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…248249251253254…316

Comments

  • #7502
    Fann Linn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,085 ✭✭✭Fann Linn


    freshpopcorn wrote: »
    Lots of teachers, Gardai, doctors, managers, etc would all be screwed if there phones got analysed.

    Always safer to keep your messing off the work phone.


  • #7503
    Fann Linn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,085 ✭✭✭Fann Linn


    Faugheen wrote: »
    That's what happens when messages get out into the open.

    Honestly don't know why the idea of those messages meaning to be private has anything to do with it. If I say something racist and/or misogynist, someone screengrabs it and sends it around, to the point where some clients and customers have heard about it. They might make my HR aware of it, and I won't have a leg to stand on.

    If Jackson and Olding lose their jobs, that's on them.

    I like the way people forget that a woman left their company bleeding and in hysterics too.

    Did the forensic medical team remark on that?


  • #7504
    freshpopcorn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 31,817 ✭✭✭✭freshpopcorn


    Fann Linn wrote: »
    Always safer to keep your messing off the work phone.

    Even if somebodies personal phone got into the wrong hands!


  • #7505
    wexie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,480 ✭✭✭wexie


    Fann Linn wrote: »
    Always safer to keep your messing off the work phone.

    Thing is, is there was any kind of messing on the work phone and anybody ever caught wind of it they wouldn't even need an excuse...

    Misuse of corporate resources ....off with ya


  • #7506
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 73,929 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Faugheen wrote: »
    That's what happens when messages get out into the open.

    Honestly don't know why the idea of those messages meaning to be private has anything to do with it. If I say something racist and/or misogynist, someone screengrabs it and sends it around, to the point where some clients and customers have heard about it. They might make my HR aware of it, and I won't have a leg to stand on.

    If Jackson and Olding lose their jobs, that's on them.

    I like the way people forget that a woman left their company bleeding and in hysterics too.

    At least you haved stopped sayingg that Jackson was aware of both the bleeding and the hysterics and that they were bragging about it.

    We are getting you somewhere nearer a truthful version of what actually happened.


  • Advertisement
  • #7507
    facehugger99
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,878 ✭✭✭facehugger99


    RabbleRouser2k wrote: »
    Yeah, the taxi drivers had many a story to tell around then-women toxically drunk, tbh. So much so they couldn't recall a single detail about the night before.
    There were cases where someone was spiked, but most were found to be just drinking.

    But there were cases where people got spiked-I know a former housemate who's drink was spiked. Her friends brought her home (She was at a club, or house party or something), but her eyes were rolling back into her head and so on. She drinks, yes-but that wasn't drunk, it was definitely a spiking. Her friends stayed in her room that night, as she was pretty distressed. And we all know the differences between someone being hammered, and someone who's been spiked.

    A friend told me of an incident where a co-worker had her drink spiked. Two non-Irish (not trying to paint anyone non-Irish as a villain, just telling how it happened) came over and started all the 'she's with us, we're taking her home' etc.

    Never been a single documented case of anyone having their drink spiked in Ireland.

    It’s an urban legend.


  • #7508
    Faugheen
    Site Banned Posts: 12,341 ✭✭✭✭Faugheen


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Faugheen wrote: »
    That's what happens when messages get out into the open.

    Honestly don't know why the idea of those messages meaning to be private has anything to do with it. If I say something racist and/or misogynist, someone screengrabs it and sends it around, to the point where some clients and customers have heard about it. They might make my HR aware of it, and I won't have a leg to stand on.

    If Jackson and Olding lose their jobs, that's on them.

    I like the way people forget that a woman left their company bleeding and in hysterics too.

    At least you haved stopped sayingg that Jackson was aware of both the bleeding and the hysterics and that they were bragging about it.

    We are getting you somewhere nearer a truthful version of what actually happened.

    Jackson was aware of the bleeding. He's admitted it himself.

    And I would like to think you will someday think it's not acceptable to perform a sex act on a person while they sleep, but for some reason I doubt it.


  • #7509
    Kidchameleon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,482 ✭✭✭Kidchameleon


    Faugheen wrote: »
    I like the way people forget that a woman left their company bleeding and in hysterics too.

    So what, she is an adult.


