Ulster Rugby Rape Trial - Not guilty to all charges

[Quimby]

Verdict just returned
Not guilty to all four accused, all unanimous decisions.

Oh thanks TheDukes, sorry for derailing

No no - carroty

Wasn't having a go - just thought it deserved a thread of it's own and to keep this one on this awful Ulster case.

The message to women and girls in NI is also very clear. Don't report. So pleased women are marching.

Thank you for the linked article CarrotyO .

I just saw this on twitter to ulster rugby. Appears players feel entitled to use their status to avoid paying in shops. It’s not a great leap to extend that entitlement to other things is it?

So sinn fein leader wants anonymity for sex abuse suspects. That is the best reform she can think of. That is worst reform given low conviction rates. 6% and falling of those reported, include those not reported it would be even less.
Sometimes I think the only thing good reason to report a rape is that women can avoid these men in future as they know who they are.
Sad that it is the ROI that are looking into taking real and substantial measures to improve the process of rape trials. I mean this case was in the UK, it should be the Northern Ireland ministers coming out with these suggestions

Yes I saw that she did go on to say this though

"Ms McDonald said: “People bringing a complaint are immediately disadvantaged and certainly feel disadvantaged and feel the proceedings are adversarial, and feel that they are on trial rather than the accused person. All of that needs to be fixed.

“I am saying all of that with absolute respect for the verdict that the jury has arrived at. We need to be careful not to be going down a very dangerous route of second-guessing jury verdicts but, at the same time, I think it was obvious to everyone that the way in which that trial proceeded was pretty appalling.”"

Which is quite frank about this case and generally supportive of changing things to benefit the victims albeit while supporting anon for accused which basically says women who say they have been raped are probably lying as it's not being asked for, for any other equally awful crimes.

In this case the only good thing is that women and girls all over NI and UK more widely know to avoid these men.

When people say they respect the verdict I am always very wary as to whether it's the real view or one they must say to avoid legal action. Libel laws must never force people to change their opinion in private or public however odious that view may be.
Anonymity for the accused will definitely send a signal that rape complainants are more likely to lie. As for being accused of rape having a greater stigma than other crimes maybe true but so does being accused of offences against children such as kidnapping or murder. No effort to give anonymity to those people. People cannot say the public view date rapists worse than a child killer even one whose not charged with a sex offence.

Agree -

ripping off pensioners
child abuse
torturing animals

people who are accused of these things take a hit on reputation

the only difference - is that the victims aren't assumed widely to be lying / acting out of vindictiveness

if we must have anon for perps then it needs to be for ALL crimes any otehr approach props up rape myths and will do massive harm

not to mention all the warboys types never being caught

I have always agreed that rape accused shouldn’t have anonymity for all the reasons already stated however this case is the first time I’ve actually wondered if it would have made a difference to the verdict if the jurors (and of course the public) hadn’t known who was infront of them. And also, in the cases of “well known/famous” attacker would the victim feel more able to report if they thought the general public wouldn’t automatically stand behind their “hero”. I don’t know. Just something that has been working it’s way round my head this past week or so.

Is it true that in places like Sweden, italy and France complainants of all crimes haves their own lawyer plus the state prosecuted in court. Every time I hear news reports about alleged crimes in those countries it's usually the complainants lawyers that is speaking not the police or state prosecutors. Or maybe that's the media getting who the person is wrong.

Ian Paisley also wants anonymity for the accused in rape cases.

Zibido the jurors would have to know who the defendants are.
As for whether people are more likely to report a celebrity if all parties had anonymity, maybe a study of countries where this is already done and compare with say UK or US to see what number/ rate of celebrities reported to the police for sex crimes would be useful.

As far as I am concerned Ian paisley is from a woman hating party and I was not surprised by that

totally Oh I know!

I challenged him in person about how he could claim the moral high ground whilst accepting money to write a column for the Sun, a 'news'paper most famous for topless women. Honestly, he was off my doorstep and down the road faster than Usain Bolt

The jurors would've known who they are anyway as they are super famous there + if they didn't, they woudl have found out through the course of the trial as a lot of it hinged on the fame of the defendents ie she was "after" famous rich men and so she can hardly complain when she got what she was "asking for".

Can somebody please explain to me how making an allegation of rape against a powerful man is more likely to be false or is going to make the complainant rich, somehow?

I don't understand why people think an alleged rape victim is being dishonest "and only saying that because he is rich or in a high profile position." If anything, it is likely to be a deterrent for women coming forward - women will know the individual will have access to the best, most powerful QCs and that they may be crushed and humiliated in the process.

Do those people think that a woman is going to the police and a rape crisis centre in order to make money? How, precisely? And how frequently does this actually happen?

Is this another rape myth?

If anything, it is likely to be a deterrent for women coming forward - women will know the individual will have access to the best, most powerful QCs and that they may be crushed and humiliated in the process.

Yes and that’s exactly what this woman feared and said in her texts to her friend. That’s exactly why she wasn’t going to report it.

Agree with those points WRT accused anonymity. Would also be loathed to share any kind of ideals with Ian P! So shall knock that notion on the head.

yy ravenheart.

I also don't understand the argument that putting oneself through a harrowing rape investigation, including intimate examination, is somehow a solution to 'regret'?

Ha!

Ian Paisley recently voted against continuing free school meals for children in England, whilst in the same week asking for £1k from local government for a 'business' dinner at a mediocre local hotel for 10 people - where £30 a head would be extravagant 😒.

I think that anonymity could be useful but it's not the main thing needed to change the system. Perhaps this verdict would have gone another way though if they had been anonymous. The key thing seems to be the defence reiterating to the jury that if they had any doubt they must return a not guilty verdict. I'm cynical by nature & always include a caveat for the smallest of things, like would say 'see you tomorrow all being well'. But if someone pushed me in such a way I could say there's a minuscule doubt but an overwhelming conviction, it just doesn't seem fair that I would have to go against my better judgement to return a verdict I didn't actually agree with if that makes sense?

Buckerjeet - does ROI have a higher rape conviction rate than UK if lack of suspect anonymity was the problem

I hadn't heard of them either - I'm in England as well and also don't follow rugby so no chance!

Well, we've all heard of them now!! 👍

Until this trial I could have told you the names of 2 rugby players- not 2 NI players but 2 out of the entire world of rugby. And both of them are retired.