Belfast rape trial - all 4 found not guilty Mod Note post one

oneilla wrote: »

Dara Florence was in the room for "less than a minute". The prosecuting QC asked her if there were any signs of consent to which she replied no.

I think her participation in all this is something of a red herring since people are working under the assumption that victims of rape fight back or actively struggle rather than wait for the ordeal to be over.

The moaning she heard outside the room stopped when she opened the door.

"She added there was also nothing to indicate “positive consent” during the brief period she witnessed the sexual activity."

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/belfast-rape-trial-week-three-evidence-focused-on-before-and-after-1.3395241?mode=amp

what you are sawing is that it is possible to witness a rape and not realise it's a rape...I find that a bit far fetched because beyond the accusation of rape itself there was no accusation of threatening behaviour or violence to coerce the girl.
Plus DC walked in unannounced....so the scene couldn't have been contrived.

The was an eye witness to an event. That is good enough for me assuming no evidence that the witness isn't being truthful

Parklife1988 wrote: »

The rallies today were in support of all victims of rape.inspired by but not about this one case.

Parklife1988 wrote: »

Good for you. I’m the same.
Look at the messages the lads sent in that WhatsApp group. They’re dragging us down and making us all look bad.
That’s the part everyone defending these lads seem to be missing.
That there’s people even defending these lads, after seeing this kind of evidence is itself disgusting.

Dragging us down? Making us look bad? If anyone is deluded enough to base their opinion of ALL men on some private messages sent between some men in a WhatsApp group, then their ability to form an informed opinion is highly questionable.

Almost nobody is defending the messages the guys sent. I can't speak for those who do, nor do I agree with them. I feel the lads made themselves look like total pricks in front of the whole world. Being a total prick *in this manner* isn't a crime though.

What is evident is the 'with us or against us' mob mentality rampant on twitter since. "Your silence is deafening" is a common one. Anyone saying anything other than 'I believe her' is being labelled a rape apologist, a misogynist and a scumbag. Those who do agree with the verdict are being told by the mob that they are lesser human beings because of an opinion they hold. And before someone makes a comparison, they do not hold a view which is illegal, such as racism or sexism. This view is one which was upheld in a court of law. They are entitled to their opinion without being denigrated.

A 'with us or against us' mentality will only ever divide and the last thing that society needs right now is an even bigger wedge between men and women.

markodaly wrote: »

Sounds like a religious sermon to be honest.

Which begs the question, why did the woman in question agree to the threesome? Any role in her own situation? No? All the mens fault I presume?

So, has womens sexual liberation failed, where woman are free to screw whomever and however they wish? If so, why are men then blamed when these situation arise?

Having your cake and eating it.

The feminists today are turning old school sexual conservatives. We are going back to the victorian times of sex!

It should be pointed out she was alone with Paddy Jackson in the bedroom when the next eejit arrives in completely uninvited. Why didn't he make his excuses and close the door the moment he realised he had disturbed a sex act? That's what most normal people would do.

oneilla wrote: »

Dara Florence was in the room for "less than a minute". The prosecuting QC asked her if there were any signs of consent to which she replied no.

I think her participation in all this is something of a red herring since people are working under the assumption that victims of rape fight back or actively struggle rather than wait for the ordeal to be over.

The moaning she heard outside the room stopped when she opened the door.

"She added there was also nothing to indicate “positive consent” during the brief period she witnessed the sexual activity."

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/belfast-rape-trial-week-three-evidence-focused-on-before-and-after-1.3395241?mode=amp

The most important bit was...

Ms Florence said she saw the woman turn her face away from her. She said Mr Jackson asked her if she wanted to “join in”. She said no and closed the door.

She told the trial she walked in on a “threesome”, not a rape.

Check-mate.

Silentcorner wrote: »

Appledreams15 wrote: »

Havent I just said two posts ago? It is not about this particular case. It is about the wider issue of women being failed in the court systems in the rep and n.ireland. That can be changed going forward.

I have to say lads, you're doing an awful lot to live up to your current reputation as Irish men as 'sexist, cruel and nasty'. If you want to keep in that vein so be it. I have been talking to men abroad on whatsapl, ive travelled a fair bit, and they were all incredibly supportive. So I think I will go and talk to the supportive people and the Irish women who actually want change. Ye need to take a hardlook at how you're acting, and how you are now looking on a global stage.

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...

This is not a gender divide....at least it is not as big as you might think it is...

Nobody won yesterday....absolutely nobody....

The system with which we treat sexual violence needs to be overhauled it is clearly not fit for purpose...

This case will not put off women who falsely report rape...if anything it could increase it...women who falsely accuse someone of rape are not stable individuals....

