Appledreams15 wrote: » Bloody hell it gets better in this joke of a system. This is the first thing that the minister said he is going to review: legal representation for the conplainant (ie it is ****e and drastically needs to be improved) At the moment: a complainant in the Irish legal system does not have any entitlement to their own legal counsel.
Appledreams15 wrote: » Bloody hell it gets better in this joke of a system. This is the first thing that the minister said he is going to review: legal representation for the complainant (ie it is ****e and drastically needs to be improved) At the moment: a complainant in the Irish legal system does not have any entitlement to their own legal counsel.
tayto lover wrote: » The girl who entered the room said she didn't look distressed. So her distress came about after that. Maybe the fact that the girl had seen what was happening caused the distress? She might have come to her senses because the girl had seen her.
hynesie08 wrote: » This case was in the UK
Stheno wrote: » How many times do you have to be told this case was in Northern Ireland???
Silentcorner wrote: » Well, now you are just wildly speculating. The girl turned her head away when the witness stuck her head in, so they could not have seen each others faces, and as the young lady testified, she did not kick or scream or fight back at any point, it was not until the third man entered the room that she finally manage to escape the room, she testified that her "flight" kicked in when the third man arrived, about 20 minutes after Dara Florence popped her head in. By the time the young lady made it to the Rape Crisis centre, and the police she had forgotten about the witness who stuck her head in the room...so her fear of exposure on social media was not a motivating factor for the young lady in question.
hynesie08 wrote: » This case was in the UK, and since you're an international news sharer, it's the case most places, witnesses don't have individual council. Feel free to look it up
Conspectus wrote: » The defendants could sue here and the PPSNI could ask for (and get) a European arrest warrant to extradite someone to the UK.
Faugheen wrote: » Why hasn't Jackson apologised then? That's part of my point, Ulster and the IRFU could say "this woman left your house bleeding and in hysterics, why haven't you apologised?" And he would have no legitimate answer for it. What Jackson has been doing is going after other people. He's let his solicitor attack the PSNI, the PPS and use his standing as an international rugby player to suggest that was the reason for bringing the case. He has also let his solicitor say he's looking forward to getting back to work, which means representing his province and country as if it was a thinly veiled threat to Ulster and the IRFU. Olding, in contrast, regretted the night, apologised for the hurt caused to the complainant, and said he hoped to be able to play rugby again. Olding gets it, Jackson refuses to get it, and it sums up the attitude of privileged that were thrown at him.
tayto lover wrote: » What's your point? I'm trying to figure out why she didn't leave when the girl looked in or call for help. Why turn her head away?
Greysquirel09 wrote: » I believe she thought she was photographed or recorded on a phone. That's enough to cause distress when the drink is wearing off.
Deleted User wrote: » I want to know why two men who are actively raping a woman would invite another woman to join in. Seems pretty counter-intuitive.
Appledreams15 wrote: » I quoted what the Minister for Justice REPUBLIC OF IRELAND said this week. Did you look that up?
Fann Linn wrote: » I made that point a few days back and was told it happened 80 miles up the road. Lots of people protesting here and elaewhere need to go back to 1st year geography and civics.
hynesie08 wrote: » Yes, doesn't change the fact you are wrong. Ask all you're international friends, they'll tell you it's the same.
tayto lover wrote: » The jury found it wasn't rape.
Deleted User wrote: » The other guy apologising doesn't mean the other should. If he's innocent and if there was consent, I'm sure he absolute despises the woman and is in no mood for apologising to save face in public.
Appledreams15 wrote: » Refer yet again to my post. I quoted the Minister for Justice in the Republic of Ireland, This week stated he is launching a review of sexual assault cases. That is the Republic of Ireland. #republicofireland why are you talking about Northern Ireland?
Appledreams15 wrote: » Refer yet again to my post. I quoted the Minister for Justice in the Republic of Ireland, This week stated be is launching a review of sexual assault cases. That is the Republic of Ireland. #republicofireland why are you talking about Northern Ireland?
Appledreams15 wrote: » At least I have more friends than your 0.
Fann Linn wrote: » Because a little court case took place in NI fairly recently.
Faugheen wrote: » Why are you talking about if someone is innocent and if there was consent. Olding was found not guilty and says there was consent, and apologised anyway. Jackson can despise the woman all he wants, but this is his mess. Notice how very few are talking ill of Olding in comparison to Jackson. He's been an absolute PR disaster since he was acquitted and the sponsors can point to that as well when it comes to Ulster and the IRFUs investigation. If I behave like they did, and all the information gets out to clients and customers of where I work, I would be sacked and I wouldn't have a leg to stand on. These boys won't either.
Appledreams15 wrote: » Why are they talking about Northern Ireland in response to a post that I said about the Minister for Justice launching a review in the Republic of Ireland? That's a different system
Deleted User wrote: » I was saying "if" because I know you think he's guilty, but I wanted to make my point anyway. And a man handling something like this badly does not mean he deserves it. And I don't think it's far to say that an accused person created their own mess. You'd be allowed to sue for damages in almost every case where you lost your job because of a public trial in which you were found not guilty.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/v2/bed6f1d088326d5eb21c0139847332c7.svg)
