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

Mr.H

NIMAN wrote: »

I think this case perhaps highlights the issue of how porn has changed over the recent decades, and it's effect it will have on our adolescents.

If they are viewing a lot of violent porn online, with so much extreme stuff passed off as normal behaviour, young lads of the future will be in a grey area when it comes to having sex.

You not think threesomes existed in the 60's?

Or do you think they beat her as well?

razorblunt

Came across a tweet just now, that has a few "likes" on it.
A woman expressing shock that "men are complaining about woman talking about this, don't they know it's happened to most of us".

I'm sorry, most of us? Most women in Ireland were raped?

average_runner

GreeBo wrote: »

100% agree, delving into peoples personal lives and making them public is not good for anyone involved.

But I think its highly unfair to say the lads spoke about her in a "vile nature" yet its fine for her to accuse them of rape via the same medium.

Well it depends on her frame of mind. If she believes she was raped then she was right to send it, but if she sent it to cover herself, then it's a different matter.

As for the guys, to describe a woman like that, is vile. Even if it was all agreed by all parties. They seemed to of forgotten they were involved in the act also.

wexie

Sidebaro wrote: »

The extreme views on both sides should be ignored in a debate because they're just that, extreme.

While I completely agree with you I find it very worrying to see that the extreme sides seem to be getting more and more mainstream and the voice of reason is getting lost in the shouting. (and not just this particular case but in general).

There will come a time (if it hasn't already) where ignoring the extremist views will mean there is no debate and we can't really have that either.

Hopefully there will be plenty of people with lots and lots of patience. Personally I find I have neither patience nor will to engage in pigeon chess and I notice it very much in how willing I'm to engage in a discussion here on boards. I don't think I'm the only one either.

Mr.H

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

No I just understand the law and basic logic but I do not think you do.
What you are doing is this:

The verdict does not prove she was lying and does not prove she was not raped. Which you are clearly trying to do an more than one post now!

The verdict shows there was not enough evidence to prove she was raped.

You might be on the right side of the argument but your logic is as bad as those who are on the wrong side of this argument.

I said "for some reason she called it rape" because that is what it is. For some reason she did call it rape. It might be because she felt she was raped or it might be because she lied. By saying for some reason you are not saying one or the other because we will never know.

I said the evidence proves they did not rape her. That is probably because there wasnt enough evidence to prove they did. But the evidence that was there proved they didnt.

average_runner

Mr.H wrote: »

You not think threesomes existed in the 60's?

Or do you think they beat her as well?

People are forgetting the sell and tell stories in the tabloids in the 90's.

Maybe people should research Ferdinand and Lampard!!!!!!!!!!!!!

jr86

Strazdas wrote: »

It's only one person's opinion on social media though. There have been a lot of attacks on the complainant on Twitter calling her a liar and a slut and saying she should be put on trial etc. All it illustrates is that there are a lot of idiots posting on social media.

There's opinions and then there's that.

She's probably young and incredibly naive but to think someone with disturbing and frankly deranged thoughts like that could end up on a jury...

storker

_Dara_ wrote: »

Wasn't teasing, you can look it up! Far too lazy to go back and copy it.

OK well do inform us if you get a reply. I'm not on Twitter...and I'm extra-glad about that this week.

Sidebaro

Mr.H wrote:

I do think that as a society we need to be more open about these things. While generally we talk about how young men dont like to speak up and talk, we should also encourage young women to talk. I would hate the idea of one of my friends or my daughter going through such trauma and feeling scared to speak out.

I truly believe that if a rape victim read through this thread she would be terrified to speak out. It seems like it's 50/50 in terms of people who believe she's lying and people who think she's telling the truth. That's a flip of the coin, would you risk it?

Mr.H wrote:

I blame our stigma on counselling. Its something else I mentioned earlier that some didnt like but I think that everyone from a young age should receive mandatory counselling. The same way kids get vaccines and check ups during their early years, I feel like they should aslo see a counselor once a year during primary school and every 6 months in secondary. This would help with issues such as managing stress and bullying. It would help them to develop social skills needed in their future as well as getting rid of the stigma about talking to someone.

