RG at arms length

[Hand of God]

Jeez lad, take a breather. That's some seriously over the top replying

I've dismissed nothing. I've had my spake on this previously, wouldn't be hard to find and my position on Gallagher

You're after putting on your county colours to dismiss a woman who said she had been a victim of domestic violence.

You continually defend Gallagher but refuse to recognize the person alleging the abuse here.

It's a simple question for you to answer and you won't address.

If you haven't dismissed anything why you are going to end of the earth to defend Gallagher here?

You are very upset at him not being allowed be involved in GAA.

You don't seem one bit concerned that he is accused of hospitalizing his ex wife numerous times with broken bones, beating her when she was pregnant, pushing down the stairs, strangling her, gouging her ribcage, dragging her down the street by the hair. This is the part you refuse to address.

In some bizarre way you view Rory Gallagher as the victim here.

[David McKeown]

Wasn't ignored. Is subject to safeguarding checks. Was banned temporarily and ban was overturned. Jarlath decided he should be a poster boy for Game Changer. Keep digging

How and why was the ban overturned. That allegations are still there? What is it about her allegations you don't believe. As long as Gallagher is unable to put these allegations to bed he should be a pariah within the GAA.

Burns shouldn't have had to intervene but a number of clubs disgraced themselves in pursuing and using the services of Gallagher after these allegations surfaced. That's the biggest issue here. What message does that send to victims of domestic violence.

If court wouldn't change your mind, in what way can Gallagher put these to bed?

She has made detailed allegations but they haven't been proven. You ask why people dont find her credible, maybe it's simply that people start from a point of presuming innocence when there has been no history of breaking the law or committing offences. At that point, they are one person's views on an incident(s), that remain her views until they can be proven.

On her allegations, would the family court or other processes RG has went through been privy to NGs medical records to verify the multiple hospital admissions etc?

What age are the children? Are they old enough or eligible to be asked about anything that went on at home to verify her claims? Would this have been part of the aforementioned processes?

So you don't think Nicola Gallaghers claims are credible? I'd like to know what your opinion is there.

If there is any inkling that what she says is true then there is no way Gallagher should be involved in the GAA. There is plenty of precedent of sports stars being pretty much banished as a result of allegations made against them which they were either not charged or proven guilty. These were also professionals.

Gylfi Sigurdsson
Mason Greenwood (English FA)
Paddy Jackson (IRFU)

They were pretty much cancelled if you want to use that word, not on the basis of a conviction or a charge but on the basis of the allegations been very credible and that's the way it should be. What sort of message are you sending to victims when alleged abusers are allowed continue with such credible allegations.

Has Gallagher every actually firmly denied the allegations? I'm not aware he has. All I've seen is him hiding behind statements where he references no charges. Has he ever pursued legal action for defamation? Surely if someone falsely accuses you of something so grievous you do all in your power to clear your name.

Gallaghers approach seems to have been that he will take his time and hope that this blows over and it becomes yesterday's news rather than contest the allegations and clear his name.

Sigurdson and Greenwood were properly subject to procedurally fair investigations and decisions were made.  I dont think Jackson was although I could be wrong but like with Greenwood their non criminal conduct was so reprehensible that even by itself it justified the IRFU's and Ulster Rugby's, FA and Mann Utd's approaches (delete as appropraite).  That reprehensible conduct was never denied by either man.

But they were never proven of doing something.

I really can't stress enough the gravity or what Gallagher has been accused of. Something which I don't actually think I have seen Gallagher explicitly deny or something he hasn't taken legal action although for some reason he is more concerned about suing the GAA over barring him than he is about the person alleging him of these heinous act.

I think Gallagher lacks serious credibility here and given the level of domestic abuse and the list of victims in the north there is no way he should be involved in GAA right now.

At what point do you think he should be barred? A criminal conviction?

We're coming off decades of institutional abuse in the church where people turned a blind eye on allegations and failed to protect victims and shielded the perpetrators. There are many things I disagree with Burns on but I've great respect for his intervention here.

I think it's very disappointing how some people are happy to dismiss these allegations until it's proven certain. This isn't a criminal trial. It's the GAA, it's reputation and it's community role in showing that they take domestic violence seriously and having a profile in the GAA doesn't give you immunity to behave in a certain way.

Yes they were. They were proven that their conduct was reprehensible. It was not established their conduct was criminal but it doesn't have to be. You keep putting weight on RG not taking legal action against his ex wife. What legal action do you think he could take.

