Next week??? another week of it…fuck.
1 Like
The closing arguments made by the defence are powderpuff and unconvincing, nothing really that will change the mind of any juror I’d suspect.
3 Likes
A lot of “would they really…?” and the prosecution’s case is “nonsense”…shite…but I’m guessing in Harrison’s and McIlroy’s cases that it’s the best they can do, since in their cases anyway, the evidence is that they are lying through their teeth. Beyond reasonable doubt.
Can anyone answer…if the jury are convinced beyond reasonable doubt that Jackson had intercourse with the girl and is lying about that…but are unsure re consent…where does that leave them?
Do you think the ‘jurors’ have already made up their minds?
If there is a reasonable doubt then Jackson walks out.
I don’t know but the defence are failing to make compelling closing arguments.
I thought the idea of going to soul food was ridiculous. The food’s terrible.
Yeah… I wonder what happen re if they are convinced he did have sex with her though, despite saying he didn’t… very difficult for jury.
If he did, he perverted the course of justice. If he did and had admitted so, I doubt the whole thing would have gone to trial tbh. I think the only reason this ended up in court is because girl & dara said sex happened versus all the lads saying it didn’t, no condoms your honour.
1 Like
That… and the laceration, conflicting accounts, deleted whatsapps and destruction of evidence…
It’s a rare situation when you’re saying a man could have got off on a rape charge by saying he did have sex with the woman.
But there are strong arguments for those points. Laceration more likely not to be as a result of a penis. Deleted messages, meh. Conflicting accounts, on both sides. Destruction of evidence, on both sides - oral DNA evidence by the girl.
But if they believe he is lying about this, which is a central point…as in it’s sex in a rape case… surely they can draw adverse inference from it.
Yes but what inference can they draw? There are several options
No, but it would suggest it wasn’t “gentle” touching as Jackson said. The girl didn’t destroy oral evidence… she didn’t say it in the clinic, I imagine as most people think, she didn’t realise how important this was as the vaginal damage was priority.
Deleted messages are a big deal when they concern an alleged rape and the accused are denying a cover up.
If she had deleted messages to her friend the next morning, that would stand hugely against her.
1 Like
He lied because he did rape her
He lied because he had sex but didn’t rape her
He lied because he has sex after being asked for a condom which he didn’t have
He lied because he had sex with her and was afraid to admit it as it would make him look guilty
He lied because he had a girlfriend and was more worried about that
He lied because he hadn’t any memory of having sex
Could be any one of those inferences
2 Likes
I think sex is not exactly a ‘gentle’ act. It involves a guy hammering/pumping/thrusting, whatever u want to call it
TFk post worthy of a good few likes