The ulster rugby trial

[David McKeown]

In respect of the claimsabout  the QC's trail comments, I think they are being unfairly judged here out of context. The comment about middle class girls was in response to the complainant saying she didn't know anything about the others in the house or how'd they would react if she called out. The complainant also I'm told by someone who was there made some comment about being middle class and not being used to going back to people's houses for sex after nights out. Now I can't find that reported anywhere but if it was said it would explain the comments to some degree.

Also It doesn't read to me that the QC's ever suggested that because the complainant said at least use a condom or because she hadn't screamed it meant she was consenting. Rather it seemed they were highlighting all the evidence in the case that tended to support their contention that she had consented in other ways and/or that the defendants had a reasonable belief in that consent. 

[Asal Mor]

In awe at the quality of Fionntamhnach's post above. Best I've read on this board for a long time.

[Asal Mor]

In respect of the claimsabout  the QC's trail comments, I think they are being unfairly judged here out of context. The comment about middle class girls was in response to the complainant saying she didn't know anything about the others in the house or how'd they would react if she called out. The complainant also I'm told by someone who was there made some comment about being middle class and not being used to going back to people's houses for sex after nights out. Now I can't find that reported anywhere but if it was said it would explain the comments to some degree.

Also It doesn't read to me that the QC's ever suggested that because the complainant said at least use a condom or because she hadn't screamed it meant she was consenting. Rather it seemed they were highlighting all the evidence in the case that tended to support their contention that she had consented in other ways and/or that the defendants had a reasonable belief in that consent.

The voice of reason as always. Great points David. The middle class girls comment makes a lot more sense in that context and it's another reminder of how unfair it is for us to jump to conclusions(I know I've jumped to a few myself) based on the snippets we see.

[haranguerer]

An excellent analysis by Fionntamhnach

[Rudi]

In awe at the quality of Fionntamhnach's post above. Best I've read on this board for a long time.

+1 probably one of the best.

[Orior]

I firmly believe that there is not a rape culture anywhere but in Ulster Rugby there is a shag competition.

it takes something special to call suspending a player with a morals clause caught saying shît like that a witch hunt. IRFU can't be soft on players if it wants to maintain some integrity.

The sheer din of odious stupidity from Orior hasn't stopped I see. Rape culture doesn't exist. Righto, kid.

You are sad.

[Farrandeelin]

In awe at the quality of Fionntamhnach's post above. Best I've read on this board for a long time.

+1 probably one of the best.

Agree with this too.

[Main Street]

In respect of the claimsabout  the QC's trail comments, I think they are being unfairly judged here out of context. The comment about middle class girls was in response to the complainant saying she didn't know anything about the others in the house or how'd they would react if she called out. The complainant also I'm told by someone who was there made some comment about being middle class and not being used to going back to people's houses for sex after nights out. Now I can't find that reported anywhere but if it was said it would explain the comments to some degree.

You need  a direct quote from the complainant about middle class, hearsay has no value.

Also It doesn't read to me that the QC's ever suggested that because the complainant said at least use a condom or because she hadn't screamed it meant she was consenting. Rather it seemed they were highlighting all the evidence in the case that tended to support their contention that she had consented in other ways and/or that the defendants had a reasonable belief in that consent.

If you take on board the defence's carefully choreographed picture of events, then you can perceive singular events such as the condom reference as good evidence of consent, you can even perceive the lack of screaming as good evidence of consent (however irrational),  one can also perceive the lady's type of underwear as evidence of being partial to consent, I am not persuaded by such claims. There just was not enough evidence to support her contention that consent was not given, but  that is not to say definitively that the woman consented to all that "carry on".
The evidence to support the defence's argument that she did give consent is weak and has little real value. Perhaps the defence's argument just gains a vastly exaggerated value because there is an absence of quality neutral evidence to support the claimant's contention of no consent.
Perhaps that's the context why people get persuaded by such weak 'evidence' of consent,  such as  type of underwear and  that she didn't scream.

[magpie seanie]

I tell ya what, i know im not the only one on here who is part of WhatsApp groups or have been where fellas post stuff about women and see it as a laugh. To call it a rape culture because someone uses a few terms is a bit of a stretch for me. Lets not get this as a Rugby problem, we would be having the exact same conversation had this been an Irish league footballer or a GAA County or Club player it is just society now, hand on heart, if my mother, sister or partner seen some of the WhatsApp groups I've been in id def have a red face. Do i agree with all the things? absolutely not, is it the same conversations fellas have on a night out or in a changing room? Absolutely. What i find astonishing is the amount of people on here on their high horse who have never said a throw away comment, laughed at an inappropriate joke or been involved in a fellas WhatsApp group. What i would hope after this, if i had a lad who was a young sportsman is watch what you say, even though Craig Gilroy is 100% nothing to do with ANY part of this court case, he is dragged through the mud for a throwaway WhatsApp message, when you hit send its there and not just one 1 phone but on all the phones of those in the group

Almost as astonishing as someone making up that there are many people on here who have stated they haven't done so.

