I feel so angry to read this...

[NotTakenUsername]

...and I can’t vent properly on Facebook because I just don’t have the words required to compete with comments like, “well why didn't She scream...?” and “it’s atrocious how those boys have been treated...”

I’m so ANGRY. What on Earth are very middle class girls...? What does that even mean? What does that encompass?
Parental income? As presumably all underage if they are girls, no? Personal income? ‘Nice’ girls...?

Talk me down.

Sorry, sorry, sorry.

Feel free to report my posts, I don't want this thread deleted, I'm just so fucking angry.

I'll step away.

Sorry.

I was under the impression that flashing was illegal, whatever the situation.

She's telling them that to convict the two of rape they must know for sure that the men knew the girl didn't consent (if they were pissed, did they know anything?) and to convict the one of exposure they must know for sure he meant to alarm or distress.

Both those seem weird; how can the jury know what anyone was thinking? Shouldn't they be looking at actions not thoughts

It's like she's offering a let out clause.

Exactly! Why didn't he just not rape? Ffs!!

Hi not, sorry I had a visitor and I’m only getting back online now. The link I read was the Belfast live one posted upthread.

I have to say I’m completely gobsmacked by the judge’s comments. Is that normal? To me she has nailed her flag to the mast for all to see. Am I misunderstanding her comments?

Is that right? ‘Men must have known she didn’t consent’ for it to be rape? I thought (hoped) it was rape unless they thought she had consented?

The judge is putting forward the legal definition of the offences. The "reasonable belief of consent" is written into law and sees a lot of men acquitted. Such as the man who went into a stranger's hotel room and had sex with her because apparently he was drunk and thought it was his girlfriend.
The judge is giving instructions on Monday before deliberations and I sincerely hope she talks about rape myths and what "reasonable belief" means.

How can I help in changing our shit system?
Does anyone have any ideas?

I do not want my teenage daughters growing up in such an out dated legal system.

Perhaps it’s time these people were given what they say they want, which is woman and girls who agree it’s up to them to prevent rape and thereby refuse any private social or professional contact with males.
Women only workplaces, bars, restaurants, clubs. Men under curfew, not allowed out without chaperones.
Give us those. Then we might have a chance of fulfilling the duty you appear so keen to impose on us, of preventing rape even though we are not the rapists.
But you won’t be too keen on that, will you?

top this is what I think. Maybe I need to get my shit together and do a proper campaign

The man would have to explain what he did to actively get consent, rather than the victim defend why she didnt consent.
We could get rid of the "reasonable belief of consent" clause as it actively works against the lack of capacity clause (e.g through drink or drugs).
We could introduce a crime like "reckless penetration" or "penetrating without due care and attention" for cases where it seems the man did very little to get consent but rape can't be proved.
The court case could be heard by a panel of expert judges rather than a jury. The trial could be inquisitorial rather than adversarial (so more like an inquest or enquiry). This would also allow a wider range of verdicts.
We could use more sexual offence prevention orders where offenders are assessed as posing a risk to women, even if found not guilty.
We could change bail guidelines so men aren't hanging round for ages waiting for a charging decision and so the impact on innocent men is minimised.

In the light of this recent stuff I might also add definition of a mandatory minimum sentence for sexual assault/rape (so people found guilty cant get a suspended sentence) and getting rid of sentences running concurrently. (So someone like warboys doesnt end up serving the sentence for just one rape).

quentin
I am happy to help you if you do start a campaign.
Please can you add that it doesn't matter what the female was wearing at the time. This one really annoys me.
Any woman should be able to go out wearing whatever she likes, the person who (may) rape her is to blame, he is in control of his own actions.

Quentin I'm another one happy to put my shoulder to the wheel on this one.

I'd also like to add that evidence / disclosures that wouldn't be admissible if they were in regards to the defendant should also be inadmissible when in regard to the complainant

I'd also like to add that evidence / disclosures that wouldn't be admissible if they were in regards to the defendant should also be inadmissible when in regard to the complainant
That is a very good point

They should never be permitted to introduce the complainant's previous sexual history, under any circumstances. Also, reasonable belief needs very detailed explanation. There is no way a jury should be left to make a decision on that.
I'm so so angry that im finding it hard to think about anything else. I can't even begin to imagine how that poor woman and her family feel.
I'm up for a campaign but am in Ireland.
It just seems to me that women have very little protection from rape under our legal system and very few people see that as a problem.
It absolutely needs to be changed so that men have to demonstrate that they ensured there was consent.

Also happy to help with a campaign. I'm so depressed by this case.

Of course they’ll be acquitted. And then we’re going to see all the comments on Twitter about what a lying slag she is. It literally is Ched Evans all over again 😔

I have hope 3eyed. I thought the prosecution played a blinder pointing out that mcilroy and olding had given the same story and no-one saw mcilroy in the room even though he claimed jackson was there.

Why are the intimate details of the accused not paraded in court? Why do we not get to see what underwear they were wearing at the time? ("Surly by wearing white Calvin Kleins, the accused was preparing to have sex that evening?") Why is their past sexual history not fair game to be dissected? ("So, you have a history of having sex with drunken women in hotel rooms after your friend has already had sex with them? So on previous occasions you have had sex where consent could not reasonably be obtained....?")

Why didn't he refrain from raping - you know the ACTUAL crime here. Why didn't he do that?

In fucking deed

Its always the womans fault in some way and this is now making me irrationally angry. Or is it irrational, IMO its entirely rational to be furious about fuckwits who do this. Both the raping and the victim blaming.

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.belfastlive.co.uk/news/belfast-news/ulster-rugby-rape-trial-judge-14457926.amp

What do you think of this. I found it quite clear to understand and encouraging. Am I naive?

Knew it 😔