The ulster rugby trial

[magpie seanie]

God love the poor craythurs.

With all respect Seanie these people have had the last 8-9 weeks of their lives consumed by this trial. They have had to listen to all the evidence and make a huge decision on the most high profile trial there has been for years. Now they have this decision being questioned significantly and people organising mass rallies....I can see how they might crack. It doesn't mean that the person should have responded but I can understand why they felt the necessity

I think your sympathy is misplaced. They were clearly directed by the judge on this when discharged. Couldn't have been clearer. To go out 7 hours later and engage online with people shows the most amazing lack of judgement I think it's legitimate to question what else this person heard and ignored.

[AQMP]

God love the poor craythurs.

With all respect Seanie these people have had the last 8-9 weeks of their lives consumed by this trial. They have had to listen to all the evidence and make a huge decision on the most high profile trial there has been for years. Now they have this decision being questioned significantly and people organising mass rallies....I can see how they might crack. It doesn't mean that the person should have responded but I can understand why they felt the necessity

I'm not sure bcb1. Strikes me as a pretty stupid thing to do.  Also I think the two people who named the complainant were in the public gallery.

[brokencrossbar1]

God love the poor craythurs.

With all respect Seanie these people have had the last 8-9 weeks of their lives consumed by this trial. They have had to listen to all the evidence and make a huge decision on the most high profile trial there has been for years. Now they have this decision being questioned significantly and people organising mass rallies....I can see how they might crack. It doesn't mean that the person should have responded but I can understand why they felt the necessity

I think your sympathy is misplaced. They were clearly directed by the judge on this when discharged. Couldn't have been clearer. To go out 7 hours later and engage online with people shows the most amazing lack of judgement I think it's legitimate to question what else this person heard and ignored.

I haven't read the comments as they've been removed. Have you?  It was foolhardy, for all we know the person had a few drinks in them and was pissed off at the way their opinion was being undermined. That doesn't in any way undermine the decision. Don't be grasping for something that isn't there.

[Owen Brannigan]

Probably an All Ireland issue.

https://theulsterfry.com/featured/ni-unemployment-solved-as-everyone-now-qualified-barrister/

[AZOffaly]

God love the poor craythurs.

Seanie, don't be like Syf. But that's not what I meant anyway. I meant they'll be getting offers of money etc. to go off the record.

I think there are more important issue to discuss than jurors being tempted to do something clearly illegal. 

Yeah, because nobody is talking about those other issues.  And with all the anger about the verdict, and your obvious issues with it, I'd have thought you'd have liked to know their reasoning to be honest.

[magpie seanie]

Probably an All Ireland issue.

https://theulsterfry.com/featured/ni-unemployment-solved-as-everyone-now-qualified-barrister/

Can you explain what you mean by this? Is it in some way directed at me?

[magpie seanie]

God love the poor craythurs.

With all respect Seanie these people have had the last 8-9 weeks of their lives consumed by this trial. They have had to listen to all the evidence and make a huge decision on the most high profile trial there has been for years. Now they have this decision being questioned significantly and people organising mass rallies....I can see how they might crack. It doesn't mean that the person should have responded but I can understand why they felt the necessity

I think your sympathy is misplaced. They were clearly directed by the judge on this when discharged. Couldn't have been clearer. To go out 7 hours later and engage online with people shows the most amazing lack of judgement I think it's legitimate to question what else this person heard and ignored.

I haven't read the comments as they've been removed. Have you?  It was foolhardy, for all we know the person had a few drinks in them and was pissed off at the way their opinion was being undermined. That doesn't in any way undermine the decision. Don't be grasping for something that isn't there.

That's brilliant two sides of the mouth stuff there BCB.

Not sure why you feel the need to make excuses for something that the person themselves was expecting the PSNI to call around about. Anyway, I know you a long time and respect your opinion so we'll not fall out over it.

[Farrandeelin]

It is poor judgement, but again I ask, who exactly were those rallies aiming their anger at? None of them heard all the evidence. The jury did, their decision must be respected.

[magpie seanie]

God love the poor craythurs.

Seanie, don't be like Syf. But that's not what I meant anyway. I meant they'll be getting offers of money etc. to go off the record.

I think there are more important issue to discuss than jurors being tempted to do something clearly illegal. 

Yeah, because nobody is talking about those other issues.  And with all the anger about the verdict, and your obvious issues with it, I'd have thought you'd have liked to know their reasoning to be honest.

Personally, I've a fair idea why the decision came as it did. I wasn't surprised.

I'm not interested in someone breaking the law (7 hours after being clearly instructed on this) to try and explain it to be honest.

[Milltown Row2]

God love the poor craythurs.

With all respect Seanie these people have had the last 8-9 weeks of their lives consumed by this trial. They have had to listen to all the evidence and make a huge decision on the most high profile trial there has been for years. Now they have this decision being questioned significantly and people organising mass rallies....I can see how they might crack. It doesn't mean that the person should have responded but I can understand why they felt the necessity

I think your sympathy is misplaced. They were clearly directed by the judge on this when discharged. Couldn't have been clearer. To go out 7 hours later and engage online with people shows the most amazing lack of judgement I think it's legitimate to question what else this person heard and ignored.

Jesus you clearly are in the TF Seferus mould! It's over the trial was held a decision made, move on. Like you really give a fcuk... thousands of cases nationwide and not a peep. Complete attention seeker

[AZOffaly]

God love the poor craythurs.

Seanie, don't be like Syf. But that's not what I meant anyway. I meant they'll be getting offers of money etc. to go off the record.

