Belfast rape trial discussion thread II

Faugheen · 13-06-2019 09:21AM

mfceiling wrote: »

He can't because some people can't get over the fact that he wasn't charged with rape. In their mind he is guilty and nothing he can do or say will change their minds.

He was charged with rape though...

FrancieBrady · 13-06-2019 09:22AM

mfceiling wrote: »

He can't because some people can't get over the fact that he wasn't charged with rape. In their mind he is guilty and nothing he can do or say will change their minds.

Like the Roman Catholics back in the day, he must prostrate himself on the ground and beg the forgiveness of the morally superior.

Olding gets a pass because he did this, and an immediate pass too because that allowed them to keep the rant about Jackson going.
Olding didn't have to demonstrate he had changed, he only had to pay lipservice to it.
Like the sponsors - image is everything for these people.

Boggles · 13-06-2019 09:25AM

wiggle16 wrote: »

if I were a juror I would not have found them guilty. It's her word against theirs, and right or wrong that's not enough to put someone in prison over.

Well it is in this country and routinely results in convictions even in cases 30/40 years old.

Witness credibility is very important in cases like this, she gave evidence for 8 days, maybe just maybe the Jurors did not find her credible.

If you were a Juror you would have set through 9 weeks of evidence and testimony, too simplistic and pretty disingenuous to say they came to their verdict because it was just one persons word against another.

Jackman25 · 13-06-2019 09:28AM

seamus wrote: »

FYP. Because that's the difference.

Sponsors, teams and the general public are not bound by some moral code to ignore the content of the trial when a not guilty verdict is delivered. They are legally obliged to consider him innocent of the specific crime of rape, but they are not legally obliged to ignore the evidence given.

It's not just a single WhatsApp, it's the behaviour before, during and after the incident.

Sponsors are reacting to the Twitter shaming Mob which is your modern day pitch fork brigade for hounding "the fallen".
Jackson has been punished terribly since the incident, his name to be forever associated with it, a promising career and employment destroyed as outlined so gleefully above by facehugger (a self-appointed representative of "polite society"). His behaviour and that of the other lads obviously left quite a bit to be desired and extremely harsh lessons have been learned and I'd say a lot in elite sporting circles have learnt quite a bit too.
It is beyond time to stop the hounding and bullying campaigns against them and give them a chance to rebuild their lives somewhat.
But mercy and forgiveness are anathema to the social media mob, often the more righteous and virtuous, the more vicious the bully as we have seen so much of in this country.

ohnonotgmail · 13-06-2019 09:28AM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Like the Roman Catholics back in the day, he must prostrate himself on the ground and beg the forgiveness of the morally superior.

Olding gets a pass because he did this, and an immediate pass too because that allowed them to keep the rant about Jackson going.
Olding didn't have to demonstrate he had changed, he only had to pay lipservice to it.
Like the sponsors - image is everything for these people.

And Jackson didnt even pay lip service which just shows how stupid he is on top of being a neanderthal.

Mrsmum · 13-06-2019 09:38AM

mfceiling wrote: »

He can't because some people can't get over the fact that he wasn't charged with rape. In their mind he is guilty and nothing he can do or say will change their minds.

Undoubtable so, for some people. But he can't shake it off either because so many of his own supporters say he doesn't have to shake off that previous reputation, that there was and is nothing wrong with it. They are wrapping him up in the very reputation he, I'm sure, no longer wants. With friends like that, who needs enemies. He probably thinks it's wisest to stay a quiet boy now so unfortunately for him you have supporters speaking for him with the wrong message. They would be better to be saying - dreadful behaviour- lesson learnt - no more of that. But instead they say all sorts of minimising stuff against which there is a pushback and the sponsors say to themselves that boy is just as divisive as he was during the rape trial. No thanks.

FrancieBrady · 13-06-2019 09:41AM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

And Jackson didnt even pay lip service which just shows how stupid he is on top of being a neanderthal.

*

"I am ashamed that a young woman who was a visitor to my home left in a distressed state. This was never my intention and I will always regret the events of that evening.

"I am also truly sorry for engaging in a WhatsApp group chat which was degrading and offensive and I apologise unreservedly for this.

"The criticism of my behaviour is fully justified and I know I have betrayed the values of my family and those of the wider public.

"Following the trial I have taken time to reflect with my family on the values that were such an integral part of my upbringing, the most important of which is respect. My departure from these values has caused understandable public anger and I am resolutely committed to returning to those principles."

Jackman25 · 13-06-2019 09:41AM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

And Jackson didnt even pay lip service which just shows how stupid he is on top of being a neanderthal.

