RugbyRebels

Careful now!

Saw this and thought of you lot. Those nasty men!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49262995

And? What argument is it you're actually making there?

That woman made a false allegation having regretted what happens, so it means the woman in the Jackson/Olding case also did?

Aren't you still statistically more likely, as a man, to be raped by another man than have a false rape allegation made against you by a woman?

Well now, where to start.

First thing first, the woman in Ayia Napa is accused, but not convicted, of having made a false allegation. The girl at the centre of the PJ/SO case has not been - and never will be - accused by the PPS of having made a false allegation, despite the inane and relentless wittering of young hugh-wankstain.

And how would our resident neanderthal characterise the actions of the 12 'men'? I frankly question how, outside of a particular niche of the porn industry, queuing up to contribute to a semen-sodden bukkake could possibly have added to the mutual enjoyment of anyone involved. If the humiliation of their victim were not already complete, filming it and sticking it up on the net would surely have finished the job. The actions of these 12 wankers seem to me to have had no object but the disgrace of the woman; whether she were a willing and compliant participant or not does not detract from their reprehensible behaviour. That she is the one standing accused does not surprise me one iota. The Cypriot police take misogyny to a level that would make h_w seem positively #metoo. Nasty doesn't come close, ye deviant wee twat.

The Cypriot case is really concerning me. The comments coming from the police that I've seen are laden with all sorts of rape myths. I haven't seen the video (and ffs don't post it here) but I'm out concerned that their legal analysis, not to say respect for women, is about as sophisticated as our resident apologist for the demeaning of women.

I was serving as a company commander in Cyprus in the late 90s. At that time the whole UK garrison was on a 22:00 curfew because of the rape and murder of a Danish girl by three soldiers of the Royal Green Jackets. Any soldier found outside the Sovereign Base Areas after 22:00 would be liable to arrest. The local cab drivers were such that any lone soldier trying to get back from Limassol to Episcopi would more probably be dumped by the cab driver in a back street where he would have the shyte hammered out of him by the local yoof before being handed over to the Cypriot police who would hammer the shyte out of him again - and keep hammering until an officer, accompanied by an SBA policeman, was able to get through the red tape to get him out of nick.

I never once heard a Cypriot policeman utter a syllable in sympathy with the murdered girl. To them the soldier was a threat to their tourism industry and needed to be treated accordingly. I suspect that this girl's complaint is viewed in the same vein.

As an aside, when I arrived on one Sunday morning to collect one of my battered soldiers and had to listen to the duty Cypriot captain of police berate the British soldiers yet again, I suggested that were it not for British soldiers, I would be having coffee with a Turk that morning. He was not amused. Despite the formal complaint that ensued, it was a line I used on at least another two occasions.

I've always thought Olding has a quality side step,.....but whatever Serj says is good with me.
Except for the process of using Court Martial to force their own opinions.
Which is unacceptable.

The armed services should be equivalent to any standard court.

A whole other can of worms there, KK. I absolutely agree that a court martial, where it is appropriate to use one, ought to be of the same standard of legal competency and adhere to the same standards of evidential proof, investigative rigour and sentencing guidelines as any civilian court. It is unacceptable for a court martial - or the investigative, prosecution advisory or judicial architecture that underpins it - to apply a lesser standard, though there are some offences that occur in military law that do not have an equivalent in common or criminal law (Absence without leave, striking a superior officer, negligent performance of a duty, etc). Courts martial do not have juries, but are tried before a panel of three or more officers and presided over by a senior judge (Usually seconded from the crown).

A soldier serving in the UK will almost certainly be tried by a civilian court if they are accused of a committing a civilian offence in the UK. If the soldier is serving overseas or the alleged offence occurred overseas, they will be protected under an MOU that will probably require that they be under the legal jurisdiction of the UK. Thus Sergeant Blackman (The Royal Marine sergeant who killed the wounded Taliban fighter in Afghanistan) was tried by court martial, while Soldier F (The Para accused of murder on Bloody Sunday in Derry) is being investigated and will be tried (If it goes that far) before a civilian court.

This rule does not always hold and the three Green Jackets accused of the abduction, rape and murder of Louise Jensen in Ayia Napa were tried, convicted and sentenced by a Cypriot court (Though the murder charge was reduced to manslaughter because they were drunk). All received 25-years sentences and served 12 years in a Cypriot prison before being released and deported.

12 years for rape or murder sounds on the face of it disgustingly lenient

Digby wrote:12 years for rape or murder sounds on the face of it disgustingly lenient

That wasn't their sentence.

Britain has one of the most punitive sentencing regimes in the world. Most foreign sentences will look lenient in comparison.

Jackson not coming to Cork tomorrow.

https://www.independent.ie/sport/rugby/ ... 87959.html