WHY?

A life is becoming less & less important.

These boys were guilty by association in that they aided & abetted the attack.

No wonder we have a problem with youth crime with violence.


Quote:

Family ‘devastated’ at not guilty verdict LEA EMERY THE devastated parents of fatally stabbed Gold Coast teenager Jack Beasley have pledged to continue their campaign against knife crimes after three men were found not guilty over their son’s death. Ma-Mal-J Toala, now 21, and two teens – now 18 – were found not guilty in the Supreme Court in Brisbane of manslaughter and two counts of grievous bodily harm on Thursday. Jack’s mother Belinda Beasley told The Courier- Mail her initial reaction to the verdict was “devastated”. “Just to keep constantly hearing that ‘not guilty, not guilty, not guilty’,” she said. Brett Beasley said: “It was heartbreaking. “It was, absolutely.” The acquittal came after more than a month of deliberation by Justice Soraya Ryan following a week-and-ahalflong trial in May. It was alleged a group of five boys were in Surfers Paradise when Parkwood teen Jack was fatally stabbed near the Surfers Paradise IGA on December 13, 2019. One of Jack’s friends, also 17, was stabbed in the back and chest, leaving him with a punctured lung, it was alleged. The group was aged between 15 and 18 at the time and the four youngest cannot be named for legal reasons. Ma-Mal-J Toala and two teens – aged 16 at the time of Jack’s death – pleaded not guilty on May 16 to manslaughter and two counts of grievous bodily harm. Toala, who was 18 at the time of the stabbing, and the two teens were acquitted on Thursday. The youngest – who is now 17 – pleaded guilty on May 9 to murder and two counts of committing a malicious act with intent. A second teen – now 19 – pleaded guilty in April to manslaughter and two counts of grievous bodily harm. The two who pleaded guilty will be sentenced at a later date. The Beasleys said they would continue their work with the Jack Beasley Foundation and campaigning against knife crime. “We are still concentrating heavily on the ‘detect knives, save lives’ thing that we do and ‘live your life without a knife’,” Mr Beasley said. “It’s just so important and I’d really love to see some sort of system, some sort of detection system being introduced at Helensvale train station.” Before acquitting Toala and the two other teens, Justice Soraya Ryan said: “This trial was all about whether any of these three defendants could be held criminally responsible for the unexpected knife violence of their accomplice.” Outside of court, a lawyer for one of the teens Michael Gatenby said it had had an “immeasurable” effect on his client and his family. “They were young and it’s a tragic accident,” he said. “Hopefully, if anything comes out of this it is that young people stop using knives in Surfers Paradise.” Mr Gatenby said the three found not guilty were not the key players. “These boys although they had been involved weren’t involved in the stabbing itself.” During the trial in May, Toala’s barrister Catherine Morgan told the court her client’s involvement was limited to striking a member of Jack’s group with a Gatorade bottle. Ms Morgan said there could not have been a plan between Toala and the rest of the defendants as Toala did not appear to interact with others.

Yet it was found in a court of law that they did not ais a abet the attack.

You want 3 kids to go down for something people they were with did?

Quote:

These boys were guilty by association

The courts work on actual guilt.

Gnads wrote on Jul 8^th, 2022 at 9:40am:

These boys were guilty by association in that they aided & abetted the attack.

What crap.

.... you are hereby charged with being a Pacific Islander in a public place in company with a person carrying a concealed weapon of clear intent ...... how do you plead?

I knew three guys who did time for robbing a Pizza Hut delivery boy... one of them pulled a knife - the other two went down for it, too....... even though they reckoned they didn't know he had it or was going to do that.

Tougher in NSW ....

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 8^th, 2022 at 6:32pm:

.... you are hereby charged with being a Pacific Islander in a public place in company with a person carrying a concealed weapon of clear intent ...... how do you plead? I knew three guys who did time for robbing a Pizza Hut delivery boy... one of them pulled a knife - the other two went down for it, too....... even though they reckoned they didn't know he had it or was going to do that. Tougher in NSW ....

I'm sure it was as uncomplicated as that.

