Paddy Jackson apology

[David McKeown]

Dara Florence's version of what she saw in the bedroom flatly contradicted the complainant's version.

It did no such thing.

It flatly contradicted Jackson.

If you believe Florence, you believe Jackson lied about having vaginal sex with the complainant.

I do, sid I sure do.
But I also said, that what the defence has to say is/was immaterial. It was up to the prosecution to prove its case and they didn't.


(BTW, when you calm down a bit, you will find that Florence contradicted both parties.)

Indeed DF's evidence contradicted both accounts,  but a small retriever for the prosecution, when at the end of her testimony she admitted she did not actually witness consent, it was just an impression.

You either accept the rule of law or you don't.

That's too black and white.
Accept the jury's decision, yes, 100% on the evidence presented in court  but i don't accept the legal procedure, i think this belfast courtroom and legal procedure was a toxic environment. The witness for the prosecution who also happens to be the complainant gets little protection in comparison to what the accused receive. Perhaps she gets treated a little better over the course of the proceedings than a snitch at a mafia mob boss trial, but not much better. I like what Noeline Blackwell the civil rights lawyer had to say about aspects of the imbalances,  eg. that the complainant should get the benefit of  having her own legal counsel, before in preparation for the what may transpire and also during the case with full rights  to intervene on her behalf in court. And that trial should be private, normal enough stuff i'd say.

She had plenty legal advice before the trial and the girl came across as a very intellectual young adult with great responses for the questioning. As for the snitch remark, I'm confused? Did you want her to be visible ? She was under no pressure from the court as no one could see her, and going by the #metoo group she had plenty supporting her

That is completely inaccurate MR2. Everybody could see her. Her testimony was up on a big screen for everybody to see. Day-trippers went from as far as way as Dublin for a look. She gave her version only able to see Judge, jury and lawyers. On screen everybody could see her. How bad is that.
The supporters of the accused dominated in the gallery as well and reports indicate that she was ridiculed all through he testimony and the layout of the courtroom appeared to have allowed that to happen without the Judge being aware of it and not clearing the court, which should have happened in those circumstances. It was 3/1 on the night and 4/1 in court.
Not having her own legal council present is an issue too. Defence council played a blinder and bullied the judge over the admissibility of some evidence. I'm still intrigued as to whom the blood stains came from that were from a third party? How could that not be relevant?
The girl got justice but I cant help thinking about animals that hop around the outback in Australia.

Bullied the judge?  Nonsense and dangerous nonsense at that. Have you any grounds for suggesting that? The prosecution weren't able or weren't going to say who's blood it was and the defence don't have to provide any explanation for irrelevant 'evidence'. The law is clear and with good reason if the prejudicial effect of potential evidence outweighs its probabative value then it should be excluded. Juries shouldn't engage in speculation and the decision to exclude the evidence was entirely correct.

[AQMP]

Dara Florence's version of what she saw in the bedroom flatly contradicted the complainant's version.

It did no such thing.

It flatly contradicted Jackson.

If you believe Florence, you believe Jackson lied about having vaginal sex with the complainant.

I do, sid I sure do.
But I also said, that what the defence has to say is/was immaterial. It was up to the prosecution to prove its case and they didn't.


(BTW, when you calm down a bit, you will find that Florence contradicted both parties.)

Indeed DF's evidence contradicted both accounts,  but a small retriever for the prosecution, when at the end of her testimony she admitted she did not actually witness consent, it was just an impression.

You either accept the rule of law or you don't.

That's too black and white.
Accept the jury's decision, yes, 100% on the evidence presented in court  but i don't accept the legal procedure, i think this belfast courtroom and legal procedure was a toxic environment. The witness for the prosecution who also happens to be the complainant gets little protection in comparison to what the accused receive. Perhaps she gets treated a little better over the course of the proceedings than a snitch at a mafia mob boss trial, but not much better. I like what Noeline Blackwell the civil rights lawyer had to say about aspects of the imbalances,  eg. that the complainant should get the benefit of  having her own legal counsel, before in preparation for the what may transpire and also during the case with full rights  to intervene on her behalf in court. And that trial should be private, normal enough stuff i'd say.

