Paddy Jackson apology

[Syferus]

Can you put a link up where it says this?  I see one where 67k want a review which is currently taking place but not one of what you are suggesting ie that they shouldn't play for ulster again

From what I can gather from a number of newspaper articles, there is widespread concern that the PSNI decided to prosecute a case that they had little or no chance of winning.  That means that Syferus and 65,000 (alleged) other fascist, anti-democratic gobdaws should either accept the verdict of a lawfully constituted court that found Olding and Jackson innocent of all charges laid against them or they reject the concept of law and order. Not only that but the PSNI may have to answer questions about their reasons for allowing wasting over eight weeks of a lot of peoples' time as well as subjecting the complainant and the accused to an immense amount of unnecessary stress.

You're starting to show yourself up. Stick to the yerrah yerrah stuff and playing handball with Enda stories and leave societal issues to those that actually have to deal with them regularly. I would say you're divorced from reality given your position but you probably voted to keep it outlawed too..

Now, now Syf, stop throwing yer rattle outa yer pram.
I like to think that I am a democrat and will accept the law of the land in any country where the will of the people is observed.
I believe that the judgement handed down in the recent case was based on a decision, freely made, buy 11 responsible peers of the accused. I also think the presiding judge delivered her directions to said jury in a fair-minded and very comprehensive way. Nothing was left to chance.
At the end of the proceedings, the jury retired to consider the evidence presented to them and returned in a very short period of time with a clear cut verdict.
Had the verdict gone the other way and if any or all of the defendants were found guilty as charged, then I would accept that verdict also. It seems the jury regarded Dora Florence to be a more credible witness than the complainant. There may have been other relevant factors involved but, for me, this is the crucial one.
Mob law is what you are advocating here and it sucks...

The decision is not the problem. The system that supports it is.

If you think rape is well policed and prosecuted you are, to be frank, wrong.

People have no responsibility to give any undue respect to a system they see as broken, and you and others would do well to remember that before you throw stones at those brave enough to try to effect some manner of change.

In fact, a responsibility to seek a more fairness society is much more fundamental to the ideals of justice and a better country for all people than blindly deferring to a judicial system and ignoring the issues that it has raised.

Woah there. I think you'll find yourself on record (repeatedly!) having a problem with the decision and on many occasions before there even was a decision.

Go back to the first post I made after the verdict. The system is the villain, not the 11 people who would probably rather not have been there who had to follow very leading directions from the judge, who herself was simply applying the laws of the very same system than allows the vast majority of rapes to go unpunished. It wasn't even the fault of the well-paid defence team that paraded a likely rape victim's underwear around a courtroom and kept her on the stand for six straight days.

The system. It all starts with the structure and not the players. And that structure was created in a society that has taken too light a hand to rape for centuries.

[Milltown Row2]

But these lads were not convicted of rape or anything else's for that matter.

How's the system in the south? Are people presumed guilty first and have to prove their innocence ?

[Hound]

But these lads were not convicted of rape or anything else's for that matter.

How's the system in the south? Are people presumed guilty first and have to prove their innocence ?

I think in Syf's idyllic system, the word of the complainant in a rape trial is taken as gospel, and should not be questioned.

Although he has yet to respond to how his system would work in this case, when the complainant has already provided a false rape allegation, that had to be subsequently changed to another charge when she changed her story.

[Syferus]

But these lads were not convicted of rape or anything else's for that matter.

How's the system in the south? Are people presumed guilty first and have to prove their innocence ?

I think in Syf's idyllic system, the word of the complainant in a rape trial is taken as gospel, and should not be questioned.

Although he has yet to respond to how his system would work in this case, when the complainant has already provided a false rape allegation, that had to be subsequently changed to another charge when she changed her story.

Just because you two have a suspicious lack of imagination when it comes to addressing the obvious flaws in the system it doesn't mean the rest of us do - https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/rape-trials-should-use-prerecorded-crossexaminations-says-new-report-36787586.html

Why people like you keep trying to fixate on the verdict is obvious - you don't really give a damn about the plight of rape victims, because there is little argument than can be made for the current system and its prosecution rates.

[Milltown Row2]

But these lads were not convicted of rape or anything else's for that matter.

How's the system in the south? Are people presumed guilty first and have to prove their innocence ?

I think in Syf's idyllic system, the word of the complainant in a rape trial is taken as gospel, and should not be questioned.

Although he has yet to respond to how his system would work in this case, when the complainant has already provided a false rape allegation, that had to be subsequently changed to another charge when she changed her story.

Just because you two have a suspicious lack of imagination when it comes to addressing the obvious flaws in the system it doesn't mean the rest of us do - https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/rape-trials-should-use-prerecorded-crossexaminations-says-new-report-36787586.html

Why people like you keep trying to fixate on the verdict is obvious - you don't really give a damn about the plight of rape victims, because there is little argument than can be made for the current system and its prosecution rates.

