The ulster rugby trial

Avondhu star · March 18, 2018, 04:12:48 PM

Quote from: whitegoodman on March 18, 2018, 10:56:38 AM
She was asked to join in in a rape?? Do you think if they really thought they were committing rape they would ask her to join in?

What they thought or did not think is of no relevance. The issue is consent or lack of consent.
If the jury have doubts that she did not give consent then that doubt must go to the benefit of the accused. If they are acquitted of rape then the charge of witholding information and perverting the course of justice is gone as well

macdanger2 · March 18, 2018, 04:31:31 PM

Is it the done thing in Belfast to hang around and have a gawk when you open the door and see/hear people getting it on? On the rare occasion I entered such a room, I doubt I ever got as far as fully opening the door before closing it again

Milltown Row2 · March 18, 2018, 05:29:42 PM

Quote from: hardstation on March 18, 2018, 04:49:19 PM
Yeah. Along with shell suits and joyriding it sets us apart.

Only joyriding if conset was given

gallsman · March 18, 2018, 05:55:29 PM

Quote from: macdanger2 on March 18, 2018, 04:31:31 PM
Is it the done thing in Belfast to hang around and have a gawk when you open the door and see/hear people getting it on? On the rare occasion I entered such a room, I doubt I ever got as far as fully opening the door before closing it again

Is the suggestion not that she opened the door, got shocked, closed the door? Don't think there's been any mention of a prolonged gawk.

Milltown Row2 · March 18, 2018, 06:52:13 PM

Quote from: gallsman on March 18, 2018, 05:55:29 PM
Quote from: macdanger2 on March 18, 2018, 04:31:31 PM
Is it the done thing in Belfast to hang around and have a gawk when you open the door and see/hear people getting it on? On the rare occasion I entered such a room, I doubt I ever got as far as fully opening the door before closing it again

Is the suggestion not that she opened the door, got shocked, closed the door? Don't think there's been any mention of a prolonged gawk.

About a minute or under? Now if I opened the door for 30 seconds that's still long

David McKeown · March 18, 2018, 07:35:12 PM

Quote from: Avondhu star on March 18, 2018, 04:12:48 PM
Quote from: whitegoodman on March 18, 2018, 10:56:38 AM
She was asked to join in in a rape?? Do you think if they really thought they were committing rape they would ask her to join in?
What they thought or did not think is of no relevance. The issue is consent or lack of consent.
If the jury have doubts that she did not give consent then that doubt must go to the benefit of the accused. If they are acquitted of rape then the charge of witholding information and perverting the course of justice is gone as well

Actually what they thought is entirely relevant. If they believed she was consenting and that belief was a reasonable one for someone in their position to have then they are not guilty of rape regardless of whether or not she consented. That maybe shouldn't be the law but that's a different argument.

Avondhu star · March 18, 2018, 10:25:37 PM

Quote from: gallsman on March 18, 2018, 05:55:29 PM
Quote from: macdanger2 on March 18, 2018, 04:31:31 PM
Is it the done thing in Belfast to hang around and have a gawk when you open the door and see/hear people getting it on? On the rare occasion I entered such a room, I doubt I ever got as far as fully opening the door before closing it again

Is the suggestion not that she opened the door, got shocked, closed the door? Don't think there's been any mention of a prolonged gawk.

An eyeful is better than a mouthful

macdanger2 · March 18, 2018, 10:34:38 PM

Quote from: gallsman on March 18, 2018, 05:55:29 PM
Quote from: macdanger2 on March 18, 2018, 04:31:31 PM
Is it the done thing in Belfast to hang around and have a gawk when you open the door and see/hear people getting it on? On the rare occasion I entered such a room, I doubt I ever got as far as fully opening the door before closing it again

Is the suggestion not that she opened the door, got shocked, closed the door? Don't think there's been any mention of a prolonged gawk.

The way it was reported was "under a minute" I think which makes it sound like a reasonable amount of time. Long enough to be invited to join anyway.

Main Street · March 18, 2018, 10:36:05 PM

Quote from: whitegoodman on March 18, 2018, 08:16:33 AM
What is this positive consent you wanted her to see ? You want the girl to stop in the middle of things any say hey everything is fine I'm having a great time? I'm not sure that's how it works!!

If I was on the jury this evidence is key. This was the girls chance to get help. Instead she turned her head away in what looks like either embarrassment or fear photos were going to be taken.

