The ulster rugby trial

[magpie seanie]

The only evidence many can provide in favour of the prosecutions case is that it's hard for a woman to bring forward a rape case and men are prejudiced against rape victims. Very few of those who believe the prosecutions case care to ponder on the actual  evidence from the trial.

Such bullshit.

[Avondhu star]

Quick question, would the PPS have taken this case to court if it wasn't for the high profiles of the accused? Just asking because it seems that way.

PPs originally decided not to run the case.

Family instructed Counsel to challenge this and he convinced PPS to throw it before a jury and see what would happen as opposed to presume what would happen. He is on a fair wedge for this

If convictions are not achieved by PPS after this trial costing many hundreds of thousands then there will be serious fallout at the PPS on the decision to prosecute.  Convictions or not the lives of 5 young people will be in shreds and their families will have to live with the consequences long after the MSM and social media interest has moved on to the next thing.

Dead right.
If the sexual offences act 2008 that David just quoted is the law that governs this case, then it should never have seen trial. The girl has been unable to specify any verbal or non-verbal indication she gave to the men to show she wasn't consenting until number 3 walked in. At least nothing that's been reported. The only specific detail we've heard from her is the admission that she took her own top off.
It looks almost certain that they will be found not guilty at this stage, from the evidence we've heard.

Reasonable doubt is all over this case.

[Milltown Row2]

The only evidence many can provide in favour of the prosecutions case is that it's hard for a woman to bring forward a rape case and men are prejudiced against rape victims. Very few of those who believe the prosecutions case care to ponder on the actual  evidence from the trial.

Such bullshit.

So expand

[Orior]

The only evidence many can provide in favour of the prosecutions case is that it's hard for a woman to bring forward a rape case and men are prejudiced against rape victims. Very few of those who believe the prosecutions case care to ponder on the actual  evidence from the trial.

Such bullshit.

There are lots of articles in the press by women who said they were raped, and even their closest friends did not believe them.

Perhaps there is something in human nature that makes us think everyone likes sex, even on a first date.

[Asal Mor]

https://books.google.ie/books?id=OwgoBQAAQBAJ&pg=PT26&lpg=PT26&dq=compliance+vs+consent+rape+victims&source=bl&ots=CHcVMHCk60&sig=WyJG8g5Scm9FcKgPeU7evlfF5Ec&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiL6o6-7MHZAhUGasAKHTaoBNQQ6AEwAHoECAkQAQ#v=onepage&q=compliance%20vs%20consent%20rape%20victims&f=false

This is a link to a passage on compliance versus consent from a book based on interviews with rape victims. With all the regressive caveman talk I was curious to see what rape victims have to say on the subject and see if I could enlighten myself. Interestingly it speaks about compliance in situations where the victim is in fear or panic but not where there is no apparent threat and no reason to think if she'd asked them to stop that they would have hurt her, never mind the easy way out when another girl walked in.

Also it mentions that pleas to wear a condom, leave the victim's children unharmed etc. are signs of compliance rather than consent, which seems so obvious that it hardly needs stating. Again, it doesn't mention anything about victims undressing themselves despite the apparent absence of any physical threat or aggression. It seems that even rape victims are not quite as progressive as Syf, Seanie and co. on the subject.

I have no issue with anything in the passage I quoted, but some of the arguments made by posters(who think the lads are guilty)   on here about compliance versus consent simply defy logic.

[Syferus]

Stop trying to tart up the corpse that is your ancient prejudices. Only those looking for reasons to hold on to their backwards ideas on rape are even fooled in the first place.

[Asal Mor]

Backward ideas like the one that a girl who takes her own clothes off is up for it? Yep, I just can't seem to let that one go.

[Milltown Row2]

Stop trying to tart up the corpse that is your ancient prejudices. Only those looking for reasons to hold on to their backwards ideas on rape are even fooled in the first place.

Come on, let's hear the legal qualifications you have again?

[Orior]

Stop trying to tart up the corpse that is your ancient prejudices. Only those looking for reasons to hold on to their backwards ideas on rape are even fooled in the first place.

Come on, let's hear the legal qualifications you have again?

Syferus's prejudices are more important that everyone elses. Someone earlier mentioned that wifes are regularly raped by their husband. In such cases, there is no evidence of domestic abuse, just rape. Does Syferus believe in the marriage vows, promising to love, honour and obey?

[StGallsGAA]

Syferus definitely seems to be hot under the collar about this case and has found the rugby trio guilty long before they've even taken the stand.   Perhaps it's pressing the wrong buttons for him due to a personal experience?

[seafoid]

Backward ideas like the one that a girl who takes her own clothes off is up for it? Yep, I just can't seem to let that one go.

Maybe she had no choice. I don't think legal insight is as important as how rapes unfold. 

[sid waddell]

Backward ideas like the one that a girl who takes her own clothes off is up for it? Yep, I just can't seem to let that one go.

The complainant alleges she had her trousers and underwear pulled off.

By her testimony, she had already been raped by the time she was ordered to take her top off.

Having already been raped and not having voluntarily taken any clothes off in that time, it's easy to see why she'd then comply with an order to take her top off.

[Avondhu star]

Stop trying to tart up the corpse that is your ancient prejudices. Only those looking for reasons to hold on to their backwards ideas on rape are even fooled in the first place.

Come on, let's hear the legal qualifications you have again?

Advisor to the local pitch and toss school. Isn't that legal enough for you?

[Tony Baloney]

100 pages of pure speculation by Thursday I'd say.

[Asal Mor]

Backward ideas like the one that a girl who takes her own clothes off is up for it? Yep, I just can't seem to let that one go.

The complainant alleges she had her trousers and underwear pulled off.

By her testimony, she had already been raped by the time she was ordered to take her top off.

Having already been raped and not having voluntarily taken any clothes off in that time, it's easy to see why she'd then comply with an order to take her top off.

True enough Sid, I hadn't read that part of her testimony or thought about the chronology (that the clothes on her bottom half were off before her top).