So in this case Syferus, who was the victim?

If someone is raped then you'll get everyone behind them, but if they weren't raped what do you do?

[Syferus]

But these lads were not convicted of rape or anything else's for that matter.

How's the system in the south? Are people presumed guilty first and have to prove their innocence ?

I think in Syf's idyllic system, the word of the complainant in a rape trial is taken as gospel, and should not be questioned.

Although he has yet to respond to how his system would work in this case, when the complainant has already provided a false rape allegation, that had to be subsequently changed to another charge when she changed her story.

Just because you two have a suspicious lack of imagination when it comes to addressing the obvious flaws in the system it doesn't mean the rest of us do - https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/rape-trials-should-use-prerecorded-crossexaminations-says-new-report-36787586.html

Why people like you keep trying to fixate on the verdict is obvious - you don't really give a damn about the plight of rape victims, because there is little argument than can be made for the current system and its prosecution rates.

So in this case Syferus, who was the victim?

If someone is raped then you'll get everyone behind them, but if they weren't raped what do you do?

Why do you keep setting up straw men in the vain hope that they will resemble a good point?

[Lar Naparka]

Can you put a link up where it says this?  I see one where 67k want a review which is currently taking place but not one of what you are suggesting ie that they shouldn't play for ulster again

From what I can gather from a number of newspaper articles, there is widespread concern that the PSNI decided to prosecute a case that they had little or no chance of winning.  That means that Syferus and 65,000 (alleged) other fascist, anti-democratic gobdaws should either accept the verdict of a lawfully constituted court that found Olding and Jackson innocent of all charges laid against them or they reject the concept of law and order. Not only that but the PSNI may have to answer questions about their reasons for allowing wasting over eight weeks of a lot of peoples' time as well as subjecting the complainant and the accused to an immense amount of unnecessary stress.

As far as I know, in the North, it is the Public Prosecution Service (PPS) that decides whether to take a case to trial, not the PSNI.

As far as I know, that is the case. But same as the gardai in the south presenting a file to the DPP, the decision to proceed to trial or not will be influenced by the PSNI's findings. 

[moysider]

Can you put a link up where it says this?  I see one where 67k want a review which is currently taking place but not one of what you are suggesting ie that they shouldn't play for ulster again

From what I can gather from a number of newspaper articles, there is widespread concern that the PSNI decided to prosecute a case that they had little or no chance of winning.  That means that Syferus and 65,000 (alleged) other fascist, anti-democratic gobdaws should either accept the verdict of a lawfully constituted court that found Olding and Jackson innocent of all charges laid against them or they reject the concept of law and order. Not only that but the PSNI may have to answer questions about their reasons for allowing wasting over eight weeks of a lot of peoples' time as well as subjecting the complainant and the accused to an immense amount of unnecessary stress.

As far as I know, in the North, it is the Public Prosecution Service (PPS) that decides whether to take a case to trial, not the PSNI.

As far as I know, that is the case. But same as the gardai in the south presenting a file to the DPP, the decision to proceed to trial or not will be influenced by the PSNI's findings.

So what to do Lar if a girl claims she has been raped? Do the police tell her to go dry her eyes?  Because unless she has been beaten back and blue or raped at knife-point, she is wasting her time. That much is clear now.
Most rapes are not reported we are told. We can understand why that is so too. I heard on radio today that only 1% of rapists end up being convicted. Are all these girls making shit up? I doubt it.
Some people here treating a verdict of not guilty as infallible. It is just a result of a process. It might not be the correct result, but may only be the only possible result in the circumstances. Oscar Pistorius beat a murder charge. R Kelly got off on a paedophilia charge - not enough evidence, victim would not testify ( I wonder why?). Even Al Capone was acquitted at least once before they got him with a cooking the books charge.
Paddy Jackson got himself a good result out of this. Expecting his old career back is a laugh though. The girl got justice the way it works. I don't think she would have been surprised by the result either. The dice was loaded against her from the start. Nothing to do with privilege either. I'd say the only one in court not from a privileged background was the Taxi-driver!

[Lar Naparka]

Can you put a link up where it says this?  I see one where 67k want a review which is currently taking place but not one of what you are suggesting ie that they shouldn't play for ulster again

From what I can gather from a number of newspaper articles, there is widespread concern that the PSNI decided to prosecute a case that they had little or no chance of winning.  That means that Syferus and 65,000 (alleged) other fascist, anti-democratic gobdaws should either accept the verdict of a lawfully constituted court that found Olding and Jackson innocent of all charges laid against them or they reject the concept of law and order. Not only that but the PSNI may have to answer questions about their reasons for allowing wasting over eight weeks of a lot of peoples' time as well as subjecting the complainant and the accused to an immense amount of unnecessary stress.

