r/northernireland • u/TomCrean1916 • Mar 30 '24
Police statement. Stfu for your own good. Political
2
u/AgreeableNature484 Apr 01 '24
The case could be thrown out on technicalities but the accused ain't coming back as a politician in public any time soon. Or marching in any parades.
10
u/WeeBuns97 Mar 31 '24
Guys I've been through the legal system as victim of historical sexual abuse. The least issue will be used to claim any evidence, witness or accusation is false, unsafe or tainted. Even when they or their client is the one who is the reason it is tainted.
Both my sister and I. The case was within the last 2 years and was against our older half brother and one of his "friends". We got both convicted, but it was a hard dlog.
We had a very strong case with the 2 of us, but the defense went to all sort of disgusting lengths to discredit, goad us into speaking out of turn and generally revictimising us all over again. The judge was excellent and put the defence Barristers in their place when they acted out.
I don't think the public at large appreciate how weighted the justice system is in favour of the accused and how the defence can behave terribly and get away with it, but the prosecution and victims have to do every single little thing perfect otherwise it is blown up and used to force the trial to aquital/mistrial.
In light of my experience, I very much doubt this Donaldson case will result in a conviction as the publicity and conjecture will 100% be used to argue a mistrial due to the jury pool being tainted.
3
u/lrish_Chick Mar 31 '24 edited Apr 04 '24
Very sorry to hear that. I know the case is triggering for many of us, so I am glad there are links, etc, with resources for those who need it.
What I will say is, we're not there yet.
Police etc have a duty of care to explain that it is in fact, very difficult to prosecute these cases and make that clear. Particularly in high profile cases.
2
u/Constant-Pop-2987 Mar 31 '24
This comment only works within their jurisdiction. They seem to forget that social media is international.
1
2
-5
u/Illustrious-Tie4967 Mar 31 '24
IN ABSOLUTELY EVERY OTHER CASE THE POLICE SHUTS THE FUCK UP IN FRONT OF ME FOR THEIR OWN GOOD THEY WEAK AF THEY CANT DO SHIT IT IS THEIR BEST INTEREST TO STFU AND WATCH THEIR FUCKING WORDS AND MOUTH AROUND ME BUT IN THIS ONE BECAUSE ITS RAPE ILL JUST LET THEM BE
1
u/Different_Onion Mar 31 '24
I'd be interested to know how long it was from when the offences were reported until they knocked on Jefferys front door arrested him and brought him in for questioning. Any longer than a day or two is far too long. Heard it was reported up to two months ago by his alleged victim which is a disgrace if true.
1
u/Green_Friendship_175 Mar 31 '24
The newspapers state today that the initial report to the police was sometime in January, nothing more specific than that.
1
4
u/playfulspirit2004 Mar 31 '24
I imagine there had to be some sort of evidence gathering before arrest to secure him being charged.
2
u/Different_Onion Mar 31 '24
If it was you or me they wouldn’t be waiting months to arrest. They would be arresting, questioned and then bailed or realised pending further investigation
1
u/Oh_its_that_asshole Mar 31 '24 edited Mar 31 '24
Can't remember them ever putting out a statement like that for literally anyone else, despite other past widley talked about cases.
It's got to be bad for the DUP to immediately punt him out.
2
u/lrish_Chick Mar 31 '24 edited Apr 04 '24
He's suspended that's all, their language was to "support those suffering who have put their faith in the legal system"
It's clear that could pertain to anyone in this case.
We will have to see, I hope justice is done
-7
u/ptay111 Mar 31 '24
The Protestant pedo party 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂. Here all week for this banter , can’t wait for the Sammy Wilson leak . 🍿 🍿
8
-2
u/Goosequam Mar 30 '24
He will suffer the same fate as Epstein, I’m sure old Jeff has a ton on dirt on people which he may use to stay out of jail , the royal family best interest to keep him quiet
0
3
u/zeroconflicthere Mar 30 '24
Ironic that by publishing their ages that the police themselves outed who they were.
Why did they give those details?
2
1
Mar 31 '24
because once they had been charged there is no right to anoniminity for the accused. Whats startling is that he/they were charged straight to court without the PPS / CPS reviewing it. They must have very rock solid evidence - video / audio admission etc.
