Register to Comment
Page 560 of 641 FirstFirst ... 60460510550558559560561562570610 ... LastLast
Results 5,591 to 5,600 of 6406
Like Tree4745Likes
  1. #5591
    buttercookie buttercookie is offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    815

    The semen could have transferred from the womans hand to the jeans.
    She had internal and external swabs taken at the sexual assault unit and no semen was found. Semen was found on her top though.
    The judge couldnt admit the semen on the jeans as evidene as the jury wete aware the charge against Olding was dropped. The Police must have accepted the woman tranferred the semen herself.
    Its disgraceful that the semen on the jeans is being used to insinuate olding was guilty of raping the woman vaginally, the police and the PPS who are supposed to work for us all are standing by while the mob exaggerate the importance of the jeans.
    If the jeans could have proved that Olding did vaginally rape the woman there is no way the charge would have been dropped.
    If the twitter loons actually stopped to put their brains in gear the facts of the situation would become clear.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  2. #5592
    Roisin3 Roisin3 is online now
    Roisin3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    16,524

    Quote Originally Posted by talkingshop View Post



    Why say he had any sexual encounter? Why not say (as in fact he also did say), that he went into room and sat down on the bed with the 2 and had "a chat", and leave it at that? Or even, why not say (as in fact he also did say) that he and the girl kissed and leave it at that? Why on earth invent an episode of oral sex that never happened?

    Because it makes a liar of the victim? Because if the person knows it never happened and there is no danger of being prosecuted for something that never happened, they can be sure it makes a liar of the victim and adds to the storyline that the victim was up for annything and anyone? Tarnish the victim’s good name, defame the victim?

    I’m reminded of a very old paternity, child support case in Belfast. The father had his friends testify that they had all had intercourse with the mother of the baby. Judge ordered them all to pay child support.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  3. #5593
    Sailor Sailor is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    59,895

    Quote Originally Posted by John Scotus View Post
    OK, lets see

    My original question was;




    You evaded that question and replied with some non-specific waffle about how you think the US defamation laws are preferable to ours;



    I am intrigued by a poster with 90K posts who seems to have only a rudimentary grasp of the English language

    But whatever
    I have concluded that "Mercurial" is actually a piece of relatively primitive AI software that some joker loaded to the system. It can deal with only a very few scenarios, it has a set of stock answers from which one is randomly selected regardless of its relevance to the question posed, and it bases its contributions based on an extremely limited rule set.
    An upgrade is long overdue!
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  4. #5594
    buttercookie buttercookie is offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    815

    Quote Originally Posted by Roisin3 View Post
    Because it makes a liar of the victim? Because if the person knows it never happened and there is no danger of being prosecuted for something that never happened, they can be sure it makes a liar of the victim and adds to the storyline that the victim was up for annything and anyone? Tarnish the victim’s good name, defame the victim?

    I’m reminded of a very old paternity, child support case in Belfast. The father had his friends testify that they had all had intercourse with the mother of the baby. Judge ordered them all to pay child support.

    Whose is the victim referred to here, there was no rape.

    McIlroy gave his evidence, he like the other two men had consensual oral sex, the jury believed him, end of.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  5. #5595
    Roisin3 Roisin3 is online now
    Roisin3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    16,524

    Quote Originally Posted by buttercookie View Post
    Whose is the victim referred to here, there was no rape.

    McIlroy gave his evidence, he like the other two men had consensual oral sex, the jury believed him, end of.
    The jury are entitled to their opinions and verdict.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  6. #5596
    Mercurial Mercurial is offline
    Mercurial's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    90,354

    Quote Originally Posted by John Scotus View Post
    OK, lets see

    My original question was;




    You evaded that question and replied with some non-specific waffle about how you think the US defamation laws are preferable to ours;



    I am intrigued by a poster with 90K posts who seems to have only a rudimentary grasp of the English language

    But whatever
    I'm afraid I'm not intrigued by you in the slightest.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  7. #5597
    Mercurial Mercurial is offline
    Mercurial's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    90,354

    Quote Originally Posted by Niall996 View Post
    That's not the question.
    I didn't suggest that it was.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  8. #5598
    Mercurial Mercurial is offline
    Mercurial's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    90,354

    Quote Originally Posted by Niall996 View Post
    You can rewind and replay endlessly the court case and the evidence submitted or not submitted. It's over. The verdict was unanimous amongst male and female jurors. You can interpret the female judges comments as you wish. And the verdict was instantaneous, without a hint of doubt. A big resounding Not Guilty. Case closed.

    Two elements made this case a lost cause way before it ever even got to court. Dara Florence and the acccuser herself whose accounts were vaque, incomplete and at times jaw droppingly contradictory. So a completely credible eye witness on one hand and a completely noncredible core witness on the other. The prosecution had nothing bar a murky agenda. It should never have gone to trial. No names should have been released. No texts should have been made public. And no prominent people in particular should have stupidly and disgustingly tweeted abusive false ugly libelous tweets. Especially after the resounding Not Guilty result.

    But the lynch mob needed a head I guess.
    It's interesting that you appeal to the credibility of the justice system when it suits you (the content of the verdict) yet simultaneously characterise it as deeply flawed when it doesn't (the fact that the case was taken in the first place).

    I suppose it's easier to imagine that there is an angry mob out there just looking to persecute innocent men, rather than to admit that these events have exposed a deep misogyny at the heart of our society - the sort that certain people do anything to avoid taking responsibility for.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  9. #5599
    Fats_Portnoy Fats_Portnoy is offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    363

    Quote Originally Posted by Mercurial View Post
    I didn't suggest that it was.
    Out of interest why do you use the avatar of a rapist. Google "David Bowie Lori Maddix"
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  10. #5600
    Mercurial Mercurial is offline
    Mercurial's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    90,354

    Quote Originally Posted by Fats_Portnoy View Post
    Out of interest why do you use the avatar of a rapist. Google "David Bowie Lori Maddix"
    I like his music.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

Sign in to CommentRegister to Comment