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 - Main Street

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 710
31
General discussion / Re: Ian Óg Twitter storm
« on: April 02, 2018, 10:29:26 PM »
Perhaps he thought Ramadan was some sort of a knife wielding murderous fiend on his way to the English capital.

32
General discussion / Re: The ulster rugby trial
« on: April 01, 2018, 12:59:31 AM »
I never thought they would be found guilty. There was too much "reasonable doubt". That is very different from saying the girl is a liar. If she was found out to be telling lies - which she wasn't - she would be in trouble with the law.

So she didn’t lie about Olding having sex with her?

I dunno.

Likewise i dunno if jackson lied about not having sex with her.

If the woman was lying, she wouldn't have gone through an ordeal and would have had no trauma.

Some people here apparently think that rape trauma is not a real thing.

It is very much a real thing, and leads to confusion and fragmented memory.

Even more so after 30 hours without sleep, which she had been when she was examined at the Rowan centre.

A great deal of store has been placed on Dara Florence's evidence.

If you believe Dara Florence was telling the truth, you believe, by definition, that Paddy Jackson lied about having vaginal sex with the complainant.

That's a serious double bind.

When she was examined by defence she admitted she couldn't see his thing or her thing, so would be unable to say with certainty they were having sex.

Florence was the only person in the house who hadn't been drinking.

"100% I saw sex" is a very categorical assessment of what was happening.
yeah, she said she saw consensual sex, but didnt see any private parts of either PJ or complainant
She said in court  "I would say 100% I saw sex, from the (Jackson's) movement,"
She said in her police statement that "her impression was that she saw not a non-consensual act".
An impression is not a 100% certainty.
However she was 100% certain she saw sex  and in my book that testimony has at least equal or even bit more value than an  impression of witnessing a consensual act.
I would consider that 100% certainty as evidence of a discrepancy in the accused's statements, at least equal to the much focused upon complainant's discrepancy.







33
General discussion / Re: The ulster rugby trial
« on: March 30, 2018, 03:46:25 PM »
https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/martina-devlin-twotier-morality-means-girls-face-an-impossible-list-of-dos-and-donts-36757069.html

Dear lord!!!

How does that nonsense get published??
Are you completely at a loss for common sense  to take on board some of the points made in that article?
Do you think there is no merit for such a rape case to be held in camera, for the complainant  or the accused who were deemed not guilty? That even in a trial where the prosecution case had much more substance, that such an experience for the complainant would be any easier? That such a court experience could be perceived as an off putting ordeal for a complainant?
You don't think people are entitled to have an opinion on the the loutish carry on of the accused?

I was talking about the whole ‘Do and Don’t’ list crap she spouts.

She makes a few valid points towards the end but in the main it’s nonsense and simply fuelling the ongoing trial by social media.
Only  few valid points at the end??
I was surprised that it's regarded as proper procedure for a lawyer to find a petty context so he can have the complainant's purple lacy underwear paraded about court, first to the judge then to be passed around to every one in the jury.

Let's have a look at some of the perceived do and donts which arose out of this trial and is not about "believe her"
Which ones of these are nonsense to a woman who has been raped and is considering making a complaint?
"Do expect to have your purple lacy underwear paraded about court."
"Don’t expect the judicial system to support you – chances are you’ll feel let down by its workings"
"Don’t expect other women to follow your example and make complaints if they believe themselves to be the victims of sex crime cases. They won’t"
"Do expect to feel like the person on trial rather than the complainant."



34
General discussion / Re: The ulster rugby trial
« on: March 30, 2018, 01:03:38 AM »
https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/martina-devlin-twotier-morality-means-girls-face-an-impossible-list-of-dos-and-donts-36757069.html

Dear lord!!!

How does that nonsense get published??
Are you completely at a loss for common sense  to take on board some of the points made in that article?
Do you think there is no merit for such a rape case to be held in camera, for the complainant  or the accused who were deemed not guilty? That even in a trial where the prosecution case had much more substance, that such an experience for the complainant would be any easier? That such a court experience could be perceived as an off putting ordeal for a complainant?
You don't think people are entitled to have an opinion on the the loutish carry on of the accused?


