The ulster rugby trial

[Asal Mor]

I take it back Tommy. You're not a good poster, you're a great poster.

[Frank_The_Tank]

On the rose mcgowan point asal my wife regularly gives off to me about her and how her situation panned out. On her i think you possibly aren't too far wrong. On a lot of others not so sure but she strikes as someone who has manipulated the situation .

It seems any angle no matter how meaningless is seized upon by a segement of this thread to try to explain away holding onto predjuices and old ways of thinking. I've not read enough of your posts to say that's what you're doing but the person you're replying to most certainly is.

Sexual asssault of women is at epidemic levels and has been for as long as there has been human civilisation. It's only in the last 100 years that people have even woke up slightly to the fundamental sexism that society is built upon.

It may take a few of the older generations dying off and reaching the ages at which they have to relinquish power for the message that younger people are already getting loud and clear to be fully accepted.

Make no mistake, people like Asal Mor and MR2 are on the wrong side of history. Change will happen no matter much they wish it not to.

Tell me this .... Do you read any posts objectively and consider them in their entireity or just see something in the post and go like a red rag to a bull claiming that the poster is as big a monster as there is? You are as guilty as anyone of seizing upon things.

Also the younger person comment.... Do you represent the entireity of younger people? You should also consider most involved in this case are younger people.

Everything is loaded against the woman, the system sucks etc etc I fully get that so in your immense amounts of bullshit, and there are immense amounts, you actually have some valid points but never help yourself.

I have seen nothing in a single post you have made to suggest you think these guys are entitled to a fair trial. (Oh wait before you lynch me i think they are all scumbags but they do deserve a fair trial).

You are actually as bad as anyone you paint as a monster here if not worse.

Excellent points..expect this post to.be ignored as any other one where he is challenged is.  Either that or deflection

[Syferus]

On the rose mcgowan point asal my wife regularly gives off to me about her and how her situation panned out. On her i think you possibly aren't too far wrong. On a lot of others not so sure but she strikes as someone who has manipulated the situation .

It seems any angle no matter how meaningless is seized upon by a segement of this thread to try to explain away holding onto predjuices and old ways of thinking. I've not read enough of your posts to say that's what you're doing but the person you're replying to most certainly is.

Sexual asssault of women is at epidemic levels and has been for as long as there has been human civilisation. It's only in the last 100 years that people have even woke up slightly to the fundamental sexism that society is built upon.

It may take a few of the older generations dying off and reaching the ages at which they have to relinquish power for the message that younger people are already getting loud and clear to be fully accepted.

Make no mistake, people like Asal Mor and MR2 are on the wrong side of history. Change will happen no matter much they wish it not to.

Tell me this .... Do you read any posts objectively and consider them in their entireity or just see something in the post and go like a red rag to a bull claiming that the poster is as big a monster as there is? You are as guilty as anyone of seizing upon things.

Also the younger person comment.... Do you represent the entireity of younger people? You should also consider most involved in this case are younger people.

Everything is loaded against the woman, the system sucks etc etc I fully get that so in your immense amounts of bullshit, and there are immense amounts, you actually have some valid points but never help yourself.

I have seen nothing in a single post you have made to suggest you think these guys are entitled to a fair trial. (Oh wait before you lynch me i think they are all scumbags but they do deserve a fair trial).

You are actually as bad as anyone you paint as a monster here if not worse.

Your inability to separate my bleif that they are obviously guilty from a desire for an unfair trial shows an incredible lack of comprehension on your part, or more likely a wilful misunderstanding of what's been said because it is easier to construct a straw man argument than defend the indefensible.

Your attempts at equivocations (comparing someone defending a rape victim and those obviously arguing in bad faith against rape victims) are very typical of those who deflect from social issues such as rape and sexual assault. Your take fits so well into stereotypical patriarchial responses that anyone with a more empathetic side has encountered these same arguments many times before and can see through them quite easily.

From your post I think it's safe to say I can group you with the Asal Mor/Orior types, though you at least can bring yourself to admit the defendants are scumbags and that the system is rigged against women.

[gawa316]

Come on lads lets not pretend you havent bought the missus something with a view towards a bit of filth as repayment.

As someone else pointed out earlier with the definition of rape, there is a large percentage of husbands who could be prosecuted for raping their wives.

And wives raping their husbands

Not sure what goes on in your bedroom


Rape

(1) A person (A) commits an offence if—
(a) he intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of another person (B)
(b) B does not consent to the penetration, and
(c) A does not reasonably believe that B consents.

(2) Whether a belief is reasonable is to be determined having regard to all the circumstances, including any steps A has taken to ascertain whether B consents.

😂😂😂 close the thread

[seafoid]

Great points Franko. Especially that Syf's inability to see how much better off the alleged victim would be if this trial was kept under wraps through anonymity for all parties, shows he doesn't give a fcuk about the girl in spite of all his ranting.

That's a problem with the legal system in NI. Trials are adversarial by nature so when they are reported it doesn't really suit rape cases.

[Asal Mor]

Great points Franko. Especially that Syf's inability to see how much better off the alleged victim would be if this trial was kept under wraps through anonymity for all parties, shows he doesn't give a fcuk about the girl in spite of all his ranting.

That's a problem with the legal system in NI. Trials are adversarial by nature so when they are reported it doesn't really suit rape cases.

