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

facehugger99

py2006 wrote: »

Are you suggesting those comments means the are guilty of rape or am I misreading you?

I agree the comments were nasty.

You're misreading me.

Laneyh

Isshelying wrote: »

And you'd be 100% in the wrong and probably end up assaulting a man who engaged in consensual sex with your daughter. Just because you arent impressed with how your daughter behaved its no excuse to target innocent men.

Its this attitude that the woman is always the victim that is ridiculous. She chose to engage in what some people would describe as depraved sex and then felt embarassed about it. Her problem, not the four men who were hauled through the courts.

Just as their guilt could not be proven beyond reasonable doubt there is no way of proving what she did or didn't willingly engage in. There were differing accounts of events some at odds with each other.

The woman was not on trial, the case has been tried and the verdict delivered.
You're just supposing she took this case because she was embarrassed.

DrPhilG

Zulu wrote: »

I feel sorry for the girl, whether or not she was telling porkies or not, it's a sorry sorry affair.

Are you nuts???

Even if she was lying and accusing 2 men of a rape they did not commit, you feel sorry for her???

howiya

C__MC wrote: »

The 4 lads would have been out pocket but did she get free legal aid?

Some people have very little understanding of how the legal system works

Mr.H

erica74 wrote: »

You're very very wrong.

Im very very not!!

jamesbere

I was thinking before that this case shouldn't of been made public cos it would devide so much opinion, could potentially damage a lot of people's life's, but one thing I'm glad to see is it shows this lad culture in rugby (possibly other sports) that's going around, to think it's ok to think as women as a piece of meat, so they can have there group sex sessions.

I do think the correct verdict was given, don't think there was enough evidence. I don't think she was lying but I think with both parties having alcohol on board that conflicting stories were highly possible.

vapor trails

Data emerging from Twitter seems to be

#repealthe8th = #IBelieveher

Given that the two issues are independent of each other. Whats causing the positive correlation in people having these unified views?

In addition to this. If prior to the case I was able to tell you that people who subscribe to a particular hashtag, would post-trial all subsequently realign with a new hashtag with the same people.

Does that reveal:

A) A predisposed alignment position that these "Independent-minded" people were always going to subscribe to regardless of the outcome of the case.

b) Just coincidental

Just before the judge sent the jury off to make their decision you could see he was trying to get the message across that you need to be a blank canvass of thought here when making your decision. Almost if the judge could, he would have memory flashed each jury member prior to the case with one of those Men in Black memory wipers.

.......

This post has been deleted.

Laneyh

Assetbacked wrote: »

It's not uncommon for girls to enjoy being used in that way, treated like a sexy toy or being gangbanged.

Is that what happened in court ? As I believe the OP was referring to the ordeal of the trial not any events from that night

py2006

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Yea, and these guys faces and names are all over the papers and websites of the main stream media in Ireland, Britain and beyond.

And any man who is accused for that matter.

SlickRic

bottom line for me -

Just because they seem like pretty disgusting individuals doesn't mean they're rapists.

VinLieger

Red_Wake wrote: »

I'd have convicted them.

Moronic comment, you cannot say 100% what you would do unless you were actually a member of the jury and a comment like that shows an obvious bias and why you would never be let near such a jury

force eleven

Was a shame that girl was on trial....oh wait..

Snickers Man

topper75 wrote: »

But who can welcome them back onto a field after those messages.

Just imagine it was your daughter they were referring to.

I'm not sure. Rugby, since its amateur days, has had a nudge nudge wink wink attitude to boisterous male behaviour. Whether it's trashing hotel rooms, throwing beds out of hotel windows or, er, enjoying the company of young women while on tour there has always been a "boys will be boys" mentality backed up by the mantra that "what goes on tour, stays on tour".

There's many a grandee in the upper echelons of the IRFU (no names, no pack drill) who would be open to charges of utter hypocrisy if they pronounced that young men boasting about "pumping a bird" after a night out was inimical to the traditional values of rugby.

They would probably take a dim view if it was found to be non consensual or forced but if they felt she was up for it......well, nothing they haven't all done, or tried to do, in their youth.

And that, whatever your feelings may be, is the legal situation. They didn't commit rape or sexual assault. End of story.

kunst nugget

ED E wrote: »

#IBelieveHer is blasting away at the minute.

What difference is that going to make to the price of turnips?

erica74

Mr.H wrote: »

I am not saying it will undo it. I am saying time and counselling can help you to live with it.

I am also saying that time and counselling will not help these innocent men to get their reputations back. Hell not even reputations. What about their friends and family members that might not 100% trust them anymore? That kind of thing damages people to the very core. They are innocent by the way. We are not talking about people who actually raped anyone!!

Actual rapists we can have a separate discussion about how we should torture them until they die a very slow death but we are talking about innocent men who now have no way to get through this accusation.

Its easy for peopel to see what I am saying a feign some sort of shock horror and think I am disgustiing for saying it. But I am comparing two different things.

One: A person being raped is horrible. They deserve all the support in the world and as far as I am concerned we do not give them enough justice as a society.

Two: A person wrongfully accused of rape. This usually happens because a person feels embarrassed about a sexual act. they claim they were raped. They make their sexual partner a criminal! For the rest of their lives the accused will have to live with this accusation. Friends and family who support them will still have small doubts. Their future kids and grand kids will always have doubts.

