Stuart Olding’s Unimpressive Testimony Of Contradictions

Stuart Olding’s Unimpressive Testimony Of Contradictions

By Lucy Caulkett-

Ireland rugby player Stuart Olding presented a drunk testimony of contradictions during Thursday’s cross examination.

Many observers could have been forgiven for believing Stuart Olding was as drunk as he surely was on the night of the rape allegation which has caused Belfast Crown Court to be filled with interested parties

Olden, who is supposed to be a fit and healthy sportsman admitted starting drinking from around 4.30pm , eventually consuming 23 drinks over the next 12 hours.

Mr Olding said he had eight cans while watching football in Blane McIlroy’s house before he and his friends moved to Cutter’s Wharf where he had a further four pints and two gin and tonics.

Mr Olding then headed for Ollie’s nightclub where he had a further five vodka and lemonades and two shots. That wasn’t enough because the Belfast rape trial defendant also had a bottle of beer in Mr Jackson’s house. He claimed to have been ”happy and having a good time”.

When Mr Hedworth suggested to Stuart Olding: “If you had that amount of drink there’s a danger of disregarding the wishes or views of another person if they get in the way of what you want to achieve.”

His response “I wouldn’t agree with that ” was a poor response for a man who would definitely have been drunk if he had consumed that much alcohol. His best response would have been to explain why he believes a man in as much a drunken state as he was would not persist in any sexual pursuits against the wishes of a woman. He did little to achieve this, although this in itself does not equate guilt

It is difficult to get over his response to a question put to him by prosecutor Toby Hedworth when Hedworth said: “Like Paddy Jackson, you were not interested in what the young woman wanted to do or was prepared to do. She was just a vehicle for your own sexual desires that night.”

Mr Olding answered: “I wouldn’t put it that way.” An intelligent defendant should have demonstrated a recollection in what the young woman wanted to do rather than disagreeing with the way the prosecutor had presented his suggestions of Stuart Olding state of mind that night.

More strange was the fact mr.Olding remembered touching the alleged rape victims face sensitively, but couldn’t remember how it went from that to oral sex.
His testimony was unimpressive and Friday’s testiminy is already underway.

Mr Hedworth put it to him that it was extraordinary that Mr Olding remembered “a tender moment” of touching the woman’s face but could not recall how they had moved from kissing to oral sex.
“It was just a moment I remember,” he sai