The ulster rugby trial

[Frank_The_Tank]

I presume that the decision here is a black or white one ie. either guilty or not guilty, because all I can see here is a lot of grey areas and on that basis it is hard to make the case that they are absolutely guilty beyond reasonable doubt. But then we are only going on media reporting which can often give different impressions even on the same event from 2 different reporters. I think both parties genuinely believe that they have been wronged ( in terms of the allegations for the accused) and I have full sympathy for the woman because she is ultimately the one that has suffered the most. I do not envy the jurors in this case.

If she is infact the victim then of course she has suffered the most but that remains to be seen.

I think it's fair to say she's suffered whatever way things might pan out from here on in!

Careful now, women who are raped must be treated with at best mistrust with no regard for the emotional toll involved in bringing a rape to trial or the peanut gallery will get hot under the collar.

How do you know she was raped?

Don't you know he was in the room on the night in question

[seafoid]

Is Harrison going to take the stand? He saw her after TSHTF. Jackson says he didn't. ...

[Esmarelda]

I presume that the decision here is a black or white one ie. either guilty or not guilty, because all I can see here is a lot of grey areas and on that basis it is hard to make the case that they are absolutely guilty beyond reasonable doubt. But then we are only going on media reporting which can often give different impressions even on the same event from 2 different reporters. I think both parties genuinely believe that they have been wronged ( in terms of the allegations for the accused) and I have full sympathy for the woman because she is ultimately the one that has suffered the most. I do not envy the jurors in this case.

If she is infact the victim then of course she has suffered the most but that remains to be seen.

I think it's fair to say she's suffered whatever way things might pan out from here on in!

But whether she has suffered the most is another thing.

To make that leap you would have to believe that she herself is knowingly making a false allegation. From the evidence I have heard I definitely do not believe that this is the case, I think that she absolutely believes that she was gang raped here. Otherwise why would she put herself through this hell. That is completely distinct from saying that there is sufficient evidence to prove beyond reasonable doubt that they are guilty.

I don't think she made a false allegation.

I don't think she was comfortable with the situation but went along with it out of a supposed fear of these being rugby lads and that they would overpower her if she kicked off and said no. Then afterwards it felt to her like she was raped.

At the same time I also don't think she said no at any stage and the lads were clearly blocked and thought it was consensual at the time.

Nobody is a winner there but I don't think the lads had any reason to think that this wasn't consensual and on that basis they probably get off.

All the bluster and nonsense that happened after only reinforces to me they did not think they had done anything wrong even though in the claimant's eyes they had!

So you think the complainant is lying about making it clear that it would go no further than kissing with Jackson, and that she said "please not him too" when Olding came in?

[screenexile]

Yes

[Esmarelda]

Yes

And the question over whether intercourse took place?

[screenexile]

Yes

And the question over whether intercourse took place?

I literally have no idea about that . . . Doctors can't agree on it complainant/witness/Jackson/Olding can't agree on it who knows

[seafoid]

I presume that the decision here is a black or white one ie. either guilty or not guilty, because all I can see here is a lot of grey areas and on that basis it is hard to make the case that they are absolutely guilty beyond reasonable doubt. But then we are only going on media reporting which can often give different impressions even on the same event from 2 different reporters. I think both parties genuinely believe that they have been wronged ( in terms of the allegations for the accused) and I have full sympathy for the woman because she is ultimately the one that has suffered the most. I do not envy the jurors in this case.

If she is infact the victim then of course she has suffered the most but that remains to be seen.

I think it's fair to say she's suffered whatever way things might pan out from here on in!

But whether she has suffered the most is another thing.

To make that leap you would have to believe that she herself is knowingly making a false allegation. From the evidence I have heard I definitely do not believe that this is the case, I think that she absolutely believes that she was gang raped here. Otherwise why would she put herself through this hell. That is completely distinct from saying that there is sufficient evidence to prove beyond reasonable doubt that they are guilty.

I don't think she made a false allegation.

I don't think she was comfortable with the situation but went along with it out of a supposed fear of these being rugby lads and that they would overpower her if she kicked off and said no. Then afterwards it felt to her like she was raped.

At the same time I also don't think she said no at any stage and the lads were clearly blocked and thought it was consensual at the time.

Nobody is a winner there but I don't think the lads had any reason to think that this wasn't consensual and on that basis they probably get off.

All the bluster and nonsense that happened after only reinforces to me they did not think they had done anything wrong even though in the claimant's eyes they had!

The lads were totally drunk. How would a no have registered ?

[seafoid]

Dara Florence saw Jacko thrusting into the claimant. Jacko says it was merely oral then fingers. Olding says he walked in and the claimant switches to him. As you do.

They have to be telling porkies.

[imtommygunn]

Reasonable doubt, I can't get past. Then I ask myself why would she put herself through that, I just can't decide.

Yeah, she gives evidence for 6 or 7 days and has her knickers and bra paraded around the court whereas Olding is asked what he got in his A Levels and how many times he played for Ireland! 

But of course they couldn't find Olding's clothes to parade around the court

Seriously though, I've a grown up daughter (in her 20s) I'm not sure I'd want her to go through what the complainant has gone through no matter what happened to her

Yeah that is bang on. The ordeal that women go through in a rape case is horrendous. How legal minds can not think that there is not something seriously flawed is beyond me. The parading knickers things sounds like something from centuries ago. To think that still goes on is absolutely ludicrous - and vile.

It is very hard to comprehend why someone would go through it unless they really really must.

[Keyser soze]

Was her underwear paraded around the court?

[imtommygunn]

Yes. Apparently common place in rape cases.

Anyone able to confirm or deny this? (Not a legal eagle but it is what I have been led to believe)

[Esmarelda]

I presume that the decision here is a black or white one ie. either guilty or not guilty, because all I can see here is a lot of grey areas and on that basis it is hard to make the case that they are absolutely guilty beyond reasonable doubt. But then we are only going on media reporting which can often give different impressions even on the same event from 2 different reporters. I think both parties genuinely believe that they have been wronged ( in terms of the allegations for the accused) and I have full sympathy for the woman because she is ultimately the one that has suffered the most. I do not envy the jurors in this case.

If she is infact the victim then of course she has suffered the most but that remains to be seen.

I think it's fair to say she's suffered whatever way things might pan out from here on in!

But whether she has suffered the most is another thing.

To make that leap you would have to believe that she herself is knowingly making a false allegation. From the evidence I have heard I definitely do not believe that this is the case, I think that she absolutely believes that she was gang raped here. Otherwise why would she put herself through this hell. That is completely distinct from saying that there is sufficient evidence to prove beyond reasonable doubt that they are guilty.

I don't think she made a false allegation.

I don't think she was comfortable with the situation but went along with it out of a supposed fear of these being rugby lads and that they would overpower her if she kicked off and said no. Then afterwards it felt to her like she was raped.

At the same time I also don't think she said no at any stage and the lads were clearly blocked and thought it was consensual at the time.

Nobody is a winner there but I don't think the lads had any reason to think that this wasn't consensual and on that basis they probably get off.

All the bluster and nonsense that happened after only reinforces to me they did not think they had done anything wrong even though in the claimant's eyes they had!

The lads were totally drunk. How would a no have registered ?

Seriously? When you're drunk, does "No" compute as something else?

[Syferus]

I presume that the decision here is a black or white one ie. either guilty or not guilty, because all I can see here is a lot of grey areas and on that basis it is hard to make the case that they are absolutely guilty beyond reasonable doubt. But then we are only going on media reporting which can often give different impressions even on the same event from 2 different reporters. I think both parties genuinely believe that they have been wronged ( in terms of the allegations for the accused) and I have full sympathy for the woman because she is ultimately the one that has suffered the most. I do not envy the jurors in this case.

If she is infact the victim then of course she has suffered the most but that remains to be seen.

I think it's fair to say she's suffered whatever way things might pan out from here on in!

But whether she has suffered the most is another thing.

To make that leap you would have to believe that she herself is knowingly making a false allegation. From the evidence I have heard I definitely do not believe that this is the case, I think that she absolutely believes that she was gang raped here. Otherwise why would she put herself through this hell. That is completely distinct from saying that there is sufficient evidence to prove beyond reasonable doubt that they are guilty.

I don't think she made a false allegation.

I don't think she was comfortable with the situation but went along with it out of a supposed fear of these being rugby lads and that they would overpower her if she kicked off and said no. Then afterwards it felt to her like she was raped.

At the same time I also don't think she said no at any stage and the lads were clearly blocked and thought it was consensual at the time.

Nobody is a winner there but I don't think the lads had any reason to think that this wasn't consensual and on that basis they probably get off.

All the bluster and nonsense that happened after only reinforces to me they did not think they had done anything wrong even though in the claimant's eyes they had!

The lads were totally drunk. How would a no have registered ?

Seriously? When you're drunk, does "No" compute as something else?

Have you not been off your tits on drink before or something?

[gallsman]

What is Olding charged with?

Seriously?!

[sid waddell]

I was just reading up a bit there now about the Mike Tyson rape trial in 1992.

I think there are some key similarities between this case and the Tyson one. The celebrity status of the defendant/s most obviously, but the victim also had vaginal abrasions, and a witness who drove the victim in a car shortly after the crime testified that she was in a distressed state. These were key to getting a conviction. I'm not 100% sure of the source on this one but it has also been written that there was no trace of semen found.

But unlike in this case, there were no direct eyewitnesses to the crime other than Tyson, who denied it, and Desiree Washington, the victim.

Yet still it resulted in a conviction.