Atlas Rotten Machinist wrote: » She said in a statement that she was "entirely vindicated." Therefore, I assume she was satisfied with the outcome, hair-splitting semantics aside.
Bannasidhe wrote: » Hardly hair splitting to point out that the word vindicated does not mean the same thing as satisfied, which presumably is why you did not use it when you were trying to make your point. Maurice McCabe has been vindicated - do you think he is satisfied?
Atlas Rotten Machinist wrote: » Maurice McCabe has pronounced himself to be "very happy" by the recent report of the Disclosures Tribunal, and said that now he and his family can get back to normal. He sounds satisfied to me.
Atlas Rotten Machinist wrote: » Greater than 0 days is the prevailing answer.
tritium wrote: » Whether you like it or not, we have a system that doesn’t just go around lynching the accused on the back of an accusation.
ohnonotgmail wrote: » Candies post is talking about a case where a man plead guilty. How is your response relevant to that?
This thread is disappointing. The names might change but the same obdurate victim blaming remains, and also proof that women can be among the worst misogynists.
retro:electro wrote: » What about those who admire guilt? God forbid they get punished either
tritium wrote: » Ah yeah, this ****e. If you don’t agree with us you’re just a misogynist. Was wondering when we’d get to this. Seriously, this isn’t a personal echo chamber in spite of the tendency on this thread for one side to stick their fingers in their ears and go lalalalala to anything that doesn’t fit their world view of oppression. Whether you like it or not, we have a system that doesn’t just go around lynching the accused on the back of an accusation. Whatever the changes we want in the legal system, removing the right of a defendant to a fair trial isn’t one of them. Especially on the back of whipped up outrage based on a trial that few seem to know all the details about. If we hang on long enough I’m sure “rape culture” will make an appearance.
tritium wrote: How do you know when or where he got married or what vows he took? How do you know how he and his wife agree to live their marriage.
Atlas Rotten Machinist wrote: » Maurice McCabe has pronounced himself "very happy" about the recent report by the Disclosures Tribunal, and said that now he and his family can get back to normal. He sounds satisfied to me.
One eyed Jack wrote: » Mrsmum wrote: » The SC was only doing her job, giving her client every advantage. I was giving you an example of other reasons why women wear thongs but you seem hell bent on thinking they are a sign of sexual intent end of story. With respect your personal experience is only based on the situations where a woman in a thong presented herself to you and most likely that was in a sexual context. But you just cannot in any safe fashion extrapolate from that that thongs = being up for sex. Because every woman will tell you there's more to thongs than sex. You said yourself people "have different reasons for doing things" so no-one else can say what her reasons were. And what the hell has that got to do with someone who is raped? It’s that sort of denial
Mrsmum wrote: » The SC was only doing her job, giving her client every advantage. I was giving you an example of other reasons why women wear thongs but you seem hell bent on thinking they are a sign of sexual intent end of story. With respect your personal experience is only based on the situations where a woman in a thong presented herself to you and most likely that was in a sexual context. But you just cannot in any safe fashion extrapolate from that that thongs = being up for sex. Because every woman will tell you there's more to thongs than sex. You said yourself people "have different reasons for doing things" so no-one else can say what her reasons were.
PlaneSpeeking wrote: » "Admire guilt" ? You'll need to explain that. Who has said here that they "admire guilt" ?
Sleeper12 wrote: » Everyones vows include being faithful. It does not matter what religion or lack of religion. Its what marriage is. It never ceases to amaze me how posters on boards will thy to defend the indefensible.
Candie wrote: » What do you think you would consider a proper sentence if you fell asleep after drinking and woke up to find a mans fingers inside you? "Sorry mate, my bad"? This thread is disappointing. The names might change but the same obdurate victim blaming remains, and also proof that women can be among the worst misogynists.
PlaneSpeeking wrote: » I wouldn't be stupid enough to get into bed with three other people when pissed and then cry rape. Seriously.
tritium wrote: » Ah yeah, keep going with the character assassinations why don’t you. Do you actually know anyone who has never lied about anything? Why is this lie worse than other lies. Why do you feel you can impinge on the acquitteds character but have nothing to say on the accusers character?
PlaneSpeeking wrote: » I did say before, the reason that certain posters will refuse to entertain a discussion on the sentences for rape, is that they genuinely would be satisfied only with castration.
AndrewJRenko wrote: » Could you please explain in very specific terms what the hell wearing a thong for sexual or any purpose has to do with being raped?