To say well there was allegations wrongly ignored by the church therefore we should believe all future allegations made by anyone without question is like me saying that because of the Salem witch trials we shouldn't believe any allegations. It doesn't and can't work like that. All allegations should be taken seriously. They should be investigated as fairly as possible and appropriate and consistent action should be taken.

At what point should he be barred. Once it's established his conduct was reprehensible and/or he presents as a risk to other members of the association. Ie following a proper investigation if that is what is concluded.

[tbrick18]

I haven't seen a single comment anywhere on this board, from the time the allegations were made until now that dismissed the allegations, or any expressions of hatred against women.

What I have seen is too many people ready to accept a Facebook post as absolute fact, whilst at the same time subsequent legal investigations are ignored by those same people.

Everyone agrees that the allegations are horrific.
Everyone agrees that if true, RG should be in prison.

Where the allegations lose SOME credibility is the fact they were investigated multiple times, by the authorities who will have had access to all information, with no action taken. Rg has refuted the allegations and he has custody of his children. Add to that his ex wife has addiction issues.

None of that means she made it up, but it also doesn't meant its entirely true.

The fact is that none of us know the real story so there is no way we can be sure of being 100% certain we know he did what he is accused of.
So it is unwise, and unsafe to have such certain views without knowing the facts.

Other domestic abuse cases, or lack of prosecutions should have no bearing on this case.

I think a lot of this is due to so many people having a dislike for RG before the allegations were made and so were happy to jump on a bandwagon.

JB seems to have formed a certain conviction and went outside the remit of his position, some would say abused his position, to push an initiative and promote his own agenda with the Facebook warriors.
This was certainly wrong imo.

[Hand of God]

Wasn't ignored. Is subject to safeguarding checks. Was banned temporarily and ban was overturned. Jarlath decided he should be a poster boy for Game Changer. Keep digging

How and why was the ban overturned. That allegations are still there? What is it about her allegations you don't believe. As long as Gallagher is unable to put these allegations to bed he should be a pariah within the GAA.

Burns shouldn't have had to intervene but a number of clubs disgraced themselves in pursuing and using the services of Gallagher after these allegations surfaced. That's the biggest issue here. What message does that send to victims of domestic violence.

If court wouldn't change your mind, in what way can Gallagher put these to bed?

She has made detailed allegations but they haven't been proven. You ask why people dont find her credible, maybe it's simply that people start from a point of presuming innocence when there has been no history of breaking the law or committing offences. At that point, they are one person's views on an incident(s), that remain her views until they can be proven.

On her allegations, would the family court or other processes RG has went through been privy to NGs medical records to verify the multiple hospital admissions etc?

What age are the children? Are they old enough or eligible to be asked about anything that went on at home to verify her claims? Would this have been part of the aforementioned processes?

So you don't think Nicola Gallaghers claims are credible? I'd like to know what your opinion is there.

If there is any inkling that what she says is true then there is no way Gallagher should be involved in the GAA. There is plenty of precedent of sports stars being pretty much banished as a result of allegations made against them which they were either not charged or proven guilty. These were also professionals.

Gylfi Sigurdsson
Mason Greenwood (English FA)
Paddy Jackson (IRFU)

They were pretty much cancelled if you want to use that word, not on the basis of a conviction or a charge but on the basis of the allegations been very credible and that's the way it should be. What sort of message are you sending to victims when alleged abusers are allowed continue with such credible allegations.

Has Gallagher every actually firmly denied the allegations? I'm not aware he has. All I've seen is him hiding behind statements where he references no charges. Has he ever pursued legal action for defamation? Surely if someone falsely accuses you of something so grievous you do all in your power to clear your name.

Gallaghers approach seems to have been that he will take his time and hope that this blows over and it becomes yesterday's news rather than contest the allegations and clear his name.

Sigurdson and Greenwood were properly subject to procedurally fair investigations and decisions were made.  I dont think Jackson was although I could be wrong but like with Greenwood their non criminal conduct was so reprehensible that even by itself it justified the IRFU's and Ulster Rugby's, FA and Mann Utd's approaches (delete as appropraite).  That reprehensible conduct was never denied by either man.

But they were never proven of doing something.

I really can't stress enough the gravity or what Gallagher has been accused of. Something which I don't actually think I have seen Gallagher explicitly deny or something he hasn't taken legal action although for some reason he is more concerned about suing the GAA over barring him than he is about the person alleging him of these heinous act.

I think Gallagher lacks serious credibility here and given the level of domestic abuse and the list of victims in the north there is no way he should be involved in GAA right now.

At what point do you think he should be barred? A criminal conviction?

