nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

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

Sam Quentin

Strange.. I'm kinda relieved it's all over.

http://www.thejournal.ie/belfast-rape-trial-verdict-3928309-Mar2018/

Mod Note Keep this relevant to this thread and don't bring up others. ie the eighth amendment thread.

MOD NOTE By the way don't post anything from members on the jury that's appearing online.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

[Deleted User]

yerwanthere123 wrote: »

Oh Jesus, Louise O'Neill is already out in force on Twitter. Didn't take long.

If you have Twitter can you kindly tell her to shut her fcuking mouth from me? Her “woke bae” Tupac was a sex offender, remind her of that. Idiot.

GLaDOS

The reaction on twitter (I know, I know) is something else. A lot of people were convinced of their guilt and only wanted one verdict.

The Talking Bread

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

The Talking Bread wrote: »

Not how it works. .....

Aah.... ok.

That's a shame.

False accusations of this life-changing nature should have consequences.

Who said that they are false (or true). Christ. Do you understand how a trial by jury works

_Dara_

py2006 wrote: »

oh surprise surprise!

Don’t be such a child. I stand by what I say. I have limited energy these days. I can’t waste it on someone with an entrenched viewpoint who is in like Flynn using an all-round unfortunate case to rant about their preoccupation.

awec

bluewolf wrote: »

Was it the second day? I was only reading they went to deliberate today, maybe i am out of date

Deliberation started yesterday afternoon.

Owryan

Twitter has gone into maximum outrage mode. Apparently they got away with it cause they are famous/rich/men/ part of the establishment, it was all a con.

Plenty of women now claiming it should be all female juries for rape cases from now on.

weldoninhio

padd b1975 wrote: »

This won't affect their careers in the slightest, nor should it.
They are innocent.

They are not guilty. Completely different. Only those there that night know what really happened.

jimgoose

castletownman wrote: »

I have been following this case from the off, and my opinion virtually meandered from one side to the next every second day. I initially believed her version of events as the stigma associated with rape, the false reporting of it and the process the "victim" had to go through led me to believe that she couldn't possibly be making it up.

Gradually, as some holes started to be unraveled I felt that they simply had to be acquitted as there wasn't enough concrete evidence to nail them. So I suppose justice prevails in the end, even if I do think they are slime-balls still.

I will say though that they are part of a misogynistic/sex-obsessed culture within rugby circles. The only real-life stories I have known of fellas having threesomes and other "adventurous" sexual encounters all involved lads that play the game. There is certainly an element of "jock culture" associated with those particularly from a private-school background.

^^^
This.

seamus

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

False accusations of this life-changing nature should have consequences.

Absolutely...if they're false.

Based on the reporting I've heard, I don't think anybody actually lied. She believed she was raped. They disagreed. The jury weighed the evidence against the legal definition of rape and agreed with the defendents.

It is possible to tell the truth and still lose a court case, because ultimately it comes down to whether the law was broken.

padd b1975

_Dara_ wrote: »

What are the stats on

1) false accusations of rape or sexual assault

2) wrongly-convicted men sitting in jail for same

One is too many.

Nerdlingr

eviltwin wrote: »

Does it really take 8 days to cover the events of one night? I don't want innocent people going to prison but equally I don't want anyone going free because a victim is afraid of a similar experience.

Four different accused with different barristers so they all had to question her.
2 days per accused seems reasonable enough.

Strazdas

ricero wrote: »

A liar and a hussie. May she suffer for what she put these young men through.

Maybe she believes she was raped and it was non consensual? A "liar" would be someone who concocts a completely invented story about a fictitious event......everyone accepts that sexual activity took place that night

sightband

eviltwin wrote: »

I don't think she's a liar. I believe she felt what happened was a rape, assault.

That doesn't mean they raped her though. It's entirely possible they believed she was completely up for it.

Having sex with strangers when you are under the influence of alcohol is a risky thing to do.

Agreed, I reckon she had some different expectations as to how things manifested when they ended up going to town on her. Bad combination of naivety and drunk rugby lads without an ounce of decency in them...don’t think either side was wholly innocent nor guilty. Very unfortunate for all concerned.

