Why Paddy Jackson may never truly shake notoriety of the Belfast rape trial

Ellen Coyne on the impact of the case, its aftermath for the acquitted — and the gruelling process for the woman at its centre, which is to be dramatised on TV

THE Belfast rape trial existed in two worlds, which were sometimes in direct conflict with each other. First of all, there was the Belfast rape trial that played out in a small court on the banks of the River Lagan: with the word of one woman on one side, the word of four men on the other. The jury had a binary choice: guilty or not guilty.

Then there was the Belfast rape trial that played out in the court of public opinion. This had none of the precision of a legal process, none of the certainty of a verdict. This was not the criminal justice system, there is no requirement to wait for someone to meet the threshold of a crime before passing judgment.

And judgment was meted out, rightly or wrongly, on everyone and everything associated with the high-profile trial: the woman, the men, the legal system, rugby culture, rape culture.

In 2018, Ulster and Ireland rugby player Paddy Jackson was found not guilty of rape and assault after a nine-week trial that gripped the island of Ireland. Stuart Olding, his then teammate, was found not guilty of rape. Their friend Blane Mcilroy was found not guilty of exposure. And a fourth man, Rory Harrison, was found not guilty of concealing evidence and attempting to pervert the course of justice.

The names of the men involved — Olding and Jackson in particular — may never shake the notoriety that the trial brought on them.

And this week, it emerged that there are plans to turn the trial that shook a country into a TV drama.

The Irish Independent first reported that a six-episode series, titled #Ibelieveher , is in the works. And Jackson has now raised concerns about a lack of communication about the plans for it.

A statement issued through Jackson’s solicitor, Kevin Winters of KRW Law, said: “As long as the outworkings of any such production are consistent with the innocence of those accused, then we don’t have a problem. Indeed, we would really welcome that.

“There needs to be engagement with the complainant and witnesses as well. Given the huge sensitivities around this case, that should be taken as a given.

“However, I’m concerned we are off to a bad start as I’ve no information at all that anyone has been contacted about this. We will take steps now to address that information deficit.”

A lawyer for Olding declined to comment. It is not known if the woman at the centre of the trial is involved.

Before the trial, both Olding and Jackson were tipped to have bright careers continuing playing rugby for Ulster or Ireland. But when the trial ended with unanimous not guilty verdicts, the debate that it ignited kept going.

One of the elements of the trial that would prove difficult for the rugby players to shake were texts about sex and women that were exchanged among the men. Some of the texts had been deleted, but were later recovered.

They variously referenced “sluts getting f ***** ,” “spit roasting,” and bravado about “legends” and “top shaggers”.

The timing of the trial was pertinent. In 2018, the whole world was in the throes of a global #Metoo movement that was completely redrawing the debate about sexual assault, consent and rape culture.

The texts and the perceptions they created about derogatory attitudes to women became a completely separate issue to the trial and the eventual not guilty verdicts.

Unlike in the Republic, defendants in UK rape trials can be named.

This meant that the Belfast rape trial had already attracted massive attention when it emerged that rugby stars Olding and Jackson were among the four accused.

Rugby in general had already suffered from perceptions of entitlement.

A debate about rugby culture had already started when Ireland captain Rory Best showed at the trial, after being listed as a character witness for Jackson. (He was never called to give evidence.)

The trial took place right in the middle of the 2018 Six Nations tournament, and a fan at one of Ireland’s games held up a tricolour with the words “I BELIEVE HER” on it. Online, a social media campaign under the hashtag #notmycaptain also criticised Best.

There was a sense that, even after being found not guilty, the conduct of Olding and Jackson and the attitudes reflected in the texts had brought rugby into disrepute.

After the verdicts, the IRFU was left with the task of trying to manage the reputational damage the trial had caused. An advert was placed in the Belfast Telegraph, demanding that the IRFU and Ulster Rugby drop both Olding and Jackson.

A counter advert would be placed the following weekend, which tried to defend the players. Online, a debate was raging about whether they deserved to play again.

Rugby legend Willie John Mcbride backed Olding and Jackson, saying he was “sorry to see that there are some people who want to deny them the opportunity and take away their livelihood”.

Bank of Ireland, which sponsored Ulster Rugby, said it was “highly concerned regarding the serious behaviour and conduct issues which have emerged as a result of the recent high-profile trial,” and said it was reviewing its sponsorship.

The IRFU and Ulster Rugby launched an internal review, which resulted in both Olding and Jackson’s contracts being revoked with immediate effect in April 2018. Both players issued statements expressing their disappointment.

Jackson said that he recognised “that my behaviour has fallen far short of the values expected of me as an international player, a role model for the game of rugby and as a son and a brother. I am truly sorry.”

Olding said that the “Stuart Olding that you read about in the trial is not the real Stuart Olding”.

Dropped by the IRFU, both had little choice but to pursue rugby careers abroad. But the trial haunted them. Clubs that would have been interested in signing Jackson in particular quickly came under pressure from fans.