35
General discussion / Re: The ulster rugby trial
« on: March 28, 2018, 11:53:44 PM »


3. A reminder once again, the IP was not on trial. The suggestion that she should now be sued by the defendants for defamation is quite a silly one. David McKeown and BCB1 will likely know this better than I do, but I don't think you can defame, libel or slander someone in a courtroom between the defence and prosecution parties. It's possible that an IP in such a case like this could be charged after the trial for wasting police time, perjury etc. if during the course of the trial evidence comes to light that the accuser is clearly lying but from the limited amount of info I've seen from this trial there is nothing to suggest any of this occoured, nor is there any apparent public interest to do so.

On that part, I thought it was obvious that she did not take the case against the defendants, the CPS did. She had no responsibility with that decision. She gave her statement to the police, she made her accusations,  she gave herself to be examined verbally, physically and emotionally, by police, a counselor and a medic. The investigation team handed all the evidence to the CPS and they decided to prosecute after testing the quality of the evidence. She had no say in that decision except for the obvious, that she would have to be prepared to give evidence in court.
Afaia her testimony in court was consistent  enough at least well within the boundaries, and she held on to her account against 4 different legal teams. She has nothing to answer for.

36
General discussion / Re: The ulster rugby trial
« on: March 28, 2018, 07:57:44 PM »
As a matter of interest, do we have the stats for successful prosecution of rape cases brought to trial?

I think in England and Wales it's around 12% or so.  Don't know about Ireland.

Sorry that's not right, I think that's reported rapes not those that actually go to trial.
It's closer to a 60% success rate for the CPS.


37
GAA Discussion / Re: 2018 NFL Division 1
« on: March 26, 2018, 10:15:58 PM »
What an achievement for Monaghan. They really are punching above their weight in terms of population. What excuses do Kildare/Meath have now???

Dublin crush Farney challenge to set-up Tyrone showdown
https://www.rte.ie/sport/gaa/2017/0805/895479-dublin-monaghan-match-report/

Smooth Dublin cruise into final as Tyrone fail to show up
https://www.rte.ie/sport/gaa/2017/0827/900293-dublin-v-tyrone/



Dublin's domination in the modern game is the reason why Kildare get mauled by Kerry? the reason why both Kildare and Meath can't get past Armagh or any Ulster team in recent years? 
There's also an evident  codependency, the only time either of you get to the Leinster final is when you meet in the semi final.
Your pound is worth a shilling or two, whereas Monaghan's pound is trading high on merit.

38
GAA Discussion / Re: 2018 NFL Division 1
« on: March 25, 2018, 11:39:32 PM »
Monaghan are the dirtiest team in Ireland.

Not even close. Under Banty they were dirty but not now

Bit of a snorefest today and maybe if there had been a few digs it might have livened it up a bit. Monaghan's shooting was awful at times but they did score 2 cracking goals and a beauty of a point to win it. Maybe the dublin subs aren't quite as good as we thought?

That fool doesn't warrant a reply. Any time I see his username it's usually something negative about Monaghan.
He's just an 'arse hole in general, not just with Monaghan. I guess that's what  happens after spending years eating his own snots at the back of the classroom.

39
GAA Discussion / Re: 2018 NFL Division 1
« on: March 25, 2018, 10:47:00 PM »
All in all, that was a very good league campaign from Monaghan and considering the winter/spring training has been relatively relaxed. There are all round improvements with most every player with a few newcomers making a very solid mark. The promising stylists from last year's campaign, Jack McCarron and Colm McCarthy were lightly used but showed enough promise that they'll play a big part later, taking more of the  scoring responsibility upon themselves, Vinny Corey having an 'Indian Summer' and goalie Rory Beggan has stepped up a few notches. The football's not too bad either.

That was a nice competitive game against the Dubs to wind up the league campaign.  I don't think anybody should read too much into it, but all the same it's warmly satisfying to the core.

40
GAA Discussion / Re: "GAA is losing ground big time" - McGeeney
« on: March 22, 2018, 10:23:29 PM »
"big time"?  I hate that expression big time.

41
General discussion / Re: The ulster rugby trial
« on: March 22, 2018, 10:13:14 PM »
In terms of a cover up here is an excerpt from Gavan Duffy now speaking for Harrison and it’s been mybview the whole time

‘In relation to the prosecution's theory that a story was cooked up between the four defendants at Soul Food café, Mr. Duffy QC asks why would two Ulster rugby players have gone to the busiest and smallest café on Ormeau Rd to do so?’