She had plenty legal advice before the trial and the girl came across as a very intellectual young adult with great responses for the questioning. As for the snitch remark, I'm confused? Did you want her to be visible ? She was under no pressure from the court as no one could see her, and going by the #metoo group she had plenty supporting her

That is completely inaccurate MR2. Everybody could see her. Her testimony was up on a big screen for everybody to see. Day-trippers went from as far as way as Dublin for a look. She gave her version only able to see Judge, jury and lawyers. On screen everybody could see her. How bad is that.
The supporters of the accused dominated in the gallery as well and reports indicate that she was ridiculed all through he testimony and the layout of the courtroom appeared to have allowed that to happen without the Judge being aware of it and not clearing the court, which should have happened in those circumstances. It was 3/1 on the night and 4/1 in court.
Not having her own legal council present is an issue too. Defence council played a blinder and bullied the judge over the admissibility of some evidence. I'm still intrigued as to whom the blood stains came from that were from a third party? How could that not be relevant?
The girl got justice but I cant help thinking about animals that hop around the outback in Australia.

Bullied the judge?  Nonsense and dangerous nonsense at that. Have you any grounds for suggesting that? The prosecution weren't able or weren't going to say who's blood it was and the defence don't have to provide any explanation for irrelevant 'evidence'. The law is clear and with good reason if the prejudicial effect of potential evidence outweighs its probabative value then it should be excluded. Juries shouldn't engage in speculation and the decision to exclude the evidence was entirely correct.

As you my have guessed, my leanings in this trial were slightly towards the complainant, but I'm with DMK here.  The blood wasn't hers and while it might be interesting to speculate whose it was and how it got there, in terms of this trial that would have added nothing.  Judging by the number of people in and out of Paddy's big bed there were multiple potential sources. 

All it tells us is that the blood either got there after the night in question, or if it was there before then it could mean that PJ doesn't wash his sheets too often! - Not unknown in a 24 year old single male!

[AQMP]

She was named in court, too.

So her "anonymity" meant very little.

This is true, then from the court to Twitter and FB in a few seconds.  You don't have to dig very far to find out her name and background.  I'm sure the majority of posters here are aware of her name at the very least, you just won't find it in the papers or mentioned on TV.  I think this is an issue for the legal process to look at.

They are. What you describe is a criminal offence and people have been At least questioned over it

That's true, we'll wait and see if there is any action taken over those tweets.  Does that come under contempt of court David??

[AQMP]

Sure what would you expect from tree hugging, sandal wearing Guardianistas??

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/apr/13/rugby-misogynists-public-support

Spare me these sob stories about the rugby misogynists - Suzanne Moore

How do legends have sex, and who do they have it with? Perhaps it's none of my business, except when these things become public knowledge, it's because they are exposed in court.

That word "legends" sticks in my mind. Or rather in my craw. It was in one of the WhatsApp messages read out in court in the Belfast trial of the "star rugby players", Paddy Jackson and Stuart Olding, accused of rape and unanimously found not guilty last month.

The messages discussing what had happened the night before, for which they later apologised, talked of "shaggers", of "Belfast sluts", of "pumping a bird" and "spit-roasting". Such technical terms had to be explained by barristers to the judge and jury, but somehow it was the self-glorifying "Why are we are such legends?" in the players' WhatsApp group that got me. Legends indeed.

I am not sure this is the word they would be using now. This was a high-profile trial in which the woman who had accused them of rape had her bloodied knickers passed around a courtroom, in which the taxi driver who took her home told of her sobbing, and her distressed texts were also read out. Since the men's acquittal further details have been released, of a pornographic video shared with Olding the day after the night in question.

The jury unanimously acquitted these men of rape. Their friends Blane McIlroy and Rory Harrison were unanimously found not guilty of indecent exposure and of perverting the course of justice. None of these men did anything illegal. Yet they are now fighting in a different court: the court of public opinion. The widespread disgust at the way that they spoke about the woman who they had sex with clings to them. It is the nature of what these young men said to each other that has appalled so many people and led to the creation of the hashtag #IBelieveHer.

This week a full-page advertisement has been taken out in the Belfast Telegraph by supporters of Jackson and Olding, asking that their suspension from Ulster and Ireland rugby duties be lifted. The advertisement reads: "As Ulster and Irish rugby fans we want these innocent men reinstated and rightly allowed to resume their roles ... The IRFU [Irish Rugby Football Union] should take note of the silent majority and not bow to the court of social media."

One wonders about the kind of sex these premier athletes actually want. This week Otto Putland, a swimmer who represented Wales at the Commonwealth Games, was also cleared of rape at Cardiff crown court. He had denied forcing himself on a woman after she had consensual sex with his friend, the Olympic swimmer Ieuan Lloyd.

