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

Options
1…283284286288289…316

Comments

  • Options
    #8552
    jm08
    Registered Users Posts: 11,300 ✭✭✭✭jm08


    Mountainsandh wrote: »
    Your second quote is just an opinion and perspective.
    From the perspective of the wrongly accused, there is just as much hardship in a trial, and often after, as illustrated for the 4 guys of this thread.
    From the perspective of someone who is not guilty, one trial is one too many.

    When I look at the stats above, I think of all these people who have been subjected to a trial for no legally valid reason, as well as the genuine courageous ladies who have to go through a trial for an already traumatic experience.

    Well, the system doesn't serve anyone well. Interesting to note that while the Republic has a very low conviction rate, they shouldn't even bother in Northern Ireland with a 2% conviction rate (and they don't bring many cases forward for prosecution).

    https://sluggerotoole.com/2018/04/07/less-than-2-of-rape-trials-in-northern-ireland-end-in-conviction-why-the-system-needs-reformed/


  • Options
    #8553
    upandcumming
    Registered Users Posts: 2,716 ✭✭✭upandcumming


    jm08 wrote: »
    Well, the system doesn't serve anyone well. Interesting to note that while the Republic has a very low conviction rate, they shouldn't even bother in Northern Ireland with a 2% conviction rate (and they don't bring many cases forward for prosecution).

    I can see why they don't seeing as they brought this farce through the courts.


  • Options
    #8554
    jm08
    Registered Users Posts: 11,300 ✭✭✭✭jm08


    upandcumming wrote: »
    I can see why they don't seeing as they brought this farce through the courts.

    The UK has the lowest conviction rate of rape in Europe. As I've posted, NI has a conviction rate of 2% and France has a conviction rate of 25%. Are you claiming that rape rarely happens in Northern Ireland and those that do report it and their cases are brought to court were doing it for the crack?
    According to the charity Rape Crisis 85,000 women and 12,000 men are raped each year in England and Wales, and only 15% of victims chose to report the crime to police.


  • Options
    #8555
    goz83
    Registered Users Posts: 8,034 ✭✭✭goz83


    smallgarden wrote: »
    It'd be interesting to see what percentage of women have been in a situation where they've said no to a guy and they've continued their behaviour. Be it sexual harassment, assault or rape.

    Why would that be interesting?

    It’d be interesting to see what percentage of men would be laughed off the stage if they reported a woman sexually harrassing them. You think men aren’t harrassed or coerced and manipulated by women?

    It’s not just men who do these things you know. Women are just as bad and I suspect a tiny number of reports are made by men. Sure its apparently not possible for a woman to rape a man.


  • Options
    #8556
    goz83
    Registered Users Posts: 8,034 ✭✭✭goz83


    jm08 wrote: »
    The UK has the lowest conviction rate of rape in Europe. As I've posted, NI has a conviction rate of 2% and France has a conviction rate of 25%. Are you claiming that rape rarely happens in Northern Ireland and those that do report it and their cases are brought to court were doing it for the crack?

    Maybe the rest of europe bring more solid cases to court, giving the higher conviction rates. Imagine if every allegation went to court. Conviction rates would be below 1%. Only solid cases should go to court. Too many he said she said cases clog up the system and imo, discourage genuine cases being reported.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #8557
    upandcumming
    Registered Users Posts: 2,716 ✭✭✭upandcumming


    upandcumming wrote: »
    I can see why they don't seeing as they brought this farce through the courts.
    jm08 wrote: »
    The UK has the lowest conviction rate of rape in Europe. As I've posted, NI has a conviction rate of 2% and France has a conviction rate of 25%. Are you claiming that rape rarely happens in Northern Ireland and those that do report it and their cases are brought to court were doing it for the crack?

    This case shouldn't have even seen a picture of the court, never mind being in it.

    Please read this carefully: It is comments like this that gives people such difficulty in talking to people like you and your comrades on this issue. I said this case shouldn't have been brought to court. Nowhere did I say rape rarely happens in Northern Ireland.


