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

anthonyjmaher

sydthebeat wrote: »

erica74 wrote: »

I think the complainant said there were girls downstairs acting slutty or something to that effect. I'm not defending her use of the word, it's a word I don't use nor do I find the use of it by anyone acceptable, but the point of Gilroy having to apologise for his use of the word is that he's representing the IRFU and they don't want supporters or sponsors to think they condone that language or degradation of women (that's probably how a lot of the public view it).

Gilroy certainly wasn't representing the Irfu, or ulster rugby, when he used that word in a private message group. There's no way that employment law or Gilroy contract could be used as a means to sanction him in this event. It will be a slap on the wrists to him.

I think a lot of what is missed in this is that these were private conversations. The only reason that these private conversations became public is because of a court case.Are we now to be held responsible publicly for the thoughts in our heads as well!
Also raises huge questions for WhatsApp. I wonder how many people will feel comfortable with their own private chat group now that the company so readily handed over their private conversations to the authorities. I would have thought that WhatsApp would have fought this, in the same way that Apple fought the authorities in the US when they asked them to decrypt the contents of a particular iPhone. I don't remember seeing any argument put up by the company that "these conversations were the private property of our customers and we refuse to hand them over" or anything like that? Or did they retrieve the conversation from one of the guy's devices?

facehugger99

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

Larry Murphy's nowhere to be found either, but he doesn't sync up with the 'male toxic masculinity robot who fights godzilla' mentality.

Wait, what?

RuMan

erica74 wrote: »

In relation to Gilroy's text "any sluts get fucked?", I suppose the issue with it for the IRFU is that it does make it sound like the activity the rugby players engaged in on the night in question is a regular occurrence. While I have no problem with people having group sex or whatever else as long as everyone is willing participants, it's obviously something the IRFU don't want to be associated with, from the point of view of sponsors and that sort of thing.
Gilroy took the best approach, I'm sorry, I'll be better, end of story.

It'll be interesting to see what else comes out of this whole thing from the point of view of the IRFU and their own investigation into everything.

Aye, rugby players having consensual sex , down with that sort of stuff.

RuMan

Fann Linn wrote: »

Can anyone tell if the same outrage is going on in Belfast, Derry etc in NI, or is it just the bandwagon down here?
Thanks.

Think the Shinners are protesting right enough, they've no respect for the law as we know

Wheety

anthonyjmaher wrote: »

I wonder how many people will feel comfortable with their own private chat group now that the company so readily handed over their private conversations to the authorities. I would have thought that WhatsApp would have fought this, in the same way that Apple fought the authorities in the US when they asked them to decrypt the contents of a particular iPhone. I don't remember seeing any argument put up by the company that "these conversations were the private property of our customers and we refuse to hand them over" or anything like that? Or did they retrieve the conversation from one of the guy's devices?

Are you sure this is what happened? I don't remember reading how the police got the text messages but would have imagined they used their own methods, i.e. just getting into the phone itself and looking through the messages or forensics.

Sure they couldn't retrieve some messages as they were deleted. They are encrypted so using computer forensics couldn't make them readable.

.......

This post has been deleted.

joe40

I would have always baulked at the idea of consent classes, but reading posts from quite a lot of people on here, now I'm not so sure. How can people think sending texts refering to women as sluts is not problematic is beyond me. I really hate the term "rape culture" since it tars most young men with the same brush and equates the actual crime with less serious action.
But this sexist arrogant behaviour is where the problems lies and should not be acceptable for anyone.
I still have faith in the decency of the vast majority of our young people male and female but why should we be afraid to condemn those that behave like this.

erica74

freshpopcorn wrote: »

If you were a Fair City fan would you complain to them about the use of the word slut if you don't find the use of it acceptable?

I don't know to be honest, I think the kind of people who complain to Ofcom about tv shows are just the permanently offended. I'd probably cringe at the use of the word but that would be about it.

anthonyjmaher wrote: »

Yeah but as has become apparent from this case, only men bear responsibility for their drinking and promiscuous behaviour, so I suppose it's a natural extension that only men are responsible for the bad words they use as well.

Not sure what you mean by this?

sydthebeat wrote: »

Gilroy certainly wasn't representing the Irfu, or ulster rugby, when he used that word in a private message group. There's no way that employment law or Gilroy contract could be used as a means to sanction him in this event. It will be a slap on the wrists to him.

