Gerry Adams…. and the Barnardos missing kids campaign.
Ah, here… >_<
Rob_G
Perhaps Gerry is giving them pointers on how to ensure they remain well and truly ‘missing’.
Owen
Did you see the comments beneath the post on twitter….? I think the oversight has been noted.
Neilo
@Clampers: the party has expertise in the area of missing mums and dads, so SF’s got that goin’ for them.
italia'90
While Gerry’s niece was having her childhood stolen by his brother, which he knew about, he did everything he possibly could to protect his own reputation.
Then Mary Lou went on the national airwaves to defend the indefensible.
Never let her forget she’s a sycophantic parasite and you can expect her to be on the airwaves again today celebrating International Women’s Day. What a hypocrite.
The Ghost of Starina
You know, I would feel so much sympathy for Paddy Jackson if we didn’t know for an actual fact that he was laughing about the girl being in hysterics and “it was never going to end well” via the WhatsApp messages. He’s been coached by his solicitors to the hilt.
Andyourpointiswhatexactly?
No matter what’s the outcome of this case, he’s rotten. Arrogant little (I can say little as I passed him outside the Shelbourne one day and was surprised that I was taller than he) git.
Owen
Exactly, “I would have never let her leave if she was crying… “, and in watsapp its all “another Belfast sl*t / we’re all great shaggers etc”. Bare in mind he knew the next day she was upset when they all went for lunch. Why didn’t he call her then?
Wwhy has nobody ripped him apart on the stand? There seems to be continuous errors in their statements / inconsistencies / and the text etc, and no hard questions were asked. Was he not allowed be questioned?
The Old Boy
The news reports of the trial say that prosecuting counsel did put those points to him. The point is not to “rip him apart on the stand” as you put it. Juries don’t like overblown prosecution theatrics (or defence theatrics for that matter.) The aim is to make the inconsistencies, or lies if you prefer, clear to the jury in a calm and clear manner, using the evidence to build a strong narrative that will ultimately destroy the credibility of his defence in the juror’s minds.
I would be interested to know what you mean by “hard questions” that you say weren’t asked.
Owen
Thanks. Useful response. On the hard questions, I guess I feel he was left off the hook a bit on occasion.
1. He said he looked for a condom, after she asked him to do so, but he searched his bedroom and could not find one.He said Mr Olding later came into the room and she switched her attention to him. Q. What happened between looking for a condom and Olding coming in? Did he ask Olding for one? Did he not go downstairs and ask for one? I know that would be most mens first approach – find a condom.
2. “The last thing I want is a girl crying and leaving my house,… “I would have completely freaked out” Q. Did he not try contact the girl when he was told she had been upset in the watsapp group? Why not?
3. If he didn’t have sex with her, and nor did Olding, and she was not naked, how can he account for her blood on his bed?
The Old Boy
I will try to take those points in turn, hopefully without second-guessing prosecuting counsel and with the caveat that the media reports of trials are, in my experience, inadequately detailed.
1. Condoms – I don’t think this line of questioning would get very far. First, it would have to be asked as an open question, because there is no evidence to back any assertion that he either asked Olding for one or went downstairs to ask anyone. So, the exchange goes something like this:
Counsel: “Did you ask Mr Olding for a condom?”
Defendant: “No.”
C: “Why not?”
D: “I just didn’t.”
Likewise for asking downstairs. It comes to a dead end and counsel cannot press the point or make a bald assertion that he’s lying. You’re into the sort of territory when counsel’s only option is to do a stage wink at the jury.
I think the point about what happened was put to him and the sequence, according to Jackson was 1. Oral sex. 2. Olding enters room. 3. Jackson leaves room to look for condom, but I have to say I am not clear on that from the reports I have read. What is clear is that he says that Olding entered when they were engaged in a sexual act.
2. Contacting her the next day – Again counsel would have to ask the sort of open questions that lead inevitable to dead-end answers.
C: “Why didn’t you contact her when you heard she was upset?”
D: “I don’t know. Why should I. I had no reason to think she should be upset.”
So what we have is a man who didn’t ring his one-night stand the following day. It doesn’t advance the case in any way, so counsel really ought not to ask it.
3. This point has been put to Jackson, to which he replied that he penetrated her vagina with two fingers. He said that he got some blood on his fingers as a result, but that she didn’t express any pain or lack of consent and that the blood was “something to do with her period”.
some old queen
Strange how the police never recovered the clothes he was wearing. You would have assumed they would have bagged all non clean clothes at the scene.
Just a point on technology. Many people get nabbed by what they think is a clean device. If you are up to no good and want to remove evidence, it is actually quite difficult as forensics can rebuild nearly everything. Bringing a phone back to factory settings won’t even remove traces of loaded apps and there is a very specific procedure involved in wiping a laptop. It involves deep formatting of the hard drive 8 times or more with specific software.
If you are using social media or a communications tool then it is impossible.
Daisy Chainsaw
Female friend of Paddy Jackson: Well he never fisted or spitroasted me against my will, so he’s a sound guy.
Bernie
Well said , Starina, the group WhatsApp messages are very revealing, so different than the acting scenes we’re hearing about, played out in court.
Cian
Um. Can I just say that the persona that we project in a WhatsApp groups may be different to the “real” us.
Many people come across differently depending on context: a family group Vs friends. A group of men Vs a group of women Vs mixed group. Old Vs young. Real life Vs Broadsheet. Work Vs Play. Personally the amount/type of swearing I do is very dependant on audience.
I wouldn’t condemn a young fella acting all macho in an all-male WhatsApp group.
Note: This is a general statement. I don’t know the specifics of this case and am not defending any individuals.
Cloud
– Mr Jackson, are you a good boy from a good family?
– Yessir
– Did you go to a good school in a good area?
– Yessir
– I rest my case…I mean, case closed
david
Norton another given a ministerial post in return for propping up lirrle Leo verruca the failed minister of health with a failed cabinet
Seems Norton not only dose not listen to parents but dose not read the news reports from the UK which have pointed out that they have now solved the problem of rapid broadband in every village in the UK
Satellite technology simple cheap and not costing billions for fibre optic cable that seems to be impossible to deliver meanwhile as incompetence denies many rural people of broadband which they pay for
And do not get Dublin is fine and dandy
Meanwhile brexit looms and well enough said
some old queen
As it currently stands, satellite technology is not cheap, at least not from a consumer’s perspective, and is always data capped. It is also very weather dependant and is nowhere near fibre optic speeds. Because of the latency, it is difficult to have a voice conversation on WhatsApp and near impossible to do a camera on Skype.
Cian
Stop with the facts!
We want pitchforks!
some old queen
In fairness I had the ‘pleasure’ of knowing someone who worked on the broadband rollout. As project managers go, he would have made a good hairdresser.
https://twitter.com/Barnardos_IRL/status/971040248280076289?s=19
Gerry Adams…. and the Barnardos missing kids campaign.
Ah, here… >_<
Perhaps Gerry is giving them pointers on how to ensure they remain well and truly ‘missing’.
Did you see the comments beneath the post on twitter….? I think the oversight has been noted.
@Clampers: the party has expertise in the area of missing mums and dads, so SF’s got that goin’ for them.
While Gerry’s niece was having her childhood stolen by his brother, which he knew about, he did everything he possibly could to protect his own reputation.
Then Mary Lou went on the national airwaves to defend the indefensible.
Never let her forget she’s a sycophantic parasite and you can expect her to be on the airwaves again today celebrating International Women’s Day. What a hypocrite.
You know, I would feel so much sympathy for Paddy Jackson if we didn’t know for an actual fact that he was laughing about the girl being in hysterics and “it was never going to end well” via the WhatsApp messages. He’s been coached by his solicitors to the hilt.
No matter what’s the outcome of this case, he’s rotten. Arrogant little (I can say little as I passed him outside the Shelbourne one day and was surprised that I was taller than he) git.
Exactly, “I would have never let her leave if she was crying… “, and in watsapp its all “another Belfast sl*t / we’re all great shaggers etc”. Bare in mind he knew the next day she was upset when they all went for lunch. Why didn’t he call her then?
Wwhy has nobody ripped him apart on the stand? There seems to be continuous errors in their statements / inconsistencies / and the text etc, and no hard questions were asked. Was he not allowed be questioned?
The news reports of the trial say that prosecuting counsel did put those points to him. The point is not to “rip him apart on the stand” as you put it. Juries don’t like overblown prosecution theatrics (or defence theatrics for that matter.) The aim is to make the inconsistencies, or lies if you prefer, clear to the jury in a calm and clear manner, using the evidence to build a strong narrative that will ultimately destroy the credibility of his defence in the juror’s minds.
I would be interested to know what you mean by “hard questions” that you say weren’t asked.
Thanks. Useful response. On the hard questions, I guess I feel he was left off the hook a bit on occasion.
1. He said he looked for a condom, after she asked him to do so, but he searched his bedroom and could not find one.He said Mr Olding later came into the room and she switched her attention to him. Q. What happened between looking for a condom and Olding coming in? Did he ask Olding for one? Did he not go downstairs and ask for one? I know that would be most mens first approach – find a condom.
2. “The last thing I want is a girl crying and leaving my house,… “I would have completely freaked out” Q. Did he not try contact the girl when he was told she had been upset in the watsapp group? Why not?
3. If he didn’t have sex with her, and nor did Olding, and she was not naked, how can he account for her blood on his bed?
I will try to take those points in turn, hopefully without second-guessing prosecuting counsel and with the caveat that the media reports of trials are, in my experience, inadequately detailed.
1. Condoms – I don’t think this line of questioning would get very far. First, it would have to be asked as an open question, because there is no evidence to back any assertion that he either asked Olding for one or went downstairs to ask anyone. So, the exchange goes something like this:
Counsel: “Did you ask Mr Olding for a condom?”
Defendant: “No.”
C: “Why not?”
D: “I just didn’t.”
Likewise for asking downstairs. It comes to a dead end and counsel cannot press the point or make a bald assertion that he’s lying. You’re into the sort of territory when counsel’s only option is to do a stage wink at the jury.
I think the point about what happened was put to him and the sequence, according to Jackson was 1. Oral sex. 2. Olding enters room. 3. Jackson leaves room to look for condom, but I have to say I am not clear on that from the reports I have read. What is clear is that he says that Olding entered when they were engaged in a sexual act.
2. Contacting her the next day – Again counsel would have to ask the sort of open questions that lead inevitable to dead-end answers.
C: “Why didn’t you contact her when you heard she was upset?”
D: “I don’t know. Why should I. I had no reason to think she should be upset.”
So what we have is a man who didn’t ring his one-night stand the following day. It doesn’t advance the case in any way, so counsel really ought not to ask it.
3. This point has been put to Jackson, to which he replied that he penetrated her vagina with two fingers. He said that he got some blood on his fingers as a result, but that she didn’t express any pain or lack of consent and that the blood was “something to do with her period”.
Strange how the police never recovered the clothes he was wearing. You would have assumed they would have bagged all non clean clothes at the scene.
Just a point on technology. Many people get nabbed by what they think is a clean device. If you are up to no good and want to remove evidence, it is actually quite difficult as forensics can rebuild nearly everything. Bringing a phone back to factory settings won’t even remove traces of loaded apps and there is a very specific procedure involved in wiping a laptop. It involves deep formatting of the hard drive 8 times or more with specific software.
If you are using social media or a communications tool then it is impossible.
Female friend of Paddy Jackson: Well he never fisted or spitroasted me against my will, so he’s a sound guy.
Well said , Starina, the group WhatsApp messages are very revealing, so different than the acting scenes we’re hearing about, played out in court.
Um. Can I just say that the persona that we project in a WhatsApp groups may be different to the “real” us.
Many people come across differently depending on context: a family group Vs friends. A group of men Vs a group of women Vs mixed group. Old Vs young. Real life Vs Broadsheet. Work Vs Play. Personally the amount/type of swearing I do is very dependant on audience.
I wouldn’t condemn a young fella acting all macho in an all-male WhatsApp group.
Note: This is a general statement. I don’t know the specifics of this case and am not defending any individuals.
– Mr Jackson, are you a good boy from a good family?
– Yessir
– Did you go to a good school in a good area?
– Yessir
– I rest my case…I mean, case closed
Norton another given a ministerial post in return for propping up lirrle Leo verruca the failed minister of health with a failed cabinet
Seems Norton not only dose not listen to parents but dose not read the news reports from the UK which have pointed out that they have now solved the problem of rapid broadband in every village in the UK
Satellite technology simple cheap and not costing billions for fibre optic cable that seems to be impossible to deliver meanwhile as incompetence denies many rural people of broadband which they pay for
And do not get Dublin is fine and dandy
Meanwhile brexit looms and well enough said
As it currently stands, satellite technology is not cheap, at least not from a consumer’s perspective, and is always data capped. It is also very weather dependant and is nowhere near fibre optic speeds. Because of the latency, it is difficult to have a voice conversation on WhatsApp and near impossible to do a camera on Skype.
Stop with the facts!
We want pitchforks!
In fairness I had the ‘pleasure’ of knowing someone who worked on the broadband rollout. As project managers go, he would have made a good hairdresser.