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

Appledreams15

Assetbacked wrote: »

How likely would it be that positive consent would be seen anytime two people are having sex? You do realise positive consent would be along the lines of her saying "I am consenting to this" as Dara walked in.

And so why do you think it was asked at court?.

Appledreams15

Appledreams15 wrote:

From the case “Were there any signs of her positively consenting?†he continued.

Like what? Giving her the two thumbs up sign when she poked her head around the door? Saying "I'm loving this" when she walked in?

Sprinter Sacre

kylith wrote: »

Because people have never lied in court?

That no guilty verdict was returned is all we know for sure.

Why believe them when they say it was consensual and not believe her when she says it was not?

It is entirely possible that this is an issue of perception. From her point of view she was pressured into group sex that she did not want by more and more guys showing up. From their point of view they had a threesome by degrees.

Thankfully we live in a part of the world with a solid justice system and these errors and lies are extremely rare, in fact mentioning or implying lies might happen is an embarrassment and undermines the entire judicial system that governs our lives. There is no reason at all to assume any lies have been mistaken for the truth in this case.

We the public should not believe anything except for the judgement passed down as we have not been disclosed the entire facts. We should only believe these men entered the court as innocent men and left the court yesterday innocent. There is no reason to assume the court, the judge or the jury failed to bring justice to the case and failed to bring all truth to the surface.

Mr.H

irishrebe wrote: »

Already gave examples of women's rights when it comes to contraception and abortion and rape crisis services.

But how is that any way compared to men having more rights?

There are specific rape crisis services for women but none for men. There are emergency accom for women suffering from domestic abuse but not men?

irishrebe

blanch152 wrote: »

irishrebe wrote: »

I once saw what I thought was a couple having an argument in the street out of my living room window. Got a knock on the door a few days later from a policeman. They didn't know each other, he had actually been following her and got violent when she told him to leave her alone (didn't see him hit her because I went to attend to the stuff I had on the cooker). I felt terrible. I'd genuinely no idea the woman was in trouble. If anyone had asked me that evening what I'd seen, I'd have said I saw a couple arguing in the street and being loud and annoying. Doesn't make it the truth, it makes it my perception.

Again, that was her claim as reported by the police. You, as a possible material witness, would not be able to verify her claim, hence there would be an element of reasonable doubt.

It was caught on CCTV. He'd been stalking her for ages. I turned out to be an unreliable witness, certainly not out of any malice on my part. I totally got the wrong end of the stick.

blanch152

Appledreams15 wrote: »

Why would they ask it then. ?

I presume it would be someone looking happy making positive noises and enjoying it.

She said no.

However, she did catch Paddy Jackson out in a big lie. He said he didnt have vaginal sex with the girl. Dara said that she saw him doing so.

I don't know how many times you have to have this explained to you.

Whatever she saw, she didn't believe she saw a rape. This makes the accusation fall clearly into an area of reasonable doubt. If she, who witnessed it, couldn't be sure it was a rape, how could the jury?

Appledreams15

professore wrote: »

All right, let's have some examples, where men have more rights than women in 2018 Ireland.

The first thing I think of is : not being raped.

God , I'd love to have not been raped. I'd actually give anything.

professore

Appledreams15 wrote: »

Why would they ask it then. ?

I presume it would be someone looking happy making positive noises and enjoying it.

She said no.

However, she did catch Paddy Jackson out in a big lie. He said he didnt have vaginal sex with the girl. Dara said that she saw him doing so.

And yet there was zero forensic evidence of him having had sex with her. And plenty of forensic evidence from Stuart Olding.

irishrebe

Mr.H wrote: »

irishrebe wrote: »

Already gave examples of women's rights when it comes to contraception and abortion and rape crisis services.

But how is that any way compared to men having more rights?

There are specific rape crisis services for women but none for men. There are emergency accom for women suffering from domestic abuse but not men?

Why is it always a competition? You are aware that working on women's rights doesn't mean taking away men's rights? Campaigning for rape kits and access to abortion for women doesn't mean men shouldn't have them. It's largely a women's issue because more women are raped than men, and if you hadn't noticed, men can't get pregnant. A large part of an initial report of rape is taking care of emergency contraception and so on.