Does male bonding have to involve the seeming humiliation of women, as it does in some American college fraternities? Is it always a kind of performance that needs to be watched by their mates? In the Belfast trial where a slang expert was brought in to explain "spit–roasting", the woman spoke of one player penetrating her from behind while another player walked in naked, holding his penis, looking to join in.

Footballer Ched Evans, unanimously cleared of rape in 2016, had sex with a woman in a hotel room following a night out in Rhyl, immediately after his friend Clayton McDonald had had sex with her. Evans left via a fire exit without speaking to the woman. His younger brother and another man watched the encounter through a window.

So is this is the ultimate in hyper-masculine male bonding? What is happening when these young sportsmen who know each other's bodies, whose business is their bodies, choose to enact their sexual desires in this way?

Of course, there is no reason why such sexual activity should not be consensual, and a lot of pornography indicates that such encounters are every woman's fantasy. Perhaps, though, in such scenarios, the women is the vessel through which these young guys communicate their power to each other?

These men are not rapists, but they are guilty of  vile misogyny. None of them presumably has difficulty getting women, who flock to them. To bring Jackson and Olding back on to the rugby field now, as their supporters are demanding, would appear to endorse what looks like degrading behaviour. This would hardly be the first time such a thing has happened. But how do we teach the boys who admire and emulate sportsmen to respect women if this is how their role models conduct themselves? Talking after his acquittal about the risks of mixing alcohol and sex, Ched Evans said he had been "young" and "stupid" at the time.

Is behaviour such as Jackson's and Olding's – which some seem willing to write off as high jinks, high-testosterone pranks – in fact best understood as being meant for each other? These men may need an audience for their performances and then to congratulate each other the next day. But is this really living the dream?

For that dream, as we have seen, can turn into a nightmare for everyone involved, while a woman can look from the outside as if she is a disposable conduit, not a person in her own right. This is where we still are. And yet there are voices telling us to think about these poor innocent lads whose reputations are ruined. It is shameful.

Misogyny is not a crime, clearly, but spare me the suffering of these rugby legends. For them to be portrayed as victims, now? That is truly unbelievable.

[David McKeown]

She was named in court, too.

So her "anonymity" meant very little.

This is true, then from the court to Twitter and FB in a few seconds.  You don't have to dig very far to find out her name and background.  I'm sure the majority of posters here are aware of her name at the very least, you just won't find it in the papers or mentioned on TV.  I think this is an issue for the legal process to look at.

They are. What you describe is a criminal offence and people have been At least questioned over it

That's true, we'll wait and see if there is any action taken over those tweets.  Does that come under contempt of court David??

It could amount to it but it's an actual criminal offence to identify the claimant in a sexual offence.

[Milltown Row2]

Sure what would you expect from tree hugging, sandal wearing Guardianistas??

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/apr/13/rugby-misogynists-public-support

Spare me these sob stories about the rugby misogynists - Suzanne Moore

How do legends have sex, and who do they have it with? Perhaps it's none of my business, except when these things become public knowledge, it's because they are exposed in court.

That word "legends" sticks in my mind. Or rather in my craw. It was in one of the WhatsApp messages read out in court in the Belfast trial of the "star rugby players", Paddy Jackson and Stuart Olding, accused of rape and unanimously found not guilty last month.

The messages discussing what had happened the night before, for which they later apologised, talked of "shaggers", of "Belfast sluts", of "pumping a bird" and "spit-roasting". Such technical terms had to be explained by barristers to the judge and jury, but somehow it was the self-glorifying "Why are we are such legends?" in the players' WhatsApp group that got me. Legends indeed.

I am not sure this is the word they would be using now. This was a high-profile trial in which the woman who had accused them of rape had her bloodied knickers passed around a courtroom, in which the taxi driver who took her home told of her sobbing, and her distressed texts were also read out. Since the men's acquittal further details have been released, of a pornographic video shared with Olding the day after the night in question.

The jury unanimously acquitted these men of rape. Their friends Blane McIlroy and Rory Harrison were unanimously found not guilty of indecent exposure and of perverting the course of justice. None of these men did anything illegal. Yet they are now fighting in a different court: the court of public opinion. The widespread disgust at the way that they spoke about the woman who they had sex with clings to them. It is the nature of what these young men said to each other that has appalled so many people and led to the creation of the hashtag #IBelieveHer.

