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; } } }

Child Item

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

Quick Links

Comments

Christy42

Mr.H wrote: »

Who cares????

Thats not a crime

What they were FALSELY accused of is

Sorry I may have missed something here. Are you not saying the accusation was false in this post? I could be missing some context.

Because we don't have that legally. We have not enough evidence which I feel is important given the attitude some are displaying here. Your statement means either she is mistaken or lying. We do not have proof of this as she was not on trial.

I am not saying you said she is lying by the way nor did I mean to imply that.

HONKEY TONK

Deleted User wrote: »

Did OJ ever get compensated.

That's not what I asked.

I want to know what happens with false allegations in court in Northern Ireland?

Samuel T. Cogley

HONKEY TONK wrote: »

What happens next? If they have received a not guilty verdict then I would have thought she would be up in court for defamation?

She may succeed in a civil case for assault/battery. As someone has pointed out: OJ.

Mossy Monk

ED E wrote: »

https://www.facebook.com/events/324273031429192/

For fooks sake.

Five losers will turn up and realise they are idiots and go home.

[Deleted User]

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

In legalese some jurisdictions have alternative verdicts such as Scotland and the 'Not Proven' verdict. We don't we have innocent and guilty, termed guilty or not guilty. A not guilty verdict does absolutely nothing, innocent parties are still innocent. To do anything else would imply a system of guilty until proven innocent.

Yeah a not guilty verdict does nothing. In the eyes of the law the defendant is the same as anyone else. In the real world though it doesn't have some magical innocence directly attached. Plenty of people get done in civil court when the burden of proof is lower. So you'll see (I see more in the UK stuff though) people get found "not guilty" but are still referred to as having done something and they can't sue because they are known to be guilty by the more reasonable proof burden.

_Whimsical_

ELM327 wrote: »

11 men and women decided the men were innocent.
The woman's story had more holes in it than swiss cheese. This case should never have come to trial.

The defence also had a raft of holes in it.

During his police interview Blane McIlroy ,who was only accused of exposing himself during the incident ,actually told police he had full sex with the woman that night.

She and every other man present said Blane had not touched her.

Just think about that.

How did that happen? You don't generally tend to mistake walking into a room with taking part in group sex and having full sex.

I think that clearly pointed to the men involved creating a story about what happened that night. It strongly suggests that they had rehersed something, allocated themselves roles in a consensual act and Blane had somehow confused his role in the story.

If they were completely innocent, if the first they'd heard of this girl being raped was when the police called they'd all have told the truth without hesitation.

There may not have been sufficient evidence to secure a conviction beyond all reasonable doubt, which is a very high threshold. There is more than enough evidence though to leave any thinking person feeling very uneasy about the legitimacy of this groups defense.

Mr.H

Christy42 wrote: »

Sorry I may have missed something here. Are you not saying the accusation was false in this post? I could be missing some context.

Because we don't have that legally. We have not enough evidence which I feel is important given the attitude some are displaying here. Your statement means either she is mistaken or lying. We do not have proof of this as she was not on trial.

I am not saying you said she is lying by the way nor did I mean to imply that.

Fair enough. That way I phrased that was unintentional. I meant wrongfully instead of falsely.

If you seen my other posts you will probably (depending if you want to or not) see that I am not accusing her of lying.

[Deleted User]

HONKEY TONK wrote: »

That's not what I asked.

I want to know what happens with false allegations in court in Northern Ireland?

In relation to this case or in general?

Samuel T. Cogley

Deleted User wrote: »

Yeah a not guilty verdict does nothing. In the eyes of the law the defendant is the same as anyone else. In the real world though it doesn't have some magical innocence directly attached. Plenty of people get done in civil court when the burden of proof is lower. So you'll see (I see more in the UK stuff though) people get found "not guilty" but are still referred to as having done something and they can't sue because they are known to be guilty by the more reasonable proof burden.

That doesn't mean they are guilty of rape or criminally culpable. It means they are found on the preponderance of evidence to be liable for damages for a specified complaint. They are still innocent.

billybonkers

Thread title is incorrect?

irishrebe

Akrasia wrote: »

Shefwedfan wrote: »

Are you serious?

Every lads group on Watsapp has the exact same BS in it....

No it doesn't. And don't be smearing me with your attitudes towards women.

Many of them do though. And this is the root of the issue. 'Joking' and 'messing' and 'bantering' about using women like objects, as if it's normal. Phrases like 'look at the tits on that' completing dehumanising women. I see it and hear it all the time. It's chilling how much is dismissed as 'lads' banter'.

[Deleted User]

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

That doesn't mean they are guilty of rape or criminally culpable. It means they are found on the preponderance of evidence to be liable for damages for a specified complaint. They are still innocent.

In purely legal terms they're not guilty. Again, the best example is probably OJ.

torqtorq

The BBC will be taken to court for naming the players within the year.

No doubt they will try and settle out of court.

meeeeh

Mr.H wrote: »

You started this whole debate by lying about my original post

I said

You said

That started all thi

YOUR LIE

Just out of curiosity should a victim who thinks she was raped and is not believed feel any better
than the one who is believed she was raped?

razorblunt

_Whimsical_ wrote: »

The defence also had a raft of holes in it.

During his police interview Blane McIlroy ,who was only accused of exposing himself during the incident ,actually told police he had full sex with the woman that night.