If I was trying to cover something up I’d have met in the privacy of my own house and sorted it out there, not in the middle of the bloody Orneau Road!!!
I thought you would be more moved by rationality than emotion. Duffy's reference to a known public meeting place and language he used was plainly meant to appeal to emotion.
We do know that the accused are not the same as  Duffy, why does he try and make them out to be the same as him?  People who have done a  stupid thing, a criminal action, can also follow up that stupid action with more stupidity. Why on earth would Duffy even equate himself to one who was complicit in covering up a rape.  And if there was some meeting to get an account straight, maybe it happened elsewhere. 
The "if i had just raped a girl why on  earth would I go on a soup run for the homeless?"  type argument  just appeals to the prejudice of people that a person who has a good appearance does not do bad things.  And yet the evidence points to the opposite.

The last paragraph was my words not Gavan Duffy
I had edited my post to reflect that they were your words and not Duffy's as I had stated.
Perhaps I was too late or you were just ahead of the game.

42
General discussion / Re: The ulster rugby trial
« on: March 22, 2018, 09:58:21 PM »
In terms of a cover up here is an excerpt from Gavan Duffy now speaking for Harrison and it’s been mybview the whole time

‘In relation to the prosecution's theory that a story was cooked up between the four defendants at Soul Food café, Mr. Duffy QC asks why would two Ulster rugby players have gone to the busiest and smallest café on Ormeau Rd to do so?’

If I was trying to cover something up I’d have met in the privacy of my own house and sorted it out there, not in the middle of the bloody Orneau Road!!!
I thought you would be more moved by rationality than emotion. Duffy's reference to a known public meeting place and language he used was plainly meant to appeal to emotion.
We do know that the accused are not the same as  you, why do you try and make them out to be the same as you?  People who have done a  stupid thing, a criminal action, can also follow up that stupid action with more stupidity. Why on earth would you even equate yourself to one who was complicit in covering up a rape?  And if there was some meeting to get an account straight, maybe it happened elsewhere. 
The "if i had just raped a girl why on  earth would I go on a soup run for the homeless?"  type argument  just appeals to the prejudice of people that a person who has a good appearance does not do bad things.  And yet the evidence points to the opposite.

43
GAA Discussion / Re: 2018 NFL Division 1
« on: March 20, 2018, 12:44:50 PM »
Deegan consulted with the linesman  before giving Cavanagh the black card. The linesman was just a metre away and still couldn’t see what happened, I wouldn’t put that one on Deegan but he fell for Bradley’s  blatant dive, hook line and sinker

44
General discussion / Re: TV Show recommendations
« on: March 20, 2018, 12:03:01 AM »
Billy mentioned some pages ago about a French secret service drama, The Bureau  (Le Bureau des Légendes), with some praise but that it was also somewhat clichéd. I got interested, and to some extent it is clichéd , but for the most part it's a superb series with carefully slow built up layered tension and directed to an (almost) perfection.
I'd put it very close to the quality of Spiral.

45
General discussion / Re: The ulster rugby trial
« on: March 18, 2018, 11:22:02 PM »
What is this positive consent you wanted her to see ?  You want the girl to stop in the middle of things any say hey everything is fine I’m having a great time?  I’m not sure that’s how it works!!

If I was on the jury this evidence is key.  This was the girls chance to get help.  Instead she turned her head away in what looks like either  embarrassment or fear photos were going to be taken.
The defense  is conveniently selective in what part of the witness' evidence they are using. The witness said she was 100% certain she did not see any distress, but the defense conveniently ignored that she also claimed she was 100% certain that Jackson had penetrative sex with her.
We have a situation where she is 100% certain on both questions, but her second 100% certainty completely contradicts Jackson's testimony.
And that part of her testimony could well have been a good part of the reasoning why Jackson decided to take the stand.

She didn't say she 100% certain she didn't see any distress. She said she didn't see any distress and then was asked if that was still her position when questioned sorting the trial and she said yes, 100%.

That is her saying "that is 100% my position, she did not appear to be in any distress", not her saying "she was 100% not in distress"

You are surmising. The witness did not say "appear". 

I said she was 100% certain she did not see distress.

as reported
Reading from one of her police statements, Mr Kelly quoted Ms Florence as saying: "I would not say the female was distressed."
When asked by Mr Kelly if this remains her recollection she said: "One hundred per cent."

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 710