Belfast rape trial discussion thread II

goz83 · 15-04-2018 3:54pm

Appledreams15 wrote: »

I am not happy that Stuart and Paddy were sacked because I am vindictive, would like to see them suffer, or have any anger at them personally.

However, I am delighted because Ireland is beginning to take sexual assault more seriously.

We could not go on the way we were. I think if men knew the true scale of rapes in Ireland, they would be very ashamed to see that it was allowed to happen for such a long time, and procedures: court, support, education were not funded or paid any attention to.

This case has helped to highlight what needs to change

Seems to me that you are vindictive. Being part of the mob forcing innocent men out of the careers because they are men is sexist, vindictive and deplorable.

The only thing being taken seriously is money. That’s the only reason the IRFU appeased the mob.

I agree that we can't go on the way are. There needs to be actual evidence before someone is arrested and taken to court on a rape allegation. The current system where a woman cries rape and the man is treated like a rapist from the start needs to stop.

Would your employer be happy with you if your man hating messages were made available?

facehugger99 wrote: »

Paddy will need to hope rumours of a contract with Clermont are true - apparently he spent over 500k on his expensive legal team to get off the charges.

Given he hasn't played for 2 years it will be interesting to see how much he can command - certainly less than his previous contract.

It will also be interesting to see whether he can ever get back to the level where he was before his disgraceful behaviour. The out-half position is as much mental as physical and he may not be ever able to shake off the shame that will follow him around for the rest of his career - they'll certainly be plenty of sledging openings for rival fans and players to draw on. Does he have the mental strength to stand up to it? Time will tell - but I doubt it. Might have been better to cut his losses and try a new career path.

I read that the fees were just over 100k. Still a staggering figure, but far shirt of half a million.

It really is disturbing to see you take satisfaction from someone elses troubles. Keep throwing those stones.

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

Except there wasn’t any sexual assault or rape here.

And I have to be honest here Apple - your posts are very demeaning toward men. I’m guessing that somewhere along the line someone hurt you and I’m sorry it happened but you’re letting it color your view of men as a whole and that’s really unfair.

She mentioned earlier that she was raped. Could be true, or could be BS. She has shown clearly that she is completely and illogically biased in favour of women.

meeeeh wrote: »

Yes but they weren't let go for rape, it was their what's app messages. So tell me is that a message we should give to young girls. You are there to provide two holes, don't worry about your own enjoyment.

2 holes? Still a virgin? Bless.

joe40 wrote: »

What qualifies me to give that woman any advice. If she asked I would tell her to be careful use good judgement, but the vast majority of young men are not dangerous.
If she finds herself in an abusive relationship where a lot of rapes occur then seek help to get out as quickly as possible.
This woman is young so when she gets over this I hope she has good nights out in the future and meets nice fellas that dont seem.to have a obsession with spit roasting.
That would be my advice

I would hope that all men stay well clear of this woman. God forbid she gets upset and they find themselves up for rape charges.

Silentcorner wrote: »

Bu bu bu but it is...why did Stuart Olding get his solicitor to read out a handwritten note prepared by him, apologising for his role in an unsavoury incident. Do you think he was lying?

Just because you don't think it is an answer, doesn't mean you are right.

He knew there was an angry mob. He gave them half a pound of flesh to keep them off his back.

skearnsot wrote: »

I’m pretty sure George Hook tried to make reference to something like this behaviour on the airwaves and the rest is history ............. or am I wrong?! George Hook was not talking about this case at the time either

The GH debacle was a disgrace. He was accused of victim blaming where he only wanted to spark a debate and question responsibility. People accused him of saying things which were simply not said and they also latched onto his apology. Any sane person knows his apology was an effort to keep his position, but of course it wasn’t enough for the mob.

facehugger99 · 15-04-2018 3:57pm

Other than the solicitors, would it be fair to say that the big winner from the last couple of weeks is young Joey Carbery?

Great chance to become the long term successor to Sexton at out-half.

Delighted for him, seems like a nice chap.

givyjoe · 15-04-2018 4:00pm

Faugheen wrote: »

He won't.

You don't want him to you mean.

Every possibility post Schmidt that he will.

mfceiling · 15-04-2018 4:02pm

facehugger99 wrote: »

Other than the solicitors, would it be fair to say that the big winner from the last couple of weeks is young Joey Carbery?

Great chance to become the long term successor to Sexton at out-half.

Delighted for him, seems like a nice chap.

