RG at arms length

[tiempo]

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

[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.

[Baile Brigín 2]

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

What ban? What was overturned? Be specific please

[Saffron_sam20]

The item on public record i am on about is the incident that happened in Clones,The fermanagh fballers wife made the comment on fb bcking her up but didnt report it to the Garda when NG make the public statement at the time.

I don't understand your point. Are you saying both Nicola Gallagher and his wife made the allegation up?

I've read his post a few times, and I'm struggling to see where Wildweasel has said they made it up?

Put it up in bold so I can read it again

I'm asking him what he is trying to say. He hasn't answered me, maybe you should let him answer it. Are you saying they made it up? Are you saying that the allegations Nicola Gallagher has made are not credible? Are you saying that her friend, a wife of a former teammates of Gallagher, is also not credible?

It's no wonder we have such a terrible stigma in the north with domestic abuse when an allegation of physical abuse is attempted to be discredited.

They are very detailed allegations made a victim who waived her anonymity about Gallagher. I just don't get why some people are so adamant to defend Gallagher from these allegations. He should not be involved in the GAA as long as they follow him around.

Who is defending him? You keep making up allegations on posters here ffs! Saying they are defending him and what not, without actually showing any proof of it! Put your head in a cooler and breathe

You're not making much sense here. You are going to great lengths to argue with me here and are accusing me of things I never said. You are answering questions for other posters who won't answer themselves. When the same question is put to you, you won't answer that either.

All I have said is Burns was right to intervene when certain clubs disgraced themselves and pursued Gallagher in the knowledge of what he is accused of. My second point is that I find her and her account of events to be very credible and this is why I think Gallagher should be a pariah within the GAA with this hanging over him.

You need to ask yourself why you are going to great lengths to argue those points. What's your motivation here?

You were happy to answer questions for other posters so I'll ask you again what I asked that poster and you wouldn't answer yourself.

What is it about Nicola Gallagher and her allegations you don't find credible?

We all know you are quite mouthy and full of opinions on lots of different things, I'm just surprised you don't want to offer this specific opinion on a topic you are happy to give lots of other opinions on in favour of Rory Gallagher.

I'm simply curious what you mean by whilst these allegations are still hanging around him?  Do you mean that the only way he should be back involved is if the two individuals did a volte face and came out and said they lied? I mean there's no mechanism for anyone to prove their innocence.  If so where is the line?

Again for the avoidance of doubt I am in no way casting aspirations on those involved. I am asking from a more theoretical perspective

The allegations for me are monstrous, multiples hospitalisations, broken bones, dragged down a public street by her hair, gouging broken ribs, bitings and strangling on a woman. What has been alleged there is horrific.

This isn't a case of whether he should be in jail or not. There is a different precedent there to satisfy before it goes to trial or gaining convictions.

What matters is we there is any ounce of credibility to them then Gallagher should be nowhere near the GAA. Burns should never have been in a place to intervene. Once the allegations became public then that should have been it.

The Derry County Board can be criticised but eventually did the right thing at their own accord. The clubs however who have pursued Gallagher in full knowledge of what he is alleged to have committed are utterly disgraced and have brought the GAA into disrepute IMO.

We are not talking legal. The GAA should be protecting their reputation and setting examples for the public. This is the key issue here, if we deem the allegations to be credible then we must treat with seriousness they are worth. Dismissing or looking for technicalities for Gallagher to operate is very poor optics particularly with domestic violence issues up north.

A telling thing for me is Gallagher has never tried to clear his name, IMO. He has hoped the whole thing would blow over and become yesterday's news. Has he ever actually denied the allegations other than cite investigations of systems that consistently fail victims of domestic violence where the evidence threshold is extremely high?

I happen to find Nicola Gallagher extremely credible. It was a very brave thing to come forward, she addressed the press on it, she provided huge amount of specific details and one specific incident was even corroborated by a wife of Gallagher's former team mates. So why are certain people willing to dismiss this so flippantly?

It's either one of two things here, Gallagher is the victim of a vindictive ex who is attempting to torch him with false allegations or Gallagher is guilty of the monstrous allegations. The GAA have an onus to judge this on the basis of who is more credible here, not looking after their own member as he has a big profile and this is huge issue across the nation with GAA stars. If they are talented - clubs, counties and the association itself are willing to overlook actions that should see they expelled. This is at the extreme gravity of what a member has been publicly accused of before.