We're coming off decades of institutional abuse in the church where people turned a blind eye on allegations and failed to protect victims and shielded the perpetrators. There are many things I disagree with Burns on but I've great respect for his intervention here.

I think it's very disappointing how some people are happy to dismiss these allegations until it's proven certain. This isn't a criminal trial. It's the GAA, it's reputation and it's community role in showing that they take domestic violence seriously and having a profile in the GAA doesn't give you immunity to behave in a certain way.

Yes they were. They were proven that their conduct was reprehensible. It was not established their conduct was criminal but it doesn't have to be. You keep putting weight on RG not taking legal action against his ex wife. What legal action do you think he could take.

To say well there was allegations wrongly ignored by the church therefore we should believe all future allegations made by anyone without question is like me saying that because of the Salem witch trials we shouldn't believe any allegations. It doesn't and can't work like that. All allegations should be taken seriously. They should be investigated as fairly as possible and appropriate and consistent action should be taken.

At what point should he be barred. Once it's established his conduct was reprehensible and/or he presents as a risk to other members of the association. Ie following a proper investigation if that is what is concluded.

I haven't seen a single comment anywhere on this board, from the time the allegations were made until now that dismissed the allegations, or any expressions of hatred against women.

What I have seen is too many people ready to accept a Facebook post as absolute fact, whilst at the same time subsequent legal investigations are ignored by those same people.

Everyone agrees that the allegations are horrific.
Everyone agrees that if true, RG should be in prison.

Where the allegations lose SOME credibility is the fact they were investigated multiple times, by the authorities who will have had access to all information, with no action taken. Rg has refuted the allegations and he has custody of his children. Add to that his ex wife has addiction issues.

None of that means she made it up, but it also doesn't meant its entirely true.

The fact is that none of us know the real story so there is no way we can be sure of being 100% certain we know he did what he is accused of.
So it is unwise, and unsafe to have such certain views without knowing the facts.

Other domestic abuse cases, or lack of prosecutions should have no bearing on this case.

I think a lot of this is due to so many people having a dislike for RG before the allegations were made and so were happy to jump on a bandwagon.

JB seems to have formed a certain conviction and went outside the remit of his position, some would say abused his position, to push an initiative and promote his own agenda with the Facebook warriors.
This was certainly wrong imo.

So what's your stance here. It's very confusing what you're saying.

Can you clarify it for me with a yes/no response.

Do you want Gallagher free to coach or train in the GAA again? Yes/no.

Do you think people accused of allegations to the severity of Gallagher should be allowed continue in the GAA unless they have a conviction? Yes/No.

Do you find Nicola Gallaghers allegations to be credible? Yes/no.

Do you think allowing Gallagher to continue in the GAA with these claims following him around to be an insult to victims of domestic abuse? Yes/no.

I bet you will refuse to answer them and pretend you have no strong opinions while you continue to get exercised about Gallagher not being able to coach while simultaneously showing little concern for a woman who claims to be have been a victim of a decade or so of repeated violent beatings from Gallagher.

[Milltown Row2]

I don't actually think you really care tbh, you're a very angry person.

You've been given plenty answers but still come back saying the same stuff.

I've yet to see a post that would defend RG if there was a grain of truth to the allegations made, and with that it answers the rest of you rant.

By the same token if you were given evidence of the contrary would you believe it?

For someone being abused it's takes some stomach to admit it to themselves never mind going public and getting the police involved. Nobody's claims should ever be dismissed and should be investigated thoroughly.

Given the extent of the allegations and physical evidence it's criminal that it didn't go further, that or the general public haven't been privy to all the facts.

[tbrick18]

Wasn't ignored. Is subject to safeguarding checks. Was banned temporarily and ban was overturned. Jarlath decided he should be a poster boy for Game Changer. Keep digging

How and why was the ban overturned. That allegations are still there? What is it about her allegations you don't believe. As long as Gallagher is unable to put these allegations to bed he should be a pariah within the GAA.

Burns shouldn't have had to intervene but a number of clubs disgraced themselves in pursuing and using the services of Gallagher after these allegations surfaced. That's the biggest issue here. What message does that send to victims of domestic violence.

If court wouldn't change your mind, in what way can Gallagher put these to bed?

She has made detailed allegations but they haven't been proven. You ask why people dont find her credible, maybe it's simply that people start from a point of presuming innocence when there has been no history of breaking the law or committing offences. At that point, they are one person's views on an incident(s), that remain her views until they can be proven.

On her allegations, would the family court or other processes RG has went through been privy to NGs medical records to verify the multiple hospital admissions etc?

What age are the children? Are they old enough or eligible to be asked about anything that went on at home to verify her claims? Would this have been part of the aforementioned processes?

