#42905
There’s a certain, still on a club’s books ex-Sale (many other clubs too) player who is with a lady who is over 40. He also had form for misbehaving in clubs… Would explain why the person I’m thinking of has not played for his club in quite a while.

Very bad affair if true.
#42913
I am not sure why this has been pasted up on this board. There is nothing to
suggest a Sale player (ex or otherwise ) is connected to this in the article.
What purpose does it serve?
Where are the suggestions that it was a Manchester nightclub? Again , not in the posted
article.
This incident is a very bad affair if true, but the idle speculation can only cause more
upset and harm.
Flumpty, Olyy, Bucks1861 and 2 others liked this
#42919
ShawSharkRedemption wrote:
Wed Jan 12, 2022 7:06 am
I am not sure why this has been pasted up on this board. There is nothing to
suggest a Sale player (ex or otherwise ) is connected to this in the article.
What purpose does it serve?
Where are the suggestions that it was a Manchester nightclub? Again , not in the posted
article.
This incident is a very bad affair if true, but the idle speculation can only cause more
upset and harm.
I don’t agree with further speculation, hard news will inevitably follow soon enough.

But, ShawShark, it is widely reported in national press reports that this incident took place in Manchester. Greater Manchester Police are directly quoted, for example by The Sun.
“A Greater Manchester Police spokesman said: “Officers were called shortly before 11am on Sunday 9th January to a report of a sexual assault on a female. “

https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/17292708 ... nightclub/

Therefore I’m not surprised that it popped up on here rather than elsewhere.

Basic research really.
By Olyy
#42928
Pretty disgusting how people have latched onto the idea that it's him with zero proof or hint or anything

Being big headed in his youth means he's the obvious suspect in a heinous situation like this?
Give your head a wobble
Flumpty, Alex liked this
#42930
The speed on which people on forums and Twitter jumped on Cipriani is astounding. The fact media were camped outside of their home is awful. Can just turn into a witch hunt.

A brief review of 29 year old England Internationals (former if you go by the guardian) somewhat narrows the field. You then tie that in with either recently deleted or locked (made private) social media accounts adds to suspicion. If you were to limit it to Sale players, it could identify a potential person. HOWEVER - until the police release the name of the suspect, I would suggest that no one else does. We can all do our digging, it’s a natural thing for people to do, but for all the investigation you do you’ll never be certain until it’s confirmed by the police and there are potential legal risks about naming people who could ultimately have nothing to do with it!
#42947
This would appear to confirm the Manchester link, but I think we are clear - only two English 29 year olds by my calculations, and while both have made the squad, neither would really be described as ex-International.

I've seen the word Rugby used a lot in this, but neither Union or League.
By WillC
#42948
Carlos wrote:
Wed Jan 12, 2022 3:50 pm
This would appear to confirm the Manchester link, but I think we are clear - only two English 29 year olds by my calculations, and while both have made the squad, neither would really be described as ex-International.

I've seen the word Rugby used a lot in this, but neither Union or League.
On the BBC the story is on the Union page, not League
#42960
HR1861 wrote:
Wed Jan 12, 2022 4:46 pm
Moderators, I think you should remove this thread.

Let people do their own digging if they want, but this board surely isn't meant to be for such issues.

Disagree. It’s news, it’s rugby. However unpleasant and revolting the alleged offence, it’s perfectly acceptable to discuss it. Not to speculate as to guilt or innocence, but not to ignore either.
#42984
Sorry if this appears controversial and sorry to be picky, but there currently is no "poor little girl". The offence is alleged. Despite the traffic divisions best efforts, innocent until proven guilty is still a basic tenet of British law. The most important one, in my opinion.
WillC liked this
By Row Z
#43039
A girl has been put in a position where she feels the need to go to the police. Irrespective of the outcome, my heart goes out to the girl who no doubt feels her world is collapsing around her right now.

For it to meet the burden of evidence for an arrest it’s simply beyond possible that it’s entirely fabricated. That doesn’t prove guilt, but it certainly demonstrates that something has gone badly wrong and she must be in an awful position. I feel for the poor girl.
45jumper, HerefordShark, Bucks1861 and 4 others liked this
#43047
Row Z wrote: For it to meet the burden of evidence for an arrest it’s simply beyond possible that it’s entirely fabricated.
You have a terrible habit of talking in absolutes, and if there's one thing you should never ever do, it's talk in absolutes.