Quick question, had this went to court and RG found not guilty what would your stance be

[Rossfan]

Had GONE

[Hand of God]

The item on public record i am on about is the incident that happened in Clones,The fermanagh fballers wife made the comment on fb bcking her up but didnt report it to the Garda when NG make the public statement at the time.

I don't understand your point. Are you saying both Nicola Gallagher and his wife made the allegation up?

I've read his post a few times, and I'm struggling to see where Wildweasel has said they made it up?

Put it up in bold so I can read it again

I'm asking him what he is trying to say. He hasn't answered me, maybe you should let him answer it. Are you saying they made it up? Are you saying that the allegations Nicola Gallagher has made are not credible? Are you saying that her friend, a wife of a former teammates of Gallagher, is also not credible?

It's no wonder we have such a terrible stigma in the north with domestic abuse when an allegation of physical abuse is attempted to be discredited.

They are very detailed allegations made a victim who waived her anonymity about Gallagher. I just don't get why some people are so adamant to defend Gallagher from these allegations. He should not be involved in the GAA as long as they follow him around.

Who is defending him? You keep making up allegations on posters here ffs! Saying they are defending him and what not, without actually showing any proof of it! Put your head in a cooler and breathe

You're not making much sense here. You are going to great lengths to argue with me here and are accusing me of things I never said. You are answering questions for other posters who won't answer themselves. When the same question is put to you, you won't answer that either.

All I have said is Burns was right to intervene when certain clubs disgraced themselves and pursued Gallagher in the knowledge of what he is accused of. My second point is that I find her and her account of events to be very credible and this is why I think Gallagher should be a pariah within the GAA with this hanging over him.

You need to ask yourself why you are going to great lengths to argue those points. What's your motivation here?

You were happy to answer questions for other posters so I'll ask you again what I asked that poster and you wouldn't answer yourself.

What is it about Nicola Gallagher and her allegations you don't find credible?

We all know you are quite mouthy and full of opinions on lots of different things, I'm just surprised you don't want to offer this specific opinion on a topic you are happy to give lots of other opinions on in favour of Rory Gallagher.

I'm simply curious what you mean by whilst these allegations are still hanging around him?  Do you mean that the only way he should be back involved is if the two individuals did a volte face and came out and said they lied? I mean there's no mechanism for anyone to prove their innocence.  If so where is the line?

Again for the avoidance of doubt I am in no way casting aspirations on those involved. I am asking from a more theoretical perspective

The allegations for me are monstrous, multiples hospitalisations, broken bones, dragged down a public street by her hair, gouging broken ribs, bitings and strangling on a woman. What has been alleged there is horrific.

This isn't a case of whether he should be in jail or not. There is a different precedent there to satisfy before it goes to trial or gaining convictions.

What matters is we there is any ounce of credibility to them then Gallagher should be nowhere near the GAA. Burns should never have been in a place to intervene. Once the allegations became public then that should have been it.

The Derry County Board can be criticised but eventually did the right thing at their own accord. The clubs however who have pursued Gallagher in full knowledge of what he is alleged to have committed are utterly disgraced and have brought the GAA into disrepute IMO.

We are not talking legal. The GAA should be protecting their reputation and setting examples for the public. This is the key issue here, if we deem the allegations to be credible then we must treat with seriousness they are worth. Dismissing or looking for technicalities for Gallagher to operate is very poor optics particularly with domestic violence issues up north.

A telling thing for me is Gallagher has never tried to clear his name, IMO. He has hoped the whole thing would blow over and become yesterday's news. Has he ever actually denied the allegations other than cite investigations of systems that consistently fail victims of domestic violence where the evidence threshold is extremely high?

I happen to find Nicola Gallagher extremely credible. It was a very brave thing to come forward, she addressed the press on it, she provided huge amount of specific details and one specific incident was even corroborated by a wife of Gallagher's former team mates. So why are certain people willing to dismiss this so flippantly?

It's either one of two things here, Gallagher is the victim of a vindictive ex who is attempting to torch him with false allegations or Gallagher is guilty of the monstrous allegations. The GAA have an onus to judge this on the basis of who is more credible here, not looking after their own member as he has a big profile and this is huge issue across the nation with GAA stars. If they are talented - clubs, counties and the association itself are willing to overlook actions that should see they expelled. This is at the extreme gravity of what a member has been publicly accused of before.

