Who will decide

[Russ]

No casual racism there at all

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

[Big-al]

Those expecting him to be paid to leave by 'mutual consent'?

Are they Basingstoke on their opinion and the 'dogs on the street'?

[Dave]

I was told a story last night of 3 rugby players from Limerick who had group sex with a 19 year old

She removed consent afterwards as she was worried there was a video

Gardai threw the case out in 2009

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Luckily there was a video.

[Russ]

I was told a story last night of 3 rugby players from Limerick who had group sex with a 19 year old

She removed consent afterwards as she was worried there was a video

Gardai threw the case out in 2009

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Luckily there was a video.

Was a brad pitt video
However was in a jurisdiction where defendants are not named
Luckily

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

[Silverstu]

I see where you are coming from but you make a fundamental error. This case was not a "she says, he says", it turned on what the only eye witness heard, saw and testified to.
That podcast was discussed here, yesterday. It's a really good piece. There is without any doubt, a very real issue with domestic and sexual violence towards women in society.

I agree Snipe that it wasn't a "He said/she said" case- I was trying to make the point [probably badly] that thats what it has been turned into on twitter etc. They have ignored the detail of the case and made it about a larger issue and then decided to go after Stu and Paddy. I missed when the podcast was discussed here I'm afraid, I've only dipped in here - just thought it was worth sharing. I may even risk trying to share it with the twitter mob- I doubt they will listen though.

[Jackie Brown]

I see where you are coming from but you make a fundamental error. This case was not a "she says, he says", it turned on what the only eye witness heard, saw and testified to.
That podcast was discussed here, yesterday. It's a really good piece. There is without any doubt, a very real issue with domestic and sexual violence towards women in society.

I agree Snipe that it wasn't a "He said/she said" case- I was trying to make the point [probably badly] that thats what it has been turned into on twitter etc. They have ignored the detail of the case and made it about a larger issue and then decided to go after Stu and Paddy. I missed when the podcast was discussed here I'm afraid, I've only dipped in here - just thought it was worth sharing. I may even risk trying to share it with the twitter mob- I doubt they will listen though.

I would leave the twatterers alone, they must be getting bored by now.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

[Rooster]

The mention of Gilroy adds a new dimension to this all, if the not guilty 2 are booted over the messages and he is not I am pretty sure Joe and his merry men will be on it like flies on sh1te

[Snipe Watson]

I see where you are coming from but you make a fundamental error. This case was not a "she says, he says", it turned on what the only eye witness heard, saw and testified to.
That podcast was discussed here, yesterday. It's a really good piece. There is without any doubt, a very real issue with domestic and sexual violence towards women in society.

I agree Snipe that it wasn't a "He said/she said" case- I was trying to make the point [probably badly] that thats what it has been turned into on twitter etc. They have ignored the detail of the case and made it about a larger issue and then decided to go after Stu and Paddy. I missed when the podcast was discussed here I'm afraid, I've only dipped in here - just thought it was worth sharing. I may even risk trying to share it with the twitter mob- I doubt they will listen though.

It's a good discussion and was worth sharing here.
I would agree with Jackie, Don't bother putting it on twitter.
Everyone has their entrenched position established on this.

[rumncoke]

Baggy

I have just read your response to D4

It sums up my feelings perfectly

Except in my humble opinion their is something approaching the political sinister on how Jackson has been singled out for the internet abuse with a substantial number of left wing feminist politicians to the fore .

Consider the photograph of the harridans holding up single letters of equal size and same colour — and tell me it is not orchestrated by some one .

How can the hounding of an innocent man advance the review of abortion when the only sexual activity was oral sex initiated by the claimant .

That’s not to say Paddy would have if he could have the irony is he didn’t .

The DPPS deliberately set out to make the case complex by the assumption of a conspiracy based on circumstantial evidence

Her text to Harrison
A meeting for lunch to discuss the trip to South Africa .
And Blane McIllroy’s confession to sexual activity which the claimant omitted , maybe because she considered to claim a second oral encounter might undermine her claim that the first was not consensual .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Russ]

The mention of Gilroy adds a new dimension to this all, if the not guilty 2 are booted over the messages and he is not I am pretty sure Joe and his merry men will be on it like flies on sh1te

Gilroy is expendable to Joe
Paddy is not

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

[BaggyTrousers]

Bottom line folks, any employer can sack any employee for any thing that they think off, however they still have to pay a price. But they can sack you for not liking your shoes, butbst8ll they have to pay the price .

#onlywomencancallslutsluts

That's OK if the case is not a cause celebre. Sack the employee and pay the tribunal settlement.

The IRFU cannot afford to have their decision dragged through the courts and overturned in full public view with wall to wall reporting. The high profile of the case now turns to being in the guys' favour instead of against them. Any skulduggery will be exposed and lead to a PR nightmare.

I take a middle line on these two opinions, if the #Warren Gatland in the FIRFU want to sack them, they will sack them. Paddy's solicitors chat outside the courtroom suggested a man gearing up for future fights and certainly a sign to the FIRFU that we are not for rolling over.

Against that, I don't know but very much expect that the FIRFU & UR may well be in a position to influence potential job prospects elsewhere, especially should they hold any unknown information on previous acts contrary to their contracts or even undisclosed disciplinary matters.

The whole thing suggests being the mutually agreeable fudge, much as I'd love to see the guys fight tooth and nail and expose the fictitious "moral high ground" that the FIRFUCs would like to be seen as occupying.

I think my days as a patron of UR are numbered. I felt dirty being at the Aviva on Sunday and won't be back.

[Snipe Watson]

Those expecting him to be paid to leave by 'mutual consent'?

Are they Basingstoke on their opinion and the 'dogs on the street'?

I'm not expecting them to leave by mutual consent. I'm expecting them to be reinstated as I don't see any legal basis for dismissal.
However I carry a healthy level of contempt for the IRFU and consider it a possibility given the seemingly intractable circumstances. I don't trust them to do the right thing.

[Snipe Watson]

Bottom line folks, any employer can sack any employee for any thing that they think off, however they still have to pay a price. But they can sack you for not liking your shoes, butbst8ll they have to pay the price .

#onlywomencancallslutsluts

That's OK if the case is not a cause celebre. Sack the employee and pay the tribunal settlement.

The IRFU cannot afford to have their decision dragged through the courts and overturned in full public view with wall to wall reporting. The high profile of the case now turns to being in the guys' favour instead of against them. Any skulduggery will be exposed and lead to a PR nightmare.

I take a middle line on these two opinions, if the #Warren Gatland in the FIRFU want to sack them, they will sack them. Paddy's solicitors chat outside the courtroom suggested a man gearing up for future fights and certainly a sign to the FIRFU that we are not for rolling over.

Against that, I don't know but very much expect that the FIRFU & UR may well be in a position to influence potential job prospects elsewhere, especially should they hold any unknown information on previous acts contrary to their contracts or even undisclosed disciplinary matters.

The whole thing suggests being the mutually agreeable fudge, much as I'd love to see the guys fight tooth and nail and expose the fictitious "moral high ground" that the FIRFUCs would like to be seen as occupying.

I think my days as a patron of UR are numbered. I felt dirty being at the Aviva on Sunday and won't be back.

That's a pertinent issue that we have absolutely no knowledge of. It's a potentially important "known unknown" and there could also be "unknown unknowns". All of my thoughts assume "all other things being equal".

[Tender]

I put it to you, my learned friends that all this conjecture and wild speculation could be construed by many to be total and utter bullshyte, based on worry and fear for the potential outcome of a meeting being held to discuss matters which might include evidence of possible historical indiscretions by the two lads in question.
Que sera, sera.
What I know for certain, is Bombay Sapphire, Schweppes Tonic (highest quinine content) and a slice of Orange makes a fine drink. I can also say without fear of contradiction, too many of them and my head will still feel fuzzy by lunchtime the following day.

[BaggyTrousers]

Ron'n, I take exception on with your description of these harridans as "left wing". It is, of course, probable that a more liberal view of these matters being rolled up into one campaign would be at play, but the matters of sexual predation on women by the powerful, abortion and the believers are likely to be a cross-section of womanhood. Then again it would surprise me to some extent if you agree with me that the left encompasses a more compassionate view of the world whilst the right as a generality employ a more "I'm alright Jack fu'ck you" attitude.

I'm sick to the back teeth of people using this for political ends, I hope that a good number of Believers turn up on the 13th, I shall take great pleasure in discussing matters. I'm thinking of taking a large placard, something like this:

DARAF.JPG (36.69 KiB) Viewed 205 times

I can't think of one good reason why they don't believe her barring the obvious fact that it doesn't suit their agenda.