Appledreams15 wrote: » I looked at that Van Persie case there. It doesn't say that she made a false allegation. It says that the case did not proceed because there was not enough evidence. Most rape cases do not get to court due to lack of evidence (it will change in the future). That is not a false allegation. There are of course actual false rape accusations yes.
Deleted User wrote: » I wouldn't have thought his wealth or lack thereof, would have any bearing on his claim?
pjohnson wrote: » How will that change?
Squatter wrote: » Wouldn't you?
FrancieBrady wrote: » Faugheen wrote: » I haven't presented that as a fact. I used it as part my perception as to what she could have been thinking. Nothing about my post implies force was used. Again you read that, got offended, and got the wrong idea. I'll spell out what I meant because you're clearly the only person that doesn't ****ing get it. In HER mind, Olding comes in, and she finds herself in a position she doesn't want to be in (surrounded by (in her mind) two big strong rugby players), she felt intimidated (through no fault of Olding or Jackson), 'froze', and then just let whatever happened, happen. I made no implication that force was used. All of the above is not being displayed as fact. There was no evidence of force being used when Olding entered the room, so why would I imply that? Again, YOU are assuming I'm saying something completely hidden in my messages when I'm ****ing not. I'm sorry if you're not intelligent enough to realise that, but I'm not implying anything you think I'm implying nor am I presenting any of the above as a fact. I think we get what you are doing, all right. I think you think that your undermining of the case is subtle...it isn't. It is fairly blatant in your postings on this site. There is literally no evidence to suggest she was there under duress or that she was frozen. The actual evidence we have from the only independent witness to the events in the room was that what was happening was consensual and that it looked like all were enjoying what was happening.
Faugheen wrote: » I haven't presented that as a fact. I used it as part my perception as to what she could have been thinking. Nothing about my post implies force was used. Again you read that, got offended, and got the wrong idea. I'll spell out what I meant because you're clearly the only person that doesn't ****ing get it. In HER mind, Olding comes in, and she finds herself in a position she doesn't want to be in (surrounded by (in her mind) two big strong rugby players), she felt intimidated (through no fault of Olding or Jackson), 'froze', and then just let whatever happened, happen. I made no implication that force was used. All of the above is not being displayed as fact. There was no evidence of force being used when Olding entered the room, so why would I imply that? Again, YOU are assuming I'm saying something completely hidden in my messages when I'm ****ing not. I'm sorry if you're not intelligent enough to realise that, but I'm not implying anything you think I'm implying nor am I presenting any of the above as a fact.
Appledreams15 wrote: » They have launched a review into all sexual assault trials in Ireland.
Faugheen wrote: » The independent witness also said that she couldn't say for sure that the complainant was positively consenting. So there we go. I can give my opinion on what happened that night, you have no right to tell me I'm trying to 'undermine' the case, when I'm not. I would like an apology from you for claiming that I implied Olding and Jackson used force on her with absolutely no evidence other misrepresenting what I said.
Roger Hassenforder wrote: » Ive a suspicion their claim of being "top shaggers" was made toungue in cheek, and as part of their childish and immature "bants". I seriously doubt anyone thinks they are in fact a top shagger, particulary when appraising anothers performance. (Did you ever think the girl in fact got better value, two top rugby players in the same session? The lads after all got 1/2 a share in the same girl). If nothing else maybe girls will stop throwing themselves at these guys and devaluing their productso cheaply.
Muff Richardson II wrote: » two of them bent over the end of the bed chatting to each other about the price of rice or something in malay, one of them checking their nails and tutting whilst i was stumbling around the room with my bags around my ankles trying to pull off the performance of a lifetime. the two hoors ganged up on me. absolutely no understanding of customer being always right and all that. hugely disappointing experience. i completely empathise with complainant. learning experience.
Roger Hassenforder wrote: » You know your winning an argument with a woman when they change the subject but continue to argue. Go back and read the context of that to which you keep referring to, bearing in mind that which ive spelled out to you. We're done. You're going around in circles with your fingers in your ears (thats figuratively speaking, not literal), offering nothing but "but..but...she was crying..."
FrancieBrady wrote: » At no point before sexual activity began was she 'surrounded by big strong rugby players'. She was already engaged in activity with Jackson when Olding entered the room. You cannot 'perceive' something that did not happen. It is disingenuous, not to mention dangerous and people have being doing it since the start of the thread.
Deleted User wrote: » No. If someone is taken to court and found not guilty, then they shouldn't be out of pocket.
Silentcorner wrote: » Where have I changed the subject....you have been studiously avoiding taking responsibility for your disgusting comments...and attempting to deflect and change the subject while doing so...
Roger Hassenforder wrote: » Would you not have asked for your money back?
Roger Hassenforder wrote: » In some deluded manner you thought you were badgering me about not having empathy for the girl, and when that particular house of cards collapsed, you've moved the goalpost out to the 22, and are now banging on about a "disgusting comment" made about threesomes. Very poor calibre stuff. Go back to your "but...but...she was crying sure even the taxi driver said it" sthick as evidence of a rape. Jasis i forgot, we're done. Yea, like whatever.
Squatter wrote: » Indeed. The innocent Ulster taxpayers should pick up Paddy's tab.
Roger Hassenforder wrote: » The Ulster taxpayer, after their police force found insufficient evidence and recommended no prosecution, a recommendation subsequently ignored, should pick up innocent Paddy's tab!
Muff Richardson II wrote: » Things are fairly hazy from the night but I’m pretty sure they weren’t issuing any kind of money back dissatisfaction receipts or vouchers at the fishbowl. It didn’t end well, I got a bit mouthy with one of them telling her to pick up her game, pun intended, and I was sent packing.
facehugger99 wrote: » That's not how it works. 500k the bold Paddy spent. Will be lucky to get even a small percentage of it back. He'll be a few years playing in France to break even and that's before you consider all the losses he will suffer due to the toxicity of his 'brand'. Tough lesson for him to learn - hopefully other young men will take note and learn some lessons from this too.
Silentcorner wrote: » More spoof....keep it coming this is hilarious!!
Roger Hassenforder wrote: » Is there any consumer agency you can bring this to the attention of? Other unsuspecting consumers could be similarly ripped off? Can the brazzers be struck off or something?
Muff Richardson II wrote: » reviews marvellous for politicians to get a pat on the back and keep your like quiet until you forget and move on to the next campaign of all men are scum and why are we so oppressed.
Appledreams15 wrote: » what he apologised for.
facehugger99 wrote: » The behaviour Paddy's apologised for. It's been all over the news for weeks now- what thread do you think you're posting in?
upandcumming wrote: » That is the only answer people can give - "bu bu bu bu look at the apology!" But that isn't actually an answer.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wf.vanillicon.com/v2/f054c80ff399c4eba8d719c617220a57.svg)
