Belfast rape trial - all 4 found not guilty Mod Note post one

TerrorFirmer

Mrsmum wrote: »

That is just not true. It totally shows you think if she isn't struggling, it is consensual and that is a discredited viewpoint nowadays.

Except that's not what I said, at all. I said:

The pivotal piece of evidence from Dara is that she established it was quite consensual and she was witness for a considerable period of time to assert this opinion.

That's not discounting that she could have possibly gotten that wrong for a variety of reasons, but the balance of probability is heavily on her side.

Everyone was drunk, she was sober, and bore witness to this, as a woman, for 'less than a minute' I think she said?

She was there for quite some time, completely sober, she didn't just take a quick look and close the door behind her.

She actually took in what she was seeing and she decided that it was consensual.

At no point whatsoever did I allude to a woman needing to scream or struggle or shout to establish she's being raped.

In this particular case, the evidence is quite compelling that she was was participating willingly.

How you can arrive at a point where I believe that if a woman isn't screaming or shouting she's not being raped is beyond me.

FrancieBrady

Strazdas wrote: »

I believe she said that was before any sexual activity. She had been kissing PJ in the bedroom but then decided to call it a night : went downstairs but realised she had left her bag in the bedroom and went back up to get it. I think she said PJ followed her back up and then pounced on her.

He initially tried to open her jeans. It was quite clear where he was going. But she still went back up to the room.

That in no way implies she was asking for it, or that it gave Jackson rights, but it does rule out any sign of a threatening situation developing over it, you don't re-enter a place where there is danger present, after all. And the jury seems to have assessed it like that as well.

The Talking Bread

RuMan wrote: »

Spent most of my late teens and early 20's going out gettting pissed, off my face and having sex with women in a similar state. Most people i know were the same.
In all cases while sex was consensual never once did i seek consent nor indeed did the woman.
I have passed out and woken up having oral sex performed on me.
Did the woman seek consent ? No
Did i consider it assault? Absolutely not, we went to bed for one reason only.
Some of the prudish comnentry makes me wonder what planet people are living in.

Are you seriously suggesting that if a woman went to bed with you but fell asleep and she woke up and you were performing some sort of sexual act on her while she was effectively unconscious, you think it is prudish that people don't think that is normal behaviour, never mind it being the most clear account of sexual assault you could suggest!

Just because she decided she freely went to bed with you initially?

I am far from a prude, in fact far from it, but that is a very disturbing line of logic, mate that could get you in trouble eventually

kylith

Potatoeman wrote: »

This is the problem with consent. Most interactions are nonverbal and it would not be considered particularly sexy if you stopped every five minutes and ask “you still sure?”.

You’ve never heard of someone saying ‘Do you like that? Does that feel good?’ while having sex?

Faugheen

Omackeral wrote: »

In general? Seek it? Why just the man? Look, things just happen in normal circumstances. Most one nighters are a case of “wanna come back to mine?”. It’s implied a lot. Outright asking the question isn’t always the done thing when both of you are are getting hot and heavy. It’s just how it is more often than not, in my experiences anyway. Body language can often be a way of communicating things. It’s not always black and white. You might say it’s shades of grey, pardon the pun.

Because the OP was referring to men. Of course consent applies both ways.

Why are you using whataboutery instead the real issue that the OP made a very concerning statement that nobody is legally obligated to seek consent?

Mrsmum

Omackeral wrote: »

In general? Seek it? Why just the man? Look, things just happen in normal circumstances. Most one nighters are a case of “wanna come back to mine?”. It’s implied a lot. Outright asking the question isn’t always the done thing when both of you are are getting hot and heavy. It’s just how it is more often than not, in my experiences anyway. Body language can often be a way of communicating things. It’s not always black and white. You might say it’s shades of grey, pardon the pun.

Both of you getting hot and heavy is the clue though. Body language is a perfectly fine language so she may be rubbing your back or pulling you in closer etc but if she is just lying there, you might have a problem guys.

RuMan

Omackeral wrote: »

That’s cuz you’re a top shagger.

No i'm a man and she was a woman. We both have sexual desires and took steps to satisfy it. Enjoyable for both , now run along to ur march and hope so woman might give u a charity shag. Lets be honest they'll all like to marry Simon the rugby playing successful businessman

Faugheen

RuMan wrote: »

Lol you've decided i was sexually assaulted even though i say i wasnt. A mutually enjoyable experience, some non involved prude has taken offense on my behalf.