Mr.H

irishrebe wrote: »

It was caught on CCTV. He'd been stalking her for ages. I turned out to be an unreliable witness, certainly not out of any malice on my part. I totally got the wrong end of the stick.

The police told you what actually happened? Is that not tampering with witness testimony?

Appledreams15

blanch152 wrote: »

I don't know how many times you have to have this explained to you.

Whatever she saw, she didn't believe she saw a rape. This makes the accusation fall clearly into an area of reasonable doubt. If she, who witnessed it, couldn't be sure it was a rape, how could the jury?

As you love Dara's evidence. What do you think about her saying she 100% saw Paddy Jackson having sex with the defendant, when he said to police that he didn't?

professore

blanch152 wrote: »

I don't know how many times you have to have this explained to you.

Whatever she saw, she didn't believe she saw a rape. This makes the accusation fall clearly into an area of reasonable doubt. If she, who witnessed it, couldn't be sure it was a rape, how could the jury?

You think there are no boys raped in Ireland?

SleetAndSnow

Appledreams15 wrote: »

The first thing I think of is : not being raped.

God , I'd love to have not been raped. I'd actually give anything.

well thats a lie, men can be raped aswell and it has happened, theres just not as much said about it, and yes a women can rape a man and a man can rape a man. Both have been reported numerous times. Same goes for mens mental health along with men being sexually abused and asaulted by their female partner. You are seen as weak if you admit to it which is another part of our culture we need to change and focus on. Also sorry to hear about your previous experience.

Assetbacked

Appledreams15 wrote: »

Why would they ask it then. ?

I presume it would be someone looking happy making positive noises and enjoying it.

She said no.

However, she did catch Paddy Jackson out in a big lie. He said he didnt have vaginal sex with the girl. Dara said that she saw him doing so.

The question was supposed to imply in the minds of jurors that "she did not see positive consent therefore rape". However, one person's positive noises could be another's pain. Or she could have been silent and not smiling but still enjoying it. The bigger point is that she did not look like she was being raped and this is crucial.

blanch152

Appledreams15 wrote: »

The first thing I think of is : not being raped.

God , I'd love to have not been raped. I'd actually give anything.

I know a number of men who have been raped.

irishrebe

Mr.H wrote: »

irishrebe wrote: »

It was caught on CCTV. He'd been stalking her for ages. I turned out to be an unreliable witness, certainly not out of any malice on my part. I totally got the wrong end of the stick.

The police told you what actually happened? Is that not tampering with witness testimony?

It came out later, obviously. I gave my statement of what I'd seen and it later turned out to be totally wrong. Imagine if it been the key piece of evidence used in the trial?

Cyrus

Appledreams15 wrote: »

Why would they ask it then. ?

I presume it would be someone looking happy making positive noises and enjoying it.

She said no.

However, she did catch Paddy Jackson out in a big lie. He said he didnt have vaginal sex with the girl. Dara said that she saw him doing so.

I believe she was mistaken on that front and heres why

If jackson did have vaginal sex with her and lied about it, it was a massive risk to take. If the jury were convinced he lied about that then chances of him being found guilty were much higher.

Appledreams15

Protest marches in ireland are the no.1 story on the daily mail online. So so proud of women in Ireland! We made it!

blanch152

professore wrote: »

You think there are no boys raped in Ireland?

Huh? Did you quote the wrong post?

Benildus

I'm not sure how true this is but the victim apparently had another rape/sexual assault case withdrawn previously so this wasn't her first time having been in this situation.

blanch152

Appledreams15 wrote: »

Protest marches in ireland are the no.1 story on the daily mail online. So so proud of women in Ireland! We made it!

People in Ireland protesting about the judicial system in Northern Ireland. Were they asking Leo to change it?

Mr.H

irishrebe wrote:

Why is it always a competition? You are aware that working on women's rights doesn't mean taking away men's rights? Campaigning for rape kits and access to abortion for women doesn't mean men shouldn't have them. It's largely a women's issue because more women are raped than men, and if you hadn't noticed, men can't get pregnant. A large part of an initial report of rape is taking care of emergency contraception and so on.

It's not a competition. You were asked what rights men have in Ireland that women don't.