So you don't think Nicola Gallaghers claims are credible? I'd like to know what your opinion is there.

If there is any inkling that what she says is true then there is no way Gallagher should be involved in the GAA. There is plenty of precedent of sports stars being pretty much banished as a result of allegations made against them which they were either not charged or proven guilty. These were also professionals.

Gylfi Sigurdsson
Mason Greenwood (English FA)
Paddy Jackson (IRFU)

They were pretty much cancelled if you want to use that word, not on the basis of a conviction or a charge but on the basis of the allegations been very credible and that's the way it should be. What sort of message are you sending to victims when alleged abusers are allowed continue with such credible allegations.

Has Gallagher every actually firmly denied the allegations? I'm not aware he has. All I've seen is him hiding behind statements where he references no charges. Has he ever pursued legal action for defamation? Surely if someone falsely accuses you of something so grievous you do all in your power to clear your name.

Gallaghers approach seems to have been that he will take his time and hope that this blows over and it becomes yesterday's news rather than contest the allegations and clear his name.

Sigurdson and Greenwood were properly subject to procedurally fair investigations and decisions were made.  I dont think Jackson was although I could be wrong but like with Greenwood their non criminal conduct was so reprehensible that even by itself it justified the IRFU's and Ulster Rugby's, FA and Mann Utd's approaches (delete as appropraite).  That reprehensible conduct was never denied by either man.

But they were never proven of doing something.

I really can't stress enough the gravity or what Gallagher has been accused of. Something which I don't actually think I have seen Gallagher explicitly deny or something he hasn't taken legal action although for some reason he is more concerned about suing the GAA over barring him than he is about the person alleging him of these heinous act.

I think Gallagher lacks serious credibility here and given the level of domestic abuse and the list of victims in the north there is no way he should be involved in GAA right now.

At what point do you think he should be barred? A criminal conviction?

We're coming off decades of institutional abuse in the church where people turned a blind eye on allegations and failed to protect victims and shielded the perpetrators. There are many things I disagree with Burns on but I've great respect for his intervention here.

I think it's very disappointing how some people are happy to dismiss these allegations until it's proven certain. This isn't a criminal trial. It's the GAA, it's reputation and it's community role in showing that they take domestic violence seriously and having a profile in the GAA doesn't give you immunity to behave in a certain way.

Yes they were. They were proven that their conduct was reprehensible. It was not established their conduct was criminal but it doesn't have to be. You keep putting weight on RG not taking legal action against his ex wife. What legal action do you think he could take.

To say well there was allegations wrongly ignored by the church therefore we should believe all future allegations made by anyone without question is like me saying that because of the Salem witch trials we shouldn't believe any allegations. It doesn't and can't work like that. All allegations should be taken seriously. They should be investigated as fairly as possible and appropriate and consistent action should be taken.

At what point should he be barred. Once it's established his conduct was reprehensible and/or he presents as a risk to other members of the association. Ie following a proper investigation if that is what is concluded.

I haven't seen a single comment anywhere on this board, from the time the allegations were made until now that dismissed the allegations, or any expressions of hatred against women.

What I have seen is too many people ready to accept a Facebook post as absolute fact, whilst at the same time subsequent legal investigations are ignored by those same people.

Everyone agrees that the allegations are horrific.
Everyone agrees that if true, RG should be in prison.

Where the allegations lose SOME credibility is the fact they were investigated multiple times, by the authorities who will have had access to all information, with no action taken. Rg has refuted the allegations and he has custody of his children. Add to that his ex wife has addiction issues.

None of that means she made it up, but it also doesn't meant its entirely true.

The fact is that none of us know the real story so there is no way we can be sure of being 100% certain we know he did what he is accused of.
So it is unwise, and unsafe to have such certain views without knowing the facts.

Other domestic abuse cases, or lack of prosecutions should have no bearing on this case.

I think a lot of this is due to so many people having a dislike for RG before the allegations were made and so were happy to jump on a bandwagon.

JB seems to have formed a certain conviction and went outside the remit of his position, some would say abused his position, to push an initiative and promote his own agenda with the Facebook warriors.
This was certainly wrong imo.

So what's your stance here. It's very confusing what you're saying.

Can you clarify it for me with a yes/no response.

Do you want Gallagher free to coach or train in the GAA again? Yes/no.

Do you think people accused of allegations to the severity of Gallagher should be allowed continue in the GAA unless they have a conviction? Yes/No.

Do you find Nicola Gallaghers allegations to be credible? Yes/no.

