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

hots

Appledreams15 wrote: »

... maybe I will be man enough...

Bit offensive.

the_syco

pjohnson wrote: »

Not anti man in the slightest

Jaysus fcuking christ.

GreeBo

SleetAndSnow wrote: »

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.

Thats incorrect.
Only a man can commit rape as it requires penetration with a penis.

Anything else is sexual assault.

RuMan

Silentcorner wrote: »

I have to say, that in my experience here in Limerick anyway, the men I spoke to yesterday about this were all as gob smacked over this verdict as each other...

This is not a gender divide....at least it is not as big as you might think it is...

Nobody won yesterday....absolutely nobody....

The system with which we treat sexual violence needs to be overhauled it is clearly not fit for purpose...

This case will not put off women who falsely report rape...if anything it could increase it...women who falsely accuse someone of rape are not stable individuals....

This will put off a lot of very distressed victims of sexual assault from seeking justice....

Consent classes need to be introduced to the education system, I found the whole experience of the last two months depressing....how victims react to rape attacks need to be understood also...

If young men, speak about women in the way those men did...then we are failing our young men...that attitude plus the physical difference between young men and women plus a shedload of alcohol is a very dangerous cocktail...

Most people i spoke to were amazed it even got to court. Cant see how anyone following the proceedings could have been shocked by the verdict

facehugger99

the_syco wrote: »

Jaysus fcuking christ.

Fcuk me - if I have to see that post one more time on this thread.

We get it

It's stupid.

freshpopcorn

Silentcorner wrote: »

I have to say, that in my experience here in Limerick anyway, the men I spoke to yesterday about this were all as gob smacked over this verdict as each other...

Were they really surprised by the not guilty verdict?

Greysquirel09

RuMan wrote: »

Most people i spoke to were amazed it even got to court. Cant see how anyone following the proceedings could have been shocked by the verdict

Have to agree. The moment I heard the witness say she walked in and saw a threesome they were walking free.

Silentcorner

freshpopcorn wrote: »

Were they really surprised by the not guilty verdict?

Ya...as was I...which was a bit foolish on our part really...I mean, what chance did she have?

the_syco

Appledreams15 wrote: »

I have been talking to men abroad on whatsapl, ive travelled a fair bit, and they were all incredibly supportive

So you and they think an accusation of rape by a woman equals immediate jail sentence without a trial?

Fann Linn

Silentcorner wrote: »

Ya...as was I...which was a bit foolish on our part really...I mean, what chance did she have?

Was that before or after she went back in for her phone?

freshpopcorn

Silentcorner wrote: »

Ya...as was I...which was a bit foolish on our part really...I mean, what chance did she have?

Thanks for the reply. Most people I met over the weeks were expecting a not guilty verdict from what they heard in the news.

razorblunt

Silentcorner wrote: »

Ya...as was I...which was a bit foolish on our part really...I mean, what chance did she have?

A decent chance if the evidence stacked up. In fact more than decent.

RuMan

Silentcorner wrote: »

Ya...as was I...which was a bit foolish on our part really...I mean, what chance did she have?

Clearly you werent following the case

GreeBo

Silentcorner wrote: »

Ya...as was I...which was a bit foolish on our part really...I mean, what chance did she have?

She had the chance to prove her accusations in a court in front of a jury...which she couldn't do.

Do you believe everyone simply accused of a crime is guilty?

Silentcorner

GreeBo wrote: »

She had the chance to prove her accusations in a court in front of a jury...which she couldn't do.

Do you believe everyone simply accused of a crime is guilty?

That old chestnut...

I don't actually...I followed another rape case in the media recently was fully convinced that the men were innocent....

Galwayguy35

It seems the radfems and the beta male cucks would prefer the men were sent to prison despite the fact that there was no proof they did anything wrong.

I'm sick of seeing this #ibelieveher crap in every comment on the subject as well.

GreeBo

Silentcorner wrote: »

That old chestnut...

I don't actually...I followed another rape case in the media recently was fully convinced that the men were innocent....

So you were convinced based on the available evidence that these men were guilty?

SleetAndSnow

GreeBo wrote: »

Thats incorrect.
Only a man can commit rape as it requires penetration with a penis.

Anything else is sexual assault.

Forced penetration has been reported in many prisions etc across the US, if that's sexual assault then so be it however my point still stands, what that poster said was incorrect about men not being raped , it happens. (Anal penetration)

RuMan

Silentcorner wrote: »

That old chestnut...

I don't actually...I followed another rape case in the media recently was fully convinced that the men were innocent....

There was no evidence in this case, she was lucky it even got to court. Would have better all around if it hadnt.

Silentcorner

GreeBo wrote: »

So you were convinced based on the available evidence that these men were guilty?

I'm not on any stand pal...I'm entitled to my opinion...

GreeBo

SleetAndSnow wrote: »

Forced penetration has been reported in many prisions etc across the US, if that's sexual assault then so be it however my point still stands, what that poster said was incorrect about men not being raped , it happens. (Anal penetration)

I'm not saying only women can be raped, I'm saying that only men can commit rape.

NIMAN

It's clear there are plenty of people posting in this thread who are making statements when they didn't actually follow the case.

They are just jumping on the latest bandwagon.

SleetAndSnow

GreeBo wrote: »

I'm not saying only women can be raped, I'm saying that only men can commit rape.

Ah right, thanks for the correction for the term

Silentcorner

NIMAN wrote: »

It's clear there are plenty of people posting in this thread who are making statements when they didn't actually follow the case.

They are just jumping on the latest bandwagon.

Well, I can only speak for myself, but I followed this case right from the start...

I couldn't give a fukk about bandwagons....

Utopia Parkway

RuMan wrote: »

Most people i spoke to were amazed it even got to court. Cant see how anyone following the proceedings could have been shocked by the verdict

Anyone following the case should not have been surprised in the slightest. It was fairly obvious weeks ago that the verdict was heading the way it did.

Too many inconsistencies and not enough evidence.

GreeBo

Silentcorner wrote: »

I'm not on any stand pal...I'm entitled to my opinion...

I'm not saying that you aren't, just wondering why you were surprised at the not guilty verdict.

Assuming you understand the legal process, to be surprised you must have personally been convinced beyond all reasonable doubt that they were guilty.

Neither I (nor the judge or jury for that matter) found any evidence to satisfy that requirement.

Dyr

Just out of curiosity, I'm assuming all the ibelieveher hash taggers are happy that they implicitly dont believe the female witness? Maybe ibelieveherbutnother would be more accurate

TOMs WIFE

the_syco wrote: »

pjohnson wrote: »

Not anti man in the slightest

Jaysus fcuking christ.

Unbelieveable.  I see that she has deleted the tweet.  Someone obviously made her see sense (what little she clearly has).

freshpopcorn

TOMs WIFE wrote: »

Unbelieveable.  I see that she has deleted the tweet.  Someone obviously made her see sense (what little she clearly has).

Normally people just calls everbody who calls them out on such Tweets trolls.

RuMan

Bambi wrote: »

Just out of curiosity, I'm assuming all the ibelieveher hash taggers are happy that they implicitly dont believe the female witness? Maybe ibelieveherbutnother would be more accurate

Dont get the sense they have any clue about evidence its all about virtue signalling who cares if they destroy the lifes of innocent men

Stonedpilot

GreeBo wrote: »

I'm not saying only women can be raped, I'm saying that only men can commit rape.

What utter utter utter crap. So if a grown woman forces herself on a young boy Pins him down, mounts him threatens him and has sex against his will that isnt rape?.
Of course it is.

Its your kinda crap excuses female paedophiles.
Disgusting post frankly.

tritium

GreeBo wrote: »

I'm not saying only women can be raped, I'm saying that only men can commit rape.

Only men can commit can commit the legally defined crime of rape.

Either gender can force the other (or their own) to have sex with them against their will. The CDC has a rather shameful episode of reclassifying and hiding that exact thing in the appendices a while back.

Not really cool to use a flaw in the legal versus common understanding of the term to score points on something like this tbh

SleetAndSnow

Stonedpilot wrote: »

What utter utter utter crap. So if a grown woman forces herself on a young boy Pins him down, mounts him threatens him and has sex against his will that isnt rape?.
Of course it is.

Its your kinda crap excuses female paedophiles.
Disgusting post frankly.

Well I mean after looking it up, that's what the law says. There is nothing in the law about women raping men so legally it can't be held up, which I believe is something that needs to be changed.

hatrickpatrick

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

beta male cucks

Way to destroy the credibility of your argument, an argument which is otherwise right on the money.

abbir

tritium wrote: »

Only men can commit can commit the legally defined crime of rape.

Women can commit the crime too, on another woman.

irishrebe

Mr.H wrote: »

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?

Why is it relevant what rights men have that women don't? You keep making it into a competition. Abortion, for example, will remain a women's issue because men can't get pregnant. Why does it bother you so much that people want to improve women's issues in Ireland?

GreeBo

tritium wrote: »

Only men can commit can commit the legally defined crime of rape.

Either gender can force the other (or their own) to have sex with them against their will. The CDC has a rather shameful episode of reclassifying and hiding that exact thing in the appendices a while back.

Not really cool to use a flaw in the legal versus common understanding of the term to score points on something like this tbh

Actually I think using the legal and correct terms and definitions is *required* for a debate such as this, otherwise there are pages and pages of misinformations, misunderstanding and plain old nonsense.

Stonedpilot wrote: »

What utter utter utter crap. So if a grown woman forces herself on a young boy Pins him down, mounts him threatens him and has sex against his will that isnt rape?.
Of course it is.

Its your kinda crap excuses female paedophiles.
Disgusting post frankly.

No, its a sexual assault.
I'm sorry for your ignorance but please dont use that to attempt to put words into my mouth and make unrelated connections to paedophiles.

And dont worry about letting facts get in the way of your posts.

hatrickpatrick

Appledreams15 wrote: »

Havent I just said two posts ago? It is not about this particular case. It is about the wider issue of women being failed in the court systems in the rep and n.ireland. That can be changed going forward.

I have to say lads, you're doing an awful lot to live up to your current reputation as Irish men as 'sexist, cruel and nasty'. If you want to keep in that vein so be it. I have been talking to men abroad on whatsapl, ive travelled a fair bit, and they were all incredibly supportive. So I think I will go and talk to the supportive people and the Irish women who actually want change. Ye need to take a hardlook at how you're acting, and how you are now looking on a global stage.

What specifically do you want to change about the justice system, though? How would you change it in such a way that did not infringe upon the right to due process? Honestly, most people who oppose the protests are all ears, waiting for those protesting against a ruling by an impartial jury to make any concrete or credible suggestions as to how the court system should be changed. What exactly is it that can be done, in your view?

Appledreams15

Appledreams15 wrote:

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

Yeah.... That's a right afforded to women. Silly statement

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!

... Starting to believe you're a troll.

RuMan wrote:

I assumed poster was taking the piss?!

I'm starting to. Sadly judging by the march against justice today, there are more than a handful floating about.

What a ****ty generation of people. Not just in Ireland. It seems to be global. Everything needs a hash tag. Not my president, me too, I believe her, occupy wallstreet. **** off.

Nermal

mayolady14 wrote: »

The Sexual Abuse and Violence in Ireland Report (2002) is now fourteen years old and it remains a deeply disturbing work. Among its findings: 27% of Irish women and men experience sexual violence in their childhood. Roughly one third of Irish women and men will experience sexual violence in their lifetime.

I thought this sounded ridiculously high, and it is.

The survey is here: http://www.drcc.ie/about/savi.pdf

The best page to look at is page 68. It cannot be reconciled to your statistic.

hatrickpatrick

To those attacking GreenBo, incredibly depressingly it is actually correct that rape is defined as penetration without consent, not intercourse without consent. So in most Western legal systems, the definition of rape physically cannot extend to a woman having sex with a man who did not consent.

Attacking the messenger over this is pointless, this is just another archaic piece of legislation which should be changed. Plain and simple. Getting mad at people for pointing out that it is, indeed, the current situation, is pointless.

irishrebe

Mokuba wrote: »

Women are suffering.

Jesus Christ.

This generation of women is the most privileged generation in the history of time, and have have not only found equality with men, but have  surpassed men. Why don't you go to Saudi Arabia where there is real suffering going on?

Christ.

Deluded. Anyone in those parades should be avoided.

Sure, no worries that a woman who is raped in Ireland can't have a legal abortion because women in Saudi Arabia have it worse! Silly b1tches should just all shut up and stop bothering you!

The Rape of Lucretia

What time is the #Ibelievetheguys march at on Saturday ?

I really think LON should come out and hear both sides.

Bottom line in this one as I see it, is that just because the numbers involved are getting higher than one is comfortable with, it doesnt make those involved up to that point suddenly classify as rapists.

Ulysses Gaze

GreeBo wrote: »

I'm not saying only women can be raped, I'm saying that only men can commit rape.

Balderdash

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/sexual-victimization-by-women-is-more-common-than-previously-known/

We also pooled four years of the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) data and found that 35 percent of male victims who experienced rape or sexual assault reported at least one female perpetrator.

We found that, contrary to assumptions, the biggest threat to women serving time does not come from male corrections staff. Instead, female victims are more than three times as likely to experience sexual abuse by other women inmates than by male staff.

tayto lover

This entire affair just goes to show the shocking level of drinking that goes on.
Remove a lot of the alcohol and the whole thing doesn't happen at all.

One_Of_Shanks

All you can do is go on the evidence presented and if I was on the jury and going on what I heard and read from the trial I would have reached the same verdict as the jury.

I think these fellas let themselves down badly and they come out of it looking like juvenile morons. And while we're at it, a bunch of ass-holes. But at the same time you cannot lock them up for that.

It's a tad scary the amount of people saying they should have been locked up for a crime they've been found not guilty of.

Why there exists an appetite for finding people guilty without sufficient evidence probably says a lot more about the people who are calling for it, or complaining about the verdict.

Maybe its the fact they're wealthy or just the understandable disdain for their extremely poor behaviour but whether anyone likes it or not there really wasn't a whole lot of evidence there to send them to prison and the jury took a few hours to reach a verdict on a case that went on for months, which says a lot about the lack of evidence.

Ultimately people attacking the verdict are doing so for their own reasons, and not for the evidence (or lack of) presented during the trial.
The jury could only go on evidence and therefore they called it correctly imo.

Tsipras

Those people marching today were an embarrassment.

Ipso

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

What specifically do you want to change about the justice system, though? How would you change it in such a way that did not infringe upon the right to due process? Honestly, most people who oppose the protests are all ears, waiting for those protesting against a ruling by an impartial jury to make any concrete or credible suggestions as to how the court system should be changed. What exactly is it that can be done, in your view?

Something based on a twitter hashtag when things don't go their way.

irishmoss

Greysquirel09 wrote: »

Have to agree. The moment I heard the witness say she walked in and saw a threesome they were walking free.

Absolutely, and did I read somewhere that the victims friend was also a friend of Dara the witness who walked in on them and the victim turns her head away?

So to me if Dara had not of walked in, this case would not have gone to court. The "victim" was upset she was caught doing what she did and feared it would get back to her friend so she called rape

Checkmate19

Listening to most talk shows last night it was like the lads where found guilty. It was a nine week trial it took just oner three hours for the verdict. There where inconsistencies in the girls account and the only other witness reckoned it wasn't rape. The jury get so see and hear everything. They get to see witness faces there demeanour etc. Weather they are giving flowing answers etc. All we got where transcripts.

The March's today IMO where a bleeding disgrace. What about these guys life's. They are ruined. The jury system is the only one we have. Some commentators last night where basically saying women should be believed. That's not the way these things work. Women have falsely accused men of rape in the past for numerous reasons. Not saying that's what happened in this case but it happens. Just because its a complaint does not mean guilt.

Nobody comes out of this well. Finally the WhatsApp messages weren't pleasant but I bet these happen every weekend of the year and from both sexes. These guys where found innocent and should be allowed get on with there life's because if they are not then we may as well have no justice system. An innocent verdict means notheing.