Hopefully he is because God forbid he makes a mistake and you'll be down on him like a ton of bricks.

givyjoe · 15-04-2018 4:02pm

facehugger99 wrote: »

Other than the solicitors, would it be fair to say that the big winner from the last couple of weeks is young Joey Carbery?

Great chance to become the long term successor to Sexton at out-half.

Delighted for him, seems like a nice chap.

You seem to be taking almost perverse amount of delight from the latest events.

ArthurDayne · 15-04-2018 4:04pm

joe40 wrote: »

Context nature of private messages is well accepted, it is not a difficult concept.

Then you agree with me that using sexist or objectifying language in private does not automatically make one sexist or a sexual deviant. You agree then with the point I have been making from the start.

joe40 wrote: »

The court case found the men innocent of the very specific charges against, it made no ruling at all on apart from that.

I am not sure what your point is here.

joe40 wrote: »

The men's own apology to their credit acknowledged their wrongdoing.

You would be extremely naive to assume that these apologies were not a simple gesture to appease public outcry. In any case, they acknowledged 'wrongdoing' in a moral sense, not legal. The acknowledgement that they acted like total sh*tebags is not an admission of having done something worthy of losing their job over.

joe40 wrote: »

We all have complex personalities, but how we behave both in public and private are indicators of that personality.

But not definitive. Do you accept that? If so -- then again you have agreed with me.

joe40 wrote: »

On a separate note please understand the importance of brevity

This is eye-rolling stuff. You are under no obligation to read my posts or respond to them. 'The importance of brevity' seems a slightly arbitrary concept -- I wasn't aware that issues such as the limits around freedom of speech and freedom of expression were issues where brevity was important. I could just as easily argue that people need be less brief on this and express their views a little deeper and maybe we might all learn something -- myself included.

I shall leave it to the moderators to let me know if a few paragraphs is simply too much for the brain to process . . .

skearnsot · 15-04-2018 4:08pm

goz83 wrote: »

Seems to me that you are vindictive. Being part of the mob forcing innocent men out of the careers because they are men is sexist, vindictive and deplorable.

The only thing being taken seriously is money. That’s the only reason the IRFU appeased the mob.

I agree that we can't go on the way are. There needs to be actual evidence before someone is arrested and taken to court on a rape allegation. The current system where a woman cries rape and the man is treated like a rapist from the start needs to stop.

Would your employer be happy with you if your man hating messages were made available?

I read that the fees were just over 100k. Still a staggering figure, but far shirt of half a million.

It really is disturbing to see you take satisfaction from someone elses troubles. Keep throwing those stones.

She mentioned earlier that she was raped. Could be true, or could be BS. She has shown clearly that she is completely and illogically biased in favour of women.

2 holes? Still a virgin? Bless.

I would hope that all men stay well clear of this woman. God forbid she gets upset and they find themselves up for rape charges.

He knew there was an angry mob. He gave them half a pound of flesh to keep them off his back.

The GH debacle was a disgrace. He was accused of victim blaming where he only wanted to spark a debate and question responsibility. People accused him of saying things which were simply not said and they also latched onto his apology. Any sane person knows his apology was an effort to keep his position, but of course it wasn’t enough for the mob.

GH should never have been let go like that & I stuck up for him every time in this particular instance - PC gone completely out of friggin control

tritium · 15-04-2018 4:09pm

joe40 wrote: »

Well this is a genuine question for you. At what stage is it safe or appropriate for a woman to go to a man room. ( just keeping it heterosexual for convenience)
I'm not trying to be awkward. Genuine question.

Well good question. It’s certainly not safe or appropriate for her to go to the room of a man who is too drunk to consent and begin sexual activity with him

Because that would of course be sexual assault on her part

Right?

sporina · 15-04-2018 4:15pm

goz83 wrote: »

Falsely accused men don’t want sympathy. They want justice. When it is proven that someone has made a false accusation, they should get thrown into prison the same way convicted rapists are thrown into prison. Both are scum.

There is conflicting research everywhere, but lets take thise figures for now and round them off. For every 10 alleged rapes, 1 of them will be proven to be false. That’s a lot of false allegations. There aren’t many jail cells with false accusers in them, are there? Usually nothing happens even when it is proven that the accuser is lying, or blatantly admits it.

Yes, that’s correct. My mistake.

Not Guilty. What were the messages Paddy Jackson sent? Can you quote them and then honestly say he deserved to be sacked for the single message he sent?

Some wouldn’t be happy until these lads were hanging from a rope. Anonymous bullies is all most of them are.