1
-4
u/GapingArfYole Mar 30 '24
That ship has sailed. The horse has bolted. This is a runaway freight train. This is a geeny that will not be put back in the lamp.
5
7
u/kia-audi-spider-legs Mar 30 '24
Absolutely agree that the victim’s anonymity should be protected and can understand why that information being spread could be harmful for the victims during this legal process.
Just out of curiosity, how does revealing the identity of the victims or speculating about details hurt the justice process? I remember this being a big issue with the OJ Simpson trial because the media and gossip columns were publishing endless speculation and it turned into a bit of a circus. But if the media are careful about only publishing select info and the speculation is coming from average people on social media, how does it affect the actual justice process?
9
u/Green_Friendship_175 Mar 30 '24
Because the jury is drawn from ordinary members of the public. The more that information (which is often false, or misrepresented) is spread through social media, the harder it becomes to find jury members who won’t have been tainted, either by direct exposure to that or indirect (“my mate told me he/she read such and such on Reddit, etc).
For justice to be properly served, the jury should be presented the evidence, assess its significance, relevance and integrity and both sides argue their case in support of a guilty verdict and an innocent verdict and then each jury member comes to his or her own conclusion, based solely on that and nothing else.
This isn’t hard to grasp.
2
Mar 31 '24
Can his legal team dispute the make up of the jury? If say 10 of them were "themmuns" could they say this wouldn't be a fair trial?
0
u/Connect_Material_644 Belfast Mar 31 '24
There is no jury in Newry Magistrates Court
1
u/Connect_Material_644 Belfast Mar 31 '24
Can a wife testify against her husband for a lesser sentence or is not testifying against your husband just an American rule
1
u/KCGAA Belfast Mar 31 '24
There are no plea bargains in UK.
How quickly you plead guilty may be taken into account by the Judge in setting a sentence.
2
u/lrish_Chick Apr 01 '24
Officially, there are no plea bargains in England and Wales.
Unofficially, its rampant
-1
u/Connect_Material_644 Belfast Mar 31 '24
The news reported he had been arraigned to appear with his wife in Newry Magistrates Court on 24th April.
1
u/Brian Mar 31 '24
A rape case will not be heard at a magistrate's court - those only handle summary offenses. All cases will start there, but serious crimes will be passed straight to crown court.
1
u/Green_Friendship_175 Mar 31 '24
INDICTABLE CRIMINAL OFFENCES
Certain offences will only be triable in the Crown Court and heard by a Judge sitting with a jury. Such offences are known as indictable offences and examples of these offences are murder, attempted murder and serious sexual offences.
https://wilson-nesbitt.com/categories-of-offences-in-northern-ireland/
Your welcome 🙏
3
2
u/kia-audi-spider-legs Mar 30 '24
It’s not that it’s hard to grasp, I just don’t believe that being exposed to hearsay and conjecture can influence someone’s objective viewpoint once they’ve been presented with facts, information and formed arguments. Gossip and social media isn’t going to “taint” people beyond reasonable consideration of whatever evidence there is.
Juror’s aren’t allowed to access outside information about the case anyway, and it seems more sensible, not to mention easier, to find 12 people with no prior knowledge or bias about the case than to ask over a million people not to openly discuss a high profile scandal.
-8
u/Green_Friendship_175 Mar 30 '24 edited Mar 30 '24
Well, I guess you know better than those that work within the criminal justice system.
Tell me, where did you gain your expert knowledge that makes you believe their advice is not worth heeding?
Were you also one of those people who knew more about Corona than the experts too? Just curious 🧐
8
u/kia-audi-spider-legs Mar 30 '24
You’ll notice I was sharing my thoughts, not presenting anything as fact. That’s generally how discussions work and since you took the time to voluntarily reply to my comment, I assume you grasp what a discussion is. But if you prefer condescending comments and strange assumptions then I’ll end the interaction here. Have a great day.
0
u/Green_Friendship_175 Mar 30 '24
You basically said “bollocks to prejudging a trail jury, my own right to talk shite about it is more important”.
If you can’t see what’s wrong with that, then best to you, but I’d have to conclude that you are not the brightest.
