Australia - you're standing in it
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/dec/03/right-to-be-scare...
Really should be some kind of investigation how this occurred in Parliament House. Who knew what and when, and the process of reporting. I remember how the room where the alleged incident occurred was ordered to be immediately cleaned.
Geez the situation is sad and frightening.
udo wrote:https://www.news.com.au/national/brittany-higgins-sensitive-evidence-dis...
The whole saga is a clusterfuck.
There is no proof of a rape as far as I can gauge. Sex occurred but as far as proof of rape, nope. Higgins evidence was a terrible jumble..she was terrible on the stand and as far as helping her case she did more harm than good.
You'd have to think Lisa Wilkinson and Samantha Maiden would have a lot to answer for as well. The both of them pretty much scuttled the case before it got off the ground. Samantha Maiden in particular has completely changed her language as well- no more mention of rape in her reporting when in the past she was happy to throw that out in practically every second sentence.
Lots of people need to be careful with what they say now, Lehrmann could easily have rights to defamation cases if called a rapist.
Do you think they'll hand their awards back?
Roadkill wrote:udo wrote:https://www.news.com.au/national/brittany-higgins-sensitive-evidence-dis...
The whole saga is a clusterfuck.
There is no proof of a rape as far as I can gauge. Sex occurred but as far as proof of rape, nope. Higgins evidence was a terrible jumble..she was terrible on the stand and as far as helping her case she did more harm than good.
Did he not claim that there was no sex as part of his defence? No one except those 2 parties probably know for sure, How the accused now can just go on his merry way without trial makes me furious. Major flaw in legal system....
"Did he not claim that there was no sex as part of his defence?"
thats what I hought, which was a curious line of defence...
all reeked a bit of... 'i did not have sexual relations with that girl'
clearly the liberal party has behaved in quite a grubby manner
but at the same time, it would seem lisa wilkinson and fuckwit fitzimmons - and their 'get em' style of over zealous political vendetta - have a lot to answer for...
what a mess
poor chick
Media alleged that Bruce Lehrmann assaulted other women: court. A court judgment has revealed that the media had previously alleged that Bruce Lehrmann assaulted other women, after a high-profile rape trial against him was dropped over grave fears for Brittany Higgins’ mental health.
Higgins remained in hospital on Friday after ACT Director of Public Prosecutions Shane Drumgold SC said he was left with no choice but to axe a retrial of Lehrmann because of an “unacceptable risk” to the life of Higgins, who he said had faced unrelenting attacks with “bravery, grace and dignity”. It can now be revealed that Lehrmann was accused of sexually harassing or assaulting other women in articles that have since been deleted, after a suppression order was lifted on Friday afternoon.
In a judgment by Chief Justice Lucy McCallum on April 29, 2022, in which she refused to halt the initial trial, the judge noted that in the weeks after Higgins went public with her claims in early 2021, “allegations were published to the effect that the man who had sexually assaulted the complainant was also accused of having sexually assaulted or harassed a number of other women”. “The most damaging material, in my view, is the material disclosing that other women had come forward with similar complaints after hearing the complainant’s allegations.” Lehrmann’s legal team had argued that these allegations, as well as other media attention, meant that Lehrmann was not able to receive a fair trial.
McCallum said the allegations were contained in articles that had since been removed from the internet and had been published before Lehrmann had been charged and named.
It can also now be revealed Higgins paused her evidence during the trial in October due to a mental health crisis. Lehrmann has maintained his innocence and pleaded not guilty to raping Higgins in the office of their then-boss, Liberal minister Linda Reynolds, in Parliament House in the early hours of March 23, 2019, after a night out drinking with colleagues. On Friday the charge against him was dropped.
A spokesman for Lehrmann said the former staffer would be “seeking legal remedies concerning untrue content that has been published about him in the future” but he wouldn’t be making any further statements during this time. The spokesman added Lehrmann would take time off to be with family and friends to get away from this “traumatising episode”.
