The ulster rugby trial

[seafoid]

It's NI so presumably the IP could get in a few contractors to do a bit of kneecapping if she is unhappy with the verdict.
The whole thing was very sad. I felt sorry for Mrs and Mrs Jackson.

[brokencrossbar1]

Will the jurors be allowed to give their reasoning, a lá American trials?

I wonder how long before the tabloids have their claws in.

No. The jury can only be polled in the case of a guilty verdict

[Milltown Row2]

It's NI so presumably the IP could get in a few contractors to do a bit of kneecapping if she is unhappy with the verdict.
The whole thing was very sad. I felt sorry for Mrs and Mrs Jackson.

I didnt realise we had the same sex marriage bill passed!

[AZOffaly]

Will the jurors be allowed to give their reasoning, a lá American trials?

I wonder how long before the tabloids have their claws in.

No. The jury can only be polled in the case of a guilty verdict

So no behind the scenes revelations in the Irish News then?

[AQMP]

Makes you wonder if the verdict would have been the same if the defendants didn't take the stand.  Judging by the outcome it probably would have as this  seems to have hinged on the credibility of the complainant and not the defendants.

[screenexile]

The sooner the whole system is changed to anonymity for defendants and complainants until a verdict is given the better!!!

[Tony Baloney]

Every woman in Ireland under the age of 25 seems to be believe her. Their Twitter outrage is hysterical in every sense of the word. I wouldn't be at all surprised if she waives her right to anonymity due to the support behind her.

[NAG1]

Where is the clampit that said a quick result would result in a guilty verdict?

Here??...I posted this:

God only knows, as long as it takes.

Some say that if the jury comes back quickly it's likely to be a guilty verdict and the longer it takes the more likely it is to be not guilty, or maybe that just in films!

Dont think that was aimed at you AQMP

[AQMP]

Every woman in Ireland under the age of 25 seems to be believe her. Their Twitter outrage is hysterical in every sense of the word. I wouldn't be at all surprised if she waives her right to anonymity due to the support behind her.

I know I'm a Philistine in these matters but Twitter outrage doesn't seem to me to be a good base to build a legal case on.

[seafoid]

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/irfu-release-statement-following-rugby-rape-trial-not-guilty-verdicts-36752705.html

The IRFU released a statement following the verdicts, which read;

"The IRFU and Ulster Rugby note the verdict handed down today at the Belfast Crown Court in relation to the case brought against Paddy Jackson and Stuart Olding. We wish to acknowledge that this has undoubtedly been a difficult and extremely traumatic time for all involved.


"To respect the judicial proceedings, the IRFU and Ulster Rugby postponed any internal review of the matter with the players, until the proceedings concluded.

"IRFU and Ulster Rugby officials will review the matter, in line with existing procedures for all contracted players. A Review Committee, made up of senior representatives of the IRFU and Ulster Rugby, has been appointed and will conclude its review as soon as practicable.


"The players will continue to be relieved of all duties while the Review Committee is in process and determining its findings."

[RedHand88]

Every woman in Ireland under the age of 25 seems to be believe her. Their Twitter outrage is hysterical in every sense of the word. I wouldn't be at all surprised if she waives her right to anonymity due to the support behind her.

Ive read a few tweets that go way past the line into libel territory...

[David McKeown]

Did you read the criteria for rape that has been posted here numerous times by David?

The girl may not have consented, but the guys may have reasonably believed she did.

That is not the same as her lying.

I'm not surprised at the verdict. It was always he said/she said, and as I said at the time, the witness statement *had* to introduce an element of doubt.

That would be true if it wasn't for the McIlroy acquittal. I don't see a way for the jury to have said we believe her but we still acquit McIlroy (unlike with Jackson and Olding).

[Milltown Row2]

Where is the clampit that said a quick result would result in a guilty verdict?

Here??...I posted this:

God only knows, as long as it takes.

Some say that if the jury comes back quickly it's likely to be a guilty verdict and the longer it takes the more likely it is to be not guilty, or maybe that just in films!

Clampit 

Though i was conviced it was Syferus, i'm sure its somewhere though

[Tony Baloney]

Every woman in Ireland under the age of 25 seems to be believe her. Their Twitter outrage is hysterical in every sense of the word. I wouldn't be at all surprised if she waives her right to anonymity due to the support behind her.

Ive read a few tweets that go way past the line into libel territory...

Aye some crazy shit saying it doesn't matter what the verdict is, Jackson and Olding are rapists etc. One doll said all the evidence of rape was there and it was a fit up from the start as there were 8 men on the jury and the complainant called it from the start that she wouldn't get justice etc.

[AZOffaly]

Did you read the criteria for rape that has been posted here numerous times by David?

The girl may not have consented, but the guys may have reasonably believed she did.

That is not the same as her lying.

I'm not surprised at the verdict. It was always he said/she said, and as I said at the time, the witness statement *had* to introduce an element of doubt.

That would be true if it wasn't for the McIlroy acquittal. I don't see a way for the jury to have said we believe her but we still acquit McIlroy (unlike with Jackson and Olding).

Good point.