[bennydorano]

Jesus, Rape Culture is a new one on me. I could see it being appropriately  applied to the likes of the Asian men in Bradford who groomed children and actually did Rape them.

[Milltown Row2]

In respect of the claimsabout  the QC's trail comments, I think they are being unfairly judged here out of context. The comment about middle class girls was in response to the complainant saying she didn't know anything about the others in the house or how'd they would react if she called out. The complainant also I'm told by someone who was there made some comment about being middle class and not being used to going back to people's houses for sex after nights out. Now I can't find that reported anywhere but if it was said it would explain the comments to some degree.

You need  a direct quote from the complainant about middle class, hearsay has no value.

Also It doesn't read to me that the QC's ever suggested that because the complainant said at least use a condom or because she hadn't screamed it meant she was consenting. Rather it seemed they were highlighting all the evidence in the case that tended to support their contention that she had consented in other ways and/or that the defendants had a reasonable belief in that consent.

If you take on board the defence's carefully choreographed picture of events, then you can perceive singular events such as the condom reference as good evidence of consent, you can even perceive the lack of screaming as good evidence of consent (however irrational),  one can also perceive the lady's type of underwear as evidence of being partial to consent, I am not persuaded by such claims. There just was not enough evidence to support her contention that consent was not given, but  that is not to say definitively that the woman consented to all that "carry on".
The evidence to support the defence's argument that she did give consent is weak and has little real value. Perhaps the defence's argument just gains a vastly exaggerated value because there is an absence of quality neutral evidence to support the claimant's contention of no consent.
Perhaps that's the context why people get persuaded by such weak 'evidence' of consent,  such as  type of underwear and  that she didn't scream.

Lots of perhaps in that post, let's just say that the jury heard everything and gave a verdict on what they heard in the correct context and were absolutely clear of their decision. You like the rest didnt

[David McKeown]

In respect of the claimsabout  the QC's trail comments, I think they are being unfairly judged here out of context. The comment about middle class girls was in response to the complainant saying she didn't know anything about the others in the house or how'd they would react if she called out. The complainant also I'm told by someone who was there made some comment about being middle class and not being used to going back to people's houses for sex after nights out. Now I can't find that reported anywhere but if it was said it would explain the comments to some degree.

You need  a direct quote from the complainant about middle class, hearsay has no value.

Fair enough although given that by that definition all we have is hearsay posted on twitter I'll await a full transcript of absolutely every piece of evidence before I condemn the man out of context.

[Asal Mor]

In respect of the claimsabout  the QC's trail comments, I think they are being unfairly judged here out of context. The comment about middle class girls was in response to the complainant saying she didn't know anything about the others in the house or how'd they would react if she called out. The complainant also I'm told by someone who was there made some comment about being middle class and not being used to going back to people's houses for sex after nights out. Now I can't find that reported anywhere but if it was said it would explain the comments to some degree.

You need  a direct quote from the complainant about middle class, hearsay has no value.

Also It doesn't read to me that the QC's ever suggested that because the complainant said at least use a condom or because she hadn't screamed it meant she was consenting. Rather it seemed they were highlighting all the evidence in the case that tended to support their contention that she had consented in other ways and/or that the defendants had a reasonable belief in that consent.

If you take on board the defence's carefully choreographed picture of events, then you can perceive singular events such as the condom reference as good evidence of consent, you can even perceive the lack of screaming as good evidence of consent (however irrational),  one can also perceive the lady's type of underwear as evidence of being partial to consent, I am not persuaded by such claims. There just was not enough evidence to support her contention that consent was not given, but  that is not to say definitively that the woman consented to all that "carry on".
The evidence to support the defence's argument that she did give consent is weak and has little real value. Perhaps the defence's argument just gains a vastly exaggerated value because there is an absence of quality neutral evidence to support the claimant's contention of no consent.
Perhaps that's the context why people get persuaded by such weak 'evidence' of consent,  such as  type of underwear and  that she didn't scream.

Has anyone said this?

[David McKeown]

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/hashtag-justice-is-no-justice-at-all-1.3449271?mode=amp

Not entirely correct about certain minor aspects but a good article on summing up my feelings.

[Orior]

In awe at the quality of Fionntamhnach's post above. Best I've read on this board for a long time.

Agreed