Quick question, had this went to court and RG found not guilty what would your stance be

I don't think it would severely change. It would depend on the evidence and testimony being heard really. The verdict would be insignificant as the threshold to a) get to trial and b) get a conviction are extremely high.

McGregor for instance never went to trial for criminal but was found guilty in a civil case. That's the level of difference you are talking about. Paddy Jackson was found not guilty in his trial but I have my views on that.

What we know of the legal system in reference to sexual assault and domestic violence is that it is very hard to convict and that the system routinely fails to protect victims or serve them justice.

We should not be discussing criminal trials here though, we should be discussing the appropriate actions of the GAA to allegations of this nature against one of its members. I think it's deplorable the way certain clubs openly pursued Gallagher amid these allegations. I think Jarlath Burns was forced into the only moral decision he should make and it was something he should never be have been forced to do.

[Saffron_sam20]

The item on public record i am on about is the incident that happened in Clones,The fermanagh fballers wife made the comment on fb bcking her up but didnt report it to the Garda when NG make the public statement at the time.

I don't understand your point. Are you saying both Nicola Gallagher and his wife made the allegation up?

I've read his post a few times, and I'm struggling to see where Wildweasel has said they made it up?

Put it up in bold so I can read it again

I'm asking him what he is trying to say. He hasn't answered me, maybe you should let him answer it. Are you saying they made it up? Are you saying that the allegations Nicola Gallagher has made are not credible? Are you saying that her friend, a wife of a former teammates of Gallagher, is also not credible?

It's no wonder we have such a terrible stigma in the north with domestic abuse when an allegation of physical abuse is attempted to be discredited.

They are very detailed allegations made a victim who waived her anonymity about Gallagher. I just don't get why some people are so adamant to defend Gallagher from these allegations. He should not be involved in the GAA as long as they follow him around.

Who is defending him? You keep making up allegations on posters here ffs! Saying they are defending him and what not, without actually showing any proof of it! Put your head in a cooler and breathe

You're not making much sense here. You are going to great lengths to argue with me here and are accusing me of things I never said. You are answering questions for other posters who won't answer themselves. When the same question is put to you, you won't answer that either.

All I have said is Burns was right to intervene when certain clubs disgraced themselves and pursued Gallagher in the knowledge of what he is accused of. My second point is that I find her and her account of events to be very credible and this is why I think Gallagher should be a pariah within the GAA with this hanging over him.

You need to ask yourself why you are going to great lengths to argue those points. What's your motivation here?

You were happy to answer questions for other posters so I'll ask you again what I asked that poster and you wouldn't answer yourself.

What is it about Nicola Gallagher and her allegations you don't find credible?

We all know you are quite mouthy and full of opinions on lots of different things, I'm just surprised you don't want to offer this specific opinion on a topic you are happy to give lots of other opinions on in favour of Rory Gallagher.

I'm simply curious what you mean by whilst these allegations are still hanging around him?  Do you mean that the only way he should be back involved is if the two individuals did a volte face and came out and said they lied? I mean there's no mechanism for anyone to prove their innocence.  If so where is the line?

Again for the avoidance of doubt I am in no way casting aspirations on those involved. I am asking from a more theoretical perspective

The allegations for me are monstrous, multiples hospitalisations, broken bones, dragged down a public street by her hair, gouging broken ribs, bitings and strangling on a woman. What has been alleged there is horrific.

This isn't a case of whether he should be in jail or not. There is a different precedent there to satisfy before it goes to trial or gaining convictions.

What matters is we there is any ounce of credibility to them then Gallagher should be nowhere near the GAA. Burns should never have been in a place to intervene. Once the allegations became public then that should have been it.

The Derry County Board can be criticised but eventually did the right thing at their own accord. The clubs however who have pursued Gallagher in full knowledge of what he is alleged to have committed are utterly disgraced and have brought the GAA into disrepute IMO.

We are not talking legal. The GAA should be protecting their reputation and setting examples for the public. This is the key issue here, if we deem the allegations to be credible then we must treat with seriousness they are worth. Dismissing or looking for technicalities for Gallagher to operate is very poor optics particularly with domestic violence issues up north.

