I am not legally trained.
I also must state from the offset that this post is not intended to inflame the current situation. I do not condone rape in any way. It is an abhorrent heinous crime that affects the victim for the rest of their lives.
In the case in hand however I cannot understand how a miscarriage of justice has not occurred.
The facts as I read them are that two footballers (fifteen minutes apart if not at the same time) had intercourse with a girl who was too intoxicated to consent. I think, though I am happy to be corrected, that this is the case.
I also understand that the law states that a rape has occurred if someone has intercourse with somebody they know cannot consent. Again, please correct me if I am wrong on this. However if I am right, if the victim was too intoxicated to consent and both footballers knew this, then on the facts of the case, both men are guilty of rape.
If this is indeed the case, then a miscarriage must have occurred, as one was convicted and one was not. It therefore follows that potentially the jury misunderstood what the law actually is.
Does it not then follow that if the first footballer was not guilty of the crime then neither was the second. I can’t see anything to say that the girl became intoxicated in the fifteen minute period between the two meetings.
Quite simply, without incurring any abuse or the wrath of the public in general, I simply want clarification on this point. How was one found not guilty and the other guilty? That’s all.
Could someone please let me know?