When you count unreported rape the figures are actually closer than you think. Men in prisons are also raped. Do they not count?

professore

irishrebe wrote: »

Why is it always a competition? You are aware that working on women's rights doesn't mean taking away men's rights? Campaigning for rape kits and access to abortion for women doesn't mean men shouldn't have them. It's largely a women's issue because more women are raped than men, and if you hadn't noticed, men can't get pregnant. A large part of an initial report of rape is taking care of emergency contraception and so on.

I'm 100% behind any and all facilities that can be provided to rape victims. And I don't want to make it a competition.

kylith

Assetbacked wrote: »

How would she "see" consent? In contrast to rape where she would see struggle, cries for help etc, "seeing" consent is different. How would she see it?

You do know that not all rape victims shout and struggle, right? And not shouting and struggling does not mean that one was not raped.

irishman86

I love the sheep mentality these verdicts bring
The court found them not guilty. If these lads werent famous there would be barely a mention of it
Lets not forget the Ched Evans case. Same marching/bitching and then it turned out all these idiots were wrong
The lads should be left alone and let get on with there lifes

Assetbacked

Appledreams15 wrote: »

And so why do you think it was asked at court?.

Why wouldn't it be? For completeness and as part of a thorough questioning. Imagine not asking the question of the key witness "did you see the complainant consent to the sex?"

Mr.H

Appledreams15 wrote:

The first thing I think of is : not being raped.

so a guy has the right to not be raped?

I'm sorry if some scum bag did that to you but he had no right and this again isn't anything to do with rights

Assetbacked

kylith wrote: »

You do know that not all rape victims shout and struggle, right? And not shouting and struggling does not mean that one was not raped.

Equally, it does not mean she was. Probably it is not rape if there is no protest when sex happens (in the absence of violence or threat of violence). The jury decided it was not rape. That's the end of it.

professore

Cyrus wrote: »

I believe she was mistaken on that front and heres why

If jackson did have vaginal sex with her and lied about it, it was a massive risk to take. If the jury were convinced he lied about that then chances of him being found guilty were much higher.

Also the fact she had an internal cut would tally with a sharp fingernail rather than a penis - I can't imagine how you could cut a vagina with a penis.

Cyrus

Appledreams15 wrote: »

Protest marches in ireland are the no.1 story on the daily mail online. So so proud of women in Ireland! We made it!

you are proud of a group marching about a court case in a different jurisdiction, where due process was followed and a jury of the accused peers found them not guilty in less than 4 hours?

What did they do when you say we made it?

what in gods name do they expect to achieve?

you can gauge the mentality of these people by the politicians involved

Cyrus

Mr.H wrote: »

so a guy has the right to not be raped?

I'm sorry if some scum bag did that to you but he had no right and this again isn't anything to do with rights

exactly

TheChosenOne_

Appledreams15 wrote: »

Protest marches in ireland are the no.1 story on the daily mail online. So so proud of women in Ireland! We made it!

Proud? A bunch of sheep is all I see. 3/4 of those people haven't a clue about the ins and outs of a trial.

But once again, it's just woman acting victimised and telling us how we should treat them better.

ANTI MAN PROTEST IS WHAT IT IS

blanch152

professore wrote: »

Also the fact she had an internal cut would tally with a sharp fingernail rather than a penis - I can't imagine how you could cut a vagina with a penis.

In fairness, a lack of lubrication could cause vaginal tears

Mr.H

irishrebe wrote:

It came out later, obviously. I gave my statement of what I'd seen and it later turned out to be totally wrong. Imagine if it been the key piece of evidence used in the trial?

No I'm not accusing I just thought that the police guy told you.

I remember I was in Liverpool last year with my better half and we were walking at night. We hear a couple of lads loudly racing past us. We stepped out if the way. Next some poor young lad running behind was in tears. They beat him up because he was gay and stole his phone and wallet. All I kept thinking was it didn't seem right why did I step out of their way. Truth is normal people don't always react to these things. We waited with he had for the police. Took three phone angry calls by me before they finally made it out. I gave the police guy an earful when he eventually arrived. Looking back I'm glad he didn't take offense.

ChikiChiki

A few crafty lads spotted in that crowd. They know well what they are at.

freshpopcorn

The Cork march I don't really get the flowers.

Nermal

kylith wrote: »

And not shouting and struggling does not mean that one was not raped.

If you are a conscious adult, not being threatened with violence, then yes it does.

wexie

Appledreams15 wrote: »

Protest marches in ireland are the no.1 story on the daily mail online. So so proud of women in Ireland! We made it!

Made what?

The DailyMail?

I think perhaps if you're looking to actually influence anything you need to set your sights a bit higher

UnknownSpecies

blanch152 wrote: »

In fairness, a lack of lubrication could cause vaginal tears

Doctor said it wasn't consistent with a laceration caused by penile rape. Much more likely to be a fingernail.

cloudatlas

TheChosenOne_ wrote: »

Proud? A bunch of sheep is all I see. 3/4 of those people haven't a clue about the ins and outs of a trial.

But once again, it's just woman acting victimised and telling us how we should treat them better.

ANTI MAN PROTEST IS WHAT IT IS

Anti legal system way of handing rape cases and solidarity with abuse victims across the board I would have thought. You'd think after hours would have no problem with civic disobedience but when there is a march like this it's always anti-men and it is always homogonised into one in their heads because any kind of real sort of engagement with the issues is too much so 'Anti man' yeah that's it now don't think about it anymore as it's too difficult for the auld brain to wrap around... Anti man mantra will do.

Assetbacked

Nermal wrote: »

If you are a conscious adult, not being threatened with violence, then yes it does.

Unless you believe that women are helpless, weak minded creatures. It tends to be those with their own mental health issues which take an alternative view to this.

RuMan

wexie wrote: »

Made what?

The DailyMail?

I think perhaps if you're looking to actually influence anything you need to set your sights a bit higher

I assumed poster was taking the piss?!

kylith

Nermal wrote: »

If you are a conscious adult, not being threatened with violence, then yes it does.

No. It really doesn't.

suicide_circus

ChikiChiki wrote: »

A few crafty lads spotted in that crowd. They know well what they are at.

Woke for the Poke

Appledreams15

Cyrus wrote: »

you are proud of a group marching about a court case in a different jurisdiction, where due process was followed and a jury of the accused peers found them not guilty in less than 4 hours?

What did they do when you say we made it?

what in gods name do they expect to achieve?

you can gauge the mentality of these people by the politicians involved

Of course I'm proud.
I am incredibly proud.
I think of all the women I have talked to, crying about their sexual assault, and I think of this day.
I think of the woman I met today, who cried and said 'it happened to me 20 years ago, I should be over it by now'. And I am proud.
The protest is in solidarity with the victim in N.I , it is ALSO about women being failed in rape cases in the REPUBLiC. Will you look up what people are bloody protesting about, before assuming and commenting.

Now a miracle on here would be a man actually saying hey thousands of wlmen are saying they are suffering, maybe I will be man enough to say that women are suffering in the country that I live in. Maybe we can change that going forward

suicide_circus

Appledreams15 wrote: »

Of course I'm proud.
I am incredibly proud.
I think of all the women I have talked to, crying about their sexual assault, and I think of this day.
I think of the woman I met today, who cried and said 'it happened to me 20 years ago, I should be over it by now'. And I am proud.
The protest is in solidarity with the victim in N.I , it is ALSO about women being failed in rape cases in the REPUBLiC. Will you look up what people are bloody protesting about, before assuming and commenting.

Now a miracle on here would be a man actually saying hey thousands of wlmen are saying they are suffering, maybe I will be man enough to say that women are suffering in the country that I live in. Maybe we can change that going forward

What do you actually want here? A trial was had. Justice was served.

Appledreams15

ChikiChiki wrote: »

A few crafty lads spotted in that crowd. They know well what they are at.

Amazing, a man might actually have a heart, and be upset about women getting raped!

How amazing in this day and age.

Assetbacked

kylith wrote: »

No. It really doesn't.

But silence and not smiling during sex equals, almost always (in the absence of violence), no rape; correct?

suicide_circus

Appledreams15 wrote: »

Amazing, a man might actually have a heart, and be upset about women getting raped!

How amazing in this day and age.

This woman wasn't raped by the accused men.

freshpopcorn

Appledreams15 wrote: »

Amazing, a man might actually have a heart, and be upset about women getting raped!

How amazing in this day and age.

Most men and women I know would have a heart for anybody who experienced any kind of sexual violence.
However no rational man or woman can convict somebody of a crime when their isn't enough evidence if they are sitting on a jury.