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

    • You're being a little disingenuous here. It is simply not true that "the area should remain suburban 2/3 storeys maximum" because: -> the area the development is in isn't 2/3 storeys maximum today - as evidenced by the school on the lot adjoining the development to the south, as well as the similarly-sized buildings to the north and east.  -> the SPG doesn't preclude this type of development anyway. This "genie in a bottle" stuff is desperate barrel-scraping. Now you're raising the spectre of a 9 storey building on the Gibbs & Dandy site (the chance would be a fine thing) but also arguing Southwark is too slow to approve things and opposed to development more than 2-3 storeys!
    • The sites in question though are not comparable to the builders yard by the station and less likely to be granted planning permission for 9 storey buildings. The builders yard fronts on to the railway line on one side and virtually no residential property surrounding on the other sides. The Gibbs & Dandy /Kwikfit and ED trading trading estate are surrounded at close proximity by residential, and in the case of the latter a Grade II building, so there would more stringent height restrictions. Both these sites are tired and sad looking, and in need of development to provide much needed housing.
    • Not sure if this is any help but was initally told to use google chrome as the browser and the code was the reference. However the person at Southwark parking took pity on me and did it for me 
    • I can see how it could've worked 20 or 30 years ago, when you couldn't swing a pool cue in the Foresters without hitting a sparks, a plumber or a chippy, but the area has changed somewhat. I'm not sure people around here have such trade-able skills these days. Have a word with someone in your local and you'll see. People are always going to need their boiler fixed, a damp patch sorted or their dimmer switch dimmed, but I can pretty much guarantee I'm never going need my corporate policy complied with, my social media planned, my data mined, my green transport tsared, my information architected or my analytics analysed. It reminds me of the great DIY con of the mid to late seventies. My Mum bought into it, my Dad didn't. Anyway, my Mum won out and we let the gardener go (he went on to be TV's Timmy Mallett, so that's a warning from history), but my Dad shorted the house out and singed his head when he cut through the flex on his new Black & Decker hedge trimmer. We all laughed, of course, but he got his own back when, because we didn't use a qualified electrician to do things properly, she electrocuted herself when she pulled the back of the plug off her Carmen heated rollers while it was still in the socket. Keep things professional, say 'No!' to this sort of nonsense. We pay people a decent rate of pay because they're specialists at these things. I did once barter my sister's space hopper and roller skates for twenty-odd square foot of crazy paving, though. That was a birthday present my Mum never forgot, and not in a good way.  
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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