Author Topic: Paddy Jackson apology  (Read 28808 times)

Orchard park

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 679
    • View Profile
Re: Paddy Jackson apology
« Reply #390 on: April 16, 2018, 09:30:45 AM »
They cant be sacked for taking part in a threesome, therefore their private messages got them sacked. Surprised Gilroy was treated differently. Should every employee now be cautious over what they text or whatsapp as it could get you in bother with your employers?

Well yes, if youíve a professional job like health service (doctor, nurse) or teaching or something along those lines you may find that you could be in murky waters


I doubt it. The messages only came into play when they were accused of rape.

As regards teaching. Arrested for a row in a chipper could be enough for a dismissal. Even if there was no conviction. A rape accusation -forget about. Even if you were aquitted.

These are the broad guidelines for dismissal for 'social' behaviour.

Complaints about certain matters that relate to conduct outside the course of a registered teacherís profession on grounds such as convictions for certain offences, and where the conduct is of such a serious nature as would bring the profession into disrepute.


 Complaint against a registered teacher can relate to any school-related professional activity, or any activity or role undertaken in their capacity as a registered teacher.




Did you know that teachers weren't allowed to live above a pub at one time? Things have moved on a bit but maybe not a lot.
Bank staff could not join GAA clubs until about 30 years ago or thereabouts.
Some things have changed and life has moved on but  NSFW images and texts haven't and those WhatsApp texts fall into that category.
The boyos may have intended keeping their boastful texts private but it's their own hard luck that they were found out and I get the distinct from talking to others around me that many who felt the verdict was justified are disgusted by the  contents of the texts. "Laddish" behaviour okay but loutish also.

where did you hear that bank staff couldn't join a GAA club up until late 80s? Sure banks had their own clubs long before then
May be inaccurate with the time okay but my son in law who was a bank manager told me it was true at one time. Tennis, golf, rugby okay but GAA out of bounds. I heard it 30 years ago or thereabouts but I didn't get find out when the ban was lifted or fell into disuse more likely.
Will check it out and  come back.

would call that out as an urban myth. perhaps in Northern and Ulster it wasnt encouraged and wouldn't be relevant in loads of circumstances but certainly not AIB or BOI

DuffleKing

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2400
    • View Profile
Re: Paddy Jackson apology
« Reply #391 on: April 16, 2018, 09:35:55 AM »
As has already been mentioned he wasn't charged with rape. He didn't leave a girl bleeding and distressed. And I believe he has been sanctioned in some way, just not sacked.

I shouldn't have said saddos - I apologise.

These men have been presumed innocent of accusations of sexual assault and rape from the moment they were made and unanimously found not guilty by a jury of their peers of the same charges. They are and cannot be disciplined for any of those charges legally. If you don't understand that you disqualify yourself from being take seriously in these debates.

These two men have been sacked because their employers have an ethical issue with how they conduct their private lives - pure and simple. That is a very dangerous precedent as they now have to follow it up. It's a very good job that the IRFU don't apply these standards retrospectively or, for example, one of the world's best half backs would be out on his ear also.

Where else is this moral code to be applied? How about employees who take performance enhancing drugs? What about players who take recreational drugs or use legal narcotics in doses that induce well being effects? What about Ulster players who are members of the Orange Order? Drink driving offences? Slapping their children?

Pandora's box is opened and you can be sure that every personal indiscretion of IRFU employees going forward will be thrown on the altar for moral judgement.
« Last Edit: April 16, 2018, 09:41:31 AM by DuffleKing »

magpie seanie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11716
    • View Profile
Re: Paddy Jackson apology
« Reply #392 on: April 16, 2018, 09:43:02 AM »
As has already been mentioned he wasn't charged with rape. He didn't leave a girl bleeding and distressed. And I believe he has been sanctioned in some way, just not sacked.

I shouldn't have said saddos - I apologise.

These men have been presumed innocent of accusations of sexual assault and rape from the moment and unanimously found not guilty by a jury of their peers of the same charges. They are and cannot be disciplined for any of those charges legally. If you don't understand that you disqualify yourself from being take seriously in these debates.

