Moderator: Moderators
Court subpoenas are a dangerous game.damianmcr wrote:Couldnt the court force him to say?BaggyTrousers wrote:Oh if only we could play a game of “what the bouncer saw”.
Please tell me that I'm correct in believing that once acquitted, the state will pick up his legal bill?BaggyTrousers wrote: we should feel aggrieved on their behalf, especially the one who has not received legal aid
Fecking scumbag.Deraless wrote:Court subpoenas are a dangerous game.damianmcr wrote:Couldnt the court force him to say?BaggyTrousers wrote:Oh if only we could play a game of “what the bouncer saw”.
You force someone to turn up to deny everything and then look stupid.
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
BaggyTrousers wrote:I loathe that people here are moralising in peoples morals. I further loathe that it’s inferred that only those of adherence to the morality envisaged by the Ulster Way should be permitted to play for one’s favoured Rugby team.
I couldn’t give a tinker’s fück if they are the most immoral creatures that walk the planet, if they are innocent of the crimes alleged I see no reason whatsoever why this circus should impact on their careers, indeed, for me, assuming the jury are not clowns, we should feel aggrieved on their behalf, especially the one who has not received legal aid and to have their careers threatened on illconsidered charges, a botched investagion and doubtless the most horrific 20 months anyone in a relatively peaceful society could envisage.
Some of you should shove your outraged morality up yer holes. I believe they have done nothing wrong, even the bragging and bullshit, it’s common amongst this generation, it maybe unappealing but it’s not a serious issue.
Now FFFS wise the fûck up, live your own lives and stop trying to impose your nonsense on others.
She did. She was brought in to say that Paddy when he got plastered was very placid and chilled rather than a violent maurauderColinM wrote:Was it Paddy's sister in law who gave a character witness? Wasn't she asleep upstairs or something at the time? Or maybe she was staying there but not present can't fully rememberDeraless wrote:8 is the official number repeatedly mentioned. 4 chaps. 3 girls together. Complainant. In Rory's testimony he actually wasn't totally sure of exact number but afaik no other people were interviewed as being present or brought forward as witnesses.Cockatrice wrote:Can someone direct me to number of people at said house party on the night in question ... is the obvious answer 4 females and 4 males honestly I lost the will to listen a while back.. today It was suggested by someone that I was chatting to that there may have been 9 people at the house.. so who is the missing one or is this more misinformation.
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
Sent from my Swift 2 Plus using Tapatalk
fixedSnipe Watson wrote:Please tell me that I'm correct in believing that once acquitted,the judge rules that the state will pick up his legal bill?BaggyTrousers wrote: we should feel aggrieved on their behalf, especially the one who has not received legal aid
We owe him that much.
Very little to do with the trialLiz Fraser wrote:Non pluses and scrum.Dave wrote:Possibly meaning another trial that did not involve some folks fav irish rugby superstar.Snipe Watson wrote:Well you are entitled to your view. Although with the exception of McIlroy, I'll take a contrary view, while still coming well short of "misunderstood wee boys.."nonplussed wrote:So twitter has them hung drawn and quartered, many here have them painted as poor misunderstood wee boys..
Personally I think they are wee entitled filth bags with the morals of an alley cat,I don’t think they’re rapists but I couldn’t care less if they never play for Ulster again.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'd still love you to flesh this one out a little for us all:nonplussed wrote:Some say this one should’ve been thrown out. I wonder will they say the same about the next one
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Just wondering if you know these guys personally or are you making assumptions about them based on the trial?
Not answering the question np.nonplussed wrote:Very little to do with the trialLiz Fraser wrote:Non pluses and scrum.Dave wrote:Possibly meaning another trial that did not involve some folks fav irish rugby superstar.Snipe Watson wrote:Well you are entitled to your view. Although with the exception of McIlroy, I'll take a contrary view, while still coming well short of "misunderstood wee boys.."nonplussed wrote:So twitter has them hung drawn and quartered, many here have them painted as poor misunderstood wee boys..
Personally I think they are wee entitled filth bags with the morals of an alley cat,I don’t think they’re rapists but I couldn’t care less if they never play for Ulster again.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'd still love you to flesh this one out a little for us all:nonplussed wrote:Some say this one should’ve been thrown out. I wonder will they say the same about the next one
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Just wondering if you know these guys personally or are you making assumptions about them based on the trial?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I don't know Snipe is the truth.Snipe Watson wrote:Please tell me that I'm correct in believing that once acquitted, the state will pick up his legal bill?BaggyTrousers wrote: we should feel aggrieved on their behalf, especially the one who has not received legal aid
We owe him that much.
Possibly the judge's call.BaggyTrousers wrote:I don't know Snipe is the truth.Snipe Watson wrote:Please tell me that I'm correct in believing that once acquitted, the state will pick up his legal bill?BaggyTrousers wrote: we should feel aggrieved on their behalf, especially the one who has not received legal aid
We owe him that much.
I suppose that makes sense.BaggyTrousers wrote:A brief research suggests "not necessarily", he would have to have applied for Legal aid and been refused, he may also not receive the full amount of costs if his chosen representatives charges were hugely larger than legal aid fees.