She and every other man present said Blane had not touched her.

Just think about that.

How did that happen? You don't generally tend to mistake walking into a room with taking part in group sex and having full sex.

I think that clearly pointed to the men involved creating a story about what happened that night. It strongly suggests that they had rehersed something, allocated themselves roles in a consensual act and Blane had somehow confused his role in the story.

If they were completely innocent, if the first they'd heard of this girl being raped was when the police called they'd all have told the truth without hesitation.

There may not have been sufficient evidence to secure a conviction beyond all reasonable doubt, which is a very high threshold. There is more than enough evidence though to leave any thinking person feeling very uneasy about the legitimacy of this groups defense.

If that indeed were the case then McIlroy would have been torn apart by the police and again on the stand.

As it was I thought they emphasised that McIlroy was a bullshítter, a Jay from the Inbetweeners type character and coat tail hanger oner!

Mahony0509

Just had a look at Twitter there. The amount of women who think this happened in the Irish justice system is mad. The case happened in Northern Ireland ffs.

kunst nugget

torqtorq wrote: »

The BBC will be taken to court for naming the players within the year.

No doubt they will try and settle out of court.

Why? It's not an issue with the Northern Irish judicial system.

HONKEY TONK

Deleted User wrote: »

In relation to this case or in general?

I guess I am wondering is there Perjury laws in Northern Ireland?

Samuel T. Cogley

Deleted User wrote: »

In purely legal terms they're not guilty. Again, the best example is probably OJ.

In all terms they're innocent. They've not been convicted of a crime. That's all that matters. We don't have degree's of criminal guilt.

BarryD2

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

She may succeed in a civil case for assault/battery.

You must be joking. The most likely course of action for the complainant is emigration.

It's quite clear from the widely conflicting evidence, the changing stories and state of drunkenness of those involved, that this case should never have gone ahead.

The public prosecution service in NI has some serious questions to answer.

Doltanian

I hope the four lads go and sue every high profile twitter scumbag who is posting their anti-male. feminist hatred. They were found innocent in the court of law and I hope some of these twits on Twitter get sued for Defamation. And it is not ordinary Joe Soap bloggers but high-profile Twitter personalities.

Mr.H

meeeeh wrote: »

Just out of curiosity should a victim who thinks she was raped and is not believed feel any better
than the one who is believed she was raped?

No but the accused can feel better.

Would you feel better if you were wrongfully accused or if someone set out to accuse you?

By the way you are only a victim if you actually think something happened. If you didnt think you were raped and you accused someone of it, you are not a victim!!

ELM327

Mahony0509 wrote: »

Just had a look at Twitter there. The amount of women who think this happened in the Irish justice system is mad. The case happened in Northern Ireland ffs.

Never let the truth get in the way of some triggered feminists!

Zulu

Kivaro wrote: »

The boys were lucky that you were not on the jury then.

Better me than you it would appear. At the very least I can comprehend nuance. The lads were found innocent of the charges brought against them. That doesn't establish if she was or was not lying.

And I'm considered enough not to make a call either way without having anything but media report and gossip. But you know best, right?

Samuel T. Cogley

HONKEY TONK wrote: »

I guess I am wondering is there Perjury laws in Northern Ireland?

Any criminal prosecution or indeed tort (defamation) will always be balanced against the public good. It's much better to have this sort of debacle than prevent genuine victims from coming forward just as it's better than ten guilty men go free than one innocent man be jailed.

martyc5674

Having been on a Jury for a very similar case(same charges not high profile though) I can say that to get a conviction is extremely difficult.
Out of the 12 of us we all thought he did it... however as jurors you can only give a guilty verdict if you are beyond reasonable doubt.
We unanimously gave a not guilty verdict.

freshpopcorn

Mahony0509 wrote: »

Just had a look at Twitter there. The amount of women who think this happened in the Irish justice system is mad. The case happened in Northern Ireland ffs.

Personally I find those into the hashtag movement can be a little slow at times.

manonboard

Very big outcome.

I wonder what it will mean for the courage it takes to bring forth a rape case against other people who may/may not have done it/similar.

For the guys. Well I expected they would be found innocent. Just so much stuff involved, that a reasonable doubt will easily remain. It lacked the hallmark aspects that people are conditioned (incorrectly) to what is considered rape. No dark alley, no stranger. It is hard to override our conditioning.

The poor girl. Whether it was initiately motivated by regret. I absolutely believe that some of her consent was violated, but i have no idea how externally communicated that consent was. It's such a tricky thing. We change our minds so easily, so often, in reaction to things. We've all had regrets, and later we do truely see them violated boundaries. Perhaps the lads were selfish arrogant asses, but that is not a crime.

With all things, I suspect it was an element of both. These things are rarely black and white, but the law and verdicts do require a yes or a no at the end of the day.

meeeeh

Mr.H wrote: »

No but the accused can feel better.

Would you feel better if you were wrongfully accused or if someone set out to accuse you?

By the way you are only a victim if you actually think something happened. If you didnt think you were raped and you accused someone of it, you are not a victim!!

Yeah but that is not what you were saying. You said you hope woman felt she was raped.

Luxxis

freshpopcorn wrote: »

Personally I find those into the hashtag movement can be a little slow at times.

#Imwithfreshpopcorn

No wait....