The ulster rugby trial

[Tony Baloney]

It's dog eat dog when you're looking down the barrel of 8-10 years in the slammer. The defence team are getting paid handsomely to sow the seeds of reasonable doubt. You seem to think an accusation of rape is enough to send people to jail.

[Kuwabatake Sanjuro]

why do we have a judicial system? Complete waste of money! All things should be settled by the Board! Fireside lawyers by the dozen!

Can we put a poll up? At least that will give us an idea and close the case! Save that girl from 3 weeks of torment

At what point of people telling you you're acting scummy will you get the message?

If you think a system that allows a woman's underwear be paraded around a court room amid a two week long grilling with countless baseless insinuations about her sexual desires and motivations is a good judicial system you are in a single world wrong.

Surely to fûck there should be a time limit on cross examination, because what is currently happening is simply an attempt akin to filibuster in politics where the aim is to wear down the victim and get a reaction that makes her look bad. That is not justice.

What the defence have attempted is not a defence of their client but a smear campaign against the victim. I hope to God the jurors are smart enough to see through the noise.

I have to say I agree with Syferus on this. The sooner the better the case moves onto the physical evidence and the communication afterwards between the accused. 

[Asal Mor]

The system is a disgrace.

Anyway, regarding the rest of the case..........

If the police did their jobs properly and the men are lying there should be plenty of inconsistencies between what they said at the time of questioning and what they are saying in court, unless they all refused to say anything when initially questioned. Given how casual they sounded in the WhatsApp messages, they hardly had their stories straight at that stage. If they gave the same version of events that they are giving in court and if each defendant's version was consistent with the other that would lead me to believe they are telling the truth. If they were inconsistent or refused to respond to initial questioning I'd be thinking they were guilty but will we even find this out? From what I've read the prosecution can't call the defendants to give evidence, which seems totally wrong when you see what the girl has been subjected to?

Maybe someone with a knowledge of the  legal system could explain what we'll find out in relation to each defendant's version of events when initially arrested and questioned.

[seafoid]

Court cases are adversarial. That is how they work.

[imtommygunn]

why do we have a judicial system? Complete waste of money! All things should be settled by the Board! Fireside lawyers by the dozen!

Can we put a poll up? At least that will give us an idea and close the case! Save that girl from 3 weeks of torment

Now far from being on shferus's side but in what world where someone reports rape and has to have their underwear paraded in front of a public court is there not something seriously wrong?

Yes those boys deserve a fair trial but so does she.

The perception of women is still very flawed... Man sleeps with many women and he's a hero. Woman does this and is a tr**p.

[Milltown Row2]

I'm not going to relate to this case, as no matter what I say I've defended the rugby players every time in Syferus's eyes! For the record if you look at any of my posts I haven't, I've consistently said if they are guilty they should be put away for the maximum time!

Now if someone accuses you of doing something surely you have the right to defend yourself? Is it then not up to the accuser to prove that that person did it? And also up to to the defence to prove innocents?
Physical, witnesss, and DNA evidence will prove most cases nowadays...

One persons word over another is different altogether I'd assume.. this is what the problem is in most rape cases I think..

Some posters need to wise up and except that the judicial system is there for a reason, put in place by people who have actually thought it out logically, it may be flawed in some people's eyes but that's it!

As for defendants not talking at interviews, standard practice.

[Jim_Murphy_74]

why do we have a judicial system? Complete waste of money! All things should be settled by the Board! Fireside lawyers by the dozen!

Can we put a poll up? At least that will give us an idea and close the case! Save that girl from 3 weeks of torment

At what point of people telling you you're acting scummy will you get the message?

If you think a system that allows a woman's underwear be paraded around a court room asks a two week long grilling with countless baseless insinuations about her sexual desires and motivations is a good judicial system you are in a single world wrong.

What the defence have attempted is not a defence of their client but a smear campaign against the victim. I hope to God the jurors are smart enough to see through the noise.

LOL what a clown. I honestly don't think you live in the real world. It's called a defence for a reason - do you expect them to hold out their hands and ask for the cuffs to be applied?!

I don't know what the answer is, as people have the right to defend themselves.  However, there is no doubt that the reports on this trial and of the treatment of this woman would make any potential complainant think twice about following through on a complaint.

/Jim.

[Orchard park]

why do we have a judicial system? Complete waste of money! All things should be settled by the Board! Fireside lawyers by the dozen!

Can we put a poll up? At least that will give us an idea and close the case! Save that girl from 3 weeks of torment

At what point of people telling you you're acting scummy will you get the message?

If you think a system that allows a woman's underwear be paraded around a court room asks a two week long grilling with countless baseless insinuations about her sexual desires and motivations is a good judicial system you are in a single world wrong.

What the defence have attempted is not a defence of their client but a smear campaign against the victim. I hope to God the jurors are smart enough to see through the noise.