I agree with you and I agree that the messages were private etc, however, the messages have since become public and the IRFU will want to protect sponsorship etc and Gilroy will want to appease the IRFU.

RuMan wrote: »

Aye, rugby players having consensual sex , down with that sort of stuff.

Why down with that sort of stuff? Everyone is allowed have consensual sex, I'm not sure why you think they shouldn't be?

erica74

anthonyjmaher wrote: »

I think a lot of what is missed in this is that these were private conversations. The only reason that these private conversations became public is because of a court case.Are we now to be held responsible publicly for the thoughts in our heads as well!
Also raises huge questions for WhatsApp. I wonder how many people will feel comfortable with their own private chat group now that the company so readily handed over their private conversations to the authorities. I would have thought that WhatsApp would have fought this, in the same way that Apple fought the authorities in the US when they asked them to decrypt the contents of a particular iPhone. I don't remember seeing any argument put up by the company that "these conversations were the private property of our customers and we refuse to hand them over" or anything like that? Or did they retrieve the conversation from one of the guy's devices?

I think the phones were "seized" (if that's the right terminology) so I don't think WhatsApp had anything to do with it.

tritium

emeraldwinter wrote: »

What reforms in the Irish Legal system would produce more convictions ? The witness is not in open court here.

I meant the UK system given it’s a UK case

Anonymity for all parties would seem sensible. It’s been proposed many times over there but political cowardice has stalled it

A less adversarial system would also benefit everyone. The use of the knickers and WhatsApp chat added very little at best. From a prosecution and defence side the onus seemed to be more on making the other side seem dislikeable rather than proving anything. We’ve become used to motion that the defence plays dirty but the prosecutions focus on class and privilege was frankly disgusting, little more than an attempt at whipping up a mob.

I also wonder, more controversially, whether we need to distinguish between types of rape. Scenarios like this one, where there is a genuine gulf between both parties view of events may not be well served by the trial process. Is there a role for mediation and possibly restitution if all parties agree?

One key thing is it can’t be just about getting more convictions. We’ve seen what happens when you try that in the UK- juries rightly refuse to convict more just because the state lowers the bar to bring a trial. We also have too little unbiased information around this crime given the associated emotions on all sides.

tayto lover

hill16bhoy wrote: »

Again, you've deflected.

I've listed numerous examples of rape culture.

Why can't you, or anybody else, even deal with one of them?

You haven't responded to my request for the stats regarding your Irish prison rape culture claim.

tretorn

Yes, the men gave up their phones.
They thought the rape claims were ludicrous so didnt act in any way like people afraid of the police would.I think Harrison and McIlroy went to the station without solicitors.
Harrison at least cleared his phone of texts he didnt want his mammy to see, thats why he was charged with conspiring to pervert the course of justice. The police had no evidence any crime had taken place but they charged harrison in relation to the non existent crime anyway.
Young men of Ireland be very afraid.
Imagine how the world would have fallen in if the word **** had been used. Women use the word slut a lot but they dont describe each other as ***** usually.
Parents should warn their sons not to have sex with strangers they meet in nightclubs and also warn them to delete all conversations about women. The problem is you will be blamed for messages other people send you, jackson was held accoutable for the any belfast sluts get ****ed text and he didnt send that at all, it was a private text sent by Gileoy.

tretorn

The word that was censored above was see you next tuesday.

tritium

the_pen_turner wrote: »

im working on stats if you need them.
given that women cannot be charged with rape in this country then it will relly squew the stats

This is an interesting one because it’s essentially been ignored or hidden. The only real figure that an be found is based on a cdc study. Shamefully this was brushed under the carpet and tucked away in appendices

https://www.google.ie/amp/amp.timeinc.net/time/3393442/cdc-rape-numbers

zedhead

I think the problem with the messages was not the use of the words 'sluts' in isolation. It was the tone and intention of the messages in general. That women are just sluts to be f*cked, a prize to be won by men. Bragging rights.

Some of the messages and the way the spoke of the woman 'It was like a merry go round at the carnival'

There is nothing wrong with consensual sex, no matter how many people are involved. But is it much to ask that people are mature enough to have a bit of respect for others involved.