And now you are believing what Paddy Jackson says? Well, that’s certainly a change. Believe him when it suits you eh?

see link below
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/ashamed-paddy-jackson-apologises-for-degrading-messages-1.3452843

Faugheen · 15-04-2018 4:17pm

pjohnson wrote: »

Nah mob rule has probably ended his international career. Any idea the reasons why Murphy and Easterby could and did play for Ireland though? I dont think its a recent ruling as Neil Best stopped playing internationally when he left Ulster for England so genuinely curious.

Nah, Jackson did a good job of ending his own career.

I genuinely don't know what the story with Murphy was though. Leo Cullen wasn't picked (or at least he wasn't often picked) when he played with Leicester. It was only when he returned to Leinster that he was selected in Ireland squads more regularly.

I remember reading somewhere that Murphy felt he would have won more caps if he was in Ireland, mind.

Roger Hassenforder · 15-04-2018 4:20pm

Silentcorner wrote: »

Jesus Christ...

Maybe Rory should have tried to explain that to her in the cab ride home!!!

Jesus christ is right!
Is the concept of a girl targetting a high profile rugby player for sex so alien?
Conor and Simon's friend boasted about it

goz83 · 15-04-2018 4:23pm

sporina wrote: »

see link below
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/ashamed-paddy-jackson-apologises-for-degrading-messages-1.3452843

Was there a point you were making?

Faugheen · 15-04-2018 4:23pm

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

Silentcorner wrote: »

Jesus Christ...

Maybe Rory should have tried to explain that to her in the cab ride home!!!

Jesus christ is right!
Is the concept of a girl targetting a high profile rugby player for sex so alien?
Conor and Simon's friend boasted about it

Paddy and Stuart's didn't.

Silentcorner · 15-04-2018 4:23pm

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

Jesus christ is right!
Is the concept of a girl targetting a high profile rugby player for sex so alien?
Conor and Simon's friend boasted about it

Did this young lady boast about it? Please post a link because it is the first I've heard of it.

It's hard to tell with this one, she was sobbing so much she was barely able to tell the cab driver her address....

Have you absolutely no empathy for a young woman who arrived home from a night out, sobbing to the point where she could barely talk?

facehugger99 · 15-04-2018 4:24pm

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

The man did absolutely nothing wrong.

Is must be concerning for women when they read statements like the above.

Paddy has more understanding of his failings than some of his supporters on here.

Roger Hassenforder · 15-04-2018 4:39pm

Silentcorner wrote: »

Did this young lady boast about it? Please post a link because it is the first I've heard of it.

It's hard to tell with this one, she was sobbing so much she was barely able to tell the cab driver her address....

Have you absolutely no empathy for a young woman who arrived home from a night out, sobbing to the point where she could barely talk?

Theres several issues here youre conflating into one.
(Have i empathy for someone raped? Of course.
Have i empathy for a girl in tears? Yes.

Does a girl in tears mean she was raped?

Faugheen wrote: »

Paddy and Stuart's didn't.

Do girls target high profile sports stars for sex or not?

meeeeh · 15-04-2018 4:41pm

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

I
If nothing else maybe girls will stop throwing themselves at these guys and devaluing their productso cheaply.

Did you notice how you used the used expression 'cheaply' like they are selling sex?

AudreyHepburn · 15-04-2018 4:45pm

If I have learned one thing from this whole debacle it’s that far from being an enlightened and forward thinking country when it comes to sexual matters we still seem to be trapped in a 19th century mindset where sex is something a man does to a woman rather than it being a consensual act between two people.

As a woman this really bothers me - on the one hand my fellow women go on about wanting equality and being seen as strong and liberated and independent yet on the other hand they can’t revert to the victim mentality quick enough when it comes to their interactions with men

I think it’s time we start acting like the grown women we are and take responsibility for ourselves and our choices. That’s what a truly strong woman does. She doesn’t revert to man hating and acting like a victim to get her way.

FrancieBrady · 15-04-2018 4:47pm

facehugger99 wrote: »

Other than the solicitors, would it be fair to say that the big winner from the last couple of weeks is young Joey Carbery?

Great chance to become the long term successor to Sexton at out-half.

Delighted for him, seems like a nice chap.

Have you checked his whatsapp history first? Seems only fair if you are going to be choosing who to be 'delighted' for.

Silentcorner · 15-04-2018 4:50pm

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

Theres several issues here youre conflating into one.
(Have i empathy for someone raped? Of course.
Have i empathy for a girl in tears? Yes.

Does a girl in tears mean she was raped?

Do girls target high profile sports stars for sex or not?