These two men have been sacked because their employers have an ethical issue with how they conduct their private lives - pure and simple. That is a very dangerous precedent as they now have to follow it up. It's a very good job that the IRFU don't apply these standards retrospectively or, for example, one of the world's best half backs would be out on his ear also.

Where else is this moral code to be applied? How about employees who take performance enhancing drugs? What about players who take recreational drugs or use legal narcotics in doses that induce well being effects? What about Ulster players who are members of the Orange Order? Drink driving offences? Slapping their children?

Pandora's box is opened and you can be sure that every personal indiscretion of IRFU employees going forward will be throw on the altar for moral judgement.


You do understand there's a difference between when someone maintains they gave consent and another person maintains they did not give consent - do you?

As we're aware of, the bar for a criminal conviction is very high as it should be. Not being convicted doesn't mean their behaviour was fine. They knew this girl was upset at the very least. They brought this on themselves with their actions. Any sympathy for them is grossly misplaced.

seafoid

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 21076
    • View Profile
Re: Paddy Jackson apology
« Reply #393 on: April 16, 2018, 09:46:19 AM »
As has already been mentioned he wasn't charged with rape. He didn't leave a girl bleeding and distressed. And I believe he has been sanctioned in some way, just not sacked.

I shouldn't have said saddos - I apologise.

These men have been presumed innocent of accusations of sexual assault and rape from the moment they were made and unanimously found not guilty by a jury of their peers of the same charges. They are and cannot be disciplined for any of those charges legally. If you don't understand that you disqualify yourself from being take seriously in these debates.

These two men have been sacked because their employers have an ethical issue with how they conduct their private lives - pure and simple. That is a very dangerous precedent as they now have to follow it up. It's a very good job that the IRFU don't apply these standards retrospectively or, for example, one of the world's best half backs would be out on his ear also.

Where else is this moral code to be applied? How about employees who take performance enhancing drugs? What about players who take recreational drugs or use legal narcotics in doses that induce well being effects? What about Ulster players who are members of the Orange Order? Drink driving offences? Slapping their children?

Pandora's box is opened and you can be sure that every personal indiscretion of IRFU employees going forward will be throw on the altar for moral judgement.
They got the boot because of reputational damage that was being done to ULster rugby and the IRFU by association with their social media messaging, which was revealed as part of the court case.
Most civilians will not have their Snapchats dissected in the Belfast Telegraph so it is wrong to compare an average punter with these legends. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aWmkuH1k7uA 
Those biscuits are for the visitors

DuffleKing

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2400
    • View Profile
Re: Paddy Jackson apology
« Reply #394 on: April 16, 2018, 09:53:26 AM »
As has already been mentioned he wasn't charged with rape. He didn't leave a girl bleeding and distressed. And I believe he has been sanctioned in some way, just not sacked.

I shouldn't have said saddos - I apologise.

These men have been presumed innocent of accusations of sexual assault and rape from the moment and unanimously found not guilty by a jury of their peers of the same charges. They are and cannot be disciplined for any of those charges legally. If you don't understand that you disqualify yourself from being take seriously in these debates.

These two men have been sacked because their employers have an ethical issue with how they conduct their private lives - pure and simple. That is a very dangerous precedent as they now have to follow it up. It's a very good job that the IRFU don't apply these standards retrospectively or, for example, one of the world's best half backs would be out on his ear also.

Where else is this moral code to be applied? How about employees who take performance enhancing drugs? What about players who take recreational drugs or use legal narcotics in doses that induce well being effects? What about Ulster players who are members of the Orange Order? Drink driving offences? Slapping their children?

Pandora's box is opened and you can be sure that every personal indiscretion of IRFU employees going forward will be throw on the altar for moral judgement.


You do understand there's a difference between when someone maintains they gave consent and another person maintains they did not give consent - do you?

As we're aware of, the bar for a criminal conviction is very high as it should be. Not being convicted doesn't mean their behaviour was fine. They knew this girl was upset at the very least. They brought this on themselves with their actions. Any sympathy for them is grossly misplaced.

Legally, charges that they have been found not guilty of cannot be used as part of their dismissal - surely you grasp that? The trial cannot be used as part of the IRFU's reasoning.

