Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I wonder how many people commenting on the law in this case have actually read the law of either sexual offences or evidence.


I was going to get into the whys and wherefores of consent, but I suspect it will just wind me up, particularly when so many inferences are being made just in the context of this thread. I will leave you with the only point that Ian left out from "The Secret Barrister"'s blog post:



10. What does this whole affair say about our society?

Christ knows. Nothing good.

Mick Mac Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


>

> Drunken consent is still consent

>


Not my definition of Drunk (we don't mean tipsy here - we mean unconscious or out on their feet)

- mind you who would want to do anything to someone in the state of my definition of drunk unless

they're completely weird (deeply unattractive state to be in).

The law doesn't define drunk - it defines consent:


"a person consents if he agrees by choice, and has the freedom and capacity to make that choice."


So drunken consent is consent unless it removes capacity. However, if a person is unconscious then it is assumed both that they did not consent and that the suspect did not reasonably believe that they consented.

DaveR Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The law doesn't define drunk - it defines

> consent:

>

> "a person consents if he agrees by choice, and has

> the freedom and capacity to make that choice."

>

> So drunken consent is consent unless it removes

> capacity. However, if a person is unconscious

> then it is assumed both that they did not consent

> and that the suspect did not reasonably believe

> that they consented.


There comes a time if you drink enough (15 pints maybe)

where you can't make a reasoned decision, been there

and been attacked in that state - and you've lost the

reasoning to get yourself out of it. Alcohol is a

terrible drug.


By the way - when this happened I've never seen the Police

so angry when I said my memory (which was there on morphine)

had gone - so you've decided to let these people get away with it

- I just said yes and so should that girl to be honest).

Otta Wrote:

------------------------------------------

> Erm, except the case wasn't written about the

> case.



Semantics - but having read your OP on this thread you might want to read the case itself. It's definitely interesting and the core details of the case are a better insight than anv second hand opinion I'd have thought.

JohnL Wrote:

----------------------------

> let off - I just said yes and so should that girl to be

> honest).


Not really - it was important that it was tested and evidenced that she wasn't raped - so they weren't let off with anything


What was perhaps wrong here is that there seemed to be an assumption by police that because she was too drunk to remember that it was therefore rape.

This was tested and found not to be the case which is also important.

And because she said she couldn't remember she then obviously couldn't then give evidence about something she couldn't remember, hence other testimonies were necessary to be taken into consideration about other times when she had drunken sex in an attempt to evidence whether the conduct claimed by the defendants was consistent.

Huggers Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> She'd fallen over in the takeaway. left her

> handbag there. That is pretty drunk. The room was

> dark. She may not even have known a second man was

> having sex with her. Maybe that was part of their

> 'joke'in 'bagging a drunk one'.



But he can't have known about what happened in the take away.


Don't want to sound like I'm defending the sleaze bag, just find the whole thing grim yet interesting.

Mick Mac Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Otta Wrote:

> ------------------------------------------

> > Erm, except the case wasn't written about the

> > case.

>

>

> Semantics - but having read your OP on this thread

> you might want to read the case itself. It's

> definitely interesting and the core details of the

> case are a better insight than anv second hand

> opinion I'd have thought.




Agreed. But the case wasn't available to read when I posted the OP.

And I think that's the trouble - media jump to conclusions too early. As did the football clubs etc.

I do find it surprising that his fiancee has stood by him though - as although he's not a rapist, he is a low moral case who treated a woman like a notch on a bedpost and no doubt took advantage of her in a situation that was just a bucket list option for him and his mate. All pretty disturbing.

Mick Mac Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I do find it surprising that his fiancee has stood

> by him though



I suppose she had to weigh it up.



On the one hand - her betrothed in a Travelodge taking it it turns with his mate to have a go on someone who was so drunk she can?t even remember the encounter.


On the other hand - his ?20,000/week wage and her unlikelihood of bagging an alternative.



It seems she has decided that everyone deserves a second chance. It's a real victory for womankind.

*Bob* Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Mick Mac Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > I do find it surprising that his fiancee has

> stood

> > by him though

>

>

> I suppose she had to weigh it up.

>

>

> On the one hand - her betrothed in a Travelodge

> taking it it turns with his mate to have a go on

> someone who was so drunk she can?t even remember

> the encounter.

>

> On the other hand - his ?20,000/week wage and her

> unlikelihood of bagging an alternative.

>

>

> It seems she has decided that everyone deserves a

> second chance. It's a real victory for womankind.


HRC stuck by Bill - vile.....

*Bob* Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> On the other hand - his ?20,000/week wage and her

> unlikelihood of bagging an alternative.


He's earning a tenth of that now. Not sure if a big club will touch him again, and he probably only has 6-8 years left of his career. So it must be love - or stupidity.

Jeremy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> He's earning a tenth of that now. Not sure if a

> big club will touch him again, and he probably

> only has 6-8 years left of his career. So it must

> be love - or stupidity.


I'm sure the football industry will be prepared to forgive and forget now all that nasty trial business is out of the way. Especially if there's a good deal to be had.

titch juicy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The media seem to have made up their mind (as do

> most on here) about the facts regardless of the

> judge's verdict.


The fact is, it's not rape. To say anything else is now potentially slander or something of that sort....

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
  • Latest Discussions

    • Not miserable at all! I feel the same and also want to complain to the council but not sure who or where best to aim it at? I have flagged it with our local MP and one Southwark councillor previously but only verbally when discussing other things and didn’t get anywhere other than them agreeing it was very frustrating etc. but would love to do something on paper. I think they’ve been pretty much every night for the last couple of weeks and my cat is hating it! As am I !
    • That is also a Young's pub, like The Cherry Tree. However fantastic the menu looks, you might want to ask exactly who will cook the food on the day, and how. Also, if  there is Christmas pudding on the menu, you might want to ask how that will be cooked, and whether it will look and/or taste anything like the Christmas puddings you have had in the past.
    • This reminds me of a situation a few years ago when a mate's Dad was coming down and fancied Franklin's for Christmas Day. He'd been there once, in September, and loved it. Obviously, they're far too tuned in to do it, so having looked around, £100 per head was pretty standard for fairly average pubs around here. That is ridiculous. I'd go with Penguin's idea; one of the best Christmas Day lunches I've ever had was at the Lahore Kebab House in Whitechapel. And it was BYO. After a couple of Guinness outside Franklin's, we decided £100 for four people was the absolute maximum, but it had to be done in the style of Franklin's and sourced within walking distance of The Gowlett. All the supermarkets knock themselves out on veg as a loss leader - particularly anything festive - and the Afghani lads on Rye Lane are brilliant for more esoteric stuff and spices, so it really doesn't need to be pricey. Here's what we came up with. It was considerably less than £100 for four. Bread & Butter (Lidl & Lurpak on offer at Iceland) Mersea Oysters (Sopers) Parsnip & Potato Soup ( I think they were both less than 20 pence a kilo at Morrisons) Smoked mackerel, Jerseys, watercress & radish (Sopers) Rolled turkey breast joint (£7.95 from Iceland) Roast Duck (two for £12 at Lidl) Mash  Carrots, star anise, butter emulsion. Stir-fried Brussels, bacon, chestnuts and Worcestershire sauce.(Lidl) Clementine and limoncello granita (all from Lidl) Stollen (Lidl) Stichelton, Cornish Cruncher, Stinking Bishop. (Marks & Sparks) There was a couple of lessons to learn: Don't freeze mash. It breaks down the cellular structure and ends up more like a French pomme purée. I renamed it 'Pomme Mikael Silvestre' after my favourite French centre-half cum left back and got away with it, but if you're not amongst football fans you may not be so lucky. Tasted great, looked like shit. Don't take the clementine granita out of the freezer too early, particularly if you've overdone it on the limoncello. It melts quickly and someone will suggest snorting it. The sugar really sticks your nostrils together on Boxing Day. Speaking of 'lost' Christmases past, John Lewis have hijacked Alison Limerick's 'Where Love Lives' for their new advert. Bastards. But not a bad ad.   Beansprout, I have a massive steel pot I bought from a Nigerian place on Choumert Road many years ago. It could do with a work out. I'm quite prepared to make a huge, spicy parsnip soup for anyone who fancies it and a few carols.  
    • Nothing to do with the topic of this thread, but I have to say, I think it is quite untrue that people don't make human contact in cities. Just locally, there are street parties, road WhatsApp groups, one street I know near here hires a coach and everyone in the street goes to the seaside every year! There are lots of neighbourhood groups on Facebook, where people look out for each other and help each other. In my experience people chat to strangers on public transport, in shops, waiting in queues etc. To the best of my knowledge the forum does not need donations to keep it going. It contains paid ads, which hopefully helps Joe,  the very excellent admin,  to keep it up and running. And as for a house being broken into, that could happen anywhere. I knew a village in Devon where a whole row of houses was burgled one night in the eighties. Sorry to continue the off topic conversation when the poor OP was just trying to find out who was open for lunch on Christmas Day!
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...