I could get on board with that. On a smaller level, if every parish can have a priest then surely they can have a counsellor? Technically a priest is meant to be somewhat a counsellor but very few people find priests approachable given the history of priesthood in this country.

GreeBo

Sidebaro wrote: »

Why not? This isn't Hollywood, it's real life. People have differing ways of approaching stuff. Maybe she was being flippant to see if her friend would recognise that it was a lot worse than she was insinuating with that text. You don't know their relationship or what was going through her mind.

Ah, I think I get it now.
So the lads texts cant be seen as flippant because they are filthy rapists?

You dont know her either, yet you are painting her texts as rosey and innocent and theirs as vile and disgusting.

I repeat, seems fair.

seamus

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

There's far too much being made about the messages because people are unable to see context.

Where they see "posh rapey guys boasting online about raping a woman", when the actual context is, "private chat between close friends after a night of partying and interesting sexual encounters".

The language used by these guys appears in private chats all over the world, by both men and women.

We've all got messages containing the picture of that black dude with the huge dick, right?

How much stuff pops up in your whatsapp chats that you'd never ever want your colleagues or even your family to see?

A lot.

I understand that some people won't have Whatsapp chats like this. They don't have a crude mate with colourful language, and it's mostly just texts to your mother or your kids.

But lots of people have pretty open and unrestrained private chats. It's completely normal.

VinLieger

Ugh prolific bandwagoner brid smith soap boxing at the spire

Sidebaro

PhlegmyMoses wrote:

Said it already, but in some quarters, this kind of handwaving and explaining away some of the inconsistencies for her is not being applied to the guys.

In fairness, it's a lot harder to do with their texts. What you could say is that they are pressured into talking that way because 'that's how lads talk'. I imagine if one person said 'hey guys, this isn't a respectful way to talk', he'd be laughed off or ignored.

GreeBo

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Such specific language you use
"teenager" and "men"... she was 19 and they were early twenties, its not like a bunch of 40 year olds and a 15 year old.

[Deleted User]

VinLieger wrote: »

Ugh prolific bandwagoner brid smith soap boxing at the spire

Someone set up the facebook event yesterday, it was then taken down so Ruth Coppenger could be the organizer. :rolleyes:

facehugger99

seamus wrote: »

T
We've all got messages containing the picture of that black dude with the huge dick, right?
.

Jerome?

*Raises hand.

GreeBo

average_runner wrote: »

Well it depends on her frame of mind. If she believes she was raped then she was right to send it, but if she sent it to cover herself, then it's a different matter.

As for the guys, to describe a woman like that, is vile. Even if it was all agreed by all parties. They seemed to of forgotten they were involved in the act also.

Its vile to accuse someone of rape, especially to do it publically.

I dont see how she is entitled to have her frame of mind brought in as a defense yet the lads texts arent viewed in the same way.
They were the morning after a boozy night before and sending private messages to others that were involved, yet we just decide that they are filth.

El Weirdo

storker wrote: »

OK well do inform us if you get a reply. I'm not on Twitter...and I'm extra-glad about that this week.

I replied that Pol Pot held similar views.

She liked it.

VinLieger

cisk wrote: »

Someone set up the facebook event yesterday, it was then taken down so Ruth Coppenger could be the organizer. :rolleyes:

Hahahah hilarious, I heard a rumour it was because someone threatened legal action and the original organiser got overwhelmed but this makes far more sense

Sidebaro

razorblunt wrote:

I'm sorry, most of us? Most women in Ireland were raped?

There are subcategories of rape and I would believe that a lot more women than you would believe fit into these subcategories. I think people assume rape is either aggressive assault or 'changing your mind', there's a massive grey area in between those two things hence the lack of understanding. Should it all be labelled under the term rape? Probably not, as it leads to this confusion, but I do believe that a huge amount of women have been sexually assaulted or harassed or some variation.

BrokenArrows

I think the biggest problem of this sort of trial is that regardless of the outcome both sides loose.

A large % of people still see them men as being Guilty regardless of the fact they were found innocent. Not Guilty for men is seen in rape cases as "not enough evidence" and doesnt mean innocent in the public eye.

