Jump to content
Caelum

What's on your mind?

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Cybes said:

I would pay money to see you attempt that.  Especially in a basement.

 

Being a one-time sport shooter, I can guarantee you that these folks were already active when Pt Arthur and the Buyback happened.  I am not in the least bit surprised that they are still here - indeed I'm only surprised that the media are making anything of it now when they've ignored 'em so long.

I have actually used guns before, but not very good at shooting straight. I know you only need an air rifle for rats LOL

Edited by Jeruselem

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, eveln said:

So people, anyone thinking of travelling to Ireland don't pack your G-strings. Leave them at home ... you don't want to be thought to be enabling / asking for a rape experience .  If a rape experience should happen you might have a chance of having the rapist jailed if you

wear your trusty full size cottontails or y-fronts  ... definitely no lace or other random frilly bits please.


when i first heard about this, i thought it must be referring to the ruling of some demented judge.  (like the nutjob we had a while back suggesting a husband can use "reasonable force" to coerce sex out of his wife).

however, i just found out the source of the outrage in this case is a defence lawyer, and much of the outrage is being directed at her — which is beyond stupid.

a barrister's job is to make a persuasive argument, period.  and, if the 'skimpy underwear is tantamount to consent' argument is actually a persuasive one in and of itself, then thats orders of magnitude more an indictment of the jury and the attitudes of the public from which it is drawn than anything else.

heres a quote from the woman who started the hashtag: “Simply put, clothing is not consent. This kind of victim blaming is archaic and had no place in our court system."

victim blaming?  er, no.  thats putting the cart before the horse.  the purpose of the trial was to establish whether or not there was a victim.  according to the court, there wasnt one.  and i dont know the full context of how the underwear argument was raised, nor is there any way to know if it was instrumental in the verdict. 

people need to appreciate, that whatever the crime in question, it is often a regrettable necessity in trials dominated by hearsay and a dearth of material evidence, that all sorts of contentious peripheral details become the scraps over which the burden of proof must be contested.  thereby, many aspects that ordinarily are, or should be, completely irrelevant to complicity, are rendered potentially relevant pending a jury's (or judge's) determination that they are not.

so, whilst i applaud #thisisnotconsent for justifiably railing against the persistence of outmoded attitudes, and believe that stamping out these attitudes in the public at large may severely curtail their usefulness in court, i am nevertheless pissed off at the pillorying this lawyer has received, especially the hate she is getting from other women.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm,

 

Been around guns all my life, can't say I really thought the gun laws here were quite well enough policed before Port Arthur, on the other hand the reaction under Howard was probably excessive. Seems to me these days crims and disgruntled idiots have no problem getting a gun but law-abiding citizens have to jump through crazy hoops to punch paper or knock down steel animal silhouettes... More trouble than it's worth.

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, @~thehung said:
23 hours ago, eveln said:

So people, anyone thinking of travelling to Ireland don't pack your G-strings. Leave them at home ... you don't want to be thought to be enabling / asking for a rape experience .  If a rape experience should happen you might have a chance of having the rapist jailed if you

wear your trusty full size cottontails or y-fronts  ... definitely no lace or other random frilly bits please.

...

so, whilst i applaud #thisisnotconsent for justifiably railing against the persistence of outmoded attitudes, and believe that stamping out these attitudes in the public at large may severely curtail their usefulness in court, i am nevertheless pissed off at the pillorying this lawyer has received, especially the hate she is getting from other women.

Good for you.

The article I saw showed a number of pics of G-strings used in the barrister's defence [ IANAL] . It seems to me if the barrister needs to use items of underwear as a defence against a rape charge then I sorta think there must be little else for the barrister to use... in which case it would seem
highly questionable to not find the rape  had occurred. I mean, the article doesn't state whether the g-strings were given in evidence for traces of the accused, it just says something along the lines that if you wear a g-string you may be enabling a rape ...
I don't assume the instance one of victim blaming. I do assume the defence was having trouble er defending .

/ now if the article totally misconstrued the reasons for listing the g-strings well then shame on the journo.

 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-11-15/women-use-g-strings-to-protest-victim-blaming-after-rape-trial/10499056

" A 27-year-old man was acquitted of raping a 17-year-old girl in the case, after his barrister drew attention to the teen's G-string during closing statements.

"Does the evidence out-rule the possibility that she was attracted to the defendant and was open to meeting someone and being with someone?" senior counsel Elizabeth O'Connell said, according to a report by the Irish Examiner.

"You have to look at the way she was dressed. She was wearing a thong with a lace front."

 

 

Edited by eveln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ireland at this time of the year would be a bit cold for thongs, surely ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

teenagers will totally ignore weather when it comes to fashion. Actually most people will if their lives revolve around being seen to be of the latest trend.

even now, femmes will wear supposedly sensible shoes ( the latest in sports trainers ) but only because some fashion Icon made it okay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, eveln said:

The article I saw showed a number of pics of G-strings used in the barrister's defence [ IANAL] . It seems to me if the barrister needs to use items of underwear as a defence against a rape charge then I sorta think there must be little else for the barrister to use... in which case it would seem highly questionable to not find the rape had occurred.

yes, i agree that it seems that way, and how it seems is very possible.  it makes me suspicious that a miscarriage of justice may have occurred.  but surface details are just that.  there may have been more to those closing arguments in context which put aspects of her testimony in doubt.  or not.  its very hard to tell when all i can find in the media furore is the same recycled selective quoting for sensationalism.  if indeed it was, exactly how it seems, then the miscarriage of justice is on the jury for being swayed by such a pathetic argument, not on a defence lawyer succeeding at her job. 

it is remarkable, though, that the jury of eight men and four women took only 90 minutes to reach its verdict.  so, in the jury's defence — and maybe i have too much faith in my fellow humans — the swiftness of their verdict leads me to suspect there were more factors under consideration than the persuasive powers of underwear.  but then again, maybe not.  and maybe they were prudish bigots successfully finagled through selection, chosen because they would be itching to deny this 'scarlet woman' her rightful justice.

but, as i said, when there is a lack of material evidence, both sides fight with scraps.  it seems all the plaintiff had was her word.  as far as evidence goes, thats a woefully inadequate scrap.  this isnt insensitivity, either to her or anyone in a similar bind.  its just a feature of any fair judicial system that higher standards of proof are sought than somebody merely saying somebody else did something.  one of the many reasons rape is so insidious, and often goes untried let alone unconvicted, is that it can be intrinsically difficult to prove a lack of consent.  how unfortunate this continues to be, doesnt make it any less true. 

sometimes, all thats left is for each side to characterise the other in ways that might establish doubt.  and in that regard, keep in mind that its quite possible for a jury of decent fair-minded people to not be swayed either way by a stunt with underwear, to believe 'he probably did it', and still not vote to convict — because the burden of proof in criminal cases is "beyond a reasonable doubt", in contrast to "the balance of probabilities" demanded of civil cases (assuming Ireland has similar standards to elsewhere). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, @~thehung said:
16 hours ago, eveln said:

The article I saw showed a number of pics of G-strings used in the barrister's defence [ IANAL] . It seems to me if the barrister needs to use items of underwear as a defence against a rape charge then I sorta think there must be little else for the barrister to use... in which case it would seem highly questionable to not find the rape had occurred.

yes, i agree that it seems that way, and how it seems is very possible.  it makes me suspicious that a miscarriage of justice may have occurred.  but surface details are just that.  there may have been more to those closing arguments in context which put aspects of her testimony in doubt.  or not.  its very hard to tell when all i can find in the media furore is the same recycled selective quoting for sensationalism.  if indeed it was, exactly how it seems, then the miscarriage of justice is on the jury for being swayed by such a pathetic argument, not on a defence lawyer succeeding at her job. 

it is remarkable, though, that the jury of eight men and four women took only 90 minutes to reach its verdict.  so, in the jury's defence — and maybe i have too much faith in my fellow humans — the swiftness of their verdict leads me to suspect there were more factors under consideration than the persuasive powers of underwear.  but then again, maybe not.  and maybe they were prudish bigots successfully finagled through selection, chosen because they would be itching to deny this 'scarlet woman' her rightful justice.

but, as i said, when there is a lack of material evidence, both sides fight with scraps.  it seems all the plaintiff had was her word.  as far as evidence goes, thats a woefully inadequate scrap.  this isnt insensitivity, either to her or anyone in a similar bind.  its just a feature of any fair judicial system that higher standards of proof are sought than somebody merely saying somebody else did something.  one of the many reasons rape is so insidious, and often goes untried let alone unconvicted, is that it can be intrinsically difficult to prove a lack of consent.  how unfortunate this continues to be, doesnt make it any less true. 

sometimes, all thats left is for each side to characterise the other in ways that might establish doubt.  and in that regard, keep in mind that its quite possible for a jury of decent fair-minded people to not be swayed either way by a stunt with underwear, to believe 'he probably did it', and still not vote to convict — because the burden of proof in criminal cases is "beyond a reasonable doubt", in contrast to "the balance of probabilities" demanded of civil cases (assuming Ireland has similar standards to elsewhere).

[ requoting cos it's why I bothered posting this piece at all on here ]

" "Does the evidence out-rule the possibility that she was attracted to the defendant and was open to meeting someone and being with someone?" senior counsel Elizabeth O'Connell said, according to a report by the Irish Examiner.

"You have to look at the way she was dressed. She was wearing a thong with a lace front." "

As to why the jury took so little time to make their verdict is anyone's guess ... maybe their lives were calling elsewhere, maybe they figured the alleged assault/rape didn't appear to have hurt the female too much, and as there was not enough evidence the jury chose not to wreck the
defendant's life any more than it already had ... bloody hell, any number of reasons as to why the jury made their choice.

re the underlined : I agree. And for that the Judge should have thrown the case out rather than let the trial and jury acquit the defendant.

 

/ it's a coincidence, that a situation in the periphery of my RL occurred the other week where by a person was accused of taking something, only for that something  to be later found. According to the accused, the something was wrongly placed ( by the accuser ) and hence not immediately
found. Unfortunately for the accused, they found the "something"... but in-between happenings happening, the accuser chose to speak of the incident amongst others. A " She said , he said " situation of a nasty kind in a small town. I took and take umbrage on the accused's side as without
corroboration he was being labelled maliciously . What makes it worse is these are not children, they are adults with the experience of life behind them.

 

I think the seventeen year old should possibly have been more strongly advised of the likely hood of failure in her quest for 'justice' ... I think the barrister was wise to use Ireland's perhaps still conservative influences of morals to win the case.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So. I just discovered how to speak to various points in replying to a member here ... i thought I fucked it up, but for once I got it just right .lol. << now I did think to go to feedback with this comment but the thread is closed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Jeruselem said:

raining MUD

Not unheard of since modern farming.  I've seen several personally, but much more dilute than that.  Events like ^that one a a bit of a fluke, though - a decent dust storm usually means there's no moisture around to make rain with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Cybes said:

Not unheard of since modern farming.  I've seen several personally, but much more dilute than that.  Events like ^that one a a bit of a fluke, though - a decent dust storm usually means there's no moisture around to make rain with.

True, dust storms mean it's pretty dry and no water to keep the soil on the ground. Well, given the weather is bit hard to predict these days ... this will happen!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aussies can buy stuff off the US Amazon site again! The Aussie site just was so limiting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Steam sale is on, huge discounts. For example Titan Quest Anniversary edition + Ragnarok bundle down from AUS56 to $15.34. I'm glad I waited ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On that note... Half Life turned 20 on the 19th November (maybe the reason for the sale?)

Black Mesa (final) is supposed to be released really soon (early access been around for years) - the current game finishes at the point where you teleport offworld.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jeruselem said:

Steam sale is on

Yes, GOG also.  My wallet hates me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to note you can buy stuff from amazon.com and ship to Stralia BUT if it is from 3rd party, you cannot buy it. It has to be from Amazon only.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An instagram to oust Tones and a facebook account to sell your daughter for marriage to the highest bidder ... gotta love the power of the web

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 21/11/2018 at 8:23 AM, eveln said:

So. I just discovered how to speak to various points in replying to a member here ... i thought I fucked it up, but for once I got it just right .lol. << now I did think to go to feedback with this comment but the thread is closed

Which thread?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×