But you were suggesting she got a great deal (getting two fine specimen as opposed to the boys having to share one)....how is that empathy? Did you ignore what state she arrived home in?

Does a girl in tears mean she was raped? I think it is fair to suggest she isn't feeling boastful.

Faugheen · 15-04-2018 4:56pm

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

Faugheen wrote: »

Paddy and Stuart's didn't.

Do girls target high profile sports stars for sex or not?

Some do, yes.

You said the girl involved with Murray and Zebo was boasting about it, which is completely irrelevant to what happened here, because the girl involved here was the complete opposite.

I think a lot of people here refuse to accept the possibility that she believes she was raped yet the lads believed it was consensual. It is absolutely possible that this is the case.

However, some people on either side just want to shout the other down, and give completely irrelevant comparisons.

This case is not a black and white one. Can you find two men guilty of rape when they believed it was consensual? In these circumstances, I don't think you can.

However, this 'false accusation' nonsense has to stop. You can't promote 'innocent until proven guilty' and then say that this girl falsely accused them of rape. Until this is proven, there's absolutely no evidence for it.

Even the defence thought the judge was so convinced by the complainants story that they accused her of being more sympathic to the complainant in her charge to the jury.

By all accounts, this woman was a very credible witness (so say most of the journos in the room). Otherwise, the defence wouldn't have tried to get the case thrown out so many times. They knew that this wasn't going to be an easy one to win. She's either telling the truth (or at least her perception of events) or she's a great actress.

Having said all that, Jackson's barrister sounds like a man very much worth the money. He crucified the prosecution evidence in his closing statement.

Do all of the above mean she was raped? Nah, but it shows that there is a wider conversation on consent that needs to be had. She could believe she was, but the lads would have been none the wiser.

It's such a sorry case for all involved, really.

meeeeh · 15-04-2018 5:01pm

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

If I have learned one thing from this whole debacle it’s that far from being an enlightened and forward thinking country when it comes to sexual matters we still seem to be trapped in a 19th century mindset where sex is something a man does to a woman rather than it being a consensual act between two people.

As a woman this really bothers me - on the one hand my fellow women go on about wanting equality and being seen as strong and liberated and independent yet on the other hand they can’t revert to the victim mentality quick enough when it comes to their interactions with men

I think it’s time we start acting like the grown women we are and take responsibility for ourselves and our choices. That’s what a truly strong woman does. She doesn’t revert to man hating and acting like a victim to get her way.

And yet in all your statements you said you would teach girls how not to regret sex. Not once you mentioned you would teach them that they should enjoy it.

You preach a lot what a strong woman does, yet you don't understand that standing up for herself is not man hating, it's being strong.

It's also funny how it's all women's fault. Fairly despicable messages are just private conversations (it's good to know that, if I plan murder over what's app it's just private conversation) and nobody should be offended by that. And then it's the obligatory statement that only repressed people don't agree with you despite being pointed out on numerous occasions that consensual mutually enjoyable sex is not a problem.

FrancieBrady · 15-04-2018 5:04pm

Faugheen wrote: »

Some do, yes.

You said the girl involved with Murray and Zebo was boasting about it, which is completely irrelevant to what happened here, because the girl involved here was the complete opposite.

I think a lot of people here refuse to accept the possibility that she believes she was raped yet the lads believed it was consensual. It is absolutely possible that this is the case.

However, some people on either side just want to shout the other down, and give completely irrelevant comparisons.

This case is not a black and white one. Can you find two men guilty of rape when they believed it was consensual? In these circumstances, I don't think you can.

However, this 'false accusation' nonsense has to stop. You can't promote 'innocent until proven guilty' and then say that this girl falsely accused them of rape. Until this is proven, there's absolutely no evidence for it.

Even the defence thought the judge was so convinced by the complainants story that they accused her of being more sympathic to the complainant in her charge to the jury.

By all accounts, this woman was a very credible witness (so say most of the journos in the room). Otherwise, the defence wouldn't have tried to get the case thrown out so many times. They knew that this wasn't going to be an easy one to win. She's either telling the truth (or at least her perception of events) or she's a great actress.

Having said all that, Jackson's barrister sounds like a man very much worth the money. He crucified the prosecution evidence in his closing statement.

Do all of the above mean she was raped? Nah, but it shows that there is a wider conversation on consent that needs to be had. She could believe she was, but the lads would have been none the wiser.

It's such a sorry case for all involved, really.

And yet the jury decided inordinately quickly on many charges.

meeeeh · 15-04-2018 5:07pm

FrancieBrady wrote: »

And yet the jury decided inordinately quickly on many charges.

