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

the_syco wrote: »

Jaysus fcuking christ.

Fcuk me - if I have to see that post one more time on this thread.

We get it

It's stupid.

freshpopcorn

Silentcorner wrote: »

I have to say, that in my experience here in Limerick anyway, the men I spoke to yesterday about this were all as gob smacked over this verdict as each other...

Were they really surprised by the not guilty verdict?

Greysquirel09

RuMan wrote: »

Most people i spoke to were amazed it even got to court. Cant see how anyone following the proceedings could have been shocked by the verdict

Have to agree. The moment I heard the witness say she walked in and saw a threesome they were walking free.

Silentcorner

freshpopcorn wrote: »

Were they really surprised by the not guilty verdict?

Ya...as was I...which was a bit foolish on our part really...I mean, what chance did she have?

the_syco

Appledreams15 wrote: »

I have been talking to men abroad on whatsapl, ive travelled a fair bit, and they were all incredibly supportive

So you and they think an accusation of rape by a woman equals immediate jail sentence without a trial?

Fann Linn

Silentcorner wrote: »

Ya...as was I...which was a bit foolish on our part really...I mean, what chance did she have?

Was that before or after she went back in for her phone?

freshpopcorn

Silentcorner wrote: »

Ya...as was I...which was a bit foolish on our part really...I mean, what chance did she have?

Thanks for the reply. Most people I met over the weeks were expecting a not guilty verdict from what they heard in the news.

razorblunt

Silentcorner wrote: »

Ya...as was I...which was a bit foolish on our part really...I mean, what chance did she have?

A decent chance if the evidence stacked up. In fact more than decent.

RuMan

Silentcorner wrote: »

Ya...as was I...which was a bit foolish on our part really...I mean, what chance did she have?

Clearly you werent following the case

GreeBo

Silentcorner wrote: »

Ya...as was I...which was a bit foolish on our part really...I mean, what chance did she have?

She had the chance to prove her accusations in a court in front of a jury...which she couldn't do.

Do you believe everyone simply accused of a crime is guilty?

Silentcorner

GreeBo wrote: »

She had the chance to prove her accusations in a court in front of a jury...which she couldn't do.

Do you believe everyone simply accused of a crime is guilty?

That old chestnut...

I don't actually...I followed another rape case in the media recently was fully convinced that the men were innocent....

Galwayguy35

It seems the radfems and the beta male cucks would prefer the men were sent to prison despite the fact that there was no proof they did anything wrong.

I'm sick of seeing this #ibelieveher crap in every comment on the subject as well.

GreeBo

Silentcorner wrote: »

That old chestnut...

I don't actually...I followed another rape case in the media recently was fully convinced that the men were innocent....

So you were convinced based on the available evidence that these men were guilty?

SleetAndSnow

GreeBo wrote: »

Thats incorrect.
Only a man can commit rape as it requires penetration with a penis.

Anything else is sexual assault.

Forced penetration has been reported in many prisions etc across the US, if that's sexual assault then so be it however my point still stands, what that poster said was incorrect about men not being raped , it happens. (Anal penetration)

RuMan

Silentcorner wrote: »

That old chestnut...

I don't actually...I followed another rape case in the media recently was fully convinced that the men were innocent....

There was no evidence in this case, she was lucky it even got to court. Would have better all around if it hadnt.

Silentcorner

GreeBo wrote: »

So you were convinced based on the available evidence that these men were guilty?

I'm not on any stand pal...I'm entitled to my opinion...

NIMAN

It's clear there are plenty of people posting in this thread who are making statements when they didn't actually follow the case.

They are just jumping on the latest bandwagon.

GreeBo

SleetAndSnow wrote: »

Forced penetration has been reported in many prisions etc across the US, if that's sexual assault then so be it however my point still stands, what that poster said was incorrect about men not being raped , it happens. (Anal penetration)

I'm not saying only women can be raped, I'm saying that only men can commit rape.

SleetAndSnow

GreeBo wrote: »

I'm not saying only women can be raped, I'm saying that only men can commit rape.

Ah right, thanks for the correction for the term

Silentcorner

NIMAN wrote: »

It's clear there are plenty of people posting in this thread who are making statements when they didn't actually follow the case.

They are just jumping on the latest bandwagon.

Well, I can only speak for myself, but I followed this case right from the start...

I couldn't give a fukk about bandwagons....

Utopia Parkway

RuMan wrote: »

Most people i spoke to were amazed it even got to court. Cant see how anyone following the proceedings could have been shocked by the verdict

Anyone following the case should not have been surprised in the slightest. It was fairly obvious weeks ago that the verdict was heading the way it did.

Too many inconsistencies and not enough evidence.

GreeBo

Silentcorner wrote: »

I'm not on any stand pal...I'm entitled to my opinion...

I'm not saying that you aren't, just wondering why you were surprised at the not guilty verdict.

Assuming you understand the legal process, to be surprised you must have personally been convinced beyond all reasonable doubt that they were guilty.

Neither I (nor the judge or jury for that matter) found any evidence to satisfy that requirement.

Dyr

Just out of curiosity, I'm assuming all the ibelieveher hash taggers are happy that they implicitly dont believe the female witness? Maybe ibelieveherbutnother would be more accurate

TOMs WIFE

the_syco wrote: »

pjohnson wrote: »

Not anti man in the slightest

Jaysus fcuking christ.

Unbelieveable. I see that she has deleted the tweet. Someone obviously made her see sense (what little she clearly has).

freshpopcorn

TOMs WIFE wrote: »

Unbelieveable. I see that she has deleted the tweet. Someone obviously made her see sense (what little she clearly has).

Normally people just calls everbody who calls them out on such Tweets trolls.

RuMan

Bambi wrote: »

Just out of curiosity, I'm assuming all the ibelieveher hash taggers are happy that they implicitly dont believe the female witness? Maybe ibelieveherbutnother would be more accurate

Dont get the sense they have any clue about evidence its all about virtue signalling who cares if they destroy the lifes of innocent men

Stonedpilot

GreeBo wrote: »

I'm not saying only women can be raped, I'm saying that only men can commit rape.

What utter utter utter crap. So if a grown woman forces herself on a young boy Pins him down, mounts him threatens him and has sex against his will that isnt rape?.
Of course it is.

Its your kinda crap excuses female paedophiles.
Disgusting post frankly.

tritium

GreeBo wrote: »

I'm not saying only women can be raped, I'm saying that only men can commit rape.

Only men can commit can commit the legally defined crime of rape.

Either gender can force the other (or their own) to have sex with them against their will. The CDC has a rather shameful episode of reclassifying and hiding that exact thing in the appendices a while back.

Not really cool to use a flaw in the legal versus common understanding of the term to score points on something like this tbh

SleetAndSnow

Stonedpilot wrote: »

What utter utter utter crap. So if a grown woman forces herself on a young boy Pins him down, mounts him threatens him and has sex against his will that isnt rape?.
Of course it is.

Its your kinda crap excuses female paedophiles.
Disgusting post frankly.

Well I mean after looking it up, that's what the law says. There is nothing in the law about women raping men so legally it can't be held up, which I believe is something that needs to be changed.

hatrickpatrick

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

beta male cucks

Way to destroy the credibility of your argument, an argument which is otherwise right on the money.