So yes One is worse than the other. You can have a life and a future with one but not the other.

That you are, and it's impossible to understand why.

.......

This post has been deleted.

eviltwin

Mr.H wrote: »

Im very very not!!

Have you ever been raped?

Have you ever been accused of rape?

Unless you can answer yes to both you have no idea.

Vicxas

I had a feeling they'd be found not guilty, there seemed to be far too many inconsistencies from the girl.

[Deleted User]

cee_jay wrote: »

Victim blaming much?

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Glebee

There will be some party in paddy jacksons house tonight.

Richard Hillman

As somebody that has sat on a jury, I was expecting this result.

There wasn't enough evidence to put somebody away to prison and your conscience to allow you to go on as normal, sleep at night etc. The evidence of the lady that popped her head in the door was the key part. The defendants being so high profile I feel also made a subconscious difference to the jurors. If they went to prison, their prison lives and the fall of their careers would have been made public and every time you seen them in the news your conscience will kick in to say "what if they were innocent?". Jurors are human.

There was a specific section of the media/politics/campaigners that as soon as the case arose were screaming "I'll see that Quimby boy hang for this". There minds were made up before any evidence was on show. Complete Sociopaths that wouldnt have batted an eyelid in seeing somebody that may have been innocent being found guilty just to enhance their world view.

retro:electro

jr86 wrote: »

Listening to Jackson's solicitor's comments a lot of the days lost to "legal issues" the mob were giving out about on Twitter, was actually as a result of stupid, ill-informed Social Media commentary. Completely unsurprising.

It was a disgrace throughout the trial

The amount of frothing at the mouth, falling over themselves to get a pat on the back throughout this trial on Twitter was astonishing to read. Can people not just shut the fcuk up and leave their amateur analysis aside until the bloody thing is over? Nobody gives two shiits what Nora from Cork thinks about the day’s events. All of this should be kept off social media and due respect given to everyone involved. Everyone has an opinion nowadays and everyone thinks they should be heard

force eleven

Plenty of backs being slapped by sheepskin coat wearing rugger boys later on. Tally ho after that. What else can you say after all this?

py2006

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

You don't get it!

Katgurl

Assetbacked wrote: »

It's not uncommon for girls to enjoy being used in that way, treated like a sexy toy or being gangbanged.

I am pretty sure she meant the courtroom experience not the sex.

Mokuba

Been keeping up with it, as best I could.

From the outside it appeared to me that she was mortified that she had been caught in a threesome. Her actions on the night from that point on, including in the taxi, make sense in that context.

From there I'd wager the whole thing just grew legs.

It was a woman who ultimately killed the whole case. A woman who had no reason to lie whatsoever. She was the one who said she saw consensual sex, with no doubt in her mind.

As for the lads - they obviously don't come out of it looking great. Their character in general has taken a huge battering and while I expect Jackson and Olding will get their careers back together somewhat, it'll happen abroad. I mean, look at the Ched Evans case, and he has been back without a peep for a while now.

As for the WhatsApp, while it looks awful, it is increasingly the norm to see similar language and behavior in those group chats. Even from someone who wouldn't be of that personality.

Laneyh

jamesbere wrote: »

I was thinking before that this case shouldn't of been made public cos it would devide so much opinion, could potentially damage a lot of people's life's, but one thing I'm glad to see is it shows this lad culture in rugby (possibly other sports) that's going around, to think it's ok to think as women as a piece of meat, so they can have there group sex sessions.

I do think the correct verdict was given, don't think there was enough evidence. I don't think she was lying but I think with both parties having alcohol on board that conflicting stories were highly possible.

yes, I think all parties involved believe their version of events to be true.
it is also damaging to all involved. Although she wasn't named, Belfast is a small place so I'm sure many know who she is.

DrPhilG

At the risk of being crude, what exactly were the other 2 guys accused of?

I know one was accused of perverting the course of justice or something, so did he lie to the cops or try to cover for the 2 lads in some way?

And the other accused? Indecent exposure or something? Was he watching and "helping himself" or what?

I'm not just looking for gory detail by the way, I've been debating this with a work colleague. She is swayed more by the 2 lesser offences. We all know that the 2 lads spit roasted the girl and she is claiming it was rape, they say consensual. But my colleague reckons that if someone was lying to the cops, there must have been something to hide.

kunst nugget

vapor trails wrote: »

Data emerging from twitter seems to be

#repealthe8th = #IBelieveher

Given that the two issues are independent of each other. Whats causing the positive correlation in people having these unified views?

In addition to this. If prior to the case I was able to tell you that people who subscribe to a particular hashtag, would post-trial all subsequently realign with a new hashtag with the same people. Does that reveal?

A) A predisposed alignment position that these "Independent minded" people were always going to subscribe to regardless of the outcome of the case.

b) Just coincidental

Just before the judge sent the jury off to make their decision you could see he was trying to get the message across that you need to be a blank canvass of thought here when making your decision. Almost if the judge could, he would have memory flashed each jury member prior to the case with one of those Men in Black memory wipers.

Thank you, I was getting worried that someone wouldn't be able to somehow find a way to shoehorn in the referendum but you did it!!!