The DUP thread

Started by armaghniac, December 31, 2022, 05:22:31 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

DaleCooper

Quote from: marty34 on June 23, 2026, 05:59:23 PMI wonder will anybody else come forward now in the light of this case?

Surely the UUP/DUP/OO knew about this years ago? Peoole around him must have knew if they went to the meeting in Armoy etc.

But what a downfall for him. Great bravery by the victims.

Jeffreys bro in law was convicted trying to meet a 13yo. I wonder if that gave them the encouragement or if wheels were already in motion.

p3427977

Quote from: Main Street on June 23, 2026, 07:20:01 PM
Quote from: p3427977 on June 23, 2026, 05:39:22 PM
Quote from: Main Street on June 23, 2026, 04:58:59 PM
Quote from: Hereiam on June 23, 2026, 07:29:44 AMWe only got a snippet of the evidence, dont think we need to know all the details
I am not interested in lurid details but considering what was allowed to be reported re Jeffrey, in comparison there was next to zero evidence reported that is convincing about Lady Dee's guilt.
You don't need to be convinced. It's the jury who needs to be convinced.
trying to be a smart áss?
No it's the truth.

Baile Brigín 2

Quote from: GTP on June 23, 2026, 06:09:26 PMWhy is anyone taking the JMcA protocol conspiracy seriously? You could apply the same MI5 made them do it bullshit to every decision made.
The story should be how an MP is distastefully trying to use the case to further his political agenda.
Everyone agrees it's cynical in the extreme to use this for positioning with unionism for votes. Even by his standards this is odious.

But that doesn't mean it's impossible for Donaldson to have been compromised somewhere along the line.

GTP

Quote from: Baile Brigín 2 on June 23, 2026, 10:14:20 PM
Quote from: GTP on June 23, 2026, 06:09:26 PMWhy is anyone taking the JMcA protocol conspiracy seriously? You could apply the same MI5 made them do it bullshit to every decision made.
The story should be how an MP is distastefully trying to use the case to further his political agenda.
Everyone agrees it's cynical in the extreme to use this for positioning with unionism for votes. Even by his standards this is odious.

But that doesn't mean it's impossible for Donaldson to have been compromised somewhere along the line.
I know it isn't impossible but giving it any oxygen as a legitimate thought when there is absolutely no evidence lends JMcA plausibility he does not deserve.
The protocol would also be a bizarre thing to get anyone to sign up for if you did want to blackmail a politician.

RedHand88

Lads, lads, it's JA, not JMcA

Milltown Row2

Stevie Wonder has put that plaster on your man's face from Ghana
None of us are getting out of here alive, so please stop treating yourself like an after thought.

Main Street

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on June 23, 2026, 10:41:55 PMStevie Wonder has put that plaster on your man's face from Ghana
Had a bit too much,  again!!! ;D

Milltown Row2

Quote from: Main Street on June 23, 2026, 11:03:17 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on June 23, 2026, 10:41:55 PMStevie Wonder has put that plaster on your man's face from Ghana
Had a bit too much,  again!!! ;D

Lol wrong thread! Tea total on school nights too  ;D
None of us are getting out of here alive, so please stop treating yourself like an after thought.

Baile Brigín 2

Quote from: GTP on June 23, 2026, 10:27:04 PM
Quote from: Baile Brigín 2 on June 23, 2026, 10:14:20 PM
Quote from: GTP on June 23, 2026, 06:09:26 PMWhy is anyone taking the JMcA protocol conspiracy seriously? You could apply the same MI5 made them do it bullshit to every decision made.
The story should be how an MP is distastefully trying to use the case to further his political agenda.
Everyone agrees it's cynical in the extreme to use this for positioning with unionism for votes. Even by his standards this is odious.

But that doesn't mean it's impossible for Donaldson to have been compromised somewhere along the line.
I know it isn't impossible but giving it any oxygen as a legitimate thought when there is absolutely no evidence lends JMcA plausibility he does not deserve.
The protocol would also be a bizarre thing to get anyone to sign up for if you did want to blackmail a politician.
Fair enough to a point. But people on this thread are saying 'people must have known'. Then when JA says what he says we shouldn't give his conspiracy any credence because he is a w**ker.