  • #7510
    RabbleRouser2k
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,662 ✭✭✭RabbleRouser2k


    ChikiChiki wrote: »
    Your male friend is a twat and you should reevaluate that friendship.

    Also who the hell bothers with airy fairy religion anymore. For 35s and unders its almost extinct so them views are definitely not the norm.

    I know many who still hold to their faiths. You'd be surprised. Or they explore other faiths, like Wiccan, Pagan, Witchcraft (which I mentioned) etc.
    From what I've seen, faiths other than Christian see people more inclined to hold their faith.
    I just tick the 'spiritual' box-covers the bases, without being a jerk.
    facehugger99 wrote: »
    Never been a single documented case of anyone having their drink spiked in Ireland.

    It’s an urban legend.

    It was from personal expierences - so no urban legend. She was lucky.

    It was also incredibly difficult to prove if someone was spiked or not-due to the drug rarely staying in the system after 24 hours.


  • #7511
    Faugheen
    Site Banned Posts: 12,341 ✭✭✭✭Faugheen


    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    Faugheen wrote: »
    I like the way people forget that a woman left their company bleeding and in hysterics too.

    So what, she is an adult.

    ...and we have a winner!

    You win the 'way to miss the point' prize.


  • Advertisement
  • #7512
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 73,929 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Faugheen wrote: »
    Jackson was aware of the bleeding. He's admitted it himself.

    And I would like to think you will someday think it's not acceptable to perform a sex act on a person while they sleep, but for some reason I doubt it.

    You were flat out doing your best to get the story out there that they were bragging about it.
    Jackson thought it was menstrual blood. He did not know she was bleeding as she left.

    Get as bad a slant on the actual facts as you can. Nice work.


  • #7513
    Strazdas
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,509 ✭✭✭✭Strazdas


    anthonyjmaher wrote: »
    These were private conversations. If HR was to see half of the private texts and private messages that people say about their colleagues/bosses, then everybody would be fired.

    Intended to be private conversations. Nonetheless, they have come into the public domain, creating a very big problem for those who held the conversation.


  • #7514
    paw patrol
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,312 ✭✭✭paw patrol


    Strazdas wrote: »
    Intended to be private conversations. Nonetheless, they have come into the public domain, creating a very big problem for those who held the conversation.

    I dont know whats more worrying , the fact that private conversation are now public domain and people are being punished for what was in those private conversation or the fact that there are many cheering this fact and think such an invasion of privacy is a great thing.

    the mind boggles


  • #7515
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 73,929 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Strazdas wrote: »
    Intended to be private conversations. Nonetheless, they have come into the public domain, creating a very big problem for those who held the conversation.

    I think the IRFU will wait until the mob moves on to the next big thing and re-instate them.


  • #7516
    Kidchameleon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,482 ✭✭✭Kidchameleon


    Faugheen wrote: »
    ...and we have a winner!

    You win the 'way to miss the point' prize.

    Could be worse, sticking my head in the sand for example


  • #7517
    kumate_champ07
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,150 ✭✭✭kumate_champ07


    I wonder how often they got up to the same type of behavior, is there a constant supply of women making themselves available? If this case never happened and their private lives stayed private, would anyone have a problem?

    Im not sure how to word the above without anyone taking offense*


  • #7518
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 13,822 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Thought this was very relevant to this case:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GaO76M81c_c


  • #7519
    tritium
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,793 ✭✭✭tritium


    paw patrol wrote: »
    I dont know whats more worrying , the fact that private conversation are now public domain and people are being punished for what was in those private conversation or the fact that there are many cheering this fact and think such an invasion of privacy is a great thing.

    the mind boggles

    To my mind the most worrying bit is that the conversations have little to no evidential value yet they were put out there to stain the defendants. It’s a sleazy, nasty way to run a prosecution and looking at the rest of the evidence it’s hard to believe their wasn’t a “prestige” element to taking this case. Certainly it seems very unlikely based on what’s been reported that it was ever going to result in a conviction. It will be interesting to see what might come to light in their privacy case against the bbc.

    At very least one of the key things to come from this is that anonymity for both accused and accuser is a must in a case like this, probably with a much more restricted public access to the trial. Ironically for those protesting in the south, that’s something we’ve actually gotten right here.


