Originally Posted by FrancieBrady
Originally Posted by Faugheen
You're not 'correcting me' on anything though, you're saying my opinion is wrong and that I'm trying to put a slant on the case.
Absolutely not the case whatsoever. What is 'incorrect' about the facts I have presented?
Remember, me saying I believe both sides' perceptions is an opinion, not a fact.
Me saying the complainant was a credible witness is an opinion, not a fact.
You claimed I was showcasing 'nasty tactics' by the defence and used two examples of the defence challenging the judge and trying to get the case thrown out. When did I say and how are these percieved to be nasty tactics?
I don't mind debate, but you're literally trying to find outrage and offence with my posts when there is nothing there but my opinion.
Where is the evidence that she was 'surrounded by big strong rugby players'?
The inference here being there was force used. Evidence of that would be good too.
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.