As far as I know, in the North, it is the Public Prosecution Service (PPS) that decides whether to take a case to trial, not the PSNI.

As far as I know, that is the case. But same as the gardai in the south presenting a file to the DPP, the decision to proceed to trial or not will be influenced by the PSNI's findings.

So what to do Lar if a girl claims she has been raped? Do the police tell her to go dry her eyes?  Because unless she has been beaten back and blue or raped at knife-point, she is wasting her time. That much is clear now.
Most rapes are not reported we are told. We can understand why that is so too. I heard on radio today that only 1% of rapists end up being convicted. Are all these girls making shit up? I doubt it.
Some people here treating a verdict of not guilty as infallible. It is just a result of a process. It might not be the correct result, but may only be the only possible result in the circumstances. Oscar Pistorius beat a murder charge. R Kelly got off on a paedophilia charge - not enough evidence, victim would not testify ( I wonder why?). Even Al Capone was acquitted at least once before they got him with a cooking the books charge.
Paddy Jackson got himself a good result out of this. Expecting his old career back is a laugh though. The girl got justice the way it works. I don't think she would have been surprised by the result either. The dice was loaded against her from the start. Nothing to do with privilege either. I'd say the only one in court not from a privileged background was the Taxi-driver!

I can accept what you are saying moy but what has that to do with my innocuous statement you are quoting?
The gardai in investigating an incident down here will prepare a file to send to the DPP, where a decision will be taken to press charges or not and I believe the same applies in the North where the PSNI passes the result of their investigations on to the PPS.

[haranguerer]

So what to do Lar if a girl claims she has been raped? Do the police tell her to go dry her eyes?  Because unless she has been beaten back and blue or raped at knife-point, she is wasting her time. That much is clear now.

How is that clear?

[seafoid]

Al Capone died of syphilis.  PJ has the reputational equivalent of it. I wonder how the verdict might have looked under the Icelandic system.

[Hound]

Can you put a link up where it says this?  I see one where 67k want a review which is currently taking place but not one of what you are suggesting ie that they shouldn't play for ulster again

From what I can gather from a number of newspaper articles, there is widespread concern that the PSNI decided to prosecute a case that they had little or no chance of winning.  That means that Syferus and 65,000 (alleged) other fascist, anti-democratic gobdaws should either accept the verdict of a lawfully constituted court that found Olding and Jackson innocent of all charges laid against them or they reject the concept of law and order. Not only that but the PSNI may have to answer questions about their reasons for allowing wasting over eight weeks of a lot of peoples' time as well as subjecting the complainant and the accused to an immense amount of unnecessary stress.

As far as I know, in the North, it is the Public Prosecution Service (PPS) that decides whether to take a case to trial, not the PSNI.

As far as I know, that is the case. But same as the gardai in the south presenting a file to the DPP, the decision to proceed to trial or not will be influenced by the PSNI's findings.

So what to do Lar if a girl claims she has been raped? Do the police tell her to go dry her eyes?  Because unless she has been beaten back and blue or raped at knife-point, she is wasting her time. That much is clear now.
Most rapes are not reported we are told. We can understand why that is so too. I heard on radio today that only 1% of rapists end up being convicted. Are all these girls making shit up? I doubt it.
Some people here treating a verdict of not guilty as infallible. It is just a result of a process. It might not be the correct result, but may only be the only possible result in the circumstances. Oscar Pistorius beat a murder charge. R Kelly got off on a paedophilia charge - not enough evidence, victim would not testify ( I wonder why?). Even Al Capone was acquitted at least once before they got him with a cooking the books charge.
Paddy Jackson got himself a good result out of this. Expecting his old career back is a laugh though. The girl got justice the way it works. I don't think she would have been surprised by the result either. The dice was loaded against her from the start. Nothing to do with privilege either. I'd say the only one in court not from a privileged background was the Taxi-driver!

So, you're comparing Jackson to Al Capone, Pistorious and Kelly when the only significant evidence against Jackson was the word of a woman who had already falsely accused someone of rape (i.e. she accused Olding of vaginal rape initially, then changed her story)?

Do you think the judge was wrong when she said to the jurors not to rely on the evidence of the complainant if they thought she lied about Olding?

[JimStynes]

How do you lads be bothered?

[Milltown Row2]

Al Capone died of syphilis.  PJ has the reputational equivalent of it. I wonder how the verdict might have looked under the Icelandic system.

Or the Judge Dredd system?

If your granny had balls she'd be your granda!

[Rufus T Firefly]

How do you lads be bothered?

This.