But you were.

A woman committed a sex act on you without your consent since you were sleeping.

That is sexual assault.

manonboard

Omackeral wrote: »

In general? Seek it? Why just the man? Look, things just happen in normal circumstances. Most one nighters are a case of “wanna come back to mine?”. It’s implied a lot. Outright asking the question isn’t always the done thing when both of you are are getting hot and heavy. It’s just how it is more often than not, in my experiences anyway. Body language can often be a way of communicating things. It’s not always black and white. You might say it’s shades of grey, pardon the pun.

Agreed. There are million different ways these things are communicated.
Kissing on the dancefloor, then asking if you wish to come home to mine tonight? It's not really a offer of sleeping location and a cup of tea.
It's pretty much always for sexual intercourse.

When home, if you ask if someone wants to continue drinking even though it's 3am in the morning. It's pretty much always so you can both keep your inhibitions low and comfortable so you feel comfortable as people tend to get nervous.

When making out on the couch and things get heavy, asking "Would you like to move into the bedroom?" Isnt because you suddenly felt tired, it's asking if you would like to move our hot/heavy sexual urges into the room/bed which is far more comfortable for further sex.

These things are culturally acceptable ways of asking consent without ever having to get into the pretty unsexy nitty gritty of "so what is sex to you? How would you like to do it? Would you? How often should we check in? What is penetration and where is it ok? What sort of sex do you want?" being asked both ways.

TerrorFirmer

kylith wrote: »

You’ve never heard of someone saying ‘Do you like that? Does that feel good?’ while having sex?

Because usually they're trying to ensure they're pleasing their partner, not consciously seeking that confirmation of consent remain in place....

Being realistic, most people don't seek continual verbal confirmation, mutual body language and a lick of common sense is usually enough.

FrancieBrady

Mrsmum wrote: »

Both of you getting hot and heavy is the clue though. Body language is a perfectly fine language so she may be rubbing your back or pulling you in closer etc but if she is just lying there, you might have a problem guys.

And the only independent witness here assessed the body language as saying what?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Potatoeman wrote: »

This is the problem with consent. Most interactions are nonverbal and it would not be considered particularly sexy if you stopped every five minutes and ask “you still sure?”.

You've never heard of nonverbal communication?

You don't have to ask: if you can't tell whether or not the woman you're having sex is enjoying it or not by the act itself, you're not as good at it as you think you are.

irishrebe

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Strazdas wrote: »

I believe she said that was before any sexual activity. She had been kissing PJ in the bedroom but then decided to call it a night : went downstairs but realised she had left her bag in the bedroom and went back up to get it. I think she said PJ followed her back up and then pounced on her.

He initially tried to open her jeans. It was quite clear where he was going. But she still went back up to the room.

That in no way implies she was asking for it, or that it gave Jackson rights, but it does rule out any sign of a threatening situation developing over it, you don't re-enter a place where there is danger present, after all. And the jury seems to have assessed it like that as well.

She went back to get her bag. Are you seriously saying she should have left the house without her phone, house keys and wallet? That if a man tries open your jeans during kissing, you should interpret him so much of a danger, that you'd leave a stranger's house in the middle of the night with no way to get home? You're doing a better job of demonising men here than any 'green haired feminist snowflake' could.

FrancieBrady

Faugheen wrote: »

But you were.

A woman committed a sex act on you without your consent since you were sleeping.

That is sexual assault.

You are deciding it is assault when he doesn't?

RuMan

The Talking Bread wrote: »

Are you seriously suggesting that if a woman went to bed with you but fell asleep and she woke up and you were performing some sort of sexual act on her while she was effectively unconscious, you think it is prudish that people don't think that is normal behaviour, never mind it being the most clear account of sexual assault you could suggest!

Just because she decided she freely went to bed with you initially?

I am far from a prude, in fact far from it, but that is a very disturbing line of logic, mate that could get you in trouble eventually

Ur probably right which is why i'm thankful i'm not 15 years younger. People trying to rewrite the laws of nature because they cant get any themselves.
Men love sex, women love sex all the consent classes in the world wont alter that

FrancieBrady

irishrebe wrote: »

She went back to get her bag. Are you seriously saying she should have left the house without her phone, house keys and wallet? That if a man tries open your jeans during kissing, you should interpret him so much of a danger, that you'd leave a stranger's house in the middle of the night with no way to get home? You're doing a better job of demonising men here than any 'green haired feminist snowflake' could.

