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; } } }

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

Comments

Silentcorner

hynesie08 wrote: »

So, similar to the USA, where someone from the district attorneys office will be assigned to you and works with you to prepare for the case?

Correct, a victim would have no control over who gets appointed.

Which does the victim no favours whatsoever, you have no idea what the dynamics are behind that decision.

hynesie08

Silentcorner wrote: »

Imagine the uproar, quite rightly I might add, if the defendants didn't get to choose their own barrister!!

Don't the Miranda rights say "if you cannot afford an attorney one will be provided for you" don't think you've got a say in that case.

Sam Quentin

brooke 2 wrote: »

So, she is the alleged victim of rape, yet is regarded as a mere witness! I wonder where she might have been while the
rape was occurring? Walking past the room? Looking in the window? Running past the field where the crime was taking
place? In no other crime, of which I know, is the victim not entitled to legal representation. This is a ludicrous situation.
Hope Charlie Flanagan follows through on his proposed changes.

The state felt it right and proper to bring a case against the 'defendants' after evidence from the complainant was put forward, scrutinised, checked double checked scrutinised again and again etc etc..
So all legal representation from the state would have been for the complainants benefit......
Who would have done a better job, state solicitors or McBrady Heshintons and Sclatchirys local solicitor :P

RuMan

Silentcorner wrote: »

Imagine the uproar, quite rightly I might add, if the defendants didn't get to choose their own barrister!!

The medical council have a similar process in medical negligence cases.

The Doctors solicitor getting stuck into a mother who may have lost a child due to negligence and has no legal support.

Would have thought that might be of more interest to woman then a trial in another state.

Silentcorner

hynesie08 wrote: »

Don't the Miranda rights say "if you cannot afford an attorney one will be provided for you" don't think you've got a say in that case.

But that is if you have been arrested. It is referring to legal aid.

hynesie08

Silentcorner wrote: »

But that is if you have been arrested. It is referring to legal aid.

And if it goes to trial??

Silentcorner

hynesie08 wrote: »

And if it goes to trial??

The same, its is just like the legal aid system here...but that is not what we are talking about here.

tretorn

brooke 2 wrote: »

Some posters don't seem to realise that a lot of people went on those marches at the weekend because they were appalled at the treatment of the complainant in the witness box.

What were they appalled about.

Her evidence had the potential to put four young men in jail for years, now again please specify what was appalling about her treatment.

She had to be questioned on her wild inconsistent claims, she sat behind a curtain while four men who were named because of her had to sit in a dock.

I think she was handled with kid gloves which is probably a tactic.

She did cry during some of the evidence but the judge toldd the jury not to take too much notice of that, it didnt necessarily mean anything.

The judge also described the men as being of good character, it was nice for them and their families to hear that.

Uncharted

brooke 2 wrote: »

Some posters don't seem to realise that a lot of people went on those marches at the weekend because they were appalled at the treatment of the complainant in the witness box.

And what would that march achieve in the long run? Do you think anyone except a few headbangers would be influenced by it? Seriously.....? Not a chance.

Sjw virtue signallers on tour do not hold sway in the real world. Just a 30 second blip on the news. Nothing more.
In the real world,people are accepting of the verdict and moving on,exactly as before.
I recommend you and your likeminded lynch mob do the same.

tupenny

I was raped by a taxi driver. The gardai hassled me loads, but i wouldnt make an official complaint. Reading all this makes me sure i made the right decision

brooke 2

Stheno wrote: »

Not quite. All that is happening is a review

Well, it's something. Won't hold my breath until they bring in any changes, though.

upandcumming

_Whimsical_ wrote:

He also said he noticed her bleeding and that he checked the car after she got out to see if it needed valeting.

Some pair of eyeballs on him to notice that...

hynesie08

But if we allowed private legal counsel for the prosecution, would that not inspire a "conviction at all costs" mentality, and see potentially innocent people jailed?

Uncharted

tupenny wrote: »

I was raped by a taxi driver. The gardai hassled me loads, but i wouldnt make an official complaint. Reading all this makes me sure i made the right decision

Well done.

Silentcorner

tupenny wrote: »

I was raped by a taxi driver. The gardai hassled me loads, but i wouldnt make an official complaint. Reading all this makes me sure i made the right decision

I'm very sorry to hear that.