This week a full-page advertisement has been taken out in the Belfast Telegraph by supporters of Jackson and Olding, asking that their suspension from Ulster and Ireland rugby duties be lifted. The advertisement reads: "As Ulster and Irish rugby fans we want these innocent men reinstated and rightly allowed to resume their roles ... The IRFU [Irish Rugby Football Union] should take note of the silent majority and not bow to the court of social media."

One wonders about the kind of sex these premier athletes actually want. This week Otto Putland, a swimmer who represented Wales at the Commonwealth Games, was also cleared of rape at Cardiff crown court. He had denied forcing himself on a woman after she had consensual sex with his friend, the Olympic swimmer Ieuan Lloyd.

Does male bonding have to involve the seeming humiliation of women, as it does in some American college fraternities? Is it always a kind of performance that needs to be watched by their mates? In the Belfast trial where a slang expert was brought in to explain "spit–roasting", the woman spoke of one player penetrating her from behind while another player walked in naked, holding his penis, looking to join in.

Footballer Ched Evans, unanimously cleared of rape in 2016, had sex with a woman in a hotel room following a night out in Rhyl, immediately after his friend Clayton McDonald had had sex with her. Evans left via a fire exit without speaking to the woman. His younger brother and another man watched the encounter through a window.

So is this is the ultimate in hyper-masculine male bonding? What is happening when these young sportsmen who know each other's bodies, whose business is their bodies, choose to enact their sexual desires in this way?

Of course, there is no reason why such sexual activity should not be consensual, and a lot of pornography indicates that such encounters are every woman's fantasy. Perhaps, though, in such scenarios, the women is the vessel through which these young guys communicate their power to each other?

These men are not rapists, but they are guilty of  vile misogyny. None of them presumably has difficulty getting women, who flock to them. To bring Jackson and Olding back on to the rugby field now, as their supporters are demanding, would appear to endorse what looks like degrading behaviour. This would hardly be the first time such a thing has happened. But how do we teach the boys who admire and emulate sportsmen to respect women if this is how their role models conduct themselves? Talking after his acquittal about the risks of mixing alcohol and sex, Ched Evans said he had been "young" and "stupid" at the time.

Is behaviour such as Jackson's and Olding's – which some seem willing to write off as high jinks, high-testosterone pranks – in fact best understood as being meant for each other? These men may need an audience for their performances and then to congratulate each other the next day. But is this really living the dream?

For that dream, as we have seen, can turn into a nightmare for everyone involved, while a woman can look from the outside as if she is a disposable conduit, not a person in her own right. This is where we still are. And yet there are voices telling us to think about these poor innocent lads whose reputations are ruined. It is shameful.

Misogyny is not a crime, clearly, but spare me the suffering of these rugby legends. For them to be portrayed as victims, now? That is truly unbelievable.

Jesus! Spare me the bullshit!!!

[sid waddell]

But there's no such a thing as "rape culture", or something.

A CORK SCHOOL is investigating after a list which said "the girls with the most number of ticks will get raped" was found in a boys' bathroom.

http://www.thejournal.ie/mallow-school-rape-list-3954562-Apr2018/

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/education/cork-secondary-school-investigates-rape-list-found-in-boys-toilets-1.3460099?mode=sample&auth-failed=1&pw-origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.irishtimes.com%2Fnews%2Feducation%2Fcork-secondary-school-investigates-rape-list-found-in-boys-toilets-1.3460099

I know you think you think you've struck evidential gold with this one but the fact that this story is national news probably disproves your point.

If this was ingrained 'culture' as you like to point out, nobody would bat an eyelid.

You have your head stuck further down in the sand than a victim of Japanese torture in World War II if you think this sort of stuff is only happening in one school.

[moysider]

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/apr/13/rugby-misogynists-public-support

Good article that.

[seafoid]

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/apr/13/rugby-misogynists-public-support

Good article that.

"These men are not rapists, but they are guilty of  vile misogyny. None of them presumably has difficulty getting women, who flock to them. To bring Jackson and Olding back on to the rugby field now, as their supporters are demanding, would appear to endorse what looks like degrading behaviour."

[AQMP]

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/apr/13/rugby-misogynists-public-support

Good article that.

One thing it does suggest to me is that if Jackson and Olding are offered a game in England, this case will follow them.

[Milltown Row2]

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/apr/13/rugby-misogynists-public-support

Good article that.

