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

Appledreams15

tretorn wrote: »

If you head off to have sex with someone who doesnt even know your name then you risk being called a slut by both men and women, other women especially will judge you because you are lowering the bar for all women by your behaviour.

Who are you referring to when you say"pinned down cut and bleeding". I hope its not Jackson and Olding because they were cleared of all charges, they admitted consensual sex and the jury believed them.

Lots of men and women live happily together in shared houses and very few women are raped, four women went back to Jacksons house and three had a good night that ended well for them. I am presuming Jackson has had numerous liaisons, he had another threesome the night after the rape allegation was made and as far as we know no one else claimed he raped them. Belfast is a tiny, tiny place so if there was any question over Jacksons character womenwould be wary of him.

The woman was cut and bleeding from an injury. That is a fact.

GreeBo

Bambi985 wrote: »

No. Not "women". The friends that your wife has does not constitute all women.

I've personally never heard any women refer to anyone, let alone another woman, in that way. "Cum dumpster", seriously? Says more about your wife's friends than anything else tbh.

Yet somehow a few anecdotes from posters on this thread means we have a rape culture.

Still not seeing the double standards.

GreeBo

Appledreams15 wrote: »

The woman was cut and bleeding from an injury. That is a fact.

And?
What if the man had torn his frenulum...would that mean he had been sexually assaulted?

Appledreams15

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I have seen men on this thread:
Saying,
It is a woman's fault for what she is wearing.
It is a woman's fault for going to a party.

Do we want to cover women from head to foot and keep them in one room?

However, I have also seen some men on this thread saying they would think a rapist is a scumbag.

It is the old ways we need to challenge, and move into a new and safer era

ShowMeTheCash

Appledreams15 wrote: »

God almighty. I'll never go to a house party again after reading this thread.

Best not to go to a house party on your own with people you don't know.

This is anecdotal but it was my own experience:
When at uni, went back to "house party" with a woman when drunk I met in a bar/club... I got to the house which was off campus I was a little lost did not know at the time exactly where I was she called the taxi, the party was full of guys, I went in and she disappeared never seen her again.
One guy asked me where you from, I said Donegal, he asked you a catholic then? As soon as he said that the penny dropped.

I managed to leg it out of the house whilst one lad tried to keep the door closed...

The next day when I was a little more sensible i thought how stupid I was for going their in the first place!

This was in Belfast in the late 90s

optogirl

wexie wrote: »

Of course.

But the argument here seems to be made that there is no such thing as women going to VIP sections in nightclubs or houseparties looking for sex. Which is complete and utter nonsense.

Now while I'm not happy with automatically labeling them as sluts or 'consenting' by being there I equally don't agree with the argument women (as well as men) don't go looking for it.

Seem to be a lot of people here who are quite happy to overlook or deny realities which don't fit their argument. Whichever side that might be.

Who said there is no such thing as women looking for sex? Nobody. Absolutely nobody. What people are arguing against is the inference that if you go to a party where there are strangers you should accept that sex is a logical conclusion to that. Are we all man-haters who assume all men are rapists or are we all naive innocents who are stupid not to assume it?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

GreeBo

If a man was drunk and went to a strangers house and got the crap beaten out of him, 100% people would think he was an idiot.

That doesnt mean the people who beat him are not wrong, it just means he bears some responsibility.

FrancieBrady

Appledreams15 wrote: »

I have seen men on this thread:
Saying,
It is a woman's fault for what she is wearing.
It is a woman's fault for going to a party.

Do we want to cover women from head to foot and keep them in one room?

However, I have also seen some men on this thread saying they would think a rapist is a scumbag.

It is the old ways we need to challenge, and move into a new and safer era

And no advice for a young girl on how to behave.

Fairly typical stuff.

.......

This post has been deleted.

[Deleted User]

We should introduce and normalize the use of sex robots.

You are literally taking your life in your hands talking to a woman in this day and age

Appledreams15

Edz87 wrote: »

We should introduce and normalize the use of sex robots.

You are literally taking your life in your hands talking to a woman in this day and age

How about asking her,
"WOULD SHE LIKE TO HAVE SEX?".

Normal. She is a human being like you.

Fann Linn

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I was in Croker on Sunday and I heard far worse directed at the ref plus Comer, Cooper, McMahon and Jim Gavin.

People who are shocked at this language must be living under a rock.

Appledreams15

GreeBo wrote: »

If a man was drunk and went to a strangers house and got the crap beaten out of him, 100% people would think he was an idiot.

That doesnt mean the people who beat him are not wrong, it just means he bears some responsibility.