DEFTLEFTHAND

eviltwin wrote: »

I don't think she's a liar. I believe she felt what happened was a rape, assault.

That doesn't mean they raped her though. It's entirely possible they believed she was completely up for it.

Having sex with strangers when you are under the influence of alcohol is a risky thing to do.

Yes but the Law relies on facts not feelings.

The amount of time and money wasted on this case not to mention the trauma inflicted on everyone involved is truly terrible. It should never have gotten this far.

py2006

Guys in their position and more so footballers, boybands and movie stars have women throwing themselves at them. You can't blame young blokes for taken advantage (perhaps poor choice of word) of the situation. High fiving each other. Its just blokes being blokes.

However, today's climate may change that.

Laois_Man

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

can she be named so other men in the future can stay well clear of her?

Hang on a second

The accused being found not guilty or rape does not equate to the accuser being found guilty of being a lying bitch!

Koobcam

jammiedodgers wrote: »

None of them should ever have been named in the first place.

Totally agree, though in the case of Jackson and Olding, it would have been impossible to hide the fact that it was them as their absence from Ulster and Ireland would have kind of given the game away.

Vlad Kelly

Delighted! Wonderful verdict. The system works.

[Deleted User]

py2006 wrote: »

Too many men are falsely accused of harassment and even rape. Many are in jail today too.

Lets assume their innocence and not guilt purely because they are men.

And let’s grant them anonymity while we’re at, if the accuser is afforded it.

Roadtoad

The law is an ass.

Where one side is granted anonymity, so too should the other side. After one side is found guilty, then the protection may be lifted, unless the harmed party would suffer or be identified.

Is the GB/NI interpretation of this the same as in the Republic?

[Deleted User]

What's the reason the accused are named in advance anyway? Does it happen for other cases? I thought in other cases the accused could only be named if the accuser also agreed to be public,I've definitely seen that before

_Dara_

GLaDOS wrote: »

The reaction on twitter (I know, I know) is something else. A lot of people were convinced of their guilt and only wanted one verdict.

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.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

py2006 wrote: »

Guys in their position and more so footballers, boybands and movie stars have women throwing themselves at them. You can't blame young blokes for taken advantage (perhaps poor choice of word) of the situation. High fiving each other. Its just blokes being blokes.

However, today's climate may change that.

If it’s just blokes being blokes speaking about a girl like they spoke about her the following day, then blokes need to take a good long look at themselves.

seamus

Roadtoad wrote: »

Is the GB/NI interpretation of this the same as in the Republic?

No, in the Republic all sides are afforded anonymity until the outcome of the trial.

Skid X

I don't know if the Jury made the right decision,

but it seems unfair that the woman in question (and all prosecution witnesses) had to be interrogated by four different QC's (one for each of the defendants).

If I had to account for my actions on any random day, I would end up contradicting myself several times if I had four of the best lawyers in Northern ireland poking holes in my story.

eviltwin

Nerdlingr wrote: »

Four different accused with different barristers so they all had to question her.
2 days per accused seems reasonable enough.

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.

jr86

Owryan wrote: »

Twitter has gone into maximum outrage mode. Apparently they got away with it cause they are famous/rich/men/ part of the establishment, it was all a con.

Plenty of women now claiming it should be all female juries for rape cases from now on.

Scary stuff

There are some absolute unhinged headcases out there

Some of the comments during the trial were worrying to say the least

ChikiChiki

Someone actually said "I believe her solely because I have no idea why you would put yourself through that incredibly public and humiliating trial if nothing bad actually happened at all'

Jesus wept, people can be fierce naive...

py2006

Omackeral wrote: »

And let’s grant them anonymity while we’re at, if the accuser is afforded it.

That is one of the most unjust aspects of these cases. Mens names and pictures are all over the media. While they're accuser remains anonymous. Even in the cases were it was clearly a false allegation.

Lives destroyed regardless of innocence.

storker

ChikiChiki wrote: »

How the bloody hell can you feel sorry for a liar??

To be fair to her, the verdict doesn't say she was lying, merely that what she said combined with the evidence wasn't enough to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.