Do you think allowing Gallagher to continue in the GAA with these claims following him around to be an insult to victims of domestic abuse? Yes/no.

I bet you will refuse to answer them and pretend you have no strong opinions while you continue to get exercised about Gallagher not being able to coach while simultaneously showing little concern for a woman who claims to be have been a victim of a decade or so of repeated violent beatings from Gallagher.

I thought I was very clear on my stance but i'll spell it out for you.

I am not in possession of the facts (neither are you) so how can I (or you) logically form a definitive opinion on if he should or should not be coaching?
What I do know is allegations were made, he was investigated by those with the facts and he wasn't charged with anything.

Ive already outlined my stance on what I think should happen if accused of something, but ill do it again for your benefit. Suspension until investigated within the rules of the organisation. At all times, following process of the rules, not feelings or opinions, facts. Then following the outcome of that investigation, apply the rules of the organisation. to either take action or not. If no rules exist to debar him, he should be allowed to continue.

if the gaa dont want people involved in the association who have allegations made about them then they need to create those rules.

Once again I'll say it, if he's guilty he should be in prison.
But I dont have the facts to find him guilty or innocent. Clear enough for you?

So let me ask you a question, how is it you are so certain RG is guilty?
Its starting to feel like you are somehow involved in the whole affair.

[Hand of God]

I don't actually think you really care tbh, you're a very angry person.

You've been given plenty answers but still come back saying the same stuff.

I've yet to see a post that would defend RG if there was a grain of truth to the allegations made, and with that it answers the rest of you rant.

By the same token if you were given evidence of the contrary would you believe it?

For someone being abused it's takes some stomach to admit it to themselves never mind going public and getting the police involved. Nobody's claims should ever be dismissed and should be investigated thoroughly.

Given the extent of the allegations and physical evidence it's criminal that it didn't go further, that or the general public haven't been privy to all the facts.

I do care. I am certain you don't though. For a person who is so mouthy and opinionated you can't give your view on whether you find the allegations Nicola Gallagher made credible or not. You usually go in hard without facts or evidence and routinely are wide of the mark on most things. So why are you so insensitive to Nicola Gallagher and other victims of domestic violence?

To be honest you are happy to answer questions definitively and comprehensively for other posters who still haven't answered them themselves but oddly when the same question was put to yo - you avoided it repeatedly.

Why is it that you don't find Nicola Gallagher's allegations credible?

[Hand of God]

I thought I was very clear on my stance but i'll spell it out for you.

I am not in possession of the facts (neither are you) so how can I (or you) logically form a definitive opinion on if he should or should not be coaching?
What I do know is allegations were made, he was investigated by those with the facts and he wasn't charged with anything.

Ive already outlined my stance on what I think should happen if accused of something, but ill do it again for your benefit. Suspension until investigated within the rules of the organisation. At all times, following process of the rules, not feelings or opinions, facts. Then following the outcome of that investigation, apply the rules of the organisation. to either take action or not. If no rules exist to debar him, he should be allowed to continue.

if the gaa dont want people involved in the association who have allegations made about them then they need to create those rules.

Once again I'll say it, if he's guilty he should be in prison.
But I dont have the facts to find him guilty or innocent. Clear enough for you?

So let me ask you a question, how is it you are so certain RG is guilty?
Its starting to feel like you are somehow involved in the whole affair.

You are not clear and done very little to clear it up. I asked for a simple answer to a numbers of questions that would provide clarity. You have given wishy washy answers that directly contradict themselves.

If you are now using the excuse of ignorance and not being in a position to give an opinion (which you have) then what are you doing in this thread.

Jarlath Burns has given his opinion. He clearly finds the allegations credible and he clearly feels that Gallagher should not be coaching as a result.

The fact you are here angry about that shows you do have an opinion and it's leans in favour of the alleged abuser.

We are not talking about a criminal trial here. People like you are hiding behind criminal convictions and a legal system that consistently fails victims as the barometer here for the GAA. Nobody here is saying Gallagher should be in jail - the threshold will always be high to convict and that's to avoid miscarriages of justice which is understandable to a degree. It is a fact that it fails victims though.

The GAA issue is this simple, it comes down to whethee the GAA belive that allegations could be true. That's the barometer there, if they believe he could have done it then he shouldn't be involved.

The pro-Gallagher/alleged abuser crowd like yourself who ironically then pretend not to be are engaging in bad faith. None of you will comment on whether you think Nicola Gallaghers allegations are credible? You will defend Gallagher and support his right to keep working in the GAA but will no make reference to the victim or the other victims of domestic violence who feel actions need to be taken. The fact you don't address that question means you don't believe or find her allegations credible and I want to find out exactly why?