  • Options
    #8558
    RabbleRouser2k
    Registered Users Posts: 8,294 ✭✭✭RabbleRouser2k


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Seriously, what needs to stop is these 'go to' phrases like 'brought the game into disrepute'

    It is utter nonsense. Hundreds of thousands of people have enjoyed thousands of minutes of rugby at all levels since these guys were charged and will continue to do so.

    Like everything, lessons need to be learned and put in place, but 'bringing the game into disrepute' is such a meaningless load of rubbish really.

    It's not a go to phrase-it's actually part of many sports councils. It's up to the individual to disprove they did so-you can find many documented cases where even an email got someone sacked.
    Even if someone hacks your email, and leaks it-the onus is on you to prove you didn't send the email-and if you can't, then suspension or ban is gonna happen.
    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Another 'opinion maker' who is still sore that the verdict didn't go the way they had already decided.

    Where were all these morally upstanding people when this happens at almost every trial going?
    It's cheap bandwagoning and faux outrage to make a buck.

    And you still haven't explained away why it is one politician gets away with full on racism and no sympathy is available in the court of public opinion for somebody else.
    Like McElduff, Kenny offended and hurt an individual as well as the general public. One's apology was accepted and the other's wasn't.

    Do you think the 'great unwashed public' need a hypocrisy check?

    The court of public opinion is a fickle monster-I can't explain it away, barring 'Enda kept his head down' etc. Kevin Myers lost his job for an article that was anti-semetic, despite he previously writing anti-semetic articles for the Irish Independent.
    George Hook lost his radio show for poorly worded comments that were actually logical. You could argue that social media played a part in Kenny keeping his job, and Myers and Hook losing theirs.
    (You could argue that Jackson was straight out of the gate after the case was over-he likely should have kept his head down, and just taken time for himself. Gone home, watched netflix as a free man. He didn't, and that triggered certain individuals).

    McElduff filmed a video, and put it on the internet. Kenny's joke wasn't recorded-as a video. I think if it had, his career would probably have been dead.
    One could even argue 'rape trumps racism'-I don't know. That's a whole other debate.

    Social Media has made many of these cases much more difficult, to say the least. The likes of the Whatsapp messages alone shows this-text messages and emails would have been the older tech, and would have been kept quiet (barring a hacking-such as the Sony movies studio hack, which did lead to firings and job losses-mainly because the content of the emails, which insulted the 'talent') because they were not freely available and easily tracked down on media.
    You could argue everyone having a mini-computer in their hand is making many of these players lives much harder-no infallibility, and constant policing.


  • Options
    #8559
    mfceiling
    Registered Users Posts: 12,793 ✭✭✭✭mfceiling


    sightband wrote: »
    Do they really though? That’s a seriously diverse set of friends your daughters have. By the law of averages I’d say you were talking through your hoop.

    Couldn't give a shìte what you think to be honest.


  • Options
    #8560
    facehugger99
    Registered Users Posts: 7,264 ✭✭✭facehugger99


    jm08 wrote: »
    Well, the system doesn't serve anyone well. Interesting to note that while the Republic has a very low conviction rate, they shouldn't even bother in Northern Ireland with a 2% conviction rate (and they don't bring many cases forward for prosecution).

    https://sluggerotoole.com/2018/04/07/less-than-2-of-rape-trials-in-northern-ireland-end-in-conviction-why-the-system-needs-reformed/

    One would have to wonder what is the more credible position, that the vast majority of women are making false rape accusations and putting themselves through the trauma of a trial process for the craic or people are getting away with rape because the burden of proof is so high.


  • Options
    #8561
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 41,301 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    https://www.google.ie/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/mar/19/myths-about-rape-conviction-rates


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #8562
    tretorn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,800 ✭✭✭tretorn


    This case has made people think that women are making false rape allegations and thats one reason it should never have been brought.