You could ask someone else to go get it. You could shout up to him to bring it down.

Would I go back into a threatening situation to get my phone...no, absolutely not.

Faugheen

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You are deciding it is assault when he doesn't?

It's the very definition of sexual assault, though, just because he doesn't consider it to be assault doesn't mean that his interpretation can be applied to all.

Reverse the roles, you go down on a woman while she's sleeping.

Is that woman not being sexually assaulted?

kylith

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

Because usually they're trying to ensure they're pleasing their partner, not consciously seeking that confirmation of consent remain in place....

Being realistic, most people don't seek continual verbal confirmation, mutual body language and a lick of common sense is usually enough.

And it also lets their partner know that it is important to them that both parties are enjoying it, and gives them an opportunity to say if they are not into what’s going on.

Potatoeman

kylith wrote: »

You’ve never heard of someone saying ‘Do you like that? Does that feel good?’ while having sex?

Sure but you can also tell by their moaning or verbalizing what they want themselves.

TerrorFirmer

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You are deciding it is assault when he doesn't?

I'd say it would be polarizing in terms of how it's interpreted by different people (putting aside the technicalities of it).

If I woke up to a one night stand doing that to me, I wouldn't consider it a grave assault, but I'd be extremely uncomfortable with it, and I would never consider doing it personally (even to a long term partner).

What's very interesting is that there's an algorithm question on dating site OKCupid that asks how you'd like a new partner to wake you up after your first sleep over.

The options are tea and toast, words, and oral sex. I was actually really surprised to discover the amount of women who chose the 'oral sex' option.

FrancieBrady

Faugheen wrote: »

It's the very definition of sexual assault, though, just because he doesn't consider it to be assault doesn't mean that his interpretation can be applied to all.

Reverse the roles, you go down on a woman while she's sleeping.

Is that woman not being sexually assaulted?

Not if she wakes up and enjoys it. Which is what the guy said he did. But you hysterically decided it was 'assault' whether or not.

Impossible and ridiculous imo.

irishrebe

RuMan wrote: »

The Talking Bread wrote: »

Are you seriously suggesting that if a woman went to bed with you but fell asleep and she woke up and you were performing some sort of sexual act on her while she was effectively unconscious, you think it is prudish that people don't think that is normal behaviour, never mind it being the most clear account of sexual assault you could suggest!

Just because she decided she freely went to bed with you initially?

I am far from a prude, in fact far from it,  but that is a very disturbing line of logic, mate that could get you in trouble eventually

Ur probably right which is why i'm thankful i'm not 15 years younger. People trying to rewrite the laws of nature because they cant get any themselves.
Men love sex, women love sex all the consent classes in the world wont alter that

You're thankful you're not 15 years younger because having sex with a person who is sleeping or passed out drunk is considered rape?

FrancieBrady

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

I'd say it would be polarizing in terms of how it's interpreted by different people (putting aside the technicalities of it).

If I woke up to a one night stand doing that to me, I wouldn't consider it a grave assault, but I'd be extremely uncomfortable with it, and I would never consider doing it personally (even to a long term partner).

What's very interesting is that there's a algorithm question on dating site OKCupid that asks how you'd like a new partner to wake you up after your first sleep over.

The options are tea and toast, words, and oral sex. I was actually really surprised to discover the amount of women who chose the 'oral sex' option.

It's completely subjective as I said. That a third party insists that it is assault is where it gets ridiculous.

irishrebe

FrancieBrady wrote: »

irishrebe wrote: »

She went back to get her bag. Are you seriously saying she should have left the house without her phone, house keys and wallet? That if a man tries open your jeans during kissing, you should interpret him so much of a danger, that you'd leave a stranger's house in the middle of the night with no way to get home? You're doing a better job of demonising men here than any 'green haired feminist snowflake' could.

You could ask someone else to go get it. You could shout up to him to bring it down.

Would I go back into a threatening situation to get my phone...no, absolutely not.

Again, why is going into the bedroom of a man who was kissing you and opening your jeans to retrieve your bag a threatening situation? Can you honestly not see what you are implying here? It's incredible.