Okay. So what about student villages. Where most nights of the week students are invited into other people's houses for parties.

The women shoudnt go?
How far do you want it to go before it is not the woman's fault.

The woman shouldnt leave her own door?

RAPISTS SHOULDNT RAPE

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Fann Linn

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

With 3 other women present and one of them sober as a judge.
Doesn't make sense to me.

tayto lover

hill16bhoy wrote: »

John Lonergan says there is a culture of sexual abuse and rape in Irish prisons.

But sure what would he know, he was only the governor of Mountjoy.

Far better to listen to you, or something.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/doubling-up-in-prisons-creating-culture-of-sex-abuse-warns-former-mountjoy-governor-30242066.html

There are two recorded alleged rapes in Mountjoy since the year 2000.
https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/prisoner-claims-detention-invalid-because-he-was-raped-at-knifepoint-29294274.html
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/prisoner-raped-by-mountjoy-inmates-1.1260604
Hardly a culture. I have a friend who works there.
By the way John Lonergan was probably trying to get more resources when he made that claim. I'm surprised he was not challenged on it. Anyway two is more than enough even if they did occur (only alleged) but again not a culture.

Maxpfizer

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

This is where you are banging your head against a brick wall called "Reality".

From a philosophical point of view you've got it right. How is it my responsibility if I was assaulted? It's the attackers responsibility not mine!

Problem. The attacker is behaving irresponsibly. They could go to prison or get hurt themselves or even just face a public shaming but they've evaluated that risk and decided to go through with it anyway.

So how can I defend against that? By putting responsibility for my safety in the hands of someone who might want to do me harm?

That's great that I can win an online argument and all but what if I just don't want to get hurt?

https://www.dfa.ie/travel/travel-advice/

https://www.dfa.ie/travel/travel-advice/a-z-list-of-countries/tunisia/

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/it-went-from-a-holiday-resort-to-a-war-zone-husband-of-nurse-killed-in-tunisia-terror-attack-36638976.html

Victim blaming?

anthonyjmaher

razorblunt wrote: »

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.

My point is that the four of them are being treated like rapists, even though none of them were found guilty. I think you are being pedantic, and I am fully aware of the facts of the case.

wexie

Maxpfizer wrote: »

This is where you are banging your head against a brick wall called "Reality".

From a philosophical point of view you've got it right. How is it my responsibility if I was assaulted? It's the attackers responsibility not mine!

Problem. The attacker is behaving irresponsibly. They could go to prison or get hurt themselves or even just face a public shaming but they've evaluated that risk and decided to go through with it anyway.

So how can I defend against that? By putting responsibility for my safety in the hands of someone who might want to do me harm?

That's great that I can win an online argument and all but what if I just don't want to get hurt?

Victim blaming?

There are a lot of people that want rights and entitlements...which is great.
Until you point out to them that they come in a bundle deal with responsibilities...

[Deleted User]

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I don't know how this has passed by intelligent people.. woman do it too, of course, they do they call other woman sluts and the like they do this as an act of social positioning in other word intimating they are better, they also do it to up their own social position its also related to poor self-belief. That does remotely make it acceptable it's also a form of bullying.

What about this really edgy radical idea what about not having opinions like t that in the first place.

Maxpfizer

Appledreams15 wrote: »

Okay. So what about student villages. Where most nights of the week students are invited into other people's houses for parties.

The women shoudnt go?
How far do you want it to go before it is not the woman's fault.

The woman shouldnt leave her own door?

RAPISTS SHOULDNT RAPE

But they do.

You are stuck in the idea that "taking personal responsibility" is equal to "it's your own fault if something bad happens".

You can win a fight on The Internet this way, sure. It's clear that you can't just have a "well it's your own fault anyway" attitude towards victims, that's horrible.

In reality though?

There are bad people and they will do bad things. It's always been that way and it always will be.

You could ask them not to do the bad things. Plead with them. Threaten them with prison time, even execution in some countries. Yet they still persist.

So we take an individual and give them a choice. Put your safety in the hands of others, potentially bad people. Or take responsibility for your own safety.

Your reaction? Can't we just tell the rapists not to rape?

Why have humans built walls and armies and the like when they could have just asked invaders to please not do that anymore?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Drogheda

"Don't tell us to build walls and train soldiers, tell Cromwell to stop conquering"

It's not a question of who's at fault. We all know who's in the wrong here and it's not the victims. Everyone agrees with that.

You can't simply deny reality because it makes a nice catchy slogan.

.......

