Aibu to be angry at the use of a womans underwear choice being used against her in court ...again....

[Cheeeeislifenow]

Just saw this and it has made me so fucking angry... How are these comments still allowed?

www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/counsel-for-man-acquitted-of-rape-suggested-jurors-should-reflect-on-underwear-worn-by-teen-complainant-883613.html?utm_source=iosapp&utm_medium=share&utm_campaign=sharebutton

Wow.That's unbelievable. A lacy thong is pretty normal isn't it. Not for me and my big bum admittedly. Just the mud involved raised my eyebrows.

Yep.. I don't agree with the verdict either..

How on earth was he acquitted? 

There has to be reasonable doubt isn't that it?? So they have to be percent sure he rapes her. If there is an inkling of doubt they have to say not guilty..it's a messed up system.. I think that's the way it works.

This is definitely beyond the bounds of what is reasonable

That poor girl. ☹️

I doubt the jury based their verdict on her wearing a thong. There is obviously evidence and testimony that we do not know about.

Wow. I know everyone has the right to a defence, but when in bloody hell are we going to move beyond "she was dressed for sex"? And even if she had been, that's not a green light to very bloody man!

^ But I agree that it is a despicable thing to bring up, and has no baring on whether she was 'looking for sex' that night.

I doubt the jury based their verdict on her wearing a thong. There is obviously evidence and testimony that we do not know about.

I'm not suggesting the verdict was wrong. (though in my personal opinion it's doubtful)...but a woman's choice of clothing has nothing to do with a rape case...full stop

Fucking hell. This is disgusting.

I saw this earlier and was enraged. Is there nothing that can be done to address this?

Even as a criminal defence lawyer I think that's bad!

Yanbu. That’s shocking.

That’s shocking, what the hell does her underwear have to do with his actions, and it seems she was a virgin, so highly unlikely to consent to her first experience in a fucking soggy field ! What a travesty

Unsurprised this was in Ireland

Um, rape happens everywhere

It only took an hour and a half to reach a verdict - there surely has to be more than her choice of underwear involved?

But you are right OP - what a woman or girl is wearing should NOT be taken into consideration -that is her choice and it just means that she is comfortable in it - not that she's up for sex with any or everyone.

If the underwear really was the decider, this jury should feel ashamed of themselves.

You shouldn't be able to use things like that in a defence. A woman's clothing is not a defence. Neither is her job, nor her "reputation".

I genuinely don't think this woman's underwear should have been referenced by the defence - I don't think that should be allowed. What a man reads into a woman's choice of clothes is his issue. Women don't wear sexy clothes for the reasons some men think we do, and we NEVER choose our knickers to consent on our behalves. Like... never.

what the actual fuck have I just read? How can that lawyer sleep at night after what she said? A lacy thong means you’re out for dick and once you put it on you don’t get a say in who fucks you?

Witness testimony he dragged her 30m up a lane
Witness testimony he had his hands round her throat
Witness testimony he raped her

He says he didn’t so he walks free.

...but a woman's choice of clothing has nothing to do with a rape case...full stop

this

Besides which, the clothing in question was the girl’s underwear that wasn’t on display and wouldn’t have been seen by anyone who didn’t force her down in the mud

Unsurprised this was in Ireland.

because rape never happens in the U.K.? Reported your post.

Reported your post

Me too.

Awful.

Also a jury of 8 men and 4 women?

I wore lacy thongs every day at that age, because I had a muddled idea that it was the "grown up" thing to do and I needed to wear "sexy" underwear to show I wasn't a child any more. I was a virgin at the time. And I'm so sure that she decided to lose her virginity to a virtual stranger, in the mud.

That said... The difficulty in rape cases like this is that it is very very hard to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the victim did not consent. And that is the standard required for criminal conviction. If there is even a slim chance she did consent, legally speaking, a juror should not vote for conviction. It's very difficult to know how to address this, given that sex usually takes place without witnesses.

That doesn't take away from the utter wrongness and repugnance of what the lawyer said though. A woman's clothing or underwear should never be cited as though it is "evidence".