The first trial - which heard evidence from Reynolds and Liberal senator Michaelia Cash, who Higgins also worked for - was cut short on October 27 after 12 days of evidence and submissions in the ACT Supreme Court and five days of deliberations, because of juror misconduct. McCallum had set down a retrial over a single charge of sexual intercourse without consent for early 2023.
Lehrmann had denied ever having sex with Higgins and in a police interview described himself behaving like a “gentleman” on the night of March 22, 2019, when they were part of a group drinking at The Dock bar in Kingston, and later 88mph nightclub, before the pair shared an Uber and Lehrmann said he needed to drop by parliament. The future of a highly anticipated book by Higgins is now in question due to the circumstances of the trial’s ending and her health, with supporters saying her life was on hold while she recovers.
Higgins’ friend Emma Webster released a statement after Drumgold’s announcement, which said: “Brittany is in hospital getting the treatment and support she needs. “The last couple of years have been difficult and unrelenting. While it’s disappointing the trial has ended this way, Brittany’s health and safety must always come first. “Brittany is extremely grateful for all the support she has received, particularly from our mental health care workers.”
Mr Drumgold said there had been a reasonable prospect of conviction when he proceeded with the first trial.
However, he said he had to weigh that against the prospect of harm caused by proceeding with the retrial. “I’ve recently received really compelling evidence from medical experts that the ongoing trauma associated with this prosecution presents a significant and unacceptable risk for the life of the complainant. “The evidence makes it clear that this is not limited to the harm of giving evidence in a witness box [and] rather applies whether or not the complainant is required to enter a witness box during a retrial.”
He paid tribute to Higgins as he concluded his brief statement, saying that “during the investigation and trial as a sexual assault complainant, [Brittany] Higgins has faced a level of personal attack that I have not seen in over 20 years of doing this work. She has done so with bravery, grace and dignity and it is my hope that this will now stop and Ms Higgins will be allowed to heal.” https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/media-alleged-that-bruce-lehrman...
What a fkn yawnfest that whole show has been. Who cares!
And blown up by selfish scumbags in Wilkinson, Fitzsimmons and co.
Id rather listen to pointless banter about World Cup soccer
there hasn't been much comment anywhere on the end of the trial which seemed interesting, 4 or 5 days in deliberation jury tells judge we can't agree but she keeps sending them back (apparently a little unusual and provoked legal discussion) until a cleaner "bumps" a jurors folder, which happens to fall on the ground, he happens to read it, -, and it just happens to show the juror has looked up something on the internet so its a mistrial not a no verdict. and the dog ate my homework..
Judge McCallum had told jurors at least 17 times that they should not conduct outside research. The direction was given in no uncertain terms every day of the trial, sometimes on multiple occasions- McCallum also revealed that a further two documents have since been found. They were brought in by the same juror
Jurors in the ACT cannot be punished for such misconduct.
From Guardian...
"Brittany Higgins makes first public statement since prosecution dropped
Former Liberal staffer Brittany Higgins has commented on the impact the legal system has on people who come forward with sexual assault allegations.
The prosecution of a man alleged to have raped Higgins in Parliament House in 2019 was dropped this week due to concerns about her mental wellbeing.
The initial trial was aborted due to juror misconduct.
Bruce Lehrmann has always maintained his innocence, denying there was any sexual contact between the pair.
In her first public comments since the prosecution was dropped, Higgins said she never understood how asymmetrical the criminal justice system was until she spoke up.
In an Instagram post on Sunday morning Higgins said she had felt like the person on trial after having her private life, messages and data publicly exposed and scrutinised.
This is the reality of how complainants in sexual assault cases are treated.
Their lives are torn apart, their families and friends called to the witness stand and the accused has the legal right to say absolutely nothing.
Higgins said the criminal justice system failed to deliver outcomes for victims of sexual assault, citing that in the ACT during 2020, only 16% of sexual offences reported to police resulted in a charge.
Only half of those resulted in a conviction.
That is to our national shame. I want to thank the other women who came forward and shared their own experiences.
I believe you. You were with me every day I walked into that court room and faced him."