This will put off a lot of very distressed victims of sexual assault from seeking justice....

Consent classes need to be introduced to the education system, I found the whole experience of the last two months depressing....how victims react to rape attacks need to be understood also...

If young men, speak about women in the way those men did...then we are failing our young men...that attitude plus the physical difference between young men and women plus a shedload of alcohol is a very dangerous cocktail...

I can't understand why you are gobsmacked. It was consensual sex then, under reflection, non-consensual sex. If the jury had done otherwise it would bring into question even the concept of having sex. Must you first sign a legal agreement before you are allowed to have sex with your partner. Is this where modern life is going?

Parklife1988 wrote: »

And you’re making blanket generalisations by saying nobody knows anyone who’s been raped. You’re wrong.

That is not what was said at all. How did you come to the conclusion that is what was said?

I think everyone should move on.

Getting petitions and all, from female friends. I don't have the heart to tell them that I respect the rule of law and the court decision.

I do actually think the lads were out of order or worse. But the evidence of the girl entering room was just too compelling for any jury to convict.

I think she got into a sex situation , it went too far - drink was involved.
Going to court was a mistake by the Public Prosecutor.

The feminist movement is just scary these days. It has stifled any reasonable discussion. Like the George Hook sacking.

The lads were total scumbags - and there is truth in that entitlement upbringing that they have come from.

There is a real discussion to be had around the sexual provocative way that women are dressing (this is from early teens). If you mentioned that in certain circles - you would be lynched.

The most bizarre statement was from the judge claiming

"This was, she said, probably the most difficult trial a jury had ever had to preside over in the history of Northern Ireland."

Genuine question - it is a location that had 3500 deaths in troubles - were none of them in any trial ?
Were any of the bombs - murders in a trial ?

qwerty ui op wrote: »

I wouldn't really agree with this, I think it's more the part they played that's out in the open which is doing most of the damage.
Supposing a judge had audio and video of the whole affair and they were judged to be innocent, their actions would still be very damaging almost as damaging as it currently is. ("currently is" is in bold cos i'm not saying as damaging as if being found guilty)
The public view them as assholes because of their attitude towards young woman not the allegation

Yes but they know about this because of the accusation. Otherwise it would be completely private as they had intended. And it just represents a snapshot of a moment yet it will be used to define them far more than any good they may actively do.

Compare that to their accuser who, quite rightly, has the benefit of anonymity. Were she named the stigma of being the one who accused 4 men who were later acquitted of a horrible crime might be expected to follow her, including the social media postings, texts etc that she made. Instead she’s out of the public eye and quite correctly protected from that

Parklife1988 wrote: »

*that you know of. Just cos they never told you doesn’t mean it didn’t happen to them.
And you’re making blanket generalisations by saying nobody knows anyone who’s been raped. You’re wrong.

Never said nobody knows anyone who's been raped. Just said I do not know of anyone who has been raped or who has claimed they were raped. How can I know someone has potentially been raped if they don't tell me.

Under what pretence can you claim that rapists are posting on boards.ie about this case? Please enlighten me.

FixdePitchmark wrote: »

I think everyone should move on.

Getting petitions and all, from female friends. I don't have the heart to tell them that I respect the rule of law and the court decision.

I do actually think the lads were out of order or worse. But the evidence of the girl entering room was just too compelling for any jury to convict.

I think she got into a sex situation , it went too far - drink was involved.
Going to court was a mistake by the Public Prosecutor.

The feminist movement is just scary these days. It has stifled any reasonable discussion. Like the George Hook sacking.

The lads were total scumbags - and there is truth in that entitlement upbringing that they have come from.

There is a real discussion to be had around the sexual provocative way that women are dressing (this is from early teens). If you mentioned that in certain circles - you would be lynched.

The most bizarre statement was from the judge claiming

"This was, she said, probably the most difficult trial a jury had ever had to preside over in the history of Northern Ireland."

Genuine question - it is a location that had 3500 deaths in troubles - were none of them in any trial ?
Were any of the bombs - murders in a trial ?

I though it was bizarre when I first heard it too, but then again many of the terrorist trials were held before non jury courts.

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

I though it was bizarre when I first heard it too, but then again many of the terrorist trials were held before non jury courts.

most terrorist activities went unpunished really

I really despair at these protest marches today, in light of the fact that the four guys were found innocent. I'm not sure what message it is meant to send, and the media coverage will put huge pressure on future juries to find ANY man in such a case guilty. You know, if they'd organised a similar protest against convicted, Irish rapist Larry Murphy I would have been there front row centre. But they will organise marches when four guys are found innocent? It seems like they are just capitalising on the huge media coverage of this case to push their own agenda.