The UAFC

BaggyTrousers wrote:

WeeWorld wrote:

pwrmoore wrote:I guess we disagree. I want people in such positions to be of the highest integrity and think they should be held to a higher standard that those in ordinary life. You obviously don't see a problem a senior judge failing to respect the institution he wants to have joint custody of.

By the way. Which questions were inadmissible? And on what grounds?

We're all entitled to the presumption of integrity I think, unless we're convicted of something.

They weren't interested in answers. The questions were purely of the "are you still beating your wife variety", because the allegations were totally unsubstantiated. Everything to do with the Ford allegations needed to be dealt with somewhere else and long ago.

Allow me to educate you.

It is unlikely that Prof. Ford would have ever publically revealed what she alleges happened to her all these years later unless her attacker resurfaced in a way which she felt was intolerable to her sensibilities.

Many of you will have suffered depression and have found it incredibly hard to talk about, you will quite possibly never have told some very close friends. Imagine how much harder it may have been had you been sexually assaulted with the self-loathing, shame and blame that victims almost routinely attach to themselves.

That, Small Mind, is why many people, both female & male (and I have a male friend who was raped in his late teens) never report rape or sexual assault. That too is why those who do not report it for years or even several decades take as long as they do to make accusations. Nobody wants to be a victim. Many try to lead their lives and put it behind them, more often than not, at the resulting damage it does to their mental health.

I have both a family member and a friend who have been sexually assaulted and raped whilst young. Neither have ever made a legal accusation, both have sought help for their mental health and still do many years later. What makes their mental health problems difficult, more difficult than it should be, is the victim blaming that occurs around a case that reaches the public arena. Morons such as yourself, Small Mind, who immediately and stupidly reach for that old chestnut: "why now, why didn't they say something earlier?"

To a degree, it makes such dickheads lucky, lucky they have not had to deal with the fallout from somebodies actions many years ago, the luck to be stupid enough to have no understanding of what such victims go through, many for a lifetime.

In conclusion, pal, consider yourself very lucky that you have no idea what you are talking about. I hope for your sake your life remains untouched.

Shan wrote:

Dave wrote:Ronaldo's sponsors have expressed concerns.

Yes Nike expressing a concern I see. I bet they don't express much concern about the poor feckers who get paid peanuts and treated like sh1te who make the crap they sell at huge profit.


Of course if he is actually guilty even a shower like that would have a valid right to be more than concerned.

Dave wrote:The only concerns they have over the allegations would be the potential impact on their share prices.

Dave wrote:

Shan wrote:

Dave wrote:Ronaldo's sponsors have expressed concerns.

Yes Nike expressing a concern I see. I bet they don't express much concern about the poor feckers who get paid peanuts and treated like sh1te who make the crap they sell at huge profit.


Of course if he is actually guilty even a shower like that would have a valid right to be more than concerned.

The only concerns they have over the allegations would be the potential impact on their share prices.

WeeWorld wrote:

BaggyTrousers wrote:

WeeWorld wrote:

pwrmoore wrote:I guess we disagree. I want people in such positions to be of the highest integrity and think they should be held to a higher standard that those in ordinary life. You obviously don't see a problem a senior judge failing to respect the institution he wants to have joint custody of.

By the way. Which questions were inadmissible? And on what grounds?

We're all entitled to the presumption of integrity I think, unless we're convicted of something.

They weren't interested in answers. The questions were purely of the "are you still beating your wife variety", because the allegations were totally unsubstantiated. Everything to do with the Ford allegations needed to be dealt with somewhere else and long ago.

Allow me to educate you.

It is unlikely that Prof. Ford would have ever publically revealed what she alleges happened to her all these years later unless her attacker resurfaced in a way which she felt was intolerable to her sensibilities.

Many of you will have suffered depression and have found it incredibly hard to talk about, you will quite possibly never have told some very close friends. Imagine how much harder it may have been had you been sexually assaulted with the self-loathing, shame and blame that victims almost routinely attach to themselves.

That, Small Mind, is why many people, both female & male (and I have a male friend who was raped in his late teens) never report rape or sexual assault. That too is why those who do not report it for years or even several decades take as long as they do to make accusations. Nobody wants to be a victim. Many try to lead their lives and put it behind them, more often than not, at the resulting damage it does to their mental health.

I have both a family member and a friend who have been sexually assaulted and raped whilst young. Neither have ever made a legal accusation, both have sought help for their mental health and still do many years later. What makes their mental health problems difficult, more difficult than it should be, is the victim blaming that occurs around a case that reaches the public arena. Morons such as yourself, Small Mind, who immediately and stupidly reach for that old chestnut: "why now, why didn't they say something earlier?"

To a degree, it makes such dickheads lucky, lucky they have not had to deal with the fallout from somebodies actions many years ago, the luck to be stupid enough to have no understanding of what such victims go through, many for a lifetime.

In conclusion, pal, consider yourself very lucky that you have no idea what you are talking about. I hope for your sake your life remains untouched.

Pisspants doing his mawkish empathy turn, as opposed to his doxxing of complainants one.

Rooster wrote:As far as the #metoo mob go I see that a guy who was deemed unproven of rape in Scotland has been ordered to pay £80k to the victim in a civil case, this is a bit of a dodgy precedent to open a potential can of worms.

BaggyTrousers wrote: Moron, I'd happily shoot you in the face, or kerbstomp your dumb little brain into oblivion. Please do not breed, there are enough halfwits in the world as it is.

Rooster wrote:As far as the #metoo mob go I see that a guy who was deemed unproven of rape in Scotland has been ordered to pay £80k to the victim in a civil case, this is a bit of a dodgy precedent to open a potential can of worms.

WeeWorld wrote:

Rooster wrote:As far as the #metoo mob go I see that a guy who was deemed unproven of rape in Scotland has been ordered to pay £80k to the victim in a civil case, this is a bit of a dodgy precedent to open a potential can of worms.

Balance of probabilities test vs beyond reasonable doubt.
First time I heard of something like this was when OJ Simpson's wife's family took a case against him

Rooster wrote: BBC story on it, I wonder has it to occur in Scotland or can anyone take the case up in Scotland ?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland- ... e-45760372

Rooster wrote:As far as the #metoo mob go I see that a guy who was deemed unproven of rape in Scotland has been ordered to pay £80k to the victim in a civil case, this is a bit of a dodgy precedent to open a potential can of worms.