8
u/kia-audi-spider-legs Mar 30 '24
Is that what I said? Or did I say that, in my opinion, people with full access to the objective information and aren’t allowed to access outside information are probably not going to be so “tainted” by social media that it affects their ability to reach a reasonable conclusion. Cause I’m pretty sure that’s what I said.
-4
u/Green_Friendship_175 Mar 30 '24
And I’m pretty sure you said “my right to talk shite is more important than letting justice take its course without prejudice”.
11
u/kia-audi-spider-legs Mar 30 '24
Well I think we now know which one of us isn’t the brightest.
-4
u/Green_Friendship_175 Mar 30 '24
You may well be, what is commonly known as “a tool”.
I’d rather be me, than you.
Think on that and all the best.
-7
u/Necessary-Permit9200 Mar 30 '24
What to add?...Yes. The victims' identities are being withheld for their own protection as well as to shield them from public humiliation.
It was not long ago that people were routinely murdered for telling the police anything that might lead to the conviction of someone involved in Northern Ireland politics or a close relative thereof. That's how Liam Adams got away with his own crimes as long as he did.
The victims are only coming forward now because the risk of their being murdered by loyalist gang members would have been too great before.
8
16
u/zebrasanddogs Belfast Mar 30 '24
Whoever is going round spreading rumours about the victims identities needs to fuck up!
The victims are having a hard enough time in coming forward without "InTeRnEt DeTeCtIvEs" sticking their noses in.
-7
u/Different_Onion Mar 31 '24
Everyone knows who it is, a Quick Look on Twitter would tell you who the alleged victims are.
-10
u/Legitimate_Run1336 Mar 30 '24
I remember around 10 years ago when Gerry Adams was arrested loyalists were standing outside Antrim police station holding union flags. I wonder did republicans do the same? Or maybe they wouldn't stoop to such a level.
76
u/TheGhostOfTaPower Belfast Mar 30 '24
It’s pretty simple: You can say Donaldson has been charged with rape and other sexual offences. He has been formally charged and he will appear in court alongside a 57 year old woman.
You can’t speculate on: Who the victims are, who the 57 year old woman is, other offences and allegations.
The 57 year old woman’s name might be released in time but it may be withheld to protect identities of the victims.
Now everyone has an idea and has heard things but don’t post them anywhere online as someone like Donaldson will be hiring a crack legal team and they will go after people for prejudicing the case and also libel.
3
u/Different_Onion Mar 31 '24
The 57 year old woman is his wife that is common knowledge now it's even on the front page of the Sunday Life.
32
u/lrish_Chick Mar 30 '24 edited Apr 04 '24
We know that the 57 year old woman lived with the man and that the bail dictates they cannot cohabitate according to some sources
Edit: The Bel Tel and other publications are now openly admitting it's his wife, but it looks like they have just copied and pasted a Sunday World article (there's 4 diff papers are newr word for word the same)Which seems lazy and ill advised and they are charging for it.
They also say the allegations were made in january Edit edit: which is also wrong and why copy pasting other papers articles is a bad idea
6
-6
u/usedtobeathrowaway94 Mar 30 '24
All we have to do is use the term "allegedly"
16
u/TomCrean1916 Mar 30 '24
Or imagine your younger sister was a victim and think would you want her name out there like that? No you wouldn’t. And just drop it.
-4
u/usedtobeathrowaway94 Mar 30 '24
I'm not talking about naming the victims mate. Slating the accused on the other hand..
-3
-15
u/Boulder1983 Mar 30 '24 edited Mar 30 '24
So what IS supposed to happen here?
The person involved is incredibly high profile. That can't be ignored, so are we supposed to (at this early stage) just accept that they are exempt from the same judicial system as the rest of us? That they shouldn't expect to be held accountable to the same laws?
It's a pretty bleak image.
Edit - I'm not advocating people should talk about it (just to be clear). I just honestly don't know how it's avoidable, given who the person in question is. I don't want them to be able to use this as an excuse for a mis-trial.
6
u/Astronomer-Honest Mar 30 '24
It is the same rules for the general public? The public and/press are not allowed to name victims unless the victim waives that. “Rumours” and trying to sway public opinion can result in a mistrial which is why it’s dangerous to post these “rumours” because it could collapse the trial.
