Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

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

1…211212214216217…316

Comments

  • #6392
    Faugheen
    Site Banned Posts: 12,341 ✭✭✭✭Faugheen


    Dick phelan wrote: »
    Find it amazing people think Jackson should apologize, apologize for what? In his mind he has done nothing wrong and ended up being accused of rape cost him a fortune plus now a bunch of idiots including elected officials are still calling him a rapist despite being found not guilty. His career in Ireland is probably over and not a hope we see him in an Ireland shirt again imo. While he deals with a bunch of idiots protesting about a trial in a different jurisdiction in which he was found no guilty, his Ireland team mates are celebrating a Grand Slam. Honestly how the hell can you expect him to offer any kind of "sorry" under such circumstances.

    Because he and his teammate left a woman bloodied and hysterical

    That we know for a fact.

    Olding acknowledged it and apologised. Jackson could do with saving his reputation somewhat and doing the same


  • #6393
    irishman86
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,814 ✭✭✭irishman86


    Mrsmum wrote: »
    If that is the case and you are the one suggesting all men as in anyone's male relations talk like that about women, why the outrage when one young woman holds up a Men r Trash placard. Would she not be right if what you are saying is true.
    And what sort of pathetic creatures are you that you need to diss the person you were intimate with so you can impress your mates. Grow up.

    How exactly is it the same what people write in a group message to a public demonstration
    Its not and you know it
    The hyperbole train is thata way
    How pathetic are you to get offended by nearly pg texts
    Top shaggers omg how offensive :pac:


  • #6394
    Uncharted
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,138 ✭✭✭Uncharted


    iamwhoiam wrote: »
    Exactly what we said here today over lunch with different age groups . We also may not like or approve of the behaviour in that house but does not make it wrong . Its not for me to judge as I was not on the jury so I have to accept their judgment and see the men as not guilty of rape .
    I feel sad for everyone involved that night . They have all paid a huge price for wrong choices and lack of judgment .

    Its a huge breath of fresh air to have some sense uttered on this thread. Ultimately right now,regarding the PJ trial,it's none of our business. It's over.
    A verdict of not guilty has been decided upon by an appointed jury. They made their minds up in less than 4 hours. It was conclusive and unanimous. It's beyond futile to be in denial of the facts.

    # NOT GUILTY.


  • #6395
    Strazdas
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,521 ✭✭✭✭Strazdas


    Outlaw Pete wrote: »
    Ah come on....



    As for the 'hurt caused' that could have been referencing how they spoke of her in the text messages.

    You've left out the part where Olding "I want to acknowledge that the complainant came to court and gave evidence about her perception of those events. I am sorry for the hurt that was caused to the complainant. It was never my intention to cause any upset to anyone on that night."

    That first sentence is very conciliatory and he accepts that the complainant gave her perception of events that night in court (with the strong suggestion he accepts that she believes what she was saying to be true, even though he strongly disputes and refutes her perception).


  • #6396
    Uncharted
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,138 ✭✭✭Uncharted


    Faugheen wrote: »
    Because he and his teammate left a woman bloodied and hysterical

    That we know for a fact.

    Olding acknowledged it and apologised. Jackson could do with saving his reputation somewhat and doing the same

    Mind your own business.


  • Advertisement
  • #6397
    Dick phelan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,651 ✭✭✭Dick phelan


    People might not agree but personally I've always felt it a bit thick to believe that someone you meet drunk in a nightclub for the first time and go home with is going to treat you with much respect. Now let me be clear people have a right to do whatever without being judged but at the same time nobody is going to treat someone they don't know and who they only plan to see for one night with a high level of respect?


  • #6398
    RuMan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 469 ✭✭RuMan


    Faugheen wrote: »
    Because he and his teammate left a woman bloodied and hysterical

    That we know for a fact.

    Olding acknowledged it and apologised. Jackson could do with saving his reputation somewhat and doing the same

    Jackson was asleep my friend and she wasnt hysterical leaving his room. Disapointing you have such contempt for due process.
    Will she apologise?


  • #6399
    Faugheen
    Site Banned Posts: 12,341 ✭✭✭✭Faugheen


    Uncharted wrote: »
    Faugheen wrote: »
    Because he and his teammate left a woman bloodied and hysterical

    That we know for a fact.

    Olding acknowledged it and apologised. Jackson could do with saving his reputation somewhat and doing the same

    Mind your own business.

    That's a very constructive argument you have made there.

    If the conversation was between two 7 year olds.

    Run along now, the adults are talking.


