To ask all Irish women to please show solidarity today?

[RottenTomatoes959]

Please join the rallies in support of the victim in belfast today,theres rallies in Dublin belfast and cork. Enough is enough and we can not take this one lying down. Show support to the brave young woman and lets not have this trial be in vain.
Something has to change.

I didn't actually, I said that could be the case in some cases, never specifically mentioned this case was tampered.

Jewelofthenile So all these rape victims were lying because the court says something so because there was not evidence to convict the accused.

I think a big popular myth About rape that the public believe is that violence = rape. Some form of physical holding down or body harm has to be present to really be rape. Thing is though, that's only one subset of rape.

There is also rape by coercion, rape by intimidation and rape by power imbalance. These wouldn't have to be violent but would be classed as rape because the individual being raped felt trapped and consent was not something given fully and happily.

So in this scenario the lady may not have been beaten up or slapped but may well have been intimidated or be victim to power imbalance (much bigger than her, older and more than one).

This does not mean it was not rape. It may mean that the men didn't see it as rape. But that's there own issue not being able to see a refusal/tears etc as a clear no.

Whatever the case, these men did have some disgusting and objectifying messages about women between each other. That on its own makes them scumbags but add the event you are left with men at the very least who thinks that they gained consent at best and when realising not think she should be grateful they bothered. At worst, they deliberately targeted a woman and used their fame and body to intimidate her.

Either way, I don't feel sorry for them.

She was injured for fuck's sake. 24 hours later she was still bleeding. Some evidence suggested he put his whole hand inside her. If that's not considered violent then I fucking despair, I really do.

OhI know Tinkly but some asshole will say she loved it or some fucked up shit like that. I was mentioning rape cases in general for the most part - the same issues keep coming up.

I just despair when you have to prove invasion of your body was in some way not obtained. Like you chose that humiliation by choice.

I've been in Dublin the past few weeks, but sadly was not able to make it there.

I really don't know what to believe in this case. Only the people directly involved can truly know.

But what I do know for certain is that trial, reporting and outcome are GREAT news for all rapists. It certainly means less women coming forward.

I’ve gotten as far as P4, but this is a very frustrating thread to read.

The men, as shown by their Whatsapps, are misogynistic shitbags without question. But that’s NOT why they were on trial and neither does that prove rape. So to keep raising it as some kind of evidence that the wrong verdict was reached is ridiculous.

It’s irrelevant.

Based on the available evidence, the jury probably reached the correct verdict. Was there a reasonable alternative narrative that might have been true? Yes. So they had to be acquitted.

Does this mean that they were factually innocent? Not necessarily. Not guilty never actually means this....it means that guilt could not be demonstrated based on the evidence. Five people in the world know whether they are actually innocent or not...the rest of us can’t know as we weren’t there. Neither were the jury.

I think it’s extremely dangerous to keep promoting the view that “women can be legally raped” or “society doesn’t give a shit about women”. This will make LESS women & girls come forward, not more.

Society in general DOES care. As do the police. As do the prosecutors.

The fact of this matter is that the young woman was believed by the police and the prosecutors that’s why there was a trial...a long, expensive trial. If no one gave a shit etc. there would have been no trial to begin with.

Court cases rely on evidence not gut reactions. With rape, evidence can be ambiguous or absent, so what on earth is the judiciary supposed to do? Lower the burden of proof for this one type of criminal case?

The jury considered the evidence and reached their verdict. And, since there was absolutely nothing that PROVED the sex that night was non-consensual then then it’s hard to see how that verdict was wrong. The prosecution were ultimately unable to PROVE rape, but it’s absolutely right that they tried.

This hysterical “sisterhood” over-reaction helps absolutely no one. The law was correctly applied. If you want to change the law then propose how we do that but please...”It’s legal for men to rape women” is absolute bullshit.

But what is evidence in a rape trial? It would seem only an admission of guilt of the accused or video footage would stand up?

“Really Quimby? So if I'm invited to a house I can take their valuable antique, for example, and just walk out with it without telling the owner. And to get it back he has to stand up in court and prove he didn't give it to me?