Also a large % of people will see the woman as a liar instead of possibly the not guilty verdict being because there was "not enough evidence".

Unfortunately the court system doesnt say "not guilty because of not enough evidence" vs "not guilty because they are 100% innocent"

I think rape cases should be kept 100% confidential until a Guilty verdict has been passed. If they accused is found innocent then absolutely nothing.

It should be illegal for papers to report on rape cases until after a guilty verdict.

kylith

GreeBo wrote: »

Yeah, seems like the sort of text a traumatised rape victim would send a couple of hours after the incident.

Are you a world expert on how rape victims react?

During my time on Boards i’ve Seen rape victims accused of both overreacting and underreacting. There is no proscribed formula for how someone behaves after a trauma.

Mossy Monk

Sidebaro wrote: »

There are subcategories of rape and I would believe that a lot more women than you would believe fit into these subcategories. I think people assume rape is either aggressive assault or 'changing your mind', there's a massive grey area in between those two things hence the lack of understanding. Should it all be labelled under the term rape? Probably not, as it leads to this confusion, but I do believe that a huge amount of women have been sexually assaulted or harassed or some variation.

What are the subcategories of rape?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Sidebaro

GreeBo wrote:

Ah, I think I get it now. So the lads texts cant be seen as flippant because they are filthy rapists?

Never said this.

GreeBo wrote:

You dont know her either, yet you are painting her texts as rosey and innocent and theirs as vile and disgusting.

No I don't know her so I haven't made definite assumptions either way. It seems a lot more open and shut with the lads texts. I'll admit, as I have a few posts back (not in reply to you), the culture lads grow up in makes it hard to deteriorate from the script in situations like this but that's not a great excuse, is it? They don't have to join in, they could just not say those things.

oneilla

razorblunt wrote: »

Came across a tweet just now, that has a few "likes" on it.
A woman expressing shock that "men are complaining about woman talking about this, don't they know it's happened to most of us".

I'm sorry, most of us? Most women in Ireland were raped?

You'll probably squabble that this isn't a majority but the 2002 Sexual Abuse and Violence in Ireland Report found that 42% of women and 28% of men had experienced sexual abuse or assault. Of women, 10% of this was "penetrative abuse" (3% for men).

seamus

kylith wrote: »

Are you a world expert on how rape victims react?

During my time on Boards i’ve Seen rape victims accused of both overreacting and underreacting. There is no proscribed formula for how someone behaves after a trauma.

It's just so bizarre how much weight is hung on someone's behaviour to try and claim that they were or weren't a victim.

Imagine if my phone was stolen today and I went after work and bought a new one. And then in court that was presented as evidence that my phone wasn't really robbed. Ridiculous, right?

But this is exactly the logic that was presented in the Tinder rape case. Because she went back on Tindr after being attacked, that there's no way she was attacked.

It's in the courtroom where we really see how far we have (or haven't) come with attitudes towards sex and promiscuity.

jr86

_Dara_ wrote: »

This tweet is disturbing. People are losing the plot. I replied to the tweet (in a civil manner) but I'm not expecting a response.

Deleted

How handy would it be if any lunatic within Ireland/Northern Ireland who has deleted a tweet in the last 24 hours is automatically banned from twitter

average_runner

GreeBo wrote: »

Its vile to accuse someone of rape, especially to do it publically.

I dont see how she is entitled to have her frame of mind brought in as a defense yet the lads texts arent viewed in the same way.
They were the morning after a boozy night before and sending private messages to others that were involved, yet we just decide that they are filth.

Yes it's vile to accuse someone of rape if she actually knows they didn't do it.
But if she believes it then its not. But we will never know the answer to that.

The only thing we seem to know is that they were all out of their head and none of them knew what really happened, as the statement from the one sober person contradicts jackson statement and her statement.

El Weirdo

jr86 wrote: »

Deleted

How handy would it be if any lunatic within Ireland/Northern Ireland who has deleted a tweet in the last 24 hours is automatically banned from twitter

It's still up for me.