::)

Aussie wrote on Jul 8^th, 2022 at 6:37pm:

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 8th, 2022 at 6:32pm: .... you are hereby charged with being a Pacific Islander in a public place in company with a person carrying a concealed weapon of clear intent ...... how do you plead? I knew three guys who did time for robbing a Pizza Hut delivery boy... one of them pulled a knife - the other two went down for it, too....... even though they reckoned they didn't know he had it or was going to do that. Tougher in NSW .... I'm sure it was as uncomplicated as that. ::)

You seeing enemies on all sides now, Cane Toad Boy?  What IS wrong with some of you people?  I'm only going on what they said... ::)  ::)  ::)

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 8^th, 2022 at 6:52pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 8th, 2022 at 6:37pm: Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 8th, 2022 at 6:32pm: .... you are hereby charged with being a Pacific Islander in a public place in company with a person carrying a concealed weapon of clear intent ...... how do you plead? I knew three guys who did time for robbing a Pizza Hut delivery boy... one of them pulled a knife - the other two went down for it, too....... even though they reckoned they didn't know he had it or was going to do that. Tougher in NSW .... I'm sure it was as uncomplicated as that. ::) You seeing enemies on all sides now, Cane Toad Boy?  What IS wrong with some of you people?  I'm only going on what they said... ::)  ::)  ::)

Shall I spend many hours posting here about the bullshit stories people have told me when they were trying to explain why they were wrongly convicted.....and even charged?

Aussie wrote on Jul 8^th, 2022 at 7:32pm:

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 8th, 2022 at 6:52pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 8th, 2022 at 6:37pm: Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 8th, 2022 at 6:32pm: .... you are hereby charged with being a Pacific Islander in a public place in company with a person carrying a concealed weapon of clear intent ...... how do you plead? I knew three guys who did time for robbing a Pizza Hut delivery boy... one of them pulled a knife - the other two went down for it, too....... even though they reckoned they didn't know he had it or was going to do that. Tougher in NSW .... I'm sure it was as uncomplicated as that. ::) You seeing enemies on all sides now, Cane Toad Boy?  What IS wrong with some of you people?  I'm only going on what they said... ::)  ::)  ::) Shall I spend many hours posting here about the bullshit stories people have told me when they were trying to explain why they were wrongly convicted.....and even charged?

Not at all!  But the simple fact is that only one had a knife.... the others either knew and were complicit or they did not know and were caught unawares - but all copped the penalty.

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 8^th, 2022 at 8:57pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 8th, 2022 at 7:32pm: Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 8th, 2022 at 6:52pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 8th, 2022 at 6:37pm: Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 8th, 2022 at 6:32pm: .... you are hereby charged with being a Pacific Islander in a public place in company with a person carrying a concealed weapon of clear intent ...... how do you plead? I knew three guys who did time for robbing a Pizza Hut delivery boy... one of them pulled a knife - the other two went down for it, too....... even though they reckoned they didn't know he had it or was going to do that. Tougher in NSW .... I'm sure it was as uncomplicated as that. ::) You seeing enemies on all sides now, Cane Toad Boy?  What IS wrong with some of you people?  I'm only going on what they said... ::)  ::)  ::) Shall I spend many hours posting here about the bullshit stories people have told me when they were trying to explain why they were wrongly convicted.....and even charged? Not at all!  But the simple fact is that only one had a knife.... the others either knew and were complicit or they did not know and were caught unawares - but all copped the penalty.

You know for a fact that only one had a knife?

::)

Aussie wrote on Jul 8^th, 2022 at 9:03pm:

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 8th, 2022 at 8:57pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 8th, 2022 at 7:32pm: Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 8th, 2022 at 6:52pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 8th, 2022 at 6:37pm: Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 8th, 2022 at 6:32pm: .... you are hereby charged with being a Pacific Islander in a public place in company with a person carrying a concealed weapon of clear intent ...... how do you plead? I knew three guys who did time for robbing a Pizza Hut delivery boy... one of them pulled a knife - the other two went down for it, too....... even though they reckoned they didn't know he had it or was going to do that. Tougher in NSW .... I'm sure it was as uncomplicated as that. ::) You seeing enemies on all sides now, Cane Toad Boy?  What IS wrong with some of you people?  I'm only going on what they said... ::)  ::)  ::) Shall I spend many hours posting here about the bullshit stories people have told me when they were trying to explain why they were wrongly convicted.....and even charged? Not at all!  But the simple fact is that only one had a knife.... the others either knew and were complicit or they did not know and were caught unawares - but all copped the penalty. You know for a fact that only one had a knife? ::)

That's what they said... nobody said any different.