That seems strange. How could he prove that? ”

You’d get in the box and say “I didn’t consent to anyone taking or removing X”
Any crime where lack of consent is a necessary proof evidence has to be adduced to support it.
Hence the judges charge.
She outlined the three necessary proofs and reminded the jury that they had to be satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt in respect of each necessary proof.

I have been on a jury for an abuse case. Although I believed with all my heart that he was guilty, the lack of evidence meant we could not return a guilty verdict, though we remained a hung jury.

eightdays, I don’t think that’s right because I think in this case a guilty verdict would probably have been returned if it hadn’t been for the evidence of the female witness who claimed she’d seen the act and believed it was consensual.

Ah, I wondered how long it would take before “hysterical” reared it’s ugly head.
I wish these people would realise that they might be taken a little more seriously if they didn’t reach for the laziest of sexist stereotypes right out of the box.
If you want us to listen to your thoughts, think. If all you’ve got is cliche, yawn.

@Mightymucks and yet the female witness's evidence was contradicted by one of the defendants! I suspect that the evidence was so contradictory that there was inevitably 'reasonable doubt'.

"28 minutes per week of evidence" that deeply concerns me too - like they didn't take it seriously enough.

"It’s irrelevant" (the whatsapp messages) - wrong if that were true they couldn't have been admitted as evidence. They are evidence of the defendants attitudes and state of mind AT THE TIME of the incident.

"I think it’s extremely dangerous to keep promoting the view that “women can be legally raped” or “society doesn’t give a shit about women”. This will make LESS women & girls come forward, not more." Why should they come forward when they're treated so badly and have their lives further ruined? Answer that! The EVIDENCE (very low prosecution rates, even lower conviction rates, victims harassed online AND in person, their family and friends harassed...) strongly suggests otherwise.

"so what on earth is the judiciary supposed to do?"

Not make victim blaming comments RIGHT BEFORE the jury is sent to deliberate

Not perpetuate rape myths

Not allow defence lawyers to re-victimise victims

Not allow defence lawyers to use the victims dress, level of intoxication, location, prior sexual history, mh history, Dv history to be used.

Issue more appropriate sentences when rapists ARE convicted

As a group they could:

Get the laws changed on

Sentencing and bail conditions
How a victim is treated in the witness box
How the accused must show they had consent
How juries are instructed

LOADS the judiciary could do.

Regards the female witness - I could never as a woman say upon seeing sexual intercourse that I believed it to be consensual - knowing that sounds of fear can sound similar to those of sexual pleasure, that people can freeze/feel paralysed when being raped, that inaction can be an act of self preservation - these guys were CLEARLY being pretty rough.

"the young woman was believed by the police and the prosecutors"
Based on the evidence yes? As it's unlikely they knew her personally but then you say

"Court cases rely on evidence not gut reactions." Contradiction right there!

After reading the reports I do wonder why if rape was going to be hard to prove that assault was not pursued. Even consensual sex should not leave a women injured. They should be banned from international rugby for the what's app messages. The Australian cricketers showed more remorse for roughing up a cricket ball than these men showed to the woman.

I think the problem often lies in men and women seeing things differently. Men seem to be preoccupied that women somehow will have ‘postcoital regret’ or cry rape if she didn’t like him in the sack. Now as a woman I struggle to imagine this scenario, let alone think it credible. Give how rape victims are treated by the criminal justice system and the way rape trials are structured, why would ANY woman go through seven rounds of hell just because she didn’t like the guy’s performance???

Something is very wrong with how society accepts the male narrative and male viewpoint (blatant example from this thread is the ‘gift’ of sex from a woman to a man). Does any woman think of sex as something she gives for good behaviour, as a reward, sort of, or sex as a means to get something from a man, a transaction? I am positive vast majority don’t.

We need to start listening to women a bit more and see the world through their eyes. And trust me women’s reality is very different to what men believe it is.

And I agree with the previous poster that the men in the Belfast trial would have believed that she was gagging for it even if she were pleading with them to stop and crying. They would have thought she is enjoying it really. So in their head she was consenting. Scum of the earth! I hope if the courts didn’t get them what they deserve, karma does.

Some questions from the defence barristers beggar belief. “Why didn’t you try to fight him off and scream for help?” Yea, as if a 19 y.o girl is a physical match for two beefy rugby players. If she didn’t play ball, they would just have used more brutal force which would have resulted in more than bruising and vaginal lacerations. She went into survival mode trying to limit the damage which was going to be inflicted on her. As the vast majority of women would react.