  • #6400
    Silentcorner
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,536 ✭✭✭Silentcorner


    Faugheen wrote: »
    That's a very constructive argument you have made there.

    If the conversation was between two 7 year olds.

    Run along now, the adults are talking.

    What's mad is, it is the likes of you and me who are being described as hysterical and deluded!!!


  • #6401
    irishman86
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,814 ✭✭✭irishman86


    Faugheen wrote: »
    That's a very constructive argument you have made there.

    If the conversation was between two 7 year olds.

    Run along now, the adults are talking.

    Patronise someone
    The sign of a child speaking
    Where exactly is the adult as its not you


  • Advertisement
  • #6402
    Faugheen
    Site Banned Posts: 12,341 ✭✭✭✭Faugheen


    RuMan wrote: »
    Faugheen wrote: »
    Because he and his teammate left a woman bloodied and hysterical

    That we know for a fact.

    Olding acknowledged it and apologised. Jackson could do with saving his reputation somewhat and doing the same

    Jackson was asleep my friend and she wasnt hysterical leaving his room. Disapointing you have such contempt for due process.
    Will she apologise?

    I don't have contempt for due process. I have already said not guilty was the right verdict.

    However, it doesn't mean that she wasn't bleeding, because it was confirmed in court that she had a laceration, and it doesn't mean that she wasn't hysterical, because she was, as confirmed by Rory Harrison.

    How does that show contempt for due process.

    Olding apologised, why can't Jackson?

    And what should she apologise for?


  • #6403
    irishman86
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,814 ✭✭✭irishman86


    Silentcorner wrote: »
    What's mad is, it is the likes of you and me who are being described as hysterical and deluded!!!

    Because you are, when the glove fits and all


  • #6404
    Uncharted
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,138 ✭✭✭Uncharted


    Faugheen wrote: »
    That's a very constructive argument you have made there.

    If the conversation was between two 7 year olds.

    Run along now, the adults are talking.

    Such intellect. I'm in awe. You probably expect a shocked angry retort.
    Pffft.

    Not happening. Try harder.


  • #6405
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 73,945 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Faugheen wrote: »
    Because he and his teammate left a woman bloodied and hysterical

    That we know for a fact.

    Olding acknowledged it and apologised. Jackson could do with saving his reputation somewhat and doing the same

    Just like none of us know what actually happened in the room, you have no idea if Jackson apologised or made contact with her or not.
    You seem very intent to further discredit the man, and it really isn't that hard to see why.
    Like the #Ibelieveher mob you cannot accept the verdict.


  • #6406
    Faugheen
    Site Banned Posts: 12,341 ✭✭✭✭Faugheen


    irishman86 wrote: »
    Faugheen wrote: »
    That's a very constructive argument you have made there.

    If the conversation was between two 7 year olds.

    Run along now, the adults are talking.

    Patronise someone
    The sign of a child speaking
    Where exactly is the adult as its not you

    If the poster isn't going to say anything constructive that adds to the conversation, and instead tells me to mind my own business for simply giving my opinion on a forum, then I will treat them as the child they want to be portrayed as.

    Patronising? Condescending? Of course, and I've made no secret of that.

    Engage constructively and you will get a constructive response.


  • #6407
    irishman86
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,814 ✭✭✭irishman86


    Uncharted wrote: »
    Such intellect. I'm in awe. You probably expect a shocked angry retort.
    Pffft.

    Not happening. Try harder.

    But how are they then going to over react to your comment in a patronising way letting you know your place :confused:


  • #6408
    Silentcorner
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,536 ✭✭✭Silentcorner


    RuMan wrote: »
    Jackson was asleep my friend and she wasnt hysterical leaving his room. Disapointing you have such contempt for due process.
    Will she apologise?

    Jackson testified that he was downstairs when she left, he remembered hearing her high heels in the hallway on the way out.


  • #6409
    Faugheen
    Site Banned Posts: 12,341 ✭✭✭✭Faugheen


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Faugheen wrote: »
    Because he and his teammate left a woman bloodied and hysterical

    That we know for a fact.

    Olding acknowledged it and apologised. Jackson could do with saving his reputation somewhat and doing the same

    Just like none of us know what actually happened in the room, you have no idea if Jackson apologised or made contact with her or not.
    You seem very intent to further discredit the man, and it really isn't that hard to see why.
    Like the #Ibelieveher mob you cannot accept the verdict.

    I accept the verdict, as I have said numerous times.

    Tell me what part of my post is wrong? The laceration? The hysterics? Or the apology by Olding for causing upset to her?