Heres Johnny

tupenny wrote: »

I was raped by a taxi driver. The gardai hassled me loads, but i wouldnt make an official complaint. Reading all this makes me sure i made the right decision

Very sorry to hear that happened to you

Bananaleaf

tupenny wrote: »

I was raped by a taxi driver. The gardai hassled me loads, but i wouldnt make an official complaint. Reading all this makes me sure i made the right decision

I'm really sorry that happened to you. I hope you are doing okay now.

Silentcorner

hynesie08 wrote: »

But if we allowed private legal counsel for the prosecution, would that not inspire a "conviction at all costs" mentality, and see potentially innocent people jailed?

No I don't see why, you are simply extending to the victim, what is guaranteed for the defendant.

On the basis that, in every rape case, the victim is the person who is on trial.

brooke 2

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What needs to change in the south?

Legal representation for rape victims - crazy as that sounds! :rolleyes:

um7y1h83ge06nx

Are there any countries where a private practice would act as prosecution? I would say it would be extremely unusual to say the least. In Ireland it would mean getting rid of the DPP. Not sure people realise how drastic a change that would be.

C__MC

Theres a few Morans going about saying that the taxi drivers evidence is more beneficial than dara Florence- the world has gone utterly mad. Surely if the taxi driver was that concerned for her as he stressed, he would of reported it there and then.

Anyway what’s this barring order about? Can anyone pm me any links?

Mr.H

Faugheen wrote:

Nothing in that case or verdict says a rape didn't take place. It's absolutely wrong to suggest otherwise.

This pathetic talk is the reason for these idiotic protests.

The lads are innocent and no rape took place.

Unless you can provide evidence of rape and that these men raped her then move on buddy.

blanch152

brooke 2 wrote: »

Some posters don't seem to realise that a lot of people went on those marches at the weekend because they were appalled at the treatment of the complainant in the witness box.

Yes, they protested outside the Irish Department of Justice about a trial that happened in the UK.

Not only bizarre, but very very stupid.

FrancieBrady

brooke 2 wrote: »

Legal representation for rape victims - crazy as that sounds! :rolleyes:

They have all the help and legal aid it's possible to give them. There are legal reasons why a legal rep cannot intervene while the case is being pursued.

Somebody more expert than me might explain.

Silentcorner

C__MC wrote: »

Theres a few Morans going about saying that the taxi drivers evidence is more beneficial than dara Florence- the world has gone utterly mad. Surely if the taxi driver was that concerned for her as he stressed, he would of reported it there and then.

Anyway what’s this barring order about? Can anyone pm me any links?

What are you on about?

who is saying that? Who gives you the authority to call a person a moran?

Why would the taxi driver report it, why would you have an issue with his testimony?

The Talking Bread

tupenny wrote: »

I was raped by a taxi driver. The gardai hassled me loads, but i wouldnt make an official complaint. Reading all this makes me sure i made the right decision

Your case, and yes I completely empathise with you, is far different than this. The chances of the taxi driver being found guilty of raping a passenger is a lot higher than a young girl going back to a house party and engaging in intimacy with the accused before the alleged rape.

tupenny

Uncharted wrote: »

Well done.

Thanks?
I'm just saying it as it is

tupenny

The Talking Bread wrote: »

Your case, and yes I completely empathise with you, is far different than this. The chances of the taxi driver being found guilty of raping a passenger is a lot higher than a young girl going back to a house party and engaging in intimacy with the accused before the alleged rape.

Yeah youre prob right there. The way its been handled is messed up though. The irrelevant questions etc

brooke 2

Fann Linn wrote: »

Nothing to do with the crime but all to do with the celebs.
Still two different jurisdictions.
Btw- the system down here is supposedly better.
Perhaps the review should take place in NI.

The system down here is better for the defendants because their identities are kept secret unless they are found guilty. However, it is no better for the victim here than it is in NI in that she is regarded merely as a witness for the prosecution. As such, as Paul Anthony McDermott pointed out, she/he is not entitled to any more legal representation than any other witness. The review promised by Charlie Flanagan is way overdue.

Silentcorner

The Talking Bread wrote: »

Your case, and yes I completely empathise with you, is far different than this. The chances of the taxi driver being found guilty of raping a passenger is a lot higher than a young girl going back to a house party and engaging in intimacy with the accused before the alleged rape.

Not having a go at you but why?

A taxi driver here in Limerick was just convicted of sexual assault, he was found in the back of his taxi with the woman who was passed out drunk, the only reason he was caught was because the husband got concerned after hearing the cab pull up outside the house, if he had been asleep the lady would have been dumped at the door none the wiser!

There is a reason rape is a very hard crime to secure a conviction.