Jackson & Olding

[Banquo]

Dont know if its been mentioned much but apparently SO & PJ are about to sue the BBC for an invasion of their privacy when they got mentioned as the prime suspects before the original investigation was complete

unwise, though not unprecedented. I don't think they realise how scummy they have been.

[BBD]

I hope it will blow over for them and they can regain some of the lost reputation they have caused themselves.

Whereas I hope they can't and they'll now lose any chance of the privilege that being a professional sportsperson brings.

fair enough, I think thats more than a little harsh in the circumstances but I respect your right to disagree

[BBD]

Dont know if its been mentioned much but apparently SO & PJ are about to sue the BBC for an invasion of their privacy when they got mentioned as the prime suspects before the original investigation was complete

unwise, though not unprecedented. I don't think they realise how scummy they have been.

I think they are starting to, however I think they would win such a case no matter how unpalatable that will be to some people

[Digby]

I hope it will blow over for them and they can regain some of the lost reputation they have caused themselves.

Whereas I hope they can't and they'll now lose any chance of the privilege that being a professional sportsperson brings.

fair enough, I think thats more than a little harsh in the circumstances but I respect your right to disagree

The one role they might have left in rugby which makes any sort of sense to me is speaking to young players on the dangers in getting carried away when forging a career in an environment where you're subject to such criticism and praise. As to playing again, pulling on a club shirt or worse a national one, keeping sponsors interested in the game, not having teammates wondering how the feck they're being expected to play for and with them, the reaction of fans, the ease with with media discussion on a game they'd feature in can get dragged away from the rugby, I just don't see a role for them.

[Banquo]

Dont know if its been mentioned much but apparently SO & PJ are about to sue the BBC for an invasion of their privacy when they got mentioned as the prime suspects before the original investigation was complete

unwise, though not unprecedented. I don't think they realise how scummy they have been.

I think they are starting to, however I think they would win such a case no matter how unpalatable that will be to some people

Oh yes, but it will just make them look like even bi55er twats, hence saying unwise, but not unprecedented. Personally I think they've dodged a bit of a bullet.

[Banquo]

Whereas I hope they can't and they'll now lose any chance of the privilege that being a professional sportsperson brings.

fair enough, I think thats more than a little harsh in the circumstances but I respect your right to disagree

The one role they might have left in rugby which makes any sort of sense to me is speaking to young players on the dangers in getting carried away when forging a career in an environment where you're subject to such criticism and praise. As to playing again, pulling on a club shirt or worse a national one, keeping sponsors interested in the game, not having teammates wondering how the feck they're being expected to play for and with them, the reaction of fans, the ease with with media discussion on a game they'd feature in can get dragged away from the rugby, I just don't see a role for them.

I get all that in a practical sense, but its an oddity that you can be rehabilitated from actually being convicted of a crime and in a lot of cases go back to your previous profession, yet be ostracised after being acquitted of this.

[Renniks]

fair enough, I think thats more than a little harsh in the circumstances but I respect your right to disagree

The one role they might have left in rugby which makes any sort of sense to me is speaking to young players on the dangers in getting carried away when forging a career in an environment where you're subject to such criticism and praise. As to playing again, pulling on a club shirt or worse a national one, keeping sponsors interested in the game, not having teammates wondering how the feck they're being expected to play for and with them, the reaction of fans, the ease with with media discussion on a game they'd feature in can get dragged away from the rugby, I just don't see a role for them.

I get all that in a practical sense, but its an oddity that you can be rehabilitated from actually being convicted of a crime and in a lot of cases go back to your previous profession, yet be ostracised after being acquitted of this.

Personally I feel they shouldn't be hired based on their general behaviour leading up to and after the event, regardless of whether the event itself was consensual.

And for anyone wondering, finding them not guilty does not mean they didn't do it, or that it was a false accusation, just that there wasn't enough evidence to convict them. It definitely doesn't mean she's done anything wrong with reporting it. And it wasn't her fault that it went to court, that they lost their jobs, and that they might not have future careers in this area.

[Stones of granite]

fair enough, I think thats more than a little harsh in the circumstances but I respect your right to disagree

The one role they might have left in rugby which makes any sort of sense to me is speaking to young players on the dangers in getting carried away when forging a career in an environment where you're subject to such criticism and praise. As to playing again, pulling on a club shirt or worse a national one, keeping sponsors interested in the game, not having teammates wondering how the feck they're being expected to play for and with them, the reaction of fans, the ease with with media discussion on a game they'd feature in can get dragged away from the rugby, I just don't see a role for them.

I get all that in a practical sense, but its an oddity that you can be rehabilitated from actually being convicted of a crime and in a lot of cases go back to your previous profession, yet be ostracised after being acquitted of this.

Highly unlikely in the case of people convicted of sexual offences.

[BBD]

Whereas I hope they can't and they'll now lose any chance of the privilege that being a professional sportsperson brings.

fair enough, I think thats more than a little harsh in the circumstances but I respect your right to disagree

The one role they might have left in rugby which makes any sort of sense to me is speaking to young players on the dangers in getting carried away when forging a career in an environment where you're subject to such criticism and praise. As to playing again, pulling on a club shirt or worse a national one, keeping sponsors interested in the game, not having teammates wondering how the feck they're being expected to play for and with them, the reaction of fans, the ease with with media discussion on a game they'd feature in can get dragged away from the rugby, I just don't see a role for them.

I suspect you will be proven right re their playing careers, the reaction in Ireland is off the scale at the moment

I think your suggestion about an ambassadorial type role (wrong word, but you know what I mean) would be a terrific way for them to make some attempt at restitution

[Digby]

fair enough, I think thats more than a little harsh in the circumstances but I respect your right to disagree

The one role they might have left in rugby which makes any sort of sense to me is speaking to young players on the dangers in getting carried away when forging a career in an environment where you're subject to such criticism and praise. As to playing again, pulling on a club shirt or worse a national one, keeping sponsors interested in the game, not having teammates wondering how the feck they're being expected to play for and with them, the reaction of fans, the ease with with media discussion on a game they'd feature in can get dragged away from the rugby, I just don't see a role for them.

I get all that in a practical sense, but its an oddity that you can be rehabilitated from actually being convicted of a crime and in a lot of cases go back to your previous profession, yet be ostracised after being acquitted of this.

The lack of a presumption of innocence massively hinders them. Though for all the ills that come from that I'm still not sold on the solution of anonymity for the accused given the trade off of other reports perhaps not being forthcoming.

About the best we can say is this is a strong reason why one shouldn't drink too much, many of us have/do and have gotten away with it (the pratfalls that may follow drinking to excess not violent sexual acts)

[OptimisticJock]

It's great you're no longer innocent until proven guilty. Makes things much easier on the internet.

[Banquo]

The one role they might have left in rugby which makes any sort of sense to me is speaking to young players on the dangers in getting carried away when forging a career in an environment where you're subject to such criticism and praise. As to playing again, pulling on a club shirt or worse a national one, keeping sponsors interested in the game, not having teammates wondering how the feck they're being expected to play for and with them, the reaction of fans, the ease with with media discussion on a game they'd feature in can get dragged away from the rugby, I just don't see a role for them.

I get all that in a practical sense, but its an oddity that you can be rehabilitated from actually being convicted of a crime and in a lot of cases go back to your previous profession, yet be ostracised after being acquitted of this.

Personally I feel they shouldn't be hired based on their general behaviour leading up to and after the event, regardless of whether the event itself was consensual.

And for anyone wondering, finding them not guilty does not mean they didn't do it, or that it was a false accusation, just that there wasn't enough evidence to convict them. It definitely doesn't mean she's done anything wrong with reporting it. And it wasn't her fault that it went to court, that they lost their jobs, and that they might not have future careers in this area.

I tend to agree, but it does run against the principles of innocent until proven guilty and of rehabilitation. I'm not in any way defending them, nor calling for any consequences on the accuser (based on the reports).

[Banquo]

It's great you're no longer innocent until proven guilty. Makes things much easier on the internet.

This too. Its very challenging isn't it.

[BBD]

Its worrying that whilst the #Ibelieveher movement is well intentioned it serves to undermine the presumption of innocence which is the basis of the judicial system

[Banquo]

The one role they might have left in rugby which makes any sort of sense to me is speaking to young players on the dangers in getting carried away when forging a career in an environment where you're subject to such criticism and praise. As to playing again, pulling on a club shirt or worse a national one, keeping sponsors interested in the game, not having teammates wondering how the feck they're being expected to play for and with them, the reaction of fans, the ease with with media discussion on a game they'd feature in can get dragged away from the rugby, I just don't see a role for them.

I get all that in a practical sense, but its an oddity that you can be rehabilitated from actually being convicted of a crime and in a lot of cases go back to your previous profession, yet be ostracised after being acquitted of this.

Highly unlikely in the case of people convicted of sexual offences.

hence saying, in a lot of cases, as its obvious in sexual offences; but they have been acquitted, so that's a different scenario.

[Banquo]

Its worrying that whilst the #Ibelieveher movement is well intentioned it serves to undermine the presumption of innocence which is the basis of the judicial system

its very difficult territory, as a recent spate of non-prosecutions have shown.....which are a huge blot on the CPS and police as the accused have been named and lives put on hold for a long time. We have to make sure genuine victims are able and safe to come forward; but there does need to be some thought given to the accused, but I don't know what that is! As we see, the accused lives are bu55ered, even if innocent- in this case, perhaps they deserve what they now get- but I'm not handing down a judgement on that.

[SerjeantWildgoose]

It is quite illustrative of how divisive the verdict has been and how wide-spread the anger over it that there have been protests this afternoon not only in Belfast, but Dublin, Cork and Limerick.

I wouldn't be inclined to challenge the verdict and I do not for a moment believe that there has been a miscarriage. It is, of course, far easier for a defence council to introduce a reasonable doubt into any case involving drunk people than it is for a prosecutor to eliminate all such doubt. However, I find it remarkable that anyone can make an immediate leap from a not guilty verdict to a presumption that the girl is at fault. It has got to the point where Drogheda United are disassociating themselves from comments made by one of their players and GAA clubs are having to make the same move to disclaim comments made on social media by their players and fans.

The passions are running pretty high in Ireland today and I don't see anyone occupying much of a middle ground. It will, of course, die down in a few days, but the IRFU will need to think very carefully about just how much risk it is prepared to take with a fan base that is making its feelings pretty clear. Irish rugby is riding a wave of popularity at the moment, but it wouldn't take much to prick the bubble.

[Spiffy]

Haven't seen this level of hot debate, moral outrage and ploarized opinion on RR since Gavin Henson got pissed on the Cardiff train several years ago.

[OptimisticJock]

It is quite illustrative of how divisive the verdict has been and how wide-spread the anger over it that there have been protests this afternoon not only in Belfast, but Dublin, Cork and Limerick.

I wouldn't be inclined to challenge the verdict and I do not for a moment believe that there has been a miscarriage. It is, of course, far easier for a defence council to introduce a reasonable doubt into any case involving drunk people than it is for a prosecutor to eliminate all such doubt. However, I find it remarkable that anyone can make an immediate leap from a not guilty verdict to a presumption that the girl is at fault. It has got to the point where Drogheda United are disassociating themselves from comments made by one of their players and GAA clubs are having to make the same move to disclaim comments made on social media by their players and fans.

The passions are running pretty high in Ireland today and I don't see anyone occupying much of a middle ground. It will, of course, die down in a few days, but the IRFU will need to think very carefully about just how much risk it is prepared to take with a fan base that is making its feelings pretty clear. Irish rugby is riding a wave of popularity at the moment, but it wouldn't take much to prick the bubble.

I can see why people are making the leap tbh. She's changed her story 3 times. Now I don't know what the changes are so won't pass judgement on her but it does raise doubts.

[SerjeantWildgoose]

I hope it will blow over for them and they can regain some of the lost reputation they have caused themselves.

Whereas I hope they can't and they'll now lose any chance of the privilege that being a professional sportsperson brings.

fair enough, I think thats more than a little harsh in the circumstances but I respect your right to disagree

I am afraid that I'm with Digby on this. Playing for a living is a rare privilege and one that comes with rare responsibilities. I reiterate what I said earlier; being found not guilty does not mean they did nothing wrong.

Let them have their chance to persuade the IRFU and the Ulster Branch that not only are they not guilty but also that they have done nothing wrong and I'll stfu; but I can't help but feeling that their trial has put in the public domain enough evidence of their questionable conduct and disgraceful post-coital celebration of it that the chances of their doing so are extremely slender.

[SerjeantWildgoose]

Dont know if its been mentioned much but apparently SO & PJ are about to sue the BBC for an invasion of their privacy when they got mentioned as the prime suspects before the original investigation was complete

unwise, though not unprecedented. I don't think they realise how scummy they have been.

I think they are starting to, however I think they would win such a case no matter how unpalatable that will be to some people

I agree with Banquo that I don't think they do acknowledge how dismal their conduct has been, but I also agree with you, Dom, that they have a valid case against the BBC and the not guilty verdicts make it almost certain that they would win it.

Yet more of the licence fee down the tubes. At this rate they won't be able to afford another series of Call the Midwife!!!

[SerjeantWildgoose]

It's great you're no longer innocent until proven guilty. Makes things much easier on the internet.

Tu, Monsieur le Maire! Je t'Accuse!

[SerjeantWildgoose]

... which are a huge blot on the CPS ...

We don't have a CPS over here, Mucker. The Crown bit makes hot blooded types want to blow holes in our court houses. Our PSs are Public.

[SerjeantWildgoose]

Haven't seen this level of hot debate, moral outrage and ploarized opinion on RR since Gavin Henson got pissed on the Cardiff train several years ago.

That's because you only ever visit the threads where everyone is in unanimous agreement that yer a wee ballix.

[Spiffy]

unwise, though not unprecedented. I don't think they realise how scummy they have been.

I think they are starting to, however I think they would win such a case no matter how unpalatable that will be to some people

I agree with Banquo that I don't think they do acknowledge how dismal their conduct has been, but I also agree with you, Dom, that they have a valid case against the BBC and the not guilty verdicts make it almost certain that they would win it.

Yet more of the licence fee down the tubes. At this rate they won't be able to afford another series of Call the Midwife!!!

To be pragmatic about it - I am sure they desperately need some cash to pay the lawyers' bills. But yes, it will still keep them in the public eye, where I don't think they want to be anymore.