Author Topic: The ulster rugby trial  (Read 159381 times)

Frank_The_Tank

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 242
    • View Profile
Re: The ulster rugby trial
« Reply #15 on: February 02, 2018, 07:51:49 AM »
How much do you know about how rape victimsí recollection of events is effected by the trauma of the event, Frank? Because to pretend like her not remembering details immediately is any sort of red flag highlights a serious lack of knowledge, nevermind empathy.

And to anyone not willing to read the tea leaves, what reason do you have to believe the victim may be lying and putting herself through this ringer?

Thanks.

Again Iím not saying I donít believe the girl I personally think the two lads are guilty from what Iíve read and heard so far but there are many reasons why she may have decided to take this case forward without her allegations being true.

I also donít think the delay between it happening and her reporting it should be due any consideration by the jury.
I actually thought she went to the police quite promptly - everything Iíve read on this *so far* points towards a horrendous attack carried out against this girl. She went for morning after pill, referred to Rowan centre then police. How many rape victims I wonder are in the right frame of mind to march straight to the police station to go through that whole ordeal first thing the next morning? The timeline of the messages to her friends the next morning - did she just decide between 5am and 9am that she was going to fabricate a rape claim? The fact it has got to trial as well sends out a pretty bleak signal in itself that something untoward has happened. The defence witness who walked in hopefully will not be as pivotal, she was asked did she want to ďjoin inĒ, not exactly the language you expect from a rapist midway through the act so I would expect there to be an argument of implied consent somewhere from the defence.

Just to clarify what I read is that she went to the Rowan centre or else the police sent her there.  And she didn't go for the morning after pill herself...she was given it in the Rowan centre which would be standard protocol for that centre as well as carrying out the Dr examination
Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience

general_lee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1522
    • View Profile
Re: The ulster rugby trial
« Reply #16 on: February 02, 2018, 08:02:14 AM »
Quote
After being persuaded by friends, the woman attended the Brook Clinic in Belfast, where she was given the morning after pill and spoke to a counsellor.

She was then advised to go to the Rowan Centre - a sexual assault referral centre in Antrim, where she underwent a medical examination.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/ulster-rugby-will-vouch-for-them-rape-claim-student-reluctant-to-report-jackson-and-olding-court-hears-36556399.html

Quote
She confided in two friends and after attending a rape crisis centre in Belfast, decided to go to the police.


https://www.belfastlive.co.uk/news/belfast-news/woman-allegedly-raped-rugby-stars-14228070

magpie seanie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11738
    • View Profile
Re: The ulster rugby trial
« Reply #17 on: February 02, 2018, 08:19:54 AM »
Many have pointed out snidely that there's lots on here willing to convict without hearing all the evidence. Conversely, it's easy to see there are also loads on here who are really hoping these lads are not convicted and making the case for them. I'd ask those guys (and it does seem to be guys) - if it were your daughter, or wife, or girlfriend......what would you think then? Would you post the same rubbish like "why wait 2 days".......especially when she told her friends within hours?

Frank_The_Tank

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 242
    • View Profile
Re: The ulster rugby trial
« Reply #18 on: February 02, 2018, 08:24:02 AM »
Many have pointed out snidely that there's lots on here willing to convict without hearing all the evidence. Conversely, it's easy to see there are also loads on here who are really hoping these lads are not convicted and making the case for them. I'd ask those guys (and it does seem to be guys) - if it were your daughter, or wife, or girlfriend......what would you think then? Would you post the same rubbish like "why wait 2 days".......especially when she told her friends within hours?

I'd don't think it's snide to wait to hear all the evidence.  And I personally haven't posted anything about how long she waited to go to the police..utterly irrelevant if she waited 2 months or went that morning.  And its stupid to just say what if was your wife daughter etc.  Of course if it was personalized you would be 100% sure of their guilt.  But the point of a jury is to take out the personal aspect of it.
Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience

Il Bomber Destro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3037
    • View Profile
Re: The ulster rugby trial
« Reply #19 on: February 02, 2018, 08:32:54 AM »
Not surprised this sort of carryon exists within Irish rugby.

What's been heard so far does not look very good at all for the defendants.

Walter Cronc

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3341
  • UTW!
    • View Profile
Re: The ulster rugby trial
« Reply #20 on: February 02, 2018, 08:44:04 AM »
Back to the inbred thread bomber!

johnneycool

  • Guest
Re: The ulster rugby trial
« Reply #21 on: February 02, 2018, 08:45:58 AM »
Not surprised this sort of carryon exists within Irish rugby.

What's been heard so far does not look very good at all for the defendants.

Not sure how you can say that, but then again rationale is limited with a lot of posters in these types of threads.

Tony Baloney

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13758
    • View Profile
Re: The ulster rugby trial
« Reply #22 on: February 02, 2018, 09:18:14 AM »
Many have pointed out snidely that there's lots on here willing to convict without hearing all the evidence. Conversely, it's easy to see there are also loads on here who are really hoping these lads are not convicted and making the case for them. I'd ask those guys (and it does seem to be guys) - if it were your daughter, or wife, or girlfriend......what would you think then? Would you post the same rubbish like "why wait 2 days".......especially when she told her friends within hours?

I'd don't think it's snide to wait to hear all the evidence.  And I personally haven't posted anything about how long she waited to go to the police..utterly irrelevant if she waited 2 months or went that morning.  And its stupid to just say what if was your wife daughter etc.  Of course if it was personalized you would be 100% sure of their guilt.  But the point of a jury is to take out the personal aspect of it.
It's very easy to take sides and from reading social media I've seen the full range of stupidity and crassness from "If she was being raped why didn't she scream the house down instead of chowing down on Olding" to "I hope these rapist c***ts are raped in jail".

For me there is reasonable doubt and there they should get off based on what I've read but I'm not in court and there is a long way to go. As to Seanies comment that people don't want to see them convicted... If they are guilty then they should be convicted if they're not they shouldn't be.

caprea

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 91
    • View Profile
Re: The ulster rugby trial
« Reply #23 on: February 02, 2018, 09:19:53 AM »
Not surprised this sort of carryon exists within Irish rugby.

What's been heard so far does not look very good at all for the defendants.

Not sure how you can say that, but then again rationale is limited with a lot of posters in these types of threads.

I would urge caution on replying to that poster. It will take this thread down a bad road.

GetOverTheBar

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 419
    • View Profile
Re: The ulster rugby trial
« Reply #24 on: February 02, 2018, 09:31:43 AM »
Many have pointed out snidely that there's lots on here willing to convict without hearing all the evidence. Conversely, it's easy to see there are also loads on here who are really hoping these lads are not convicted and making the case for them. I'd ask those guys (and it does seem to be guys) - if it were your daughter, or wife, or girlfriend......what would you think then? Would you post the same rubbish like "why wait 2 days".......especially when she told her friends within hours?

I'd don't think it's snide to wait to hear all the evidence.  And I personally haven't posted anything about how long she waited to go to the police..utterly irrelevant if she waited 2 months or went that morning.  And its stupid to just say what if was your wife daughter etc.  Of course if it was personalized you would be 100% sure of their guilt.  But the point of a jury is to take out the personal aspect of it.
It's very easy to take sides and from reading social media I've seen the full range of stupidity and crassness from "If she was being raped why didn't she scream the house down instead of chowing down on Olding" to "I hope these rapist c***ts are raped in jail".

For me there is reasonable doubt and there they should get off based on what I've read but I'm not in court and there is a long way to go. As to Seanies comment that people don't want to see them convicted... If they are guilty then they should be convicted if they're not they shouldn't be.

In my opinion the whole thing hinges in this girl that walked in during the middle of it, if she says it didn't look like an attack. That's the end of it all right there. She's the only 'neutral' witness. Her testimony holds the key to the whole thing.

From what we've heard so far, she's walked in and said "oh", Jackson has allegedly asked did she want to join, which she said no and walked out. When this phase is fleshed out the case will be come clearer - If she's steamed and can't remember. There will be an element of reasonable doubt as quoted post.

shezam

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 119
    • View Profile
Re: The ulster rugby trial
« Reply #25 on: February 02, 2018, 09:40:06 AM »
Many have pointed out snidely that there's lots on here willing to convict without hearing all the evidence. Conversely, it's easy to see there are also loads on here who are really hoping these lads are not convicted and making the case for them. I'd ask those guys (and it does seem to be guys) - if it were your daughter, or wife, or girlfriend......what would you think then? Would you post the same rubbish like "why wait 2 days".......especially when she told her friends within hours?

I'd don't think it's snide to wait to hear all the evidence.  And I personally haven't posted anything about how long she waited to go to the police..utterly irrelevant if she waited 2 months or went that morning.  And its stupid to just say what if was your wife daughter etc.  Of course if it was personalized you would be 100% sure of their guilt.  But the point of a jury is to take out the personal aspect of it.
It's very easy to take sides and from reading social media I've seen the full range of stupidity and crassness from "If she was being raped why didn't she scream the house down instead of chowing down on Olding" to "I hope these rapist c***ts are raped in jail".

For me there is reasonable doubt and there they should get off based on what I've read but I'm not in court and there is a long way to go. As to Seanies comment that people don't want to see them convicted... If they are guilty then they should be convicted if they're not they shouldn't be.

In my opinion the whole thing hinges in this girl that walked in during the middle of it, if she says it didn't look like an attack. That's the end of it all right there. She's the only 'neutral' witness. Her testimony holds the key to the whole thing.

From what we've heard so far, she's walked in and said "oh", Jackson has allegedly asked did she want to join, which she said no and walked out. When this phase is fleshed out the case will be come clearer - If she's steamed and can't remember. There will be an element of reasonable doubt as quoted post.

Can you explain what an attack is supposed to look like? Plus she never seen what went on before she walked in.

gallsman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7150
  • Retired
    • View Profile
Re: The ulster rugby trial
« Reply #26 on: February 02, 2018, 09:52:24 AM »
Given the high profile cases in the UK at the minute where exonerating evidence was "missed" by the cops or wasn't handed to the defence, it is impossible to scream "guilty" or "innocent" on the basis of a few text messages.

Just let the trial play out and we'll see what emerges.
"Never mind your why. Why ain't in your repetoire no more n***a"

GetOverTheBar

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 419
    • View Profile
Re: The ulster rugby trial
« Reply #27 on: February 02, 2018, 09:57:12 AM »
Many have pointed out snidely that there's lots on here willing to convict without hearing all the evidence. Conversely, it's easy to see there are also loads on here who are really hoping these lads are not convicted and making the case for them. I'd ask those guys (and it does seem to be guys) - if it were your daughter, or wife, or girlfriend......what would you think then? Would you post the same rubbish like "why wait 2 days".......especially when she told her friends within hours?

I'd don't think it's snide to wait to hear all the evidence.  And I personally haven't posted anything about how long she waited to go to the police..utterly irrelevant if she waited 2 months or went that morning.  And its stupid to just say what if was your wife daughter etc.  Of course if it was personalized you would be 100% sure of their guilt.  But the point of a jury is to take out the personal aspect of it.
It's very easy to take sides and from reading social media I've seen the full range of stupidity and crassness from "If she was being raped why didn't she scream the house down instead of chowing down on Olding" to "I hope these rapist c***ts are raped in jail".

For me there is reasonable doubt and there they should get off based on what I've read but I'm not in court and there is a long way to go. As to Seanies comment that people don't want to see them convicted... If they are guilty then they should be convicted if they're not they shouldn't be.

In my opinion the whole thing hinges in this girl that walked in during the middle of it, if she says it didn't look like an attack. That's the end of it all right there. She's the only 'neutral' witness. Her testimony holds the key to the whole thing.

From what we've heard so far, she's walked in and said "oh", Jackson has allegedly asked did she want to join, which she said no and walked out. When this phase is fleshed out the case will be come clearer - If she's steamed and can't remember. There will be an element of reasonable doubt as quoted post.

Can you explain what an attack is supposed to look like? Plus she never seen what went on before she walked in.

It's fairly standard stuff in any trial, she'll be asked did it look to her as if there was any sign of aggression or discomfort, in her opinion did it look consensual? How long was she in the room? Did the lady in question react in any way to her being in the room? (I think I've read she covered herself up? Open to correction), if/when she covered up when you were in the room, why do you think she didn't instead ask you for help? Did the lady look in any sign of distress? Did she hear anything to signify distress before entering the room? Did she hear anything that prompted her to come up and check in on the room initially?

These are unpleasant questions, it's an unpleasant situation. I'm not saying who's right and wrong please don't think that the above is in any way defending Jackson/Olding because it's literally day 3 of a 5 week trial. There is a lot of information to come and considering the threshold of 'beyond reasonable doubt' in a criminal case. This maybe key in my opinon, that's my point.

Frank_The_Tank

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 242
    • View Profile
Re: The ulster rugby trial
« Reply #28 on: February 02, 2018, 10:06:43 AM »
Given the high profile cases in the UK at the minute where exonerating evidence was "missed" by the cops or wasn't handed to the defence, it is impossible to scream "guilty" or "innocent" on the basis of a few text messages.

Just let the trial play out and we'll see what emerges.

 +1
Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience

Captain Scarlet

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 663
    • View Profile
Re: The ulster rugby trial
« Reply #29 on: February 02, 2018, 10:12:24 AM »
I havent looked at the rugby thread enough but seeing as this is standalone. What are the view on Best and henderson going to the trial?
Is that not ridiculous the week of a match to be going there, even in your own time?
them mysterons are always killing me but im grand after a few days.sickenin aul dose all the same.