#IBelieveHer
March 29, 2018 6:27 AM Subscribe
For the past six weeks the island of Ireland has been gripped by the proceedings at a Belfast rape trial, where two of the accused were players on the Irish rugby team.
After 42 days, 30 witnesses, two snow storms, one Six Nations and three hours and 40 minutes of jury deliberations, the accused were acquitted on all counts.
The verdict has stirred a strong response both on social media and with protests taking place around the country.
[Whole post CW for sexual assault]
The Whatsapp messages of all parties to the trial came up in evidence.
The Journal recaps key elements of the trial including the accuser's evidence and that of the taxi driver who dropped her home that night.
Louise O'Neill has written about her reaction to the verdict and the uncanny similarities between the case and her book Asking For It.
The Dublin Rape Crisis Centre has issued a statement on consent, reporting of rape and the differences between the judicial systems in Northern Ireland and Ireland.
The Whatsapp messages of all parties to the trial came up in evidence.
The Journal recaps key elements of the trial including the accuser's evidence and that of the taxi driver who dropped her home that night.
Louise O'Neill has written about her reaction to the verdict and the uncanny similarities between the case and her book Asking For It.
The Dublin Rape Crisis Centre has issued a statement on consent, reporting of rape and the differences between the judicial systems in Northern Ireland and Ireland.
This thread on proof beyond reasonable doubt provides some context for that.
posted by roolya_boolya at 6:43 AM on March 29, 2018 [6 favorites]
posted by roolya_boolya at 6:43 AM on March 29, 2018 [6 favorites]
That thread on reasonable doubt makes it clear that rape prosecutions are systemically suppressed. The system literally prevents it in most all situations without a third party witness.
posted by Dysk at 6:49 AM on March 29, 2018 [13 favorites]
posted by Dysk at 6:49 AM on March 29, 2018 [13 favorites]
The reasonable doubt thread makes me wonder if more of the world should consider introducing Scotland's "not proven" verdict. On the one hand, it kind of complicates things. On the other hand, it allows the jury to make clear that while they couldn't convict on a reasonable doubt standard, they weren't convinced the defendant was "not guilty" either.
posted by fremen at 7:00 AM on March 29, 2018 [12 favorites]
posted by fremen at 7:00 AM on March 29, 2018 [12 favorites]
Winnipeg: just a wild guess here, but I'd imagine the answer goes something like "misogyny." Both structural, as shown by the way reasonable doubt is defined in these cases, and individual, as in the tendency of (especially male) jurors to just not convict rapists regardless of evidence.
Also let's throw in a heaping helping of celebrity privilege. After all, "When you're a star, they let you do it. You can do anything."
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 7:00 AM on March 29, 2018 [15 favorites]
Also let's throw in a heaping helping of celebrity privilege. After all, "When you're a star, they let you do it. You can do anything."
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 7:00 AM on March 29, 2018 [15 favorites]
Having just completed a university based hearing process regarding my own rape by a fellow student (hearing was Monday; it'll still be a few days before I get the determination), part of the reason I chose not to go through the courts is because of the difference in standard. (Other reasons: retraumatization, taking too much time out of my education, and, despite everything, not wanting to put the assailant--who had once been a very close friend--behind bars.) Despite my evidence (photos of my bruises, text messages in which my assailant said "what I did was unspeakable", witnesses from the party where it occurred), since no one was actually in the room but me and him, it seemed incredibly unlikely to me that a criminal proceeding would come out in my favor. I don't have a whole lot of faith in the university process, either, but at least the standard is "preponderance of the evidence" and not "beyond a reasonable doubt."
posted by ocherdraco at 7:07 AM on March 29, 2018 [68 favorites]
posted by ocherdraco at 7:07 AM on March 29, 2018 [68 favorites]
@ ocherdraco: I am so sorry you have to go through this!
posted by Katjusa Roquette at 7:14 AM on March 29, 2018 [14 favorites]
posted by Katjusa Roquette at 7:14 AM on March 29, 2018 [14 favorites]
ocherdraco, I am so, so sorry that not only did your former friend rape you, but now you have had to go through a hearing process like this. I will be thinking of you.