He was undoubtedly very poorly advised.
To appease the mob you must appear contrite no matter how much nasty vitriol has been hurled at you for the preceding months or how many asshole senators
virtue signal at your expense and cravenly delete their tweet then.

if you don't abase yourself, the mob will not get to feel that they have gotten their pound of flesh and they will keep coming for you.

facehugger99 · 13-06-2019 09:42AM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Like the Roman Catholics back in the day, he must prostrate himself on the ground and beg the forgiveness of the morally superior.

Olding gets a pass because he did this, and an immediate pass too because that allowed them to keep the rant about Jackson going.
Olding didn't have to demonstrate he had changed, he only had to pay lipservice to it.
Like the sponsors - image is everything for these people.

Olding's playing for Brive, in the 2nd division of French rugby - probably on a fraction of what he was on for Ulster.

ohnonotgmail · 13-06-2019 09:45AM

facehugger99 wrote: »

Olding's playing for Brive, in the 2nd division of French rugby - probably on a fraction of what he was on for Ulster.

He was never at the same level as Jackson and wasnt even a regular for Ulster. He is only at brive because Jeremy Davidson is their manager.

facehugger99 · 13-06-2019 09:46AM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

*

Weird that you are defending the behavior that PJ has admitted was "degrading and offensive", considering that PJ believes the "criticism of my behaviour is fully justified".

ohnonotgmail · 13-06-2019 09:46AM

Jackman25 wrote: »

He was undoubtedly very poorly advised.
To appease the mob you must appear contrite no matter how much nasty vitriol has been hurled at you for the preceding months or how many asshole senators
virtue signal at your expense and cravenly delete their tweet then.

if you don't abase yourself, the mob will not get to feel that they have gotten their pound of flesh and they will keep coming for you.

This is nothing about appeasing a mob. He acted like an absolute **** towards women and basically doubled down on it after the trial. Why would any sponsor want anything to do with him?

FrancieBrady · 13-06-2019 09:48AM

facehugger99 wrote: »

Weird that you are defending the behavior that PJ has admitted was "degrading and offensive", considering that PJ believes the "criticism of my behaviour is fully justified".

Oh dear. Now I am defending his behaviour? The mob revs up again. :rolleyes:

Hedgelayer · 13-06-2019 09:56AM

Mrsmum wrote: »

I somehow don't think it would be helpful to Sean O'Brien if there were WhatsApp messages showing that he was laughing and joking afterwards with his pals under a group heading called 'top p***ers about how much craic it was to p**s on someone. It would change his persona from a drunken idiot on one night into an arrogant, entitled, pr**k who generally goes around disrespecting people.

It's amazing how fast a Watts app conversation can get snap shot and the reverberation goes world wide in a matter of seconds...

It's usually these silly collar's up Polo shirt guy's who get caught out, one knows the type they go out on a Saturday night dressed like they're about to tee up on the Dromoland Castle golf course on a Saturday morning.

I cannot stand Jocks

suicide_circus · 13-06-2019 09:57AM

how can paddy jackson be foregiven his sins? what is his road to redemption?

facehugger99 · 13-06-2019 10:07AM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Oh dear. Now I am defending his behaviour? The mob revs up again. :rolleyes:

I really doubt anyone much cares about your views, much less a mob. perhaps you have an inflated sense of your own importance?

Regardless, the sponsors know that many people are disgusted with Jackson's behavior, they don't want the products they spend millions marketing being soiled through association with him.

It's not terribly difficult to understand and it really doesn't matter what you believe. You are wrong about most things and are surely used to that by now.

No mob required, just a quiet revolution of consumer choice.

Gimme A Pound · 13-06-2019 10:24AM

DavidLyons_ wrote: »

I’d love to hear the answer to this (I won’t hold my breath).

Jackson was acquitted by a jury of his peers (in another jurisdiction, just for measure) and can only really be held accountable for one fairly innocuous, if mildly unchivalrous, WhatsApp message which read along the lines of “there was a lot of spitting going on”.

The morons want him lynched and his life ruined for that.

Mildly unchivalrous? Oh come on, David, that's disingenuous beyond belief.

They were found not guilty and i accept that. Girls are eejits to lose their self respect too when it comes to sports "stars" - but his and the others' attitude towards women has been revealed to be really disgusting. None of the guys downplaying it would be ok with that kind of talk about their sisters/daughters. They would ****ing lose it - because they know full well how vile it is.

And the case has brought the hideous mysoginists out of the woodwork, and it's grim reading if you're a woman. If these folk can condemn misogyny by muslims (and they usually happily do - hypocritical bollox) they can practise what they preach, and not speak about women so loathsomely.

An example is that Hardcharger person, whose hatred of women is intense. His post on this thread - wow (along with other posts by him). All kinds of women - not just fat or flat chested or ugly (because good looking slim/curvy women are all totally fine with misogyny) condemned Jackson and co. And women who like dogs or who don't have pets (what's this sh1t about only certain types of women liking cats, and having cats being akin to a crime? What a retarded bandwagon).

