Mrsmum wrote: » Fair enough but the point is still that I hire the best and I pay for the best. Anyway in the example I might admit to being a crime boss but I actually mightn't have done that particular crime.
tretorn wrote: » That is really sensible advice and most women who heed it manage to get home safe after nights out. You can scream and throw all your toys out of the pram but that is the truth. Most sensible parents say this to their daughters as they head out to nightclubs, dont drink, dont take drugs, stay with your friends. They dont dd the bit about engaging in casual sex with strangers becausee sensible parents think this doesnt need to be said. Parents dont usually worry about sons going out half as much but after the Beelfast case parents will be warning sons about one night stands and to learn from jacksons experience that you need to get consent in writing or risk a ten year prison sentence.
Lux23 wrote: » Eh, you saw Paddy Jackson's apology of last week? He has no chance of winning a libel case now.
Lux23 wrote: » Most women are raped by people they know. What sensible advice would you give to me to ensure my partner, friend, relative etc. doesn't rape me?
goz83 wrote: » Yes, but your point was tainted by a high likelihood of guilt because you said you were a major crime boss, rather than just having been accused of being one. In the eyes of any unbiased viewer, it would be an outrage to pay the legal fees under the circumstances outlaid in your anology. And to answer your follow up post here, I would say the edited analogy is akin to a convicted serial rapist being accused of another rape but being found not guilty due to lack of evidence and then having the state cover the fees. Crime bosses commit crime. Serial rapists rape people. We may not know of or be able to prove their guilt in all cases, but I am sure you see my point. I am of the view that the costs of the lads legal fees should be covered by the state. If nothing else, it will discourage weak cases being brought to court, resulting in higher conviction rates.
goz83 wrote: » Lux23 wrote: » Most women are raped by people they know. What sensible advice would you give to me to ensure my partner, friend, relative etc. doesn't rape me? Choose your partners and friends wisely. Don’t drink so much that you can’t walk straight. Don’t snork coke. Drugs are baad.
tretorn wrote: » Its the same as if I have an argument in my house and someone leaves upset, I would probably apologise becasue I woudnt like anyone leaving my house upset but I would be apologising for the argument causing upset, I wouldnt be changing my point of view on the argument though in anyway.
jm08 wrote: » People have every right to protest at having Evans at the club bearing in mind what he admitted to. He also had the nerve to say afterwards that women should be careful of getting drunk and how they behave because they might end up in the hands of a real rapist!
Faugheen wrote: » Or, just maybe, we could ask men to, you know, not rape people? Don't victim blame. It sums up exactly what people mean when they say we have a rape culture here.
lifeandtimes wrote: » So this happenedhttps://twitter.com/AodhanORiordain/status/983282392113836032 Obviously his legal team told him to do it because trouble is probably ciming his way in the line of a libel suit. The lawyers for jackson have said they are examing all social media regarding the case and plan to take high court proceedings againts any defamation
Grayson wrote: » Deranged and damaged? What's wrong with you? Ireland has some of the lowest participation for women in politics in the developed world. We currently have one of the highest participation levels we've ever had and it's still pitifully low. We're 78th in the world. Countries that have a higher participation include Iraq and Afghanistan.http://archive.ipu.org/wmn-e/classif.htm Wanting to see a parity is not deranged and people who'd like to see it are not damaged. I'd suggest that people who have your kind of visceral reaction to a suggestion that we have more people in parliament have some kind of twisted ideology. There's something wrong with you if you think that someone who thinks that we should have better participation than Iraq or Afghanistan is deranged and damaged.
BBDBB wrote: » 2 years of 4 young mens lives put on hold. Career ambitions, educational achievement, employment opportunities all stymied Press camped outside your house, photos and facts about your life regurgitated again and again to fill out news articles with limited new information Friends and neighbours gossiping about you every time you or your family show your face outside the door Months of preparation for a trial, stress and anxiety for you and your family 9 weeks of a trial where your future is at stake, photographed every day going into court scrutiny over what you wear, what you look like, what you are poured over in the press social media pre judging you by the court reports in the press as the story unfolds, with no pretence about due process, right to reply or any semblance of a fair go of it It takes a jury less than 4 hours, thats between right now and lunchtime to return a not guilty verdict. After months of pressure and stress on you and your family, it takes less than an hour per accusation, less than an hour per accused person for those who heard the evidence to determine you aren't guilty. You still face an internal investigation by the two interested bodies who control your career path, both potential employers, although with two years out of the game you aren't at your peak form anyway. Every word out your mouth is analysed as to whether its satisfactory to the mob Social media decides that the verdict isn't right and instead of facing a trial in the legal system of the land you face a trial by social media who have already decided you are guilty. They haven't heard all the evidence, but are sure you are guilty and so your punishment will be determined by a petition because clearly thats the only way justice will be served? Theres a line where justice becomes spiteful blind vengeance, I think we are there now, time to back away and let all four start to rebuild their lives as best they can
DavidLyons_ wrote: » The misandry being constantly spewed by that poster is nothing short of a disgrace. The quoted post insinuated that our male elected representatives do not protect our female citizens properly. The quotas suggestion is bullsh1t and if there are suitable and capable female candidates they are surely getting elected.