– AAP
yep YAWN
He is still an innocent man…all the talk is about Higgins state of mind. I struggle with the fact that she is the accuser, his life is destroyed also yet he is at this stage innocent of all charges, surely as she was the accuser he should be able to demand the case proceeds to give him the option of a not guilty verdict?
Lawyers for former Liberal staffer Brittany Higgins have given notice that they will sue former Liberal ministers Linda Reynolds and Michaelia Cash as well as the Commonwealth for about $3 million. https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/brittany-higgins-seeking-3-milli...
Roadkill wrote:He is still an innocent man…all the talk is about Higgins state of mind. I struggle with the fact that she is the accuser, his life is destroyed also yet he is at this stage innocent of all charges, surely as she was the accuser he should be able to demand the case proceeds to give him the option of a not guilty verdict?
I havent really been following this too much, but yeah if the guy is innocent it kinda sucks for him having his name dragged through the mud, I don't know if he would want to have the case proceed though even if he really is innocent as there is always a risk he could be found guilty.
It's like the whole Hawthorn footy coach thing and allegations of racism, even if not found true many wont believe and the damage is already done.
The police never turn up at my place investigating car thefts, one because I don’t steal cars and two I don’t hang around car thieves. Something to ponder when people are being investigated/prosecuted.
Roadkill wrote:He is still an innocent man…all the talk is about Higgins state of mind. I struggle with the fact that she is the accuser, his life is destroyed also yet he is at this stage innocent of all charges, surely as she was the accuser he should be able to demand the case proceeds to give him the option of a not guilty verdict?
The tone of your posts imply that you think Brittany Higgins is lying. Seeing as research has consistently suggested that only 2 to 5 percent of sexual assault reports are false, and that she would have been under no assumption that that going through with the allegations would be both anything but public and painful, I suggest you have a little rethink about how you use your words.
Hiccups wrote:Roadkill wrote:He is still an innocent man…all the talk is about Higgins state of mind. I struggle with the fact that she is the accuser, his life is destroyed also yet he is at this stage innocent of all charges, surely as she was the accuser he should be able to demand the case proceeds to give him the option of a not guilty verdict?
The tone of your posts imply that you think Brittany Higgins is lying. Seeing as research has consistently suggested that only 2 to 5 percent of sexual assault reports are false, and that she would have been under no assumption that that going through with the allegations would be both anything but public and painful, I suggest you have a little rethink about how you use your words.
The tone of your post suggest you think she is not lying.
His guilt is not up to you or me to decide. Innocent until proven guilty is our system. As at this stage he has no guilty verdict thus he is innocent.
Roadkill wrote:He is still an innocent man…all the talk is about Higgins state of mind. I struggle with the fact that she is the accuser, his life is destroyed also yet he is at this stage innocent of all charges, surely as she was the accuser he should be able to demand the case proceeds to give him the option of a not guilty verdict?
Innocent by the law ....... In reality maybe, maybe not ...
Why would victim make it up??? Attention?
Anyway whole situation is incredibly sad.
Roadkill wrote:Hiccups wrote:Roadkill wrote:He is still an innocent man…all the talk is about Higgins state of mind. I struggle with the fact that she is the accuser, his life is destroyed also yet he is at this stage innocent of all charges, surely as she was the accuser he should be able to demand the case proceeds to give him the option of a not guilty verdict?
The tone of your posts imply that you think Brittany Higgins is lying. Seeing as research has consistently suggested that only 2 to 5 percent of sexual assault reports are false, and that she would have been under no assumption that that going through with the allegations would be both anything but public and painful, I suggest you have a little rethink about how you use your words.
The tone of your post suggest you think she is not lying.
His guilt is not up to you or me to decide. Innocent until proven guilty is our system. As at this stage he has no guilty verdict thus he is innocent.
Asinine and predictable response.
andy-mac wrote:Roadkill wrote:He is still an innocent man…all the talk is about Higgins state of mind. I struggle with the fact that she is the accuser, his life is destroyed also yet he is at this stage innocent of all charges, surely as she was the accuser he should be able to demand the case proceeds to give him the option of a not guilty verdict?