And prosecution decided the case is strong enough to bring it forward. An awful lot of people decide an awful lot of things and unless you know how and why they decided something your conclusions are pure speculation.

joe40 · 15-04-2018 5:08pm

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Faugheen wrote: »

Some do, yes.

You said the girl involved with Murray and Zebo was boasting about it, which is completely irrelevant to what happened here, because the girl involved here was the complete opposite.

I think a lot of people here refuse to accept the possibility that she believes she was raped yet the lads believed it was consensual. It is absolutely possible that this is the case.

However, some people on either side just want to shout the other down, and give completely irrelevant comparisons.

This case is not a black and white one. Can you find two men guilty of rape when they believed it was consensual? In these circumstances, I don't think you can.

However, this 'false accusation' nonsense has to stop. You can't promote 'innocent until proven guilty' and then say that this girl falsely accused them of rape. Until this is proven, there's absolutely no evidence for it.

Even the defence thought the judge was so convinced by the complainants story that they accused her of being more sympathic to the complainant in her charge to the jury.

By all accounts, this woman was a very credible witness (so say most of the journos in the room). Otherwise, the defence wouldn't have tried to get the case thrown out so many times. They knew that this wasn't going to be an easy one to win. She's either telling the truth (or at least her perception of events) or she's a great actress.

Having said all that, Jackson's barrister sounds like a man very much worth the money. He crucified the prosecution evidence in his closing statement.

Do all of the above mean she was raped? Nah, but it shows that there is a wider conversation on consent that needs to be had. She could believe she was, but the lads would have been none the wiser.

It's such a sorry case for all involved, really.

And yet the jury decided inordinately quickly on many charges.

What is the implication of that

Faugheen · 15-04-2018 5:08pm

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Faugheen wrote: »

Some do, yes.

You said the girl involved with Murray and Zebo was boasting about it, which is completely irrelevant to what happened here, because the girl involved here was the complete opposite.

I think a lot of people here refuse to accept the possibility that she believes she was raped yet the lads believed it was consensual. It is absolutely possible that this is the case.

However, some people on either side just want to shout the other down, and give completely irrelevant comparisons.

This case is not a black and white one. Can you find two men guilty of rape when they believed it was consensual? In these circumstances, I don't think you can.

However, this 'false accusation' nonsense has to stop. You can't promote 'innocent until proven guilty' and then say that this girl falsely accused them of rape. Until this is proven, there's absolutely no evidence for it.

Even the defence thought the judge was so convinced by the complainants story that they accused her of being more sympathic to the complainant in her charge to the jury.

By all accounts, this woman was a very credible witness (so say most of the journos in the room). Otherwise, the defence wouldn't have tried to get the case thrown out so many times. They knew that this wasn't going to be an easy one to win. She's either telling the truth (or at least her perception of events) or she's a great actress.

Having said all that, Jackson's barrister sounds like a man very much worth the money. He crucified the prosecution evidence in his closing statement.

Do all of the above mean she was raped? Nah, but it shows that there is a wider conversation on consent that needs to be had. She could believe she was, but the lads would have been none the wiser.

It's such a sorry case for all involved, really.

And yet the jury decided inordinately quickly on many charges.

Francie, which part of the post have I said or even suggested it should have been otherwise?

Seriously, read it. There is absolutely nothing wrong with what I've said in it. I haven't said the lads raped her, I haven't said they should have been found guilty. I've simply said that she felt she could have been and the lads were none the wiser.

I even said you can't convict based off all that.

Seriously, why do I have to explain myself every single time to you when you simply refuse to read what the post even says?

AudreyHepburn · 15-04-2018 5:14pm

meeeeh wrote: »

And yet in all your statements you said you would teach girls how not to regret sex. Not once you mentioned you would teach them that they should enjoy it.

You preach a lot what a strong woman does, yet you don't understand that standing up for herself is not man hating, it's being strong.

It's also funny how it's all women's fault. Fairly despicable messages are just private conversations (it's good to know that, if I plan murder over what's app it's just private conversation) and nobody should be offended by that. And then it's the obligatory statement that only repressed people don't agree with you despite being pointed out on numerous occasions that consensual mutually enjoyable sex is not a problem.

Why do you persist in misinterpreting what I am saying?

I never said it was all women’s fault. I never said we can’t enjoy sex I never said that standing up for yourself is man hating.

I am simply making the point that as women our unwillingness to take personal responsibility for our choices when it comes to sexual matters is dangerous.