This is very clear - irrespective of how much smoke and dust that is kicked up around it - these two players have been sacked because of how they conduct themselves in their personal lives irrespective of those actions being perfectly legal.


HiMucker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1755
    • View Profile
Re: Paddy Jackson apology
« Reply #395 on: April 16, 2018, 09:57:39 AM »
As has already been mentioned he wasn't charged with rape. He didn't leave a girl bleeding and distressed. And I believe he has been sanctioned in some way, just not sacked.

I shouldn't have said saddos - I apologise.

These men have been presumed innocent of accusations of sexual assault and rape from the moment and unanimously found not guilty by a jury of their peers of the same charges. They are and cannot be disciplined for any of those charges legally. If you don't understand that you disqualify yourself from being take seriously in these debates.

These two men have been sacked because their employers have an ethical issue with how they conduct their private lives - pure and simple. That is a very dangerous precedent as they now have to follow it up. It's a very good job that the IRFU don't apply these standards retrospectively or, for example, one of the world's best half backs would be out on his ear also.

Where else is this moral code to be applied? How about employees who take performance enhancing drugs? What about players who take recreational drugs or use legal narcotics in doses that induce well being effects? What about Ulster players who are members of the Orange Order? Drink driving offences? Slapping their children?

Pandora's box is opened and you can be sure that every personal indiscretion of IRFU employees going forward will be throw on the altar for moral judgement.


You do understand there's a difference between when someone maintains they gave consent and another person maintains they did not give consent - do you?

As we're aware of, the bar for a criminal conviction is very high as it should be. Not being convicted doesn't mean their behaviour was fine. They knew this girl was upset at the very least. They brought this on themselves with their actions. Any sympathy for them is grossly misplaced.

Legally, charges that they have been found not guilty of cannot be used as part of their dismissal - surely you grasp that? The trial cannot be used as part of the IRFU's reasoning.

This is very clear - irrespective of how much smoke and dust that is kicked up around it - these two players have been sacked because of how they conduct themselves in their personal lives irrespective of those actions being perfectly legal.
That is simply not true.  I don't know why this line continues to be pedalled out. 

magpie seanie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11716
    • View Profile
Re: Paddy Jackson apology
« Reply #396 on: April 16, 2018, 09:59:34 AM »
As has already been mentioned he wasn't charged with rape. He didn't leave a girl bleeding and distressed. And I believe he has been sanctioned in some way, just not sacked.

I shouldn't have said saddos - I apologise.

These men have been presumed innocent of accusations of sexual assault and rape from the moment and unanimously found not guilty by a jury of their peers of the same charges. They are and cannot be disciplined for any of those charges legally. If you don't understand that you disqualify yourself from being take seriously in these debates.

These two men have been sacked because their employers have an ethical issue with how they conduct their private lives - pure and simple. That is a very dangerous precedent as they now have to follow it up. It's a very good job that the IRFU don't apply these standards retrospectively or, for example, one of the world's best half backs would be out on his ear also.

Where else is this moral code to be applied? How about employees who take performance enhancing drugs? What about players who take recreational drugs or use legal narcotics in doses that induce well being effects? What about Ulster players who are members of the Orange Order? Drink driving offences? Slapping their children?

Pandora's box is opened and you can be sure that every personal indiscretion of IRFU employees going forward will be throw on the altar for moral judgement.


You do understand there's a difference between when someone maintains they gave consent and another person maintains they did not give consent - do you?

As we're aware of, the bar for a criminal conviction is very high as it should be. Not being convicted doesn't mean their behaviour was fine. They knew this girl was upset at the very least. They brought this on themselves with their actions. Any sympathy for them is grossly misplaced.

Legally, charges that they have been found not guilty of cannot be used as part of their dismissal - surely you grasp that? The trial cannot be used as part of the IRFU's reasoning.

This is very clear - irrespective of how much smoke and dust that is kicked up around it - these two players have been sacked because of how they conduct themselves in their personal lives irrespective of those actions being perfectly legal.
That is simply not true.  I don't know why this line continues to be pedalled out.


Exactly. Completely untrue. I wouldn't mind but it's not even that far back on this thread where it has been stated that in other professions people are let go if they get arrested.

