RG at arms length

[seafoid]

The RG trial by social media maybe isn't as clear cut. And it would appear there is some truth in these allegations. But what's to stop some head case of a woman making some total lies up about an ex and plastering it on social media. He's automatically guilty, even if it is complete lies. Life ruined.

That assumes the dynamics of this case are universal. In your postulation, the woman would lie. It probably wouldn't be the first time. Someone on the man's side would defend him and  the accusation would have no traction. Life would continue as normal.

[smelmoth]

The RG trial by social media maybe isn't as clear cut. And it would appear there is some truth in these allegations. But what's to stop some head case of a woman making some total lies up about an ex and plastering it on social media. He's automatically guilty, even if it is complete lies. Life ruined.

The law

It won't stop someone doing it, and the legal process will be a lot slower than having your reputation destroyed, that will be pretty instant.

Case in point being that head case Egan in Cork. Lives destroyed, all bullshit and made up.

https://www.corkbeo.ie/news/local-news/pathological-liar-sonya-egan-jailed-26936490

The law as a deterrent doesn't 100% work for any offence.

But people putting their name to allegations and being backed up by others who expose themselves to the law cannot be brushed aside. It's far from trial by social media

[smelmoth]

It really is best to let it play out as it will. If RG did what is alleged, I doubt there's anyone here who would back him. But until he's charged with an offence, I'm keeping an open mind

So the lady who stepped forward and corroborated an allegation. If RG is not charged then you dismiss her as a liar?

[High Fielder]

No, but as importantly, I won't label him a wife beater

[smelmoth]

No, but as importantly, I won't label him a wife beater

And yet one of them will be true. Either she is a liar or he is a wife beater. When this all plays out you, me and everyone else will come down on one side or other.

He definitely could go a large way to clearing all your uncertainties up but coming out with his denial. He also has the option of defamation case against 3 individuals. He has a lot cards to play here.

[High Fielder]

There are many good reasons for him to stay quiet. He still has custody of the children remember. Does he really want to get into a public tit for tat? Notwithstanding that, if he's charged anc prosecuted based on fresh evidence or whatever, then there's only one side we can fall down on. Until then, it's speculation and/or hearsay

[Milltown Row2]

Yeah I'd say any legal advice he's getting is to say nothing, there is and should not be any hiding place for this behaviour btw, its just that I'm against this 'social media' kangaroo court justice that randomers pile on. Its absolutely none of our business. But hey ho here we are with the pitch fork at the ready.

As soon as that's done then on to the other one, like there is a serious thirst for this stuff, not a health thirst either

[seafoid]

There are many good reasons for him to stay quiet. He still has custody of the children remember. Does he really want to get into a public tit for tat? Notwithstanding that, if he's charged anc prosecuted based on fresh evidence or whatever, then there's only one side we can fall down on. Until then, it's speculation and/or hearsay

If everyone on Instragram believed he was a satanist, that would be speculation.
If his ex wife makes a statement which is backed up by a witness it isn't speculation.

[tbrick18]

There are many good reasons for him to stay quiet. He still has custody of the children remember. Does he really want to get into a public tit for tat? Notwithstanding that, if he's charged anc prosecuted based on fresh evidence or whatever, then there's only one side we can fall down on. Until then, it's speculation and/or hearsay

If everyone on Instragram believed he was a satanist, that would be speculation.
If his ex wife makes a statement which is backed up by a witness it isn't speculation.

To use that same argument, if hypothetically RG posted online that his ex wife was an absolute liar and one of his friends wives publicly agreed, would that make it fact?

Again, not condoning DV and if guilty it should be a jail sentence. But just because someone says it, doesn't necessarily make it true. There also needs to be more "proof" for want of a better word. But it seems on social media, someone only has to say it for it to be true.
That's the only issue I have with the whole affair.

[seafoid]

There are many good reasons for him to stay quiet. He still has custody of the children remember. Does he really want to get into a public tit for tat? Notwithstanding that, if he's charged anc prosecuted based on fresh evidence or whatever, then there's only one side we can fall down on. Until then, it's speculation and/or hearsay

If everyone on Instragram believed he was a satanist, that would be speculation.
If his ex wife makes a statement which is backed up by a witness it isn't speculation.

To use that same argument, if hypothetically RG posted online that his ex wife was an absolute liar and one of his friends wives publicly agreed, would that make it fact?

Again, not condoning DV and if guilty it should be a jail sentence. But just because someone says it, doesn't necessarily make it true. There also needs to be more "proof" for want of a better word. But it seems on social media, someone only has to say it for it to be true.
That's the only issue I have with the whole affair.

It's not just about declaring something. The reaction of people is based on how plausible  both parties are and how they respond. Did he deny what she said ?
Ultimately it comes down to credibility. Lack of credibility is what caused him to resign. Blaming it on Social media is deflection. He realised that there was a hole in his credibility.

[Sonny Joe]

I'm trying to put myself in the shoes of someone who is a successful coach/manager with a successful team and my ex goes on line and declares to all that I'm am guilty of DV. Would I resign my role of the said team if i was innocent and the allegations were untrue. Would you? I am certain I would not be resigning, I would in the strongest terms be denying it and  going down the legal path and issuing a statement explaining as much. I would be forcing my employers to sack me so I could after them as well, knowing there is no evidence that will come out. I would not be resigning. Kinda makes it simple.

