The ulster rugby trial

[magpie seanie]

Mea culpa re: Dara Florence. She was of course a prosecution witness. Why I referred to her in those terms was because of the weight many seem to be giving to her evidence regarding the act she witnessed between Olding and the alleged victim.

I accept there were inconsistencies in the alleged victims story but I think her explanations were far more plausible and believable. Is that because I'm biased towards her or am I biased towards her because of this....I'm not sure. My gut feeling is she is trying to tell the truth. I do not believe the accused and their friends are trying to do this. I believe Dara Florence told the truth.

These are all my opinions gleaned from what information we can get so I accept the points people make. Just trying to explain why I think they're guilty.

[macdanger2]

Afterwards the texts suggest that Harrison only told McIlroy about her being upset. Neither of them mentioned the distress on the WhatsApp groups. So Jackson's testimony supports all that. Prosecution said surely they talked about it with Jackson, but he said they didn't and that he's disappointed in them that they didnt. Personally I think that is completely believeable. If they had told Jackson, whether he was guilty or not, he would have gone to the girl to try and sort it out.

Is it?? For me, that was completely unbelievable! If I was at a house party and a girl one of my friends had been with told me "what happened was not consensual", I'm pretty sure it's something I'd mention to him especially in the context of meeting him the next day for lunch.

Regardless of the evidence (and there's not a huge amount of conclusive hard evidence), this is probably going to come down to who comes across as more believable on the stand and that's presumably the reason the accused are taking the stand.

[magpie seanie]

Afterwards the texts suggest that Harrison only told McIlroy about her being upset. Neither of them mentioned the distress on the WhatsApp groups. So Jackson's testimony supports all that. Prosecution said surely they talked about it with Jackson, but he said they didn't and that he's disappointed in them that they didnt. Personally I think that is completely believeable. If they had told Jackson, whether he was guilty or not, he would have gone to the girl to try and sort it out.

Is it?? For me, that was completely unbelievable! If I was at a house party and a girl one of my friends had been with told me "what happened was not consensual", I'm pretty sure it's something I'd mention to him especially in the context of meeting him the next day for lunch.

Regardless of the evidence (and there's not a huge amount of conclusive hard evidence), this is probably going to come down to who comes across as more believable on the stand and that's presumably the reason the accused are taking the stand.

I also find that unbelievable. There's no way in hell they didn't tell him.

[nrico2006]

Were there any questions on consent yesterday, i.e. was Jackson asked whether or not the girl resisted his advances?  What is her version of the consent stance with regard to Jackson alone?

[Taylor]

Completely unbelievable that Harrison didnt mention to the boys at lunch that the girl had told them it wasnt consensual.

Thought i read somewhere he may have been trying to protect them - protect them from what?

I dont believe there are inconsistencies on the boys stories I believe some of them are telling lies about what happened but then they are telling different stories which confuses it more. One would think if telling lies they would have stories that at least add up.

Some of what the girl said doesnt add up either so I think part of her story is lies as well.

The reasonable doubt is what the case will come down to

[AQMP]

Olding on the stand.  It'll take to lunchtime to get through what he had to drink!

[Keyser soze]

Tbh I am not putting much credence on what I am hearing being reported as it is very staccato to say the least. Also it appears to me that not one witness so far has a clear recollection of what took place that night due to the amount of alcohol consumed. When a man accused of exposure instead claims he got a bj he is either very clever or very stupid.

This is a complete clusterf*** of a trial ...I am not sure how anyone including the jury will ever be able to pronounce a verdict with any degree of certainty. 

[Hound]

Completely unbelievable that Harrison didnt mention to the boys at lunch that the girl had told them it wasnt consensual.

Thought i read somewhere he may have been trying to protect them - protect them from what?

I think it is believable that these lads would have it in their head they'd be protecting their big star. And I'd find it hard to believe that if they did tell PJ and SO, that they wouldnt try and speak to her to try and calm it all down.

But whether they did or didnt, it doesn't really make any difference to whether there was consent or not.

[Hound]

Rosanna Cooney
Olding says when he stayed at Paddy's house, where he stayed 2/3 times a month, he would stay in Paddy's bed or on the sofa.


I'd like to see a picture of Paddy's bed for some context - must be feckin huge !

[Syferus]

Completely unbelievable that Harrison didnt mention to the boys at lunch that the girl had told them it wasnt consensual.

Thought i read somewhere he may have been trying to protect them - protect them from what?

I think it is believable that these lads would have it in their head they'd be protecting their big star. And I'd find it hard to believe that if they did tell PJ and SO, that they wouldnt try and speak to her to try and calm it all down.

But whether they did or didnt, it doesn't really make any difference to whether there was consent or not.

You've gotten very defensive about the continual inconsistencies by the defense.

And all this inconsistency and incredulous statements very much contribute to how believable they are when they say there was consent. I can't really see how anyone could say otherwise.

[magpie seanie]

It's a deliberate attempt to create confusion. There's no way a group of lads wouldn't discuss the night before especially with a young one leaving in tears and saying the activity wasn't consensual. If it comes down to believability I think it's only going one way.

[nrico2006]

What is her view on how she communicated her non-consent?

[HiMucker]

Completely unbelievable that Harrison didnt mention to the boys at lunch that the girl had told them it wasnt consensual.

Thought i read somewhere he may have been trying to protect them - protect them from what?

I think it is believable that these lads would have it in their head they'd be protecting their big star. And I'd find it hard to believe that if they did tell PJ and SO, that they wouldnt try and speak to her to try and calm it all down.

But whether they did or didnt, it doesn't really make any difference to whether there was consent or not.

I will have to disagree with you there.  I find that incredibly hard to believe.

[Taylor]

Completely unbelievable that Harrison didnt mention to the boys at lunch that the girl had told them it wasnt consensual.

Thought i read somewhere he may have been trying to protect them - protect them from what?

I think it is believable that these lads would have it in their head they'd be protecting their big star. And I'd find it hard to believe that if they did tell PJ and SO, that they wouldnt try and speak to her to try and calm it all down.

But whether they did or didnt, it doesn't really make any difference to whether there was consent or not.

You've gotten very defensive about the continual inconsistencies by the defense.

And all this inconsistency and incredulous statements very much contribute to how believable they are when they say there was consent. I can't really see how anyone could say otherwise.

Consistentencies in both defence and prosecution but then a legal genius with all your qualifications would have already seen this

[AQMP]

Olding says when he went into the room the complainant was "on top of Paddy" and was fully clothed.  He didn't see any oral sex going on. (Contradiction here from Jackson's evidence)

The complaining then performed oral sex on him and he didn't force her.  He asked her (not ordered her) to take off her top and she did. 

He wasn't aware of anyone else entering the room - perhaps because the person didn't come into the room fully or perhaps because of his drunkenness.

Adamant that he didn't force the complainant to perform oral sex on him.

The complainant didn't say anything that made him think she wasn't consenting.  When he left to clean himself he assumed sexual activity between Jackson and the complainant would continue.

McIlroy was never in the room while he (Olding) was there.

All defence questioning.