It's not rape if you're wearing lacy knickers.

[FloralBunting]

www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnewsireland/counsel-for-man-acquitted-of-rape-suggested-jurors-should-reflect-on-underwear-worn-by-teen-complainant-883613.html?fbclid=IwAR35TmZ4qXy2n1YHC0sHTl_37mqRM9EZE5Bs7d7ZC2-IZuR4UVrAT5h5FKA

I'm gobsmacked.

I said on the other thread that juries should be told that a man who goes out wearing pants that allow easy access to his penis shoudl be presumed to have gone out with the intent to rape, because otherwise why would they need to be able to get to their genitals with one hand quickly and easily?

They just don’t see rape as an actual crime that should result in a man going to prison do they? We’re expected to put up and shut up like we did in the olden days and like many women do now in different cultures due to ‘shame’. And men wonder why we’re so wary of them - this is why. This is the potential consequence of being near the wrong man at the wrong time and then having no justice for what happens to you.

This is disgusting. But not surprising.

Even if a woman had gone out with the intent to get laid, as men do frequently. Why would that in anyway mean she would want to accuse the person of rape?

Or mean it was OK for any man to have sex with her?

Does any man who goes with the intent to pull also have to be open the fact that a man might want to assault him due to his sexy pants?

There's literally no logic behind any of these myths and yet people around the world seem happy to buy them with no critical thinking whatsoever.

This crap about the lacy knickers would mean you are never allowed to change your mind.

That statement denies that you can say no at any point, something I had foolishly believed was set in law, so how can anyone legitimately say,and everywhere accept this blatantly false to the whole world supposition.
Perhaps one should carry a selection of knickers and be given time to change underwear...just to make things clear. What new evil is this??!!?

So, going by the logic of wearing lacy thongs, if she had been wearing big 'granny knickers' it would have been rape?

The judgement is disgusting.

We need clarity on the underwear. Perhaps Ms Elizabeth O’Connell could write some guidance

So, going by the logic of wearing lacy thongs, if she had been wearing big 'granny knickers' it would have been rape?

Aahhh but then why was she out alone at that time

Those granny pants also hold your tummy In so clearly she wanted to look nice for someone.

And well, that thong in her bag she was planning on putting on when she got to her boyfriends house puts her back to square one really too...

Back to sports bras, stained ripped underwear and not washing perhaps?

That and staying home .

How dare we go out vaginaring all over the place

Mrs O’Connell could show us all her knickers so we can all see what “don’t put your penis in me” knickers look like.

Jesus christ.

Do you know what, due to the laws of our country (and Ireland's I assume?) and the fact that the burden of proof is on the accuser and it has to be 'proved beyond reasonable doubt' that he did not have reasonable belief in consent, it is hard to get a rape conviction. And I do understand that.

But the knickers thing, what the actual fucking fuck? What do her knickers have to do with anything? Some people will only wear nice knickers, they only buy nice lacey ones so that's all they wear. And loads of thongs just have lace on them anyway. I am fucking raging that the judge called upon this to be taken into account? What the fuck?

Is there a route of public investigation into the basis of this ruling? It's an open court hearing for what reason, what rights do those members of the public watching it have? What's the point in the public being there?

I'm a criminal advocate in England. I can thankfully say I've never came across this here. The judge would haul you over hot coals and rightfully so.

Where did this happe? Sorry if I've missed that

A 27-year-old man who denied raping a 17-year-old in county Cork wept loudly as he was found not guilty by a jury at the Central Criminal Court in Cork.

Half considering making a thread to collect all the ridiculous defences men use tp get off (for rape and murder)
It's disgusting and there is a pattern.

...but the law that's letting them get off compounds the issue. It's bad enough they deny, but to be supported in law by that.

I don't even want to look at their smug expressions, what are the doing holding high office and securing massive pay rates, without doing their job of protecting the public. Protecting women from rape!!
Well named and shamed Frank

The police apologised as they asked me what I was wearing at the time of my assault. I was a similar age of the girl in the current case. I was helping out at an event similar to a brownie camp. Wtf did they think i was wearing and why was it relevant.

ohmy

Ohmy . They apologised, but asked anyway as it was still very important to them to know wtaf.
I am sorry you experienced this, did you feel you had to answer that?

The policewoman was mortified. She has been great with everything else. She had to ask. Just like they need to go through all my medical records and counselling notes. They also checked with social services that I wasn't known to them. I also had to give details of all other times i have been assaulted. The court process is bloody awful. The police are being as supportive as they can. I think it's more the CPS who need it all.

I also think it is crap that it isn't actually my court case, the Crown prosecute, I'm just a witness. I get very limited information so nothing influences my evidence. Meanwhile he gets to see everything. We all know these types of offences are more about control than sex. He still seems much more in control of the situation than me

This is horrific.

We are marching backwards in time.

I really couldn't fault the policewoman. It's a special unit she works in. She has done absolutely everything she can to make it as easy as possible for me. She rings when she says she will, updates me when she has information I am allowed to know. I've not had to speak to any other police officer than her. I have her mobile number. She organised other support for me. The horrific things that she must hear every day . She has kids of her own. I couldn't do her job but I'm very thankful she can.

It's the court system. They have to know all about previous abuse as the defence may say that I was confusing the offence with another . They have to look through my counselling notes to see whether i mentioned it to the counsellor (the case is not about the worst abuse i suffered so most of my counselling had been about the other stuff).

And yes, the court case has been worse than the original offence (this case is about assault not rape). However I have been raped and this court case is still worse. It drags on for ages, apart from the intrusive questions it also perminates into all of my relationships. It affects my relationship with my dp, with my kids, with my family who have never been supportive. My work have had to be told, my friends have been questioned and have to give evidence. My relationship with my mother will never be the same. I'm hypersensitive to things that I wouldn't have given a second thought to before. My case involves a certain type of institution where this sort of thing is sadly too common (think boarding school or cadets group type set up). The 'institution' pays for a dedicated support worker, almost unlimited private counselling and probably anything else I could ask for. It's still been horrific. Sadly the girl in the op wouldn't have had any of the extra support i have been given and her offence was much worse than mine. She must be devastated now . I don't know how i will feel if he gets off. The policewoman told me that not guilty actually means not proven beyond all reasonable doubt and beyond all reasonable doubt is very difficult to prove. Doesn't mean that he didn't do it and could mean every one of the jury was 95% sure that he did.