Innocent by the law ....... In reality maybe, maybe not ...
Why would victim make it up??? Attention?
Anyway whole situation is incredibly sad.
See my post above. Sorry Andy that one was for roadkill.
soggydog wrote:andy-mac wrote:Roadkill wrote:He is still an innocent man…all the talk is about Higgins state of mind. I struggle with the fact that she is the accuser, his life is destroyed also yet he is at this stage innocent of all charges, surely as she was the accuser he should be able to demand the case proceeds to give him the option of a not guilty verdict?
Innocent by the law ....... In reality maybe, maybe not ...
Why would victim make it up??? Attention?
Anyway whole situation is incredibly sad.See my post above. Sorry Andy that one was for roadkill.
All good.
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/dec/04/brittany-higgins-...
Last paragraph talks about accused seeking legal advice. Somewhere I read it was mentioned that he may sue Higgins for defamation. My very limited understanding is if this was the case she could use 'truth' defence which is easier to prove than find 'guilty beyond reasonable doubt' in criminal case. Anyone out there with legal background ??
The accused would want to be very confident in his innocence if to take this option I would think.
Additionally, Higgins previous employer really treated he disgracefully considering her situation. Remember this alleged incident took place in a minister's office and the way it was handled was strange. Office being ordered to be cleaned, Info re case handed to Dutton etc
BL born in Texas - A Dual Aust Citizen ...So Conviction for Rape would mean Deportation after serving his Sentence ?
soggydog wrote:The police never turn up at my place investigating car thefts, one because I don’t steal cars and two I don’t hang around car thieves. Something to ponder when people are being investigated/prosecuted.
Thats a very silly comparison.
Most of us here id expect have probably had nothing to do with car thefts or car thieves or those circles or even had our car stolen there is almost no chance of police knocking on our door on this issue
But im betting most of us at some stage of our lifes have had sex while drunk with someone other than a regular partner who is also drunk often just a one night stand.
While its rare for women to lie about rape, it does happen most us could be in a similar situation if we did happen to sleep with some screwed up chick.
BTW. Im not saying he isn't guilty just saying its a silly comparison.
My former brother in law was accused of rape by a Chinese woman he brought over through one of the internet sites. I have no idea how they work but she lived with him on some sort of visa. Didn`t work out so she had to leave the country due to not living with him anymore.
Went to the police and accused him of rape. Luckily for him she had some female issues which required medical attention of which he paid for. Receipt and dates for these medical attendances proved rape wasn't possible.
Reason for accusation of rape was she would then not have to leave the country due to court proceedings etc.
Not stating this has anything to do with Higgins but it does happen.
andy-mac wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/dec/03/right-to-be-scare...
Really should be some kind of investigation how this occurred in Parliament House. Who knew what and when, and the process of reporting. I remember how the room where the alleged incident occurred was ordered to be immediately cleaned.
Geez the situation is sad and frightening.
What’s frightening is the number of people who prejudged this case and sided with Higgins. This was a question for a jury. Now Drumgold’s impartiality also being questioned.
Many seem to forget that Higgins went to the media prior to formally giving police interview. She created the media circus.
oxrox wrote:My former brother in law was accused of rape by a Chinese woman he brought over through one of the internet sites. I have no idea how they work but she lived with him on some sort of visa. Didn`t work out so she had to leave the country due to not living with him anymore.
Went to the police and accused him of rape. Luckily for him she had some female issues which required medical attention of which he paid for. Receipt and dates for these medical attendances proved rape wasn't possible.
Reason for accusation of rape was she would then not have to leave the country due to court proceedings etc.
Not stating this has anything to do with Higgins but it does happen.
Always astounds me how many men will bring up anecdotes like this, but never bother mentioning that they know several women that have been sexually assaulted (we all do), that never reported it and/or weren't believed.
Maybe for context. I actually don't know any women who have been raped. Or maybe they haven't told me. Maybe you shouldn't be including the (we all do) into your comment. Getting pathetic isn't it.
indo-dreaming wrote:soggydog wrote:The police never turn up at my place investigating car thefts, one because I don’t steal cars and two I don’t hang around car thieves. Something to ponder when people are being investigated/prosecuted.