    The PSNI said there wasnt enough evidence and they recommended no prosecution, this means the allegations were just that and there was no evidence to back up the womans claims so it became a case of he said and she said, unfortuneately not only a case of this but it was also too many different variations of she said. This case has done so much damage to the genuine cases of rape, not only because this case would have taken up so much police time and so much CPS time and it also took up nine weeks of court time, this meant the woman who was raped and has the evidence to proof it and a version of events without major inconsistencies had to wait in line for justice.

    Women continuing to march and to write letters to newspapapers and engaging in defamation online are not doing a service to genuine victims of rape. Complaining about women being questioned in court is futile too, men are entitled to defend themselves against accusations and you can bet your life if a son of anyone of those women pouring bile on Jacksons head was in jacksons position those women would want their sons to get the best defence money can buy.


  • Options
    #8563
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 41,301 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    tretorn wrote: »
    ...... this means the allegations were just that and there was no evidence to back up the womans claims so it became a case of he said and she said,

    Protectors say the biggest issue with trying to get rape cases convicted is a lack of a third party witness.
    In this case there was a third party witness, whose testimony was that she thought what she witnessed was a consentual threesome.
    So it wasn't even just a case of he said, she said.


  • Options
    #8564
    Greysquirel09
    Registered Users Posts: 96 ✭✭Greysquirel09


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    Protectors say the biggest issue with trying to get rape cases convicted is a lack of a third party witness.
    In this case there was a third party witness, whose testimony was that she thought what she witnessed was a consentual threesome.
    So it wasn't even just a case of he said, she said.

    Don't forget she was invited to join in on this rape. For me that was the main reason behind the aquittal. Doesn't seem like something one would say while engaging in such a dreadful act.


  • Options
    #8565
    Tell me how
    Registered Users Posts: 21,525 ✭✭✭✭Tell me how


    Greysquirel09 wrote:
    Don't forget she was invited to join in on this rape. For me that was the main reason behind the aquittal. Doesn't seem like something one would say while engaging in such a dreadful act.

    Come on now. Did you miss the verdict?


  • Options
    #8566
    goz83
    Registered Users Posts: 8,034 ✭✭✭goz83


    facehugger99 wrote: »
    One would have to wonder what is the more credible position, that the vast majority of women are making false rape accusations and putting themselves through the trauma of a trial process for the craic or people are getting away with rape because the burden of proof is so high.

    No guessing as to what you believe then. But sure, “for the craic” we will start throwing men into jail if he:
    looks at a women the wrong way.
    Plays rugby.
    Drinks alcohol.
    Makes a comment which offends someone who wasn’t present.
    farts in public.
    tretorn wrote: »
    This case has made people think that women are making false rape allegations and thats one reason it should never have been brought.

    The PSNI said there wasnt enough evidence and they recommended no prosecution, this means the allegations were just that and there was no evidence to back up the womans claims so it became a case of he said and she said, unfortuneately not only a case of this but it was also too many different variations of she said. This case has done so much damage to the genuine cases of rape, not only because this case would have taken up so much police time and so much CPS time and it also took up nine weeks of court time, this meant the woman who was raped and has the evidence to proof it and a version of events without major inconsistencies had to wait in line for justice.

    Women continuing to march and to write letters to newspapapers and engaging in defamation online are not doing a service to genuine victims of rape. Complaining about women being questioned in court is futile too, men are entitled to defend themselves against accusations and you can bet your life if a son of anyone of those women pouring bile on Jacksons head was in jacksons position those women would want their sons to get the best defence money can buy.

    I agree with your post, but the first part almost sounds like you don’t believe women make false allegations. They do and I bet it’s more common than we know. These are the ones which mostly won’t see the inside of a court room or which won’t be reported to the police, or even to the rape crisis centre. Sometimes it is just an allegation made to friend, or a group and goes no further, at least not legally.