So yes (and this is speaking in general, not just to one person): object to Paddy being convicted by a mob, and his career being ruined. But quit downplaying his atrocious attitude to women just because it suits - AND resorting to more misogyny, AND then on another discussion claiming to be concerned about women in Islam.

FrancieBrady · 13-06-2019 10:27AM

facehugger99 wrote: »

I really doubt anyone much cares about your views, much less a mob. perhaps you have an inflated sense of your own importance?

Regardless, the sponsors know that many people are disgusted with Jackson's behavior, they don't want the products they spend millions marketing being soiled through association with him.

It's not terribly difficult to understand and it really doesn't matter what you believe. You are wrong about most things and are surely used to that by now.

No mob required, just a quiet revolution of consumer choice.

Ha haha Cash Converters???? Amazing what the high moral grounders will do to score a victory.

Pass me the sick bucket.

FrancieBrady · 13-06-2019 10:29AM

Lacey Rapping Equalizer wrote: »

Mildly unchivalrous? Oh come on, David, that's disingenuous beyond belief.

They were found not guilty and i accept that. Girls are eejits to lose their self respect too when it comes to sports "stars" - but his and the others' attitude towards women has been revealed to be really disgusting. None of the guys downplaying it would be ok with that kind of talk about their sisters/daughters. They would ****ing lose it - because they know full well how vile it is.

And the case has brought the hideous mysoginists out of the woodwork, and it's grim reading if you're a woman. If these folk can condemn misogyny by muslims (and they usually happily do - hypocritical bollox) they can practise what they preach, and not speak about women so loathsomely.

An example is that Hardcharger person, whose hatred of women is intense. His post on this thread - wow (along with other posts by him). All kinds of women - not just fat or flat chested or ugly (because good looking slim/curvy women are all totally fine with misogyny) condemned Jackson and co. And women who like dogs or who don't have pets (what's this sh1t about only certain types of women liking cats, and having cats being akin to a crime? What a retarded bandwagon).

So yes (and this is speaking in general, not just to one person): object to Paddy being convicted by a mob, and his career being ruined. But quit downplaying his atrocious attitude to women just because it suits - AND resorting to more misogyny, AND then on another discussion claiming to be concerned about women in Islam.

Their 'attitude' to a type of woman...promiscuous, celebrity obsessed drunk women.

Not all 'women' or womankind. Do you think these talked about or treated all the women in their lives like that? Deary me.

Gimme A Pound · 13-06-2019 10:30AM

What does moral high ground mean? Is it just a generic term used about something people don't like reading?

The critics of bloody Sunday are taking the moral high ground which is surely a good thing?

SirGerryAdams · 13-06-2019 10:38AM

facehugger99 wrote: »

Doubt he's cleaning up. He's very much damaged goods and the clubs know it. His lucrative contract with the IRFU was terminated and he's reduced to scraping around the lower reaches of France/UK to try to cobble a career together for a few more short years. The current situatiuon with LI only confirms what most of us already realised - he's not welcome back into polite society.

After his playing career ends he will find that the usual post-playing avenues of punditry, speaking engagements and coaching are closed to him.

His legal bills were huge, combined with a ill-advised failed attempt to sue the BBC.

Basically he's fcuked financially.

But TBH I can't say I'll be shedding any tears for him. He brought it all on himself. Sometimes karma provides the justice the legal system can't.

Sean O'Brien is getting 500k from London Irish and he's crocked and not a great player anymore. Jackson was one of the best out halves in the league last season. Probably drowned in french slug slime too

ohnonotgmail · 13-06-2019 10:39AM

SirGerryAdams wrote: »

Sean O'Brien is getting 500k from London Irish and he's crocked and not a great player anymore. Jackson was one of the best out halves in the league last season.

the second tier of english rugby?

SirGerryAdams · 13-06-2019 10:40AM

suicide_circus wrote: »

how can paddy jackson be foregiven his sins? what is his road to redemption?

The death penalty is the only option. The twitter mob have said so.

SirGerryAdams · 13-06-2019 10:40AM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

the second tier of english rugby?

Who?

London Irish are in the premiership now :pac::pac::pac::pac:

Gimme A Pound · 13-06-2019 10:42AM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Their 'attitude' to a type of woman...promiscuous, celebrity obsessed drunk women.

Not all 'women' or womankind. Do you think these talked about or treated all the women in their lives like that? Deary me.

Jeez let me reply before the passive aggressive "deary me" gets resorted to!

