nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

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

Sam Quentin

Strange.. I'm kinda relieved it's all over.

http://www.thejournal.ie/belfast-rape-trial-verdict-3928309-Mar2018/

Mod Note Keep this relevant to this thread and don't bring up others. ie the eighth amendment thread.

MOD NOTE By the way don't post anything from members on the jury that's appearing online.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Silentcorner

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What alternatives are you suggesting. That neither partner can get horny? Jaysus, the real world is calling again.

I'd be surprised if you knew what was going on in the real world...you're struggling with this thread all day...

I was referring to a consent video for dummies...

Faugheen

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What alternatives are you suggesting. That neither partner can get horny? Jaysus, the real world is calling again.

Nobody is saying neither partner can't be horny.

If you have an understanding with your partner where this is the norm, that's fine.

However, don't be surprised if you have a one night stand and then you decide a couple of hours later to do that while they sleep, that they wake up, freak out and report you.

Pac1Man

Lads yee just wasted a whole long weekend posting in this thread.

Faugheen

RuMan wrote: »

Who? Post a link, preferably not the one that involved penetration and ejaculation as that is entirely different from the scenario i have given.

He got done for sexual assault as well.

emeraldwinter

Faugheen wrote: »

Nobody is saying neither partner can't be horny.

If you have an understanding with your partner where this is the norm, that's fine.

However, don't be surprised if you have a one night stand and then you decide a couple of hours later to do that while they sleep, that they wake up, freak out and report you.

Considering I have not heard of a case..

FrancieBrady

The Talking Bread wrote: »

ah, so you are obliged to sort it out because you had sex when you were awake earlier and, therefore, anything goes from thereon........... that is essentially your mindset.

Otherwise the girl is a juvenile, prudish, abnormal, man hating (unconsenting) social outcast. Because she may not be into that whole fetish and she may feel violated! She has just been sexually molested in her sleep which she may not be into but sure a few words and a cup of coffee is the right way to sort it out.............. otherwise she is not a "normal adult"

Right. I think we are going around in circles. I'm out!

You need to get a grip here. I never said 'anything goes'.

I said that the intention to WAKE somebody who you had intimate relations with earlier, with some pleasurable activity is not a crime.
If you perform a full sex act on a sleeping person, that is a crime.

Which bit are you having bother with here.

RuMan

Faugheen wrote: »

He got done for sexual assault as well.

Yes we know. That case is not relevant to the scenario outlined here. If you have another case that is please post.

Lucy8080

Faugheen wrote: »

She also said she couldn't determine if the complainant was positively consenting.

In fairness, you can say that in "one's own opinion" a scene looked /didn't look like rape. That wouldbe a witness statement.

Nobody can say /determine someone was positively consenting.That would be guessing.

You would have to be witnessing everything from start to finish.

I reckon that " I can't positively say it was consenting" was the only logical answer to a leading question.

The fact still remains that in Dara's own opinion, what she saw was not a rape.

The Talking Bread

wexie wrote: »

Yes, and the suggestion that when that happens between two adults in a sexual relationship and it's automatically a crime is pure and utter bollox. However long or short that relationship may be.

The reason this is in the law is to stop random people from shagging other random people when passed out (drunk) at parties etc. etc.

Suggesting otherwise is ...well....I won't finish that sentence as I've a pretty decent record here on Boards and I'd quite like to keep it that way.

But...............But........................it is a crime!!!

People have gone to jail for doing it!! The relationship aspect is completely out of context!

You are bordering on saying that because you are in a relationship, anything goes!!

emeraldwinter

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You need to get a grip here. I never said 'anything goes'.

I said that the intention to WAKE somebody who you had intimate relations with earlier, with some pleasurable activity is not a crime.
If you perform a full sex act on a sleeping person, that is a crime.

Which bit are you having bother with here.

I'm struggling having lived in the Real world and not a college campus that continually goes on about Rape culture and all sex is rape. I think there has been some kind of brain washing and or no real experience in the real world. You know what happens between consenting adults.

FrancieBrady

Silentcorner wrote: »

I'd be surprised if you knew what was going on in the real world...you're struggling with this thread all day...

I was referring to a consent video for dummies...

I ain't struggling.
A simple act has led to me being called a 'rapist'. Yet none of you can present a case were the circumstances outlined have ever been defined as a rape.

Sooner or later you have to recognize the existence of the real world in which we live, not some feminist sexual utopia that is very similar to an Irish Catholic church utopia of dancing maidens at the crossroads,

RuMan

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I ain't struggling.
A simple act has led to me being called a 'rapist'. Yet none of you can present a case were the circumstances outlined have ever been defined as a rape.

Sooner or later you have to recognize the existence of the real world in which we live, not some feminist sexual utopia that is very similar to an Irish Catholic church utopia of dancing maidens at the crossroads,

You'd have to think we are in a cycle and eventually there will be backlash against this "rape culture" and " consent classes" nonsense.
A new 1960's.

When some of the posters on here have kids and those kids reach their teenage years the posters are in for a hell of a shock.

Mrsmum

emeraldwinter wrote: »

I'm struggling having lived in the Real world and not a college campus that continually goes on about Rape culture and all sex is rape. I think there has been some kind of brain washing and or no real experience in the real world. You know what happens between consenting adults.

You can't consent when you are asleep. You may be tolerant of this behaviour from your partner or even not know that he doesn't have the right to do it but consent is absent.

FrancieBrady

Mrsmum wrote: »

You can't consent when you are asleep. You may be tolerant of this behaviour from your partner or even not know that he doesn't have the right to do it but consent is absent.