  • #6410
    irishman86
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,814 ✭✭✭irishman86


    Faugheen wrote: »
    If the poster isn't going to say anything constructive that adds to the conversation, and instead tells me to mind my own business for simply giving my opinion on a forum, then I will treat them as the child they want to be portrayed as.

    Patronising? Condescending? Of course, and I've made no secret of that.

    Engage constructively and you will get a constructive response.

    Thats funny as all youve shown is staying power
    Not the ability to respond in a constructive way
    Youve been on the same rambling point for well forever
    Paddy has nothing to apologise for


  • #6411
    Creol1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 554 ✭✭✭Creol1


    Silentcorner wrote: »
    Well, for a start she will be guided through what is a very impersonal experience, never underestimate how tough a courtroom appearance can be.

    In this case, if she had her own barrister, she would have more control over her narrative.

    For instance, she gave accounts to both the Rape Crisis Centre and the Police, and there were inaccuracies between them, which were explained but not in huge detail, her defence barrister should be afforded a separate opportunity to go through those inaccuracies, because, they are were attacked by the other barristers.

    How can you have a "defence barrister" if you are not a defendant? The system as it stands allows for the complainant to consult her own lawyer(s); I'm not sure if the complainant has to pay for this herself or not, but regardless, it's not something that requires a barrister representing her in court.
    Silentcorner wrote: »
    Also, in the origional account of her version that she gave to police, there were a few things that corroborated her version of events.

    1 She described freezing from the start of the incident, she describes what she did with Stuart Olding, she did this before she remembered that a witness had entered the room, Dara Florence, by the time she remembered Dara Florence, the two lads had given their statement denying having any sex at all with the young woman, Dara Florence ended up confirming the description of events that she gave. But it got lost in the whole, was it consensual sex argument.

    2 The fact that she went to the police before she remembered Dara Florence obliterates the theory that she lied because she was afraid of her pictures getting onto social media.

    3 She left the room on three occasions, the first time when she kissed Jackson, she had the presence of mind to bring her bag upstairs with her, but she left the room without it, which a good barrister could indicate that she left the room as quick as she could, whatever happened.

    4 She returned to the party, she felt the mood had changed, she decided to leave, she was seen (in a picture) putting on her shoes, which would indicate that she was leaving, she could not have known that that picture existed, but it did.

    5 The taxi driver describes vividly how upset she was, but again not much was made of it, taxi drivers are always dropping drunk/emotional people home, her own barrister could have spent more time ascertaining how upset she was in comparison to other passengers, again, this was fairly glossed over.


    Now, that is just based on what we are aware of, there are still, strangely enough, reporting restrictions on this case, so we have no idea what else the jury heard...but that the above are just some ways her own team could help her.

    All of these are points that would have been for the prosecution to make. The whole prosecution case revolved around her account so it was in their interest as much as hers for the account to be as convincing as possible.

    Regarding (2), it by no means "obliterates" the theory that the complainant was afraid of being filmed/photographed. After all, Ms Florence herself was concerned the encounter was being filmed, the implication being that someone else in the room could have been doing it.

    If the complainant has her own legal representation, then what is their status going to be vis-a-vis the prosecution; what if the prosecution disagrees with her lawyers? That would add further complications and I don't know in whose interest it would be. If we're not talking about separate representation, but merely the availability of a lawyer/legal advice to the complainant, then as far as I know this is or can be facilitated under the current system.


  • Advertisement
  • #6412
    Faugheen
    Site Banned Posts: 12,341 ✭✭✭✭Faugheen


    irishman86 wrote: »
    Faugheen wrote: »
    If the poster isn't going to say anything constructive that adds to the conversation, and instead tells me to mind my own business for simply giving my opinion on a forum, then I will treat them as the child they want to be portrayed as.

    Patronising? Condescending? Of course, and I've made no secret of that.

    Engage constructively and you will get a constructive response.

    Thats funny as all youve shown is staying power
    Not the ability to respond in a constructive way
    Youve been on the same rambling point for well forever
    Paddy has nothing to apologise for

    Should have told Olding not to so, as it doesn't shed Jackson in a good light that Olding apologised for the hurt and upset he caused to the complainant and Jackson seems to think it was grand.


  • #6413
    freshpopcorn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 31,822 ✭✭✭✭freshpopcorn


    Dick phelan wrote: »
    People might not agree but personally I've always felt it a bit thick to believe that someone you meet drunk in a nightclub for the first time and go home with is going to treat you with much respect. Now let me be clear people have a right to do whatever without being judged but at the same time nobody is going to treat someone they don't know and who they only plan to see for one night with a high level of respect?

