day and age, why.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2977
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,228 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Of course it won't because we know in this day and age, why.

    because it is very difficult to prove that somebody knowingly told a lie? because that is the standard for a conviction for perjury.


  • Options
    #2978
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 67,141 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    People showing humility when they are exposed as absolute ****s?

    Yes Father! :)

    You just proved exactly what I was saying. Prostrate yourself and beg for our forgiveness. Ashes and sackcloth for you me boyo!


  • Options
    #2979
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 67,141 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    because it is very difficult to prove that somebody knowingly told a lie? because that is the standard for a conviction for perjury.

    It isn't for me or you to pre-empt whether that can be done or not.


  • Options
    #2980
    jm08
    Registered Users Posts: 11,300 ✭✭✭✭jm08


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    That the sponsors are responding to a mob mentality only confirms how fickle corporations and companies are when it comes to making a buck. They don't care about the lives of ordinary people when it comes to it either like the twitter mob.

    It is no accident that you ran away from a question about how you treat people in your personal circle who make mistakes.


    In fairness to Guinness, it has a very fine reputation for being a responsible employer with a social conscience. They built half the housing stock in Dublin and were one of the first companies to provide free health care to its employees (and they employed half of Dublin!), not to mention their pensioners coming in for their free lunch every day.


    I don't know if you remember this, but Claire Byrne Live did a poll (1000 people by phone). As far as I recall, 70% of the public thought that the IRFU were correct to sack him, so its not just the twitter mob who were out to get him.


    https://www.thejournal.ie/jackson-olding-poll-3961719-Apr2018/


  • Options
    #2981
    Yeah_Right
    Registered Users Posts: 5,971 ✭✭✭Yeah_Right


    Muahahaha wrote: »
    He plays for relegation fodder now Francie, its far from the top tier of rugby he used to be playing in. Its the football equivalent of playing for Man City or Liverpool and then going down to play for West Brom or Aston Villa. But even worse than that he is frozen out of the international game which is where rugby players really earn their crust.

    You seem to want to put a positive spin on his career for some reason. There is nothing positive about going from a club team challenging for trophies to going to a team that loses 24 out of 26 games and gets relegated. And nothing positive about him never playing for Ireland again, thats the huge kicker for him as he was a shoe in for replacing Johnny Sexton.

    There is a few things wrong with this post. Firstly Ulster are nothing like rugby's equivalent of Man City or Liverpool. More like the 2019 version of Man Utd :D

    Yes he has signed for teams that have just been promoted first in France and now in the UK. Both sides are actually big name clubs that have dreams of recapturing past glories. Perpingnon failed in that but LI haven't been afraid to splash the cash on some big name players for next season.

    The international game isn't where players earn their crust actually. Unless they play for NZ, Ireland, Australia or Wales. In the UK and France, the majority of the money comes from the clubs not the national team. And those clubs quite like players who have "retired" from international rugby and will pay more for them. Though if he was given a choice, I'm sure he would rather still be representing his country.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2982
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,228 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    It isn't for me or you to pre-empt whether that can be done or not.

    I'm not pre-empting anything. I'm telling you the proof required. It is very high bar that is nearly impossible to reach.


  • Options
    #2983
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Of course it won't because we know in this day and age, why.

    A not guilty verdict doesn’t automatically mean that the accuser lied. These types of cases are notoriously difficult to secure a guilty verdict in. I think the verdict was correct but that doesn’t mean that the accuser made everything up. The verdict reflects that there was reasonable doubt.

    Reporting of sexual assaults is already very low and would get even lower if the accuser could then be charged with making false allegations. If the accuser was then accused of making false allegations, hopefully the standard of proof would be as high - beyond reasonable doubt.


  • Options
    #2984
    Faugheen
    Site Banned Posts: 12,341 ✭✭✭✭Faugheen


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Like the rape...the 'evidence' is tested in a court. It is proved or not proved.

    There is on foot of the verdict at least a prima facie case that she lied.

    You will only have 'proof' after a case...not before.

    The verdict won’t stand up in court as evidence.

    Next?


  • Options
    #2985
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,228 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Yes Father! :)

    You just proved exactly what I was saying. Prostrate yourself and beg for our forgiveness. Ashes and sackcloth for you me boyo!

    you really need to look up what humility means. If he was smart he would have done it. He isn't.


  • Options
    #2986
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 67,141 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »
    A not guilty verdict doesn’t automatically mean that the accuser lied.

    Which is why I said 'prima facie' case.
    These types of cases are notoriously difficult to secure a guilty verdict in. I think the verdict was correct but that doesn’t mean that the accuser made everything up. The verdict reflects that there was reasonable doubt.

    It is for a court to decide if lies were told. But already we see the absolutists here saying NO WAY did she lie.
    Reporting of sexual assaults is already very low and would get even lower if the accuser could then be charged with making false allegations. If the accuser was then accused of making false allegations, hopefully the standard of proof would be as high - beyond reasonable doubt.

    I would be an advocate of 'let the truth be told, whatever the price'.

    And I agree the standard of the proof must be high. And who knows, something inadmissible to the first trial might be admissible in a false accusation case. People have been done for making false accusations.

    You don't require 'proof' first, you require 'evidence' which then proves the case, is the point I am making.


  • Options
    #2987
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 67,141 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    you really need to look up what humility means. If he was smart he would have done it. He isn't.

    I prefer honesty myself. If he felt more angry that humble, so be it. I emphatise fully with his anger.


