The official Cork court report thread.

Frank is arrogant or at least comes accross as arrogant.

There are other criminal solictors in cork doing the same and making staggering amounts of money but doing it quietly.

Frank seems to revel in the attention sometimes..so so it seems.


What ever happened to the female solictor who held up a rape victims panties in court that time?
Another class act there
Not arrogant at all, it's just part of the persona. Very funny guy as well as being super sharp.
 
Frank is arrogant or at least comes accross as arrogant.

There are other criminal solictors in cork doing the same and making staggering amounts of money but doing it quietly.

Frank seems to revel in the attention sometimes..so so it seems.


What ever happened to the female solictor who held up a rape victims panties in court that time?
Another class act there
I have never found him to be the slightest bit arrogant to be honest.

I assume the female you are referring to is Elizabeth O Connell, who is a senior counsel rather than a solicitor. The point she was making in that case was entirely lost in the hysteria that surrounded it. It wasn't a great point (imo) but it neither was it the slut shaming it was presented as.
 
I have never found him to be the slightest bit arrogant to be honest.

I assume the female you are referring to is Elizabeth O Connell, who is a senior counsel rather than a solicitor. The point she was making in that case was entirely lost in the hysteria that surrounded it. It wasn't a great point (imo) but it neither was it the slut shaming it was presented as.

What was the precise point she was making that you think necessitated holding up a pair of panties in the court at a rape trial?
 
The common story out there is that she held up a pair of sexy panties in the court room.

The story may be inaccurate but thats there the hysteria is coming from
A bit of chicken and egg i'd say. There was hysteria at the fact that she spoke to the jury about the alleged victim's underwear. Then the story was embellished to claim that she held up the alleged victim's underwear in court, which caused more hysteria.

Her point (which I don't think was a great one) was that the jury should consider the possibility that the alleged victim was open to the idea of consensual sex on the evening in question, and that one piece of evidence to back this up was that she was wearing sexy underwear. FWIW, the accused was acquitted in the case.
 
A bit of chicken and egg i'd say. There was hysteria at the fact that she spoke to the jury about the alleged victim's underwear. Then the story was embellished to claim that she held up the alleged victim's underwear in court, which caused more hysteria.

Her point (which I don't think was a great one) was that the jury should consider the possibility that the alleged victim was open to the idea of consensual sex on the evening in question, and that one piece of evidence to back this up was that she was wearing sexy underwear. FWIW, the accused was acquitted in the case.

Open to the idea of consensual sex on the evening in question? :oops:

There was a guy from Kerry that worked with RTE who was invited into bed by a one that many years later successfully claimed to have been sexually assaulted subsequently by him in said bed but someone is open to the idea of consensual sex on an evening because they wear sexy underwear? Strange how the rules seem to change in the same jurisdiction.
 
EVENT GUIDE - HIGHLIGHT
The Lee Sessions Trad Trail
The Gables, Douglas St.

29th May 2024 @ 9:30 pm
More info..

Crush Collective DJ Night

The Pav, Today @ 8pm

More events ▼
Top