Atoms for Peace wrote: » I do have some sympathy for Steward Olding, after his statement, and the other lad charged with obstruction; but absolutely none for Paddy Jackson due to the aggressive statement given by his lawyer and now trying to sue for defamation. You would think he's had enough of court and keep his head down.
The Talking Bread wrote: » The idea of a trial is to persuade a jury. That is your job as representative for your client. I would have imagined a blood stained pair of underwear would have had some subtle, at the least, effect on some of the jury. It was heavily referenced in the evidence of her text messages so like all evidence if the prosecution feels it warrants using to "influence" the verdict in their "favour", naturally they would. It is hardly rocket science! Hmm, just read the article and seen it was the defence who used the underwear to "strengthen their case. Still obviously for the same attempts to influence the jury.
Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: » My background is middle class from a working class area. I went to a normal school and then a posh college. In England. The men there were worse by far. Well the jocks anyway.
Deleted User wrote: » Similar post by the same poster in the legal forum (also now deleted by Mod, and banned)- that one was quoted by someone else. It's easily done (to quote posts)- not sure though what the legal aspect is when something like a defamation post by one poster, is quoted/re-tweeted by another. Is the re-tweeter also potentially liable?
dark crystal wrote: » Seriously, take a break from the internet for a while. I honestly don't know anyone in my social circle, workplace or family who holds these hateful views on men. Not one. If you know one or more who does, keep your distance and get on with your life. What's scary is this divide that's growing between the genders and it's going on on both sides. I've only ever encountered it on the internet which would make you wonder, who's driving it? The paranoia this gender war crap stirs up is what's grim; we're not all out to get you jailed and castrated and you're not all out to rape us and keep us downtrodden. open your eyes and take a look around the real world and don't get so carried away getting nosebleeds about some fictional dystopian future the internet loons have you believing in.
Strazdas wrote: » I would blame Jackson's lawyer mostly, he seems somewhat aggressive and confrontational going by his speech outside the Court after the trial. Olding's lawyer was much more measured and conciliatory towards the young woman and towards everyone in general.
Fann Linn wrote: » Why should he keep his head down?
Atoms for Peace wrote: » It's a thing called decency, he got himself into a very compromising and vulgar scenario and doesn't seem to be showing any contrition only spitefulness.
cloudatlas wrote: » Your own social circle is not exclusive. No I'm not a prude I don't talk about women referring to them as sluts and prostitutes. I show respect towards sex partners.
Atoms for Peace wrote: » Fann Linn wrote: » Why should he keep his head down? It's a thing called decency, he got himself into a very compromising and vulgar scenario and doesn't seem to be showing any contrition only spitefulness.
Appledreams15 wrote: » I love how youre speaking for all women now as well. I and my friends have yet to refer to men as prostitutes or to a man as a merry go around after two of us took a turn on him and left him crying
irishman86 wrote: » cloudatlas wrote: » Your own social circle is not exclusive. No I'm not a prude I don't talk about women referring to them as sluts and prostitutes. I show respect towards sex partners. You dont, but most do talk like that Not just men, women are equally guilty Im sorry if you have lived a very sheltered life and missed out on well everything from 1940 onwards
Outlaw Pete wrote: » This isn't something like a Rodney King situation where there's evidence of a crime having taken place but that the powers that be are covering it up. This is a situation where men have been found not guilty of rape in a court of law and the strongest witness for the defense was a woman. Yet still and all a protest is held by a crowd of predominantly young girls to chant that they still believe her regardless and all while they hold banners with feminist slogans. You say you don't fear feminism. Well, my reply to that would be dependent on just what it is you think feminism is but given that you defending these people's actions, I highly doubt it's the same definition as people like Susan B Anthony or even Christina Hoff Sommers would have, but if it was, I'd not be fearing it either. Something tells me though, that it's more in line with the bastardized version of feminism propagated by the likes of Louise O'Neill and her ilk and if so, you very much have something to fear, you just don't realise it.
C__MC wrote: » Atoms for Peace wrote: » It's a thing called decency, he got himself into a very compromising and vulgar scenario and doesn't seem to be showing any contrition only spitefulness. He had been accused of rape and sexual assault. There is a 50-50 chance that night that he was telling the truth and everything was consensual. Now he has lost everything possibly because of lies on her behalf. His name has been tarnished, of course he feels angry. I would to if I was accused of some of the stuff he was. It could have been blatant lies and might not have been. Should senators representing Ireland be taking one side and tarnishing his name which was cleared by the jury. How would you feel if someone thought you got a non Guilty verdict due to your class?
