Eh, it’s a completely accurate use of the word. The integrity of the complainant, her account and the entire case were attacked by you and others, with her mother’s profession being the rod used. That’s an aspersion. Nothing has been mentioned about Harrison’s father having the same job.
The rest of your post is conjecturous nonsense.
What has anyone said to deny harrisons father is a lawyer or that he may not be of assistance?
Nobody has. You just made a nothing point.
And it is the wrong use of the word in this context. Completely wrong.
Outside of the sex acts? She’s lying about an alleged rape…you seem to be acknowledging it.
Try opening your mind a little more…you admitted you doubted her credibility in relation to retuning for her phone…
You don’t have to join the baying hordes clamouring for conviction or acquittal
My point was, we will never know what fully happened in that room exactly. The issue of consent is debatable. But every other event that night, her story has checked out and theirs hasn’t under oath. So if they lie about that stuff, how can we take their word? No credibility in the eyes of the jury. Do you think it odd she returned for her phone? And can you explain how, if she did, she got through a locked door? Ninja complainant.
That’s totally incorrect.
They all have inconsistencies
An inconsistency is an inaccuracy. Not an entirely made up story. It is impossible for all the defendants to be telling the truth, even for two of them to be telling the whole truth.
I enjoy the banter but I’d enjoy it more if you’d a bit of sense. Being blindly partisan is fine if you’re supporting a football team. It’s not fine when you’re supporting sending people to prison and destroying their lives.
Looks like you’ve completely misunderstood what’s being said again, amazing you feel comfortable asserting that you’re right on matters of comprehension.
Harrison’s father is a lawyer. That is an undeniable fact. I haven’t said anyone said otherwise.
You went to great lengths to emphasize that because the complainant’s mother was a lawyer, she must have been coached and that she pushed the police to pursue the investigation. That’s an aspersion. You are making a statement to undermine the integrity of the complainant and the case.
On the other hand, when it emerges Harrison’s father is a lawyer, no similar comments were made about him coaching his son or any other such involvement in the case. That would be a lack of aspersions.
Anyone know if found not guilty, could they all face charges of perverting the course of justice? They may be deliberately muddying the waters with their differing accounts in an attempt to confuse & sway against the ‘beyond reasonable doubt’
What part from OUTSIDE the sex acts do you not get? She didn’t say Olding had her hands on his head the entire time, and Dara has said that she saw PJ having sex with her from behind, just as complainant says. If you wanna go on what the witness saw. Their stories are ludicrous when combined.
Doesn’t matter, they’re not the ones crying rape
They’re crying innocence… which that I’m sure they are not, despite PJ’s pathetic attempt to paint himself whiter than white… would “hate for anyone to leave his house upset” 
really? Even his longterm girlfriend finding out he cheated?
McIlroy - “Did she follow him? I can’t remember an awful lot."
Harrison - “Aw me neither."
McIlroy - “Did you tell the police we were all fucked?”
Harrison - “just said we were all drinking. …but not one out of control.
At 5.37 Blane McIIroy picked up a call from the police.
McIlroy - “they just called for me I have to go down now."
McIlroy - “had the other 3 girls left when this girl left?"
Amazing how McIlroy could remember so clearly then the other girls leaving and how the complainant left in his interviews and evidence on stand. Fair enough if they were locked and couldn’t remember, but they did not say that originally. They gave details about what happened, didn’t say they were drunk and can’t remember.
You questioned why people are not casting aspersions on Harrison.
That’s irrelivant because he was hardly pushing for a case. Have you anything to say he tried to block it with influence?
I know you are smarter than this.
Ironically, the truth would likely have set the defendants free. If they had held their hands up and said we were locked, we were too drunk to realise that she wasn’t consenting and we were arseholes to her/about her after, they would have come out of this a whole lot better.
I don’t for a minute think they went out with the intent of raping someone or believed they were raping her at the time. But that doesn’t mean it didn’t happen, she certainly does feel she was raped and there seems to be no evidence that consent was given. The only “evidence” that she was consenting is Olding saying she beckoned him in, which Jacksom says didn’t happen and McIlroy’s nonsense statement, which all parties day didn’t happen.
I don’t think they deserve to rot in prison for eternity or anything like that and I do think it’s obvious by trying to cover up what happened they have gotten themselves into an awful mess.
I just don’t think branding her a liar and them totally innocent here is correct either. An acknowledgement that she was assaulted and remorse for their actions, even in the aftermath and the clear false statements would be appropriate.
They just refuse to go back on what they said in the interviews and have gone for a deny all approach, hence making them look so much worse and regardless of verdict, they are being severely punished for it now. I don’t know what the best outcome could be… I do not think they’re likely re~offenders or anything like that. I think she needs some justice here too however.
That’s about as objective as I can be on this topic.
I notice how you’ve completely neglected to countenance the possibility of coaching, which I’ve mentioned in my previous post. That was an aspersion that was levelled against the complainant.
You’re also ignoring the possibility that he could have placed pressure in the other direction (I’m not saying he did, but if you’re using the mothers job as a reason for asserting she pressurised, then why wouldn’t it apply here). Of course he wouldn’t have pressurised the police to pursue an investigation against his son, that’s a dumb, obvious point.
Of course he is coached.
I never made a big deal of that.
I was making the point that being well coached and solid on the stand is not proof of truth. It could be that she is well coached.
A fairly obvious point that bizarrely upset a few lads.
My main point is the general feeling by police and legal community up there was this should never have got to court.
And it was not about money.
So what was it about.
The same answers come back all the time.
Can I be sure of those beliefs or rumours? Of course not.
I hope this latest “six” “nations” rubby weekend doesn’t result in the rubby community releasing another set of rumours about the complainant.
Justice and truth is what it’s about.
I’m just talking to a wall here What do people think would be a fair verdict? Genuinely. All bullshit aside. Do people think that all men should be found not guilty entirely on every offence?
With the evidence we know so far and that has been publicised, if I were on the jury, granted that we don’t know as much as them and the case isn’t finished I think the following fair…
Harrison ~ guilty of withholding evidence. Beyond reasonable doubt for me, even before cross~examination. Clearly knows more than he’s saying and attempted to pervert the course of justice through damage control.
Olding~not guilty. No way to prove that at all.
Jackson~not guilty of rape in a courtroom… not beyond reasonable doubt anyway. Guilty of sexual assault beyond reasonable doubt. She was caused bodily harm and was bleeding from whatever happened.
McIlroy~don’t know what to say about him…Guilty of exposure in my mind yes, but again, can’t prove it in a court. I do think he should be up for perverting the course of justice though, his story was an absolute fabrication.