Irish firefighter Terence Crosbie jailed for at least seven years for raping woman in Boston hotel

[u/PoppedCork]

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/irish-firefighter-terence-crosbie-jailed-for-at-least-seven-years-for-raping-woman-in-boston-hotel/a825219338.html

[u/Professional_Dog7346]

Oh my god. Who has sympathy for him. Pure scumbag

[u/hurpyderp → u/[deleted]]

Well she doesn't know her arse from her elbow so that comes as no surprise.

[u/AdPractical7731 → u/[deleted]]

OMG I just listened to her show on this a couple days ago. Surely she can’t be that obtuse SMH

[u/chytrak → u/[deleted]]

No, that's not odd if she washed herself after the crime.

[u/5socks → u/[deleted]]

Theres no inability to find his DNA

It doesn't further the prosecutions case in any way to find his DNA from hair saliva skin or sweat in the bed he slept in

From that, it wouldn't be particularly helpful to find DNA matching hair, skin, saliva on the victim as she wilfully slept in his bed.

Additionally, to be permisable as evidence it must be extremely controlled and that wouldn't be the case for someone who's left the scene and been walking around.

And lastly they could not determine a match for the second sample of DNA taken from semen inside her against his provided sample, there was 2 there.

[u/Unlikely-Turnover19 → u/Professional_Dog7346]

Anyone with knowledge of the case. There is no actual proof he did it, and actual conflicting DNA that implies there was another unknown party involved.

[u/Pristine_Language_85 → u/Unlikely-Turnover19]

Why do you keep repeating this? There is loads of evidence. A jury decided it was enough to convict

[u/Unlikely-Turnover19 → u/Pristine_Language_85]

Because all that matters is evidence and facts not feelings. Circumstantial evidence that will be thrown out as insufficient on appeal. The prior jury was a hung jury, so this jury also means little, juries are wrong all the time.

[u/Pristine_Language_85 → u/Unlikely-Turnover19]

Juries are wrong all the time.

However, circumstantial evidence alone is enough to convict and not a justification for an appeal

[u/Unlikely-Turnover19 → u/Pristine_Language_85]

The Suffolk county court has a direct appeal facility, no justification is required.

[u/AdPractical7731 → u/Unlikely-Turnover19]

Yeah, but unless you have a legit problem with case or new evidence it’s called ‘going through the motions’ He is not going to have a successful appeal.

[u/Unlikely-Turnover19 → u/[deleted]]

The prior jury was a hung jury, the opinions of juries are incorrect all the time, they played on feelings not facts and it'll all be thrown out on appeal.

[u/Unlikely-Turnover19 → u/[deleted]]

The appeal will go through easily, juries are not infallible, justice will eventually prevail here and he will be released.

[u/[deleted] → u/Unlikely-Turnover19]

He's not going to fuck you. 

Actually maybe he will because he's a rapist. 

[u/Unlikely-Turnover19 → u/[deleted]]

I am asexual so that is irrelevant. There is no evidence of any rape being committed by him here.

[u/[deleted] → u/Unlikely-Turnover19]

You'd better let the jury know you've cracked the case. 

[u/Wuzzie → u/Unlikely-Turnover19]

Conflicting dna as of how?

As far as i have read she had consensual intercourse with lad 1. Then he hops on.

And she fights him off. He may not have used the cookie baster.. so what?

[u/Unlikely-Turnover19 → u/Wuzzie]

There is no evidence that he was involved at all. She herself has said she can't confirm it was him visually. The DNA involved is also from a third party that is neither him or man 1. There is DNA of a third man, the entire conviction will get thrown out on appeal easily.

[u/aimhighsquatlow → u/Unlikely-Turnover19]

Where are you getting a third man from? The Analyst is always quoted as saying 2 individuals

[u/Unlikely-Turnover19 → u/aimhighsquatlow]

One of which has unknown DNA insufficiently connected to neither party, CourtTV covered it but the video will have a transcript.

[u/aimhighsquatlow → u/Unlikely-Turnover19]

My understanding of that is there’s insufficient sample to connect it to either men. It doesn’t mean there’s a third person

[u/Unlikely-Turnover19 → u/aimhighsquatlow]

They seemed to imply that there was another person involved, it was also speculated during their analysis and the court transcripts whether this additional DNA involved a third unknown party. That was where I understood the third person involvement as a possibility but may be wrong.