posted by hurdy gurdy girl at 7:18 AM on March 29, 2018 [10 favorites]
posted by hurdy gurdy girl at 7:18 AM on March 29, 2018 [10 favorites]
The problem with the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard, especially in trials like this, is that "reasonable" is a very slippery thing,especially given how utterly fucked the dialog around consent is. I still believe that affirmative consent needs to be the standard.
posted by NoxAeternum at 7:34 AM on March 29, 2018 [4 favorites]
posted by NoxAeternum at 7:34 AM on March 29, 2018 [4 favorites]
From the Irish Times article:
"... Both doctors disagreed on the injuries to such an extent that at one stage there was a concern the video of the vaginal examination would have to be shown to the jury..."
Out of so many injustices about this case I've raged against reading each link, this made me weep.
Go to court, says every shitty tool trolling #metoo social media threads. Fuck you assholes.
posted by honey-barbara at 7:55 AM on March 29, 2018 [28 favorites]
"... Both doctors disagreed on the injuries to such an extent that at one stage there was a concern the video of the vaginal examination would have to be shown to the jury..."
Out of so many injustices about this case I've raged against reading each link, this made me weep.
Go to court, says every shitty tool trolling #metoo social media threads. Fuck you assholes.
posted by honey-barbara at 7:55 AM on March 29, 2018 [28 favorites]
I've been following this one fairly closely (my closest friend is a rabid rugby fan) and the entire thing has been stomach churning. I'm twice that woman's age and I don't think I have the strength to do what she's done, and yes, I believe her. To say that I'm disappointed by the verdict is an understatement - after having watched the Ireland team make history recently, I can only hope that none of the men involved ever wear an Ireland jersey again.
I'm hoping that the owners and coaches look at the protests today and if NOTHING else realize that the men involved are financial liabilities. If they pull the same bullshit that the Blackhawks did with Patrick Kane, I hope their consciences rot their souls from the inside out and they all go bankrupt. (This is probably not coherent, I've been alternating between wanting to throw up and wanting to flip tables since the verdict was announced.)
posted by librarianamy at 8:23 AM on March 29, 2018 [3 favorites]
I'm hoping that the owners and coaches look at the protests today and if NOTHING else realize that the men involved are financial liabilities. If they pull the same bullshit that the Blackhawks did with Patrick Kane, I hope their consciences rot their souls from the inside out and they all go bankrupt. (This is probably not coherent, I've been alternating between wanting to throw up and wanting to flip tables since the verdict was announced.)
posted by librarianamy at 8:23 AM on March 29, 2018 [3 favorites]
→ Scotland's "not proven" verdict … allows the jury to make clear that while they couldn't convict on a reasonable doubt standard, they weren't convinced the defendant was "not guilty" either.
Not Proven, though, is a not guilty version: I'd walk away free from conviction and couldn't be retried. It's commonly applied when evidence has been irreparably tampered with by authorities. When police have been determined to catch a local "bad lad" for years, they can sometimes get a bit overzealous with telling their side of the story and suppressing fairness. For example, in 1981 George King, a prominent Glasgow bookie and liquor store owner, was accused of masterminding a theft from a jewelry store. The police did not like King, so made sure the evidence was manipulated to show King to be a very bad man indeed. This became obvious to the jury, and the case could not be proven. NP's a very unpopular verdict as it shows up failings in the system. You don't want to be in the Glasgow High Court when a Not Proven verdict comes down.
In this Belfast trial, it sounds more that justice was withheld from the start.
(ocherdraco: thinking of you at this difficult time.)
posted by scruss at 8:34 AM on March 29, 2018 [2 favorites]
Not Proven, though, is a not guilty version: I'd walk away free from conviction and couldn't be retried. It's commonly applied when evidence has been irreparably tampered with by authorities. When police have been determined to catch a local "bad lad" for years, they can sometimes get a bit overzealous with telling their side of the story and suppressing fairness. For example, in 1981 George King, a prominent Glasgow bookie and liquor store owner, was accused of masterminding a theft from a jewelry store. The police did not like King, so made sure the evidence was manipulated to show King to be a very bad man indeed. This became obvious to the jury, and the case could not be proven. NP's a very unpopular verdict as it shows up failings in the system. You don't want to be in the Glasgow High Court when a Not Proven verdict comes down.
In this Belfast trial, it sounds more that justice was withheld from the start.
(ocherdraco: thinking of you at this difficult time.)
posted by scruss at 8:34 AM on March 29, 2018 [2 favorites]
There is a recent case where a not proven verdict has led to a civil action being brought (for damages and to recover costs). It follows a similar civil action last year.
posted by epo at 9:03 AM on March 29, 2018 [1 favorite]
posted by epo at 9:03 AM on March 29, 2018 [1 favorite]
Will there ever be justice?
posted by BlueHorse at 9:20 AM on March 29, 2018 [2 favorites]
posted by BlueHorse at 9:20 AM on March 29, 2018 [2 favorites]
epo, that's a heartening development I hadn't heard about.
posted by scruss at 9:38 AM on March 29, 2018
posted by scruss at 9:38 AM on March 29, 2018
How can we ask women to report rape after Belfast?
posted by roolya_boolya at 9:42 AM on March 29, 2018 [6 favorites]
posted by roolya_boolya at 9:42 AM on March 29, 2018 [6 favorites]
ocherdraco, it might not help in a court room but there are untold numbers of us standing with you and believing.
posted by roolya_boolya at 10:09 AM on March 29, 2018 [12 favorites]
posted by roolya_boolya at 10:09 AM on March 29, 2018 [12 favorites]
ocherdraco, I am so sorry you are going through this. I believe you.
posted by Nutritionista at 10:21 AM on March 29, 2018 [2 favorites]
posted by Nutritionista at 10:21 AM on March 29, 2018 [2 favorites]
I can't remember which founding father had argued that the bill of rights would have the end result of restricting freedom by virtue of defining them. But I'm always reminded of this when we talk about sexual violence, and the fact that it's virtually always centered around criminal justice.
It centers the conversation around his guilt, creating a false dilemma between believing her and finding a guilty verdict. But we don't disbelieve robbery victims just because there wasn't enough evidence to go to trial. When family members steal anothers' identity to run up fraudulent credit charges, we understand why people didn't take legal action without condoning it.
To be clear, I think this was a clear miscarriage of justice. But I believe that by always centering the conversation around the government's enforcement of the law, we erode the credibility of the victims. We are so used to using the gray space to discount women's experience, we aren't willing to acknowledge that really a lot of men have probably raped a woman and gotten away with it. We aren't talking about a few monsters, but we continue to act as though it is. So when we can't reconcile the nice boy on the stand with our belief only the worst possible man would rape a woman, we disbelieve her. Despite all evidence otherwise.
We perpetuate a system where our impulse is first evaluate the perpetrator, and let that determine the credibility of the victim. Which is why the end result is so much different when the accused is a person of color.
posted by politikitty at 11:14 AM on March 29, 2018 [9 favorites]
It centers the conversation around his guilt, creating a false dilemma between believing her and finding a guilty verdict. But we don't disbelieve robbery victims just because there wasn't enough evidence to go to trial. When family members steal anothers' identity to run up fraudulent credit charges, we understand why people didn't take legal action without condoning it.
To be clear, I think this was a clear miscarriage of justice. But I believe that by always centering the conversation around the government's enforcement of the law, we erode the credibility of the victims. We are so used to using the gray space to discount women's experience, we aren't willing to acknowledge that really a lot of men have probably raped a woman and gotten away with it. We aren't talking about a few monsters, but we continue to act as though it is. So when we can't reconcile the nice boy on the stand with our belief only the worst possible man would rape a woman, we disbelieve her. Despite all evidence otherwise.
We perpetuate a system where our impulse is first evaluate the perpetrator, and let that determine the credibility of the victim. Which is why the end result is so much different when the accused is a person of color.
posted by politikitty at 11:14 AM on March 29, 2018 [9 favorites]
I am in Ireland right now and this story the main headline in the papers. I started reading the articles and have been so sickened by the details of the attack and so angry about the verdict. For one, I saw that there were eight male jurors and just three female ones, which feels unfair. How was that even possible?! The victim/survivor was incredibly brave to come forward and it's beyond horrible that she was put through this, not only the assault but all the hours and days of questioning as well as the brutal character assaults people have done to her online. I wish things were better in 2018 but this is just one awful example of how they're not. I hope this case can bring about some change for good even if justice certainly was not served.
posted by smorgasbord at 5:07 PM on March 29, 2018 [4 favorites]
posted by smorgasbord at 5:07 PM on March 29, 2018 [4 favorites]
This is so fucking horrifying and also so normal.
posted by corb at 5:23 PM on March 29, 2018 [2 favorites]
posted by corb at 5:23 PM on March 29, 2018 [2 favorites]
Decent men are despondent, the men I know are livid
posted by roolya_boolya at 5:19 AM on March 30, 2018 [2 favorites]
posted by roolya_boolya at 5:19 AM on March 30, 2018 [2 favorites]
Another thing I realized reading some of the coverage is: you’re not allowed, apparently, in Northern Ireland, to say someone is guilty after they’ve been acquitted - it’s considered libel. Which is absolute bullshit - I’m comfortable saying these fuckers are guilty as sin. But it may be influencing why this coverage isn’t spreading internationally.
posted by corb at 6:28 AM on March 30, 2018
posted by corb at 6:28 AM on March 30, 2018
politikitty: I can't remember which founding father had argued that the bill of rights would have the end result of restricting freedom by virtue of defining them.
Wasn't a founding father, but rather a member of the Georgia delegation to the Constitutional Convention.
(Why yes, The West Wing taught me more about the workings and history of American government than 20 years of school did--why do you ask?)
posted by tzikeh at 9:19 AM on March 30, 2018
Wasn't a founding father, but rather a member of the Georgia delegation to the Constitutional Convention.
(Why yes, The West Wing taught me more about the workings and history of American government than 20 years of school did--why do you ask?)
posted by tzikeh at 9:19 AM on March 30, 2018
Paddy Jackson intends to sue Senator Senator Aodhán Ó Ríordáin over a tweet (now deleted - screenshot here) about the verdict.
Now #SueMePaddyis trending in Ireland, proving that even when we're angry, Irish women (and men) can be damn funny.
posted by roolya_boolya at 8:28 PM on March 30, 2018 [5 favorites]
Now #SueMePaddyis trending in Ireland, proving that even when we're angry, Irish women (and men) can be damn funny.
posted by roolya_boolya at 8:28 PM on March 30, 2018 [5 favorites]
I want the woman at the centre of the Belfast rape case to know that she has been incredibly courageous and that I, and thousands of others, believe her. The smug well-connected middle-class boys win out again. #Ibelieveher
That was Aodhain Ó Ríordáin's tweet. Post it everywhere you can.
#SueMePaddy
posted by Elmore at 2:42 PM on March 31, 2018 [2 favorites]
That was Aodhain Ó Ríordáin's tweet. Post it everywhere you can.
#SueMePaddy
posted by Elmore at 2:42 PM on March 31, 2018 [2 favorites]
I'm late to this but can't not comment - it's so horrible. The foul Whatsapp messages, including the ones from the man (Harrison) the victim said had helped her. The possibility of the victim's physical examination being shown to the judge. The length of time of the victim's multiple cross-examinations. The short time the jurors deliberated. The fact that her name has been widely shared online. Just horrible.
posted by paduasoy at 5:16 PM on April 3, 2018
posted by paduasoy at 5:16 PM on April 3, 2018
« Older Why'd you choose such a backward time in such a... | Women of Early D&D Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by WinnipegDragon at 6:39 AM on March 29, 2018 [4 favorites]