At one point, it was rumoured that Manchester club Sale Sharks was interested in signing both players. But this was abandoned after season ticket holders objected, with one supporter telling the media that signing Jackson and Olding would have been a “PR disaster”.

England seemed to prove too close for either player to escape the bad reputations that they had acquired in the aftermath of their acquittals. By the summer, Olding and Jackson had both turned to France.

In June 2018, Jackson was signed to Perpignan USAP, a first division French team. Olding went to Brive Athletic Club, a second division team where the 31-year-old continues to play. In France, there seemed to be little concern about the issues raised in the rape trial, with some seeup

ing their acquittal as the end of the matter. One French journalist did ask Olding about the trial when he first joined Brive. Olding said it was “complicated to live through”. He added: “But personally, I was at peace with myself. I knew I had nothing to reproach myself.”

In 2019, after spending one year in France, Jackson was signed to London Irish. The club immediately came under pressure from fans who were unhappy with the decision. On social media, a boycott was threatened and the infamous texts from the trial were again resurrected.

Cash Converters, which had been sponsoring the club, responded: “As a company, we are committed to the highest possible standards when it comes to our investments in any sponsorships and collaborations. As a result of a detailed and thorough review of our support for London Irish, we have decided to discontinue our association with the club.”

This was followed by a similar announcement from Diageo, which said Guinness was ending its 40-year relationship with London Irish over the decision to sign Jackson.

“We have met with the club to express our concerns. Their recent decision is not consistent with our values and so we have ended our sponsorship,” it said.

Last year, London Irish met its demise when it entered administration in the midst of major financial issues. Jackson ended up going back to France, signing with Lyon. Earlier this year, it was reported that the 32-yearold’s contract with Lyon has been extended until 2026.

In a way, the Belfast rape trial put the criminal justice system in the dock. All across the island of Ireland, the public were paying very close attention to proceedings.

There was widespread horror at what people saw as a gruelling and intimidating process for the woman at the centre of the case.

Because there were four defendants, the young woman was cross-examined four times. She would spend eight days being questioned. Her blood-stained underwear was introduced as evidence. This was later defended by Brendan Kelly QC for Jackson, who told RTÉ: “The case has to be put to the witness. It’s not for the barrister to say, ‘You know what, that’s just a little bit too unpleasant — or that’s a little bit too detailed or there’s a little bit too much graphic in that’.”

He argued that if the defence are going to make points about the prosecution evidence, including clothing, a witness should be given the chance to address those points.

There was a concern on both sides of the border that the trial could deter others from reporting rape, for fear of having to endure a very intimidating trial. The year after, Simon Harris would say that he was “ashamed” of the way rape trials are conducted in Ireland.

The Irish government ordered a review of the ways that vulnerable witnesses are treated in sexual violence trials, citing the public’s “unease” in the wake of the Belfast rape trial.

The report, known as the O’malley Review, would recommend that the right to anonymity — currently available to those accused of rape — should be extended in the Republic to include defendants accused of all sexual assault offences. Northern Ireland also ordered its own review in the aftermath of the trial, which proposed widespread reforms of the criminal justice system to make it more compassionate towards vulnerable victims in sexual violence cases.

The trial also proved extremely triggering, with graphic and difficult evidence being heard and discussed.

There was serious concern for the welfare of the woman in the case, who was suffering significant abuse online.

Despite being entitled to lifelong anonymity, her name was shared on social media almost as soon as the trial started.

To the rest of the public, this unknown woman became an avatar for the fears, anxieties and experiences of many women.

After the verdict, there were demonstrations in Belfast, Derry, Cork, Limerick, Galway and Dublin.

Those organising or attending demonstrations were often careful to explain that they were not protesting the verdict, but the process that the woman in the case had been put through.

The Dublin Rape Crisis Centre reported a spike in donations.

Throughout the trial and afterwards, the hashtag #Ibelieveher was consistently trending online. Soon, the entire country was acting as a jury and many started to opine and give verdicts long before the case had concluded.

After he was found not guilty, Jackson’s legal team warned that they were monitoring social media.

Defamation proceedings were initiated against Labour senator Aodhán Ó Ríordáin for remarks that he made on social media about the trial. Ó Ríordáin would later post an apology, adding that he was “not privy to all the evidence put before the jury during the trial”.

The defamation action launched a kind of Streisand effect, with other social media users openly goading Jackson to sue them.

The case raised a lot of concerns about the uncontrollable effect or even influence that social media might have on high-profile trials.

The Belfast rape trial was a touchstone moment. Five years on, it is likely to cause an equally difficult debate if and when it becomes a television drama.

The Irish Independent reported that the proposed show would be a “courtroom drama based on trial transcripts and public domain reports”. Promotional material for it said that the project would “challenge our perceptions of the Belfast rugby rape trial” and will explore “the entire spectrum of rape myth culture, as we follow the complainant’s journey through the criminal justice system”.

Jackson had not known anything about the project, before he was contacted by a journalist.

It is unlikely Olding knew anything either.

Nobody knows if the woman in the case had known about the project, or if she just found out about it this week when reading it in the press.

‘There was concern for the welfare of the woman, who was suffering abuse online’