Why would it be bizarre? Unionist thought needed to be shoved in a direction and it was. If we go all conspiracy it does explain why the DUP were opposed to it, voted for it, then suddenly opposed it again. We never understood that.

nrico2006

Quote from: David McKeown on June 23, 2026, 07:05:44 PM
Quote from: nrico2006 on June 23, 2026, 02:40:50 PMWhat can happen to the wife?

4 options now open to the court.

1. Public Protection Order (without restrictions);
2. Public Protection Order with Restrictions;
3. Supervision and Assessment Order;
4. Absolute Discharge. 

A discharge is highly unlikely in this case.

A public protection order is basically an order requiring an individual to be detained in hospital for treatment.

The with restrictions part sets out what level of restrictions can be placed on the individual and who ultimately has the power to order a discharge.

A supervision and assessment order doesn't require a person to be detained but does place some restrictions on liberty such as requirements to report to specific services or undergo specific treatments.

Good man David!
'To the extreme I rock a mic like a vandal, light up a stage and wax a chump like a candle.'

Main Street

We all know that Jeffrey has been found guilty and we have had access to enough of the evidence to have a sense of the seriousness of the charges against him but not for Lady Dee, no evidence of any substance has been revealed to support the verdict against her, not least to support the public ignominy directed against her. Are we living in a big brother knows best world, therefore the prejudices of the public that she must have known that she must have facilitated her husband´s gross sexual abuses are to be supported by such flimsy evidence?

David McKeown

Quote from: Main Street on June 24, 2026, 02:29:56 AMWe all know that Jeffrey has been found guilty and we have had access to enough of the evidence to have a sense of the seriousness of the charges against him but not for Lady Dee, no evidence of any substance has been revealed to support the verdict against her, not least to support the public ignominy directed against her. Are we living in a big brother knows best world, therefore the prejudices of the public that she must have known that she must have facilitated her husband´s gross sexual abuses are to be supported by such flimsy evidence?

MS there is a few different things that arise with the determination into ED. Firstly she wasn't on trial. She faced a finding of fact hearing. The reason I was stressing that earlier is that it is significantly different to a trial. The evidence in it can not be dissected to the same extent that it can in trial so inherently there is less evidence heard and it is less likely to be reported.

Secondly given the nature of this trial and the offences as well as the real possibility of jigsaw identification a large amount of the evidence can not be reported on.

What we do know is that the jury (or at least 10 of them anyway as I've seen conflicting reports on this) were satisfied that the evidence which they heard but we hadn't was enough to leave them convinced that the prosecution evidence was sufficient to allow them to conclude that the act was done.

The defence also don't seem to have made any legal challenge regarding whether or not there was enough evidence for the matter to be left to the jury.
2022 Allianz League Prediction Competition Winner

Sportacus

Donaldson was full of entitlement: Knight of the Realm; Privy Council; Orange Order; UDR; MP and the list goes on. He brazened it out with his victims to the bitter end, put them through hell one more time - the worst type.

It now appears quite a few politicians and journalists knew he was at least a liar and led a double life in London - why was he never called out?

JPGJOHNNYG

Quote from: Sportacus on June 24, 2026, 09:23:42 AMDonaldson was full of entitlement: Knight of the Realm; Privy Council; Orange Order; UDR; MP and the list goes on. He brazened it out with his victims to the bitter end, put them through hell one more time - the worst type.

It now appears quite a few politicians and journalists knew he was at least a liar and led a double life in London - why was he never called out?

Isn't funny how quick they all are in creeping out of the woodwork saying they knew he was dodgy because of x,y and z yet never said anything when he was such a powerful figure.

brokencrossbar1

Quote from: JPGJOHNNYG on June 24, 2026, 09:42:19 AM
Quote from: Sportacus on June 24, 2026, 09:23:42 AMDonaldson was full of entitlement: Knight of the Realm; Privy Council; Orange Order; UDR; MP and the list goes on. He brazened it out with his victims to the bitter end, put them through hell one more time - the worst type.

It now appears quite a few politicians and journalists knew he was at least a liar and led a double life in London - why was he never called out?

Isn't funny how quick they all are in creeping out of the woodwork saying they knew he was dodgy because of x,y and z yet never said anything when he was such a powerful figure.

Spotlight on Friday will be an interesting watch....apparently goes in deeply on his double life,  heavy drinking,  prostitutes etc etc.  If it was as bad as it is alleged to have been surely there were questions being being asked behind the scenes and you'd really have to question the DUP having him as leader.