He's been arrested, but to the best of my knowledge, not charged yet, so to say it's incontrovertible that it's entirely fabricated is nonsense, there's any number of scenarios where this could feasibly be entirely fabricated, equally it's entirely possible that it's not, or that it's far worse than has been reported. That's why we have a criminal justice system.
SimonG liked this
By Row Z
#43050
Aside from anything else, the absolute brilliance of this (I am sure) deliberately tautological statement is beyond reproach... unless it of course was not, I cant be absolutely certain:

"one thing you should never ever do, it's talk in absolutes."



Okay, lets put it another way, I would happily wager all of the money in my pocket, against all of the money in your pocket, that this does not end in the girl being put in jail for the perverting the course of justice having been found to have absolutely fabricated *every* part of the situation.

Which is why, I believe there should be sympathy for the situation the girl finds herself in. I'm entirely open to it being down to interpretations and suchlike, which is why we have a criminal justice system. The accused is still innocent until proven guilty in the eyes of the law. This does not mean that the law decides whether or not an event happened - that is already historical fact. It's just that anyone who was not there and not party to the events does not know. The law decides if there is a burden of proof to convict, and if it is in the public interest to prosecute (Actually the other way round). By making an arrest they have made the first assessment that there is, prima facie, enough to suggest at this time that it is a matter for the courts.

Of course you knew all of that, as did everyone else, and it was simply easier to abbreviate.

Have a nice day.
#43051
Aside from anything else, the absolute brilliance of this (I am sure) deliberately tautological statement is beyond reproach... unless it of course was not, I cant be absolutely certain:

"one thing you should never ever do, it's talk in absolutes."
Have another read of it and see if you can spot the joke. Take your time.
Okay, lets put it another way, I would happily wager all of the money in my pocket, against all of the money in your pocket, that this does not end in the girl being put in jail for the perverting the course of justice having been found to have absolutely fabricated *every* part of the situation.
And there you go again, just like in the Sanderson thread, stating an absolute and insisting that it's the only possible scenario. She doesn't have to be put in jail for perverting the course of justice, the charges could either not be made in the first place or subsequently dropped.
Which is why, I believe there should be sympathy for the situation the girl finds herself in.
Which is supposition on your part despite not being in full possession of the facts.
The accused is still innocent until proven guilty in the eyes of the law. This does not mean that the law decides whether or not an event happened - that is already historical fact.
Um, that's exactly what the law does. You're determining that a rape took place despite it not having been proven (in both senses of the word) in a court of law. In doing so you undermine the supposition of innocent until proven guilty because if it's a "historical fact" that something happened justifying the arrest, then according to your logic the accused is automatically guilty because under the circumstances as you've determined them they can't be anything but.
By making an arrest they have made the first assessment that there is, prima facie, enough to suggest at this time that it is a matter for the courts.
Which doesn't assume guilt or otherwise (which is what you're doing), or whether either party is telling the truth. That's for the court to decide.
Of course you knew all of that, as did everyone else, and it was simply easier to abbreviate.
And there you go again. There can't possibly be any other interpretation than RowZ's, whom everybody knows is right. You're not Dominic Cummings are you?
SimonG, wrinklieshark, WillC liked this
By Row Z
#43052
Thanks for the engagement. I'll move on swiftly after simply pointing out that stating something that has already happened is a historical fact. This is entirely different to whether or not those facts are known, understood and agreed upon. Nothing will change the historical fact, but of course our knowledge and interpretation of it may vary wildly over time and given our own perspective.

This does not equate to me determining a rape has taken place at all. Ludicrous. It is also highly unlikely that a court will determine if a rape has taken place or not, they will assess on the balance of evidence whether the evidence available supports the accusation, and whether the evidence supports the conviction of the accused. Wildly different things.

But to be in this position the girl deserves sympathy, and to go back to the original point, is a 'poor little girl' at this stage. To vehemently stand up for the accused's 'Innocent until proven guilty' position, yet be at pains to stress she is not innocent (and deserving of sympathy for being in this position in her life) until *proven innocent* is both inconsistent, and at best a little bit crappy. At best. n.b You did not do this sir, but someone else above did. It is that which I am responding to. But I have work to do. Have a good day.
#43054
after simply pointing out that stating something that has already happened is a historical fact. This is entirely different to whether or not those facts are known, understood and agreed upon. Nothing will change the historical fact,
The historical fact is that an arrest has taken place on the basis of an accusation by one party, anything beyond that, including sympathy for any party is pure speculation.
This does not equate to me determining a rape has taken place at all. Ludicrous.
Except an expression of sympathy does. Because if it hadn't why would you be expressing sympathy with her? You're already prejudging the facts without being in possession of them.
But to be in this position the girl deserves sympathy, and to go back to the original point, is a 'poor little girl' at this stage.
How can you be certain?

