Ruth Coppinger holds up thong in Dail

Sleeper12 wrote: »

Here is what you should do, you keep making up things that you want me to say but I didn't. Then pretend you are me and make up the answers too. This will save me replying to your nonsense comments that I never said. If you make up half you might as well make up everything

Did you or did you not say that his sworn testimony was not reliable because he cheated on his wife?

Did you then go on to say that he was found not guilty and should be left alone.

Very simple question, why don't you leave him alone?

Wild speculation based on lies is the complete opposite of leaving him alone, you do understand that right?

Sleeper12 wrote: »

You keep bringing him up!

It's a very simple question, that you are refusing to answer.

Sleeper12 wrote: »

Deflect all you want.

Indeed.

So when you said he should be left alone, what you meant based on what you have posted about him on here (wild speculation and lies) that he should be left alone but you are not going to.

Grand.

Boggles wrote: »

Or isn't far more plausible that the jury heard several pieces of evidence over what I imagine what was a relative long trial and based on that evidence came to the only logical safe conclusion they could?

Yesterday your tactic was to discredit the acquitted by pedaling the fantasy that if he cheated on his fictional wife, then he broke his vows therefore what evidence he gave in the trial was not credible.

You've moved on now to try and discredit the jury, using some perceived notion about evolution the jury was made up of 12 Trump supporting flat earthers who think the undewear one wears absolves someone not just of rape but of brutal physical assault.

It's complete and utter baffling nonsense.

You are not beyond a little bit of fancy footwork yourself above. You suggest that the "jury heard several pieces of evidence" and again that it "was a relative long trial" thereby giving gravitas to their decision when in reality apart from the thong we don't know anything about what other evidence was presented to support his claims that it wasn't rape and we don't know either how long or short the trial was.

But actually I sincerely hope you are right because if the thong alone was the thing that created the reasonable doubt, I'm sure you will agree that truly would be scandalous. You would agree with that, wouldn't you ? And I still object to the SC telling the jury they should have regard to the way the girl was dressed in a thong with a lacy front because there is always a woman or girl inside that thong and she is the one he should have regard for.

Boggles wrote: »

It's a very simple question, that you are refusing to answer.



Indeed.

So when you said he should be left alone, what you meant based on what you have posted about him on here (wild speculation and lies) that he should be left alone but you are not going to.

Grand.

He should be left alone because posters trying to defend him were using terms like underage sex & pedophile & this obviously wasn't true. Another poster stated that he had been charged with rape before. I also challenged that. I actually flagged the post for a mod to look at but it's still there. I have actually stuck up for him at times. Many posters said that he was married & was "caught Stepping out on his wife". If that were true I'd have to excuse myself from the jury mid trial because I think cheating on your wife or husband is a scumbag thing to do. I'm my opinion it makes you a liar & a cheat of the worst kind & I would not be able to believe their word over the girl who wasn't proven to be of such low character. If the man was cheating with a minor he would not get a fair trial with me on the jury. It was pointed out to me that it wasn't reported in the news that he was married & he may not be married so I stopped there & then commenting about him cheating on his wife.



He should be left alone. When one poster sticks up for him someone else points out that he had his hand around her throat. In most cases people sticking up for him are doing him more harm than good. The thread isn't about his guilt or lack of so why keep bringing him up. The thread & the worlds media attention has nothing to do with him at all. The issue is the justice system & how it failed this girl & how it fails other girls

FACT 6: Rape is not a well reported crime. In the Rape Crisis Network National Statistics 2015, fewer than 32% of survivors reported the sexual violence to the Gardaí. Fear of not being believed, of hurting loved ones (for example, if the rapist is a family member), or fear of the attacker can cause a survivor not to report. Also, many survivors simply try to forget that it ever happened.

FACT 7: Sexual violence does not only happen to an unfortunate few, Irish research has found that one in five adult women and one in ten adult men experienced sexual violence (The SAVI Report, Prof. Hannah McGee et al, Royal College of Surgeons, Liffey Press, 2002).

https://www.rapecrisis.ie/statistics.html


A justice system that discourages the reporting of crime is a failed justice The Irish justice system fails rape victims FACT!

Mrsmum wrote: »

there is always a woman or girl inside that thong and she is the one he should have regard for.

I think you mean she should have regard for

Boggles wrote: »

A more than reasonable assumption, I'm sure you would agree?

I would disagree there. A trial with no whiteness? A trial where both agree that sex took place? A trial that boils down to consent? He said & she said? I would suggest that it was a shorter trail

Boggles wrote: »

A more than reasonable assumption, I'm sure you would agree?

Ah but assumptions are very dangerous things - see assumptions about thongs.

Mrsmum wrote: »

Ah but assumptions are very dangerous things - see assumptions about thongs.

So for all the lies and wild speculation on this thread.

You pull me up on the assumption that a criminal trial of this nature would have more than one piece of evidence?

Boggles wrote: »

So for all the lies and wild speculation on this thread.

You pull me up on the assumption that a criminal trial of this nature would have more than one piece of evidence?

I'm only pulling you up because you are pulling other people other people up on their reasonings. You can't be telling them to stick to the actual facts out there when you don't strictly do that yourself and instead assume what to you are reasonable assumptions. What is it they say about assume making an ass of u and me. What's good for the goose etc.

Personally I quite like to hear peoples thoughts around this case as it shows how they come to their pov.

Boggles wrote: »

The allegation was of a very serious physical and sexual assault. Not "he said, she said".

There is very little detail about this case, but I suggest you go and read what is known.

I did read up on it

Ms Justice Carmel Stewart thanked the jury in a case dominated by the issue of consent.

Mr Creed SC for the prosecution said to the jury: “You decide if there was sexual intercourse between them. You decide if there was consent.

It was in fact he said & she said or at least that's all that was reported.


No mention of medical witnesses or anything like that. I assume that some Gardai were there as they would have taken both statements but there honestly doesn't seem to be too much to this case from what was reported. There is nothing to suggest that it was a lengthy trial in any paper

Boggles wrote:

Really?

Well I have an idea. The jury being advised to consider that she was wearing a thong helped him. The fact that the judge has to give the jury warnings during his charge helped him too as it leads to confusion for some jurors.

batgoat wrote: »

Crying wolf... Yep you've definitely gotten a pretty warped attitude going on regardless of how many women you hire. It also looks like that this could very well lead to change. Our government is looking into it, legal scholars are backing changes on this front.

Warped attitude now is it ?

You just can't help getting personal can you..

Yes we are now ruled by twitter..

I don't see that as a good thing.