    Women make false allegations for all sorts of reasons....not just malice or revenge or to cause hurt. Sometimes it is to get attention. An ex girlfriend of mine told me she was raped at a house party. Her story sounded so real. It made me so angry at the time. I convinced her to report it...or at least I thought I had. A couple of weeks later she told me she reported it and apparently the guy was up on charges for raping another girl a few months later.

    To cut a long story short, we split up a couple of years later and didnt see eachother for years. When we became friends again, I asked her what happened with the report she made and if the guy was convicted. She laughed and confessed it was a made up story. She wanted me to feel sorry for her at the time because she was insecure. Needless to say my view of her went way down after that revelation. I had used her example to trash talk rapists and alleged rapists because my view had been tainted by her sob story. Make up stories can be very dangerous.


  • Options
    #8567
    givyjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 3,287 ✭✭✭givyjoe


    facehugger99 wrote: »
    One would have to wonder what is the more credible position, that the vast majority of women are making false rape accusations and putting themselves through the trauma of a trial process for the craic or people are getting away with rape because the burden of proof is so high.
    The burden of proof is no higher than in ANY other criminal case for any other offence. It's beyond a reasonable doubt for good reason.


  • Options
    #8568
    jm08
    Registered Users Posts: 11,300 ✭✭✭✭jm08


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    Protectors say the biggest issue with trying to get rape cases convicted is a lack of a third party witness.
    In this case there was a third party witness, whose testimony was that she thought what she witnessed was a consentual threesome.
    So it wasn't even just a case of he said, she said.

    She also thought that PJ and the complainant were having penetrative sex.

    'She thought' is just the introduction of a reasonable doubt.


  • Options
    #8569
    tritium
    Registered Users Posts: 7,437 ✭✭✭tritium


    jm08 wrote: »
    Well, the system doesn't serve anyone well. Interesting to note that while the Republic has a very low conviction rate, they shouldn't even bother in Northern Ireland with a 2% conviction rate (and they don't bring many cases forward for prosecution).

    https://sluggerotoole.com/2018/04/07/less-than-2-of-rape-trials-in-northern-ireland-end-in-conviction-why-the-system-needs-reformed/

    Your statistics except by the most misleading reading, in no way show what you claim they do
    Seventy-three of the accused pleaded guilty, thereby saving the court valuable time, for which they would have received reduced sentences. Of the others charged before the court, 205 defendants were sent to trial. Those trials ended with 35 convictions, and 155 acquittals. In 15 instances, the jury was unable to agree on a verdict.



    One way of interpreting those figures would be that the jury convicted fractionally over 17% of those tried for rape and acquitted 76.6%. Those figures did not take into account 289 other cases. In 106 instances, the State entered a nolle prosequi, and the rape charge was listed as having been taken into consideration in the other 183 cases.


    From the above 73 cases were prosecuted so thouroughly that the accused conceded guilt. 35 more were convicted at trial in apit if denying the crime for a total of 108 out of 278. That 17% is just nonsense unless you aim to mislead the reader

    Of the additional 289 cases 183 were taken into consideration, ie they influenced the outcome.

    Your statistics are a prime example of what the information around this crime is such a mess.


  • Options
    #8570
    jm08
    Registered Users Posts: 11,300 ✭✭✭✭jm08


    False allegations are fairly rare - saw a stat of something like between 2 and 5%.

    Changing law in Iceland. New law means the accused must prove they had explicit consent.
    Under the new law, consent must be clearly and voluntarily expressed.
    It represents a shift in the country’s legislation, as it places the consent burden on the accused – rather than the court focusing on whether the victim said ‘no’ or tried to fight back, the accused will have to prove the other person consented.

    http://www.thejournal.ie/iceland-consent-3943673-Apr2018/

    Sweden are making similar type changes.


  • Options
    #8571
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 67,641 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    jm08 wrote: »
    False allegations are fairly rare - saw a stat of something like between 2 and 5%.

