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

tretorn wrote: »

Oldings semen was found, he said the woman gave him a consensual blowjob and the jury believed him.

There was no evidence whatsoever that Jackson had sex with the woman, he is supposed to have had vaginal sex with her three times, he denies it and the evidence that he told the truth is more compelling.

To state that maybe there was evidence but it no longer exists is nonsense.

Paddy Jackson is supposed to have shoved his whole hand inside her, there would definitely be evidence of this in a forensic examination, there was none. These highly trained staff in sexual assault units know exactly what evidence to note and there was none to note in this case, well apart from a 1 CM tear, she wasnt battered, bleeding, bruised, traumatised and the jury who sat through nine weeks knew this.

I think I will take the word of the jury over silentcorners hysterical posts, thats wimmin for ye.

Well, you clearly haven't been reading my posts....I have stated clearly I am male...

There is a lot of hysterical posts on this thread alright....I will take the word of the Police and CPS if you don't mind....and I will respect the decision of the jury....

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Where is the evidence of restraint and threat?

There isn't any. She was in a bedroom with a stranger kissing him, left and then came back.

That is what we know.

Like I said earlier...I can't help you mate...sorry

meeeeh wrote: »

And what would the evidence be? Someone screaming 'I'm going to freeze now'?

Shoe size range indeed.

So, like the others, you just want to insinuate that she was frozen in fear to insinuate that she was raped.


A jury considering the actual evidence concluded that she wasn't. But our gallant posters wish to set that aside.

Silentcorner wrote: »

It's an epidemic on this thread....

Anybody who goes up against the rape narrative is now being mocked. Alá the 'MenRTrash' strategy.

God help us all.

The Talking Bread wrote: »

irishrebe wrote: »

'Free'? I know rape victims who can barely leave the house, have no social life, and whose lives are basically over. If that's being 'free', then yeah. There are no winners.

of course you do.

TBH I can't take anything you say seriously after that wishy washy story earlier.

I am not saying it doesn't happen, of course it does,  but you seem to have had significantly more exposure to rape, sexual assault, paedophilic verbal abuse, etc etc  than your average Joe which is added to everytime  you want to counter a point.

It is easy to say all this behind a computer and there is an extreme propaganda machine out there at the moment ever more generalising men as sexual deviants, whether in subtle form or downright straight to the point (see some of the banners at that march, a massive portion of tweets and, indeed, comments on here such as "all my foreign friends see Irish men as misogynist drunkards".

A large segment of feminists have in my opinion taken advantage of the verdict (indeed twisting what the verdict even means) to pursue this agenda and it is an extremely dangerous, divisive route to go down. Social media is powerful and we will have new generations coming in seeing these anti-men trends and it isn't going to be pretty for society. Look at that dose, Louise O'Neill using it to promote her book ffs.

You have refused to account for the fact that your messages have had a similar significant generalisation tone to them, or maybe you have wrapped yourself unintentionally in this manner of thinking,  and I expect an ultra defensive retort to this. (like everyone of your posts here - you seem incapable of debate w/o going on the defence which isn't helping people who are attempting to take your posts seriously)

What wishy washy story? You think being harassed in the street means I have had more exposure to those things than the average Joe? I'd say your head would spin if you had even the slightest idea of how many women have been sexually harassed and assaulted in their lives. I suppose you think the Me Too hashtag was just a way to attack men? Get attention? Rather than actually believing it could be true? This attitude is part of the problem. No matter how many times and in how many ways we try to explain our experiences, we're shut down and silenced by people accusing us of lying. The fact so many people refused to believe that grown men would sexually harass a minor was mind-blowing to me. People acting as if it was just so far fetched it couldn't possibly be true. Part of the problem. 

You'd think, wouldn't you, that with the church scandal, the Rotherham scandal, the USAG scandal and the hundreds of similar cases around the world, all much more serious and horrific and harrowing that what happened to me, that you'd finally think, "Jesus, maybe we do have a problem with abuse and harassment victims not being believed". You'd think that people would finally stop implying that stories of abuse and harassment are too far fetched and ridiculous to be true.
Instead, you call a detailed recollection of a traumatic time in someone's life (which I was cross examined on in great detail) a 'wishy washy story', while a man posts a total 'whataboutery' account of how he had sex with a woman once and was worried she MIGHT accuse him of rape (she didn't) and concluded that men are very vulnerable in today's society.

I don't know whether to laugh or cry, honestly.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

It is possible for someone to 'freeze'.

What some cannot accept here is that in THIS CASE the jury did not find that it was plausible. Why? Because there was NO EVIDENCE of it. :rolleyes:

I think, every jury that is about to serve on a rape trial, should be given an induction delivered by an independent rape/sexual assault expert as to how victims react in rape cases...independent of any side (defence or prosecution)...that person should have no knowledge of the case or the evidence or the people involved....

Clearly, the average man on the street struggles with understanding it...

irishrebe wrote: »

I think you'll find a certain subset of people simply can't identify with a victim from a different demographic. I guess it's easy to mock and roll your eyes and laugh when the chances of you personally being raped are small.

To be honest, when faced with any kind of violent action against them, noone really knows what they are going to do.

Men tend to get into risky situations more than women, and so are more familiar with their own response.

But freezing absolutely happens. It's nature. You hear people say it all the time, "Then he stuck a gun in my back, and I froze."

To discount freezing is daft.

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

irishrebe wrote: »

I don't see how any of that conversation proves anything at all. But several posters have brought up the 'lol'. Why?

Exactly. A whatssapp conversation proves ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!!

Sending the song is evidence that they were trying to mitigate the rape (per some).
But also think her replying "lol" is irrelevant, and doesnt prove anything.

I think sending the song is irrelevant to a crime, as is the lol. Neither is evidence.

But to reply to your rapists' friend a few minutes after telling your own friend you were raped, "lol" doesnt sit right. Its not evidence of her lying of being raped, as much as the song is evidence the lads were trying to cover up a rape. Its just another element IMO of the whole fcuked up night, where the truth is somewhere in between all the stories

I don't think any of it is relevant to the case. What doesn't sit right is trying to insist that victims of a crime should behave in a certain way. That writing 'lol' somehow proves anything at all. I was the victim of a physical assault in Dublin years ago. I was shell shocked, angry and in disbelief, moving between trying to joke about it and ranting about my assailants. I'm sure if the guards had examined my phone, they'd have found similar messages with 'lol' in them. Proves absolutely nothing at all. People process shock in different ways. 
And if you're going to say calming music proves nothing, then you can't insinuate that her sending 'lol' meant she wasn't acting traumatised enough for your liking.

tretorn wrote: »

So all victims react the same in all rape cases.

Would you go away and eat the easter eggs your mammy bought you silentcorner.

You are PC crap personified.

You are not reading my posts....I never once said that....

Again, I am really sorry for angering you...it is not my intention...

Sofiztikated wrote: »

To be honest, when faced with any kind of violent action against them, noone really knows what they are going to do.

Men tend to get into risky situations more than women, and so are more familiar with their own response.

But freezing absolutely happens. It's nature. You hear people say it all the time, "Then he stuck a gun in my back, and I froze."

To discount freezing is daft.

What is present here ^ that is absent from the evidence presented in the court...a physical threat to the woman.

I can find no research that shows 'TI' occurs from penetrative sex alone which is what was suggested earlier.

Dara's evidence said that there was no signs that she was being restrained against her will or by force and that to her, it looked consensual.