Around dinner tables in Ireland people are talking about the Belfast rape trial.
During the nine-week trial of Paddy Jackson, 26, Stuart Olding, 25 and Blane McIlroy, 26, all Ulster rugby players and their friend Rory Harrison, 25, every day saw a lengthy queue outside the court room to hear the confronting details of an incident that took place in June, 2016.
In Ireland, the complainant, in this case a young woman, is entitled to life-long anonymity – something particularly important in such a high profile case. But given the public was granted access to the rape trial, her name was soon discussed and published on social media.
The woman, who is now 21 years old, told the court that on the 27th of June, 2016, she completed her exams and decided to go out with friends to celebrate.
According to the Irish Times she spoke “confidently and precisely”.
First, she said, she went to a friend’s house and there she had a glass of wine. Later she decided to go to Ollie’s nightclub, a popular venue in Belfast. Along with a group of friends, the woman found herself in the VIP area, surrounded by the Northern Ireland football team who had just returned from France, and Paddy Jackson and Stuart Olding, who had just returned from South Africa after representing the Irish squad.
As the night wound up, the woman said she was invited to an after-party by a friend and caught a taxi with three women and Jackson. She alleges Jackson simply informed the driver, “I’m Paddy Jackson”, and the driver immediately knew who he was – a detail Jackson vehemently denies.
Top Comments
So, she touched the knee of one footballer, and the arm of another?! ** Gasp! Oh yes, she was asking for it! That is absolutely consent to have sex with two other footballers later on. Was she wearing a skirt above the knee? That is also consent, as good as a signed permission form for any man in the club to f*ck her later on. Or ever. (sarcasm galore here)
Come on. The ruling is a joke. The men's stories don't add up, and their text messages pretty much confirm they knew exactly what they did wrong. They shouldn't have been found "not guilty."
It seems like sportsman get so many women coming home with them and being sexual consensually, and probably being 'roasted' (hate the terminology) that they convince themselves that a woman simply coming home with them is enough, and to dismiss anything else after that.
They probably assume - wrongly - that women are thrilled to have sex with a famous sportsmen. WRONG. A woman (or man for that matter) can withdraw consent when you are inside of her - mid thrust. You pull out, you stop. Immediately. Don't even try and talk her into continuing.
A note for accuracy and consistency:
Ireland refers to the republic of Ireland.
Belfast is in Northern Ireland - same piece of land, different country.
Ireland can also refer to the piece of land itself, so I'd agree that 'Around dinner tables in Ireland people are talking about the Belfast rape trial', however when discussing what the complainant, is entitled to, I imagine you mean legally-speaking in Northern Ireland.
Yes - to clarify for the writer and audience, in Ireland (as in the Republic of) the law is different for rape cases. If the case had been heard in the south of Ireland the defendants would have been able to access the protection of anonymity, like the complainant. The case would also have been heard privately. As it was tried in the north where the law is based on UK procedure, those accused of rape are not entitled to anonymity and the case was heard with a full public gallery.
IMO the entire thing has been a circus and no one has been vindicated. The poor girl has had to go through hell and the players simply serve to highlight how badly some men treat, speak about and objectify women. Their language in the texts alone is a sad indictment of the next generation of boys who look up to these role models.