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 - all 4 found not guilty Mod Note post one

Options
1…4748505253…316

Comments

  • Options
    #1472
    Summer In the City
    Closed Accounts Posts: 249 ✭✭Summer In the City


    Gregk961 wrote: »
    A traveller in general can get away with crimes others can not. That particular traveller thinks the lads "got away" with it because of their status. That's ironic.

    Haha, are you suggesting they have "traveller privilege" ?"Jesus Christ almighty. Supreme irony.


  • Options
    #1473
    Muahahaha
    Registered Users Posts: 19,613 ✭✭✭✭Muahahaha


    davidmarsh wrote: »
    If the very same witness told the court that she saw a girl getting raped, I've no doubt they would have been convicted and you wouldn't be questioning her testimony.

    I'm hearing all day that we have to trust our women, whatever that message is supposed to achieve. Well.. trust this woman. I don't see why she would lie - she was originally a witness for the prosecution I believe.

    It has nothing to do with trust women or even of taking sides. It is about getting to the truth of the matter. What me and cloudatlas have speculated is that Dara Florances testimony that the sex was consensual seems to be shaky at best. She was at the door for only a few seconds so as to how she can judge (with 100% certainty) that the sex was consensual is beyond belief imo.

    I dont believe any person can just walk in on a sex act and see it for a few seconds can make any concrete judgement of whether or not the sex was consensual or not. Rape victims generally do not tend to shout out or fight back, there is overwhelming evidence that they completely freeze up until the rape is over. Just last week there was a case of a woman who was sexually assaulted by a man for three hours straight on a bus journey. Despite other passengers, the driver, her phone, etc she did not once call out for help because she was completely frozen up. This is what happens in many rapes and in that regard the complainant in this trial said she experienced this very same freezing. If Dara Florance walked in what she could well have seen in Jackson and Olding going at it hammer and tongs with the complainant frozen. Yet she says she is 100% certain the sex was consensual, how can she be so sure? There has been nothing reported in the media that backs up her certainty in this regard.

    So what I am saying is that I do not believe Dara Florance (or anyone for that matter) could have made a judgement call in the few seconds she was present. However it is Florances evidence that seems to have tipped the balance towards a not guilty verdict.


  • Options
    #1474
    brooke 2
    Registered Users Posts: 5,472 ✭✭✭brooke 2


    BrianBoru00 wrote: »
    Do you perhaps have a source for that? or a screenshot of the tweet?

    Fake apparently. Was doing the rounds earlier. I have deleted my post.


  • Options
    #1475
    brooke 2
    Registered Users Posts: 5,472 ✭✭✭brooke 2


    C__MC wrote: »
    ARe you for real?
    That is a fake and untrue tweet-


    Calm down! It was doing the rounds earlier until you, I believe, informed us it was fake. As said above, I have deleted the post. It also appeared on Politics.ie tonight!


  • Options
    #1476
    Muahahaha
    Registered Users Posts: 19,613 ✭✭✭✭Muahahaha


    brooke 2 wrote: »
    Fake apparently. Was doing the rounds earlier. I have deleted my post.

    It was definitely a fake tweet, no way did Jackson tweet that plus his account has been on lock down for months now. It is ridiculousy easy to create fake tweets these days, there are literally hundreds of sites for tweeting anything you want in the name of anyone else. here is a common one https://tweeterino.com/


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1477
    Sam Quentin
    Registered Users Posts: 2,223 ✭✭✭Sam Quentin


    Muahahaha wrote: »
    It was definitely a fake tweet, no way did Jackson tweet that plus his account has been on lock down for months now. It is ridiculousy easy to create fake tweets these days, there are literally hundreds of sites for tweeting anything you want in the name of anyone else. here is a common one https://tweeterino.com/

    Someone needs to get a hold of 'social media's' collar,, and shake it until its trouble making sheeeeet is shocked out of it's core never to return!?!?!?