Thats a very silly comparison.
Most of us here id expect have probably had nothing to do with car thefts or car thieves or those circles or even had our car stolen there is almost no chance of police knocking on our door on this issue
But im betting most of us at some stage of our lifes have had sex while drunk with someone other than a regular partner who is also drunk often just a one night stand.
While its rare for women to lie about rape, it does happen most us could be in a similar situation if we did happen to sleep with some screwed up chick.
BTW. Im not saying he isn't guilty just saying its a silly comparison.
What I’m saying is that people don’t get investigated, much less prosecuted unless there is substantial evidence to support the prosecution. Think of the millions of drunk hookups that happen, something pretty bad has to happen for a rape accusation to arise, then the statistics on those that are reported then prosecuted are very low.. the Public Prosecutor also thought there where enough suspicious car parts found to prosecute.
So it’s not a silly statement. And coming from you Indo. Pot……kettle, blah blah blah.
oxrox wrote:Maybe for context. I actually don't know any women who have been raped. Or maybe they haven't told me. Maybe you shouldn't be including the (we all do) into your comment. Getting pathetic isn't it.
So around 25% of Australian women have experienced some form of sexual assault, but we better hear about one of the comparatively tiny cases of a false rape statement that you know about, "for context". I agree. It is pathetic.
Front page protection post.
Hiccups wrote:oxrox wrote:Maybe for context. I actually don't know any women who have been raped. Or maybe they haven't told me. Maybe you shouldn't be including the (we all do) into your comment. Getting pathetic isn't it.
So around 25% of Australian women have experienced some form of sexual assault, but we better hear about one of the comparatively tiny cases of a false rape statement that you know about, "for context". I agree. It is pathetic.
We are talking about a specific case…you keep trying to introduce stats that are irrelevant to an individual case.
You would be weeded out of jury duty in the first round as you inability to concentrate on the one case is obvious.
Roadkill wrote:Hiccups wrote:oxrox wrote:Maybe for context. I actually don't know any women who have been raped. Or maybe they haven't told me. Maybe you shouldn't be including the (we all do) into your comment. Getting pathetic isn't it.
So around 25% of Australian women have experienced some form of sexual assault, but we better hear about one of the comparatively tiny cases of a false rape statement that you know about, "for context". I agree. It is pathetic.
We are talking about a specific case…you keep trying to introduce stats that are irrelevant to an individual case.
You would be weeded out of jury duty in the first round as you inability to concentrate on the one case is obvious.
Oh no, I'd be weeded out of Lycra Man's hypothetical jury duty! By that measure, so would oxrox. I wonder why it's only me you're focusing on though? Let me guess. It's cos you vote conservative, and are invested in the patriarchy.
I have 2 daughters, both have been sexually molested. The worst case was
(20 year old) grabbed on her butt at Brisbane train station. She rang us we told her to report it to the station which she did. They took details and had a walk around with her to see if she could identify the old perv that did it..nothing further happened. She works part time at Coles and always has old men making stupid comments to her…it happens all the time.
Sadly for females the above is nothing new.
Hiccups wrote:Roadkill wrote:Hiccups wrote:oxrox wrote:Maybe for context. I actually don't know any women who have been raped. Or maybe they haven't told me. Maybe you shouldn't be including the (we all do) into your comment. Getting pathetic isn't it.
So around 25% of Australian women have experienced some form of sexual assault, but we better hear about one of the comparatively tiny cases of a false rape statement that you know about, "for context". I agree. It is pathetic.
We are talking about a specific case…you keep trying to introduce stats that are irrelevant to an individual case.
You would be weeded out of jury duty in the first round as you inability to concentrate on the one case is obvious.
Oh no, I'd be weeded out of Lycra Man's hypothetical jury duty! By that measure, so would oxrox. I wonder why it's only me you're focusing on though? Let me guess. It's cos you vote conservative, and are invested in the patriarchy.