  • Options
    #2988
    facehugger99
    Registered Users Posts: 7,241 ✭✭✭facehugger99


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    I prefer honesty myself. If he felt more angry that humble, so be it. I emphatise fully with his anger.

    Presumably you feel if the twitter mob are honestly outraged by his behaviour that's cool too.


  • Options
    #2989
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 67,141 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    facehugger99 wrote: »
    Presumably you feel if the twitter mob are honestly outraged by his behaviour that's cool too.

    Ha ha...good joke! A mob - outraged and honest. :D:D


  • Options
    #2990
    Faugheen
    Site Banned Posts: 12,341 ✭✭✭✭Faugheen


    And Diageo are gone

    https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2019/0613/1055221-diageo-london-irish-jackson/


  • Options
    #2991
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Which is why I said 'prima facie' case.



    It is for a court to decide if lies were told. But already we see the absolutists here saying NO WAY did she lie.



    I would be an advocate of 'let the truth be told, whatever the price'.

    And I agree the standard of the proof must be high. And who knows, something inadmissible to the first trial might be admissible in a false accusation case. People have been done for making false accusations.

    You don't require 'proof' first, you require 'evidence' which then proves the case, is the point I am making.

    Of course it would be up to the courts to decide. :confused: Who else would decide? Somebody would have to decide it was worth taking it to court though. A not guilty verdict in a rape case alone wouldn’t necessarily mean a strong case for the acquitted.

    If I was raped, I’d be very reluctant to report it, knowing how difficult it is to prove, and even more so if I thought I could be accused of making false accusations if a guilty verdict wasn’t reached in the rape trial. I don’t know if the woman was lying in this case but I hate the idea of a rape victim being brought back on charges of making false accusations because the person she accused was acquitted.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2992
    jm08
    Registered Users Posts: 11,300 ✭✭✭✭jm08


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    I prefer honesty myself. If he felt more angry that humble, so be it. I emphatise fully with his anger.


    And you have no empathy for what happened to the young woman? She was on her own, up against 4 men (2 of them with high profiles and London QCs). She had no one to defend her.


    I think you are complete nuts if you think anyone would even attempt what she did if she didn't believe that she was telling the truth about what happened.


  • Options
    #2993
    martingriff
    Registered Users Posts: 10,725 ✭✭✭✭martingriff


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Like the rape...the 'evidence' is tested in a court. It is proved or not proved.

    There is on foot of the verdict at least a prima facie case that she lied.

    You will only have 'proof' after a case...not before.

    Verdict does not prove she lied or she thought it was rape. She is also innocence until proven guilty


  • Options
    #2994
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 67,141 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    jm08 wrote: »
    And you have no empathy for what happened to the young woman? She was on her own, up against 4 men (2 of them with high profiles and London QCs). She had no one to defend her.


    I think you are complete nuts if you think anyone would even attempt what she did if she didn't believe that she was telling the truth about what happened.

    Which is all fine, if you believe she was in fact raped and not in a consensual situation.

    I don't know if she was lying or not, but I think ultimately she was badly advised to proceed here. She wasn't on trial by the way, the men who were were always going to defend themselves.


  • Options
    #2995
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    martingriff wrote: »
    Technically not guilty in this instance means can not convict on evidence as is not that 1 side is a liar and the other side is not. Jackson can always bring her to court if they want to prove she lied

    This is true, they are free to do that.

    Some people here don’t seem to get that it’s not an open and shut case though that she lied. That the same standard of beyond reasonable doubt would be applied to her as to them.
    Micheal Landon wrote: »
    What about those falsely accused, not a nice position to be in.

    It surely isn’t. And if they can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the person made false allegations, great. Being acquitted of rape charges doesn’t provide that proof though.


  • Options
    #2996
    facehugger99
    Registered Users Posts: 7,241 ✭✭✭facehugger99


    Diaego has ended its sponsorship of London Irish over the Jackson signing.

    Good news, if not unexpected.


  • Options
    #2997
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 67,141 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    facehugger99 wrote: »
    Diaego has ended its sponsorship of London Irish over the Jackson signing.

    Good news, if not unexpected.

    This is even better news, somebody has finally had the balls to stand up and be counted and not blackmailed or bullied.
    London Irish wrote:
    “the club will move on without the support of Diageo, who have chosen to stand down after a nearly 30-year association with the club”.


  • Options
    #2998
    Jackman25
    Registered Users Posts: 456 ✭✭Jackman25


    facehugger99 wrote: »
    Diaego has ended its sponsorship of London Irish over the Jackson signing.

    Good news, if not unexpected.

    You must be thrilled. Keep it going and maybe he will up homeless and penniless on the streets. Would that be enough penance to suit the high priest of boards.ie?


  • Options
    #2999
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    jm08 wrote: »
    Why would anyone falsely accuse someone of rape? What is there to be gained from it? You think it has been easy for the young woman (who was named on social media)? Why would someone do that to her anyway?

    Spite? It does happen. Pretty rarely but it does happen.


  • Options
    #3000
    Jackman25
    Registered Users Posts: 456 ✭✭Jackman25


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    This is even better news, somebody has finally had the balls to stand up and be counted and not blackmailed or bullied.

    Fair play to them. I hope they go on to have a great season.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #3001
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 67,141 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »
    Spite? It does happen. Pretty rarely but it does happen.

    9% of cases in Ireland are false accusations, among the highest in Europe according to a link I posted earlier in the thread.
    Why indeed would somebody do it.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement