irishrebe wrote: » Hilarious. And you're calling other people loons. You honestly expect someone who is up late and wrecked and falling asleep to spend time finding information for someone too thick or lazy to use google? You're not all there, are you? No worries, I'll do so, and I'll bill you for the time spent.
Silentcorner wrote: » Correct....which is what can happen to victims in all sexual assaults/rape.... Very few rapes carry a threat of violence.....doesn't mean that the victim doesn't fear danger....come on...
backspin. wrote: » If I ever ended up interviewing the woman who held up that 'men r trash' sign I would never give her a job. Crap like that is completely unacceptable.
Mrsmum wrote: » Maybe this is a mad idea but would there be any benefit to have four separate court cases ? Would that be fairer at all to the girl as in a one to one rather than four against one? Each defendant had different claims to defend and as witnesses for each other wouldn't have complete knowledge of what each other had said. Might they not be the ones tripping themselves up then ? No ?
Omackeral wrote: » ShowMeTheCash wrote: » You claimed to have studied law earlier, why are you giving me legislation from the state of Indiana in the USA? Was this answered or dodged? Also, MidlandsApple15 I hope you have a stack of consent forms, a nice quill pen and a few witnesses in your room should I ever be lucky enough to find myself back there.
ShowMeTheCash wrote: » You claimed to have studied law earlier, why are you giving me legislation from the state of Indiana in the USA?
Silentcorner wrote: » irishrebe wrote: » Hilarious. And you're calling other people loons. You honestly expect someone who is up late and wrecked and falling asleep to spend time finding information for someone too thick or lazy to use google? You're not all there, are you? No worries, I'll do so, and I'll bill you for the time spent. They are also conveniently ignoring the new posters to this site who are on their side of this particular issue...
FrancieBrady wrote: » Silentcorner wrote: » What are you on about? You intimated that the victim had frozen to 'survive what they perceive to be a dangerous situation'.
Silentcorner wrote: » What are you on about?
FrancieBrady wrote: » I don't think there was a shred of evidence that claimed there had been a threat of violence. But well done for getting it into the mix.
Silentcorner wrote: » Greebo...why do you feel so threatened at the suggestion that we need to lock up more rapists?
Silentcorner wrote: » I never said there was any threat of violence you brought it into the mix??????? I said victims react in rape cases/sexual assaults with what is known as tonic immobilisation...which is how their bodies react to what they perceive to be a dangerous situation.... I can see you are having problems with it...I know it can't be easy for you...
backspin. wrote: If I ever ended up interviewing the woman who held up that 'men r trash' sign I would never give her a job. Crap like that is completely unacceptable.
GreeBo wrote: » You want to lock up more men without more supporting evidence of a crime being committed. I think most people would feel threatened by that? I'm still waiting for you to suggest anything that will increase conviction rates, other than removing the need for pesky evidence.
Silentcorner wrote: » Men who do not Rape have nothing to fear....I can't be more explicit than that...
FrancieBrady wrote: » You insinuated that this may have been the case here, when there isn't a shred of evidence for it only a prosecutor (like you) introducing it as a 'possibility'. I know it can't be easy for you to accept what the prosecutor wanted to put in the minds of the jurors.
Silentcorner wrote: » I INSINUATED NOTHING OF THE SORT. You are the only person who mentioned a threat of violence. I never mentioned any threat of violence ANYWHERE... I can't help you with this at all I'm afraid....I can't even understand how you are struggling with it...
Silentcorner wrote: » I really can't help you with this.... Men who do not Rape have nothing to fear....I can't be more explicit than that...
Silentcorner wrote: » I really can't help you with this.... ...I can't be more explicit than that... I have made about a half dozen different suggestions NONE of which involve removing the need for pesky evidence.... How is that posters are twisting/misrepresenting everything that challenges the piss poor conviction rate for rape....it's bizaar...
Shelga wrote: Imagine being held up as the symbol of absolutely everything these so-called feminists despise. Being subjected to an onslaught of horrific online bullying and abuse, from hundreds of thousands of people. Mob rule in its absolute worst form.
Shelga wrote: All these rabid imbeciles are going to achieve is anonymity being granted to rape case defendants. How can they not see that? They are building a perfect case for it. They are not achieving anything else whatsoever. I’m glad they’ve brought my attention to this, because it’s something I, as a woman, would now wholeheartedly support.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Silentcorner wrote: » I INSINUATED NOTHING OF THE SORT. You are the only person who mentioned a threat of violence. I never mentioned any threat of violence ANYWHERE... I can't help you with this at all I'm afraid....I can't even understand how you are struggling with it... How can it be a dangerous situation then, dangerous enough for you to freeze? The 'body' would have to percieve a threat. Not sure you have thought this through in the effort to throw out another buzz word - 'tonic immobilisation'.
Silentcorner wrote: » I really can't help you with this.... Men who do not Rape have nothing to fear....I can't be more explicit than that... I have made about a half dozen different suggestions NONE of which involve removing the need for pesky evidence.... How is that posters are twisting/misrepresenting everything that challenges the piss poor conviction rate for rape....it's bizaar...
Silentcorner wrote: » They are also conveniently ignoring the new posters to this site who are on their side of this particular issue...
_Dara_ wrote: » I came across that yoke myself on Twitter. No self-awareness.
irishrebe wrote: » You don't think the body can interpret being penetrated without your consent as a 'dangerous situation'?
_Whimsical_ wrote: » I most certainly did not make it up. You haven't looked hard enough obviously.https://imgur.com/a/Ijr0u that's from an article in Fridays independent. It was read out on either prime time or the Pat Kenny show when someone read from the transcript of the court. In her statement to police she said she heard aggressive moaning and was 100 percent sure she saw Paddy Jackson having sex. In court she called them sexual noises. She said she heard moaning, was asked if this was sensual moaning and replied no. She then offered that it was an aggressive male moaning and later in court said it sounded like sex. Why would go forth and open the door if she thought the sound was just her friend having sex? Her behaviour is much more easily reconciled with her first version of events to police Perhaps you should take your own advice on making things up just to fill in the blanks.
upandcumming wrote: » It's despicable really. And he after walking free from court with a not guilty verdict. All reasonable people should be supporting anonymity for defendants in cases such as this, and I would argue that this anonymity should hold even if the complainant waives their right to same, until a guilty verdict is reached.
irishrebe wrote: » Yes, of course people of all races were made to attend. It wasn't some sort of punishment for being white any more than consent classes are a punishment for being a man.
Silentcorner wrote: » I really can't help you with this.... Men who do not Rape have nothing to fear....I can't be more explicit than that... .
GreeBo wrote: » Silentcorner wrote: » Read your post again... More like 100 women wake up and decide retrospectively that they have been raped...implies explicitly that the 100 women in this country (50 of whom will report the crime to the gardai*) are all making it up.... You are a right charmer you are!! *Those who do report a rape, are subjected to a very invasive body exam, very often miles away from home. You are right, we should just accept the accusations without obtaining any evidence from the alleged victim. Lock up those men!
Silentcorner wrote: » Read your post again... More like 100 women wake up and decide retrospectively that they have been raped...implies explicitly that the 100 women in this country (50 of whom will report the crime to the gardai*) are all making it up.... You are a right charmer you are!! *Those who do report a rape, are subjected to a very invasive body exam, very often miles away from home.
FrancieBrady wrote: » So the body freezes and allows it to happen some more? Ok. :rolleyes:
