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

Arghus

Strazdas wrote: »

A legal expert was on with Ivan Yates a few minutes ago and he says having listened to all the evidence, the woman probably believes she was raped and the men believed they didn't rape her, that's what it comes down to.

Probably nobody on the stand was lying, they were all giving their version of the 'truth'.

This is kind of the mind I'd be in too about the case: a large and confusing grey area with no easy answers.

People should think about that rather than the childish demands that she be named.

If you want people who do have legitimate wrongs done onto them to never come forward claiming sexual assault for fear of being named and shamed if they lose the case, then hope for that day that your wishes about that come true.

This thread will be a clusterfck soon enough.

Fann Linn

kunst nugget wrote: »

Either verdict would have had to been unanimous. If they were deadlocked then the judge might have directed then for a majority verdict but it never got to that.

So some people would accept a unanimous Guilty'' verdict however they won't accept a unanimous 'not guilty' verdict.

dark crystal

ahnowbrowncow wrote: »

Anyone listening to the Matt Cooper show? Four feminists on complaining about the justice system and how it needs to change as a result of this case. He had invited numerous male guests but they all declined. It's hardly surprising when you see what happened to George Hook for speaking common sense.

Who were the four feminists?

BTW, I find it increasingly funny how men complain their voices aren't heard enough and then justify the lack of male commentators on this story (by their own choice) as being someone else's fault.

Plenty of women who agreed with this verdict too....bit sexist to assume all the male guests would be on the side of the aquitted.

professore

manonboard wrote: »

Me too actually. A fair number of my friends have been raped. I don't encourage reporting it in most of the situations because it's likely to me that it will go no where, and further add more suffering to them already. There needs to be evidence, and not just he said/she said.

Its sad, but true in my opinion

This is true of any crime.

I have gone to the Gardai on a few occasions, one in particular where my 16 year old daughter had her jaw broken and her 16 year old boyfriend was repeatedly kicked in the head and was lucky not to die by an older guy off his head on drugs in front of multiple witnesses. Nothing further happened as none of the multiple witnesses would testify. In the end we dropped it as the guy in question is from a notorious drug family.

You need proof and solid independent eyewitness testimony. In this case the independent testimony was heavily in favour of acquittal.

Doctors room ghost

Fann Linn wrote: »

So some people would accept a unanimous Guilty'' verdict however they won't accept a unanimous 'not guilty' verdict.

No we were talking about the actual process of how they came to that judgment in the courtroom. I understood it was to be a unanimous decision by all jury members as apposed to majority ruling.

spookwoman

Her name is protected.
From PSNI Statement "In addition to this, she was named on social media sites during the trial contrary to her legal entitlement. Any breach of this entitlement is and will be investigated."

suicide_circus

I can absolutely understand the logic of not naming the complainant.

What I cannot get my head around is why the same dignity and protection is not afforded to the accused.

professore

professore wrote: »

This is true of any crime.

I have gone to the Gardai on a few occasions, one in particular where my 16 year old daughter had her jaw broken and her 16 year old boyfriend was repeatedly kicked in the head and was lucky not to die by an older guy off his head on drugs in front of multiple witnesses. Nothing further happened as none of the multiple witnesses would testify. In the end we dropped it as the guy in question is from a notorious drug family.

You need proof and solid independent eyewitness testimony. In this case the independent testimony was heavily in favour of acquittal.

No no, patriarchy.

Fann Linn

spookwoman wrote: »

Her name is protected.
From PSNI Statement "In addition to this, she was named on social media sites during the trial contrary to her legal entitlement. Any breach of this entitlement is and will be investigated."

Applicable to NI no doubt, but what about down here. My daughter was able to show me her pics etc on FB or Instagram 2 or 3 days into the trial.

nice_guy80

I'm sure anyone who wants to know who she is would be able to find out pretty quick

professore

dark crystal wrote: »

That's quite probable, I don't know for sure what happened either.

The problem I have is how she's immediately branded a liar (no rape took place) by people on the internet who weren't there that night. This is a large part of the reason many victims don't bother to seek prosecution. Unless you're one of the 1% who manage to prove your case and secure a conviction, there's a good chance a case like this would put you off completely.

I still think if when that other woman entered the room, she had said "help, I'm being raped" -
or had screamed - or even looked afraid - instead of quite deliberately turning her head away from her so as not to be photographed, we would be looking at 4 convictions instead of 4 acquittals.

I know the arguments about people freezing etc but the sexual moaning coming from the room FROM A FEMALE according to the only independent witness it just doesn't make sense that she was frozen with fear being raped .... that coupled with her having the presence of mind to turn her head away ...

I along with I hope the vast majority of men are disgusted by rape and would happily put them away for 10 years each, rugby internationals or not. But I am not at all convinced that it was actually rape.

Spencer Winterbotham

Justice has been served.

Faugheen

professore wrote: »

I still think if when that other woman entered the room, she had said "help, I'm being raped" -
or had screamed - instead of quite deliberately turning her head away from her so as not to be photographed, we would be looking at 4 convictions instead of 4 acquittals.

I know the arguments about people freezing etc but the sexual moaning coming from the room FROM A FEMALE according to the only independent witness it just doesn't make sense that she was frozen with fear being raped .... that coupled with her having the presence of mind to turn her head away ...

Expert medical witness for the defence admitted that most people just tend to let it happen.

It's very easy to say she should have screamed, but in her mind that woman entering the room was a friend of theirs.

dark crystal

dark crystal wrote:

BTW, I find it increasingly funny how men complain their voices aren't heard enough and then justify the lack of male commentators on this story (by their own choice) as being someone else's fault.

Men complain that when they express their opinion, unless it is in complete agreement with modern feminists, they are vilified and, especially people in the public eye, are at risk of losing their career.

AudreyHepburn

suicide_circus wrote: »

I can absolutely understand the logic of not naming the complainant.

What I cannot get my head around is why the same dignity and protection is not afforded to the accused.

I have yet to hear a good credible reason why the accused aren’t afforded privacy in these cases.

It’s archaic quite frankly.

I’d imagine it harks back to the days when women were locked away and treated as fragile dolls and sex was something men did to them consensual or otherwise.

Either you name both parties or you protect both parties - it’s as simple as that.

professore

Faugheen wrote: »

Expert medical witness for the defence admitted that most people just tend to let it happen.

It's very easy to say she should have screamed, but in her mind that woman entering the room was a friend of theirs.

Do they also turn their head away from someone who could help? Do they also make moaning sexual noises and don't appear to be in any distress?

I wasn't aware Dara Florence was a friend of anyone. She went looking for her friend Emily who was asleep in another room upstairs. No mention anywhere that she was a friend of the defendants.

Roadtoad

Diceicle wrote: »

Can someone clarify, why are the defendants named but not the complainant? Are closed hearinga not a good idea in these types of cases?

Justice should be visible, in general. And blind of course!
When minors are involved in sex cases it should be in camera, to protect the minor.
Apparently in the republic if one side is unnamed, so is the other, at least until the judgement is decided.
The state, not the girl, brought the charge, it's not a person A v person B conflict.
Why the GB /Irl difference, wiser voices please!

david75

freshpopcorn wrote: »

We did the same course at college. I got to know her. I left the course after two years. She went abroad and is back home and I haven't seen her since 2013. I don't we know much about her now in her late twenties apart from where she works/lives but I knew loads about her during her college years.

Yet you’re still on about her) You know more about this girl than I do members of my own family. Id say start a blog or write a book or something. Got it out of your system though. Doesn’t reflect well on you going on about her at length like this.

AudreyHepburn

Faugheen wrote: »

Expert medical witness for the defence admitted that most people just tend to let it happen.

It's very easy to say she should have screamed, but in her mind that woman entering the room was a friend of theirs.

Letting it happen is one thing but being heard to enjoy it and to turn away from a potential rescuer is another.

spookwoman

Fann Linn wrote: »

Applicable to NI no doubt, but what about down here. My daughter was able to show me her pics etc on FB or Instagram 2 or 3 days into the trial.

If the images on fb and instagram do not belong to the poster and were taken of someones page without permission a take down can be issued for copyright infringement
As the CPS has demonstrated already, should this image appear on a social media website such as Twitter or Facebook, the situation is straightforward. UK and EU internet safety organisations work closely with social media partners so that distressing, illegal or problematic information can be removed as soon as possible. The value of personal relationships between social media companies, law enforcement agencies, and intermediaries cannot be underestimated.
taken from https://inforrm.org/2015/02/20/the-cloak-of-anonymity-the-naming-of-rape-victims-on-social-media-clare-brown/

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

Letting it happen is one thing but being heard to enjoy it and to turn away from a potential rescuer is another.

You do realise rape victims can experience an orgasm during rape and also remember a gang of men who were a lot stronger than were in that room, what was it 3 against 1. Not everyone is going to cry out for help, everyone reacts differently. Moan could also have come from the pain of the vaginal laceration

Appledreams15

Shefwedfan wrote: »

Are you serious?

Every lads group on Watsapp has the exact same BS in it....

So why? Why do some lads need to brag to each other and put women down to feel good about themselves. I shared the media headlines with friends abroad, male and female, and they were shocked at the texts.

markodaly

ahnowbrowncow wrote: »

Anyone listening to the Matt Cooper show? Four feminists on complaining about the justice system and how it needs to change as a result of this case. He had invited numerous male guests but they all declined. It's hardly surprising when you see what happened to George Hook for speaking common sense.

This is arguably the most telling. We are going to have wall to wall coverage now on how the justice system is some sort of woman hating creation of the patriarchy.

What these people want is not justice or equality but a way to make accusations of rape easier to attain and if people are convicted wrongfully, then so be it.

It is easy to mock the nutty Femnazi's but when they are trying to bend the court system to their own will then people need to take a stand.

They see everything through the prism of their gender studies class and cannot handle how the real world and real people think and work.

professore

Appledreams15 wrote: »

So why? Why do lads need to brag to each other and put women down to feel good about themselves. I shared the media headlines with friends abroad, male and female, and they were shocked at the texts.

I don't know, it's some weird bravado thing that teenage boys do. I don't think it's "putting women down" as such - it's more like rap music or something, as a kind of camaraderie thing. It is utterly stupid of course but there you have it. In most cases it doesn't mean anything and a lot of the time it isn't even true. Women do it too anyway with men - I've heard them.

I guess it's the same reason a bunch of married women get together to give out about their husbands or men about their wives for hours on end. They generally don't hate their spouses but it gives them something to talk about.

dark crystal

markodaly wrote: »

This is arguably the most telling. We are going to have wall to wall coverage now on how the justice system is some sort of woman hating creation of the patriarchy.

What these people want is not justice or equality but a way to make accusations of rape easier to attain and if people are convicted wrongfully, then so be it.

It is easy to mock the nutty Femnazi's but when they are trying to bend the court system to their own will then people need to take a stand.

They see everything through the prism of their gender studies class and cannot handle how the real world and real people think and work.

What evidence do you have for any of this?

Still waiting to hear who the four feminists on the Matt Cooper show were.

Fann Linn

Paddy Jackson's solicitor on 6.1 in a minute.

AudreyHepburn

Appledreams15 wrote: »

So why? Why do lads need to brag to each other and put women down to feel good about themselves. I shared the media headlines with friends abroad, male and female, and they were shocked at the texts.

I really don’t understand why people are acting as if the male tendency toward bravado and trying to out do each other in terms of manliness is something new and unusual.

Far from it - males of any and all species, young males particularly, will always try to outdo do each other to be the strongest, the best looking, the most attractive to the opposite sex.

Human males are no different - it’s a primal instinct that goes back to our ape ancestors.

Snickers Man

andekwarhola wrote: »

I'd hate to be on a jury that has to make a judgement on something like this.

It wouldn't be pleasant, I'm sure. I was thinking about how I would have approached it had I been on the jury. And the simple realisation was that it was impossible to be nice: whatever conclusion you arrived at, you were going to screw somebody's life up probably irreparably.

Either you were going to condemn three young men as "nonces" into a prison system where the only people more vehemently self righteous about the issue of sex crimes are those who are in prison for crimes of extreme violence, and a fourth for being a sneaky conspirator in attempting to cover up their acts; or you were going to brand the complainant as at best a regretful fantasist or at worst a malevolent liar.

So it was important to attempt to establish the facts, as best you could from the evidence; and after that you had to determine whether there was no reasonable doubt that a crime had been committed.

Not an easy task.

mariaalice

professore wrote: »

I don't know, it's some weird bravado thing that teenage boys do. I don't think it's "putting women down" as such - it's more like rap music or something, as a kind of camaraderie thing. It is utterly stupid of course but there you have it. In most cases it doesn't mean anything and a lot of the time it isn't even true. Women do it too anyway with men - I've heard them.

I guess it's the same reason a bunch of married women get together to give out about their husbands or men about their wives for hours on end. They generally don't hate their spouses but it gives them something to talk about.

They were not teenage boys though and that is an important point, there is a huge difference between a moan about the other half ( something I never and have never done as I don't like it ) and what they were saying about the woman.

qwerty ui op

Who was the woman seen walking with Blane Mcllroy, was it his mother?

where could I see the the Instagram comments?

ahnowbrowncow

dark crystal wrote: »

Who were the four feminists?

BTW, I find it increasingly funny how men complain their voices aren't heard enough and then justify the lack of male commentators on this story (by their own choice) as being someone else's fault.

Plenty of women who agreed with this verdict too....bit sexist to assume all the male guests would be on the side of the aquitted.

I don't know their names, you can listen to the podcast.

I never said all male guests would be on the side of the acquitted, it was a caller/texter to the show that asked why there were no male guests and Matt stated all the male guests declined. My point was that opposing the feminist view has proven fatal for a career in so it wouldn't be surprising that the reason male guests declined the invite was due to holding a different view.

I don't care what someone's sex is, my point was that there was no dissenting opinion on the show so it was more or less an echo chamber.

Appledreams15

ahnowbrowncow wrote: »

Anyone listening to the Matt Cooper show? Four feminists on complaining about the justice system and how it needs to change as a result of this case. He had invited numerous male guests but they all declined. It's hardly surprising when you see what happened to George Hook for speaking common sense.

Ireland did recently have the accolade of being the country with the lowest rape convictions of all of Europe , so do you think it is working efficiently? It needs a massive overhaul. What was the point of this 9 week circus, when everyone knew they were bound to get off. I also think that the accuseds identities should be anonymous. Guilty or innocent, those lads were subjected to a 9 week awful media campaign. What was the point of that either? There are much wider issues that need to be addressed in this area.

Fann Linn

Appledreams15 wrote: »

Ireland did recently have the accolade of being the country with the lowest rape convictions of all of Europe , so do you think it is working efficiently? It needs a massive overhaul. What was the point of this 9 week circus, when everyone knew they were bound to get off. I also think that the accuseds identities should be anonymous. Guilty or innocent, those lads were subjected to a 9 week awful media campaign. What was the point of that either? There are much wider issues that need to be addressed in this area.

Are you talking about Irl, NI or UK criminal justice system in relation to above?

blanch152

Deleted User wrote: »

Again, to make my opinion clear.
I think on balance there probably was rape.
If I had to say beyond a reasonable doubt based on what I've heard then I'd be right on the fence.
11 people heard all of the evidence for weeks and made a unanimous decision very quickly which implies that for them it wasn't too close to reasonable doubt for those who heard all the evidence.

An interesting perspective.

I wonder will she sue for damages. The burden of proof in a civil cases is on the balance of probabilities.

Appledreams15

Stuart Olding has apologised for 'hurt caused to the woman'.

blanch152

Appledreams15 wrote: »

Ireland did recently have the accolade of being the country with the lowest rape convictions of all of Europe , so do you think it is working efficiently? It needs a massive overhaul. What was the point of this 9 week circus, when everyone knew they were bound to get off. I also think that the accuseds identities should be anonymous. Guilty or innocent, those lads were subjected to a 9 week awful media campaign. What was the point of that either? There are much wider issues that need to be addressed in this area.

This case was in the UK.

tinpib

pjohnson wrote: »

Neither were the jurors who said unanimously no rape occured.

The jurors agreed unanimously that the prosecution did not prove a rape occured beyond a reasonable doubt. There is a difference.

MissShihTzu

He's on now.

From what I read of the case, I wasn't surprised. Seems Olding is 'sorry for the hurt he caused'. I don't know though - There was never enough evidence to prosecute, and the girl's story was full of holes. That's not to say it happened or not either way, but the evidence didn't seem to stack up. I always felt the men would get off.

So many rape cases seem to fail. Look at the case of the poor boy in Croydon. He was up on a rape charge that nearly went all the way simply because the girl concerned decided to get him out of spite. Another man in the UK was actually convicted and imprisoned before evidence was found that exonerated him. More and more women are being prosecuted and indeed imprisoned for making false allegations of rape.

Rape is a serious violent crime, and the fact these cases fail for whatever reason, deters more women who are in this position from coming forward.

All this has left me feeling very uncomfortable.

Fann Linn

blanch152 wrote: »

An interesting perspective.

I wonder will she sue for damages. The burden of proof in a civil cases is on the balance of probabilities.

Could the 4 alleged defendents also sue?

professore

spookwoman wrote: »

You do realise rape victims can experience an orgasm during rape and also remember a gang of men who were a lot stronger than were in that room, what was it 3 against 1. Not everyone is going to cry out for help, everyone reacts differently. Moan could also have come from the pain of the vaginal laceration

Initially it was 1 on 1. Then Stuart Olding came in making it 2 on 1. Then Dara Florence came in and left again. Then the 3rd guy came in and she ran out. You make it sound like the 3 of them cornered her in a room and started raping her together. Even her own account doesn't support this.

Vaginal laceration would not cause a "moan" or "sexual noises" response. That would be more of an "ouch that's sore" response.

What do you want me to say? I believe every woman unconditionally about rape? I'm not going to say that. Have seen too many liars, male and female, who lie about all sorts of ridiculous and outlandish stuff, in my 46 years. Will I say maybe she WAS raped? Yes. Maybe she was. But I'm not at all convinced in this case.

david75

Ultimately it’s the tommy tiernan theory
‘Didja ever raaaape someone?’

‘No. It was only aggressive sex.’

Then The defenders say ‘you can’t rape the willing’

So it was her fault?

Such a cluster****. Literally and figuratively.

blanch152

Fann Linn wrote: »

Could the 4 alleged defendents also sue?

On what basis, and for what?

The independent prosecuter determined there was a case to answer, i.e. that from the evidence available, one was entitled to form the opinion that there was a rape. The court case was about establishing whether it was beyond a reasonable doubt.

markodaly

dark crystal wrote: »

Still waiting to hear who the four feminists on the Matt Cooper show were.

There is a #ibelieveher hashtag trending with all the usual suspects in toe.

These people are not interested in fact finding or getting to the truth of matters but want to go down the emotional route wether they are right or wrong.

Superstition belongs to the last century, we don't need to have a justice system bent and coerced into a superstitious belief system based on Gender studies classes.

professore

mariaalice wrote: »

They were not teenage boys though and that is an important point, there is a huge difference between a moan about the other half ( something I never and have never done as I don't like it ) and what they were saying about the woman.

Really? I've heard some awful things said about other halves over the years. Really awful stuff. I don't like it either and don't do it myself.

Appledreams15

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

I really don’t understand why people are acting as if the male tendency toward bravado and trying to out do each other in terms of manliness is something new and unusual.

Far from it - males of any and all species, young males particularly, will always try to outdo do each other to be the strongest, the best looking, the most attractive to the opposite sex.

Human males are no different - it’s a primal instinct that goes back to our ape ancestors.

Ah always blame the apes.

Surely if we have evolved from apes, our behaviour evolves too.
Someone , a man, said to me this week, while this case is in the news,

'Rape is a very animalistic thing, Im surprised it hasn't died out by now'.

Are we not getting any more enlightened in anyway shape or form??

david75

markodaly wrote: »

There is a #ibelieveher hashtag trending with all the usual suspects in toe.

These people are not interested in fact finding or getting to the truth of matters but want to go down the emotional route wether they are right or wrong.

Superstition belongs to the last century, we don't need to have a justice system bent and coerced into a superstitious belief system based on Gender studies classes.

So you support alleged rapists in one thread but rail against women looking for bodily autonomy and abortion in another.

You have a problem with women apparently.

jimmycrackcorm

Doctors room ghost wrote: »

It wasn’t unanimous by 11 for not guilty.jury were told before deliberations that all 11 had to come to a guilty verdict or else they wouldn’t be convinced.all 11 with the same verdict of guilty is what I heard on the radio.was that right as opposed to majority vote

The news is reporting that the jury decision was unanimous, not in-between so I think the verdict is very clear.

#IBelieveDara

pjohnson

david75 wrote: »

So you support alleged rapists in one thread but rail against women looking for bodily autonomy and abortion in another.

You have a problem with women apparently.

Are you going to keep tagging on peoples views on abortion into this thread?

This proves the earlier point that some people see all these issues as a single thing where there is only one possible choice if you previously chose "x". There is no borg hive mind.

monty_python

The case was dismissed due to insufficient evidence

Different to being found not guilty

david75

pjohnson wrote: »

Are you going to keep tagging on peoples views on abortion into this thread?

This proves the earlier point that some people see all these issues as a single thing where there is only one possible choice if you previously chose "x". There is no borg hive mind.

You were the very first person to even bring that referendum up in this thread funny enough. So it’s ok for you but nobody else? Right.

freshpopcorn

Mod NoteKeep this relevant to this thread and don't bring up others. ie the eighth amendment thread.