The ulster rugby trial

[sid waddell]

I think Olding has the most to worry about.

I don't see any way how Jackson can be convicted of either rape or sexual assault but Olding not convicted of rape.

But Jackson being acquitted of both charges doesn't necessarily mean Olding is in the clear.

[AZOffaly]

I would have thought Olding was the least in danger, given the witness statement. I suppose if Olding is not guilty, it would be hard to prosecute Jackson as well, given how they are linked, but Jackson sounds like such a liar.

McIlroy is the one I think could potentially be done for exposing himself. Not sure about Harrison, he might be on a sticky wicket for destroying messages alright.

[Asal Mor]

So is today D Day then??!

Think they're expected to retire to consider the verdict today. Am I right in thinking that a majority of 10 is needed for a verdict?

[brokencrossbar1]

So is today D Day then??!

Think they're expected to retire to consider the verdict today. Am I right in thinking that a majority of 10 is needed for a verdict?

Yes a majority of 10 is needed if not unanimous. I think PJ could very easily be convicted of sexual assault but found not guilty of rape. He openly admits to using his fingers. If non-consent is accepted but they cannot prove the penile penetration then he will be found guilty of sexual assault

[magpie seanie]

If any of you are reading the judges direction it is greatly at odds with the prevailing view here I think.

[TabClear]

If any of you are reading the judges direction it is greatly at odds with the prevailing view here I think.

In what way Seanie? Have not read it so cant comment

[AZOffaly]

If any of you are reading the judges direction it is greatly at odds with the prevailing view here I think.

I thought that too seanie. The bits of direction we are quoted here almost gives the girl a bye ball for any inconsistencies, which I thought was a bit surprising.

Mind you, she also said that the jury should not place too much emphasis on the whatsapp messages between the lads, as young men embellish and exaggerate their conquests.

[Asal Mor]

I would have thought Olding was the least in danger, given the witness statement. I suppose if Olding is not guilty, it would be hard to prosecute Jackson as well, given how they are linked, but Jackson sounds like such a liar.

McIlroy is the one I think could potentially be done for exposing himself. Not sure about Harrison, he might be on a sticky wicket for destroying messages alright.

+1

The case against SO is weaker than the one against PJ but the jury would be ridiculed in the media if they convicted PJ and acquitted Olding. It could be interpreted as the jury believing that Jackson raped her and then she consented to oral sex with Olding which would be obviously ludicrous.

Can't see either of these 2 being convicted of anything though PJ does seem to be lying about penetration.

[TabClear]

If any of you are reading the judges direction it is greatly at odds with the prevailing view here I think.

I thought that too seanie. The bits of direction we are quoted here almost gives the girl a bye ball for any inconsistencies, which I thought was a bit surprising.

Mind you, she also said that the jury should not place too much emphasis on the whatsapp messages between the lads, as young men embellish and exaggerate their conquests.

Is that necessarily helpful for the defendants BC? I know it was debated on here that the tone in the Whatsapps was almost being heralded as a defense i.e. they were quite open about their "conquest" which you would not expect if they believed they had committed a rape?

[Asal Mor]

I thought some of the judge's directions were unfair on the accused. She seemed to be telling them to ignore the sloppy police work when surely that same sloppiness raises a reasonable doubt.

[magpie seanie]

If any of you are reading the judges direction it is greatly at odds with the prevailing view here I think.

I thought that too seanie. The bits of direction we are quoted here almost gives the girl a bye ball for any inconsistencies, which I thought was a bit surprising.

Mind you, she also said that the jury should not place too much emphasis on the whatsapp messages between the lads, as young men embellish and exaggerate their conquests.

Talk to a psychiatrist and it's not even up for discussion.....this is accpted fact. One I wasn't aware of and I think one very many refuse to accept. The minor inconsistencies in the alleged victims account are perfectly consistent with rape cases. That along with the "submitting" as opposed to fighting back were two things I hadn't appreciated and which closed any doubts I had as to the alleged victims story.

[whitey]

"Judge Smyth is now going through some of the inconsistencies in the woman's account like the fact she initially told police Blane McIlroy came into the room with his trousers down. She told jurors he was 'completely naked'.

When you come to consider whether her account is true, you must avoid making the assumption that because she said something different to someone else, the evidence she gave to you is untrue.  Experience has shown that inconsistencies in accounts can arise whether a person is telling the truth or not because memory can be affected in different ways and may have a bearing on a person's ability to take it in, register it and recall it".

You might say that applies to the defendants too, but here the judge was specifically referring to the complainant.

Her mate was barfing in the jacks before all this kicked off......how much alcohol did the unfortunate victim have on board?

