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

Stheno

[Deleted User] wrote: »

When I read that in the papers, it really brought home to me the difference between ROI and NI trials.

Public (excepting journalists) aren't allowed in ROI rape trials- I never knew that. And I don't see why they needed the video link on her throughout testimony for the public to see in the NI trial- obviously it's their legal system.

I can understand why the jury need to be able to read the body language etc of ANYONE giving testimony- but why the public?

Agreed its a bizarre approach especially in a small place like Belfast.

Are the public definitely excluded from rape trials here? I ask as i was at a trial supporting a friend who had been sexually abused as a child and the court was open to the public and they had no annonymity in court but the press were not allowed name the complainants ( there were three)

Sidebaro

Uncharted wrote:

This thread is proving to be a microcosm of the 'new woke female' attitude.

Uncharted wrote:

Full of vitriol and bile. Offended for the sake of being offended. Spinning lies and falsehoods to bolster any case,even ones that have been resolved in a court of law.

Uncharted wrote:

Imagine some of these will go on to be parents to young kids. Imagine the endless gender neutral,entitled sjw,perma-offended,hateful brainwashing that will take place. It's truly grim. It's gonna be a very scary world to be a man.

Thank God the men are behaving so honourable! Take off the blinkers.

Stheno

Stheno wrote: »

Agreed its a bizarre approach especially in a small place like Belfast.

Are the public definitely excluded from rape trials here? I ask as i was at a trial supporting a friend who had been sexually abused as a child and the court was open to the public and they had no annonymity in court but the press were not allowed name the complainants ( there were three)

Well, I stand corrected so, if that's your experience here in ROI. It was either RTE or a newspaper article, I can't remember which one, that said ROI rape trials, public were excluded.

EDIT- here you go.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/district-court/how-rape-trials-in-republic-differ-from-those-in-north-1.3443644

Christy42

Mokuba wrote: »

And the likes of the one from 50 pages ago, who said she would have had 4 innocent men locked up?

Bad apples on both sides. Not representative of the majority.

The world and the people in it are never going to be as you want it. Some people will say mean things. Thats life.

Indeed but those individuals can be shown up as utter ****s and let's be fair they are a bit more extreme than I believe her.

Given I have seen more complaining about the I believe her stuff I am pretty sure my own post was bringing more balance to the both sides have bad eggs!

Outlaw Pete

freshpopcorn wrote: »

I just find it odd that people are trying to dictate of what two consenting adults do.

It's all about control....

Esther Vilar wrote about it in her book The Manipulated Man. She predicted pretty much everything we're seeing today. Obviously not with regards to social media and the advent of the Internet (it was 1971, she wasn't Nostradamus :P) but it's scary how accurate she got some of the societal issues we are dealing with today, especially with regards to sexual politics and the seemingly never ending demonization of male sexuality.

I would agree with those who stay steer clear of those who use terms such as toxic masculinity and rape culture. Avoid them like the plague. When I look at how many of that crowd at the Spire were young girls I genuinely fear for young men today. Hopefully that group is not too representative of our youth culture but sadly all signs are that it very well might be.

LynnGrace

Deleted User wrote: »

If it's the same article, it was actually very good- it outlined all of the key facts of the case throughout- a good piece of journalism

Agreed. This is it;

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/inside-court-12-the-complete-story-of-the-belfast-rape-trial-1.3443620

Stheno

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Well, I stand corrected so, if that's your experience here in ROI. It was either RTE or a newspaper article, I can't remember which one, that said ROI rape trials, public were excluded.

EDIT- here you go.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/district-court/how-rape-trials-in-republic-differ-from-those-in-north-1.3443644

Ill read it later thanks.

It could well be that there are different rules for rape trials versus sexual abuse. The trial i was at was in relation to offences committed in the 80s and open to the public but reporting on the identity of the complainants was not allowed during or after the trial.

The accused was named after he was found guilty

Depp

Stheno wrote: »

Ill read it later thanks.

It could well be that there are different rules for rape trials versus sexual abuse. The trial i was at was in relation to offences committed in the 80s and open to the public but reporting on the identity of the complainants was not allowed during or after the trial.

The accused was named after he was found guilty

It's also new enough legislation I think, 2017 as far as I know but I could be wrong.

Christy42

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

It's all about power....

Esther Vilar wrote about it in her book The Manipulated Man. She predicted pretty much everything we're seeing today. Obviously not with regards to social media and the advent of the Internet (it was 1971, she wasn't Nostradamus :P) but it's scary how accurate she got some of the societal issues we are dealing with today, especially with regards to sexual politics and the seemingly never ending demonization of male sexuality.

I would agree with those who stay steer clear of those who use terms such as toxic masculinity and rape culture. Avoid them like the plague. When I look at how many of that crowd at the Spire were young girls I genuinely fear for young men today. Hopefully that group is not too representative of our youth culture today but sadly all signs are that it very well might be.

Some complain about this protesters being perpetual victims and we have stuff like this here. Many in the protest seemed to be annoyed at the

As a young man I am not scared of feminism. I really see nothing to fear. This is just over the top nonsense. Some disagreed with the result, a more sensible amount I saw interviewed were annoyed with how the woman was treated during the trial and I can see how parts of it would be traumatising.

Stheno

Depp wrote: »

It's also new enough legislation I think, 2017 as far as I know but I could be wrong.

Ah that would explain it, i think 2015 was the year of the trial i was at

steddyeddy

Church on Tuesday wrote: »

It's a murky and lurid mess.

None of us here will ever truly know what went on that night.

And yeah lads, not all lads, tend to be pretty cavalier about their sexual exploits and general attitude toward women in general.

At the end of the day it really is a question of respect. But, and lets be honest here, once you add copious amounts of alcohol into a situation like this, common sense, respect etc tends to go out the window a bit. It can lead to a lot of confusion.

That goes for both genders BTW.

There was nothing confusing about the Whatsap messages these guys sent. What they wrote wouldn't be out of place in a Glasgow back alley on Saturday night. They acted liked low lives, alcohol or not. All this despite having been recipients on a decent education.

tritium

hill16bhoy wrote: »

A lot of the neurotic, women-hating goading post-trial is certainly tied into alt-right thinking.

I can accept a verdict and I think most people can. I can accept that the defendants have the right to resume their careers.

It seems others can't accept entirely legitimate democratic protests they disagree with, or that some people still believe the complainant.

What sort of thinking is the considerable amount of neurotic man hating thinking we’ve seen post trial linked to?

Heres Johnny

steddyeddy wrote: »

Church on Tuesday wrote: »

It's a murky and lurid mess.

None of us here will ever truly know what went on that night.

And yeah lads, not all lads, tend to be pretty cavalier about their sexual exploits and general attitude toward women in general.

At the end of the day it really is a question of respect. But, and lets be honest here, once you add copious amounts of alcohol into a situation like this, common sense, respect etc tends to go out the window a bit. It can lead to a lot of confusion.

That goes for both genders BTW.

There was nothing confusing about the Whatsap messages these guys sent. What they wrote wouldn't be out of place in a Glasgow back alley on Saturday night. They acted liked low lives, alcohol or not. All this despite having been recipients on a decent education.

Careful now, there could be someone from Glasgow reading this.

#Glasgowlivesmatter

dark crystal

Uncharted wrote: »

This thread is proving to be a microcosm of the 'new woke female' attitude.

Full of vitriol and bile. Offended for the sake of being offended. Spinning lies and falsehoods to bolster any case,even ones that have been resolved in a court of law.

Imagine some of these will go on to be parents to young kids. Imagine the endless gender neutral,entitled sjw,perma-offended,hateful brainwashing that will take place. It's truly grim. It's gonna be a very scary world to be a man.

Seriously, take a break from the internet for a while. I honestly don't know anyone in my social circle, workplace or family who holds these hateful views on men. Not one. If you know one or more who does, keep your distance and get on with your life.

What's scary is this divide that's growing between the genders and it's going on on both sides. I've only ever encountered it on the internet which would make you wonder, who's driving it?

The paranoia this gender war crap stirs up is what's grim; we're not all out to get you jailed and castrated and you're not all out to rape us and keep us downtrodden. open your eyes and take a look around the real world and don't get so carried away getting nosebleeds about some fictional dystopian future the internet loons have you believing in.

pumpkin4life

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

It's all about control....

Esther Vilar wrote about it in her book The Manipulated Man. She predicted pretty much everything we're seeing today. Obviously not with regards to social media and the advent of the Internet (it was 1971, she wasn't Nostradamus :P) but it's scary how accurate she got some of the societal issues we are dealing with today, especially with regards to sexual politics and the seemingly never ending demonization of male sexuality.

I would agree with those who stay steer clear of those who use terms such as toxic masculinity and rape culture. Avoid them like the plague. When I look at how many of that crowd at the Spire were young girls I genuinely fear for young men today. Hopefully that group is not too representative of our youth culture today but sadly all signs are that it very well might be.

I think one of the things that has happened is that these women have been put into these bullshìt leftist liberal arts courses (English in UCD) for example and are coming out of these courses wired to look for issues and victimization that isn't there. I posted about this before: that it's smart but not very smart people that tend to be the easiest to be radicalized (left or right), and people who end up in these courses tend to be that level of intelligence.

There's other problems as well. The technology sector of Dublin (in particular the HR departments) are now getting populated with people like this, and that's going to hurt your company because there will be a mysterious spike in sexual assault, harassment and groping of wans.

Also, avoid any man that calls himself a male feminist or brags on facebook about the rights of women. Everyone knows what that lad is and what he wants: King Schnake.

steddyeddy

Heres Johnny wrote: »

Careful now, there could be someone from Glasgow reading this.

#Glasgowlivesmatter

Apologies, my boss is from Glasgow. It doesn't change the fact that these men behaved like low lives.

Sofiztikated

pumpkin4life wrote: »

I think one of the things that has happened is that these women have been put into these bullshìt leftist liberal arts courses (English in UCD) for example and are coming out of these courses wired to look for issues and victimization that isn't there. I posted about this before: that it's smart but not very smart people that tend to be the easiest to be radicalized (left or right), and people who end up in these courses tend to be that level of intelligence.

There's other problems as well. The technology sector of Dublin (in particular the HR departments) are now getting populated with people like this, and that's going to hurt your company because there will be a mysterious spike in sexual assault, harassment and groping of wans.

Also, avoid any man that calls himself a male feminist or brags on facebook about the rights of women. Everyone knows what that lad is and what he wants: King Schnake.

You're literally telling women they've nothing to fear, and then go on to say except the lads that want in your pants.

Heres Johnny

steddyeddy wrote: »

Heres Johnny wrote: »

Careful now, there could be someone from Glasgow reading this.

#Glasgowlivesmatter

Apologies, my boss is from Glasgow. It doesn't change the fact that these men behaved like low lives.

I'm only messing, work away!!

Franz Von Peppercorn

LynnGrace wrote: »

Agreed. This is it;

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/inside-court-12-the-complete-story-of-the-belfast-rape-trial-1.3443620

Some extraordinary cross examination there. I’m no sjw but I fail to see the reason for the use of the underwear.

I can't believe the stupidity and downright disregard for law of that Moderator-deleted post just now - I hope they'll be reported to PSNI.

FrancieBrady

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

Some extraordinary cross examination there. I’m no sjw but I fail to see the reason for the use of the underwear.

There was bleeding, so they would have retained by the prosecution/police I would imagine.

Part of the evidence, just like her jeans would have been.

tritium

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I can't believe the stupidity and downright disregard for law of that Moderator-deleted post just now - I hope they'll be reported to PSNI.

Scummy thing to do alright, although I’m not sure there’s any legal ramifications given it was done in a different jurisdiction

Church on Tuesday

steddyeddy wrote: »

There was nothing confusing about the Whatsap messages these guys sent. What they wrote wouldn't be out of place in a Glasgow back alley on Saturday night. They acted liked low lives, alcohol or not. All this despite having been recipients on a decent education.

Yeah, it's pretty vile. But lots of lads talk like this amongst their friends.

Laois_Man

Deleted User wrote: »

I can't believe the stupidity and downright disregard for law of that Moderator-deleted post just now - I hope they'll be reported to PSNI.

And the racist undertones and sanctimonious preaching in it!

Uncharted

dark crystal wrote: »

Seriously, take a break from the internet for a while. I honestly don't know anyone in my social circle, workplace or family who holds these hateful views on men. Not one. If you know one or more who does, keep your distance and get on with your life.

What's scary is this divide that's growing between the genders and it's going on on both sides. I've only ever encountered it on the internet which would make you wonder, who's driving it?

The paranoia this gender war crap stirs up is what's grim; we're not all out to get you jailed and castrated and you're not all out to rape us and keep us downtrodden. open your eyes and take a look around the real world and don't get so carried away getting nosebleeds about some fictional dystopian future the internet loons have you believing in.

Eh, when I said this thread..... I meant THIS thread. Not the actual real world .
My point is exactly as you put it. You have made my point for me.
The actual real world outside of the internet is nothing like what's been writen here.
Men and women getting on with their own lives everyday of the week.
It's the loony internet brigades version of the world that I was referring to in my post....

I apologise if my sarcasm was too vague.

irishrebe

hill16bhoy wrote: »

super_furry wrote: »

Absolutely and you can see it in the language. SJW's, Feminazis, feminism is cancer, it's like they people using it all did some kind of red-pill, alt-right night course.

It's very similar to the thinking among dominant ethnic groups when their hegemony is challenged.

The same type of nonsense we got when Obama was president and that we so regularly hear from the DUP up north.

Basically, the message to any groups who "get uppity" or "above their station" is to shut up and "know your place".

A significant minority of men treat women's issues and issues around consent as basically a joke.

An awful lot of them have seen this trial as simply another tool to goad women with in the manner that a 10 year old who supports Manchester United might goad a classmate who supports Liverpool after Manchester United win 2-1.

Such posters rarely display any genuine belief in what they say - the primary aim is to annoy as many women or "cucks" as possible.

It's really, really weird.

And all the while being in total denial of the fact they ARE the dominant group with more power.

steddyeddy

Church on Tuesday wrote: »

Yeah, it's pretty vile. But lots of lads talk like this amongst their friends.

I grew up in a rough area of Dublin. So, no only scum talks about women like that among friends. It's disgusting.

RuMan

irishrebe wrote: »

And all the while being in total denial of the fact they ARE the dominant group with more power.

Protestants?

steddyeddy

Deleted User wrote: »

I can't believe the stupidity and downright disregard for law of that Moderator-deleted post just now - I hope they'll be reported to PSNI.

I reported it presumably along with a lot of other people. I also think that it's incredibly dangerous. More stupid is the fact that I nearly quoted it!

Peatys

Uncharted wrote: »

Eh, when I said this thread..... I meant THIS thread. Not the actual real world .
My point is exactly as you put it. You have made my point for me.
The actual real world outside of the internet is nothing like what's been writen here.
Men and women getting on with their own lives everyday of the week.
It's the loony internet brigades version of the world that I was referring to in my post....

I apologise if my sarcasm was too vague.

Have a look at the top posters sign up dates.

If they take the time to sign up in the last couple of weeks just so they can let us all know how outraged they are, the least we can do is pretend to be interested.

Franz Von Peppercorn

FrancieBrady wrote: »

There was bleeding, so they would have retained by the prosecution/police I would imagine.

Part of the evidence, just like her jeans would have been.

Odd then that the prosecution is passing them around. Was I missing something.

Edit:

I meant the defence.

The Talking Bread

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

Some extraordinary cross examination there. I’m no sjw but I fail to see the reason for the use of the underwear.

The idea of a trial is to persuade a jury. That is your job as representative for your client. I would have imagined a blood stained pair of underwear would have had some subtle, at the least, effect on some of the jury. It was heavily referenced in the evidence of her text messages so like all evidence if the prosecution feels it warrants using to "influence" the verdict in their "favour", naturally they would.

It is hardly rocket science!





Hmm, just read the article and seen it was the defence who used the underwear to "strengthen their case. Still obviously for the same attempts to influence the jury.

FrancieBrady

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

Odd then that the prosecution is passing them around. Was I missing something.

To prove/illustrate the bleeding that had occurred I presume. . She was bleeding from the vagina and it had to be proved.

They were evidence, there is no place for prurience or even privacy when it comes to things like that

Outlaw Pete

Christy42 wrote: »

As a young man I am not scared of feminism. I really see nothing to fear. This is just over the top nonsense.

This isn't something like a Rodney King situation where there's evidence of a crime having taken place but that the powers that be are covering it up. This is a situation where men have been found not guilty of rape in a court of law and the strongest witness for the defense was a woman. Yet still and all a protest is held by a crowd of predominantly young girls to chant that they still believe her regardless and all while they hold banners with feminist slogans.

You say you don't fear feminism. Well, my reply to that would be dependent on just what it is you think feminism is but given that you defending these people's actions, I highly doubt it's the same definition as people like Susan B Anthony or even Christina Hoff Sommers would have, but if it was, I'd not be fearing it either. Something tells me though, that it's more in line with the bastardized version of feminism propagated by the likes of Louise O'Neill and her ilk and if so, you very much have something to fear, you just don't realise it.

irishrebe

pjohnson wrote: »

Plenty, argubaly most men are for repeal, despise rapists, want women to get equal opportunities be it job opportunities or pay etc.

People men (AND women) have said the marches and hashtags and the likes are a crock of shíte. But then a certain type of feminist start rabbiting on about "red pill" and how men hate women (despite I guess women hating women if they agree???).


No one with a quarter of a braincell should generalise people based on a cóck or vagína. Males can be stupid, females can be stupid. One stupid male does not represent all males one stupid woman does not represent all women.

Certain people want to turn everything into a gender issue.

Only men who read the alt right, women hating, red pill sh1t use terms like 'feminazi', 'feminist cancer', 'penis haters', label men who attend feminist marches as just wanting to pick up women, etc. Normal, healthy men who respect women just do not use this type of language. I have no idea why forums like this attract so many of this type of men, but they do. Thank God, most of the men I know in real life would never use these terms or think in this way. They're completely supportive of improving women's rights in Ireland without starting with the 'what about the menz?' crap, as if it's all a big competition. The men I know are rightly appalled at the language used by those lads to talk about the woman they had sex with and by those who are calling for the women to be prosecuted for lying because the lads were not convicted. 

Just as those who attended the march and claimed that the lads who have been acquitted are not innocent are a significant minority, so are men with these toxic opinions a significant minority. The majority of people just want better rights and a better life for everyone. It would be easy to think otherwise when you look at the echo chamber that is Twitter and this site.

Franz Von Peppercorn

The Talking Bread wrote: »

The idea of a trial is to persuade a jury. That is your job as representative for your client. I would have imagined a blood stained pair of underwear would have had some subtle, at the least, effect on some of the jury. It was heavily referenced in the evidence of her text messages so like all evidence if the prosecution feels it warrants using to "influence" the verdict in their "favour", naturally they would.

It is hardly rocket science!

Actually I said that wrong. Obviously I get why the prosecution would have passed it around. But they didn’t, the defence did.

Why did the defence pass her blood stained underwear around?

irishrebe

steddyeddy wrote: »

Church on Tuesday wrote: »

Yeah, it's pretty vile. But lots of lads talk like this amongst their friends.

I grew up in a rough area of Dublin. So, no only scum talks about women like that among friends. It's disgusting.

It isn't class dependent either. I'm from Clondalkin and heard as much of that sh1te studying at Trinity than I did back on my estate. There are scum in all class and income brackets.

Uncharted

irishrebe wrote: »

It isn't class dependent either. I'm from Clondalkin and heard as much of that sh1te studying at Trinity than I did back on my estate. There are scum in all class and income brackets.

Thinly veiled 'Trinners student' comment.....yawn

irishrebe

RuMan wrote: »

irishrebe wrote: »

And all the while being in total denial of the fact they ARE the dominant group with more power.

Protestants?

All the groups mentioned. Despite undoubtedly having had it better for years on end, they start crowing very loudly when it looks like other people might be getting some rights. There's that saying, when you're used to privilege, equality looks like oppression.

Franz Von Peppercorn

irishrebe wrote: »

It isn't class dependent either. I'm from Clondalkin and heard as much of that sh1te studying at Trinity than I did back on my estate. There are scum in all class and income brackets.

My background is middle class from a working class area. I went to a normal school and then a posh college. In England. The men there were worse by far. Well the jocks anyway.

irishrebe

Uncharted wrote: »

irishrebe wrote: »

It isn't class dependent either. I'm from Clondalkin and heard as much of that sh1te studying at Trinity than I did back on my estate. There are scum in all class and income brackets.

Thinly veiled 'Trinners student' comment.....yawn

Eh...what's your point? Mine was very clearly that this kind of behaviour is not confined to rough areas. What is yours?

Church on Tuesday

steddyeddy wrote: »

I grew up in a rough area of Dublin. So, no only scum talks about women like that among friends. It's disgusting.

Like I said before SOME lads do talk like this about women amongst their peer group, regardless of background.

I've heard lads in college, educated if you will, come out with some fairly vile things about women.

I've heard what you might call 'rough' lads do the same.

And then I've heard some women on both sides of the spectrum say not particularly pleasant things about men.

The whatsapp messages are vile. But its conversations that are being replicated amongst lads tonight as we speak.

It's really nothing new. I always found it cringy to read/hear myself but it's a fact of life.

Atoms for Peace

I do have some sympathy for Steward Olding, after his statement, and the other lad charged with obstruction; but absolutely none for Paddy Jackson due to the aggressive statement given by his lawyer and now trying to sue for defamation. You would think he's had enough of court and keep his head down.

markodaly

irishrebe wrote: »

All the groups mentioned. Despite undoubtedly having had it better for years on end, they start crowing very loudly when it looks like other people might be getting some rights. There's that saying, when you're used to privilege, equality looks like oppression.

So, you are not interested in equality but with the acquirement of power?
Now, what this has to do with the case itself is beyond me, especially when the plaintiff comes from a very well known and affluent family.

Franz Von Peppercorn

Uncharted wrote: »

Thinly veiled 'Trinners student' comment.....yawn

It wasn’t veiled at all

Strazdas

pumpkin4life wrote: »

I think one of the things that has happened is that these women have been put into these bullshìt leftist liberal arts courses (English in UCD) for example and are coming out of these courses wired to look for issues and victimization that isn't there. I posted about this before: that it's smart but not very smart people that tend to be the easiest to be radicalized (left or right), and people who end up in these courses tend to be that level of intelligence.

There's other problems as well. The technology sector of Dublin (in particular the HR departments) are now getting populated with people like this, and that's going to hurt your company because there will be a mysterious spike in sexual assault, harassment and groping of wans.

Also, avoid any man that calls himself a male feminist or brags on facebook about the rights of women. Everyone knows what that lad is and what he wants: King Schnake.

I think you'd be wrong to assume that it's only left wing, middle class liberals doing this. A lot of women on my Facebook timeline have been linking to reports about the protests and many would be working class women who have never set foot in a university.

Uncharted

Atoms for Peace wrote: »

I do have some sympathy for Steward Olding, after his statement, and the other lad charged with obstruction; but absolutely none for Paddy Jackson due to the aggressive statement given by his lawyer and now trying to sue for defamation.

He was defamed.... hence the defamation case.

steddyeddy

irishrebe wrote: »

It isn't class dependent either. I'm from Clondalkin and heard as much of that sh1te studying at Trinity than I did back on my estate. There are scum in all class and income brackets.

I agree. I went to UCD and now work in labs with people from Oxford and Cambridge. It's not class dependent at all.

steddyeddy

steddyeddy wrote: »

I reported it presumably along with a lot of other people. I also think that it's incredibly dangerous. More stupid is the fact that I nearly quoted it!

Similar post by the same poster in the legal forum (also now deleted by Mod, and banned)- that one was quoted by someone else. It's easily done (to quote posts)- not sure though what the legal aspect is when something like a defamation post by one poster, is quoted/re-tweeted by another. Is the re-tweeter also potentially liable?

Fann Linn

Atoms for Peace wrote: »

I do have some sympathy for Steward Olding, after his statement, and the other lad charged with obstruction; but absolutely none for Paddy Jackson due to the aggressive statement given by his lawyer and now trying to sue for defamation. You would think he's had enough of court and keep his head down.

Why should he keep his head down?