    Changing law in Iceland. New law means the accused must prove they had explicit consent.



    http://www.thejournal.ie/iceland-consent-3943673-Apr2018/

    Sweden are making similar type changes.



    Just another version of 'he said-she said'.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #8572
    Tell me how
    Registered Users Posts: 21,525 ✭✭✭✭Tell me how


    jm08 wrote: »
    False allegations are fairly rare - saw a stat of something like between 2 and 5%.

    Changing law in Iceland. New law means the accused must prove they had explicit consent.



    http://www.thejournal.ie/iceland-consent-3943673-Apr2018/

    Sweden are making similar type changes.



    I wonder if someone recorded the interaction on their mobile, so as to prove they had explicit consent throughout, would that be acceptable.

    Can't see too many people being comfortable with that but is it to that level we are now moving to?


  • Options
    #8573
    salmocab
    Registered Users Posts: 11,315 ✭✭✭✭salmocab


    jm08 wrote: »
    False allegations are fairly rare - saw a stat of something like between 2 and 5%.




    5% would be 1 in 20 thats hardly fairly rare.


  • Options
    #8574
    Dyr
    Registered Users Posts: 23,246 ✭✭✭✭Dyr


    jm08 wrote: »
    False allegations are fairly rare - saw a stat of something like between 2 and 5%.

    Changing law in Iceland. New law means the accused must prove they had explicit consent.



    http://www.thejournal.ie/iceland-consent-3943673-Apr2018/

    Sweden are making similar type changes.



    What you're seen there is the spin off of a strand of feminist theory that all sex is inherently rape.


  • Options
    #8575
    jm08
    Registered Users Posts: 11,300 ✭✭✭✭jm08


    tritium wrote: »
    Your statistics except by the most misleading reading, in no way show what you claim they do
    From the above 73 cases were prosecuted so thouroughly that the accused conceded guilt.

    They had irrefutable proof that rape had taken place (an example of a case like this would be someone beating up the victim so there is physical evidence that they were raped).
    more were convicted at trial in apit if denying the crime for a total of 108 out of 278. That 17% is just nonsense unless you aim to mislead the reader

    The stats are what they are. 17% of reported rapes result in convictions. If you takeout the uncontested cases, its about 11%.


  • Options
    #8576
    jm08
    Registered Users Posts: 11,300 ✭✭✭✭jm08


    salmocab wrote: »
    5% would be 1 in 20 thats hardly fairly rare.

    Claims/reports. Doesn't mean they go to court.


  • Options
    #8577
    salmocab
    Registered Users Posts: 11,315 ✭✭✭✭salmocab


    jm08 wrote: »
    Claims/reports. Doesn't mean they go to court.

    Not sure what point your making, you said false allegations are fairly rare only 2-5% I said that 5% would hardly be rare and you then talk about going to court. I am happy to repeat that 1 in 20 would hardly be rare.


  • Options
    #8578
    jm08
    Registered Users Posts: 11,300 ✭✭✭✭jm08


    Bambi wrote: »
    What you're seen there is the spin off of a strand of feminist theory that all sex is inherently rape.

    The new legislation (proposed by a man) was passed unanimously by the Icelandic parliament.


  • Options
    #8579
    One eyed Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 23,695 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


    tretorn wrote: »
    This case has made people think that women are making false rape allegations and thats one reason it should never have been brought.


    Unless you have evidence to support your claim, then you shouldn't expect anyone to take your claim seriously. This case hasn't made anyone believe anything contrary to what they believed already, so as a reason why it should never have been brought, your claim just doesn't stand up under any examination.

    The PSNI said there wasnt enough evidence and they recommended no prosecution, this means the allegations were just that and there was no evidence to back up the womans claims so it became a case of he said and she said, unfortuneately not only a case of this but it was also too many different variations of she said.


