Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - caprea

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7
1
Cavan / Re: Cavan under20s
« on: May 21, 2018, 10:17:27 PM »
No idea but maybe they in the preliminary? Also Donegal suppose to be taking it very serious. Cavan should have a decent team with last year's minors.

Yeah prelim, Boyle’s have them at 25s. Pricing it up as a Tyrone donegal 2 horse race

2
Cavan / Re: Cavan under20s
« on: May 21, 2018, 10:05:18 PM »
It's curtain raiser to a senior game.

Thanks but no exactly the insight I was hoping for.  :)

3
Cavan / Cavan under20s
« on: May 21, 2018, 09:22:42 PM »
Anyone know why they are 16s for ulster. Seems big. Anyone with any insight? Any view on the price?

4
GAA Discussion / Re: Money, Dublin and the GAA
« on: April 13, 2018, 06:52:13 PM »
Belfast the next powerhouse of Football? ?

http://www.gaa.ie/news/gaa-launches-initiative-support-gaelic-games-belfast/

Unlikely, Dublin were already a powerhouse when they got their money. Antrim Has a lot more to do.

5
Hurling Discussion / Re: GAA Documentary - Hurling Guru Needed
« on: April 09, 2018, 06:01:59 PM »
You might get lucky asking here but personally I would look to ring the GAA for get through to their communications or PR department and get them to try and help you.

6
GAA Discussion / Re: 2018 NFL Division 4
« on: April 02, 2018, 06:48:20 PM »
See a Laois player is in hospital after an assault in Carlow on the night of the game.

7
General discussion / Re: The ulster rugby trial
« on: April 01, 2018, 03:52:48 PM »
Capera

What exactly was the judiciary supposed to do about the vaginal charge for Olding? How was it sloppy work?

Drop the charge I would have thought. It really depends how late they knew they wouldn’t be presenting a case to prosecute it no?

Since writing the blog I think what happened is the girl wasn’t sure if Olding had vaginal sex with her. She said she was face down so couldn’t be sure.

Guess it depends on the timeline of finding that out.

But that's nothing to do with the judiciary. The decision of what charges to bring is the sole preserve of the PPS. Once Olding entered a not guilty plea to the charge at arraignment (and I imagine there must have been some evidence to ground that charge at that stage) the only way it could have played out is exactly how it did.

Of course. I’m wrong.

Please can you teach Suffering some humility like that!!!

Think it affects almost all humans in arguments. People too keen to stand by arguments that are disproven instead of being happy to be educated and enlightened.

8
General discussion / Re: The ulster rugby trial
« on: April 01, 2018, 03:40:14 PM »
Capera

What exactly was the judiciary supposed to do about the vaginal charge for Olding? How was it sloppy work?

Drop the charge I would have thought. It really depends how late they knew they wouldn’t be presenting a case to prosecute it no?

Since writing the blog I think what happened is the girl wasn’t sure if Olding had vaginal sex with her. She said she was face down so couldn’t be sure.

Guess it depends on the timeline of finding that out.

But that's nothing to do with the judiciary. The decision of what charges to bring is the sole preserve of the PPS. Once Olding entered a not guilty plea to the charge at arraignment (and I imagine there must have been some evidence to ground that charge at that stage) the only way it could have played out is exactly how it did.

Of course. I’m wrong.

9
General discussion / Re: The ulster rugby trial
« on: April 01, 2018, 03:15:21 PM »
Capera

What exactly was the judiciary supposed to do about the vaginal charge for Olding? How was it sloppy work?

Drop the charge I would have thought. It really depends how late they knew they wouldn’t be presenting a case to prosecute it no?

Since writing the blog I think what happened is the girl wasn’t sure if Olding had vaginal sex with her. She said she was face down so couldn’t be sure.

Guess it depends on the timeline of finding that out.

10
General discussion / Re: The ulster rugby trial
« on: April 01, 2018, 01:49:43 PM »
No going to bother with arguing over what juries should or shouldn’t do in people’s opinions. They should follow the judge’s instructions. If they don’t and the forewoman said that online then we will see where it ends up.