No, I don't think that's how they view all women. I'm sure they'd only marry a woman who is nice and demure with very little sexual experience (but it's ok for them to be the opposite, coz laaaads!l

But their attitude towards the women in question is still vile, and if these women are so contemptible, why sully their dicks by having sex with them? Why enable these vile harlots' behaviour? Logically that makes them as bad. But oh yeah, laaaaaads!

facehugger99 · 13-06-2019 10:43AM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Their 'attitude' to a type of woman...promiscuous, celebrity obsessed drunk women.

Not all 'women' or womankind. Do you think these talked about or treated all the women in their lives like that? Deary me.

The mask slips.

So she was 'asking for it' was she Francie?

Presumably being 'promiscuous' or 'celebrity obsessed' or 'drunk' means you're fair game to be refereed to as a slut or passed around like a piece of meat - because you're, to use your words, that "type of woman".

PJ and friends get a pass for that because, hey, she was only a slapper and therefore forgoes the right to any standard of decent treatment?

I honestly believe you to be one of the most morally reprehensible posters on this site, on the majority of issues you spout your ****e about and I sincerely hope that impressionable young readers hold you in the same contempt.

FrancieBrady · 13-06-2019 10:44AM

Lacey Rapping Equalizer wrote: »

What does moral high ground mean? Is it just a generic term used about something people don't like reading?

The critics of bloody Sunday are taking the moral high ground which is surely a good thing?

People who put protection of a rigorous moral code before the ordinary decent humanity of live and let live. People who insist that others live to their version of that code and if they fall off never allow them to make amends.
Like the Roman Catholic hierarchy, preaching about sanctity while ignoring what was happening in reality.
I asked somebody here last night how they treated somebody in their personal circle if they made a mistake and got called names as they deflected.

Nobody lives who hasn't made a mistake or done something they are not proud of. Does everyone pay an equal price? Not according to the modern phenomenon of the twitter mob.

SirGerryAdams · 13-06-2019 10:45AM

facehugger99 wrote: »

The mask slips.

So she was 'asking for it' was she Francie?

Presumably being 'promiscuous' or 'celebrity obsessed' or 'drunk' means you're fair game to be refereed to as a slut or passed around like a piece of meat - because you're, to use your words, that "type of woman".

PJ and friends get a pass for that because, hey, she was only a slapper and therefore forgoes the right to any standard of decent treatment?

I honestly believe you to be one of the most morally reprehensible posters on this site, on the majority of issues you spout your ****e about and I sincerely hope that impressionable young readers hold you in the same contempt.

Do you ever wonder why so many pro football players get hookers?

Because they know there's a good chance if they bang a random bird from a club they'll make up lies or get up the duff.

It's not really safe for a random lad to have a one night stand anymore, you never know what she'll say the next morning, nevermind a rich celebrity.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 13-06-2019 10:47AM

Lacey Rapping Equalizer wrote: »

Jeez let me reply before the passive aggressive "deary me" gets resorted to!

No, I don't think that's how they view all women. I'm sure they'd only marry a woman who is nice and demure with very little sexual experience (but it's ok for them to be the opposite, coz laaaads!l

But their attitude towards the women in question is still vile, and if these women are so contemptible, why sully their dicks by having sex with them? Why enable these vile harlots' behaviour? Logically that makes them as bad. But oh yeah, laaaaaads!

facehugger99 wrote: »

The mask slips.

So she was 'asking for it' was she Francie?

Presumably being 'promiscuous' or 'celebrity obsessed' or 'drunk' means you're fair game to be refereed to as a slut or passed around like a piece of meat - because you're, to use your words, that "type of woman".

PJ and friends get a pass for that because, hey, she was only a slapper and therefore forgoes the right to any standard of decent treatment?

I honestly believe you to be one of the most morally reprehensible posters on this site, on the majority of issues you spout your ****e about and I sincerely hope that impressionable young readers hold you in the same contempt.

It’s the Madonna-whore thing. Some women are pure, others dirty skanks, doncha know?

FrancieBrady · 13-06-2019 10:47AM

Lacey Rapping Equalizer wrote: »

Jeez let me reply before the passive aggressive "deary me" gets resorted to!

No, I don't think that's how they view all women. I'm sure they'd only marry a woman who is nice and demure with very little sexual experience (but it's ok for them to be the opposite, coz laaaads!l

But their attitude towards the women in question is still vile, and if these women are so contemptible, why sully their dicks by having sex with them? Why enable these vile harlots' behaviour? Logically that makes them as bad. But oh yeah, laaaaaads!

But their attitude towards the women in question

Try saying that in future and you won't get called out on it. And well done with your extra bit of stereotyping. :rolleyes:

I'm sure they'd only marry a woman who is nice and demure with very little sexual experience

Belfast rape trial discussion thread II

Comments