tretorn wrote: » Excellent post, every angle has been covered. The most unjust part of all is the fact that the verdict is still not being accepted by the twitter mob. The only thing stopping them calling Paddy jackson a rapist on twitter is his threat to take libel proceedings. Aodhan O Riordan has had his wings clipped and he will think twice in future about defamation laws before he disrespects a lawful verdict.
lifeandtimes wrote: » Telling someone to be careful before something happens is called advice Telling them after something happens to them is called victim blaming Get it right
Grayson wrote: » DavidLyons_ wrote: » The misandry being constantly spewed by that poster is nothing short of a disgrace. The quoted post insinuated that our male elected representatives do not protect our female citizens properly. The quotas suggestion is bullsh1t and if there are suitable and capable female candidates they are surely getting elected. I'd say that women would probably be better at highlighting women's issues than men would. That doesn't make me a misandrist does it? I also think it's a disgrace that Iraq and afghanistan have higher levels of participation. So, am I deranged and damaged?
DavidLyons_ wrote: » I dunno. I never said anyone was "deranged". That's your word. I have taken the view that I have of the poster from ALL of their postings - not just the one that you would like to dwell on.
Grayson wrote: » DavidLyons_ wrote: » I dunno. I never said anyone was "deranged". That's your word. I have taken the view that I have of the poster from ALL of their postings - not just the one that you would like to dwell on. So you agree with me that Ireland needs more women in parliament. And that women would, in general, be better advocates for women's issues?
Grayson wrote: » So you agree with me that Ireland needs more women in parliament. And that women would, in general, be better advocates for women's issues?
Appledreams15 wrote: When you have a nearly all male government, how do you expect women to be taken care of in this country?
Grayson wrote: Wanting to see a parity is not deranged and people who'd like to see it are not damaged. I'd suggest that people who have your kind of visceral reaction to a suggestion that we have more people in parliament have some kind of twisted ideology. There's something wrong with you if you think that someone who thinks that we should have better participation than Iraq or Afghanistan is deranged and damaged.
lifeandtimes wrote: » Similar to how people say "im sorry for your loss" The person saying sorry hasnt done anything wrong but they are sorry you are experiencing traumu or anguish
Mrsmum wrote: » I gave you a "fair enough" on the last one but I'm afraid I don't see your point on this one because you haven't a leg to stand on. If PJ is entitled to his legal costs back, everyone in every court case found not guilty is entitled to their legal costs back. Now he could sue the state and if he was able to prove that it was a weak case and the state knew it was a weak case then yes he gets his costs back. Otherwise I'm afraid he is exactly the same as every 'non guilty' person. And personally I think even a convicted rapist is entitled to due process.
tretorn wrote: » There is nothing in Jacksons aplogy to show he wont win a defamation case. no one can call him a rapist without risk of being sued. I notice the media are very careful now, they are saying the victim left his house crying, they arent saying she was covered in blood or brutalised like some people are still claiminghere. Jackson apologised because a guest(uninvited) to his home left upset. He didnt apologise for her upset or admit in anyway he caused it. Its the same as if I have an argument in my house and someone leaves upset, I would probably apologise becasue I woudnt like anyone leaving my house upset but I would be apologising for the argument causing upset, I wouldnt be changing my point of view on the argument though in anyway. Oldings apology was exactly the same, he apologised that the womans perception of events was different to his, he didnt say she made clear in anyway that she wasnt happy to be in the bedroom with himself and Jackson. The woman in my opinion should now apologise too for her role in the nights events. She shouldnt have gone uninvited to Jacksons house and she shouldnt have followed him upstairs. She should have made it completely clear that she didnt want to participate in the threesome either by word or by simply leaving the room. Jackson testified he would never have stopped her leaving and she needs to acknowledge that, she left when she decided to go and no body stopped her. She wasnt dragged up to the bedroom, she went of her own free will. It will be very interesting to see what evidence was deemed in inadmissable during the trial. The public also need to know the outcome of any investigation that takes place into the decision to bring this case to court, its the least taxpayers can expect when over a millions sterling of their tax has been spent on this trial, hopefully the files are subject to freedom of Information requests, if they arent we will never be told the truth of the matter.
goz83 wrote: » Faugheen wrote: » Or, just maybe, we could ask men to, you know, not rape people? Don't victim blame. It sums up exactly what people mean when they say we have a rape culture here. Have you ever asked any if the males in your family not to rape you. What would you say if you were out having a meal with some of your male family and friends and the female server took everyones order and before leaving, she says “Oh and to the men at the table, I would ask kindly that none of you rape me, I have to get home early tonight."
Faugheen wrote: Just so we're clear here, you're questioning the idea of telling men not to rape people?
Deleted User wrote: » Or we could just make it illegal.... Oh wait...
Faugheen wrote: » Just so we're clear here, you're questioning the idea of telling men not to rape people? Thanks for proving my point. I'm a man, btw.
