Second thread for Eoghan McDermot
So well put. If its any solace to the victim if she is reading this, I had a similar experience to you both with an older man when I was 17. He was in his late 20s and and knew I was a virgin (probably got off on it). He took my virginity and yes I consented but he knew me since I was 13, and its only now I'm older I can see I had been groomed - but 'technically' it was legal. So if any cretins on boards are asking why she is only coming out now, sometimes these things take time for you to realise how wrong they were.There were idiots on Boards defending this man, completely writing off the redditor's account of events because she got her age wrong by probably a few months off, ugh. I am so dissapointed in Love Island Australia giving him a platform. Here is my response to the Board morons:
Hi lads,
I have been following this case since the twitter allegations first came out last February. I think a bit of ironing out is necessary to make you understand that it's not a matter of this thread just having emotional responses or rage at his hypocrisy as is being suggested here.
Objectively speaking it's reasonable to be annoyed that he is being given a platform again, given how severe the accusations were (are). Personally, I am a bit suprised that the man wishes to continue to pursue a career in the spotlight, the whispers will follow him. Surely being an Irish speaker he could do something else, but then again not sure I'd recommend him to school girls for grinds
Please, take another look at the letter he released from the girl's solicitor.
To break it down for you, the man got off on a technicality. Yes, he released a letter from the girl's solicitor earlier this year disclosing that there were a number of falsities in her original tweets, including her age at the time. I am not disputing that this is incredibly unfortunate and would make the accuser appear less credible. Believe me, I would be the first to defend any man who has been proven to have been victim of malicious fictitious agendas but imo this is not how it was in this case.
We can be certain it wasn't just some plot by a random hater of Eoghan's, pretending to be who they claimed to be. Eoghan confirmed that this was indeed written by someone who he deemed was in a 'relationship' with him back in 2010. Therefore, we can believe beyond a reasonable doubt that there has to be elements of truth for this woman to come out of the blue 10 years on and write a detailed, very specific and deeply emotional post.
Many here are writing off this woman's experience completely, and perhaps you are correct. Maybe this woman is unstable, perhaps suffers from schizophrenia, sees hallucinations and has a completely untrue recollection of events. It's unlikely but possible.
Now as others here have attempted to explain, the solicitor's letter he issued is a revelation in itself.
The accuser admits to a number falsehoods and refers to specifics such as her age, his drug use, as well as her sharing tweets of unproven sexual misconduct tweets from third parties.
So what's the issue here? Well the original post incriminated Eoghan of two sexual crimes, oral rape and statutory rape (if girl was underage). She has since confirmed she was above age of consent when they met and engaged in a physical relationship but thankfully, most people in law as well as decent people can see the massive elephant in the room. The letter did not refute the oral rape, being the most awful accusation brought against him. It's actual words were 'our client accepts that Mr. McDermott fundamentally disputes our client's version of events of what occurred between them during the course of their relationship.' This means the accuser accepts they each have different outlook of events as to what occurred between them.
If you want a refresher as to what her's were:
Absolutely horrific. What sort of evil bastard would sulk when a girl doesn't want to get intimate with him, not least with a teenager - her solicitor's letter was so carefully written and didn't refer to her as an adult, only above the age of consent so 17 when in a physical relationship. Therefore, it's safe to say they were in non physical contact when she was 16 and that part was true.
Someone else here said it, the only reason why any man in his mid to late twenties would be in pursuit of a teenager is for one reason only, sex. Who is better to manipulate than a teenager who was a self confessed virgin? The issue of legality vs morality keeps coming up here, so let's set the record straight. Eoghan did not physically engage with an underage girl, therefore isn't guilty of statutory rape. However, since there is no explicit retraction of the most severe crime described in the original reddit post, it seems that ultimately it came down to a she said he said situation.
I do not know what happened between them over the past year but in the end she decided not to go through the courts, and agreed to grant Eoghan this letter of retractions. I don't know if it was settled between both parties where she was paid off by Eoghan to not bring it any further or if she felt he has already got what he deserved. They may have reached an agreement similar to what Philip Schofield has managed to do with his teenage gay lover and the papers.
What I do know is that him not naming her is as much a favour to himself as it is her. Can you imagine the media's questions to her and what she could say? Recalling that he picked her up in a taxi, took her out for drinks and asked her how many guys she had slept with... not a good look for a man in his position.
Remember how there wasn't a date on the letter Eoghan released. My guess is he kept moving the goalposts as to what the letter would contain, to make him come out of this looking as good as is possible. Eventually he settled with what he was provided with and issued it when there was other controversy with the 2 Johnny's.
Fact of the matter is, there is more than meets the eye in this case. He wouldn't be a guy I would defend like some of you are. Do I think the man deserves a hate mob? No. Do I think he deserves to be given a platform on Love Island whose main viewers are teenagers and young adults? Absolutely not.
This man is far from somebody who should be idolised in the public eye and love island Aus is disgraceful for employing him again. If this situation was different and he was innocent then I would be delighted to see him get his jobs back. It was a technicality and I think i did a good way of explaining this.
If the victim comes across this message, I would like to say I am so sorry for what happened to you, and the trauma it has left you with. You were the innocent party in this case, groomers running after teenagers are sick x I have been objective to this, but when I was an inexperienced and vulnerable teenager, I too was also targeted by an abusive egomaniac of a grown man so I know what it's like.
Was just about to post the same thing, a very cold response from Dan (as it should be)I see head of 2FM has ruled out a return of Eoghan to the station. I’d say there’s are plenty who read between the lines of the statements and came to the conclusion he’s not a good look regardless of how he is trying to spin the outcome of the whole thing.
Where can I read this please?I see head of 2FM has ruled out a return of Eoghan to the station. I’d say there’s are plenty who read between the lines of the statements and came to the conclusion he’s not a good look regardless of how he is trying to spin the outcome of the whole thing.
RTÉ 2fm boss opens up about Eoghan McDermott’s future at the station (msn.com)Where can I read this please?
Eh, the prospect of legal action for defamation? Healy himself would get the sack if he was being "honest"RTÉ 2fm boss opens up about Eoghan McDermott’s future at the station (msn.com)
Why do we live in world where Healy says his contract "was up at that time" rather than being honest?
Thanks a million for that 🫶RTÉ 2fm boss opens up about Eoghan McDermott’s future at the station (msn.com)
Why do we live in world where Healy says his contract "was up at that time" rather than being honest?
I'm not dumb.. I just mean by saying something like "due to other issues" etc, not going into detailsEh, the prospect of legal action for defamation? Healy himself would get the sack if he was being "honest"
He's shiteing on about how, after he and his dog have died, he hopes to be welcomed at the pearly gates by the doggo.Did his dog die or what is he going on about
He had it all, lost it all (i.e. cancelled)..If the chap is hinting he might be depressed suppose it's understandable. Sometimes I feel a bit sorry for him, but then again, Nah! he started out as a good presenter both radio/TV but then started getting political, spouting annoying ultra- wokeness and was just a hypocrite really.His latest post on Instagram, about a Christmas movie and depression?
I really don't get this.Still hiding away so this prick is
Just heard this and came straight here….Broadcaster, 39, charged with defilement of child
https://www.rte.ie/news/courts/2023/0214/1356653-courts-ireland/
Guess what age Eoghan is…
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?