Silentcorner wrote: » Truly amazing....my god...
_Whimsical_ wrote: » Does anyone else find the evidence of the girl who witnessed the incident strange? Was her name Dara? She said her friend had gone upstairs to lay down. A little later she followed and said she heard sex noises, an aggressive male moan. She then entered the room this was coming from, far enough to see just who was having sex. Who walks in while people are having sex in a room? The only reason I can think that id do that would be if I heard something very concerning and I was very worried about my friend. Even then I think I'd call out her name first and see if a reply came. I think I'd either have to have serious queries about the company I was keeping or have heard something really worrying before I'd walk right into a room where I was sure people were having sex. Or do other people just ramble in to their friends while theyre in the middle of having sex?
Bob_Marley wrote: » Not according to the stats they don't, there's very little risk of ever being convicted.
torqtorq wrote: » He was a 24 year old on the night in question. Big difference between a 24 yr old and a 26 year old.
Rodin wrote: » Unless convicted in a court of law, nobody is a rapist. Therefore no 'rapists' are 'getting away with it.'
tretorn wrote: » This case happened in 2016, the woman is now 21, she was nineteen at the time, Olding was twenty two and Jackson twenty four. Olding was terribly drunk, probably a lot more drunk than the woman so probably so it wasnt as if he had all his wits about him either. We dont know how much Jackson had to drink but in any event all three of the adults in that room were drunk. Which one of the men was twenty six at the time.
optogirl wrote: » Fann Linn wrote: » Okay, and what did your parents or teachers do? I didn't tell them. I was embarassed by it.
Fann Linn wrote: » Okay, and what did your parents or teachers do?
iamwhoiam wrote: » So a murderer who was never caught is not a murderer ? Is a robber who got off on a technicality not a robber . ? Is a man who raped a young child and was never caught not a rapist ?
drillyeye wrote: » irishrebe wrote: » Right. So what you're saying is, men have so little self control that I can expect them to gang rape me when we have a few drinks on us. You don't see how truly f*cked up that is? Cant be "some men", or "some people". No, it has to be "men", with the implication that its every single male on the planet.
irishrebe wrote: » Right. So what you're saying is, men have so little self control that I can expect them to gang rape me when we have a few drinks on us. You don't see how truly f*cked up that is?
Bob_Marley wrote: » Are you taking the piss ?
hynesie08 wrote: » Anything factually wrong with that statement?
hynesie08 wrote: » If someone is murdered, and the murderer flees, he will not be identified as a murderer until after he is convicted. They are a suspect until then, no matter how obvious it is.
Mrsmum wrote: » Legally maybe but in reality do you really think that ? I don't know what the RRC is needed for. Sure there are barely any rapes happening, isn't that right.
Ulysses Gaze wrote: » Remember that in the quest to get more rape convictions, innocent men can be hurt and imprisoned. Alison Saunders, head of the CPS, put immense pressure on Police Services in the UK to up the number of rape convictions that they could get in courts. You know what the net result was? A number of innocent men falsely accused of rape with evidence being withheld that would exonerate them. The result of this has meant that ALL rape cases in the last 2 years in the UK are now under investigation to see how many further cases of innocent men have been imprisoned. Do we really want this type of thing happening in Ireland as well?
Fann Linn wrote: » Bob, theres a problem with crime stats big time, here in the south. Only a few weeks back the Gardai had to answer to the Dail that all their homicide/murder figures were all over the shop and that certain figures had to be either deleted or else have cases reopened. Then we had all crime stats relatig to drink driving which meant people either did or didn't get breathylsed and some districts were allegedly brilliant whilst others were disastrous and in Conor Faugnans words of the AA, results of these inadequacies meant resources for traffic management wasn't adequately distributed and at best case, some drunk drivers probably evaded detection. At worst case scenario some road deaths may have been avoided. Then we had the penalty points debacle were some people were wrongly convicted due to a bureacratic error and at best case, premiums were increased for a large number of motorists and at worst case put off the road and in some cases possible loss of jobs All of the above occured down here in the Republc, and Coppinger or Brid Smyth or Aodhan oRiordain didnt organise protests for Gardai malfeaseance or misfeasance which affected 000s of people down here However, 3 sport celebs are named up north, found not guilty, and all of a sudden there are calls for radical overhaul of legal system down here.If they were 3 track suit wearing yobs from the Divis Flats we wouldn't be having this debate.
Bob_Marley wrote: » Worried Father wrote: » If I can't be proven it can't be proven and the perp is free to go. It's the only way it can be. Do you really think a 0.018 % conviction rate for reported rape is effective law and order ?
Worried Father wrote: » If I can't be proven it can't be proven and the perp is free to go. It's the only way it can be.
torqtorq wrote: » If you wish anybody to take you seriously then at the very least you should get the most basic of facts correct. But then it does not fit with your narrative.
Bob_Marley wrote: » I've already said these peoples lives were not ruined by the trial, but by unsocial media, and that peoples identities should not be revealed in such a trial.
iamwhoiam wrote: » You just called him a murderer without a conviction ? He murdered whether convicted or not .
Fann Linn wrote: » If they were 3 track suit wearing yobs from the Divis Flats we wouldn't be having this debate.
Silentcorner wrote: » To help me understand your point, do you have any link to what is the known or suspected percentage of alleged rape incidents that are false?
Scotland Yard is reviewing hundreds of rape, child abuse and sexual assault cases.
Silentcorner wrote: » Funnily enough I'm inclined to agree with you...
retro:electro wrote: » You know you’ve been asked a tonne of questions right? And you just keep apple bobbing your head in ignoring everything asked and going on another rant. People in Spain must be laughing at us and our inability to answer questions
irishrebe wrote: » Good God, you're slow. I was responding ironically to a man suggesting that a woman should not be drunk around 'men', outlining how ludicrous their suggestion was. Do keep up.
Ace2007 wrote: » A few years ago, a couple of Irish Rugby players were involved in a 3some that had a video - now one of those lads is a Grand Slam winner, there was no uproar cause everything was obv consensual. - Where was the media storm there - where were the marches about how the men were filmed doing this with a woman?
Bob_Marley wrote: » If you're going to play silly buggers , then you're going to have to explain why it's ok for a 24 year old professional athlete for Ireland to be binge drinking and having threesome sex with a drunk and vulnerable teenage girl and other rugby players but not a 26 year old one.
Silentcorner wrote: » I've already suggested a major one...allow a victim legal representation... Allowing an independent expert in Sexual Assault to explain how victims can react to assaults... Banning the parading of womens underwear in court...no reason not to allow the jury request if they feel it is neccessary.... How about you, any other suggestions to improve the deplorable conviction rate other than sticking our heads in the sand????
Rodin wrote: » Mrsmum wrote: » Legally maybe but in reality do you really think that ? I don't know what the RRC is needed for. Sure there are barely any rapes happening, isn't that right. Legally is all that matters. Rape is a criminal offence. If not convicted, the criminal offence never happened. People seem to struggle with this concept.