I have called a few people (men and women) out who have said 'sure we all talk like that on whatsapp with our friends' to really read the transcript of the messages. And if they do genuinely speak like that then they should maybe think for a minute about their attitude towards other people. And its not the same as calling someone (one person) a c*nt or a b*tch because they did something to annoy you or irritate you. Its the general attitude and lack of respect towards people as a whole.
Most people go on to say 'well it wouldnt be as bad as what they were saying'...

The thing about the messages is that while they were sent in private they have now been made public. If the texts were speaking of black people in a similar derogatory way, or gay people then the response would have to be the same from the IRFU and people wouldn't be as quick to say. If they were filmed having this conversation out loud but just between them would it be different?

If a private conversation like that I had was made public, and my name was linked to the company I work for publicly then the connection is made in public and I would expect to go through disciplinary procedures. End of.

RuMan

erica74 wrote: »

I don't know to be honest, I think the kind of people who complain to Ofcom about tv shows are just the permanently offended. I'd probably cringe at the use of the word but that would be about it.

Not sure what you mean by this?

I agree with you and I agree that the messages were private etc, however, the messages have since become public and the IRFU will want to protect sponsorship etc and Gilroy will want to appease the IR

Why down with that sort of stuff? Everyone is allowed have consensual sex, I'm not sure why you think they shouldn't be?

Joke mate. We've had a trial.
Whole thing is over time to move on and get behind our rugby football world cup campaign in the event of an injury to Sexton we need an inform Jacko.

FrancieBrady

What is the politically correct slang descriptive term for some promicious women now?

If I refer to the male equivalents as 'horndogs' I would never have a baying mob after me for slighting the 'mal gender'. Why do some get offended by the words 'sluts' as a descriptive term? Are all words in our vocabulary to be excised because they are 'not nice' or 'derogatory'?

VinLieger

zedhead wrote: »

I think the problem with the messages was not the use of the words 'sluts' in isolation. It was the tone and intention of the messages in general. That women are just sluts to be f*cked, a prize to be won by men. Bragging rights.

And women aren't doing the same thing every night? Say a woman shags a top male sports player, movie star or big celebrity of some variety, are you telling me she isnt bragging to her friends the next morning about it and going through the lurid details?

BTW im not saying shes wrong to do it, i just really wish we could get beyond this moronic talking point that shockingly people, yes both men and women, might say things in private that would be considered not fit for public consumption.

tretorn

Really the message is talk whatever way you like among your own friends but delete all records because the thought police are on the prowl. They will use your right to use whatever words you like in private conversations as evidence in a rape trial.

The only thing between you and a prison cell is a sensible jury with the guts to ignore twitter SJWS.

Its only a problem though if you are male, women can use the word slut but thats ok.

RuMan

VinLieger wrote: »

And women aren't doing the same thing every night? Say a woman shags a top male sports player, movie star or big celebrity of some variety, are you telling me she isnt bragging to her friends the next morning about it and going through the lurid details?

Jacko or Will Grigg she wanted that night

razorblunt

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What is the politically correct slang descriptive term for some promicious women now?

If I refer to the male equivalents as 'horndogs' I would never have a baying mob after me for slighting the 'mal gender'. Why do some get offended by the words 'sluts' as a descriptive term? Are all words in our vocabulary to be excised because they are 'not nice' or 'derogatory'?

Loose/Easy.

I've heard this being used/referred to by women.

A friend of mine plays camogie at a relatively decent level, she has some stories about the carry on in their dressing rooms too. Let's not pretend this is male only. Wasn't "sooo Samantha" a thing for a while when Sex in The City was in its prime?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

razorblunt

anthonyjmaher wrote: »

Four high profile people are found innocent of rape, and there are marches around the country with the full support of the media. Actual three time convicted rapist is released on to the streets and there is not a dicky bird from the protestors or the media ?

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/serial-rapist-homeless-in-dublin-following-early-release-from-prison-36633890.html

It's a funny world we live in.

I take your valid point.

But cmon man, 2 of them were up for rape. The other 2 weren't.
The amount of people getting the basic facts of the case wrong and throwing their oar in is crazy.

Maxpfizer

joe40 wrote: »

I would have always baulked at the idea of consent classes, but reading posts from quite a lot of people on here, now I'm not so sure. How can people think sending texts refering to women as sluts is not problematic is beyond me. I really hate the term "rape culture" since it tars most young men with the same brush and equates the actual crime with less serious action.
But this sexist arrogant behaviour is where the problems lies and should not be acceptable for anyone.
I still have faith in the decency of the vast majority of our young people male and female but why should we be afraid to condemn those that behave like this.