Exactly seafoid.

At the same time, it's a fascinating case and a very enjoyable one to debate.

[seafoid]

Great points Franko. Especially that Syf's inability to see how much better off the alleged victim would be if this trial was kept under wraps through anonymity for all parties, shows he doesn't give a fcuk about the girl in spite of all his ranting.

That's a problem with the legal system in NI. Trials are adversarial by nature so when they are reported it doesn't really suit rape cases.

Exactly seafoid.

At the same time, it's a fascinating case and a very enjoyable one to debate.

I think so too, Asal.

[Milltown Row2]

Come on lads lets not pretend you havent bought the missus something with a view towards a bit of filth as repayment.

As someone else pointed out earlier with the definition of rape, there is a large percentage of husbands who could be prosecuted for raping their wives.

And wives raping their husbands

Not sure what goes on in your bedroom


Rape

(1) A person (A) commits an offence if—
(a) he intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of another person (B)
(b) B does not consent to the penetration, and
(c) A does not reasonably believe that B consents.

(2) Whether a belief is reasonable is to be determined having regard to all the circumstances, including any steps A has taken to ascertain whether B consents.

😂😂😂 close the thread

http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/pshe_and_citizenship/pdf/rape.pdf

Up to a 1000 men a year claim to be raped by women, made to penetrate is the term, would fall under sexual assault by law but there are moves to change that

[imtommygunn]

On the rose mcgowan point asal my wife regularly gives off to me about her and how her situation panned out. On her i think you possibly aren't too far wrong. On a lot of others not so sure but she strikes as someone who has manipulated the situation .

It seems any angle no matter how meaningless is seized upon by a segement of this thread to try to explain away holding onto predjuices and old ways of thinking. I've not read enough of your posts to say that's what you're doing but the person you're replying to most certainly is.

Sexual asssault of women is at epidemic levels and has been for as long as there has been human civilisation. It's only in the last 100 years that people have even woke up slightly to the fundamental sexism that society is built upon.

It may take a few of the older generations dying off and reaching the ages at which they have to relinquish power for the message that younger people are already getting loud and clear to be fully accepted.

Make no mistake, people like Asal Mor and MR2 are on the wrong side of history. Change will happen no matter much they wish it not to.

Tell me this .... Do you read any posts objectively and consider them in their entireity or just see something in the post and go like a red rag to a bull claiming that the poster is as big a monster as there is? You are as guilty as anyone of seizing upon things.

Also the younger person comment.... Do you represent the entireity of younger people? You should also consider most involved in this case are younger people.

Everything is loaded against the woman, the system sucks etc etc I fully get that so in your immense amounts of bullshit, and there are immense amounts, you actually have some valid points but never help yourself.

I have seen nothing in a single post you have made to suggest you think these guys are entitled to a fair trial. (Oh wait before you lynch me i think they are all scumbags but they do deserve a fair trial).

You are actually as bad as anyone you paint as a monster here if not worse.

Your inability to separate my brief they are obviously guilty from a desire for an unfair trial shows an incredible lack of comprehension on your part, or more likely a wilful misunderstanding of what's been said because it is easier to construct a straw man argument than defend the indefensible.

Your attempts at equivocations (comparing someone defending a rape victim and those obviously arguing in bad faith against rape victims) are very typical of those who defend and deflect from social issues such as rape and sexual assault. Your take fits so well into stereotypical patriarchial responses that anyone with a more empathetic side has encountered these same arguments many times before and can see through them quite easily.

From your post I think it's safe to say I can group you with the Asal Mor/Orior types, though you at least can bring yourself to admit the defendants are scumbags and that the system is rigged against women.

What's that -  you have put me in a box again? What's that everything is a box in these scenarios(or any) for you?

Did you read a book at school once on this subject and become an expert?

You have absolutely no ability to debate without getting on a high horse. The purpose of a trial is to prove whether or not these guys or guilty. Then if someone expresses an opinion they may not be guilty they must be a crass monster. You have no ability to separate any different instance from another. You basically have no ability to debate. You're what these days is called a snowflake. What's that snowflake - you didn't like one of someone's opinions so you became outraged,

Sometimes the lack of self awareness people have makes me laugh. At some point in time you decided you would behave like you were smarter than everyone. How you drew this conclusion is beyond me because it is certainly not a conclusion anyone else would draw.

All this from a person who actually thought somewhere you had some valid points so it pales to what other people would think of your opinions.

[Ty4Sam]

This thread is about to explode!! Paddy Jackson taking the stand.

[Jim_Murphy_74]

This thread is about to explode!! Paddy Jackson taking the stand.

If the prosecution have closed their case, can they still cross-examine him?

/Jim.

[Ty4Sam]

They have just finished calling their witnesses wtc. They can still cross examine anyone in the witness box. They then have to give their final arguments to the jury.

[Avondhu star]

This thread is about to explode!! Paddy Jackson taking the stand.

Is he going into the box?

[Avondhu star]

This thread is about to explode!! Paddy Jackson taking the stand.

If the prosecution have closed their case, can they still cross-examine him?

/Jim.

FFS! Have you any idea at all how the system works?

[longballin]

This thread is about to explode!! Paddy Jackson taking the stand.

If the prosecution have closed their case, can they still cross-examine him?

/Jim.

FFS! Have you any idea at all how the system works?

Yes they can in other words : )