I think your stance might become a bit less certain if you were experiencing the shame and associated fallout of just having been anally raped.
Printable View
Article is a bit mental to say the least, some properly damning stuff in there.
Similarly though some grey areas too.
Ronaldo also has previous, with a "rape" claim against him back in October 2005 when he was a 20 year old with Man United.
Quote from The Guardian 25th Nov 2005:
"Manchester United footballer Cristiano Ronaldo will not face criminal charges over allegations that he raped a woman in a London hotel, police said last night. Ronaldo, 20, was questioned last month after two women made an allegation of rape against him and another man.
The Portuguese winger has denied the accusations.
A spokeswoman for Scotland Yard said the decision was made after the crown prosecution service had decided there was insufficient evidence to prosecute"
[QUOTE=Lennon's Lip;5566356]Ronaldo also has previous, with a "rape" claim against him back in October 2005 when he was a 20 year old with Man United.
Quote from The Guardian 25th Nov 2005:
"Manchester United footballer Cristiano Ronaldo will not face criminal charges over allegations that he raped a woman in a London hotel, police said last night. Ronaldo, 20, was questioned last month after two women made an allegation of rape against him and another man.
The Portuguese winger has denied the accusations.
[COLOR=#ff0000]A spokeswoman for Scotland Yard said the decision was made after the crown prosecution service had decided there was insufficient evidence to prosecute[B]"
Or you could say - Ronaldo has previous for doing nothing wrong at all.
[QUOTE=Newry Hibs;5566362]Previous as in: He has previous claims against him.
One claim against you might be dismissed, with the benefit of the doubt given, but 2 claims of rape suggests perhaps something a bit more sinister and warrants a deeper investigation.
Anyone else got unproven rape allegations against them on here?
Seems to be a common thing
It would appear that the young lady has suffered horrific injuries somehow, reported it and has been silenced by fear.
Whatever has happened, she must have been through hell in this process.i
Interesting that the lawyer has called the der spiegal report ‘illegal’.
Not false, just illegal.
a very strange situation, she allegedly couldnt remember where the incident had taken place or a description of her attacker, he must be one of the most famous people on the planet, thats not to say she wasnt given something but dont think that has ever been suggested or reported
on most of the reports, pretty sure it was the police who said this
Conversely, without this kind of reporting the profile of sexual abuse of children by perverted individuals associated with football never have had the publicity that encouraged more and more victims to come forward.
Too many restrictions would suit the beasts, yes there can be damage through unfounded allegations, but we have a free press and without that the activities of many depraved individuals would have remained uninvestigated.
I don't get why it's the super rich, global superstar that people are feeling sorry for here.
Even if Ronaldo never plays football again he'll be sitting on more cash than I could ever dream of. In no way will Hibs life be ruined.
If we've learned anything over the last few of years it's that those in power are skilled at hiding their crimes behind NDA's and lawyers. The last thing they need is more protection whilst victims have their actual lives ruined and if they dare say something, are savaged online.
As well as sitting up and listening women, agreements like this should be banned. I can't understand how it's ethical for a lawyer to profit from something like this either.
I'm not sure why exposing a fact (the Guardian newpaper article) makes my post "terrible". It is what it is.
The said article has been read by millions already.
That first claim against Ronaldo is only now thrown into light and revisited because a 2nd claim of "rape" has been levelled at Ronaldo. This 2nd claim of rape is all the more sinister and telling because Ronaldo "paid her off" in the hope of "silencing her"
The first claim was dropped through insufficient evidence.
Insufficient evidence does not equate to the accused being innocent.
If only Jimmy Saville had been exposed by the media when the initial and early rumours and accusations were doing the rounds.
Same goes for Clement Freud and the long line of rich and powerful who use their money and influence to "cover up" and "bury" crimes.
And by the same token people like Graham Stack have spent the last 10 years or so being called a beast by tens of thousands of people every week for something he was found not guilty of. Which is the reason it shouldn’t be made public imo.
If you could guarantee the guys who’s names were getting released we’re going to be found guilty then bash on and name them ASAP. But that can’t be guaranteed and so they should all have their names kept anonymous until convicted.
How often is the not proven verdict used in Scotland out of interest?