Why does the bar have to set so high (as in a criminal conviction) to stop someone in operating a role within an amateur organisation?You sound like the type of guy who would have made a great Catholic bishop in the 1960s and 1970s.

Finally why is Gallagher now taking legal action against Burns and the GAA for barring him over allegations made by his ex wife when he has taken no legal action against his ex wife? That for me is the big giveaway.

[imtommygunn]

There is no pro Gallagher crowd. You're trying to make the debate binary. It's not.

[Milltown Row2]

I don't actually think you really care tbh, you're a very angry person.

You've been given plenty answers but still come back saying the same stuff.

I've yet to see a post that would defend RG if there was a grain of truth to the allegations made, and with that it answers the rest of you rant.

By the same token if you were given evidence of the contrary would you believe it?

For someone being abused it's takes some stomach to admit it to themselves never mind going public and getting the police involved. Nobody's claims should ever be dismissed and should be investigated thoroughly.

Given the extent of the allegations and physical evidence it's criminal that it didn't go further, that or the general public haven't been privy to all the facts.

I do care. I am certain you don't though. For a person who is so mouthy and opinionated you can't give your view on whether you find the allegations Nicola Gallagher made credible or not. You usually go in hard without facts or evidence and routinely are wide of the mark on most things. So why are you so insensitive to Nicola Gallagher and other victims of domestic violence?

To be honest you are happy to answer questions definitively and comprehensively for other posters who still haven't answered them themselves but oddly when the same question was put to yo - you avoided it repeatedly.

Why is it that you don't find Nicola Gallagher's allegations credible?

I've asked several times now and you have yet to show me where I've said I don't believe her. You're a melt, god love whoever is closest to you

[Hand of God]

I don't actually think you really care tbh, you're a very angry person.

You've been given plenty answers but still come back saying the same stuff.

I've yet to see a post that would defend RG if there was a grain of truth to the allegations made, and with that it answers the rest of you rant.

By the same token if you were given evidence of the contrary would you believe it?

For someone being abused it's takes some stomach to admit it to themselves never mind going public and getting the police involved. Nobody's claims should ever be dismissed and should be investigated thoroughly.

Given the extent of the allegations and physical evidence it's criminal that it didn't go further, that or the general public haven't been privy to all the facts.

I do care. I am certain you don't though. For a person who is so mouthy and opinionated you can't give your view on whether you find the allegations Nicola Gallagher made credible or not. You usually go in hard without facts or evidence and routinely are wide of the mark on most things. So why are you so insensitive to Nicola Gallagher and other victims of domestic violence?

To be honest you are happy to answer questions definitively and comprehensively for other posters who still haven't answered them themselves but oddly when the same question was put to yo - you avoided it repeatedly.

Why is it that you don't find Nicola Gallagher's allegations credible?

I've asked several times now and you have yet to show me where I've said I don't believe her. You're a melt, god love whoever is closest to you

Your unwillingness to tell us that you don't her allegations are credible is enough for me. It's a clear as that, you actually went as far to answer that for another poster but when it came to yourself you didn't need an answer and anyone who has posted here knows you of all people are never short of an opinion so needing evidence and proof is certainly not a standard you rely on.

I'll ask again, do you find Nicola Gallaghers allegations credible? Yes/no? I'm taking avoidance as no.

[David McKeown]

I don't actually think you really care tbh, you're a very angry person.

You've been given plenty answers but still come back saying the same stuff.

I've yet to see a post that would defend RG if there was a grain of truth to the allegations made, and with that it answers the rest of you rant.

By the same token if you were given evidence of the contrary would you believe it?

For someone being abused it's takes some stomach to admit it to themselves never mind going public and getting the police involved. Nobody's claims should ever be dismissed and should be investigated thoroughly.

Given the extent of the allegations and physical evidence it's criminal that it didn't go further, that or the general public haven't been privy to all the facts.

I do care. I am certain you don't though. For a person who is so mouthy and opinionated you can't give your view on whether you find the allegations Nicola Gallagher made credible or not. You usually go in hard without facts or evidence and routinely are wide of the mark on most things. So why are you so insensitive to Nicola Gallagher and other victims of domestic violence?

To be honest you are happy to answer questions definitively and comprehensively for other posters who still haven't answered them themselves but oddly when the same question was put to yo - you avoided it repeatedly.

Why is it that you don't find Nicola Gallagher's allegations credible?