And just to be clear I'm very much not picking sides in this at all.
SimonG liked this
By Row Z
#43124
Incredible.

You do realise that juries don’t have the ability to change history or time travel? They assess evidence to determine legal outcomes? What a jury decides does not go back in time and change events. You get that right? What has happened has happened and literally nothing will change that. No matter what we know or find out it doesn’t change past events. You get that right?

You do also realise that you can have sympathy for someone being in a bad spot in their life without assuming a rape has taken place.

You do realise that I have never once said what happened, or prejudged the outcome of any future case. Just said I have sympathy for someone whose life is in such a bad spot that they have (for any reason) gone to the police and made accusations of awful events. I can’t imagine how bad things must be in any scenario, for any reason to do that. That deserves some sympathy in my view.

Blandly calling out ‘innocent until proven guilty’ whilst *simultaneously* showing no empathy or concern for the girl (for any reason, but clearly in these cases employing the standard of ‘suspicious until proven innocent’ on the alleged victim) is either a lack of brains or a lack of morals. Judge Pickles would be proud.
By Row Z
#43127
This does not equate to me determining a rape has taken place at all. Ludicrous.
Except an expression of sympathy does. Because if it hadn't why would you be expressing sympathy with her? You're already prejudging the facts without being in possession of them.



1. Sorry. I really don’t know how to quote things properly on here.
2. Let us imagine a wildly hypothetical and entirely fabricated position where someone’s life has stoopped so low that for EXTREME reasons of need, greed, jealousy, hatred, confusion, paranoia, or any other scenario that they are willing to risk fabricating a wild fantasy about someone entirely innocent commuting an horrific act on them. This fantasy is so driven in their mind that they’re willing to go through an outrageously horrific ideal at the hands of the police being forensically examined and humiliated mentally and physically and presumably willing to be dragged through court and possibly outed in public. To be seen by the world as some form of damaged goods or victim. They see that as worthy because of everything wrong in their mind. Their mind is so warped this is worth doing. They don’t have the capacity to consider the abhorrent harm their fabrication does to others. Their world is so skewed this somehow makes sense.

Even amongst the disgust and contempt you would have for this person you can’t comprehend that someone somewhere would have some form sympathy towards the horrific situation of someone being so f**ked up in the first place?

If anyone did have any degree of sympathy towards this warped person they are somehow also accepting their fantasy is true?

You CAN have sympathy without prejudging what happened. Of course you can.
Last edited by Row Z on Sat Jan 15, 2022 8:37 am, edited 1 time in total.
By Row Z
#43128
Finally - I’ll leave it there. This is a rugby forum and I/We are way off topic for rugby other than this (allegedly) involves a rugby player. I appreciate your discussion, Mr Poynton, if not the meatheaded views of others. I’ll leave them to shout into the void from hereon in.
#43130
You know when the stadium announcer starts to give the latest scores from games you’re recording at home and want to watch later?

Yep, thumbs firmly in ears, fingers waggling, loud tuneless laa-laas for at least a full minute…….

The “I’m not listening anymore” exit to any debate is disappointing, and carries an air of “well, you lot are too stupid to understand me, so I’m off” to my ears anyway.

I’d been enjoying the argument, if not the subject matter.
Flumpty, chris1850, SimonG liked this
#43136
And I immediately break my own promise.

I'll start with an admission that my view on such things is tainted by an awful experience. A friend of mine had his life ruined by a fabricated, malicious accusation of this nature. He was arrested and indeed charged, those charges were dropped before reaching court and he was completely exonerated. The problem was that upon arrest his name was out, he was immediately vilified, his daughter (12 yo at the time) was abused and bullied by strangers and former friends alike, children and adults. He had been a business owner, that business collapsed, his customers chose to travel 50km to the nearest alternative. He and his family moved away, he committed suicide a year later. I know, 100% that he was innocent, he was with me at the time he was accused 450km away from the fabricated incident. So no, I don't have immediate sympathy for all of the "poor little girls", in my friend's case she was a narcissistic, greedy opportunist in my view.

Of course, that doesn't mean that they all are, indeed the majority are not, just that I am wary.

Dolly

I doubt any backs will be looking to leave Quins[…]

Saracens (A) Challenge Cup

Well for those among you who are still doing permu[…]

Team S'Up vs Th'Ospreys

Only Dewi Lake and Adam Beard make the match day 2[…]