We simply can’t blame men for everything that goes wrong- if we truly are the strong modern women we claim to be then we should be able take responsibility for our own choices and accept the mistakes we make.

Sardonicat · 15-04-2018 5:18pm

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

We simply can’t blame men for everything that goes wrong- if we truly are the strong modern women we claim to be then we should be able take responsibility for our own choices and accept the mistakes we make.

Who is blaming men fot their mistakes? What mistakes are you referring to? Your post is very unclear.

mfceiling · 15-04-2018 5:19pm

Faugheen wrote: »

Nah, Jackson did a good job of ending his own career.

I genuinely don't know what the story with Murphy was though. Leo Cullen wasn't picked (or at least he wasn't often picked) when he played with Leicester. It was only when he returned to Leinster that he was selected in Ireland squads more regularly.

I remember reading somewhere that Murphy felt he would have won more caps if he was in Ireland, mind.

I'm not being smart here but there are people posting here about rugby matters who probably watch the 6N games and that's it.
Players like Olding and PJ won't be missed? They were average?

The reason why overseas players aren't picked is a decision made by the IRFU to keep their best players in ireland where they can manage their workload.
In the past very few players playing outside ireland got to play for the national team. Murphy, Bowe and Easterby were exceptions to this. EOS said before that if he had to pick between the player playing at home or the one abroad he neatly always gave the nod to the guy plying his trade here.

Not having a go at you Faugheen - just clearing up the above.

15-04-2018 5:20pm

Silentcorner wrote: »

Did this young lady boast about it? Please post a link because it is the first I've heard of it.

It's hard to tell with this one, she was sobbing so much she was barely able to tell the cab driver her address....

Have you absolutely no empathy for a young woman who arrived home from a night out, sobbing to the point where she could barely talk?

She could have been sobbing at the result of being humiliated or sore. Rough sex does not constitute rape. Sobbing does not constitute guilt on the mens part. So if you see a woman sobbing does it mean she has just been raped?

Did you read the part where she claimed to have looked at Paddy Jackson pleadingly in the eye while lying on her stomach? She must be a contortionist. And she returned to the house to collect her belongings a couple of minutes later in spite of her trauma?

I think the girl was humiliated but there is holes in her story and given the key witness Dara Florences testimony, it would be very very hard to prove that consent wasnt given here.

My honest belief is that was young and stupid she got herself into a situation where she wasnt mature enough to handle the outcome and thought to get revenge on the men in question. As a result, everyones a loser.

Dont get me wrong, the men in question dont come out of this smelling of roses in any way shape or form but they are not rapists

Sardonicat · 15-04-2018 5:26pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

She could have been sobbing at the result of being humiliated or sore. Rough sex does not constitute rape. Sobbing does not constitute guilt on the mens part. So if you see a woman sobbing does it mean she has just been raped?

Did you read the part where she claimed to have looked at Paddy Jackson pleadingly in the eye while lying on her stomach? She must be a contortionist. And she returned to the house to collect her belongings a couple of minutes later in spite of her trauma?

I think the girl was humiliated but there is holes in her story and given the key witness Dara Florences testimony, it would be very very hard to prove that consent wasnt given here.

My honest belief is that was young and stupid she got herself into a situation where she wasnt mature enough to handle the outcome and thought to get revenge on the men in question. As a result, everyones a loser.

What situation do you think she got herself into that she couldn't handle?

meeeeh · 15-04-2018 5:27pm

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

Why do you persist in misinterpreting what I am saying?

I never said it was all women’s fault. I never said we can’t enjoy sex I never said that standing up for yourself is man hating.

I am simply making the point that as women our unwillingness to take personal responsibility for our choices when it comes to sexual matters is dangerous.

We simply can’t blame men for everything that goes wrong- if we truly are the strong modern women we claim to be then we should be able take responsibility for our own choices and accept the mistakes we make.

They were rightfully cleared of rape, the evidence just wasn't enough. But your opinion that it was just a threesome she regreted is also pure speculation. Versions of events from all involved were pretty confused so you can only make a conclusion it was just sex she regretted because it's a conclusion that suits certain narrative.

AudreyHepburn · 15-04-2018 5:27pm

Sardonicat wrote: »

Who is blaming men fot their mistakes? What mistakes are you referring to? Your post is very unclear.

I was referring to the idea a lot women seem to have that if you regret having sex then it’s rape.

I think that was possibly the case in this trial but everyone seems determined to blame only the four lads and to absolve the girl of any responsibility.