David McKeown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1989
    • View Profile
Re: Paddy Jackson apology
« Reply #397 on: April 16, 2018, 10:15:12 AM »
As has already been mentioned he wasn't charged with rape. He didn't leave a girl bleeding and distressed. And I believe he has been sanctioned in some way, just not sacked.

I shouldn't have said saddos - I apologise.

These men have been presumed innocent of accusations of sexual assault and rape from the moment and unanimously found not guilty by a jury of their peers of the same charges. They are and cannot be disciplined for any of those charges legally. If you don't understand that you disqualify yourself from being take seriously in these debates.

These two men have been sacked because their employers have an ethical issue with how they conduct their private lives - pure and simple. That is a very dangerous precedent as they now have to follow it up. It's a very good job that the IRFU don't apply these standards retrospectively or, for example, one of the world's best half backs would be out on his ear also.

Where else is this moral code to be applied? How about employees who take performance enhancing drugs? What about players who take recreational drugs or use legal narcotics in doses that induce well being effects? What about Ulster players who are members of the Orange Order? Drink driving offences? Slapping their children?

Pandora's box is opened and you can be sure that every personal indiscretion of IRFU employees going forward will be throw on the altar for moral judgement.


You do understand there's a difference between when someone maintains they gave consent and another person maintains they did not give consent - do you?

As we're aware of, the bar for a criminal conviction is very high as it should be. Not being convicted doesn't mean their behaviour was fine. They knew this girl was upset at the very least. They brought this on themselves with their actions. Any sympathy for them is grossly misplaced.

Legally, charges that they have been found not guilty of cannot be used as part of their dismissal - surely you grasp that? The trial cannot be used as part of the IRFU's reasoning.

This is very clear - irrespective of how much smoke and dust that is kicked up around it - these two players have been sacked because of how they conduct themselves in their personal lives irrespective of those actions being perfectly legal.
That is simply not true.  I don't know why this line continues to be pedalled out.


Exactly. Completely untrue. I wouldn't mind but it's not even that far back on this thread where it has been stated that in other professions people are let go if they get arrested.

Indeed it's entirely incorrect. There's nothing in law to prevent the IRFU doing their own investigation and reaching an entirely different conclusion. Any investigation should be fair and based on evidence and not simply what's been reported in the press. That said the admissions made by the two players when taken with their apologises is probably enough if not for termination for cause (to use the American) at least to make the outcome a foregone conclusion.

sid waddell

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1459
    • View Profile
Re: Paddy Jackson apology
« Reply #398 on: April 16, 2018, 10:24:07 AM »
So the fem nazis have succeeded in making sure the two boys dont play in Ireland again. The should be happy with their work

Who is the next target for them?


No. It was their own actions that got them the door. They've accepted that. I suggest you and the other saddos who can't accept this do likewise.

There was no other decision that could have been made.

No need to resort to personal abuse MS.  :-\

How has Gilroy got off with a sanction if the Whats App messages were the crux of the problem?

I'm not sure if you get the irony of complaining about the term "saddos" while using the term "Nazis".

Taylor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 885
    • View Profile
Re: Paddy Jackson apology
« Reply #399 on: April 16, 2018, 10:33:56 AM »
So the fem nazis have succeeded in making sure the two boys dont play in Ireland again. The should be happy with their work

Who is the next target for them?


No. It was their own actions that got them the door. They've accepted that. I suggest you and the other saddos who can't accept this do likewise.

There was no other decision that could have been made.

No need to resort to personal abuse MS.  :-\

How has Gilroy got off with a sanction if the Whats App messages were the crux of the problem?

I'm not sure if you get the irony of complaining about the term "saddos" while using the term "Nazis".

Did I make it personal to MS? Thought not. Move along Syf

seafoid

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 21076
    • View Profile
Re: Paddy Jackson apology
« Reply #400 on: April 16, 2018, 10:46:38 AM »
If Sid is also Syf then Larnaparka must be Indiana.
Those biscuits are for the visitors

sid waddell

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1459
    • View Profile
Re: Paddy Jackson apology
« Reply #401 on: April 16, 2018, 11:07:26 AM »
So the fem nazis have succeeded in making sure the two boys dont play in Ireland again. The should be happy with their work

Who is the next target for them?