This post has been deleted.

Maxpfizer

anthonyjmaher wrote: »

My point is that the four of them are being treated like rapists, even though none of them were found guilty. I think you are being pedantic, and I am fully aware of the facts of the case.

I think it's definitely worth underlining that only 2 of the 4 were actually accused of rape since a lot of people are at least acting like the 4 of them were all charged with the same offense.

It's the same with the Whatsapp group. There's no real breakdown of who said what. All 4 are just treated the same.

wexie

Maxpfizer wrote: »

But they do.

You are stuck in the idea that "taking personal responsibility" is equal to "it's your own fault if something bad happens".

You can win a fight on The Internet this way, sure. It's clear that you can't just have a "well it's your own fault anyway" attitude towards victims, that's horrible.

In reality though?

There are bad people and they will do bad things. It's always been that way and it always will be.

You could ask them not to do the bad things. Plead with them. Threaten them with prison time, even execution in some countries. Yet they still persist.

So we take an individual and give them a choice. Put your safety in the hands of others, potentially bad people. Or take responsibility for your own safety.

Your reaction? Can't we just tell the rapists not to rape?

Why have humans built walls and armies and the like when they could have just asked invaders to please not do that anymore?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Drogheda

"Don't tell us to build walls and train soldiers, tell Cromwell to stop conquering"

It's not a question of who's at fault. We all know who's in the wrong here and it's not the victims. Everyone agrees with that.

You can't simply deny reality because it makes a nice catchy slogan.

It's the argument of : war is bad, there shouldn't be war....so I should be free to go backpacking through Syria and if something bad happens to me it's completely not my responsibility

Maxpfizer

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Yes. Definitely the same. I was thinking exactly that. :rolleyes:

I suppose at least you didn't preface it with "so you're saying".

So I'll just remove the analogy part. Now you can address the points and I don't need to cop on.

This is where you are banging your head against a brick wall called "Reality".

From a philosophical point of view you've got it right. How is it my responsibility if I was assaulted? It's the attackers responsibility not mine!

Problem. The attacker is behaving irresponsibly. They could go to prison or get hurt themselves or even just face a public shaming but they've evaluated that risk and decided to go through with it anyway.

So how can I defend against that? By putting responsibility for my safety in the hands of someone who might want to do me harm?

That's great that I can win an online argument and all but what if I just don't want to get hurt?

Appledreams15

Maxpfizer wrote: »

But they do.

You are stuck in the idea that "taking personal responsibility" is equal to "it's your own fault if something bad happens".

You can win a fight on The Internet this way, sure. It's clear that you can't just have a "well it's your own fault anyway" attitude towards victims, that's horrible.

In reality though?

There are bad people and they will do bad things. It's always been that way and it always will be.

You could ask them not to do the bad things. Plead with them. Threaten them with prison time, even execution in some countries. Yet they still persist.

So we take an individual and give them a choice. Put your safety in the hands of others, potentially bad people. Or take responsibility for your own safety.

Your reaction? Can't we just tell the rapists not to rape?

Why have humans built walls and armies and the like when they could have just asked invaders to please not do that anymore?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Drogheda

"Don't tell us to build walls and train soldiers, tell Cromwell to stop conquering"

It's not a question of who's at fault. We all know who's in the wrong here and it's not the victims. Everyone agrees with that.

You can't simply deny reality because it makes a nice catchy slogan.

Then maybe it is many men who are the problem in Ireland. That somehow bizarrely think that they are entitled to rape.

Do you want us to be like a muslim country where women are covered head to toe, and their brothers accompany them everywhere?

These countries are usually condemned for the human rights abuses of women.

OR

Do you want to educate men in this country. That is where the change needs to be made

razorblunt

anthonyjmaher wrote: »

My point is that the four of them are being treated like rapists, even though none of them were found guilty. I think you are being pedantic, and I am fully aware of the facts of the case.

Genuinely wasn't, it's happened time and time again. The title of the thread had to be changed 3 times for example.

Being pedantic you stated 4 cleared of rape, not treated.

.......

This post has been deleted.

tritium

Bambi985 wrote: »

No. Not "women". The friends that your wife has does not constitute all women.

I've personally never heard any women refer to anyone, let alone another woman, in that way. "Cum dumpster", seriously? Says more about your wife's friends than anything else tbh.

So to extrapolate that, even if this WhatsApp chat wasn’t a snapshot that tells us little about the four men , it would still not constitute all men and therefore it in no way should be taken to indicate a wider problem with misogyny in certain social classes as certain commentators (not you) have claimed