    Funnily enough my friend and I used bring back women from clubs and give them tea and cake and send them on their merry way. It didn't go down well.


  • #6414
    irishman86
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,814 ✭✭✭irishman86


    Faugheen wrote: »
    Should have told Olding not to so, as it doesn't shed Jackson in a good light that Olding apologised for the hurt and upset he caused to the complainant and Jackson seems to think it was grand.

    Up to Olding to do what he wishes, Paddy has no reason to do so and rightly didnt say sorry.


  • #6415
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 73,945 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Faugheen wrote: »
    I accept the verdict, as I have said numerous times.

    Tell me what part of my post is wrong? The laceration? The hysterics? Or the apology by Olding for causing upset to her?

    Do you accept that Jackson had no idea on the night that she was hysterical?
    Do you accept as the jury most likely decided that a drunk woman could be hysterical about any number of things.
    And do you accept that the jury did not find the evidence of the blood indicated that a rape took place?

    We have already seen that the 'bragging about leaving a woman bleeding and hysterical' claim by another couple of posters has been completely debunked. Can you just clarify where you stand on the above.


  • #6416
    wonga77
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,610 ✭✭✭wonga77


    Faugheen wrote: »
    Should have told Olding not to so, as it doesn't shed Jackson in a good light that Olding apologised for the hurt and upset he caused to the complainant and Jackson seems to think it was grand.

    How do you know Jackson thinks it was grand?


  • #6417
    Princess Consuela Bananahammock
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,779 ✭✭✭✭Princess Consuela Bananahammock


    freshpopcorn wrote: »
    Funnily enough my friend and I used bring back women from clubs and give them tea and cake and send them on their merry way. It didn't go down well.

    Ya see what happens if you don't ASK if they want tea and cake first?

    Everything I don't like is either woke or fascist - possibly both - pick one.



  • #6418
    brooke 2
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,472 ✭✭✭brooke 2


    hynesie08 wrote: »
    Why would she? She wasn't on trial.

    :D

    Bet she felt like she was though!! I find it incomprehensible that an alleged rape victim can have no legal representation when she is being mauled by the barristers of the alleged rapists. It seems positively inhumane. I heard Paul Anthony McDermott insisting that the complainant is 'just' a witness for the state and, as such, is not entitled to any more legal representation than any other witness! FFS!!!!! :mad:

    If your house is broken into and you go to court, you can have legal representation. Similarly, if your car is broken into. But, if your body is broken into, you are left defenceless in the court and thrown to the wolves as the defendants' lawyers tear you to pieces!! THAT is why so many people were out marching over the weekend. About time there was some change! :mad: I am very glad to hear that Charlie Flanagan has displayed some willingness to remedy the situation for rape victims by at least discussing the possibility of granting them some legal represenatation. It seems to me that the whole system was originally set up to allow the rapists to walk free. :mad:


  • #6419
    ArthurDayne
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,966 ✭✭✭ArthurDayne


    Faugheen wrote: »
    I accept the verdict, as I have said numerous times.

    Tell me what part of my post is wrong? The laceration? The hysterics? Or the apology by Olding for causing upset to her?

    I'm trying to figure out what point you are trying to assert here. Is it simply that you accept the verdict (i.e. that Jackson et al are not guilty) but you also think that Jackson should apologise in the same manner that Olding did?

    Apologies are somewhat of an obsession in the wider public when well-known people are perceived to have committed a wrong, whether moral or legal. In almost all cases, such apologies solve absolutely nothing.

    Jackson is under no obligation to provide any sort of public apology to anyone. I do not feel that a public apology will appease those of the '#ibelieveher' persuasion so it is pointless in that regard. The apology certainly won't appease the accuser if her genuine perception of events was that she was raped. Finally, an apology in the aftermath of a criminal trial can be a sensitive matter when one might reasonably expect that a civil trial of some sort may follow.

    I get that people find apologies to be a chivalrous act -- but in this case it solves utterly nothing and will do nothing to change anyone's mind or perception.


  • #6420
    wexie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,480 ✭✭✭wexie


    freshpopcorn wrote: »
    Funnily enough my friend and I used bring back women from clubs and give them tea and cake and send them on their merry way. It didn't go down well.

    You animal!!

    They were probably devastated with the rejection :mad:


  • Advertisement
  • #6421
    GreeBo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,520 ✭✭✭✭GreeBo


    Faugheen wrote: »

    Also, I'll remind you, Jackson hasn't apologised to the complainant like Olding has. That will be one of the first things they'll ask him in that review.
    Remind me, did the complainant apologize to Jackson?


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement