Ulster Rugby trial -continued

[ZibbidooZibbidooZibbidoo]

New thread.

But why anita would that not be akin to perverting the course of justice? Has the law just got so complex now that it’s not serving it’s own purpose? Ie he has form, he wrote down that he wanted to do it, but that’s irrelevant, let’s talk about whom you lost your virginity to and what colour pants you wear instead’

Quite.

The prejudicing the jury thing always confused me - surely the jury should have the full facts?

Their argument was "writing down an intention is not the same as doing it, and it was written too long beforehand" There was other stuff as well, but I don't want to go into too much detail.

Btw - I saw this recently - it's well worth a read.

victimfocus.wordpress.com/2017/10/15/what-if-rape-was-responded-to-like-terrorism/

Crimes against women are simply not taken seriously.

Suggesting "Prejudicing the jury" with evidence showing the defendants are lying fuckwits doesn't seem like justice to me

Anita - sounds very similar to my friends rape trial. It felt like she was on trial. Her sexual history brought up. Not his previous convictions.

Made me so angry. Bearing in mind she was unrecognisable when I went to see her in hospital. Her face was about 3 times it’s normal size where he’d beaten her repeatedly as she fought back.

In the end she lay very still, until he’d finished.

But yes, seeing pictures of someone nearly beaten to death, and they ask about her sexual history

If there are lawyers willing to make up stories for their clients in the cases where there are huge amounts of physical evidence, then what chance does your average rape victim have, where there’s little physical evidence, you freeze, don’t say no or scream, and know the person. They will always say they thought they had consent, and that the woman has had sex and regretted it

I get that everyone has a right to representation. But since when did that include lying, to get the criminal off? How is that justice.

The only reason Ched Evans case was overturned was due to victim’s sexual history. Why does that mean anything? Or are these the same people that think prostitutes can’t be raped.

It seems the more the evidence shows a man is guilty the less likely you are able to show it to a jury.
Don't get me wrong but I thought the whole point of prosecution evidence was to prejudice the jury against the defendant.

How would the Scottish concept of "not proven" work in a case like this?

www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/ulster-rugby-and-irfu-officials-under-pressure-from-sponsors-1.3460021#.WtBPo6Nxx5A.mailto

This is great. Sponsors have been contacted directly and asked what their view is. Many seem to be -hiding behind- waiting for the findings of the internal review. At least there is now a comprehensive list of companies.

I thought the whole point of prosecution evidence was to prejudice the jury against the defendant.

Nope, it’s a sly little dance, isn’t it? Prosecutors and defence are technically only to display the facts. Any prejudicing has to be very subtle... less difficult for defence when you live in such an intrinsically misogynistic society.

"There's a balancing act in what we look for from the justice system when a crime is committed...justice, a "sense" of justice for the victim, keeping the public safe, eg, custody, reducing offending/reoffending, rehabilitation.... ultimately fewer victims. Currently we fail on all of these"

I agree with all of your post Chaosandchocolate but particularly this last paragraph.

Our adversarial justice system does not work well for rape cases.

I'm sure relatives of people killed by drunk drivers and accidental deaths feel that the perpetrators of the crime should be convicted of murder rather than manslaughter or death by dangerous driving or whichever other lesser offence they are convicted of but I still think that some justice, or at least some acknowledgement of the wrong doing, must be better than the person walking away having been found not guilty.

In this case the poor woman would probably have found it easier to get an assault conviction for the injuries she sustained than a rape conviction

I can't believe they were allowed to discuss her previous sexual history. I thought this was only allowed if the defence agreed to it?

Not taken - it's easier for the defence to introduce prejudicial evidence because judges decisions on admissibility of evidence can be overturned on appeal. Prosecution in UK just don't have the same right of appeal. Judges don't like being overturned on appeal. Siding with the defence is works out better for the judge.
And yes having a society full of misogyny along with a jury system where decisions by it does not need to be explained and the decision making process - jury deliberations are secret makes it easier to acquit based rape myths

Totallymyownperson I’ve heard a lot about not wanting defence to appeal in this case. Is that a common thing throughout, or specifically in cases of this nature.

Also to anyone going down to Kingspan this evening... I’m nervous about going in case t gets rowdy. Am I being silly?

Not taken - if you mean the judge siding with defence because they have more appeal rights and are more likely to to use them than I am afraid it applies to all cases but the sense of unfairness is made worse in rape cases because defence is often allowed to use the flimsiest of things to attack character of complainants like a previous type of sex she has had even though you may look at that in its own and think that was just part of a normal sexual relationship.
Prosecution cannot introduce his previous sexual history even if sexual acts are similar just because it was consensual or even as previous posters have said when they have evidence of non sexual acts such previous convictions.
It seems judges are doing every they can to bend over backwards to ensure a not guilty verdict

“I can't believe they were allowed to discuss her previous sexual history. ”

I don’t believe they were

I’m open to correction as I may have missed it

And we don't live in a rape culture...

Cork school

You know I think rather than having a lesser charge or not proven maybe the word 'rape' should be removed?

Assault with penis maybe, with the same penalties.

Also, and I don't think this could be done with English/UK law there should be two juries, one for a criminal case and one for a civil case, or possibly a second judge for a civil case finding on the balance of probabilities.

Bumble - think you would feel better if you went. You would be with many people who believe as you do.
I would go but no where near the area

Bumble - that's o.k too hope you feel better

GrainneWail That’s an upsetting article. From what I have learned on this thread, I assume the list wouldn’t be admissible as evidence if someone on the list was to report a rape by a boy in that school?

Imagine, the girls on the list are ashamed for being on the list. Why is every boy who used those toilets and seen that list and didn’t whistle blow not hanging their heads in shame!?

NotTaken - they probably will not be able to use list. Defence will argue something like it was childish prank and should not be put before jury to stop bias against accused.
If a woman made a list of men she would like to falsely accuse, that list will mean the case would never even get to court.
Girls being made to feel more ashamed than boys that just rape culture

The Belfast telegraph Facebook page is a damning insight into the minds of N Ireland. They covered the protest at Kingspan (which was unfortunately very small) and there are about 600 comments after the report. About ten of them are supportive. There are several hundred posts pointing out how ugly the protesters are, how they should just shut up, why are they not protesting about X or Y or Z etc. I actually looked at my beautiful daughter earlier and felt like crying at how much hate she will have to face.

I'm watching the Scrum V coverage of the Ulster v Ospreys match and in the half time chat they touched on the case and mentioned the protest outside the stadium and then briefly showed the banners of the protesters. I was surprised they mentioned it at all.