[imtommygunn]

The difference in this one is what happens when you ask around about it. The stories aren't good. Where we live is small and it doesn't take you to go too far to know someone who knows someone etc. how this wasn't in the public domain before based on what you hear now I do not know.

[Mike Tyson]

I'm trying to put myself in the shoes of someone who is a successful coach/manager with a successful team and my ex goes on line and declares to all that I'm am guilty of DV. Would I resign my role of the said team if i was innocent and the allegations were untrue. Would you? I am certain I would not be resigning, I would in the strongest terms be denying it and  going down the legal path and issuing a statement explaining as much. I would be forcing my employers to sack me so I could after them as well, knowing there is no evidence that will come out. I would not be resigning. Kinda makes it simple.

Which didn't happen in this case when he issued a response as far as I am aware.

The latter part in bold, we simply don't know what has gone on in hearings or in court prior to this as David McKeown has suggested, so there could be something there and the reason for no flat out denial or there may not be.

In society these days you are guilty until proven otherwise. Don't think Derry have come out of it very well - they could have issued a statement at the time along the lines of "we are aware of allegations and will consider our response and condemn all forms of DV".

Although maybe given the GAA's response to Shane King's situation they were reluctant to jump in too early.

[High Fielder]

There are many good reasons for him to stay quiet. He still has custody of the children remember. Does he really want to get into a public tit for tat? Notwithstanding that, if he's charged anc prosecuted based on fresh evidence or whatever, then there's only one side we can fall down on. Until then, it's speculation and/or hearsay

If everyone on Instragram believed he was a satanist, that would be speculation.
If his ex wife makes a statement which is backed up by a witness it isn't speculation.

To use that same argument, if hypothetically RG posted online that his ex wife was an absolute liar and one of his friends wives publicly agreed, would that make it fact?

Again, not condoning DV and if guilty it should be a jail sentence. But just because someone says it, doesn't necessarily make it true. There also needs to be more "proof" for want of a better word. But it seems on social media, someone only has to say it for it to be true.
That's the only issue I have with the whole affair.

It's not just about declaring something. The reaction of people is based on how plausible  both parties are and how they respond. Did he deny what she said ?
Ultimately it comes down to credibility. Lack of credibility is what caused him to resign. Blaming it on Social media is deflection. He realised that there was a hole in his credibility.

You're speculating. Do you know for sure lack of credibility caused him to resign? If you do, and it's common knowledge, has the investigation been reopened? Has he been charged? Has he lost the kids? Thankfully the law deals in facts and not speculation. If he's guilty, genuinely guilty, lock him up and throw away the key. Until then, he retains the presumption of innocence

The possibility of RG ever getting a fair trial is shot to pieces by all the commentary around this case. I was shocked to read that Joe Brolly was planning to boycott the Ulster Final if RG was there. Isn't or wasn't he a barrister? I'm sure he's had to defend some unsavoury characters

[tbrick18]

There are many good reasons for him to stay quiet. He still has custody of the children remember. Does he really want to get into a public tit for tat? Notwithstanding that, if he's charged anc prosecuted based on fresh evidence or whatever, then there's only one side we can fall down on. Until then, it's speculation and/or hearsay

If everyone on Instragram believed he was a satanist, that would be speculation.
If his ex wife makes a statement which is backed up by a witness it isn't speculation.

To use that same argument, if hypothetically RG posted online that his ex wife was an absolute liar and one of his friends wives publicly agreed, would that make it fact?

Again, not condoning DV and if guilty it should be a jail sentence. But just because someone says it, doesn't necessarily make it true. There also needs to be more "proof" for want of a better word. But it seems on social media, someone only has to say it for it to be true.
That's the only issue I have with the whole affair.

It's not just about declaring something. The reaction of people is based on how plausible  both parties are and how they respond. Did he deny what she said ?
Ultimately it comes down to credibility. Lack of credibility is what caused him to resign. Blaming it on Social media is deflection. He realised that there was a hole in his credibility.

You're speculating. Do you know for sure lack of credibility caused him to resign? If you do, and it's common knowledge, has the investigation been reopened? Has he been charged? Has he lost the kids? Thankfully the law deals in facts and not speculation. If he's guilty, genuinely guilty, lock him up and throw away the key. Until then, he retains the presumption of innocence

The possibility of RG ever getting a fair trial is shot to pieces by all the commentary around this case. I was shocked to read that Joe Brolly was planning to boycott the Ulster Final if RG was there. Isn't or wasn't he a barrister? I'm sure he's had to defend some unsavoury characters

I agree.
But also, the possibility of NG getting justice could also be shot to pieces for the same reason. Maybe this is TV law (because I know fook all squared about law), but surely if he's already guilty in the public eye i's impossible to get an impartial jury. So can he argue any trial would be tainted and so get out of a trial, therefore robbing NG or her right to justice?

I've said it previously, I think it's particularly relevant in these types of cases or those involving allegations against children or sexual violence, that all names should be kept out of the public domain until guilt or innocence has be proven.