CAMPAIGNERS against sexual violence have hit out at comments made by a senior defence barrister during the rugby rape trial regarding 'middle class' women not tolerating rape. Louise Kennedy of Women's Aid NI said she feared some of the statements made in the case of four Ulster rugby players, who were cleared of all charges, would adversely impact women coming forward to report crimes. During the trial in Belfast defence barrister Frank O'Donoghue QC, who represented Stuart Olding, told the jury there were a string of questions police should have asked the woman who made the allegations. "Why didn't she scream the house down?" he said "A lot of very middle-class girls were downstairs. "They were not going to tolerate a rape or anything like that." The Irish News contacted the Bar Library and asked Mr O'Donoghue to respond to the criticism to his comments. So far however there has been no response.Read more: Paddy Jackson can make bid to recover legal defence costsHard partying Ulster rugby players cause rift in dressing room The Women's Aid worker said her organisation was "very clear" that rape "does not discriminate against anybody" and that most victims did not "scream or run away" but instead became numb with fear. Ms Kennedy, who is the body's Regional Policy and Information Co-ordinator, said: "It's common knowledge that the trauma response of the body system is not just 'fight or flight'. It's a bit deeper than that," she added. "You could fight or might run away - but many people freeze, tense up and do nothing, you then might start diplomatically try to convince someone to stop and then you may go completely limp. "With regards to 'middle class' women not 'tolerating rape', we are very clear we support victims of domestic and sexual violence across Northern Ireland. It does not discriminate between class, ethnicity...abuse and rape happens everywhere.'' The leading campaigner said the Women's Aid helpline had received distressed calls since the trial started two months ago from victims who said it had "put them off ever reporting rape of sexual violence to police" or "going through the criminal justice system". There has been severe criticism of "vile" comments made about the woman at the centre of the trial on social media.Read more: Campaigning doctor urges rape victims to seek help at pioneering support centre South Belfast Green Party assembly member Clare Bailey, who works for the support group Nexus, expressed concern about any suggestion that someone from a more privileged background cared more about rape victims. "Rape is not just a sexual crime, it is about power and control," Ms Bailey said. Ms Bailey said she was aware victims had been "re-traumatised" by the coverage of the trial both in mainstream media and on Twitter.
RDM_83 again wrote: » A important one in terms of this discussion is the fact that social and romantic isolation has became more common, some people may be getting a lot of attention but on the flipside there is a higher proportion of people remaining as virgins to an older age (which isn't an exact thing but does point to increased romantic isolation for some).
Den14 wrote: » Agreed I think a large proportion of men share this idea of 'shure it's nothing to be worried about.' But this so called third wave feminism is slowly seeping ever more into society and it will keep doing so as men sit back and let it happen. These feminists are very determined to change the world. It has been a just and noble cause to give women more rights and liberties thanks indeed to them for doing so. However the extreme end however wish to push things further and they are dangerous. They are very influential and easily capture the hearts and minds of many women and indeed men. They don't really care about equality. All they care about is making women the more powerful and dominant of the sexes. To hell with the men. They have increasing influence in media and government and this will inevitably cause changes which will ultimately affect men as a result. These sleeping men won't know what hit them if and when the rug is pulled from under them
Uncharted wrote: » He was defamed.... hence the defamation case.
Mrs Shuttleworth wrote: » It's not "feminazis" or the like that are responsible in this situation. I'm as conservative and anti-SJW as they come and have to keep my trap shut in the circles in which I move. But in this case the Fantastic Four (as I assume we are now obliged to call them) irrespective of the criminal trial must take responsible for their actions and the fallout from that. Their actions and behaviour and correspondences were morally puerile and act as confirmation bias to women who've have bad experiences with men. So far I'm not seeing any evidence of any remorse or sensibility.
theoneeyedman wrote: » There is no chance whatsoever of Jackson going to court on this. Any lawyer (barrister?) would easily make it a rehash of the original trial. Jackson would be on the defensive, if anything would have to prove his innocence, which he would have difficulty doing I would suggest. He'd be nuts to open the can of worms again. Been following the commentary during the week, and all I can say is WTF. I don't do twitter, but I never cease to be amazed about how the dumb, idiotic, and plain stupid attention seekers can't wait to spill their bile to all and sundry. That this includes public figures and politicians... Well... Says a lot about leadership in our society really.
FixdePitchmark wrote: » If Aodhan has any real conviction - he should call the bluff of the Jackson Legal team. There would be an absoulte top of the league legal team ready to take PJ to court and would do it pro bono. The Jackson team should keep the head down.
irishrebe wrote: » No, they don't. You must associate with total scumbags because most decent people do not talk like that. There are a minority of crass scumbags with no class who go on like that. It's very sad that you think using dehumanising and degrading language while talking about private sexual acts is in any way normal. It seems to be that people who behave like this believe that everybody behaves like this, as if they're living in a bubble. It's like people who do drugs and think everyone does drugs.
pumpkin4life wrote: » Bingo. What you have now is a sexual free market place, where women are the choosers and the men are the chasers. Remember, she went to the house party, all by herself, to meet these lads. And being rugby lads, their attractiveness to wans is far higher than Alan the Accountant or the indian lad working as a computer programmer in the docklands. It makes perfect sense she did why she did and any very attractive man has stories as crazy as that, though they don't get to that stage of court appearances obviously. Most men will never ever be in this position. You get a free market system and you end up with some big winners and big losers as well. More men with nothing and more wans ending up single. Its like with IQ and automation. If you're fat, bald, small, not the most charismatic, not the wealthiest or the lad with the coolest job, than unlike the past, the probability you're going to end up with nothing is just going to end up increasing in the next while.