  • Options
    #1478
    Foxtrol
    Registered Users Posts: 11,010 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    Muahahaha wrote: »
    It has nothing to do with trust women or even of taking sides. It is about getting to the truth of the matter. What me and cloudatlas have speculated is that Dara Florances testimony that the sex was consensual seems to be shaky at best. She was at the door for only a few seconds so as to how she can judge (with 100% certainty) that the sex was consensual is beyond belief imo.

    I dont believe any person can just walk in on a sex act and see it for a few seconds can make any concrete judgement of whether or not the sex was consensual or not. Rape victims generally do not tend to shout out or fight back, there is overwhelming evidence that they completely freeze up until the rape is over. Just last week there was a case of a woman who was sexually assaulted by a man for three hours straight on a bus journey. Despite other passengers, the driver, her phone, etc she did not once call out for help because she was completely frozen up. This is what happens in many rapes and in that regard the complainant in this trial said she experienced this very same freezing. If Dara Florance walked in what she could well have seen in Jackson and Olding going at it hammer and tongs with the complainant frozen. Yet she says she is 100% certain the sex was consensual, how can she be so sure? There has been nothing reported in the media that backs up her certainty in this regard.

    So what I am saying is that I do not believe Dara Florance (or anyone for that matter) could have made a judgement call in the few seconds she was present. However it is Florances evidence that seems to have tipped the balance towards a not guilty verdict.

    I think the term 'froze' is very loose from what it was described she was doing to Olding at the time.

    We have posters, along with half of twitter, trusting her observation on what Jackson was doing but then questioning her observations on consent. I simply don't believe these people would be attempting to throw out her evidence on consent if it went in line with their prejudgment of the case


  • Options
    #1479
    s7ryf3925pivug
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,007 ✭✭✭s7ryf3925pivug


    She probably did intend to have sex. She probably didn’t want to be spit roasted. She probably was too drunk and disorientated to express that and probably just went with it. She felt violated and degraded.

    They were into the sexual degradation thing. They knew she was getting more than she bargained for. They dehumanized her; she was a slut and therefore into it.

    Ugly behaviour. The fact she was drunk and 19 puts it well into the category of exploitation. They knew she was young or there wouldn’t have been the text asking how old she was when they heard things were going awry.

    Is it ok to sexually degrade drunk teenagers and boast about it? Not at all, regardless of whether it meets the legal definition of rape. I’ve no doubt she perceived it as such though.

    The institutional violence of slaughtering her in the media and eight days of cross examination is horrific. Regardless of where your sympathies lie with this, putting it in the papers is just a bad idea. I think the rugby players are scum but I also think I don’t need to know any of this and that their own privacy should have been respected as well.


  • Options
    #1480
    Franz Von Peppercorn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,070 ✭✭✭Franz Von Peppercorn


    Was this trial inordinately long compared to a trial in Ireland?


  • Options
    #1481
    Summer In the City
    Closed Accounts Posts: 249 ✭✭Summer In the City


    Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »
    Was this trial inordinately long compared to a trial in Ireland?

    I'm wondering this myself. For a case that took so long why did it take the jury a couple of hours to settle it?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1482
    RabbleRouser2k
    Registered Users Posts: 8,277 ✭✭✭RabbleRouser2k


    Foxtrol wrote: »
    I think the term 'froze' is very loose from what it was described she was doing to Olding at the time.

    We have posters, along with half of twitter, trusting her observation on what Jackson was doing but then questioning her observations on consent. I simply don't believe these people would be attempting to throw out her evidence on consent if it went in line with their prejudgment of the case

    There was a decent enough analysis on Prime Time (I didn't get to see it live, so I recorded it).
    They had a solicitor on who discussed all the tenets needed to prove a rape prosecution, and how alcohol, drugs, and other factors factor into a case.

    There was some blips on the show however-they used the word 'innocent' instead of 'acquitted', the language the judge used. I felt that this rape case was so heated, they should have used the legalese-because we weren't there.

    Then they mentioned the 'consent' classes-and we pretty much had a whole spiel about 'consent'...didn't mention the complete failure of those classes, and how many places abandoned em.

