The jury decided that there wasn’t enough evidence to prove beyond reasonable doubt and convict for rape.
That doesn’t mean there was no rape.
That you would show such a fundamental misunderstanding of the criminal justice system is the icing on the cake of your self-humiliation and your voluntary outing of yourself as a woman-hating piece of shit.
Perhaps you could move on to writing reams of nonsense posts about how what the hooded men who were interned in the North in 1971 suffered could not amount to torture because of a court decision?
I’ve sympathy for everybody involved. These cases are total mess for everybody involved. People taking joy in the verdict one way or the other and people looking for the girl to be shamed make me sick.
They were found innocent. It is done. You are not going to get anymore conclusive than that.
I agree with you that comments of some posters who deemed the girl to be lying still remain out of order despite the verdict but for God sake let the trial go.
Not only was he a full on cheerleader for one side of the story during the trial, he also was heaping praise on the Prosection. It’s not like he can even take on the angle that this was a case where there just wasn’t enough evidence and the prosecution couldn’t prove the case. He was cheering Toby Hedworth like he was Wolfie at Lakeside and deriding Kelly like he was a PDC player.
I notice he is just going over the “rape apologist” and “you know how rape victims should react???” line here, the inconvenience of it all for him.
To be honest I don’t think the verdict makes a whole pile of difference, we’ll never know what happened that night, a lot of people on TFK let themselves down and continue to do so, its grand to have a slag and throw out a bit of bile but not in situations like this,
The case will have done some public good though, people will think twice in certain situations
An awful hames of a case
Why would I be seething? justice was done, I saw a lot of problems in the girl’s ‘story’, many inconsistencies etc, which I have pointed out at various stages on this thread.
I respect the rule of law and if it is to mean anything the defendants should be allowed resume their careers, and with Ulster too, but that doesn’t mean I or anybody else have to agree with the verdict.
It is beyond reasonable doubt that the defendants lied, in fact it’s impossible that they didn’t.
Jackson’s and McIlroy’s accounts of the time McIlroy entered the room, for instance, directly contradicted each other. McIlroy claimed he recieved oral sex from the woman and was talking to Jackson as this happened. Jackson said “that didn’t happen”, that McIlroy never even entered the room. One of them has to be lying.
The accounts of how the complainant left the house were all over the place - the accounts of Jackson, McIlroy and Harrison all contradicted each other. At least two of them had to be lying.
So we know beyond doubt that they lied.
They weren’t foundinnocent - they were found not guilty to the burden of proof required.
In the eyes of the law, they remain innocent, because that is the default position for everybody until found otherwise.
That’s a different thing from being found innocent.