Ulster Rugby Rape Trial - Not guilty to all charges

[Quimby]

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

[SpidersWilliesOnYourFrillys]

If these ‘fellas’ were from the Shankill or the Falls and working class they would be found guilty on all counts.

They classed themselves as top shaggers they are nothing but a bunch of wankers.

[Quimby]

“In no other criminal case does a victim have to prove that she didn't consent to a crime being committed against her. We don't have to prove we didn't consent to having our cars stolen, our houses broken into,”

Tbf you do have to prove lack of consent in those cases, it’s just much more likely to be a pro forma question where the prosecution barrister will ask them if they consented to someone taking their property etc. And doesn’t become an issue as the IP is normally believed so the defence don’t make a huge issue of it, their defence will normally lie elsewhere.
But it is still a necessary proof for all consent based offences, it’s just that rape is the only one that seems to attract juries performing mental gymnastics to decide the defendant may have had a reasonable belief that there was consent despite what the IP says.

[Babayaggatheboneylegged]

What I really don't understand is that in her testimony, she said that Paddy Jackson kissed her (and she consented to that) but that the kissing stopped when he tried to get her trousers off and she realised he didn't know her name.

Paddy Jackson also testified that they kissed but that the kissing stopped when she realised he didn't know her name.

HOW does anyone logically get from that scenario, to the one that the defendants argued, where she was suddenly offering BJs all round, to men who not only didn't know her name, but hadn't even spoken to her upon entering the bedroom?

Just...HOW?

[CaffeineAndCrochet]

I go to Irish rugby matches quite frequently but the thought of going to one and seeing either of those two on the pitch makes me feel ill. There's going to be an IRFU review, so I'm hoping their conduct is held against them. They may have been found not guilty but we've seen the messages and we know how they treat and speak about women. They're not appropriate people to put on a green jersey.

[LassWiADelicateAir]

When they took the stand, they were hardly questioned at all

I thought they didn't give evidence in court?

[Justanotherzombie]

There are a lot of half facts about the case being stated on this thread. And some interpretations of second hand information that are slightly but importantly incorrect. It's very frustrating but at the end of the day, these guys have been shown up to be pretty scummy. That is all I know for sure.

[Isthisnameacceptable01]

So annoyed at this verdict. I didn’t think the prosecution were good at all. The closing argument was very short and left out many of the main points.

[Maryz]

Yes, Justanotherzombie. I'm mentally convicting them of being sleazebags based on their (uncontested) messages that show their attitude to women.

I will never go to a rugby match that they are playing in. And won't go to an Ulster match if they are taken back by Ulster rugby. I will also be emailing the IRFU to strongly object to them being allowed to represent my country, because it's not just a job, it's much more than that, and there should be minimum standards of behaviour.

Quimby, how come if I say I didn't consent to having my handbag taken I'm believed, but if I say I didn't consent to having sex I have to prove it beyond doubt? Does anyone know?

[Quimby]

“I thought they didn't give evidence in court?“

They all have evidence

[Quimby]

*Gave

[QuentinSummers]

I'm so angry I can barely speak

I believe her. Those men are absolute scum

[Quimby]

“Quimby, how come if I say I didn't consent to having my handbag taken I'm believed, but if I say I didn't consent to having sex I have to prove it beyond doubt? Does anyone know?”

That’s a question for juries and since we don’t know their reasoning it’s impossoble to say.

At a guess id imagine it’s a mix of rape myths and personal experience.

Most people won’t be able to imagine a scenario where they’d just give their handbag to a stranger but have probably had sexual encounters with strangers or are at least aware of them occurring regularly in society.
So if someone says that man took my handbag and he says “oh no she said I could have it” people probably think well that’s not something that happens his defence doesn’t ring true.
Where as of someone says that man had sex with me without consent and he says “yeah we had sex but it was consensual” they probably then think well strangers have been known to have sex, so I’m not sure who to believe.
After that it comes down to evidence and facts of individual cases etc but the question is way beyond my ken.

[PanGalaticGargleBlaster]

There are a lot of half facts about the case being stated on this thread. And some interpretations of second hand information that are slightly but importantly incorrect.

Yep.

[Maryz]

They gave evidence, but were hardly asked any questions. There was no bringing up of their past behaviour, the jury weren't shown their underwear (or pictures of their penises) and their messages were dismissed (effectively) as "banter", ie made up to show off, not their real opinions etc. They all told conflicting stories, but that's ok because they'd had a lot to drink, obviously, and that's ok, because they are men, obviously.

Then their character witnesses proved them to be absolutely perfect in every way.

It all made me wonder who exactly was on trial

[Quimby]

“Quimby, how come if I say I didn't consent to having my handbag taken I'm believed, but if I say I didn't consent to having sex I have to prove it beyond doubt? Does anyone know?”

To be clear you have to prove both beyond a reasonable doubt, it’s just that in practice there doesn’t seem to be much reward in trying to convince juries that the accused had a reasonable belief that he did have consent to take your handbag (although it still can happen) whereas there does seem to be a lot of scope for reward in trying to create a grey area with regards sex, rape and consent with juries.

[QuentinSummers]

Yes maryz
There's no way the prosecution would've been able to question those wank badgers they way the defence questioned her. It's not fair.

Fucking men. I hate the world today.

[SpidersWilliesOnYourFrillys]

This is on Twitter, I have not created this image.

[SpidersWilliesOnYourFrillys]

Ok it didn’t post

[PollyEthel]

Going back a few messages, the last thing any of them want is a libel case - that would be on balance of probabilities rather than beyond reasonable doubt.

What I know is that they are utter scum (based on their own messages and testimony). What I believe is that I believe her.

I've been expecting this verdict since the judge's comments, at the same time hoping against hope that this time things might be different. I just feel sick, for her, and for the world we live in.

[SophieLMumsnet]

Hi all,

This is just to remind everyone that they are individually responsible for what they post and to keep Talk Guidelines in mind. Please also avoid speculation.

Thanks

[boxthefox]

Prosecution were useless. I have nothing more to say about that aspect. The defence obviously played a blinder. That's adversarial law for you.

We can rant all we like but that's the reality, the prosecution didn't convince the jury so there was an element of doubt. And where it cannot be proven without reasonable doubt, the jury must acquit.

Clear heads, cool hearts. The lady may be able to take a civil case where the burden of proof is not as high as in a criminal case. Replaced by "on the balance of probabilities" I hope she does.

[Quimby]

Tbf to the jury I agree with their verdict
Based on what I’ve seen reported I wouldn’t have been convinced beyond a reasonable doubt

[Quimby]

That’s not to say I think I know what happened or anything like that

Quite the opposite
I’m not clear at all and don’t think I could honestly say I’m convinced beyond a reasonable doubt

[buckeejit]

Is there an official detail of the Belfast protest? It would be a pita for me to go but wouldn't want to miss it if I can make it.

If they are such dead on lads then I'd at least have a modicum of respect for them if they openly said sorry that they behaved abhorrently & did something to promote active consent. But they can't do that as they lied about things. I think they do now know that they raped her. As pp says it is possible they didn't understand that she didn't consent as they were so entitled that they didn't think there was even a need for the question at the time.

It makes me feel sick. Definitely should not be role models for young people.

[ZibbidooZibbidooZibbidoo]

This is another trial that ended today in NI. Gavan Duffy was defence counsel in this case too as well as for Rory Harrison in the rape trial.

www.belfastlive.co.uk/news/belfast-news/sleepwalking-belfast-man-cleared-sexually-14468644