    Focused heavily on the rugby fellas, barely mentioned the girl. It was very rushed, and tbh, should have been left for a day-this kind of case was too sensitive for that kind of rushed treatment.


  • Options
    #1483
    jucko
    Registered Users Posts: 184 ✭✭jucko


    Serenity Bumpy Galaxy wrote: »
    She probably did intend to have sex. She probably didn’t want to be spit roasted. She probably was too drunk and disorientated to express that and probably just went with it. She felt violated and degraded.

    They were into the sexual degradation thing. They knew she was getting more than she bargained for. They dehumanized her; she was a slut and therefore into it.

    Ugly behaviour. The fact she was drunk and 19 puts it well into the category of exploitation. They knew she was young or there wouldn’t have been the text asking how old she was when they heard things were going awry.

    Is it ok to sexually degrade drunk teenagers and boast about it? Not at all, regardless of whether it meets the legal definition of rape. I’ve no doubt she perceived it as such though.

    The institutional violence of slaughtering her in the media and eight days of cross examination is horrific. Regardless of where your sympathies lie with this, putting it in the papers is just a bad idea. I think the rugby players are scum but I also think I don’t need to know any of this and that their own privacy should have been respected as well.
    This is the crux of it .great observation.


  • Options
    #1484
    Jayesdiem
    Registered Users Posts: 908 ✭✭✭Jayesdiem


    I find this whole "freezing" theory hard to buy. Not from the perspective of saying it can't happen but you don't end up with someone's penis in your mouth against your will because you were "frozen". Some form of resistance could have been be expected, even as little as a "no thank you". Surely SOME commotion would have ensued? I think back to the Shawshank Redemption in which the main charachter informed his attackers that anything they put in his mouth, they "would lose". I'm not suggesting that's what the complainant would/should have done but the scenario is so very far fetched to me. Forced vaginal penetration would have been plausible. Forced oral sex? I'm just finding that very difficult to believe under these circumstances. I've no doubt this will bring out irrational rage in some people but that's just my point of view so away with you.


  • Options
    #1485
    erica74
    Registered Users Posts: 2,619 ✭✭✭erica74


    riffmongous wrote: »
    What I didn't get was how each defence lawyer seemed to get an entire day each to tell the jury that she was making it up at the end..

    Yeah, you'd have to wonder if being told repeatedly over the course of 4 days that she was making it up would have made it difficult for the jury to see past the inconsistencies on her part. I mean, each lawyer would have probably summarised the testimony given by their client, summarised their cross examination of the complainant and then basically said she was making it up. I think it would be difficult to listen to 4 days of that and maintain an unbiased opinion.


  • Options
    #1486
    jr86
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,930 ✭✭✭jr86


    Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »
    Was this trial inordinately long compared to a trial in Ireland?

    4 different defence teams and because of idiots on social media nearly collapsing the trial they lost days due to legal argument


  • Options
    #1487
    jr86
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,930 ✭✭✭jr86


    Why is there a poll?

    No one here was on the jury.

    The unanimous decision took a quick few hours, that says it all.

    Of course many will vote it was the wrong decision despite probably not even following the trial, or having pretty much zero understanding of the legal process. Trial by social media eh


  • Options
    #1488
    erica74
    Registered Users Posts: 2,619 ✭✭✭erica74


    jr86 wrote: »
    Why is there a poll?

    No one here was on the jury.

    The unanimous decision took a quick few hours, that says it all.

    Of course many will vote it was the wrong decision despite probably not even following the trial, or having pretty much zero understanding of the legal process. Trial by social media eh

    I voted yes I agree with the jury's verdict. To be honest, it did feel wrong to click yes. I was raped when I was 20 and I was sexually abused as a child so it felt (disloyal?) or something, I don't know how to verbalise it. It's a tricky subject for me but I would like to think I can still look at things like this objectively.


  • Options
    #1489
    bigpink
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,552 ✭✭✭bigpink


    Did Paddy Jackson really tweet in victory tonight?