  • #7520
    UsedToWait
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,273 ✭✭✭UsedToWait


    ArthurDayne wrote: »
    The direction of the discussion towards the behaviour, attire or drinking habits of women is indicative of one of the major obstacles in getting society to a better place in addressing sexual violence. A sexual assault or rape is the result of a person (usually male) who, with a criminal and violent intent, subjects the victim (usually female) to the assault. It is the result of a perpetrator being willing to intentionally commit the crime. It is immaterial whether the victim is wearing a hijab or a bikini -- the sexual assault or rape is wholly the result of an inability and unwillingness on the man's part to stop himself from acting on a criminal intent to inflict these crimes on the female. It is sad therefore to see the discussion steer once again to the sideshow of a woman's conduct or attire rather than the more obvious problem of the sexual assailants themselves and all the mentalities and abnormalities which drive them.

    Indeed, this thread of many thousands of comments, and the entire furore surrounding the trial, has been thoroughly depressing. It is a national conversation where an 'ibelieveher' movement has taken a rather regrettable absolutist stance in simply assuming that 3 men are rapists because an accuser says they are. It is a conversation where crude and disrespectful Whatsapp messages were unfairly equated with sexual criminality. It is also a conversation where many people seem unable to understand the concept that even if a rape does not take place, this does not invariably mean that the sex or all the sexual acts were consensual, and that a woman who perceives to have been subjected to a non-consensual sex act is not necessarily 'lying' about her perception of having been raped.The media need to take a long look at themselves in how they have turned this trial into one which has made a mockery of the presumption of innocence, but has also made a mockery of the need to ensure that a Complainant's claims are considered and dealt with sensitively, rather than being enthusiastically transposed into a national soap opera.

    We need balance on the matter of sexual violence. We need an objective discussion which sets aside absolutist stances which conflate crude jokes with true misogyny or even propensity to commit sexual violence, and which also is more appreciative of the complexity of a rape claim -- in which even if no rape actually does occur, it does not mean that a complainant is lying that an act was non-consensual or that their perception that they were raped is not held honestly and in good faith. I fear that a significant section of our population, on all sides of the arguments and debates, is still some way off reaching a stage where a constructive and genuinely helpful conversation can be had. We continue to be subjected to daft placards, misguided protests and old-fashioned attitudes on how ladies should behave.

    While I agree with much of your analysis, the parts I've highlighted in bold are contradictory - if you accept that the complainant can perceive that the act was non-consensual, "even if no rape actually does occur", surely the corollary is true, and the accused can perceive that the act was consensual, and that there was no "criminal intent to inflict these crimes on the female"


  • #7521
    Faugheen
    Site Banned Posts: 12,341 ✭✭✭✭Faugheen


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Faugheen wrote: »
    Jackson was aware of the bleeding. He's admitted it himself.

    And I would like to think you will someday think it's not acceptable to perform a sex act on a person while they sleep, but for some reason I doubt it.

    You were flat out doing your best to get the story out there that they were bragging about it.
    Jackson thought it was menstrual blood. He did not know she was bleeding as she left.

    Get as bad a slant on the actual facts as you can. Nice work.

    No no Francie. See you read what you wanted to read, again.

    I said they were bragging about their exploits with a woman that had left their company bleeding and in hysterics.

    Never ever made reference to them bragging about leaving her in that state. I even said they probably didn't know, but it doesn't change the facts that she left their company in that state, and they were boasting about being top shaggers and spitroasting.

    You need to make sure you know what I said before you comment. Makes you look quite foolish.


  • Advertisement
  • #7522
    wexie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,480 ✭✭✭wexie


    kumate_champ07 wrote: »
    I wonder how often they got up to the same type of behavior, is there a constant supply of women making themselves available? If this case never happened and their private lives stayed private, would anyone have a problem?