I think there are more important issue to discuss than jurors being tempted to do something clearly illegal. 

Yeah, because nobody is talking about those other issues.  And with all the anger about the verdict, and your obvious issues with it, I'd have thought you'd have liked to know their reasoning to be honest.

Personally, I've a fair idea why the decision came as it did. I wasn't surprised.

I'm not interested in someone breaking the law (7 hours after being clearly instructed on this) to try and explain it to be honest.

Fair enough. I'm not sure what your 'fair idea is'. I wasn't surprised either because of the scope for 'reasonable doubt', but I was surprised at the speed and unanimity of it, and I was also surprised, when David pointed it out, that McIlroy's acquittal basically said they didn't believe the girl.

[Owen Brannigan]

Probably an All Ireland issue.

https://theulsterfry.com/featured/ni-unemployment-solved-as-everyone-now-qualified-barrister/

Can you explain what you mean by this? Is it in some way directed at me?

Touchy or what?

Don't flatter yourself that it was aimed at you.

Given how so many on this Board with two notable exceptions have become legal experts over the last two months, the article is fairly apt here as for all those keyboard warriors on social media.

[TabClear]

God love the poor craythurs.

With all respect Seanie these people have had the last 8-9 weeks of their lives consumed by this trial. They have had to listen to all the evidence and make a huge decision on the most high profile trial there has been for years. Now they have this decision being questioned significantly and people organising mass rallies....I can see how they might crack. It doesn't mean that the person should have responded but I can understand why they felt the necessity

I think your sympathy is misplaced. They were clearly directed by the judge on this when discharged. Couldn't have been clearer. To go out 7 hours later and engage online with people shows the most amazing lack of judgement I think it's legitimate to question what else this person heard and ignored.

I haven't read the comments as they've been removed. Have you?  It was foolhardy, for all we know the person had a few drinks in them and was pissed off at the way their opinion was being undermined. That doesn't in any way undermine the decision. Don't be grasping for something that isn't there.

That's brilliant two sides of the mouth stuff there BCB.

Not sure why you feel the need to make excuses for something that the person themselves was expecting the PSNI to call around about. Anyway, I know you a long time and respect your opinion so we'll not fall out over it.

The report I read (below) indicated that the juror had listened to what the judge had said and "thought" they had not breached the judge's instruction. Poor judgement yes but I am inclined to take it at face value that they did not think they were doing anything wrong. They had to realise that the media would be all over this so anything they said would be picked up.

Speaking to The Irish Times last night, the juror said they had not commented on anything related to the jury's deliberations, and therefore were not in breach of the judge's order that jurors must not discuss the deliberations.

The juror contacted The Irish Times to say they had been told by the Lord Chief Justice's office to remove the comments. The juror said they then got in touch with Broadsheet which took down the comments.

The Lord Chief Justice's representation also asked them if they had a solicitor, the juror said, adding: "I'm in big trouble."

"I'm sitting here in the kitchen waiting for the cops to arrive, two PSNI constables to arrive and I'm going to be handcuffed away and all I've done is just, I made a posting about, this is why there was a return of not guilty," the juror said.


"When we were all discharged, the 11 of us, the only thing the judge said was, 'Do you know what, go about your everyday life, whatever, business as usual, but don't reveal discussions within the jury room,' and none of that was like part of anything I have said."

[magpie seanie]

It is poor judgement, but again I ask, who exactly were those rallies aiming their anger at? None of them heard all the evidence. The jury did, their decision must be respected.

Not having been at any or indeed seen much coverage of them I can't say for certain but I think anyone with any level of cop on can see that for the vast majority it's at the legal system and the way these types of trials are conducted. Others are just angry and need to vent or lash out. Lots of women may have been through something similar or know someone who went though something similar. Only 7.5% of reported cases result in convictions......either we've a massive number of liars out there or the system is grossly unfit for purpose.

I can see how the anger is legitimate and this high profile case has proved to be a lightening rod for an underlying issue that's there a long time.

[brokencrossbar1]

God love the poor craythurs.

With all respect Seanie these people have had the last 8-9 weeks of their lives consumed by this trial. They have had to listen to all the evidence and make a huge decision on the most high profile trial there has been for years. Now they have this decision being questioned significantly and people organising mass rallies....I can see how they might crack. It doesn't mean that the person should have responded but I can understand why they felt the necessity

I think your sympathy is misplaced. They were clearly directed by the judge on this when discharged. Couldn't have been clearer. To go out 7 hours later and engage online with people shows the most amazing lack of judgement I think it's legitimate to question what else this person heard and ignored.

I haven't read the comments as they've been removed. Have you?  It was foolhardy, for all we know the person had a few drinks in them and was pissed off at the way their opinion was being undermined. That doesn't in any way undermine the decision. Don't be grasping for something that isn't there.

That's brilliant two sides of the mouth stuff there BCB.

Not sure why you feel the need to make excuses for something that the person themselves was expecting the PSNI to call around about. Anyway, I know you a long time and respect your opinion so we'll not fall out over it.

Ah seanie how the hell do you get that out of what I said. I simply stated I hadn't read what was said. I asked you do you had and I said it was foolhardy, stupid, unwise, but as tabclear posted the person didn't think they were doing anything wrong. We can not judge what was said as we don't know what was said. We can judge them for making a stupid mistake but given the furore that has surrounded the whole thing perhaps they felt the need to defend themselves as some of the stuff that I've read about the jury online has been disgraceful. It doesn't mean what they did was right but after a pretty intensive and life impacting 8 weeks they are bound to be tired and emotional and I know I would not like my integrity being questioned by faceless morons online.