  • Options
    #1490
    dudara
    Registered Users Posts: 33,519 ✭✭✭✭dudara


    Yes, in the sense that there was reasonable doubt and it was legally the correct result

    Not sure on a personal level.


  • Options
    #1491
    erica74
    Registered Users Posts: 2,619 ✭✭✭erica74


    bigpink wrote: »
    Did Paddy Jackson really tweet in victory tonight?

    No, I think it has been clarified the tweet was fake. They all seem like absolute knobs but they'll all still be trying to protect their future careers so I'd imagine we won't hear much from them until the IRFU and their sponsors etc conclude their own investigations.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1492
    suicide_circus
    Registered Users Posts: 19,802 ✭✭✭✭suicide_circus


    Not sure what the point of the poll is


  • Options
    #1493
    evolving_doors
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,812 ✭✭✭✭evolving_doors


    suicide_circus wrote: »
    Not sure what the point of the poll is

    To measure opinion


  • Options
    #1494
    SlickRic
    Registered Users Posts: 36,081 ✭✭✭✭SlickRic


    I love that every person on social media knows what happened that night, despite pretty much every account being different.

    Why can't more people just simply say:
    'I don't know what happened.'

    There's no shame in saying 'I don't know'.

    The assumption on one side that they callously raped her, and the assumption on the other that they did nothing wrong are both unbelievably naive positions to take considering the evidence presented.

    The most pathetic thing is that this will add fire to the 'gender war' that is currently taking place. Society is basically teaching men and women to hate each other.


  • Options
    #1495
    Teyla Emmagan
    Registered Users Posts: 5,641 ✭✭✭Teyla Emmagan


    I have to say if I was that young woman, and went through all of that to lose the case, I would be on suicide watch right now. I do think she felt she was raped. I hope she has very good care right now, this must be devastating.


  • Options
    #1496
    Edward M
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,837 ✭✭✭Edward M


    erica74 wrote: »
    I voted yes I agree with the jury's verdict. To be honest, it did feel wrong to click yes. I was raped when I was 20 and I was sexually abused as a child so it felt (disloyal?) or something, I don't know how to verbalise it. It's a tricky subject for me but I would like to think I can still look at things like this objectively.

    I voted yes, even though I still feel more sympathy for the accuser than than the accused.
    I feel she was used perhaps by the men anyway.


  • Options
    #1497
    suicide_circus
    Registered Users Posts: 19,802 ✭✭✭✭suicide_circus


    evolving_doors wrote: »
    To measure opinion
    Whether people agree or disagree with a verdict is irrelevant. None of us were there that night and none of us were on the jury. It's like putting up a poll after a general election and asking whether we agree with the result.


  • Options
    #1498
    Wheeliebin30
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,593 ✭✭✭Wheeliebin30


    I seen some pics of her months ago from her various social media pages.

    Very racey and glamour model like wannabee.

    Who knows the real reason she went with this allegation.


  • Options
    #1499
    Edward M
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,837 ✭✭✭Edward M


    Wheeliebin30 wrote: »
    I seen some pics of her months ago from her various social media pages.

    Very racey and glamour model like wannabee.

    Who knows the real reason she sent with this allegation.

    Not sure what you mean by that?


  • Options
    #1500
    padser
    Registered Users Posts: 2,375 ✭✭✭padser


    Summer In the City wrote: »
    I'm wondering this myself. For a case that took so long why did it take the jury a couple of hours to settle it?

    A jury coming back that quickly generally means there was no dissenting jurors (ie no one on the fence) and that all jurors regarded it as "open and shut"

    Don't forget that judges tell juries they must go through all the evidence before making a decision, so 3 hours for 8 weeks evidence really is them saying "we are absolutely of one mind here"


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1501
    Uncharted
    Registered Users Posts: 4,138 ✭✭✭Uncharted


    Edward M wrote: »
    Not sure what you mean by that?

    Yes you are.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement