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

ChikiChiki

suicide_circus wrote: »

While spit roast is a crass and juvenile way of describing that particular act, I don't think there is any other way to describe it

Also known as a 4-baller. Jokes aside I don't think I'd want to have sex with a girl at the same time as a mate. To me that would be just plain weird.

Zulu

pjohnson wrote: »

Love some of the twitter eejits saying men shouldn't be allowed on juries for rape cases.

The women jurors found the defendants not guilty aswell. Or have they lost their right to be classed as a woman?

Ahh keep up will you - that's the internalized misogyny that comes out in the patriarchy when toxic masculinity is present in a room.

Adamocovic

suicide_circus wrote: »

While spit roast is a crass and juvenile way of describing that particular act, I don't think there is any other way to describe it

Ménage à trois

(technically is meant for 3 people in a relationship, but the use and meaning varies)

pjohnson

irishproduce wrote: »

Anyone know her name by the way?
I would have thought she'd be identified by now since the allegations failed.
Anyone know name?

Known up there apparently. Should be public outright. At least to warn people about her.

irishproduce

pjohnson wrote: »

Known up there apparently. Should be public outright. At least to warn people about her.

I would expect it to be know locally of course but for those of us looking on, we know who was on one side of the trial but we don't know who was on the other.
I would like to know

PokeHerKing

Samuel T. Cogley wrote:

Honestly? I find it hard to believe anyone would not feel sorry for her. She either genuinely believes she was raped or she's nuts. Either way...

No chance she's just a malicious wagon who wanted fame, fortune or revenge no?

Samuel T. Cogley

pjohnson wrote: »

Known up there apparently. Should be public outright. At least to warn people about her.

Frankly the whole thing should have been done in camera and stayed that way.

Adamocovic

ChikiChiki wrote: »

Also known as a 4-baller. Jokes aside I don't think I'd want to have sex with a girl at the same time as a mate. To me that would be just plain weird.

It's hard enough trying to find someone willing to let me sleep with them, let alone trying to find someone to actually be my friend.

sheroman01

Zulu wrote: »

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

Out of interest, why exactly would you feel sorry for the girl if she was lying?

VinLieger

garbo speaks wrote: »

Or doing the 'sydney harbour bridge'

If the lads high five its an "Eiffel Tower"

Yer Da sells Avon

pjohnson wrote: »

Known up there apparently. Should be public outright. At least to warn people about her.

If someone is found not guilty, that does not mean that their accuser is a liar or that people need to be warned about her.

lalababa

Ulster and IRFU better man the f**k up and invite these men back to training in a few weeks when things on **** for brains Twitter /social media and **** paper tabloids calm down a bit.
If they don't , major respect will be lost.

silverharp

Zulu wrote: »

Ahh keep up will you - that's the internalized misogyny that comes out in the patriarchy when toxic masculinity is present in a room.

every jury should just be made up of Julie Bindel and Anita Sarkeesian "does the convict have anything to say before the verdict is made?

garbo speaks

ChikiChiki wrote: »

I don't think I'd want to have sex with a girl at the same time as a mate. To me that would be just plain weird.

I wouldn't mind, it would be kinda cool to high-five your mate while doing it, but I would need to be 100% guaranteed that penises would not touch in any way.

benneca1

Google Stuart Olding and see what comes up. Not guilty he may be but the online encyclopedia has its own views. This is libel so could be interesting.

[Deleted User]

Adamocovic wrote: »

Mge rois

(technically is meant for 3 people in a relationship, but the use and meaning varies)

Also it means all 3 with each other, with one at each end the only contact would usually be eye. And maybe a high five.

Samuel T. Cogley

PokeHerKing wrote: »

No chance she's just a malicious wagon who wanted fame, fortune or revenge no?

Possibly, but putting her self through this lot for it? I just don't see it. Perhaps naively

storker

Zulu wrote: »

Ahh keep up will you - that's the internalized misogyny that comes out in the patriarchy when toxic masculinity is present in a room.

Well remembered. Your Gender Studies degree is in the post...

Debtocracy

The emotional arguments I see on twitter are:

Believe every woman who claims rape
The men should have been convicted 1) for what the girl was made to go through in court 2) to encourage rape victims to report 3) to punish their sleazy behaviour

Looking at social media, I feel very worried that a feminist zeigest could have made an example of these men. If so, the ruling would have huge implications. While it may support more legitimate convictions, it would also increase the chances of false convictions where there is no clear evidence of non-consent.

In eyes of the law, the most heinous act that can ever be committed is to falsely imprison an innocent person. The jury could not be sure of guilt and had to return a verdict of not guilty based on the objective evidence.

Legal cases are about civil rights, evidence, facts and balanced judgement. Emotional gender politics should stay out of the courtroom.

meeeeh

freshpopcorn wrote: »

I wouldn't either. Did I say you had to or other people had to spend time with men/women with similar views in my post?

What were you replying to the then. I didn't say they were guilty I said I think they were scum. And to brush off that attitude towards women as just a bit of banter (or similar) is just sad.

Strazdas

seamus wrote: »

Sure. But courts have to take into account that obtaining a consent form before a sex act is not a reasonable expectation (and actually wouldn't make a difference).

The overall measure is to determine whether the defendants believed the act to be consensual, with the requirement that consent must be active and ongoing. So as soon as the person falls asleep, you no longer have active consent. As soon as they say no, you do not have active consent.

If the act starts out with active consent and she continues being conscious, engaged and not attempting to stop you, verbally or physically, then a reasonable person will believe they have consent, even if she feels like she is being forced.

That's how horrible situations like these come about.

A complicating factor is that it seems to have started with Jackson and the woman alone in the bedroom, and then they were joined by others, but at no point were there four people in the room. The last two to enter the room would probably have no knowledge of what went on before or how the sexual encounter was initiated.

Zulu

sheroman01 wrote: »

Out of interest, why exactly would you feel sorry for the girl if she was lying?

Why wouldn't I. It's clear she isn't happy.

....and just to head things off at the pass - feeling sorry for her is not the same as condoning her actions, and it's not mutually exclusive to feeling sorry for the others in this case.

david75

This’ll freak all you fragile Menimists out but there’s rallies tomorrow

Solidarity rallies to say #IBelieveHer tomorrow at half 12:

Belfast Courthouse
Dublin, the Spire
Limerick, Bedford Row

Please RT.

pjohnson

Adamocovic wrote: »

It's hard enough trying to find someone willing to let me sleep with them, let alone trying to find someone to actually be my friend.

:pac:

PokeHerKing

Samuel T. Cogley wrote:

Possibly, but putting her self through this lot for it? I just don't see it. Perhaps naively

Very naively I'm afraid. Her Instagram tells a story.

Vicxas

david75 wrote: »

This’ll freak all you fragile Menimists out but there’s rallies tomorrow

Solidarity rallies to say #IBelieveHer tomorrow at half 12:

Belfast Courthouse
Dublin, the Spire
Limerick, Bedford Row

Please RT.

Jesus christ......

suicide_circus

PokeHerKing wrote: »

Very naively I'm afraid. Her Instagram tells a story.

What story is that? A summary...

.......

This post has been deleted.

Christy42

benneca1 wrote: »

Google Stuart Olding and see what comes up. Not guilty he may be but the online encyclopedia has its own views. This is libel so could be interesting.

Prove it is libel. As long as they don't say he was found guilty they should be OK. For libel he needs to prove it did not happen which has not happened yet and would be difficult.

DEFTLEFTHAND

david75 wrote: »

This’ll freak all you fragile Menimists out but there’s rallies tomorrow

Solidarity rallies to say #IBelieveHer tomorrow at half 12:

Belfast Courthouse
Dublin, the Spire
Limerick, Bedford Row

Please RT.

Do you not accept the verdict?