I've asked several times now and you have yet to show me where I've said I don't believe her. You're a melt, god love whoever is closest to you

Your unwillingness to tell us that you don't her allegations are credible is enough for me. It's a clear as that, you actually went as far to answer that for another poster but when it came to yourself you didn't need an answer and anyone who has posted here knows you of all people are never short of an opinion so needing evidence and proof is certainly not a standard you rely on.

I'll ask again, do you find Nicola Gallaghers allegations credible? Yes/no? I'm taking avoidance as no.

I'll ask again what legal action do you think RG could take against his ex wife?

[Hand of God]

I don't actually think you really care tbh, you're a very angry person.

You've been given plenty answers but still come back saying the same stuff.

I've yet to see a post that would defend RG if there was a grain of truth to the allegations made, and with that it answers the rest of you rant.

By the same token if you were given evidence of the contrary would you believe it?

For someone being abused it's takes some stomach to admit it to themselves never mind going public and getting the police involved. Nobody's claims should ever be dismissed and should be investigated thoroughly.

Given the extent of the allegations and physical evidence it's criminal that it didn't go further, that or the general public haven't been privy to all the facts.

I do care. I am certain you don't though. For a person who is so mouthy and opinionated you can't give your view on whether you find the allegations Nicola Gallagher made credible or not. You usually go in hard without facts or evidence and routinely are wide of the mark on most things. So why are you so insensitive to Nicola Gallagher and other victims of domestic violence?

To be honest you are happy to answer questions definitively and comprehensively for other posters who still haven't answered them themselves but oddly when the same question was put to yo - you avoided it repeatedly.

Why is it that you don't find Nicola Gallagher's allegations credible?

I've asked several times now and you have yet to show me where I've said I don't believe her. You're a melt, god love whoever is closest to you

Your unwillingness to tell us that you don't her allegations are credible is enough for me. It's a clear as that, you actually went as far to answer that for another poster but when it came to yourself you didn't need an answer and anyone who has posted here knows you of all people are never short of an opinion so needing evidence and proof is certainly not a standard you rely on.

I'll ask again, do you find Nicola Gallaghers allegations credible? Yes/no? I'm taking avoidance as no.

I'll ask again what legal action do you think RG could take against his ex wife?

I've seen multiple damages awards and criminal charges brought against people who have made false allegations in the past so the avenue is absolutely there.

On the other hand Gallagher is actively pursuing an amateur organisation for damaging his character but not the person who has publicly accused him of dragging her through the streets by the hair, hospitalizing her and attacking her while pregnant.

Are you saying there is no legal recourse Gallagher can take action against his wife if these allegations are false?

[David McKeown]

I don't actually think you really care tbh, you're a very angry person.

You've been given plenty answers but still come back saying the same stuff.

I've yet to see a post that would defend RG if there was a grain of truth to the allegations made, and with that it answers the rest of you rant.

By the same token if you were given evidence of the contrary would you believe it?

For someone being abused it's takes some stomach to admit it to themselves never mind going public and getting the police involved. Nobody's claims should ever be dismissed and should be investigated thoroughly.

Given the extent of the allegations and physical evidence it's criminal that it didn't go further, that or the general public haven't been privy to all the facts.

I do care. I am certain you don't though. For a person who is so mouthy and opinionated you can't give your view on whether you find the allegations Nicola Gallagher made credible or not. You usually go in hard without facts or evidence and routinely are wide of the mark on most things. So why are you so insensitive to Nicola Gallagher and other victims of domestic violence?

To be honest you are happy to answer questions definitively and comprehensively for other posters who still haven't answered them themselves but oddly when the same question was put to yo - you avoided it repeatedly.

Why is it that you don't find Nicola Gallagher's allegations credible?

I've asked several times now and you have yet to show me where I've said I don't believe her. You're a melt, god love whoever is closest to you

Your unwillingness to tell us that you don't her allegations are credible is enough for me. It's a clear as that, you actually went as far to answer that for another poster but when it came to yourself you didn't need an answer and anyone who has posted here knows you of all people are never short of an opinion so needing evidence and proof is certainly not a standard you rely on.

I'll ask again, do you find Nicola Gallaghers allegations credible? Yes/no? I'm taking avoidance as no.

I'll ask again what legal action do you think RG could take against his ex wife?

I've seen multiple damages awards and criminal charges brought against people who have made false allegations in the past so the avenue is absolutely there.

On the other hand Gallagher is actively pursuing an amateur organisation for damaging his character but not the person who has publicly accused him of dragging her through the streets by the hair, hospitalizing her and attacking her while pregnant.

Are you saying there is no legal recourse Gallagher can take action against his wife if these allegations are false?