AudreyHepburn · 15-04-2018 5:29pm

meeeeh wrote: »

They were rightfully cleared of rape, the evidence just wasn't enough. But your opinion that it was just a threesome she regreted is also pure speculation. Versions of events from all involved were pretty confused so you can only make a conclusion it was just sex she regretted because it's a conclusion that suits certain narrative.

Tbh I lean more towards it being a misunderstanding as regards consent but I am willing to accept that it could be simply regret.

There is no evidence of it being rape at all and to claim otherwise is just silly.

Roger Hassenforder · 15-04-2018 5:32pm

meeeeh wrote: »

Did you notice how you used the used expression 'cheaply' like they are selling sex?

Nice attempt to affect some affront. God , the preciousness.
Its a turn of phrase, at the risk of mansplaining*

Ill rephrase it as you may have difficulties.
Maybe if the girls held themselves in higher regard, not to throw themselves at someone who wont appreciate them for who they are as a person, rather than someone to fcuk on a particular night.
Its a two way street. Ive been fcuked by girls who couldnt remember my name. Im sure i was used a few times for gratification on ONS. As i have. Its called casual sex. Women and men engage enthusiastically in it. All. The. Time.

We're not living in some backward society where women are expected to remain pure and chaste for their future husbands. There are the odd throwback of a Neanderthal that wishes this was the case, and youre coming accross as someone who seems to want to deny female sexuality). Newsflash: women enjoy sex. Women can initate a sexual relationship with a stranger. However, if a girl initates such a relationship, while she doesnt deserve to be raped, she may be "used" for sex as other women use other men.
This isnt a difficult concept. Its equality.
Freedom to fcuk who we want as long as its consensual.

Oh dear, im after victim blaming all girls who are just forced to persue high profile sports stars for sex.
I cant win. *rollseyes

*nods to facehugger

Silentcorner · 15-04-2018 5:33pm

Deleted User wrote: »

She could have been sobbing at the result of being humiliated or sore. Rough sex does not constitute rape. Sobbing does not constitute guilt on the mens part. So if you see a woman sobbing does it mean she has just been raped?

Did you read the part where she claimed to have looked at Paddy Jackson pleadingly in the eye while lying on her stomach? She must be a contortionist. And she returned to the house to collect her belongings a couple of minutes later in spite of her trauma?

I think the girl was humiliated but there is holes in her story and given the key witness Dara Florences testimony, it would be very very hard to prove that consent wasnt given here.

My honest belief is that was young and stupid she got herself into a situation where she wasnt mature enough to handle the outcome and thought to get revenge on the men in question. As a result, everyones a loser.

Dont get me wrong, the men in question dont come out of this smelling of roses in any way shape or form but they are not rapists

She was sobbing for the best part of half an hour!!!

So, unless she had a leg chopped off I think we can rule out soreness.

If it was humiliation that caused that reaction, then it was some humiliation!!

There are holes in everyones stories, including Dara Florence.

What do you think she wasn't able to handle?

meeeeh · 15-04-2018 5:36pm

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

There is no evidence of it being rape at all and to claim otherwise is just silly.

Because there is always loads of evidence in a rape case...

15-04-2018 5:37pm

Sardonicat wrote: »

What situation do you think she got herself into that she couldn't handle?

This girl a 19 year old, ended up going back to Paddy Jacksons house with a few rugby players, going into their room and performing oral sex on two to three of the men. This is what i believe happened. I believe her claim was made as a result of deep regret of her actions and the fact that she was seen by a woman and that her reputation would be severely damaged around Belfast as a result.

Did she even know Jackson or Olding before this whole debacle?

Sardonicat · 15-04-2018 5:38pm

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

I was referring to the idea a lot women seem to have that if you regret having sex then it’s rape.

I think that was probably the case in this trial but everyone seems determined to blame only the four lads and to absolve the girl of any responsibility.

I haven't come across these women who have that idea.

Appledreams15 · 15-04-2018 5:39pm

I noticed today that I did something different because of this thread. My colleague asked to go for a walk with me today, to a river.

On the way he asked to stop at his appartment to pick up something. I said, ok, I will wait for you outside. And I did.

I realise, especially after reading some of the comments on this thread, "she shouldnt have gone to his house" etc., that I am not safe going into a man's appartment, and that I must protect myself.

AudreyHepburn · 15-04-2018 5:39pm

Deleted User wrote: »

This girl a 19 year old, ended up going back to Paddy Jacksons house with a few rugby players, going into their room and performing oral sex on two to three of the men. This is what i believe happened. I believe her claim was made as a result of deep regret of her actions and the fact that she was seen by a woman and that her reputation would be severely damaged around Belfast as a result.