Bannasidhe wrote: » Then I concede McCabe may be satisfied. Did the victim of the man who plead guilt also say she was "very happy" or did she use a word that means something entirely different? A word that means her accusation has been proven correct and this is what "satisfies" her.
retro:electro wrote: » Well there’s a remarkable leap if ever I saw one. God forbid justice be served to someone who openly admitted to assault. And what about yourself there PlaneSpeeking, what punishment do you think is fitting for someone who openely admitted to digital penetration of a sleeping girl? Slap on the wrist? Ah sure at least you admitted it off ya go son. You minimised his actions earlier as “copping a feel”. You might as well just come out and write all women are sluts because we all know that’s the way your posts are going.
tritium wrote: Or do you just want to build a character assassination narriative? Would it be ok on your opinion to do the same with the accuser. Would it be ok to question if for example her drinking while underage called her integrity into question- “ after all judge, how could we trust someone who clearly doesn’t respect the law.....â€
PlaneSpeeking wrote: » Sleeper12 wrote: » I didn't say she was too young for sex. I said that she is a minor & she is. she is not an adult. He is an adult. He showed poor judgement at best. Did he check her birth cert? She easily could have been 2 years younger & he'd be in a whole mess of trouble. He left himself open to a lot of risks. Very, very poor judgment for a 27 year old We're forever being told women mature quicker than men, is there much really both mentally and emotionally between a 17 year old woman and a 27 year old man ?
Sleeper12 wrote: » I didn't say she was too young for sex. I said that she is a minor & she is. she is not an adult. He is an adult. He showed poor judgement at best. Did he check her birth cert? She easily could have been 2 years younger & he'd be in a whole mess of trouble. He left himself open to a lot of risks. Very, very poor judgment for a 27 year old
PlaneSpeeking wrote: » I'd kindly thank you to either respond CIVILLY as demanded by the site rules or refrain from saying what you think I am saying, or more accurately what you'd like me to say so you can respond as you'd wish. And pointless it may be of course, but reported - again. And on ignore. I bid you good day.
PlaneSpeeking wrote: » I'd kindly thank you to either respond CIVILLY as demanded by the site rules or refrain from saying what you think I am saying, or more accurately what you'd like me to say so you can respond as you'd wish. And pointless it may be of course, but reported - again. And on ignore.I bid you good day.
Snipp wrote: » Sleeper12 wrote: » I'm not missing any point. Prosecutor or defense barrister can't just say anything they want. It has to be rellivent to the case The judge can ask "where are you going with this" & then allow or refuse. For the judge to allow suggests that he/she also has the view that a teenagers knickers is proof of intent for sex. This is clearly wrong. It's this type of nonsense we are trying to remove from the court room. A judge with this type of belief has no p[lace in a rape trial. A judge is highly trained in applying objective reasoning, not his beliefs.
Sleeper12 wrote: » I'm not missing any point. Prosecutor or defense barrister can't just say anything they want. It has to be rellivent to the case The judge can ask "where are you going with this" & then allow or refuse. For the judge to allow suggests that he/she also has the view that a teenagers knickers is proof of intent for sex. This is clearly wrong. It's this type of nonsense we are trying to remove from the court room. A judge with this type of belief has no p[lace in a rape trial.
Sleeper12 wrote: » I'll just point out that I'm not questioning the defendant. I've repeatedly said that this thread is about the thong. Not him and not the verdict itself. If you bother to read the thread it was other posters saying that he cheated on his wife. I pointed out that the prosicution would have used this to show him as a dishonest man with low morals. My own personal belief is anyone who cheats on their partner, male or female are scumbags. The lowest of the low. As for her underage drinking you could try challange her integrity but as she is a minor & not an adult it wouldn't really wash. She is a teenager. Her brain hasn't stopped developing yet. She isn't even mature enough to vote. Children do stupid things. There is a big difference in her a minor doing something wrong and a 27 year old man. He's an out and out dope. He took stupid risks. Possibly came close to losing his family or maybe has lost them. This girl could have turned out to be 15. What sort of mess would he be in then. The risks he took were massive. There is nothing reported about him that shows he has any cop on at all. 27 years of age I was four years into my first mortgage, self employed and, married with two children.
Cleopatra_ wrote: » This attitude is one of the reasons why I didn't report what happened to me. I got black out drunk and couldn't remember most of my night out. I came to and there was a guy getting dressed and about to leave. I was still so drunk at this stage (6am) that my conversation is hazy with him in parts. He was horribly nasty to me. I had no idea what had happened or how I'd even gotten home, I had no memory. I had to ask him what happened. I remembered chatting to him in a pub with his friends and thinking he was a bit of an arsehole and my friend was there, then my memory was blank aside from a few flashes. He told me that I gave him a sh1t blow job and that he was sorry he ever came back with me. He also told me that we had sex but that I passed out. Then he told me that he was sure he'd see me posting about how much I regretted it on boards. He left me in floods of tears in my bed, sore from sex and god knows what else he may or may not have done to me. I came out in bruises on my thighs and wrist a couple of days later. Of course I felt it was my fault for getting so drunk, for putting myself in that position, for possibly encouraging him. But you know what I've realised over time? He had to have been more sober than me to have been able to ''perform'', he remembered the night and I didn't and he had his wits about him and was about to feck off as I was still out of it. So, I'm sure there are posters like planespeeking who would argue that I was asking for it or that I consented. I have the courage to say now that I was raped, I was too drunk to consent and that would have been obvious to anyone who saw me. I can't even remember how I got home, nothing, it's all a blank.
tritium wrote: » There should be nothing reported about him at all- he as anonymity legally in this jurisdiction. Reading this thread I see why.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/v2/bb1b435feca4d036f6db42bb67252c40.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/v2/b6984b3dff155c34b5a9498bb42f9c13.svg)