    <trigger alert>

    For consensual sex? I'd imagine they generally don't need to look any further than the nearest VIP section of the nearest nightclub

    *EDIT* I'm not implying that this particular case involved consensual or non consensual sex so stop your moaning.
    Just implying that (semi) famous sports stars/movie stars/ rock stars /reality stars don't have to have long periods of 'drought' if they don't choose to


  • #7523
    tritium
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,793 ✭✭✭tritium


    UsedToWait wrote: »
    While I agree with much of your analysis, the parts I've highlighted in bold are contradictory - if you accept that the complainant can perceive that the act was non-consensual, "even if no rape actually does occur", surely the corollary is true, and the accused can perceive that the act was consensual, and that there was no "criminal intent to inflict these crimes on the female"

    As I understand (and I am not a lawyer) this point Is key. To be guilty the jury needs to form the view that a reasonable person would have in the circumstances known there was an absence of consent and disregarded it or been reckless with it.


  • #7524
    Silentcorner
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,536 ✭✭✭Silentcorner


    Faugheen wrote: »
    No no Francie. See you read what you wanted to read, again.

    I said they were bragging about their exploits with a woman that had left their company bleeding and in hysterics.

    Never ever made reference to them bragging about leaving her in that state. I even said they probably didn't know, but it doesn't change the facts that she left their company in that state, and they were boasting about being top shaggers and spitroasting.

    You need to make sure you know what I said before you comment. Makes you look quite foolish.

    What I found most interesting in those messages, was what wasn't said in them.

    The first thing a bunch of horny lads, who DIDN'T get laid because of a lack of condoms, would mention was the lack of condoms in the house you'd imagine!

    And the fact that the woman wasn't even referenced in any way, like, she wasn't even described as "fit as f##k" or "a stunner" "was wrecked" or anything....it was like she wasn't even there.

    That is, in any of the messages that we are aware of!


  • #7525
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 73,929 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Faugheen wrote: »
    No no Francie. See you read what you wanted to read, again.

    I said they were bragging about their exploits with a woman that had left their company bleeding and in hysterics.

    Never ever made reference to them bragging about leaving her in that state. I even said they probably didn't know, but it doesn't change the facts that she left their company in that state, and they were boasting about being top shaggers and spitroasting.

    You need to make sure you know what I said before you comment. Makes you look quite foolish.

    What relevance was her 'state' then to them?

    The insinuation was that they had caused the bleeding and the hysterics and the jury plainly didn't agree.


  • #7526
    Dick phelan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,647 ✭✭✭Dick phelan


    There seems to be a lack of basic respect in our society creeping in. I think it comes down to the very individualistic culture we have now, all about satisfying ourselves and others be damned.Firstly while the lads may be innocent of any crime no one can honestly say their messages were anything but crass and certainly showed them in a very bad light. Now of course we all make somewhat rude or crass comments at times but i can honestly say i would never describe a women the way those lads did and no i'm not looking for plaudits because i think most lads would be like minded. 

    My view is that this is a case of girl who was treated pretty badly, lads were prob quite rough and therefore she felt **** in the cold of day. Having said that when you meet a lad drunk in a nightclub and go back to their house do you honestly expect they ask you back to play chess. I believe she consented to what happened but regretted it the next day after the lads were less then gentlemanly toward her.  Perhaps if we all just treated each other and ourselves with more respects unfortunate situations like this wouldn't happen.


  • #7527
    Faugheen
    Site Banned Posts: 12,341 ✭✭✭✭Faugheen


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Faugheen wrote: »
    No no Francie. See you read what you wanted to read, again.

    I said they were bragging about their exploits with a woman that had left their company bleeding and in hysterics.

    Never ever made reference to them bragging about leaving her in that state. I even said they probably didn't know, but it doesn't change the facts that she left their company in that state, and they were boasting about being top shaggers and spitroasting.

    You need to make sure you know what I said before you comment. Makes you look quite foolish.

    What relevance was her 'state' then to them?

    The insinuation was that they had caused the bleeding and the hysterics and the jury plainly didn't agree.

    How on Earth does the not guilty verdict of rape insinuate that the jury didn't think they caused the bleeding and hysterics?

    You are actually just making things up now.


  • #7528
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 73,929 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Faugheen wrote: »
    How on Earth does the not guilty verdict of rape insinuate that the jury didn't think they caused the bleeding and hysterics?

    You are actually just making things up now.
    You think the jury thought they had caused the bleeding and hysterics and decided not guilty.

    Ok.


