The ulster rugby trial

[David McKeown]

For what it is worth David I don't think there is anything wrong with the process as I don't see how on what was known for definite they could have convicted.  I just don't think it is correct to say in the eyes of the law the girl is a liar.

Fair enough but again all we know is the jury didn't believe her about McIlroy.

[Milltown Row2]

For what it is worth David I don't think there is anything wrong with the process as I don't see how on what was known for definite they could have convicted.  I just don't think it is correct to say in the eyes of the law the girl is a liar.

Fair enough but again all we know is the jury didn't believe her about McIlroy.

So if they didn't believe her then that makes her a...?

[Syferus]

Still not guilty... for all the crap in the eyes of the law she lied and believer crowd are still giving it large!

In the eyes of the law she lied you said.

That isn't true.

What i believe and you believe is irrelevant - you saying in the eyes of the law she lied is incorrect.

(P.s. I didn't know i had to answer with a yes or a no. I am unconvinced anyone in that bedroom accurately remembers what happened. )

Can I just ask what do you mean its not true?  If the jury had have believed the complainant McIlroy would have been convicted, the fact he wasn't means they didn't believe her.  'So in the eyes of the law' whatever that means it is as true to say she was lying as it is to say she wasn't.

The jury may well have had strong belief in the complainant on this charge.

However McIlroy's version was that he entered the room and received oral sex from the complainant, and was talking to Jackson while this was occurring.

Jackson's version was that McIlroy didn't enter the room at all.

Thus, McIlroy's and Jackson's accounts may have placed a reasonable doubt in the jurors' minds on this charge.

Strong belief = not guilty.

I think Jackson's version was actually that he didn't see McIlory enter the room or have oral sex with her but he had no reason to doubt McIlory but assuming you are correct you think two completely contradictory alternative versions to the complainants was enough to make the jury not believe the complainant?  I find that highly doubtful particularly if as we keep hearing the defendants were such bad witnesses.

All we know for sure is the Jury did not believe the complainant about what happened with McIlroy.  Anything else is speculation.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/paddy-jackson-says-he-would-have-gone-to-police-if-told-of-rape-allegation-1.3418181

Mr McIlroy's counsel asked Mr Jackson about his evidence that he never saw Mr McIlroy in the room. Mr McIlroy told police he was in the room and received oral sex from the woman while Mr Jackson was there.

Mr Jackson agreed with counsel he was drunk and very tired by the end of the night. He said it was possible he could have been drifting in and out of consciousness when the complainant was leaving his bedroom.

Counsel put it to Mr Jackson that his client says Mr Jackson was doing something with the woman while she performed oral sex on Mr McIlroy.

"That didn't happen," Mr Jackson said, adding: "He wasn't in the room".

He said he could think of no reason for Mr McIlroy to lie about being in the room.

------

My take is that is that the contradictory testimony of the defendants as well as the testimony of Florence created a sort of "fog of war" scenario. Ultimately the weight of having four different defendants with conflicting stories confused the hell out of the jury who basically didn't know what was what by the end of the trial and thus had to acquit on all counts.

That's quite a take Sid but they reached not guilty verdicts for all 4 defendants in four hours. Surely in the scenario you're desperately clinging to there would have been a long period of deliberation followed by a hung jury. The notion that you acquit multiple defendants because their lies are too conflicting and confusing despite having a strong belief in the complainant's evidence is insane. As David has said if they had any faith in the girl's evidence Mcillroy would have been convicted. There is zero to corroborate his story even from his fellow defendants and he came across very stongly as an arrogant bullshitter in the messages.

I'm honestly unsure if that last paragraph is a wind-up Sid as you surely can't believe it to be the case when the verdict was reached unanimously and so quickly.

You obviously paid no heed to the judge's directions. Not surprising.

It made a full acquittal very easy and the suggested thing to do if they doubted the verdacity of any the evidence.

[Milltown Row2]

Still clutching at straws it seems... case is closed.. no winners at all, very messy experience for all involved and some fcukwits looking to drag it on with the smear campaign!

[gallsman]

For what it is worth David I don't think there is anything wrong with the process as I don't see how on what was known for definite they could have convicted.  I just don't think it is correct to say in the eyes of the law the girl is a liar.

Fair enough but again all we know is the jury didn't believe her about McIlroy.

So if they didn't believe her then that naked her a...?

This is not difficult. Not believing someone doesn't mean they lied.

[Syferus]

Still clutching at straws it seems... case is closed.. no winners at all, very messy experience for all involved and some fcukwits looking to drag it on with the smear campaign!

Isn't society terrible, not letting the Top Shaggers go back to being heroes to children (and some adults here it seems) after being implicated in a gang rape.

[Milltown Row2]

For what it is worth David I don't think there is anything wrong with the process as I don't see how on what was known for definite they could have convicted.  I just don't think it is correct to say in the eyes of the law the girl is a liar.

Fair enough but again all we know is the jury didn't believe her about McIlroy.

So if they didn't believe her then that naked her a...?

This is not difficult. Not believing someone doesn't mean they lied.

Did she say that two people had vaginal sex with her?

