Author Topic: The ulster rugby trial  (Read 177385 times)

AQMP

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3401
    • View Profile
Re: The ulster rugby trial
« Reply #2055 on: March 12, 2018, 05:50:41 PM »
I don't think any of the defendants are credible. Harrison and McIlroy in particular were all over the place.

Agreed.  Their evidence was pure dung from start to finish.  The only thing they agreed on was to use the word "consensual" as much as possible.  If I was on the jury I'd be thinking, "I can discount all the defendants' evidence...now do I believe the girl?"

seafoid

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 21845
    • View Profile
Re: The ulster rugby trial
« Reply #2056 on: March 12, 2018, 06:03:04 PM »
If I was Harrison I wouldn't back the other 3. He came across as reserved and not the orgy type. Why would he take one for team flute?
Those biscuits are for the visitors

Therealdonald

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 572
    • View Profile
Re: The ulster rugby trial
« Reply #2057 on: March 12, 2018, 06:05:05 PM »
Reading the excerpts from Cooney's tweets makes for uncomfortable reading. Is Harrison trying to throw himself under the bus?

Syferus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15753
    • View Profile
Re: The ulster rugby trial
« Reply #2058 on: March 12, 2018, 06:08:28 PM »
If I was Harrison I wouldn't back the other 3. He came across as reserved and not the orgy type. Why would he take one for team flute?

“Bros before hoes”

Why are you expecting anything else from a bunch of entitled meatheads?

Therealdonald

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 572
    • View Profile
Re: The ulster rugby trial
« Reply #2059 on: March 12, 2018, 06:40:04 PM »
If I was Harrison I wouldn't back the other 3. He came across as reserved and not the orgy type. Why would he take one for team flute?

“Bros before hoes”

Why are you expecting anything else from a bunch of entitled meatheads?

Syf, did you apply to get into Queen's or something and got rejected?

Hound

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5048
    • View Profile
Re: The ulster rugby trial
« Reply #2060 on: March 13, 2018, 09:06:24 AM »
Defence has been an absolute joke! Allowing McIlroy and Harrison take the stand was a disaster, and completely predictably so. That's a big disadvantage of having 4 separate defence teams, as they all try and save themselves rather than having a co-ordinated approach. I wondered at the start why McIlroy and Harrison were even charged, but the prosecution knew exactly what they were doing.

Having said all that, I think not guilty is still a strong possibility. Frozen/complying when you've no way out, when it's the least worst option is not only believable, its almost automatic. However, when you've 3 other girls nearby, when there's no violence or threats, when you take off your own top, when one scream would have ended it all, when a rescuer actually comes into the room and you ignore her, I couldn't vote guilty. But I haven't seen every piece of evidence, so will see what the jury comes up with.

Perjury on the other hand, especially for McIlory, I'd vote for that all day long!   

Milltown Row2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18240
  • It was the Ref that did it!!
    • View Profile
Re: The ulster rugby trial
« Reply #2061 on: March 13, 2018, 01:09:13 PM »
Was chatting to the brother in-law who's a solicitor and he was saying by now the jury will have already made their mind up and the arguments at the end wont make a big difference.. for him, having 9 lads on the jury is crazy and they might be aquitted on that..

I think there's more than a reasonable doubt where their guilt is involved, so who knows
Anything I post is not the view of the County Board!! Nobody died in the making of this post ;-)

Taylor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 928
    • View Profile
Re: The ulster rugby trial
« Reply #2062 on: March 13, 2018, 01:18:21 PM »
As a fireside lawyer and with all the usual caveats after the defence screwed up by putting them on the stand at the moment I think Harrison & McIlroy could get done and the other two get off.

Could change my mind as the verdicts approach but the reasonable doubt could be enough to get PJ & SO off.

brokencrossbar1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8052
    • View Profile
Re: The ulster rugby trial
« Reply #2063 on: March 13, 2018, 01:27:08 PM »
I think of all of them McIlroy is most at risk of conviction. His is a stand alone crime in that it’s alleged exposure. Harrison’s is kinda linked with Jackson and Olding I’m withholding information relating to their ‘crimes’.  If they are found not guilty then I think the jury would have to find Harrison not guilty also. Not guaranteed but there’s a strong possibility

Taylor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 928
    • View Profile
Re: The ulster rugby trial
« Reply #2064 on: March 13, 2018, 01:44:03 PM »
I think of all of them McIlroy is most at risk of conviction. His is a stand alone crime in that it’s alleged exposure. Harrison’s is kinda linked with Jackson and Olding I’m withholding information relating to their ‘crimes’.  If they are found not guilty then I think the jury would have to find Harrison not guilty also. Not guaranteed but there’s a strong possibility

While it seems clear they are all telling lies or at the very least dont clearly remember what happened I had thought Harrison is more at risk for what he is charged of given the deleted texts/forgotten phone calls/not telling the police info