What would you teach in consent class? "Don't use the word slut, ever."

These texts were sent in private so what does it matter how they were referring to anyone? It was a private conversation among friends, wasn't it?

A problem I am having here is that it seems like only 1 of the 4 accused used the word "slut"? So what are the other 3 guilty of? That they didn't say "don't use that word".

Would this whole thing be any better if they had said "delightfully promiscuous young lady"?

From what you've said here it seems that you would imagine a "consent class" as a vehicle for affecting people in such a way that even in private conversations they feel an authoritarian guiding hand influencing which words they use and how they use them.

Who are you to say what people should and should not say to each other in private?

How far would you like to take it? Should all conversations be made public and anyone falling foul of our acceptable behavior laws should face criminal charges and be punished by the state?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

tretorn

Most sensible people see the whatsapp stuff for the nonsense it is, very young men boasting about their sex lives.
If the texts were sent by married men in their thirties about women of nineteen and twenty it would be viewed very differently. That would be seen as seedy.
Everyone in PjS house was young and single and seven of the eight had drunk a lot. The whatsapp and text messages were no different to any messages sent by many young men to their pals after a night out, women who engage in casual sex probably send derogatory texts about male catches too, the casual consensual sex is nobody elses business and neither are the discussions afterwards.
I couldnt care less anyway.

zedhead

VinLieger wrote: »

And women aren't doing the same thing every night? Say a woman shags a top male sports player, movie star or big celebrity of some variety, are you telling me she isnt bragging to her friends the next morning about it and going through the lurid details?

BTW im not saying shes wrong to do it, i just really wish we could get beyond this moronic talking point that shockingly people, yes both men and women, might say things in private that would be considered not fit for public consumption.

Later in my post, the part you didnt quote I mentioned where both men and women I have spoke to claimed to talk that way among friends at which point I did not discriminate about gender. We should try and promote people having a bit of respect for those they have sexual contact with - and to be honest just people i general.

The first part of my message I was speaking specifically of the messages these men sent, in which it was men speaking of women. Its not about men v women.

In response there are some women who speak like that. I don't nor do any of my friends. We may discuss individual encounters but it would always be respectful. Never have I asked my friends did they '**** any sluts' (or equivilant) the previous night. Or had a threesome occured discussed one party as if they were just a piece of meat, or a merry go round at a carnival.

And i don't think its ok to say 'Sure other people talk like that so its grand' - lets have a think about how we speak about people as whole, because this group, bragging mentality we see among some men and women will have an effect on the sexual encounters that some of them have. The sense of entitlement that its ok for a woman to grab a mans crotch in a club or a man grab a womens boob just to have a bit of a laugh about it with their mates after. Neither is ok, and there is a connection between these actions and they way these people speak in private with their friends.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Uncharted

Some women are s l u t s though. As are some men. It's reality. Get over it like....

Maxpfizer

hill16bhoy wrote: »

Another culture that exists here is the culture of denying reality.

That's a culture beloved of reactionary misogynists.

Rape culture and the culture of denying reality are synonymous.

How convenient that denial of Rape Culture is in itself proof that rape Culture exist.

A: God exists!
B: I don't believe that.
A: See! Yet more evidence that God exists.

hill16bhoy wrote: »

Right here on this thread we had two posters who couldn't figure out what's wrong with carrying out a sex act on a sleeping person, a person who could not give consent. A prima facie case of sexual assault at best.

All of the elements I listed are part of rape culture. Every single one of them displays a degrading attitude to women.

Wow, two posters. This is clear evidence of a cultural issue when 2 people out of 100s (maybe 1000s?) have some crappy views.

Let's not be too dismissive though. Maybe I am being dumb.

Maybe I just don't understand it because "Rape Culture" seems to be such a nebulous term.

Maybe I am having trouble understanding it because there is a whole, seemingly endless, list of things that contribute to this culture and some of the definitions seem very, suspiciously and conveniently, flexible.

So lets get specific. You seem to be the expert. Can you answer a few points?

How do YOU personally contribute to Rape Culture?

What have YOU personally done to reduce your role in creating a Rape Culture?

What can we all do as individuals to end Rape Culture?

Would you support the idea of bringing criminal charges against those who either contribute to or do nothing about Rape Culture?