Ahh I thought you didn't understand the law of defamation. Taking proceedings against complainants is incredibly difficult for a number of reasons but primarily due to the fact that the law seeks to not dissuade victims and witnesses of crimes to report them. On top of that the law assumes that acquittals no prosecution decisions etc go a long way towards protecting an accused reputation as they remain innocent until proven guilty. In addition it's not simply that the allegations have to be untrue they must be made with malice. Finally there must be some utility in the redress. Ie there is no point suing someone who doesn't have the ability to pay. The court doesn't exist for paper declarations. On top of that there are the legal fees. So it's unlikely that RG would ever have been advised to sue.

So whilst you like to talk about how you can place no weight on either the criminal process or the family process. You seem to want to place weight on one aspect of the civil process.

I say one aspect of the civil process because of course it would have been open to sue in a civil court for the alleged offences. Like Nikita Hand did.  I've no idea why that wasn't done but it would have been at least as equally possible if not more so.

[Hand of God]

I don't actually think you really care tbh, you're a very angry person.

You've been given plenty answers but still come back saying the same stuff.

I've yet to see a post that would defend RG if there was a grain of truth to the allegations made, and with that it answers the rest of you rant.

By the same token if you were given evidence of the contrary would you believe it?

For someone being abused it's takes some stomach to admit it to themselves never mind going public and getting the police involved. Nobody's claims should ever be dismissed and should be investigated thoroughly.

Given the extent of the allegations and physical evidence it's criminal that it didn't go further, that or the general public haven't been privy to all the facts.

I do care. I am certain you don't though. For a person who is so mouthy and opinionated you can't give your view on whether you find the allegations Nicola Gallagher made credible or not. You usually go in hard without facts or evidence and routinely are wide of the mark on most things. So why are you so insensitive to Nicola Gallagher and other victims of domestic violence?

To be honest you are happy to answer questions definitively and comprehensively for other posters who still haven't answered them themselves but oddly when the same question was put to yo - you avoided it repeatedly.

Why is it that you don't find Nicola Gallagher's allegations credible?

I've asked several times now and you have yet to show me where I've said I don't believe her. You're a melt, god love whoever is closest to you

Your unwillingness to tell us that you don't her allegations are credible is enough for me. It's a clear as that, you actually went as far to answer that for another poster but when it came to yourself you didn't need an answer and anyone who has posted here knows you of all people are never short of an opinion so needing evidence and proof is certainly not a standard you rely on.

I'll ask again, do you find Nicola Gallaghers allegations credible? Yes/no? I'm taking avoidance as no.

I'll ask again what legal action do you think RG could take against his ex wife?

I've seen multiple damages awards and criminal charges brought against people who have made false allegations in the past so the avenue is absolutely there.

On the other hand Gallagher is actively pursuing an amateur organisation for damaging his character but not the person who has publicly accused him of dragging her through the streets by the hair, hospitalizing her and attacking her while pregnant.

Are you saying there is no legal recourse Gallagher can take action against his wife if these allegations are false?

Ahh I thought you didn't understand the law of defamation. Taking proceedings against complainants is incredibly difficult for a number of reasons but primarily due to the fact that the law seeks to not dissuade victims and witnesses of crimes to report them. On top of that the law assumes that acquittals no prosecution decisions etc go a long way towards protecting an accused reputation as they remain innocent until proven guilty. In addition it's not simply that the allegations have to be untrue they must be made with malice. Finally there must be some utility in the redress. Ie there is no point suing someone who doesn't have the ability to pay. The court doesn't exist for paper declarations. On top of that there are the legal fees. So it's unlikely that RG would ever have been advised to sue.

So whilst you like to talk about how you can place no weight on either the criminal process or the family process. You seem to want to place weight on one aspect of the civil process.

I say one aspect of the civil process because of course it would have been open to sue in a civil court for the alleged offences. Like Nikita Hand did.  I've no idea why that wasn't done but it would have been at least as equally possible if not more so.

But there is in an inconsistency there that is perplexing. Gallagher has no issue taking legal action against Burns and the GAA on the basis of them making an internal decision on his involvement in the sport due to allegations from his ex wife.

At the same time he has taken no legal action against the person who publicly made these allegations. That to me is mind boggling, surely that's the issue you want to tackle and clear your name.

Gallaghers strategy to me from the outset has been to ride this storm and hope it passes over and becomes yesterday's news rather than fighting to clear his name. I think an innocent would be far more worried about tackling the allegations rather than the impact they have on him being involved in an amateur sport. He's relying on legal cases where the threshold to convict and bring to trial are extremely high. The GAA doesn't need that same level of certainty to take action.