But we shouldn’t say this, should we? The men walked away scot free not proven guilty, so she must have made it all up, mustn’t she? Postcoital regret, clearly.

I do think we need to equip young women with the truth that no matter what is said about consent as soon as you enter an intimate space with a man, consent will be either seen as given or one word against another in a court of law in the UK.

Sadly, I agree with you Boulshired and it fucks me right off. Women’s idea of consent is often different to men’s idea. Men seem to think ‘She flirted with me, she kissed me, she went home with me>> she MUST want sex then’. And they seem to have trouble with the concept that well she can change her mind at any point, even if she kissed you 10 minutes ago and even if she got naked and then decided not tonight. They really seem to struggle with that notion.

So as women we only have so much agency, up until a certain point. The best is not to find yourself in an intimate situation with a guy. It is the same as the previous analogy, well don’t have guests over if your don’t want all your possession lifted due silent assumption of host’s agreement. You let them through the door well, why are you crying all your antics are gone as a result? Did you think any different?

What a fucked up view of rape. And THF I got no hope women will come any close to equality with men any time soon. We are treated as second class citizens where it’s ok to pass our knickers gratuitously round the court room and tut at our party outfits. As someone said nobody would say to the burglar victims ‘Serves you right for leaving your bedroom window open’. But people seem to think it perfectly ok to tell rape victims they brought it on themselves.

EightdaysaweekIloveu This statistics is American. It has nothing to do with rape prosecution in the UK.

www.cps.gov.uk/sites/default/files/documents/publications/cps-vawg-report-2017_1.pdf - Provides you statistics for the UK.

@Graphista

You clearly have zero understanding of how criminal justice system works...

"28 minutes per week of evidence" that deeply concerns me too - like they didn't take it seriously enough. - They have been in court for the duration of the entire trial and would have been thinking about it the entire time. The length of deliberations makes me think that there wasn't much disagreement or doubt. None of us were there for the entire duration, so we can not judge how well either side of the case were argued.

they couldn't have been admitted as evidence - This isn't American tv series. Things aren't "admitted as evidence". There is a vast amount of material available and the test of relevance is whether it relates to the events in question. The messages themselves have nothing to do with mens rea for rape...

Not allow defence lawyers to use the victims dress, level of intoxication, location, prior sexual history, mh history, Dv history to be used.

Not just talking about this case now. How can you sensibly argue that these things are never relevant and should never be allowed to be used? How can you prove or disprove consent in any situation? Most of these are to an extent relevant.

@Boulshired - I'm not saying this happened in this case. But consensual sex could leave a woman injured, couldn't it? Accidents happen...
Assault would be hard to prove as proving intent or recklessness to causing physical injury in such scenario is as tricky as proving consent

@Toomanynamestoremember - Were you there? You speak with such authority! Why didn't you contact the CPS to offer your witness evidence? .........

We were not present at the time of the event. We have no idea whether she consented or not, was acting like she consented, consented but regretted it....Offence of rape is strictly defined and is not for personal interpretation. It is a legal term. It is not up to us to believe her or not.

Wedonttalkaboutthesethings, please don’t disappoint and be a male.

How can you prove or disprove consent in any situation? Most of these are to an extent relevant.

This is the crux of the problem. Men believe they have consent when a woman really is trying to get out of the situation with as little damage as possible. If that means having sex, she will as a means of survival. Better than dead or injured. She won’t fight, she won’t protest and otherwise anger the stronger male. Men don’t get it.

- Were you there? You speak with such authority! Why didn't you contact the CPS to offer your witness evidence? .........

I speak with such conviction because it is exactly what I would have done if put in that situation (as majority of women would!) The young victim had horrendous injuries as it was, she was not about to make it worse for herself.

I can’t believe you dismissed the intercourse inflicted injuries as ‘stuff happens’. No it doesn’t. Women have consensual anal sex, consensual fisting during sex and they don’t get injuries from either because they are in control.

I will be honest. I am having trouble with concept of withdrawing consent after kissing someone and going home with them.

My point exactly. Are you a man?

Appalled and speechless at the verdict but sadly not surprised one bit.