Did she even know Jackson or Olding before this whole debacle?

I think I read that she had a crush on Jackson for ages despite the later claims that she had no idea who they were.

Sardonicat · 15-04-2018 5:40pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

This girl a 19 year old, ended up going back to Paddy Jacksons house with a few rugby players, going into their room and performing oral sex on two to three of the men. This is what i believe happened. I believe her claim was made as a result of deep regret of her actions and the fact that she was seen by a woman and that her reputation would be severely damaged around Belfast as a result.

Did she even know Jackson or Olding before this whole debacle?

I didn't know oral sex could result in a tear of the vaginal wall.

And what is the relevance of whether she knew the men or not?

Sardonicat · 15-04-2018 5:43pm

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

I think I read that she had a crush on Jackson for ages despite the later claims that she had no idea who they were.

Where did you read thay? And what is the relevance?

AudreyHepburn · 15-04-2018 5:44pm

meeeeh wrote: »

Because there is always loads of evidence in a rape case...

This is getting tiresome now and I don’t want to waste my time arguing with someone who clearly has a chip on their shoulders and who subscribes to the guilty until proven innocent club.

This was not a rape - at worst it was a misunderstanding in terms of consent.

At the end of the day if women were more willing to take responsibility for their choices instead of putting all the onus on men we would all be much better off.

meeeeh · 15-04-2018 5:44pm

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

Oh dear, im after victim blaming all girls who are just forced to persue high profile sports stars for sex.
I cant win. *rollseyes

*nods to facehugger

No I was implying you consider girls who have sex with someone because they are famous prostitutes. Being judgemental and all that.

AudreyHepburn · 15-04-2018 5:46pm

Sardonicat wrote: »

Where did you read thay? And what is the relevance?

I genuinely can’t remember, I’ll have to look it up.

As for the relevance I was replying to the poster who asked if she knew who they were, that’s all so don’t try and twist if.

15-04-2018 5:47pm

Sardonicat wrote: »

I didn't know oral sex could result in a tear of the vaginal wall.

And what is the relevance of whether she knew the men or not?

Jackson was also charged and alleged to have unlawfully penetrated her with his fingers so that could explain that tear.

My point is why would she go upstairs with guys she didnt know? Granted they were rugby players but she was a young girl who didnt know them personally.

Roger Hassenforder · 15-04-2018 5:47pm

Silentcorner wrote: »

But you were suggesting she got a great deal (getting two fine specimen as opposed to the boys having to share one)....how is that empathy? Did you ignore what state she arrived home in?

Does a girl in tears mean she was raped? I think it is fair to suggest she isn't feeling boastful.

Have you deliberately ignored where i explicitly expressed empathy for either a girl raped, or a girl in tears? You seem to have.
Its a pity because you're now just repeating yourself.

A girl in tears certainly does not mean she was raped. There are several reasons that could explain wby a girl is in tears, one of which could be rape. But it isnt evidence of rape. You need to divest yourself of this notion, and stop repeating it enough times in the hope it will make it true in some way.

It was an asendum to a paragraph where i doubted the lads were top shaggers as they claimed. What is wrong with the logic though, lets tease it out:

Women enjoys sex with famous sports star?
Ends up with two of them? Bonus? I know if i pulled a famous sportstar, lets say Anna kourinikova, and in the middle of it on walked Maria Sharapova in her undies id be thrilled.
Men generally prefer MFF rather than MMF. But hang on, are you saying maybe we're not equal afterall? That a women couldnt enjoy a threesome? Thats a serious contention.

Faugheen · 15-04-2018 5:49pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Sardonicat wrote: »

What situation do you think she got herself into that she couldn't handle?

This girl a 19 year old, ended up going back to Paddy Jacksons house with a few rugby players, going into their room and performing oral sex on two to three of the men. This is what i believe happened. I believe her claim was made as a result of deep regret of her actions and the fact that she was seen by a woman and that her reputation would be severely damaged around Belfast as a result.

Did she even know Jackson or Olding before this whole debacle?

So she was afraid of her reputation being damaged she decided having a 2 years before a 9 week trial in which she was questioned for 8 days and had her underwear shown in open court was a better idea?

Sardonicat · 15-04-2018 5:49pm

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

I genuinely can’t remember, I’ll have to look it up.

As for the relevance I was replying to the poster who asked if she knew who they were, that’s all so don’t try and twist if.

I'm not trying to twist anything. I genuinely want to understand the relevance of whether or not she knew who these guys were.

Belfast rape trial discussion thread II

Comments