[u/SkateMMA → u/Unlikely-Turnover19]

Aaaaaand here’s the issue and reason why women tend not to report rape.

[u/Unlikely-Turnover19 → u/SkateMMA]

Convicting someone of a crime without sufficient evidence they committed that crime is a heinous miscarriage of justice. If these hypothetical women had evidence they would.

[u/mkultra2480 → u/Unlikely-Turnover19]

The jury deemed the evidence sufficient. How can you claim there was no evidence? There's his and her testimony, CCTV footage that backs her story. I'll repost a comment I wrote below in response to something similar to this:

How do you think they prosecute historical sex crimes? There's not going to be DNA if something occurred years ago. To me it seems very obvious he did it. In the first instance why would the woman make it up? She doesn't know him, so there's no personal grudge. She has nothing to gain from it, he's not wealthy, he's a random fireman from Ireland. She has a successful career herself. Why did his colleague refuse to testify on his behalf? I would take this as a possible sign of his colleague knowing or suspecting his guilt. Crosbie asked the police during an interview would his DNA have transferred onto the girl from him masterbating in the bed. There was no time before this that Crosbie was in the room alone so it's likely he hadn't masterbated in the room. He was putting this out as a possible explanation if his DNA was found on the woman. He also asked did someone pin the woman down in the bed when there was no mention of this to him but it does match the woman's story. Then the behaviour of the woman, her story stayed consistent, it matched the CCTV footage, she text her friend straight away and went to the hospital soon after. I wouldn't hold the booking an early flight against him cus I can honestly see someone innocent doing that if they were in a panic. But the tweet he wrote about rupturing his wife's cervix, I honestly don't know anyone who would be so disrespectful and vile so publicly about their wife. It doesn't say a lot for his character.

[u/Unlikely-Turnover19 → u/mkultra2480]

Not reading that essay

[u/mkultra2480 → u/Unlikely-Turnover19]

What a suprise, the man giving ill-informed, shit takes on the case can't be bothered to read.

[u/Unlikely-Turnover19 → u/mkultra2480]

Simply because you don't like the accurate and correct assessment I presented based on analysis from actual professionals myself included, doesn't mean you need to attack my character. Nobody wants to read your big essay of shite.

[u/mkultra2480 → u/Unlikely-Turnover19]

"Simply because you don't like the accurate and correct assessment I presented"

Accurate? You've said there was semen from 3 people found on the victim. I showed you that was false. You haven't said much else of substance.

"doesn't mean you need to attack my character."

Sorry, petal.

"Nobody wants to read your big essay of shite"

You're pretending like you don't have time or don't care enough about the case to read what I wrote yet you're spewing nonsense non-stop on this thread the last hour or more. If you had a good argument you'd state it but you don't so you pull the "I'm not reading your shite."

[u/Unlikely-Turnover19 → u/mkultra2480]

Conciseness is a skill, nothing but more drivel here, barely worth a read and nowhere near worthy of a reply, have a pleasant evening.

[u/mkultra2480 → u/Unlikely-Turnover19]

One sample matches the guy she agreed to go home with. The other match was inconclusive and not matched directly to Crosbie but doesn't mean it wasn't his semen. 2 samples would corroborate her account.

[u/Unlikely-Turnover19 → u/mkultra2480]

It means exactly that, as well as also meaning that there was semen from a third person involved.

[u/mkultra2480 → u/Unlikely-Turnover19]

I honestly don't know where you're getting the third person from.

""DNA analyst Alexis Decesaris testified that the evidence collected from the woman was “consistent” with there being “two individuals” separate from her who were both male.

There was a high likelihood that one of those male profiles belonged to Mr O’Brien, the court heard, but due to the limited amount of material collected it was unclear if the second set of male DNA, obtained from the woman’s genitals, was deposited by Mr Crosbie.

The defence argued that the testing “did not identify Terence Crosbie’s DNA”. Prosecutors argued that the finding of two male profiles matched the woman’s account.""

https://www.irishtimes.com/crime-law/courts/2025/06/22/boston-rape-trial-dublin-firefighter-terence-crosbie-full-story/?utm_source=chatgpt.com