Wrote this about the trial at https://t.co/WUg8Y2DT91

This piece is meant to be a short look at the evidence presented and how it didn’t lead to a conviction. It will in particular look at the parts of the trial that seem to have been missed in the media and social media (twitter) analysis. It will also ask questions around what this case meant for rape trials in general and how they are covered in the media.

So to start with the evidence for the prosecution; undue attention was put on the whatsapp conversations between the accused and their friends on whatsapp. The main accused Paddy Jackson barely said anything on these conversations but seems to have been lumped in with the comments made by David Mcillroy (accused of exposure) whose comments on whatsapp were surely the most objectionable. Ultimately the texts on whatapp were crude but it’s hard to give them much punching power in terms of evidence of a coverup or non-consensual sex.

So my focus is on “devil in the detail” stuff;

The compliant gave a statement indicating the incident started when Jackson pulled down her jeans. When it finished the compliant said she put her underwear in her pocket. That means the underwear and trousers came all the way off her legs. I would like to know therefore during the incident was she wearing shoes? If she was how were the shoes removed (they had to be for her to be able to put her underwear in her pocket). Did she remove them or did Jackson? If the compliant removed them it is a signal, a big signal, towards consent and puts her story that she froze under significant stress.
Another thing that was left unanswered for me during the trial is how Jackson always alleged he never had vaginal sex with the woman. If he was lying about this did he know already the DNA test on the woman had shown no sperm sample from Jackson? If he didn’t know none of his sperm was found and was lying he took a huge risk as his story would be immediately sunk if he had had sex with the girl and his sperm was found but lied about it. Another unanswered question from the evidence presented and ultimately something that strengthens the testimony of Jackson as his story ultimately checked out.

Another issue that didn’t seem to come out until the verdicts were read out was that the jury had to be directed to find Stuart Olding not guilty of vaginal rape. This was just a box ticking exercise as the state never pursued this charge as prosecutable. This is …. strange. Why did the state not pursue this charge or why did they change it at all? I’m almost sure from reading up on the case that it was established very early that the compliant only alleged oral rape by Olding. Was it just extremely sloppy work from the judiciary that this charge actually came before the court. Is this what Jackson’s lawyer meant when he alluded to the compliant’s inconsistencies. Again it’s a weird aspect of the case that will probably go unanswered.

Moving on from the trial to looking at the protests in Dublin and Belfast it is hard to say if the protests are directed at the verdict, the way the trial was ran or a general perception of toxic masculinity that needs to be addressed in society. The protests are set to continue and it will be interesting to say how they develop for at the moment they seem to lack focus beyond slogans where a meaningful change to the justice system or legislation is to be demanded.

Also interesting has been the media attention on the case which has been incessant. However the hard questions don’t seem to get asked as it would be labeled as victim blaming. However if the defence solicitor is prepared to ask why the compliant didn’t “scream the house down” then you have to accept that he wouldn’t use this tactic if he didn’t feel it would reverberate with the jury. Similarly as a man who has never experienced a sexual assault and the affect it has on your state of mind I don’t fully follow why you would freeze as someone was touching in a non-violent way with which you were not comfortable. Would you not say something or do something? I think this question has to be confronted by those that know as those that don’t like me don’t completely understand it and it was been used by the defence as a legal argument so it simply has to be addressed.

The conclusion to this is my own view on the case as a whole. Early on when I heard the opening statements I believed the defendants were in serious trouble but about a month into the trial it became fairly clear to me that Guilty beyond a reasonable doubt was not a realistic outcome. When Dara Florence took to the stand to say she had witnessed “a threesome” which she was invited to join, it was already a reasonable doubt. Before she had taken the stand, it had emerged that the two medical experts conflicted on whether the blood was menstrual or from the wound on the vaginal wall. Finally to bring a rape charge against Jackson where there was no physical evidence of vaginal intercourse was surely a major red flag to the jury of a reasonable doubt. Given these three reasonable doubts to the prosecution it does seem worthy to ask if this case should have been proceeded with. The jury’s short deliberation time was also noteworthy.