[Milltown Row2]

Still clutching at straws it seems... case is closed.. no winners at all, very messy experience for all involved and some fcukwits looking to drag it on with the smear campaign!

Isn't society terrible, not letting the Top Shaggers go back to being heroes to children (and some adults here it seems) after being implicated in a gang rape.

Guilty of saying you're a top shaggers doesn't mean you gang raped a woman! In your head possibly, but I'd say if a man winked at a girl you'd have him down as a rapist

[Syferus]

Still clutching at straws it seems... case is closed.. no winners at all, very messy experience for all involved and some fcukwits looking to drag it on with the smear campaign!

Isn't society terrible, not letting the Top Shaggers go back to being heroes to children (and some adults here it seems) after being implicated in a gang rape.

Guilty of saying you're a top shaggers doesn't mean you gang raped a woman! In your head possibly, but I'd say if a man winked at a girl you'd have him down as a rapist

If I thought a man raped a woman I would. Wink wink.

It must be simple living in your world of black and white.

[Milltown Row2]

Still clutching at straws it seems... case is closed.. no winners at all, very messy experience for all involved and some fcukwits looking to drag it on with the smear campaign!

Isn't society terrible, not letting the Top Shaggers go back to being heroes to children (and some adults here it seems) after being implicated in a gang rape.

Guilty of saying you're a top shaggers doesn't mean you gang raped a woman! In your head possibly, but I'd say if a man winked at a girl you'd have him down as a rapist

If I thought a man raped a women I would. Wink wink.

It must be simple living in your world of black and white.

You should try it...

[caprea]

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...

[Tony Baloney]

Still clutching at straws it seems... case is closed.. no winners at all, very messy experience for all involved and some fcukwits looking to drag it on with the smear campaign!

Isn't society terrible, not letting the Top Shaggers go back to being heroes to children (and some adults here it seems) after being implicated in a gang rape.

Guilty of saying you're a top shaggers doesn't mean you gang raped a woman! In your head possibly, but I'd say if a man winked at a girl you'd have him down as a rapist

If I thought a man raped a woman I would. Wink wink.

It must be simple living in your world of black and white.

It has been demonstrated time again that you inhabit the same black and white world as these feminazis. You have no grasp of nuance or shades of grey. I have met many people like this in life and they typically haven't had a rounded life experience. They stick herd-like to their own "type" either in the real world or online. Take off your tinfoil hat and get out an enjoy the world; stay out late, drink too much, try chatting up a few girls. You never know Syf, you might like it out there.

[David McKeown]

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

[Syferus]

Still clutching at straws it seems... case is closed.. no winners at all, very messy experience for all involved and some fcukwits looking to drag it on with the smear campaign!

Isn't society terrible, not letting the Top Shaggers go back to being heroes to children (and some adults here it seems) after being implicated in a gang rape.

Guilty of saying you're a top shaggers doesn't mean you gang raped a woman! In your head possibly, but I'd say if a man winked at a girl you'd have him down as a rapist

If I thought a man raped a woman I would. Wink wink.

It must be simple living in your world of black and white.

It has been demonstrated time again that you inhabit the same black and white world as these feminazis. You have no grasp of nuance or shades of grey. I have met many people like this in life and they typically haven't had a rounded life experience. They stick herd-like to their own "type" either in the real world or online. Take off your tinfoil hat and get out an enjoy the world; stay out late, drink too much, try chatting up a few girls. You never know Syf, you might like it out there.

That you'd use the word feminazi unironically is a serious flag in and of itself. Forgive me if I take your critique with a grain of salt.

Simple question - do you think the incredibly low rate of reporting rapes and a remarkably low level of convictions stemming from those that are reported is the sign of a system that is functioning correctly?

[Tony Baloney]

Still clutching at straws it seems... case is closed.. no winners at all, very messy experience for all involved and some fcukwits looking to drag it on with the smear campaign!

Isn't society terrible, not letting the Top Shaggers go back to being heroes to children (and some adults here it seems) after being implicated in a gang rape.

Guilty of saying you're a top shaggers doesn't mean you gang raped a woman! In your head possibly, but I'd say if a man winked at a girl you'd have him down as a rapist

If I thought a man raped a woman I would. Wink wink.

It must be simple living in your world of black and white.

It has been demonstrated time again that you inhabit the same black and white world as these feminazis. You have no grasp of nuance or shades of grey. I have met many people like this in life and they typically haven't had a rounded life experience. They stick herd-like to their own "type" either in the real world or online. Take off your tinfoil hat and get out an enjoy the world; stay out late, drink too much, try chatting up a few girls. You never know Syf, you might like it out there.

That you'd use the word feminazi unironically is a serious flag in and of itself. Forgive me if I take your critique with a grain of salt.

Simple question - do you think the incredibly low rate of reporting rapes and a remarkably low level of convictions stemming from those that are reported is the sign of a system that is functioning correctly?

I didn't use it unironically, I used it very pointedly knowing it would be the focus of your response. ENTIRELY predictable. You get shown up in pretty much every topic you engage in, so maybe you should leave the big topics to the grown-ups.