I dislike this man as much as everyone else but if he has committed sexual abuse then the victims deserve to see justice done.
2
u/Boulder1983 Mar 30 '24
But see... that's my point.
I don't want them to get off on a technicality, claiming mis-trial on the basis that the case has been discussed significantly by the public, speculations made etc. But I don't see how, given the profile of the accused, that this can be avoided.
And you're absolutely right, it is the victims who would suffer the most.
12
u/GrowthDream Mar 30 '24
Huh? Why wouldn't he be held accountable after being arrested and charged just because we're asked not to speculate about the identity of victims on social media?
-4
u/Boulder1983 Mar 30 '24
Pretty much, yeah.
I don't want them to be able to use that as an excuse to claim mis-trial or anything like that, but given their profile, it's impossible for it to not be discussed online, speculations made etc.
So I don't know how it can be avoided.
3
u/Soggy-Blueberry-5321 Mar 30 '24
I wonder if we are still able to have trials with 3 judges instead of a jury like years ago?. It could be just terrorist offences for that but I think it could be an option here too because of his high profile. No doubt Jeffrey Will whinge moan and stamp his feet If that happened.
-8
u/ToasterInCupboard Mar 30 '24
LMAO
You can't observe a black hole. We know it's there because of everything around it.
-14
u/f0sh1zzl3 Mar 30 '24
Lads … it’s non recent , all is grand
3
u/Soggy-Blueberry-5321 Mar 30 '24
Crazy that people aren't getting the sarcasm lol. It's a valid point too he's charged with rape but it's put across as not recent sex offences.
15
u/cogra23 Mar 30 '24
If victims are alive their right to anonymity still stands until they waive it.
27
u/EarlyHistory164 Mar 30 '24
STFU for the victims' sake. They are all that matters.
0
u/Noname_Maddox Mar 30 '24
So no one mention the biggest scandal in the past 30 years?
4
u/EarlyHistory164 Mar 30 '24
No. No-one post anything that could potentially identify the victims - try reading the statement. The scandal is all over the news in case you haven't noticed.
4
u/Noname_Maddox Mar 30 '24 edited Mar 30 '24
Jesus dude yeah, don’t name victims. But we are tiny community. With at most 2 degrees of separation from the people involved. I knew who the victims where by Friday afternoon.
3
50
u/-MrTorgueFlexington- Belfast Mar 30 '24
Absolutely mate. The victims names have not been released so anyone spreading rumour and speculation needs to wise up and catch themselves on.
What if it was your family someone was talking about?
305
u/Weak_You5569 Mar 30 '24
Rape. That's what the BBC is saying. Let's not soften the language with historical offences. Simp bullshit.
6
59
u/DanGleeballs Mar 30 '24 edited Mar 30 '24
Yes. But there is no good to come from naming the victims or worse just guessing who they are publicly. This is already devastating for the victims and their friends and siblings and other family members. People should stop sharing names.
63
u/Weak_You5569 Mar 30 '24
I didn't mention names, haven't and agree. It's only the language by the police and most of the media that I'm talking about, it's rape, there's no need to say historical offences, it's rape he's been charged with. There is no difference in historical or recent sex crimes, none.
4
u/JazzyJay8989 Mar 31 '24
Because it's the PSNI, you think they wouldn't be throwing softballs when the alleged rapist is DUP?
-47
u/Spiritual-Mix7665 Mar 30 '24
They always do this , pedos get the most protection, and sympathy from the prosecution.
21
u/FlamingBearAttack Mar 30 '24
Are you dense? Victims of sex offences are entitled to lifelong anonymity. It is a criminal offence to breach that right. The above PSNI statement makes this clear.
-16
-36
u/Valdularo Moira Mar 30 '24
Also I hate to be that guy dude but there are so many times someone cried rape when it was a lie to ruins someone’s life. And had ruined lives even after it comes out it was all a lie.
The court of public opinion can be devastating. It’s why we really should wait until the court case closes. I agree with you in concept to what you’re saying but it’s really not and never will be that simple.
1
u/Sensitive_Nose_7192 Mar 31 '24
Not to say that it can’t happen but I find it very very hard to believe that two separate victims would put themselves through an incredibly high profile trial, risk ruining their own lives and potential prosecution and for what reason.
It is incredibly incredibly hard to come forward as a victim, especially as a victim as a child and go through something that you’ve spent the rest of your life trying get over or forget. It’s estimated that around 1.3% of rapes are reported to the police and around 3% of the reports to the police might be false. Of those reported of which around 1 in 60 is actually charged and the conviction rate is less than 2%.
Yes false accusations happen but men are more likely to actually be raped than to be falsely accused of rape. Our society makes it miserable for victims of sexual abuse who speak out, let’s give make it as safe and comfortable for them as we can
1
u/Valdularo Moira Mar 31 '24
Ok? Legitimate victims aren’t the point of topic here dude. People’s identities should be protected from public view until the justice system has reached its conclusion via the courts.
Yeah it’s hard to come forward etc etc. that isn’t in doubt. It’s the idea that if a false accusation is made you’ve just ruined someone’s life because the common person makes snap decisions. Hence the court of public opinion. If it’s a legitimate case and that’s proven release the identity.
It’s not fucking rocket science to hold back on releasing the identities of those involved on BOTH sides until a clear picture is given through an investigation and brought before the court. This whole thread is a perfect example of how people want to exact their own form of justice because they have a justice boner when we don’t even know the fucking facts yet.
6
u/Unlikely_Magician630 Mar 30 '24
I always find the people who say 'i hate to be this person' more often than not dont hate to be that person, in fact they love to show off how 'reasonable' they are by being able to play devils advocate. And then i read how one comment made you fly off the handle like a child.
Must be breeding them stupid up in moira, eh?
-2
u/Valdularo Moira Mar 30 '24
“Assumption is the mother of all fuck ups” - Unknown
The assumptions in this post. Does me saying that take away from the point being made? Disagree with that aspect if you wish, the point beyond that stands.
Assuming where I was born is just golden really.
8
u/Unlikely_Magician630 Mar 30 '24
I honestly couldnt care less about your point, if i did i wouldve mentioned it. Im talking about how you are going about getting your point across, and given that youve proceeded to have a meltdown in the comment section just says it all
0
u/Valdularo Moira Mar 30 '24
If you don’t care. Why are you commenting? Do you see how one doesn’t equal the other?
14
u/Deep-Log-1775 Mar 30 '24
Name one case here in NI that got to court but was a false allegation.
-22
u/Valdularo Moira Mar 30 '24
Are you serious?! Are you actually fucking serious you dumb cunt…
Here is your fucking case… do you own research next time. Pretending like it doesn’t fucking happen. You ignorant piece of shit.
1
u/Lord_Bamford Mar 30 '24
Rattle those 2 braincells around a bit more and read what he wrote, dumdum.
-8
u/Lord-squee Mar 30 '24
That was no rape worthy
1
u/Valdularo Moira Mar 30 '24
Oddly if you search you’ll find it quite easily.
1
u/Lord-squee Mar 30 '24
That's truly fucked !! Wtf is wrong with this shitty world and she avoids jail again like wtf!!!
-2
3
u/Valdularo Moira Mar 30 '24
Glad you’re a legal expert who can make such a claim because it confirms to your narrative.
-7
u/Lord-squee Mar 30 '24
Yea just one looks and her waistline is easily in breach of sexual offences act 1956 section 1 rebuttal
3
u/Valdularo Moira Mar 30 '24
Excuse me? I’m done with the comment thread. You’re disgusting.
-5
12
u/Deep-Log-1775 Mar 30 '24
You misread what I wrote. I was asking for a false allegation that made it to court. The case you shared did not. The police picked on it straight away and charged the accuser. No need to get emotional.
-19
u/Valdularo Moira Mar 30 '24
Let me get this straight. You’re saying it doesn’t happen? That I’ve made up some lie? That no one could be evil enough to make up such a lie right?
You know if you took even a moment to google it you’d see how wrong you are with your implication that it doesn’t happen. You’re so utterly ignorant.
15
u/Deep-Log-1775 Mar 30 '24
Still waiting on a case that made it to court. I'd also like to point out that in both cases the accusers had limited mental capacity and that the claim never resulted in an arrest or a court date. Take your time next time.
3
u/lrish_Chick Apr 01 '24
Well done being so polite and restrained here, this guy needs mental health intervention.
-7
u/Valdularo Moira Mar 30 '24
Why is it making it to court relevant? You’ll find any of those across the UK and Ireland. But even if it doesn’t make it to court how does that make the argument any less relevant? How does that make it any less disgusting when it’s actually done?
You’re trying to make it seem like it doesn’t happen when it does. When accusations are made it should be fully investigated. In every case.
The idea that every single person who is accused is guilty is the post of the original comment in this thread. When that isn’t the case. And until an investigation is done we need to protect identifies on both sides. Once it is sorted then reveal the identity of the guilty party.
7
u/Deep-Log-1775 Mar 30 '24
I can't find any. It's relevant because you're bringing up the subject of false allegations in a thread about a case where there is enough evidence to warrant an arrest and a court date. Do you know what proportion of rape cases a) get reported and b) make it to court?
-1
u/Valdularo Moira Mar 30 '24
My point specifically was about naming people involved. We don’t know the outcome of the case as he hasn’t went to court yet. Which is usually where we decided if people are guilty on not (granted based on evidence available so not a perfect system but better than assumption) so therefore should we just name someone when it hasn’t been found one way or another at this point?
51
u/Green_Friendship_175 Mar 30 '24
Read their statement. They are trying to protect the victims identity and ensure legal proceedings to get justice for them are not jeopardised by clowns who don’t actually care about the victims or justice (because if they did they wouldn’t be making these posts).
-55
u/Key_Connection238 Mar 30 '24
Protecting the accused, shock.
5
u/PaulJCDR Mar 30 '24
What's wrong with protecting the accused? Remember innocent until proven guilty. If every person accused was treated as they were guilty, they place would be a right fucking mess. Until proven guilty, they are afforded the same rights as everyone else.
-9
u/Key_Connection238 Mar 30 '24
So jimmy savile and jeffery Epstein are both innocent? good to know. I wouldn’t tell that to their victims though.
2
u/PaulJCDR Mar 30 '24
What's that got to with anything?
-2
u/Key_Connection238 Mar 30 '24
Dunno man read a book
1
Mar 30 '24
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/northernireland-ModTeam Mar 31 '24
We have removed your recent post as we believe it to have breached Rule 1.
1
7
u/swim-omad Mar 30 '24
Epstein was convicted of offences.
He had pleaded guilty in 2008 to prostitution-related charges in Florida and was required to register as a sex offender.
Saville died before he could be put on trial. Now that he’s dead he can no longer engage in court proceedings.
-1
u/Key_Connection238 Mar 30 '24
So saville is innocent?
-1
u/swim-omad Mar 30 '24
Saville who?
-1
u/Key_Connection238 Mar 30 '24
The person you’re talking about, who else??
-2
u/swim-omad Mar 30 '24
You said ‘so Saville is innocent’ who are you referring to?
0
11
36
u/s8wasworsethanhitlyr Mar 30 '24
How is this protecting the accused?
-9
u/Key_Connection238 Mar 30 '24
Because his name has already been released on the news, if they are now withholding the name, it stops other victims coming forward.
2
u/s8wasworsethanhitlyr Mar 30 '24
How does it stop other victims coming forward? People know it was Donaldson. The police are doing this to make sure the trial goes forward with no issues
4
u/FlamingBearAttack Mar 30 '24
The PSNI cannot name someone charged with an offence, and have not named Donaldson at any point.
In this case we know that it refers to Donaldson as he has written to the DUP to resign as leader, and states that he has been charged with these offences.
Victims of sex offences are entitled to lifelong anonymity, unless they choose to waive that right. It is a criminal offence to breach this entitlement. A lot of people have speculated as to Donaldson's alleged victims are, which could mean they have committed an offence themselves.
20
u/DwayneBaroqueJohnson Mar 30 '24
They're not saying stop mentioning Donaldson, they're saying stop posting who you think the victims are or what connection they might have to him
-6
u/Key_Connection238 Mar 30 '24
Where do they say stop mentioning Donaldson?
12
u/DwayneBaroqueJohnson Mar 30 '24
I just said they're not saying that. You're the one that thinks they're withholding his name, not me
-5
u/Key_Connection238 Mar 30 '24
Look at the statement, Do you see his name on it? Even though his name is plastered all over news sites.
11
u/Objective-Farm9215 Mar 30 '24
Because the PSNI are not allowed to name people in public who are charged with a crime. There are laws and procedure in place as well as GDPR. The first time the justice system will officially name the suspects involved will be at their first court appearance in April, just like any other member of the public.
How our justice system works, needs to be taught in schools.
-4
u/Key_Connection238 Mar 30 '24
Justice system is flawed, nothing to do with education.
5
8
u/Objective-Farm9215 Mar 30 '24
You are proving that it quite clearly is an matter of education. It has been explained multiple times why they can’t name him, you clearly don’t understand.
→ More replies (0)31
Mar 30 '24 edited Apr 02 '24
overconfident airport hat versed merciful saw support fuzzy deserve scandalous
This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact
8
-24
u/Key_Connection238 Mar 30 '24
Can hack the heat? It’s okay, you made a mediocre attempt.
22
Mar 30 '24 edited Apr 02 '24
late lunchroom voracious deer ring punch erect many expansion mighty
This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact
-16
u/Key_Connection238 Mar 30 '24
Seeing as you’re now following my comments I highly doubt that.
10
Mar 30 '24 edited Apr 02 '24
coherent birds silky governor fuel divide materialistic dazzling gold wrench
This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact
2
22
u/MrMastodon Mar 30 '24
It's literally how the justice system is supposed to work. Innocent until proven guilty.
-19
u/Key_Connection238 Mar 30 '24
So jimmy Savile is innocent?
23
u/MrMastodon Mar 30 '24
From the point of view of the justice system? Yes, he was never tried.
From my point of view? No, the accusations against him are too many and too well supported.
Also this was about the fact that the police (part of the justice system) are telling the public (not part of the justice system) not to endanger the prosecutions case by speculating on the case and trying to find out information before it's ready to be released.
Pull your head out of your arse, mucker.
-10
-10
u/Key_Connection238 Mar 30 '24
The point you’re making though is innocence until proven guilty is absolute.
Now you’ve pretty much said jimmy Savile is innocent in the eyes of the law.
Tell that to his victims..
15
u/MrMastodon Mar 30 '24
In the justice system innocence is absolute until proven guilty. Which is the point I've been making the entire time. Go back and have a read and take some time. Sound it out if you have to. Just stop frothing at the mouth for 30 seconds.
-5
u/Key_Connection238 Mar 30 '24
Aye so why you trying to tell me your point of view on jimmy Savile? if that’s not the point of your argument?
You’re sitting here defending the justice system when it comes to releasing the accused name, but if it’s someone more high profiled, your personal beliefs sway in a different direction.
“Frothing at the mouth” sounds like something someone would say when they know they’re wrong.
10
u/MrMastodon Mar 30 '24
Every time I've replied to you youve put words in my mouth. You're not interested in a good faith exchange. You just want to be angry. Go be angry.
-2
u/Key_Connection238 Mar 30 '24
How am I angry 😂
I’m just putting a point across, and countering your argument, I’m not putting words in your mouth..
105
u/Early-Accident-8770 Mar 30 '24
I can see the case collapsing when the defense claims that the speculation and publicity has caused the case to be subject to prejudice.
5
u/Different_Onion Mar 31 '24
The time from him being arrested , interviewed and charged shows they have damning evidence he cannot wriggle out of
7
u/GapingArfYole Mar 30 '24
It's too in the public interest. Unless he gets "Mi5'ed" in the meantime.
8
u/lrish_Chick Mar 30 '24 edited Apr 04 '24
Editing
2
u/No-Penalty-4708 Apr 03 '24
It's already game over as far as any future in politics or anything else is concerned. But a long jail sentence will be a welcome bonus, for both of them. But yet another well kniwn 'alleged' sex criminal who has a knighthood, you'd be forgiven for starting to wonder if the 2 aren't somehow connected.
9
u/SnooblesIRL Mar 30 '24
Someone said on here that a high profile person like that is more likely to top themselves than see a court case, historically that kind of makes sense but I doubt it will give comfort to the victim(s)
5
u/rtpsx Mar 30 '24
If that was the case, couldn't the suspect spread crap online in order to use that defence?
6
u/Early-Accident-8770 Mar 30 '24
Who’s to say that their supporters and others might already be doing this exact strategy?
7
u/rtpsx Mar 30 '24
Then I would highly doubt it would affect any case because everyone ever called up for a court appearance would do it and no justice would ever be done.
7
u/lllGreyfoxlll Newtownabbey Mar 30 '24
This is a very valid strategy and oftentimes used, especially in the US where the whole 'beyond a reasonable doubt' thing means all a defense attorney needs to do is spell massive amounts of bullshit until the point where it's borderline impossible to have a clear picture.
In here, though, it's a bit less likely to work IMO, in this case at least. I'd hope decency alone would be enough reason to leave the victims out of the shitstorm that this whole case is going to be. Not like they haven't suffered enough already.
3
u/Senior-Watercress643 Mar 31 '24
Beyond reasonable doubt is the requirement for conviction in the UK and most if not all other liberal democracies on the planet. That's not a 'US thing'.
1
u/Early-Accident-8770 Mar 30 '24
Depends on how high profile the accused and comments are, sure Joe soap might have some comments made but not on every single piece of social media.
-5
u/Lord-squee Mar 30 '24
Yes thar makes so much sense...... I'm sure that's why epstein got away scot free because of publican speculation.....
1
u/RabidHorizon Mar 30 '24 edited Mar 30 '24
Agree, how difficult will it be to pull a jury together for this? Open to correction but technically knowing anything about the case prior to being asked to sit on the jury can exempt you as you may have already built up a prejudice. There's not 12 persons in NI not aware of the case or does not know who JD is?
4
u/denk2mit Mar 30 '24
You'd be very surprised. There are plenty of people who don't give a flying fuck about politics and who don't use social media for anything other than posting photos of their grandkids and their dogs. Sure the courts will be able to find 12 people in the crossover between both.
0
u/Connect_Material_644 Belfast Mar 31 '24
It is Newry Magistrates court. No Jury. Not even Newry. Newry Court will sit at Craigavon Courthouse between 29 March 2024 and 1 July 2024 due to essential structural work at Dungannon Court House. Apologies for any inconvience
5
u/HerrManHerrLucifer Mar 31 '24
All criminal cases begin in the magistrates court. The magistrates send serious cases (i.e. indictable-only offences) straight up to the Crown Court, and that's where you'd find a jury.
3
-6
79
u/Neitzi Mar 30 '24 edited 16d ago
rock angle bow squeamish nutty pause shame faulty square touch
This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact
20
Mar 30 '24 edited Apr 02 '24
middle zephyr existence fly deserve frightening aromatic tidy rotten grab
This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact
3
Mar 30 '24 edited Mar 30 '24
[removed] — view removed comment
4
Mar 30 '24 edited Apr 02 '24
[removed] — view removed comment
-1
24
u/Neitzi Mar 30 '24 edited 16d ago
glorious direful illegal deserted toy close racial waiting familiar sophisticated
This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact
49
u/Objective-Farm9215 Mar 30 '24
There were serious issues during the Rugby rape case. Several days were lost in the trial due to comments on social media. The presiding judge had to make a public statement on it.
15
Mar 30 '24 edited Apr 02 '24
violet onerous sleep automatic gaze tart squealing fearless attraction point
This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact
13
u/Neitzi Mar 30 '24 edited 16d ago
deer grandfather like observation hunt steep sharp fertile head air
This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact
2
Mar 30 '24 edited Apr 02 '24
unwritten reach door ancient practice important political disagreeable oatmeal detail
This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact
7
u/Neitzi Mar 30 '24 edited 16d ago
dime bear fuel fade rainstorm direful obtainable degree rhythm enter
This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact
→ More replies (4)
1
u/AgreeableNature484 Apr 01 '24
Why not a Diplock court made up of disso Republican lawyers. Fairs fair.