Maybe you need 'Real Life/Relationship' classes. Has that thought ever crossed your mind?

emeraldwinter

Mrsmum wrote: »

You can't consent when you are asleep. You may be tolerant of this behaviour from your partner or even not know that he doesn't have the right to do it but consent is absent.

Again taken from legislation that is not black and white. I hate to keep asking but there has only been one case as that was totally different. That leads me to believe in the Real world this is not an issue.

So you have 2 options

1. there is no issue.
2. The cases are not taken by the Guarda or the DPP. As they would not lead to a conviction.

bodice ripper

I feel we have drifted into arguing over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin; consent edition here...

emeraldwinter

bodice ripper wrote: »

I feel we have drifted into arguing over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin; consent edition here...

Well seen as the trail is over and the outcome was the one not wanted. We have all kinds of scenarios being brought out now that need to be challenged.

kylith

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You need to get a grip here. I never said 'anything goes'.

I said that the intention to WAKE somebody who you had intimate relations with earlier, with some pleasurable activity is not a crime.
If you perform a full sex act on a sleeping person, that is a crime.

Which bit are you having bother with here.

It doesn’t matter what your intentions are, it is still technically a crime. You admit if here yourself: performing a sex act on a sleeping person is a crime. Oral sex is a sex act. Digital penetration is a sex act. If you do them to a person who is asleep then that is a crime.

If my friend breaks into my house cos they need somewhere to stay the fact that i’m Ok with it does not negate the fact that they have committed a crime. I may not report them to the Gardaí, but it is still a criminal act.

emeraldwinter

kylith wrote: »

It doesn’t matter what your intentions are, it is still technically a crime. You admit if here yourself: performing a sex act on a sleeping person is a crime. Oral sex is a sex act. Digital penetration is a sex act. If you do them to a person who is asleep then that is a crime.

If my friend breaks into my house cos they need somewhere to stay the fact that i’m Ok with it does not negate the fact that they have committed a crime. I may not report them to the Gardaí, but it is still a criminal act.

No it's a crime when you are charged with a crime....

Mrsmum

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Maybe you need 'Real Life/Relationship' classes. Has that thought ever crossed your mind?

Because someone points out the law to you. you think they as opposed to yourself need real life relationship classes.

FrancieBrady

bodice ripper wrote: »

I feel we have drifted into arguing over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin; consent edition here...

I agree wholeheartedly. The amount of moralising going on is shocking.
And it is moralising dressed up as women's rights.

A woman deserves to be respected and she is and always has been in my life. Despite being called a rapist I have not been imprisoned yet.

kylith

emeraldwinter wrote: »

No it's a crime when you are charged with a crime....

That’s not how it works... The act itself is a crime. Doing the act means you have committed a crime. A mugger isn’t _not_ a criminal just because they haven’t been caught.

emeraldwinter

Mrsmum wrote: »

Because someone points out the law to you. you think they as opposed to yourself need real life relationship classes.

Then why do we have a legal system when charges are all that is needed ? Are you saying the law is black and white and followed to the letter ? It's not in the real world it's interpreted by the judge and jury on “Evidence.”

emeraldwinter

kylith wrote: »

That’s not how it works... The act itself is a crime. Doing the act means you have committed a crime. A mugger isn’t _not_ a criminal just because they haven’t been caught.

Yeah sorry that was a stupid statement retracted.... hold me hands up on that one :P

Faugheen

emeraldwinter wrote: »

Mrsmum wrote: »

Because someone points out the law to you. you think they as opposed to yourself need real life relationship classes.

Then why do we have a legal system when charges are all that is needed ? Are you saying the law is black and white and followed to the letter ? It's not in the real world it's interpreted by the judge and jury on “Evidence.”

Francie has said he would admit performing the act if brought in for questioning by police.

There's your evidence.

Silentcorner

RuMan wrote: »

You'd have to think we are in a cycle and eventually there will be backlash against this "rape culture" and " consent classes" nonsense.
A new 1960's.

When some of the posters on here have kids and those kids reach their teenage years the posters are in for a hell of a shock.

Well back in the 60s and up into the 70s it was illegal for a woman to refuse sex to her husband...

At least we are progressing eh!

FrancieBrady

Mrsmum wrote: »

Because someone points out the law to you. you think they as opposed to yourself need real life relationship classes.

The law is an ass. Ever heard that?
It took 9 weeks in this case to administer the law and we are none the wiser as to what actually happened.

All we can do is learn the lessons and move on.
The radicals have no solutions to how it can work better bar making some small changes to how the complainant is treated.
The extremists want to convict on the basis of allegations alone.

emeraldwinter

Faugheen wrote: »

Francie has said he would admit performing the act if brought in for questioning by police.

There's your evidence.

Then the Guarda would either charge or not. Then the DPP would weigh up the case and the legislation.

FrancieBrady

Faugheen wrote: »

Francie has said he would admit performing the act if brought in for questioning by police.

There's your evidence.

IF I DIDN'T STOP.
Can you please stop with your sinister carry on here.

Faugheen

emeraldwinter wrote: »

Faugheen wrote: »

Francie has said he would admit performing the act if brought in for questioning by police.

There's your evidence.

Then the Guarda would either charge or not. Then the DPP would weigh up the case and the legislation.

I know how the law works, pal.

I honestly don't think you understand what we're talking about here. We're talking about the fact performing a sex act on somebody while they sleep is illegal, and you just walk us through what the guards might do.

If Francie admits to this to the guards under questioning then how could he be found not guilty (barring the case being thrown out for whatever reason)?