Fann Linn wrote: » No one knows what people have on their whatsapp accounts which are private. And personally as far as im concerned I dont want to know.
tretorn wrote: » Thats not the message I am getting from the marches, sorry witch hunt. They placards are all about I believeher, in other words disrespecting a jury verdict. Why would it make more sense to you that she gave more detail to the medical staff than she gave to the police, this isnt actually what happened at all, read the evidence. She told the staff in the Sexual Assault clinic that three men had raped her, she never mentioned oral sex at all. She told the police that Jackson and Olding had raped her and forced her to have oral sex with them. She told Police Mcilroy had arrived in stark naked with his penis in his hand demanding oral sex, in another version he was clothed and pulled down his clothes. The inconsistencies in the mens evidence in my opinion was to do with loyalty to each other, they didnt want to say anything to incriminate the pals, this was utterly stupid but you have to remember how young they were, Olding was only twenty two. Harrison and Mc Ilroy went to the Police Station without their solicitors which in itself was a foolhardy thing to do. Neither though actually believed anything non consensual had happened so they were too blase about the danger they were walking into.
bebeman wrote: » Sure its all coming out who her father is, and this is why the case was brought, despite no case could be made, the father had to manitain his reputation for work reasons
FrancieBrady wrote: » If your son did that, would he deserve to have his life and career blighted?
Katgurl wrote: I have read the evidence. And actually I do believe her despite the verdict. I have sat on a jury myself and argued (successfully) for a not guilty verdict even though I thought the defendent probably did commit a crime. The evidence wasn't there to support it. There was room for doubt. Prosecution had not proved otherwise beyond reasonable doubt.
Katgurl wrote: » a lack of conviction does not mean a rape didn't take place.
Maxpfizer wrote: A young woman forced to proceed with an unwinnable court case, forced to endure the scrutiny of her choices and actions, all to protect the reputation of her father.
Katgurl wrote: » That men are scum placard is a disgrace but does not represent everyone there.
Strazdas wrote: There's a fair bit of truth in the argument that the players' general behaviour that night created problems for themselves. Olding saying he had 23 alcoholic drinks that day / night, a girl leaving their house distressed and in tears, referring to women as 'sluts' and bragging about 'spit roasting'. It's all a bit yobbish and unsavoury.
cloudatlas wrote: » They could be found to have brought the game into disrepute, we have evidence of how they view women, so we do know.
One eyed Jack wrote: » Absolutely. No question. I would be wondering where the fcuk did he pick up that attitude from because it certainly isn't one he would have learned from his parents. I'd wonder what sort of people he was associating with that would ever think that sort of behaviour and attitude should be dismissed as though it is acceptable. It isn't, and if the consequences of his behaviour were that he ended his own career prematurely and meant that no employer would hire him, I would completely understand why they wouldn't want to employ him, and I would understand why nobody would want to associate with him. Hell, I wouldn't myself, why would I expect anyone else should want to associate with him unless they shared that sort of mentality? Fortunately for society, most young men do not share these men's mentality, and that's the reason why I wouldn't encourage anyone to use these high profile trials as a barometer with which to judge the rest of society.
Mr.H wrote: » So they deserve to be branded rapists and be witch hunted after been found not guilty? Utter rubbish by a childish mentality
Mr.H wrote: » Everyone at the protests are letting down humanity. Grow up, these men had their day in court and were proven not guilty.
Christy42 wrote: » They are protesting how people are treated as they bring forward sexual assault/rape cases. How is that letting down humanity? Strong words. I would apply that far quicker to those in the WhatsApp conversation or some of the disgusting comments I have seen on twitter towards this woman (Laois and Drogheda players amongst them). At no point were they ever proven not guilty. That is not how are justice system works. They are of course assumed not guilty. Claiming they are proven not guilty suggests that the woman is at fault and that this fact has been shown in fact. No such thing has been proven. We are in a legal state of not knowing what happened.
tretorn wrote: » What people do in the privacy of their own homes is none of anyone elses business. Olding can drink whatever he likes when he is on holidays, is anyone keeping a tab of what you drink when you are on your holidays. Oldings drink consumption is pretty normal for young people these days, he didnt get into a car and drive while drunk so his alcohol consumption is his problem and no one elses. What people post in private whatsapp groups is their own business too and everyone has sent whatsapp messages to trusted groups of friends that wouldnt see the light of day anywhere else. Plenty of people like swinging and like threesomes and they can call this activity whatever they like. The problem was created by someone who participated willingly in what went on deciding at some point she wasnt happy.
FrancieBrady wrote: » A young immature man deserves to have his life and career blighted for making some remarks on a whatsapp group chat and for a drunken night? Ok :eek:
One eyed Jack wrote: » To be perfectly honest RuMan, if they were sports professionals I would expect that they would behave like sports professionals, and not the utter scumbags that they are. I can say that without fear of being sued for defamation, because the evidence that they are utter scumbags is already in the public domain. Their behaviour and their attitudes towards other people are not what I would expect of sports professionals, and they are entirely responsible for the consequences of their own actions, attitudes and behaviours. They should have given consideration to that before they behaved the way they did, and I know it was mentioned earlier that consideration must be given to the fact that they are young, but implying that their age or their immaturity should be a mitigating factor in defence of their attitudes and behaviours, does a disservice to the vast majority of young men the same age as them who would never even think to behave the way they did, or treat any woman the way they did, and I can tell you now for a fact that if my son were ever to display the attitudes and behaviours that they did, a trial before a jury of his peers would be the least of his worries.