No. It was their own actions that got them the door. They've accepted that. I suggest you and the other saddos who can't accept this do likewise.

There was no other decision that could have been made.

No need to resort to personal abuse MS.  :-\

How has Gilroy got off with a sanction if the Whats App messages were the crux of the problem?

I'm not sure if you get the irony of complaining about the term "saddos" while using the term "Nazis".

Did I make it personal to MS? Thought not. Move along Syf
So you didn't get the irony, and still don't?


Taylor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 885
    • View Profile
Re: Paddy Jackson apology
« Reply #402 on: April 16, 2018, 11:15:26 AM »
So the fem nazis have succeeded in making sure the two boys dont play in Ireland again. The should be happy with their work

Who is the next target for them?


No. It was their own actions that got them the door. They've accepted that. I suggest you and the other saddos who can't accept this do likewise.

There was no other decision that could have been made.

No need to resort to personal abuse MS.  :-\

How has Gilroy got off with a sanction if the Whats App messages were the crux of the problem?

I'm not sure if you get the irony of complaining about the term "saddos" while using the term "Nazis".

Did I make it personal to MS? Thought not. Move along Syf
So you didn't get the irony, and still don't?

 ::)  ::)

Anyway, reports say a number of big clubs are looking them and an announcement this week. Unless it is in France assume it is bs?

DuffleKing

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2400
    • View Profile
Re: Paddy Jackson apology
« Reply #403 on: April 16, 2018, 12:51:53 PM »
As has already been mentioned he wasn't charged with rape. He didn't leave a girl bleeding and distressed. And I believe he has been sanctioned in some way, just not sacked.

I shouldn't have said saddos - I apologise.

These men have been presumed innocent of accusations of sexual assault and rape from the moment and unanimously found not guilty by a jury of their peers of the same charges. They are and cannot be disciplined for any of those charges legally. If you don't understand that you disqualify yourself from being take seriously in these debates.

These two men have been sacked because their employers have an ethical issue with how they conduct their private lives - pure and simple. That is a very dangerous precedent as they now have to follow it up. It's a very good job that the IRFU don't apply these standards retrospectively or, for example, one of the world's best half backs would be out on his ear also.

Where else is this moral code to be applied? How about employees who take performance enhancing drugs? What about players who take recreational drugs or use legal narcotics in doses that induce well being effects? What about Ulster players who are members of the Orange Order? Drink driving offences? Slapping their children?

Pandora's box is opened and you can be sure that every personal indiscretion of IRFU employees going forward will be throw on the altar for moral judgement.


You do understand there's a difference between when someone maintains they gave consent and another person maintains they did not give consent - do you?

As we're aware of, the bar for a criminal conviction is very high as it should be. Not being convicted doesn't mean their behaviour was fine. They knew this girl was upset at the very least. They brought this on themselves with their actions. Any sympathy for them is grossly misplaced.

Legally, charges that they have been found not guilty of cannot be used as part of their dismissal - surely you grasp that? The trial cannot be used as part of the IRFU's reasoning.

This is very clear - irrespective of how much smoke and dust that is kicked up around it - these two players have been sacked because of how they conduct themselves in their personal lives irrespective of those actions being perfectly legal.
That is simply not true.  I don't know why this line continues to be pedalled out.


Exactly. Completely untrue. I wouldn't mind but it's not even that far back on this thread where it has been stated that in other professions people are let go if they get arrested.


Just because you repeat something that doesn't make it true

https://www.rte.ie/news/ulster/2018/0414/954460-stuart-olding-paddy-jackson/

In a statement, the IRFU and Ulster Rugby said: "In arriving at this decision, the IRFU and Ulster Rugby said they acknowledged their responsibility and commitment to the core values of the game - respect, inclusivity and integrity."

There is no mention of the court case. The IRFU could have interviewed witnesses, examined testimony, etc. but they didn't - they made a decision on these contracts based on a commitment to the core values of the game as they see them - which they are perfectly entitled to do.

The problem they have now is that every employee has to be held stringently to the the same core values.