One thing it does suggest to me is that if Jackson and Olding are offered a game in England, this case will follow them.

the mob would follow

[Franko]

But there's no such a thing as "rape culture", or something.

A CORK SCHOOL is investigating after a list which said "the girls with the most number of ticks will get raped" was found in a boys' bathroom.

http://www.thejournal.ie/mallow-school-rape-list-3954562-Apr2018/

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/education/cork-secondary-school-investigates-rape-list-found-in-boys-toilets-1.3460099?mode=sample&auth-failed=1&pw-origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.irishtimes.com%2Fnews%2Feducation%2Fcork-secondary-school-investigates-rape-list-found-in-boys-toilets-1.3460099

I know you think you think you've struck evidential gold with this one but the fact that this story is national news probably disproves your point.

If this was ingrained 'culture' as you like to point out, nobody would bat an eyelid.

You have your head stuck further down in the sand than a victim of Japanese torture in World War II if you think this sort of stuff is only happening in one school.

I'd suggest you throw up some proof of this or I'm afraid it's just more speculation.

Between my own schooling, that of my family and extended family, a great many friends and relations who are teachers and coaching kids myself after school, I've never once heard of anything even remotely like this before.

[sid waddell]

But there's no such a thing as "rape culture", or something.

A CORK SCHOOL is investigating after a list which said "the girls with the most number of ticks will get raped" was found in a boys' bathroom.

http://www.thejournal.ie/mallow-school-rape-list-3954562-Apr2018/

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/education/cork-secondary-school-investigates-rape-list-found-in-boys-toilets-1.3460099?mode=sample&auth-failed=1&pw-origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.irishtimes.com%2Fnews%2Feducation%2Fcork-secondary-school-investigates-rape-list-found-in-boys-toilets-1.3460099

I know you think you think you've struck evidential gold with this one but the fact that this story is national news probably disproves your point.

If this was ingrained 'culture' as you like to point out, nobody would bat an eyelid.

You have your head stuck further down in the sand than a victim of Japanese torture in World War II if you think this sort of stuff is only happening in one school.

I'd suggest you throw up some proof of this or I'm afraid it's just more speculation.

Between my own schooling, that of my family and extended family, a great many friends and relations who are teachers and coaching kids myself after school, I've never once heard of anything even remotely like this before.

21% of Irish people believe rape is justifiable in some circumstances.

That's not a statistic I've dreamt up, it's what was found by Eurobarometer, which is an official measure of public opinion by the EU.

But sure dismiss that all you want.

https://ec.europa.eu/ireland/news/21-de-mhuintir-na-h%C3%A9ireann-den-tuairim-go-bhfuil-caidreamh-colla%C3%AD-gan-toili%C3%BA-ceart-go-leor-i_en

[Mourne Red]

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-43756181

On a lighter note I think we can all laugh at the line 'Rugby is the peoples game' in Ireland now...

[thebigfella]

But there's no such a thing as "rape culture", or something.

A CORK SCHOOL is investigating after a list which said "the girls with the most number of ticks will get raped" was found in a boys' bathroom.

http://www.thejournal.ie/mallow-school-rape-list-3954562-Apr2018/

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/education/cork-secondary-school-investigates-rape-list-found-in-boys-toilets-1.3460099?mode=sample&auth-failed=1&pw-origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.irishtimes.com%2Fnews%2Feducation%2Fcork-secondary-school-investigates-rape-list-found-in-boys-toilets-1.3460099

I know you think you think you've struck evidential gold with this one but the fact that this story is national news probably disproves your point.

If this was ingrained 'culture' as you like to point out, nobody would bat an eyelid.

You have your head stuck further down in the sand than a victim of Japanese torture in World War II if you think this sort of stuff is only happening in one school.

I'd suggest you throw up some proof of this or I'm afraid it's just more speculation.

Between my own schooling, that of my family and extended family, a great many friends and relations who are teachers and coaching kids myself after school, I've never once heard of anything even remotely like this before.

21% of Irish people believe rape is justifiable in some circumstances.

That's not a statistic I've dreamt up, it's what was found by Eurobarometer, which is an official measure of public opinion by the EU.

But sure dismiss that all you want.

https://ec.europa.eu/ireland/news/21-de-mhuintir-na-h%C3%A9ireann-den-tuairim-go-bhfuil-caidreamh-colla%C3%AD-gan-toili%C3%BA-ceart-go-leor-i_en

That should go in the WTF thread