Gawd, what a dickhead. Carry on :)
Roadkill wrote:Hiccups wrote:Roadkill wrote:Hiccups wrote:oxrox wrote:Maybe for context. I actually don't know any women who have been raped. Or maybe they haven't told me. Maybe you shouldn't be including the (we all do) into your comment. Getting pathetic isn't it.
So around 25% of Australian women have experienced some form of sexual assault, but we better hear about one of the comparatively tiny cases of a false rape statement that you know about, "for context". I agree. It is pathetic.
We are talking about a specific case…you keep trying to introduce stats that are irrelevant to an individual case.
You would be weeded out of jury duty in the first round as you inability to concentrate on the one case is obvious.
Oh no, I'd be weeded out of Lycra Man's hypothetical jury duty! By that measure, so would oxrox. I wonder why it's only me you're focusing on though? Let me guess. It's cos you vote conservative, and are invested in the patriarchy.
Gawd, what a dickhead. Carry on :)
Splendid retort from a consistently foolish fool.
Hiccups wrote:Roadkill wrote:Hiccups wrote:Roadkill wrote:Hiccups wrote:oxrox wrote:Maybe for context. I actually don't know any women who have been raped. Or maybe they haven't told me. Maybe you shouldn't be including the (we all do) into your comment. Getting pathetic isn't it.
So around 25% of Australian women have experienced some form of sexual assault, but we better hear about one of the comparatively tiny cases of a false rape statement that you know about, "for context". I agree. It is pathetic.
We are talking about a specific case…you keep trying to introduce stats that are irrelevant to an individual case.
You would be weeded out of jury duty in the first round as you inability to concentrate on the one case is obvious.
Oh no, I'd be weeded out of Lycra Man's hypothetical jury duty! By that measure, so would oxrox. I wonder why it's only me you're focusing on though? Let me guess. It's cos you vote conservative, and are invested in the patriarchy.
Gawd, what a dickhead. Carry on :)
Splendid retort from a consistently foolish fool.
In a serious discussion, the best you can offer is asinine (to use your word) posts from the sideline.
Clever stuff, Hiccups, I bet you feel proud of yourself.
Roadkill wrote:Hiccups wrote:Roadkill wrote:Hiccups wrote:Roadkill wrote:Hiccups wrote:oxrox wrote:Maybe for context. I actually don't know any women who have been raped. Or maybe they haven't told me. Maybe you shouldn't be including the (we all do) into your comment. Getting pathetic isn't it.
How is calling out one sided anecdotes that add nothing but even more distrust of women to those susceptible, asinine? Hint: It's not.
So around 25% of Australian women have experienced some form of sexual assault, but we better hear about one of the comparatively tiny cases of a false rape statement that you know about, "for context". I agree. It is pathetic.
We are talking about a specific case…you keep trying to introduce stats that are irrelevant to an individual case.
You would be weeded out of jury duty in the first round as you inability to concentrate on the one case is obvious.
Oh no, I'd be weeded out of Lycra Man's hypothetical jury duty! By that measure, so would oxrox. I wonder why it's only me you're focusing on though? Let me guess. It's cos you vote conservative, and are invested in the patriarchy.
Gawd, what a dickhead. Carry on :)
Splendid retort from a consistently foolish fool.
In a serious discussion, the best you can offer is asinine (to use your word) posts from the sideline.
Clever stuff, Hiccups, I bet you feel proud of yourself.
How is calling out one sided anecdotes that encourage more distrust in women from those susceptible to such chatter, asinine? Hint: It's not.
Hiccups wrote:Roadkill wrote:Hiccups wrote:Roadkill wrote:Hiccups wrote:Roadkill wrote:Hiccups wrote:oxrox wrote:Maybe for context. I actually don't know any women who have been raped. Or maybe they haven't told me. Maybe you shouldn't be including the (we all do) into your comment. Getting pathetic isn't it.
How is calling out one sided anecdotes that add nothing but even more distrust of women to those susceptible, asinine? Hint: It's not.