LOL what a clown. I honestly don't think you live in the real world. It's called a defence for a reason - do you expect them to hold out their hands and ask for the cuffs to be applied?!

I don't know what the answer is, as people have the right to defend themselves.  However, there is no doubt that the reports on this trial and of the treatment of this woman would make any potential complainant think twice about following through on a complaint.

/Jim.

a minimum of 7 days cross examination of a complainant wont encourage many victims forward again

[general_lee]

Maybe because there is more than one individual accused it seems a lot more traumatic for the alleged victim having to answer to 3 or 4 different QCs. From what I have read so far the girl has been remarkable

[magpie seanie]

Maybe because there is more than one individual accused it seems a lot more traumatic for the alleged victim having to answer to 3 or 4 different QCs. From what I have read so far the girl has been remarkable

Yes, that seems to be the case.

[brokencrossbar1]

With 4 defendants and the prosecution barrister there was always going to be a lengthy period of cross examination.  It may seem harsh and complainant unfriendly but it is the system. The thing is now the only way the defendants will be pushed themselves is if they put themselves into the box. I think given how well she has done and other evidence in terms of medicals and WhatsApp messages I think they will have to and there will be a chance of it unraveling depending on what they have or have not said in their interviews.

We live in a society where you are presumed innocent until you are proven otherwise. That is not a qualified presumption. You can't be any more or less innocent because you are an international rugby player from a well to do background or a drug taking homeless man with a record living in a card board box.  Everyone has the same presumption of innocence. As a consequence you have the same right to face your accuser and challenge them. You have the right to challenge their allegations. Take the nature of this crime out and make it an attempted murder trial. You cannot have one set of rules in terms of cross examination for one type of crime and a different for another. You need uniformity because as soon as you start making exceptions the clever lawyers use these as wriggle room tactics and create doubt where no doubt is really there. I do believe in the case of all sexual crimes their should be full anonymity till conviction but I understand the concept that not only should the law do right but it should be seen to be done right therefore this causes issues. I believe that there should at least be the option to remain anonymous though.

This case will go to the wire. There are too many variables and withbthe 4 QC who are involved, and I know how they operate as I have worked with 3 of them regularly over the years, this is only going to get tougher for the accuser. If she is telling the truth the. The truth will out and as Jesus (and Jim Carrey ) said the truth shall set her free!

[AZOffaly]

BC, do you think they are labouring the 'drunk' and hazy stuff, making the girl continually say she wasn't out of it, so that they can present some sort of evidence that implies consent later on. They'd not have to worry about drunk consent is no consent then.

She is being treated horrifically though, I don't know why anyone would report a rape to the police if this is how they are treated at trial. If I was her father, I think I'd be more inclined to visit these lads privately than put her through this.

[Milltown Row2]

BC, do you think they are labouring the 'drunk' and hazy stuff, making the girl continually say she wasn't out of it, so that they can present some sort of evidence that implies consent later on. They'd not have to worry about drunk consent is no consent then.

She is being treated horrifically though, I don't know why anyone would report a rape to the police if this is how they are treated at trial. If I was her father, I think I'd be more inclined to visit these lads privately than put her through this.

Assuming they are guilty?

[north_antrim_hound]

You have to emphasise with both parties to proceedings reach their conclusion. The Girl is going through a serious ordeal but so are the accused if they are innocent. Professional Careers in taters and reputations tainted for life. Rape victims are fully briefed and prepared for what lies in front of them and the function of cross examination is to establish the truth which is what the innocent party wants anyway.  I must say this whole thing is got an OJ Simpson feel to it, the big media presence, the "did they do it or is she a rugger groupie" kinda theme.
I think things are getting a bit out of hand on here when the girls private parts are coming into the debate. That's my 2 cents 

[brokencrossbar1]

BC, do you think they are labouring the 'drunk' and hazy stuff, making the girl continually say she wasn't out of it, so that they can present some sort of evidence that implies consent later on. They'd not have to worry about drunk consent is no consent then.

She is being treated horrifically though, I don't know why anyone would report a rape to the police if this is how they are treated at trial. If I was her father, I think I'd be more inclined to visit these lads privately than put her through this.

They will only have anecdotal evidence I would imagine that she was drunk. She would not have been submitted to a blood test at the time and in any event she went to the doctors a good bitbafter the incident so it would all be circumstantial. They are simply trying to paint a picture of a drunk, flirty girl who gave as good as she got and was a very willing participant, if not the instigator of it all. Classic defence tactics. If she is telling the truth, which I personally think she is, then she would not have had many inconsistencies, which she hasn't. The defence are pushing her to try to get her crack and open a door to a major inconsistency. Hasn't happened and she has tonbe admires for that and this is why my gut feeling is that she is telling the truth.