The defense is conveniently selective in what part of the witness' evidence they are using. The witness said she was 100% certain she did not see any distress, but the defense conveniently ignored that she also claimed she was 100% certain that Jackson had penetrative sex with her.
We have a situation where she is 100% certain on both questions, but her second 100% certainty completely contradicts Jackson's testimony.
And that part of her testimony could well have been a good part of the reasoning why Jackson decided to take the stand.

Milltown Row2 · March 18, 2018, 10:38:57 PM

What did the taxi man say? Did he hear say anything that would help the prosecution ?

gallsman · March 18, 2018, 11:10:46 PM

Quote from: Main Street on March 18, 2018, 10:36:05 PM
Quote from: whitegoodman on March 18, 2018, 08:16:33 AM
What is this positive consent you wanted her to see ? You want the girl to stop in the middle of things any say hey everything is fine I'm having a great time? I'm not sure that's how it works!!

If I was on the jury this evidence is key. This was the girls chance to get help. Instead she turned her head away in what looks like either embarrassment or fear photos were going to be taken.
The defense is conveniently selective in what part of the witness' evidence they are using. The witness said she was 100% certain she did not see any distress, but the defense conveniently ignored that she also claimed she was 100% certain that Jackson had penetrative sex with her.
We have a situation where she is 100% certain on both questions, but her second 100% certainty completely contradicts Jackson's testimony.
And that part of her testimony could well have been a good part of the reasoning why Jackson decided to take the stand.

She didn't say she 100% certain she didn't see any distress. She said she didn't see any distress and then was asked if that was still her position when questioned sorting the trial and she said yes, 100%.

That is her saying "that is 100% my position, she did not appear to be in any distress", not her saying "she was 100% not in distress"

Main Street · March 18, 2018, 11:22:02 PM

Quote from: gallsman on March 18, 2018, 11:10:46 PM
Quote from: Main Street on March 18, 2018, 10:36:05 PM
Quote from: whitegoodman on March 18, 2018, 08:16:33 AM
What is this positive consent you wanted her to see ? You want the girl to stop in the middle of things any say hey everything is fine I'm having a great time? I'm not sure that's how it works!!

If I was on the jury this evidence is key. This was the girls chance to get help. Instead she turned her head away in what looks like either embarrassment or fear photos were going to be taken.
The defense is conveniently selective in what part of the witness' evidence they are using. The witness said she was 100% certain she did not see any distress, but the defense conveniently ignored that she also claimed she was 100% certain that Jackson had penetrative sex with her.
We have a situation where she is 100% certain on both questions, but her second 100% certainty completely contradicts Jackson's testimony.
And that part of her testimony could well have been a good part of the reasoning why Jackson decided to take the stand.

She didn't say she 100% certain she didn't see any distress. She said she didn't see any distress and then was asked if that was still her position when questioned sorting the trial and she said yes, 100%.

That is her saying "that is 100% my position, she did not appear to be in any distress", not her saying "she was 100% not in distress"

You are surmising. The witness did not say "appear".

I said she was 100% certain she did not see distress.

as reported
Reading from one of her police statements, Mr Kelly quoted Ms Florence as saying: "I would not say the female was distressed."
When asked by Mr Kelly if this remains her recollection she said: "One hundred per cent."

gallsman · March 18, 2018, 11:27:39 PM

You've just repeated the same mistake. She said the complainant did not seem distressed. She was asked, almost two years later, if this was still her recollection, and said yes, 100%.

That is her saying "yes, my recollection is 100% that she did not seem distressed" i.e. she does not recall it any differently now to how she did at the time. That is NOT the same as her saying "she was 100% not distressed."

See the difference?

sid waddell · March 18, 2018, 11:35:26 PM

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/nisi/2008/1769/article/5

Quote
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.

What if any steps did Mr. Jackson and Mr. Olding take to ascertain whether the complainant consented?

Milltown Row2 · March 18, 2018, 11:37:49 PM

Quote from: gallsman on March 18, 2018, 11:27:39 PM
You've just repeated the same mistake. She said the complainant did not seem distressed. She was asked, almost two years later, if this was still her recollection, and said yes, 100%.

That is her saying "yes, my recollection is 100% that she did not seem distressed" i.e. she does not recall it any differently now to how she did at the time. That is NOT the same as her saying "she was 100% not distressed."

See the difference?

Based on what she said then, you think she seen a rape?