A telling thing for me is Gallagher has never tried to clear his name, IMO. He has hoped the whole thing would blow over and become yesterday's news. Has he ever actually denied the allegations other than cite investigations of systems that consistently fail victims of domestic violence where the evidence threshold is extremely high?

I happen to find Nicola Gallagher extremely credible. It was a very brave thing to come forward, she addressed the press on it, she provided huge amount of specific details and one specific incident was even corroborated by a wife of Gallagher's former team mates. So why are certain people willing to dismiss this so flippantly?

It's either one of two things here, Gallagher is the victim of a vindictive ex who is attempting to torch him with false allegations or Gallagher is guilty of the monstrous allegations. The GAA have an onus to judge this on the basis of who is more credible here, not looking after their own member as he has a big profile and this is huge issue across the nation with GAA stars. If they are talented - clubs, counties and the association itself are willing to overlook actions that should see they expelled. This is at the extreme gravity of what a member has been publicly accused of before.

Quick question, had this went to court and RG found not guilty what would your stance be

I don't think it would severely change. It would depend on the evidence and testimony being heard really. The verdict would be insignificant as the threshold to a) get to trial and b) get a conviction are extremely high.

McGregor for instance never went to trial for criminal but was found guilty in a civil case. That's the level of difference you are talking about. Paddy Jackson was found not guilty in his trial but I have my views on that.

What we know of the legal system in reference to sexual assault and domestic violence is that it is very hard to convict and that the system routinely fails to protect victims or serve them justice.

We should not be discussing criminal trials here though, we should be discussing the appropriate actions of the GAA to allegations of this nature against one of its members. I think it's deplorable the way certain clubs openly pursued Gallagher amid these allegations. I think Jarlath Burns was forced into the only moral decision he should make and it was something he should never be have been forced to do.

So for you allegations are enough, you realise how dangerous that is?

We really really are now looking for trial by social media.

I have zero time for RG and wouldn't really want him near Antrim but stopping someone from being involved in GAA for something they've allegedly done which is outside the GAA really doesn't sit well with me

[Hand of God]

So for you allegations are enough, you realise how dangerous that is?

We really really are now looking for trial by social media.

I have zero time for RG and wouldn't really want him near Antrim but stopping someone from being involved in GAA for something they've allegedly done which is outside the GAA really doesn't sit well with me

You seem to have an awful lot of time for Rory Gallagher actually. You think it's ok for him to continue on the GAA when he's been alleged to have attacked and hospitalized his wife numerous times, threw down the stairs while she was pregnant, bit her on the face and tries to strangle her.

What about Nicola Gallaghers allegations do you not view credible?

It seriously is no wonder we have such a domestic violence problem in the north when people like you show such skepticism to victims of domestic violence. Go have a read about the Jonathan Cresswell case and read about how a serial abuser got away with it for years which culminated in the murder of Katie Simpson.

This isn't a legal matter, it's a GAA one and I've a serious issue with Rory Gallagher being involved when such credible allegations hang over him.

[David McKeown]

The item on public record i am on about is the incident that happened in Clones,The fermanagh fballers wife made the comment on fb bcking her up but didnt report it to the Garda when NG make the public statement at the time.

I don't understand your point. Are you saying both Nicola Gallagher and his wife made the allegation up?

I've read his post a few times, and I'm struggling to see where Wildweasel has said they made it up?

Put it up in bold so I can read it again

I'm asking him what he is trying to say. He hasn't answered me, maybe you should let him answer it. Are you saying they made it up? Are you saying that the allegations Nicola Gallagher has made are not credible? Are you saying that her friend, a wife of a former teammates of Gallagher, is also not credible?

It's no wonder we have such a terrible stigma in the north with domestic abuse when an allegation of physical abuse is attempted to be discredited.

They are very detailed allegations made a victim who waived her anonymity about Gallagher. I just don't get why some people are so adamant to defend Gallagher from these allegations. He should not be involved in the GAA as long as they follow him around.

Who is defending him? You keep making up allegations on posters here ffs! Saying they are defending him and what not, without actually showing any proof of it! Put your head in a cooler and breathe

You're not making much sense here. You are going to great lengths to argue with me here and are accusing me of things I never said. You are answering questions for other posters who won't answer themselves. When the same question is put to you, you won't answer that either.