  • #7529
    Silentcorner
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,536 ✭✭✭Silentcorner


    Dick phelan wrote: »
    There seems to be a lack of basic respect in our society creeping in. I think it comes down to the very individualistic culture we have now, all about satisfying ourselves and others be damned.Firstly while the lads may be innocent of any crime no one can honestly say their messages were anything but crass and certainly showed them in a very bad light. Now of course we all make somewhat rude or crass comments at times but i can honestly say i would never describe a women the way those lads did and no i'm not looking for plaudits because i think most lads would be like minded. 

    My view is that this is a case of girl who was treated pretty badly, lads were prob quite rough and therefore she felt **** in the cold of day. Having said that when you meet a lad drunk in a nightclub and go back to their house do you honestly expect they ask you back to play chess. I believe she consented to what happened but regretted it the next day after the lads were less then gentlemanly toward her.  Perhaps if we all just treated each other and ourselves with more respects unfortunate situations like this wouldn't happen.

    I absolutely agree with your first paragraph, I have spent about 35 years of my life playing team sports and I have never heard women being discussed to that graphic level, no where near it, but most of those 35 years were before the whatsapp generation.

    On your second paragraph, it should be pointed out that the young lady was witnessed in a state of distress at least 10 minutes after leaving the room, was said to be "in hysterics" by Harrisson, so the regret must have kicked in very quickly, by 10am the next morning she first mentioned the word rape, by noon, Harrisson was informed she felt it was not consensual. The lads testimony does not refer to any conversations with her, so we do not know if they were gentlemanly or not, or whether Jackson rejected her, there was no mention of either!


  • #7530
    Faugheen
    Site Banned Posts: 12,341 ✭✭✭✭Faugheen


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Faugheen wrote: »
    How on Earth does the not guilty verdict of rape insinuate that the jury didn't think they caused the bleeding and hysterics?

    You are actually just making things up now.
    You think the jury thought they had caused the bleeding and hysterics and decided not guilty.

    Ok.

    By your logic the jury decided they didn't even do anything (even digital or oral) to her and that nothing happened.

    By your logic the jury decided that she wasn't even at the house.

    The jury found them not guilty of rape.

    That does not mean they didn't leave her bleeding (Jackson admitted having blood on his fingers) or in hysterics (as said by Rory Harrison).

    Use your brain, mate, and stop making a fool of yourself.


  • Advertisement
  • #7531
    tretorn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,800 ✭✭✭tretorn


    Dick phelan wrote: »
    There seems to be a lack of basic respect in our society creeping in. I think it comes down to the very individualistic culture we have now, all about satisfying ourselves and others be damned.Firstly while the lads may be innocent of any crime no one can honestly say their messages were anything but crass and certainly showed them in a very bad light. Now of course we all make somewhat rude or crass comments at times but i can honestly say i would never describe a women the way those lads did and no i'm not looking for plaudits because i think most lads would be like minded. 

    My view is that this is a case of girl who was treated pretty badly, lads were prob quite rough and therefore she felt **** in the cold of day. Having said that when you meet a lad drunk in a nightclub and go back to their house do you honestly expect they ask you back to play chess. I believe she consented to what happened but regretted it the next day after the lads were less then gentlemanly toward her.  Perhaps if we all just treated each other and ourselves with more respects unfortunate situations like this wouldn't happen.

    There was no evidence they were rough at all, if there was the prosecuting counsel would have referred to it and he didnt.

    The staff in the sexual assault unit saw no evidence of anything being non consensual. The woman said PJ forced his whole hand inside her and you would expect to see bruising and there wasnt any.

    Maybe the jury should have sat and had a few cups of coffee rather than arriving back with such a quick a verdict, they sat and deliberated for less than two hours on the final day which was astonishing after a nine week trial, you would think it would take days to go through the evidence but a decision was made to acquit not one but four defendents in less than four hours in total. This reflects very badly on the accuser because it looks like the jurors made their minds up long before the trial was over.

    This alone sends a very serious message to the CPS about the taking of this case, how much would the proscecution costs alone be, the senior counsel employed by the State is London based so his fees would be astronomical.

    The only winners in the whole sorry mess as always are the lawyers/


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement