It was rape, say police

[SpaceMonkey]

The police never said there was evidence that the woman was raped.

channel 10 just annouced differently on the preveiw

Let's try to explain this one more time. The officer said there was evidence a rape occured. He then went on to say that evidence for rape and evidence for consensual sex can be the same. There has already been an admission of consensual sex with the girl.

Make sense now ??

You still miss the point. The police officer said that the evidence was consistent with consensual sex under certain circumstances. Bruises and abrasions are not consistent with normal consensual sex, which is, I assume what the Bulldogs player has admitted to. There is still an inconsistency.

 

[Raider_69]

The police never said there was evidence that the woman was raped.

channel 10 just annouced differently on the preveiw

Let's try to explain this one more time. The officer said there was evidence a rape occured. He then went on to say that evidence for rape and evidence for consensual sex can be the same. There has already been an admission of consensual sex with the girl.

Make sense now ??

explain it as much as you like
FACT: Many league fans and a large proportion of the general public still believe a question mark hangs over the players innocence

its not going to court only because of lack of evidence, that dosnt prove them guilty OR INNOCENT, thus the question mark

GET IT?!

 

[dice]

Having sex in a pool is bringing the game into disrepute? Hmmmm.....maybe it is....I must admit this is not my area of expertise. So yes, what should the penalty be....and be careful to remember the precedents already set for bringing the game into disrepute and there have been a few.

Judging by the lack of action in the Gower exposure incident I doubt the NRL would do much.

Are you actually a QC?

 

[Raider_69]

There is evidence of rape
now my problem is now there is a question mark
there is evidence so she COULD have been raped but their isnt enough evidence with indicates that their may not have been a rap

fact is for everyone but a bulldogs fan there is a question mark

That's ridiculous. So for every rape allegation we have to assume guilt, even though it may have only been consesual sex, because the evidence for rape and the evidence for consensual sex can be the same.

my god your dumb
ill try one more time

I AM NOT ASSUMING THE PLAYERS ARE INNOCENT OR GUILTY, THERE IS EVIDENCE OF RAPE, BUT NOT ENOUGH FOR COURT, THAT NEITHER PROVES GUILTY OR INNOCENCE...

 

[The General]

The police never said there was evidence that the woman was raped.

channel 10 just annouced differently on the preveiw

Let's try to explain this one more time. The officer said there was evidence a rape occured. He then went on to say that evidence for rape and evidence for consensual sex can be the same. There has already been an admission of consensual sex with the girl.

Make sense now ??

You still miss the point. The police officer said that the evidence was consistent with consensual sex under certain circumstances. Bruises and abrasions are not consistent with normal consensual sex, which is, I assume what the Bulldogs player has admitted to. There is still an inconsistency.

Who's to say these injuries occured due to a sexual act ? Who to say they didn't occur when she had consensual group sex with a number of players? Who's to say they didn't occur when she had consensual sex with a player near the pool are (which is most likely concreted). This still doesn't mean a rape DID occur.

 

[Pensacola Q.C]

The police never said there was evidence that the woman was raped.

channel 10 just annouced differently on the preveiw

Let's try to explain this one more time. The officer said there was evidence a rape occured. He then went on to say that evidence for rape and evidence for consensual sex can be the same. There has already been an admission of consensual sex with the girl.

Make sense now ??

You still miss the point. The police officer said that the evidence was consistent with consensual sex under certain circumstances. Bruises and abrasions are not consistent with normal consensual sex, which is, I assume what the Bulldogs player has admitted to. There is still an inconsistency.

And what about the witness report that suggested the girl was engaging in oral sex with a male who was not a Bulldog member? Given the facts that her timeline and version of events have been called into question, how do we know that others other than Dog players were not responsible for a condition that lead police to think may be consistent with a sexual assault?

 

[Raider_69]

The police never said there was evidence that the woman was raped.

channel 10 just annouced differently on the preveiw

Let's try to explain this one more time. The officer said there was evidence a rape occured. He then went on to say that evidence for rape and evidence for consensual sex can be the same. There has already been an admission of consensual sex with the girl.

Make sense now ??

You still miss the point. The police officer said that the evidence was consistent with consensual sex under certain circumstances. Bruises and abrasions are not consistent with normal consensual sex, which is, I assume what the Bulldogs player has admitted to. There is still an inconsistency.

Who's to say these injuries occured due to a sexual act ? Who to say they didn't occur when she had consensual group sex with a number of players? Who's to say they didn't occur when she had consensual sex with a player near the pool are (which is most likely concreted). This still doesn't mean a rape DID occur.

Dosnt mean a rape DIDN'T occur either
hence most bar bulldogs fans still question the players innocence

 

[The General]

There is evidence of rape
now my problem is now there is a question mark
there is evidence so she COULD have been raped but their isnt enough evidence with indicates that their may not have been a rap

fact is for everyone but a bulldogs fan there is a question mark

That's ridiculous. So for every rape allegation we have to assume guilt, even though it may have only been consesual sex, because the evidence for rape and the evidence for consensual sex can be the same.

my god your dumb
ill try one more time

I AM NOT ASSUMING THE PLAYERS ARE INNOCENT OR GUILTY, THERE IS EVIDENCE OF RAPE, BUT NOT ENOUGH FOR COURT, THAT NEITHER PROVES GUILTY OR INNOCENCE...

But in the eyes of the law a person is either innocent or guilty. No charges have been laid. Does that not make the players innocent ??

 

[Pensacola Q.C]

And can someone explain to me why she was unable to identify any of her alleged attackers from photos?

There are inconsistencies regarding the Bulldogs? I think there are many more regarding the accuser.

 

[mickdo]

No, in court you are innocent until proven guilty.

 

[Generalissimo Stalin]

The police never said there was evidence that the woman was raped.

channel 10 just annouced differently on the preveiw

Let's try to explain this one more time. The officer said there was evidence a rape occured. He then went on to say that evidence for rape and evidence for consensual sex can be the same. There has already been an admission of consensual sex with the girl.

Make sense now ??

the admission of concensual sex was by a player and not by the woman. so all it boiled down to was x number of people said this happened including 2 11th hour witnesses against the version of events stated by 1 person - the women with no witnessed to her verify her version of events.

how come i had 4 witnesses who verified my account of events in relation to a motor vehicle offence and the police only 1 ( an off duty police officer in the car that booked me) and i lost in court??? - oh that's right when it's the police one police officers account is the only one taken into account no matter how many witnesses you have. the sytems better in Russia just pay the police to avoid being booked.

 

[CouldaBeenAnything]

Agreed my learned friend

 

[Raider_69]

exactly in the eyes of the law
not the general public who are able to be in the gray area

the law is black and white, unfortunatly this incident is NOT, there for by the law they are innocent, but to the general public their innocence has a question mark over it

 

[Pensacola Q.C]

The police never said there was evidence that the woman was raped.

channel 10 just annouced differently on the preveiw

Let's try to explain this one more time. The officer said there was evidence a rape occured. He then went on to say that evidence for rape and evidence for consensual sex can be the same. There has already been an admission of consensual sex with the girl.

Make sense now ??

You still miss the point. The police officer said that the evidence was consistent with consensual sex under certain circumstances. Bruises and abrasions are not consistent with normal consensual sex, which is, I assume what the Bulldogs player has admitted to. There is still an inconsistency.

Who's to say these injuries occured due to a sexual act ? Who to say they didn't occur when she had consensual group sex with a number of players? Who's to say they didn't occur when she had consensual sex with a player near the pool are (which is most likely concreted). This still doesn't mean a rape DID occur.

Dosnt mean a rape DIDN'T occur either
hence most bar bulldogs fans still question the players innocence

You're brain-dead.

 

[mickdo]

And can someone explain to me why she was unable to identify any of her alleged attackers from photos?

There are various possibilities - different haircuts, she may have only been face to face with some of them, etc...
And she did identify some of them, just not all of them...

 

[Raider_69]

The police never said there was evidence that the woman was raped.

channel 10 just annouced differently on the preveiw

Let's try to explain this one more time. The officer said there was evidence a rape occured. He then went on to say that evidence for rape and evidence for consensual sex can be the same. There has already been an admission of consensual sex with the girl.

Make sense now ??

You still miss the point. The police officer said that the evidence was consistent with consensual sex under certain circumstances. Bruises and abrasions are not consistent with normal consensual sex, which is, I assume what the Bulldogs player has admitted to. There is still an inconsistency.

Who's to say these injuries occured due to a sexual act ? Who to say they didn't occur when she had consensual group sex with a number of players? Who's to say they didn't occur when she had consensual sex with a player near the pool are (which is most likely concreted). This still doesn't mean a rape DID occur.

Dosnt mean a rape DIDN'T occur either
hence most bar bulldogs fans still question the players innocence

You're brain-dead.

the irony is a work of art
can you honestly not see how people can still doubt their innocence?

 

[The General]

Dosnt mean a rape DIDN'T occur either
hence most bar bulldogs fans still question the players innocence

Except for a few things:

* DNA tests proved nothing
* She lied about her reason for going to the hotel
* Her own friend contradicts many statements she made
* The time given for the alleged rape is not consistent with eye witness statements

And a lot of other things I can't be bothered repeating.

 

[Raider_69]

But if a decision was clear cut about their innocence as many of you dogs fans believe it is, the young female would be in a fair amount of strife

the police are unsure of what really happened, this is due to a variety of things but fact is they can not say with certainity either way, so how can dog fans?

 

[Unreal V]

Although there is no evidence of rape their is clearly enough evidence that the dogs have brought the game once more into the gutter. If the management at Belmore can fall on their swords the players should also have to pay a price.

The NRL and the Bulldogs management will need to stamp their authority and send a message that the type of behaviour displayed by the players in question will not be tolerated. The players should be named, shamed and then banished from the playing field; to do less, to attempt to cover up will only send the message that boys will be boys and they will be protected.

It may not have been rape, but surely it was not a moral and sound act, surely as representatives of the NRL these players have a duty to act in a manner be fitting their status. If they truly beleive they have done nothing wrong then they should at least come clean with their side of the story; a little emmabarssing to say the least.

If the NRL wants the code to be a family code, if the bulldogs still want to be known as the family club then they will have to show the moral conviction that comes with such a title

 

[Pensacola Q.C]

[/quote]

the irony is a work of art
can you honestly not see how people can still doubt their innocence?[/quote]

Anything can be doubted but due process has been followed and the police findings have been made public. I'm not 100% sure because I wasn't there but this is the system we have and I'm confident that justice has been delivered.

Can people not get over it?