All I have said is Burns was right to intervene when certain clubs disgraced themselves and pursued Gallagher in the knowledge of what he is accused of. My second point is that I find her and her account of events to be very credible and this is why I think Gallagher should be a pariah within the GAA with this hanging over him.

You need to ask yourself why you are going to great lengths to argue those points. What's your motivation here?

You were happy to answer questions for other posters so I'll ask you again what I asked that poster and you wouldn't answer yourself.

What is it about Nicola Gallagher and her allegations you don't find credible?

We all know you are quite mouthy and full of opinions on lots of different things, I'm just surprised you don't want to offer this specific opinion on a topic you are happy to give lots of other opinions on in favour of Rory Gallagher.

I'm simply curious what you mean by whilst these allegations are still hanging around him?  Do you mean that the only way he should be back involved is if the two individuals did a volte face and came out and said they lied? I mean there's no mechanism for anyone to prove their innocence.  If so where is the line?

Again for the avoidance of doubt I am in no way casting aspirations on those involved. I am asking from a more theoretical perspective

The allegations for me are monstrous, multiples hospitalisations, broken bones, dragged down a public street by her hair, gouging broken ribs, bitings and strangling on a woman. What has been alleged there is horrific.

This isn't a case of whether he should be in jail or not. There is a different precedent there to satisfy before it goes to trial or gaining convictions.

What matters is we there is any ounce of credibility to them then Gallagher should be nowhere near the GAA. Burns should never have been in a place to intervene. Once the allegations became public then that should have been it.

The Derry County Board can be criticised but eventually did the right thing at their own accord. The clubs however who have pursued Gallagher in full knowledge of what he is alleged to have committed are utterly disgraced and have brought the GAA into disrepute IMO.

We are not talking legal. The GAA should be protecting their reputation and setting examples for the public. This is the key issue here, if we deem the allegations to be credible then we must treat with seriousness they are worth. Dismissing or looking for technicalities for Gallagher to operate is very poor optics particularly with domestic violence issues up north.

A telling thing for me is Gallagher has never tried to clear his name, IMO. He has hoped the whole thing would blow over and become yesterday's news. Has he ever actually denied the allegations other than cite investigations of systems that consistently fail victims of domestic violence where the evidence threshold is extremely high?

I happen to find Nicola Gallagher extremely credible. It was a very brave thing to come forward, she addressed the press on it, she provided huge amount of specific details and one specific incident was even corroborated by a wife of Gallagher's former team mates. So why are certain people willing to dismiss this so flippantly?

It's either one of two things here, Gallagher is the victim of a vindictive ex who is attempting to torch him with false allegations or Gallagher is guilty of the monstrous allegations. The GAA have an onus to judge this on the basis of who is more credible here, not looking after their own member as he has a big profile and this is huge issue across the nation with GAA stars. If they are talented - clubs, counties and the association itself are willing to overlook actions that should see they expelled. This is at the extreme gravity of what a member has been publicly accused of before.

Quick question, had this went to court and RG found not guilty what would your stance be

I don't think it would severely change. It would depend on the evidence and testimony being heard really. The verdict would be insignificant as the threshold to a) get to trial and b) get a conviction are extremely high.

McGregor for instance never went to trial for criminal but was found guilty in a civil case. That's the level of difference you are talking about. Paddy Jackson was found not guilty in his trial but I have my views on that.

What we know of the legal system in reference to sexual assault and domestic violence is that it is very hard to convict and that the system routinely fails to protect victims or serve them justice.

We should not be discussing criminal trials here though, we should be discussing the appropriate actions of the GAA to allegations of this nature against one of its members. I think it's deplorable the way certain clubs openly pursued Gallagher amid these allegations. I think Jarlath Burns was forced into the only moral decision he should make and it was something he should never be have been forced to do.

Lets use the Jackson one as an example.  That was a case that went to trial where a jury having heard all the evidence clearly did not believe the complainant.  If that's not enough to put allegations to bed what is?

Why don't you factor in the fact that three different investigations investigated the allegations and could not find sufficient evidence and or corroboration to allow for a charge which is a very low bar?  Why don't you factor in the findings of the family court which would have considered all of these allegations before effectively dismissing them? Why don't you factor in his denials?

I just dont understand why you don't factor in every consideration and why you think Jarlath Burns shouldn't either?   

[Hand of God]

Lets use the Jackson one as an example.  That was a case that went to trial where a jury having heard all the evidence clearly did not believe the complainant.  If that's not enough to put allegations to bed what is?