Finally I still am not convinced about how satisfactory this case’s outcomes are. Why would a woman alledge rape if she wasn’t? The prosecution told a story that she was worried about pictures or video being taken but there was no evidence to support this as something that even entered her head. Had she a boyfriend and needed to “cry rape” to avoid him discovering infidelity? Again no evidence of this was presented in court. Why did McIlroy alledge he received oral sex from the compliant when she said this didn’t happen. Was it a cover-story mixup? On and on the questions come and who knows if there will ever be answers.

11
General discussion / Re: The ulster rugby trial
« on: April 01, 2018, 12:08:41 PM »
The foreperson said they had been deliberating for a week? Sure that’s not allowed.

I’d say they would have talked about the case in general throughout the 8.5 weeks, deliberating after case finished was simple then,  i’d imagine

They would have been talking about the case on every break, so the deliberating would have started long before the judge gave her directions

That’s not allowed. In ireland anyway.

12
General discussion / Re: The ulster rugby trial
« on: April 01, 2018, 12:07:56 PM »
The juror said on facebook that they were deliberating before all evidence was heard? Oh my. How stupid could you be? It’s bad enough that they were doing that which goes against the judges distinct instructions.  From what I remember of being on a jury you are reminded each and every day not to deliberate until all evidence is heard. But then to say you deliberated on social media...holy crap.

Could that be grounds for a mistrial?

13
General discussion / Re: The ulster rugby trial
« on: April 01, 2018, 11:30:38 AM »
Interesting that it emerged in the verdict proceedings that Olding had a charge of Vaginal rape dropped. I wonder why the state didnt keep this charge? Did this link into the compliant having inconsistencies in her initial statement?

So many unanswered questions...

Given that the IP was going to say in the witness box that no vaginal intercourse had occurred between her and Olding it would have been impossible for the PPS to prove that offence. What is more interesting is that he was arraigned on it. For that to have happened the PPS must have charged him with it once they had collated all the evidence including the IP's statement to police but then decided after he had pleaded not guilty to offer no evidence. That's a very long time to have left that charge on the books. Hard to know why that happened

Would you care to put forward a theory?

 It seems to me (being just a punter) that the compliant alleged this and then backed off it..possible or issues with that theory?

No as I say it's hard to know why that happened I just find it unusual. It's possible that the complainant initially alleged vaginal rape against Olding and the PPS didn't speak to her again until after arraignment. Similarly it's possible they just left the charge in there because of what the complainant told the doctor or because Olding was questioned about the offence. Hard to know but it's unusual enough for it to have remained on the books for as long as it did.

That sounds shabby if they just left a charge in there that was eliminated extremely early in the investigation.

14
General discussion / Re: The ulster rugby trial
« on: April 01, 2018, 11:23:52 AM »
The foreperson said they had been deliberating for a week? Sure that’s not allowed.

15
General discussion / Re: The ulster rugby trial
« on: April 01, 2018, 11:11:13 AM »
Interesting that it emerged in the verdict proceedings that Olding had a charge of Vaginal rape dropped. I wonder why the state didnt keep this charge? Did this link into the compliant having inconsistencies in her initial statement?

So many unanswered questions...

Given that the IP was going to say in the witness box that no vaginal intercourse had occurred between her and Olding it would have been impossible for the PPS to prove that offence. What is more interesting is that he was arraigned on it. For that to have happened the PPS must have charged him with it once they had collated all the evidence including the IP's statement to police but then decided after he had pleaded not guilty to offer no evidence. That's a very long time to have left that charge on the books. Hard to know why that happened

Would you care to put forward a theory?

 It seems to me (being just a punter) that the compliant alleged this and then backed off it..possible or issues with that theory?

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7