So around 25% of Australian women have experienced some form of sexual assault, but we better hear about one of the comparatively tiny cases of a false rape statement that you know about, "for context". I agree. It is pathetic.
We are talking about a specific case…you keep trying to introduce stats that are irrelevant to an individual case.
You would be weeded out of jury duty in the first round as you inability to concentrate on the one case is obvious.
Oh no, I'd be weeded out of Lycra Man's hypothetical jury duty! By that measure, so would oxrox. I wonder why it's only me you're focusing on though? Let me guess. It's cos you vote conservative, and are invested in the patriarchy.
Gawd, what a dickhead. Carry on :)
Splendid retort from a consistently foolish fool.
In a serious discussion, the best you can offer is asinine (to use your word) posts from the sideline.
Clever stuff, Hiccups, I bet you feel proud of yourself.How is calling out one sided anecdotes that encourage more distrust in women from those susceptible to such chatter, asinine? Hint: It's not.
This is how the old "women lie about being raped" line/massive exaggeration gets perpetuated. People don't call it out, and things never change.
....
Hiccups wrote:oxrox wrote:Maybe for context. I actually don't know any women who have been raped. Or maybe they haven't told me. Maybe you shouldn't be including the (we all do) into your comment. Getting pathetic isn't it.
So around 25% of Australian women have experienced some form of sexual assault, but we better hear about one of the comparatively tiny cases of a false rape statement that you know about, "for context". I agree. It is pathetic.
Yeah Hiccups, the context part if I need to spell it out for you, is the recent comments are about a high profile rape case. There is context with my comment.
Next part of context was a comment by soggydog above relating to car theft and if you are being investigated for said theft you are highly likely, or are, a car thief. Obviously inferring that if you are being investigated for rape, you are highly likely, or are a rapist.
I used the example of my former brother in law as an example of someone investigated for rape being innocent.
All in context with this page's discussion. You my friend are the one out of context with your comments.
I can asssure you I don't bring up my former brother in law's unfortunate situation in general discussion. In fact, I had completely forgotten about it until soggydog's comment.
I have 3 young adult daughters whom I worship the ground they walk on. So you can fuck off with your generalisations.
An interesting opinion piece:
https://www.smh.com.au/national/don-t-judge-the-legal-system-for-sorry-s...
oxrox wrote:Hiccups wrote:oxrox wrote:Maybe for context. I actually don't know any women who have been raped. Or maybe they haven't told me. Maybe you shouldn't be including the (we all do) into your comment. Getting pathetic isn't it.
So around 25% of Australian women have experienced some form of sexual assault, but we better hear about one of the comparatively tiny cases of a false rape statement that you know about, "for context". I agree. It is pathetic.
Yeah Hiccups, the context part if I need to spell it out for you, is the recent comments are about a high profile rape case. There is context with my comment.
Next part of context was a comment by soggydog above relating to car theft and if you are being investigated for said theft you are highly likely, or are, a car thief. Obviously inferring that if you are being investigated for rape, you are highly likely, or are a rapist.
I used the example of my former brother in law as an example of someone investigated for rape being innocent.
All in context with this page's discussion. You my friend are the one out of context with your comments.
I can asssure you I don't bring up my former brother in law's unfortunate situation in general discussion. In fact, I had completely forgotten about it until soggydog's comment.
I have 3 young adult daughters whom I worship the ground they walk on. So you can fuck off with your generalisations.
And your anecdote proves my point. Your brother no matter the accusation was innocent so nothing to investigate/prosecute, so the case was dropped. On the other hand in the case we are discussing the public prosecutor was presented with enough evidence to make a compelling case against the defendant. Confident of a conviction.
My comment holds water.
Oxrox, women will often keep it to themselves, so even though you don’t think you know anyone who’s been subject to unwanted sexual harassment, you very well may.
All well and good soggydog and I wasn' t having a crack at you but we are talking about a rape case, not sexual harassment.
It's not for me or you for that matter to judge whether the prosecution had the evidence to prosecute or not. Neither you or I were present at the hearing or at the crime scene so I'm unsure where you are coming from.