Why don't you factor in the fact that three different investigations investigated the allegations and could not find sufficient evidence and or corroboration to allow for a charge which is a very low bar?  Why don't you factor in the findings of the family court which would have considered all of these allegations before effectively dismissing them? Why don't you factor in his denials?

I just dont understand why you don't factor in every consideration and why you think Jarlath Burns shouldn't either?   

You are being extremely disingenuous here. You are citing the legal system as being wholly appropriate and a litmus test of justice to the alleged victim.

That is utter nonsense. The legal system consistently fails victims. A person being found not guilty is effectively a verdict of their not being enough evidence to 100% be sure someone committed a crime or not. It is not actually saying they 100% didn't do it.

Conor McGregor was not even sent to a criminal trial for his sexual assault as the threshold to prove it is extremely high. Conversely when he went to a civil case, which is on the basis of the balance of probabilities rather than certainty, he was found guilty.

The GAA in the case of these allegations and the brutal nature of them have to be going on the basis of whether they believe they are credible or could have taken place. We have a named victim, we have detailed specific allegations and we actually have a third party who corroborated these allegations. Why do you believe they are not credible and why do you believe the GAA should show the victim and domestic violence such disregard.

[nrico2006]

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?

[Milltown Row2]

Not talking about this case. This is a separate question

But do you (hog)take everything on the internet as being truthful, or the statement made by someone as fact or is it just your personal judgment?

Btw anyone that carries out a fraction of what she has put out with that post is rotten.

[JoG2]

Legal system = bad
Facebook system = good

[David McKeown]

Lets use the Jackson one as an example.  That was a case that went to trial where a jury having heard all the evidence clearly did not believe the complainant.  If that's not enough to put allegations to bed what is?

Why don't you factor in the fact that three different investigations investigated the allegations and could not find sufficient evidence and or corroboration to allow for a charge which is a very low bar?  Why don't you factor in the findings of the family court which would have considered all of these allegations before effectively dismissing them? Why don't you factor in his denials?

I just dont understand why you don't factor in every consideration and why you think Jarlath Burns shouldn't either?   

You are being extremely disingenuous here. You are citing the legal system as being wholly appropriate and a litmus test of justice to the alleged victim.

That is utter nonsense. The legal system consistently fails victims. A person being found not guilty is effectively a verdict of their not being enough evidence to 100% be sure someone committed a crime or not. It is not actually saying they 100% didn't do it.

Conor McGregor was not even sent to a criminal trial for his sexual assault as the threshold to prove it is extremely high. Conversely when he went to a civil case, which is on the basis of the balance of probabilities rather than certainty, he was found guilty.

The GAA in the case of these allegations and the brutal nature of them have to be going on the basis of whether they believe they are credible or could have taken place. We have a named victim, we have detailed specific allegations and we actually have a third party who corroborated these allegations. Why do you believe they are not credible and why do you believe the GAA should show the victim and domestic violence such disregard.

Let's get a few things straight. Firstly I am not being disingenuous. I have consistently said that in isolation acquittals, no prosecution decisions etc should not be determinative of the natter. I have never cited the legal system as wholly appropriate. The system is far from infallible but so is some idea of believing every allegation anyone ever makes.

I have though asked the question why you choose to ignore the plethora of events in this case that lead away from the conclusion that the allegations are credible.

You have then raised Jackson in response to a question as to what an accused individual has to do put the allegations behind them saying that in that case you still had your suspicions.

The Jackson case is one of the clearest examples in recent years of a jury hearing all the evidence unanimously acquitting all accused. Given in particular the way the case was presented against Blaine McElroy it's difficult to see how the jury could have so quickly come to that conclusion unless they did not believe the complainant in that case. You've indicated that still wouldn't be enough for you.

I have consistently said I don't know whether the allegations against RG are true or not. I've consistently said there are a number of factors that need to be considered to primarily ensure the safety of everyone and b where possible to treat everyone fairly.

As an aside. Criminal trials don't work on a 100% proof basis, it's beyond a reasonable doubt. Prosecutors will often tell juries that means they have to be firmly convinced but do not need to be certain.

[tyrone08]

Legal system = bad
Facebook system = good

Legal system is far from good. If it was the dirtbags in the epstein files wouldn't be walking around.