Which "mate" was this, now?

The "mate" who wasn't her mate at all?

A couple of weeks back you were saying that it was the complainant that was getting sick, so this is the second time you've displayed yourself unaware of a basic fact regarding the same specific detail of the case.

You'll get there in the end.

Maybe.

LOL......youre very touchy.....does shagging paralytic drunk birds hit a little close to home for you?

I misread the original newspaper article and another poster corrected me and said no, it was her friend. Maybe he was wrong too.

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/rape-trial-ireland-rugby-player-olding-embarrassed-of-immature-boasting-whatsapp-messages-36685172.html

One of the parties involved had 22 alcoholic beverages

Someone else is projectile vomiting in the bathroom

The victim herself has given conflicting evidence and contradictory statements

If she too was impaired, that would possibly explain the inconsistencies

Why don't you read some facts before posting up horseshit here? It's well documented the amounts of alcohol taken by the alleged victim and others in this case. And none of her friends were in the house.

Well then answer the fvckin question then.....how much did she have to drink?

[AZOffaly]

If any of you are reading the judges direction it is greatly at odds with the prevailing view here I think.

I thought that too seanie. The bits of direction we are quoted here almost gives the girl a bye ball for any inconsistencies, which I thought was a bit surprising.

Mind you, she also said that the jury should not place too much emphasis on the whatsapp messages between the lads, as young men embellish and exaggerate their conquests.

Talk to a psychiatrist and it's not even up for discussion.....this is accpted fact. One I wasn't aware of and I think one very many refuse to accept. The minor inconsistencies in the alleged victims account are perfectly consistent with rape cases. That along with the "submitting" as opposed to fighting back were two things I hadn't appreciated and which closed any doubts I had as to the alleged victims story.

True Seanie.  It's very hard to understand how you wouldn't fight or scream, especially in a crowded house, but this is, as you say, accepted fact in the case of rape.

[shezam]

"Judge Smyth is now going through some of the inconsistencies in the woman's account like the fact she initially told police Blane McIlroy came into the room with his trousers down. She told jurors he was 'completely naked'.

When you come to consider whether her account is true, you must avoid making the assumption that because she said something different to someone else, the evidence she gave to you is untrue.  Experience has shown that inconsistencies in accounts can arise whether a person is telling the truth or not because memory can be affected in different ways and may have a bearing on a person's ability to take it in, register it and recall it".

You might say that applies to the defendants too, but here the judge was specifically referring to the complainant.

Her mate was barfing in the jacks before all this kicked off......how much alcohol did the unfortunate victim have on board?

Which "mate" was this, now?

The "mate" who wasn't her mate at all?

A couple of weeks back you were saying that it was the complainant that was getting sick, so this is the second time you've displayed yourself unaware of a basic fact regarding the same specific detail of the case.

You'll get there in the end.

Maybe.

LOL......youre very touchy.....does shagging paralytic drunk birds hit a little close to home for you?

I misread the original newspaper article and another poster corrected me and said no, it was her friend. Maybe he was wrong too.

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/rape-trial-ireland-rugby-player-olding-embarrassed-of-immature-boasting-whatsapp-messages-36685172.html

One of the parties involved had 22 alcoholic beverages

Someone else is projectile vomiting in the bathroom

The victim herself has given conflicting evidence and contradictory statements

If she too was impaired, that would possibly explain the inconsistencies

Why don't you read some facts before posting up horseshit here? It's well documented the amounts of alcohol taken by the alleged victim and others in this case. And none of her friends were in the house.

Well then answer the fvckin question then.....how much did she have to drink?

The woman told the trial during her evidence she had one and a half glasses of wine and three double vodkas during the night.

[tintin25]

I would have thought Olding was the least in danger, given the witness statement. I suppose if Olding is not guilty, it would be hard to prosecute Jackson as well, given how they are linked, but Jackson sounds like such a liar.

McIlroy is the one I think could potentially be done for exposing himself. Not sure about Harrison, he might be on a sticky wicket for destroying messages alright.

+1

The case against SO is weaker than the one against PJ but the jury would be ridiculed in the media if they convicted PJ and acquitted Olding. It could be interpreted as the jury believing that Jackson raped her and then she consented to oral sex with Olding which would be obviously ludicrous.

Can't see either of these 2 being convicted of anything though PJ does seem to be lying about penetration.

Is it that ludicrous though?

My own personal thought is that she has consented to a point and that Jackson has taken it too far.

Thing is, everyone will have a different take on what they think happened....we'll never know.

Let's just see what the Jury decide.