Cant see strong enough reasonable doubt to convict the other two of rape

TabClear

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1211
    • View Profile
Re: The ulster rugby trial
« Reply #2065 on: March 13, 2018, 01:45:15 PM »
I think of all of them McIlroy is most at risk of conviction. His is a stand alone crime in that it’s alleged exposure. Harrison’s is kinda linked with Jackson and Olding I’m withholding information relating to their ‘crimes’.  If they are found not guilty then I think the jury would have to find Harrison not guilty also. Not guaranteed but there’s a strong possibility

I know what you are saying BCB and I think the decision of PJ and SO will definitely influence the jury but do you know what that the standing is from a legal perspective? I would assume that irrespective of whether a crime had been committed, taking actions that hinder a police investigation into an alleged crime could be convicted on a standalone basis? This is probably one of those cases where a hypothetical jury comprised of legal professionals could come to a very different verdict to a "normal" jury.

magpie seanie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11847
    • View Profile
Re: The ulster rugby trial
« Reply #2066 on: March 13, 2018, 02:04:58 PM »
I think of all of them McIlroy is most at risk of conviction. His is a stand alone crime in that it’s alleged exposure. Harrison’s is kinda linked with Jackson and Olding I’m withholding information relating to their ‘crimes’.  If they are found not guilty then I think the jury would have to find Harrison not guilty also. Not guaranteed but there’s a strong possibility

I know what you are saying BCB and I think the decision of PJ and SO will definitely influence the jury but do you know what that the standing is from a legal perspective? I would assume that irrespective of whether a crime had been committed, taking actions that hinder a police investigation into an alleged crime could be convicted on a standalone basis? This is probably one of those cases where a hypothetical jury comprised of legal professionals could come to a very different verdict to a "normal" jury.


Yeah. Harrison doesn't know for definite that there wasn't a crime committed so even if Jackson and Olding are found not guilty I think Harrison could be found guilty but then again I've no qualifications or experience in this area.

brokencrossbar1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8052
    • View Profile
Re: The ulster rugby trial
« Reply #2067 on: March 13, 2018, 02:11:00 PM »
I think of all of them McIlroy is most at risk of conviction. His is a stand alone crime in that it’s alleged exposure. Harrison’s is kinda linked with Jackson and Olding I’m withholding information relating to their ‘crimes’.  If they are found not guilty then I think the jury would have to find Harrison not guilty also. Not guaranteed but there’s a strong possibility

I know what you are saying BCB and I think the decision of PJ and SO will definitely influence the jury but do you know what that the standing is from a legal perspective? I would assume that irrespective of whether a crime had been committed, taking actions that hinder a police investigation into an alleged crime could be convicted on a standalone basis? This is probably one of those cases where a hypothetical jury comprised of legal professionals could come to a very different verdict to a "normal" jury.

He can be found guilty even though the other two are found not guilty but I think the jury will be looking at it as an all duck or no dinner type scenario.

sid waddell

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1747
    • View Profile
Re: The ulster rugby trial
« Reply #2068 on: March 13, 2018, 02:12:01 PM »
I think of all of them McIlroy is most at risk of conviction. His is a stand alone crime in that it’s alleged exposure. Harrison’s is kinda linked with Jackson and Olding I’m withholding information relating to their ‘crimes’.  If they are found not guilty then I think the jury would have to find Harrison not guilty also. Not guaranteed but there’s a strong possibility
Why would McIlroy be convicted of exposure and not Olding of rape and Jackson of at least sexual assault?

The woman alleges that the sexual contact with Jackson and Olding was not consensual. Jackson and Olding allege it was consensual.

The woman alleges that McIlroy exposing himself was uninvited on her part. McIlroy alleges it was invited.

It basically all comes down to to the same questions of whether consent was given or not, or whether there was reasonable belief in consent, across all three of these defendants.

Asal Mor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2050
    • View Profile
Re: The ulster rugby trial
« Reply #2069 on: March 13, 2018, 02:34:01 PM »
Defence has been an absolute joke! Allowing McIlroy and Harrison take the stand was a disaster, and completely predictably so. That's a big disadvantage of having 4 separate defence teams, as they all try and save themselves rather than having a co-ordinated approach. I wondered at the start why McIlroy and Harrison were even charged, but the prosecution knew exactly what they were doing.

Having said all that, I think not guilty is still a strong possibility. Frozen/complying when you've no way out, when it's the least worst option is not only believable, its almost automatic. However, when you've 3 other girls nearby, when there's no violence or threats, when you take off your own top, when one scream would have ended it all, when a rescuer actually comes into the room and you ignore her, I couldn't vote guilty. But I haven't seen every piece of evidence, so will see what the jury comes up with.

Perjury on the other hand, especially for McIlory, I'd vote for that all day long!
Great post Hound. Would agree with all of that.