    Where are you getting your information? According to a spokesperson for the PPS, they didn't receive any recommendation along those lines from the PSNI? They wouldn't anyway because the only role of the PSNI is to investigate cases and present their findings to the PPS -

    A PPS spokesperson said: “The evidence received in this case was subjected to a very thorough and careful examination by a team of experienced lawyers, including Senior Counsel, before it was concluded that the Test for Prosecution was met, in line with our Code for Prosecutors.

    “This meant that there was both sufficient evidence to provide a reasonable prospect of conviction and it was in the public interest to prosecute.

    “Any claims that an initial decision was made not to prosecute or that advices were received that the Test for Prosecution was not met, are wholly inaccurate. There was only ever one decision taken in relation to these defendants – and that was a decision to prosecute.
    “This case was properly brought before the Courts and overcame a number of legal challenges. It was ultimately right that the matter was placed before a jury to make their determination.”

    Source: BelfastLive.co.uk


    That's even before we get to the fact you claim the PSNI said there wasn't enough evidence (I'm guessing you mean to secure a conviction?), and then go on to point out that there was no evidence to back up the woman's claims? You're contradicting your own claims that you claim the PSNI made!

    This case has done so much damage to the genuine cases of rape, not only because this case would have taken up so much police time and so much CPS time and it also took up nine weeks of court time, this meant the woman who was raped and has the evidence to proof it and a version of events without major inconsistencies had to wait in line for justice.


    It really hasn't, it hasn't had any effect whatsoever on cases where a rape has been alleged to have occurred as each case will be judged upon the circumstances pertaining to each individual case. That's how the criminal justice system actually functions. It's not as though resources are actually that tight that the PSNI carry out investigations into allegations of rape one case at a time, let alone that the Courts services actually hear one case at a time. This means that in cases where the prosecution has what they believe to be sufficient evidence to support a conviction, the case will go forward for trial if the accused maintains that they are not guilty. It will still be up to the prosecution to present evidence to the jury that would lead them to determine that the accused is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

    Women continuing to march and to write letters to newspapapers and engaging in defamation online are not doing a service to genuine victims of rape.


    I don't know whether they are or they aren't tbh, as many of those women who are protesting and marching are victims of rape themselves, and I wouldn't stop anyone from protesting against something they have a fundamental disagreement with. Either we live in a free and democratic society, in which case we allow for civil protests, or we don't live in a free and democratic society, in which case nobody has permission to protest against what they believe to be an injustice. I know which society I personally prefer to live in.

    Complaining about women being questioned in court is futile too, men are entitled to defend themselves against accusations and you can bet your life if a son of anyone of those women pouring bile on Jacksons head was in jacksons position those women would want their sons to get the best defence money can buy.


    I'm not a woman, but I wouldn't bet my life on it that if my son were ever to behave anything like those men who find themselves in the position they're in now as a result of their own behaviour, you'd lose that bet, so I wouldn't be so quick to bet your life on anything tbh.


  • Options
    #8580
    jm08
    Registered Users Posts: 11,300 ✭✭✭✭jm08


    salmocab wrote: »
    Not sure what point your making, you said false allegations are fairly rare only 2-5% I said that 5% would hardly be rare and you then talk about going to court. I am happy to repeat that 1 in 20 would hardly be rare.

    I wouldn't think its that high. It would be interesting to compare to other false crime accusations).


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #8581
    upandcumming
    Registered Users Posts: 2,716 ✭✭✭upandcumming


    jm08 wrote: »
    False allegations are fairly rare - saw a stat of something like between 2 and 5%.

    Changing law in Iceland. New law means the accused must prove they had explicit consent.



    http://www.thejournal.ie/iceland-consent-3943673-Apr2018/

    Sweden are making similar type changes.


    jm08 wrote: »
    The new legislation (proposed by a man) was passed unanimously by the Icelandic parliament.

    #notallmen

    On a serious note, the accused having to prove anything is completely backward, and goes against innocent until proven guilty. Hard to have any faith in that.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement