The ulster rugby trial

[Avondhu star]

There is a video circulating of 3 ulster players - Paddy, Tommy and another.

Could influence the jury :-/

Video of what?

I'd imagine of the bedroom variety

I'd imagine it's the one of Jackson, Bowe and some South African chap doing a soft focus PR media piece for Ulster rugby's social media platforms.

Bowe asks the others would they prefer to see the future or change the past. Bowe and the South African both state they'd prefer to see the future. Jackson then states he'd prefer to change the past - "I've done some dark things."

In the clip, the players are wearing the Ulster kit worn between 2015 and 2017 but it's not clear exactly when the clip was filmed.

Let's stop beating about the bush there's a rumour that a video exists of the encounter that night. I haven't seen it and don't know anybody who has but apparently there is one.

"Apparently"  Thats the type of evidence that might stand up in a West Belfast back kitchen kangaroo court but you won't get too far with it in the Laganside

You've obviously never seen the British judicial system in full flow

I know all about the British judicial system and I would take my chances on it rather than the kangaroo court system

[Avondhu star]

Doctor at the rape clinic saying she made no reference to Olding having orally raped her when being examined.

According to Frank Greaney, she also alleged that the "second man vagninally raped her while on her back".

So why is Olding being done for oral rape and not vaginal?

The charge will be in the basis of what she reported to the police. Not sure of any criminal justice systems that charges people based on what they say to a doctor.

The doctor is an independent witness. Any discrepancy creates a doubt.

[armaghniac]

The charge will be in the basis of what she reported to the police. Not sure of any criminal justice systems that charges people based on what they say to a doctor.

However, inconsistency in different accounts could affect the likelihood of being convicted on that charge.

[gallsman]

The charge will be in the basis of what she reported to the police. Not sure of any criminal justice systems that charges people based on what they say to a doctor.

However, inconsistency in different accounts could affect the likelihood of being convicted on that charge.

I know, but that's not the question that was asked, was it?

[Aaron Boone]

The charge will be in the basis of what she reported to the police. Not sure of any criminal justice systems that charges people based on what they say to a doctor.

However, inconsistency in different accounts could affect the likelihood of being convicted on that charge.

I know, but that's not the question that was asked, was it?

Sowing seeds of doubt in the jury's mind. Bit by bit, the barristers happy to peck away.

[gallsman]

What?! The barristers have done nothing. This entire sub-conversation had started because one muppet heard a rumour about a video going around. This hasn't made its way to court.

[Jeepers Creepers]

If there was a video we would have all seen it by now. As proven in the suposed footage of the star witness doing the rounds.

[seafoid]

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/doctor-who-examined-alleged-rugby-rape-victim-could-not-say-if-sex-was-consensual-36624562.html
He found a tear approximately two or three centimetres inside the vagina.

Prosecutor Toby Hedworth QC asked: "How much of the skin was affected by that ... the tissue that was lacerated or torn?"

Dr Lavery said: "The definition of a laceration is a full thickness tear."

It could have been caused by "any blunt force trauma" applied to the wall of the vagina, he said.

Dr Lavery said: "It could include a penis, it could include fingers or it could include any object."

When asked if he could "choose" between any of the potential causes, the doctor replied: "No, Your Honour."

The woman had been tearful but co-operative during the hour-long examination and showed no signs of intoxication, the court heard.

Later, during questioning by a barrister for Stuart Olding who also denies rape, Dr Lavery read aloud notes he had recorded about the complainant's account of what happened.

In them she described being "pushed on to the bed" and raped by a man who then turned her over and "raped her from the front".

The alleged assailant caused pain because he was "rough", the doctor noted.

According to the document, a second man entered the room and vaginally raped her while she was on her back.

No condom was used and she was unsure if ejaculation had taken place, he said.

[Hound]

Looks to be, based on what I've read of the evidence to date, that Olding must be very close to being cleared.

Entered the room, and as the witness said while we would not have seen actual consent been given, it looked like consensual actions. There was no violence or threat of violence, according to the IP. Witness saw the IP's head at Olding's midrift and Olding's hands down by his side.

Jackson still a harder case to call. Medical evidence not great from his point of view, but perhaps key that the doctor said the same injuries could be caused if it was consensual.

[AQMP]

It's very hard to call this on the basis of a two minute summary of a full day's evidence.

Maybe I missed this last week but what is Rory Harrison alleged to have done that led to him being charged with perverting the course of justice?

[Owen Brannigan]

It's very hard to call this on the basis of a two minute summary of a full day's evidence.

Maybe I missed this last week but what is Rory Harrison alleged to have done that led to him being charged with perverting the course of justice?

It is very hard to see what the case against him actually is.  Perhaps he was not as forthcoming with information as PPS would have liked.  Much made of the PSNI not asking for his phone during the investigation to push back by showing the investigation wasn't great.  It would appear that he is being included with the others to give the impression of conspiracy to build the case against his friends.

[Taylor]

From what I can gather so far

Defence is.......
No medical evidence to suggest it wasnt consensual
Independent witness said apparently no force
IP told a different story to doctor than to police
PJ, SO etc say all consensual

Prosecution is.........
No medical evidence to suggest it was consensual
IP says there was no consent
Taxi driver says IP was upset going home
Blood stained clothing

Is there anything missing or does it constitute beyond all doubt?

[Milltown Row2]

From what I can gather so far

Defence is.......
No medical evidence to suggest it wasnt consensual
Independent witness said apparently no force
IP told a different story to doctor than to police
PJ, SO etc say all consensual

Prosecution is.........
No medical evidence to suggest it was consensual
IP says there was no consent
Taxi driver says IP was upset going home
Blood stained clothing

Is there anything missing or does it constitute beyond all doubt?

Oh didnt realise that there was blood stains

[laceer]

You've forgot Syferus' verdict. Surely that's the most important argument here.

[Taylor]

From what I can gather so far

Defence is.......
No medical evidence to suggest it wasnt consensual
Independent witness said apparently no force
IP told a different story to doctor than to police
PJ, SO etc say all consensual

Prosecution is.........
No medical evidence to suggest it was consensual
IP says there was no consent
Taxi driver says IP was upset going home
Blood stained clothing

Is there anything missing or does it constitute beyond all doubt?

Oh didnt realise that there was blood stains

Unless Im mistaken it was mentioned 2 weeks ago?