RuMan

irishrebe wrote: »

You're thankful you're not 15 years younger because having sex with a person who is sleeping or passed out drunk is considered rape?

Okie dokie . U tell urself that

Mrsmum

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You could ask someone else to go get it. You could shout up to him to bring it down.

Would I go back into a threatening situation to get my phone...no, absolutely not.

You're not getting it. There is no evidence that she didn't trust him when she went back up to get her bag. Nothing bad had happened up to then. It was when she was getting her bag that she claims he prounced so to speak and it was then it all kicked off.

irishrebe

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Faugheen wrote: »

But you were.

A woman committed a sex act on you without your consent since you were sleeping.

That is sexual assault.

You are deciding it is assault when he doesn't?

You do realise that legal definitions of crimes don't depend on what random people think? Is this honestly news to you?

irishrebe

RuMan wrote: »

irishrebe wrote: »

You're thankful you're not 15 years younger because having sex with a person who is sleeping or passed out drunk is considered rape?

Okie dokie . U tell urself that

I'm not telling myself that. That's what it says.

Faugheen

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Faugheen wrote: »

It's the very definition of sexual assault, though, just because he doesn't consider it to be assault doesn't mean that his interpretation can be applied to all.

Reverse the roles, you go down on a woman while she's sleeping.

Is that woman not being sexually assaulted?

Not if she wakes up and enjoys it. Which is what the guy said he did. But you hysterically decided it was 'assault' whether or not.

Impossible and ridiculous imo.

And if she wakes up and says no, you're already in trouble.

kylith

RuMan wrote: »

Ur probably right which is why i'm thankful i'm not 15 years younger. People trying to rewrite the laws of nature because they cant get any themselves.
Men love sex, women love sex all the consent classes in the world wont alter that

Oh my god, people teaching young people about consent and non verbal signs so that they can be aware of when someone feels pressured or uncomfortable, or comfortable, and everyone has a more enjoyable sex life. What a shower of bastards!

kylith

Potatoeman wrote: »

Sure but you can also tell by their moaning or verbalizing what they want themselves.

IME some men have difficulty telling the difference between Oooo and Owwww, and that is the real mood killer; when you have to physically stop what’s happening to explain to someone that they’re hurting you because they can’t or won’t hear to what you’re verbalising. And that’s during consensual sex.

The Talking Bread

RuMan wrote: »

Ur probably right which is why i'm thankful i'm not 15 years younger. People trying to rewrite the laws of nature because they cant get any themselves.
Men love sex, women love sex all the consent classes in the world wont alter that

So you are suggesting that it is only people who aren't as sexually active as you make out to be that would not find this scenario a bit messed up.

If you think people reacting negatively to a scenario when you are performing sexual acts on sleeping people or vice versa is a sign that they are prudish, you have a very strange mindset.

There are plenty of prudes on this thread, plenty of men haters, plenty who see sex as a means to an end rather than an enjoyable, experimental experience but I don't think you can call anyone a prude for calling you out on that scenario

FrancieBrady

Faugheen wrote: »

And if she wakes up and says no, you're already in trouble.

You stop what you are doing.

If you persist, then it is assault.

irishrebe

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Faugheen wrote: »

And if she wakes up and says no, you're already in trouble.

You stop what you are doing.

If you persist, then it is assault.

Eh.....no.

Faugheen

Faugheen wrote: »

It's the very definition of sexual assault, though, just because he doesn't consider it to be assault doesn't mean that his interpretation can be applied to all.

Reverse the roles, you go down on a woman while she's sleeping.

Is that woman not being sexually assaulted?

Would you extend this to serious relationships / marriages?

FrancieBrady

irishrebe wrote: »

Again, why is going into the bedroom of a man who was kissing you and opening your jeans to retrieve your bag a threatening situation? Can you honestly not see what you are implying here? It's incredible.

What did he do when he 'pounced on her'? Open her jeans?

She knew when she left what he was after. But yet she went back again.

drillyeye

RuMan wrote: »

Okie dokie . U tell urself that

Don't mind some of the people here! If they had their way you'd be carrying consent forms around with you, and a solicitor on speed dial.

They aren't normal, just a bizarre bubble of people that you'll rarely meet in real life. Thankfully, they advertise themselves a million miles away, so its easy to avoid them.