As I stated in my last paragraph in my original post re my former brother in law, my comments were not directed towards the rape case at hand but was a general discussion point after your car thief comments.
With regards to your comments re women not talking about sexual harassment. Yes I agree. I haven't had my head in the ground all these years. The discussion is not about sexual harassment in general but about a specific high profile rape case.
soggydog wrote:oxrox wrote:Hiccups wrote:oxrox wrote:Maybe for context. I actually don't know any women who have been raped. Or maybe they haven't told me. Maybe you shouldn't be including the (we all do) into your comment. Getting pathetic isn't it.
So around 25% of Australian women have experienced some form of sexual assault, but we better hear about one of the comparatively tiny cases of a false rape statement that you know about, "for context". I agree. It is pathetic.
Yeah Hiccups, the context part if I need to spell it out for you, is the recent comments are about a high profile rape case. There is context with my comment.
Next part of context was a comment by soggydog above relating to car theft and if you are being investigated for said theft you are highly likely, or are, a car thief. Obviously inferring that if you are being investigated for rape, you are highly likely, or are a rapist.
I used the example of my former brother in law as an example of someone investigated for rape being innocent.
All in context with this page's discussion. You my friend are the one out of context with your comments.
I can asssure you I don't bring up my former brother in law's unfortunate situation in general discussion. In fact, I had completely forgotten about it until soggydog's comment.
I have 3 young adult daughters whom I worship the ground they walk on. So you can fuck off with your generalisations.And your anecdote proves my point. Your brother no matter the accusation was innocent so nothing to investigate/prosecute, so the case was dropped. On the other hand in the case we are discussing the public prosecutor was presented with enough evidence to make a compelling case against the defendant. Confident of a conviction.
My comment holds water.
Oxrox, women will often keep it to themselves, so even though you don’t think you know anyone who’s been subject to unwanted sexual harassment, you very well may.
The most senior police officer on the case didn’t think there was enough evidence to make a compelling case for a conviction.
Roadkill wrote:soggydog wrote:oxrox wrote:Hiccups wrote:oxrox wrote:Maybe for context. I actually don't know any women who have been raped. Or maybe they haven't told me. Maybe you shouldn't be including the (we all do) into your comment. Getting pathetic isn't it.
So around 25% of Australian women have experienced some form of sexual assault, but we better hear about one of the comparatively tiny cases of a false rape statement that you know about, "for context". I agree. It is pathetic.
Yeah Hiccups, the context part if I need to spell it out for you, is the recent comments are about a high profile rape case. There is context with my comment.
Next part of context was a comment by soggydog above relating to car theft and if you are being investigated for said theft you are highly likely, or are, a car thief. Obviously inferring that if you are being investigated for rape, you are highly likely, or are a rapist.
I used the example of my former brother in law as an example of someone investigated for rape being innocent.
All in context with this page's discussion. You my friend are the one out of context with your comments.
I can asssure you I don't bring up my former brother in law's unfortunate situation in general discussion. In fact, I had completely forgotten about it until soggydog's comment.
I have 3 young adult daughters whom I worship the ground they walk on. So you can fuck off with your generalisations.And your anecdote proves my point. Your brother no matter the accusation was innocent so nothing to investigate/prosecute, so the case was dropped. On the other hand in the case we are discussing the public prosecutor was presented with enough evidence to make a compelling case against the defendant. Confident of a conviction.
My comment holds water.
Oxrox, women will often keep it to themselves, so even though you don’t think you know anyone who’s been subject to unwanted sexual harassment, you very well may.
The most senior police officer on the case didn’t think there was enough evidence to make a compelling case for a conviction.
I wonder if this case stands alone as an extraordinary mess. It seems like parliament is a workplace that operates well out of the bounds of accountability and responsibility experienced by most professional environments, so when something like this happens it can only end up a complete mess.
Yeah oxrox I was toning down the language using sexual harassment, probably should have had a “/assault/rape.”added to it.
I just read that too RK.
And it would seem the legalities are just beginning for the central players as well as a few satellite actors.
The "I can't believe it's not politics" thread.