That's probably why they believe the things they do, normal people dodge them like they plague, so they end up surrounded by other nutters.

Its a safe bet that they also have serious relationship problems. Can you imagine being attached to someone who needs verbal communication when it comes to intimacy?

Someone made a good point above about non-verbal communication. But that apparently isn't legal enough or good enough for some! Yikes!

Faugheen

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Faugheen wrote: »

And if she wakes up and says no, you're already in trouble.

You stop what you are doing.

If you persist, then it is assault.

No, you have already committed a sex act on someone without their consent.

You have already committed the assault.

irishrebe

Mrsmum wrote: »

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You could ask someone else to go get it. You could shout up to him to bring it down.

Would I go back into a threatening situation to get my phone...no, absolutely not.

You're not getting it. There is no evidence that she didn't trust him when she went back up to get her bag. Nothing bad had happened up to then. It was when she was getting her bag that she claims he prounced so to speak and it was then it all kicked off.

Imagine if a woman had made that statement. That any man who has made a sexual move (even if it was rejected) should be treated as a potential rapist who is so dangerous that it would be unwise to even enter an empty room to grab a bag you left behind there with things you needed to be able to get home. Imagine if a woman had posted that.

Faugheen

Deleted User wrote: »

Faugheen wrote: »

It's the very definition of sexual assault, though, just because he doesn't consider it to be assault doesn't mean that his interpretation can be applied to all.

Reverse the roles, you go down on a woman while she's sleeping.

Is that woman not being sexually assaulted?

Would you extend this to serious relationships / marriages?

Yes, I would. And there have been cases before the courts as well.

RuMan

Potatoeman wrote: »

Sure but you can also tell by their moaning or verbalizing what they want themselves.

Issue is people who never have sex cant know that so they try to impose their laws on us normal people.
Its pretty obvious if a man or woman wishes to have sex or not. Words arent needed.

FrancieBrady

irishrebe wrote: »

Eh.....no.

'Eh...no' ...What?

So any initiation from the guy or woman can be portrayed as 'assault'? Is this what you are saying?

RuMan

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You stop what you are doing.

If you persist, then it is assault.

Exactly. I woke up and could have chosen to tell the woman to stop. I didnt obviously and she continued.

Faugheen

FrancieBrady wrote: »

irishrebe wrote: »

Eh.....no.

Eh...no What?

So any initiation from the guy or woman can be portrayed as 'assault'? Is this what you are saying?

If a person is asleep when the act starts, then it can't be portrayed as assault. It IS assault.

This what people mean when they say there's a rape culture here. That people deem it ok to perform a sex act on someone when they're asleep.

johnpatrick81

It’s weird, I check in on the first day of the trial and a certain poster is vehemently challenging any post deemed suspicious that the lads were in the wrong. Fast forward 6 days and he’s still here, relentlessly defending the lads non stop

irishrebe

FrancieBrady wrote: »

irishrebe wrote: »

Eh.....no.

'Eh...no' ...What?

So any initiation from the guy or woman can be portrayed as 'assault'? Is this what you are saying?

It is seriously concerning that you are even asking this question. I would recommend educating yourself on consent and the law before you find yourself up on a rape charge.

FrancieBrady

irishrebe wrote: »

Imagine if a woman had made that statement. That any man who has made a sexual move (even if it was rejected) should be treated as a potential rapist who is so dangerous that it would be unwise to even enter an empty room to grab a bag you left behind there with things you needed to be able to get home. Imagine if a woman had posted that.

I just discussed it with my partner. And she said, no way would she re-enter a room where somebody tried to open her jeans like that.

Imagine indeed.

RuMan

Faugheen wrote: »

Yes, I would. And there have been cases before the courts as well.

Better report the wife

johnpatrick81

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I just discussed it with my partner. And she said, no way would she re-enter a room where somebody tried to open her jeans like that.

Imagine indeed.

Case closed so :rolleyes:

The Talking Bread

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You stop what you are doing.

If you persist, then it is assault.

What are you smoking!

It is actually even down in law that it is black and white that it is sexual assault! If you are asleep you have no ability to give consent!! The crux of sexual assault!!

The assault has already taken place, in legal terms before you wake up! Obviously if you wake up and enjoy it you are 99% not going to pursue it as a crime but performing a sexual act on someone while they are asleep is a f*cking crime! Because you can't give consent!