Well let's hope the two who did do the stabbing get 15 years in jail with a non-parole period of 12 years

But as we know, they'll probably get a 3 year suspended sentence living back home with Mum and Dad ... especially if they are Islanders

Bias_2012 wrote on Jul 8^th, 2022 at 9:14pm:

Well let's hope the two who did do the stabbing get 15 years in jail with a non-parole period of 12 years But as we know, they'll probably get a 3 year suspended sentence living back home with Mum and Dad ... especially if they are Islanders

Carrying a weapon is intent to use it - they should get life without and a possibility of release by the Crown at some unspecified date under strict conditions .... Aussie will know what that term is.......... consigliere - over to you...

Push yer own barrow!

Lazy duffer...

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 8^th, 2022 at 9:17pm:

Bias_2012 wrote on Jul 8th, 2022 at 9:14pm: Well let's hope the two who did do the stabbing get 15 years in jail with a non-parole period of 12 years But as we know, they'll probably get a 3 year suspended sentence living back home with Mum and Dad ... especially if they are Islanders Carrying a weapon is intent to use it - they should get life without and a possibility of release by the Crown at some unspecified date under strict conditions .... Aussie will know what that term is.......... consigliere - over to you...

Oh dear… I’m guilty as charged then! I had a Stanley knife in my bag i bought at a hardware store closing down on special for $2…. Oh it’s the best I’ve ever bought!
Well I put it in my bag and you know… outta sight outta mind… it slips snuggly at bottom of my handbag…. Forgotten!
Until….. going through x-ray to enter a magistrates court!  :o
“Oh that’s where it went!”  ;D ;D

Mr. Grappler… should I get life without release because an assumed “intent” I would use it?
(I bought it for art and craft…)

Sophia wrote on Jul 9^th, 2022 at 1:16pm:

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 8th, 2022 at 9:17pm: Bias_2012 wrote on Jul 8th, 2022 at 9:14pm: Well let's hope the two who did do the stabbing get 15 years in jail with a non-parole period of 12 years But as we know, they'll probably get a 3 year suspended sentence living back home with Mum and Dad ... especially if they are Islanders Carrying a weapon is intent to use it - they should get life without and a possibility of release by the Crown at some unspecified date under strict conditions .... Aussie will know what that term is.......... consigliere - over to you... Oh dear… I’m guilty as charged then! I had a Stanley knife in my bag i bought at a hardware store closing down on special for $2…. Oh it’s the best I’ve ever bought! Well I put it in my bag and you know… outta sight outta mind… it slips snuggly at bottom of my handbag…. Forgotten! Until….. going through x-ray to enter a magistrates court!  :o “Oh that’s where it went!”  ;D ;D Mr. Grappler… should I get life without release because an assumed “intent” I would use it? (I bought it for art and craft…)

You airline terrorist!!  9/11 with Lols!!  A Stanley knife is not quite the same as a shiv, baby... got a couple around here somewhere.... not in the car or a bag or anything though.

Life without for you!!

freediver wrote on Jul 8^th, 2022 at 10:43am:

Quote: These boys were guilty by association The courts work on actual guilt.

Do they?

In the case below - there was the murderer(gunman that took a life) got life & the 2 associates were charged with manslaughter ...

the female got 15 years and the getaway driver got 9 years.

The boys who were apart of the gang which saw their associate stab & kill Jack Beasely & stab one of his friends were partly responsible.

They were there to assault & or rob their victims.





Quote:

The 35-year-old police officer was shot in the head while trying to stop an armed robbery at the Pacific Pines Tavern in May 2011. Gunman Phillip Graeme Abell, 41, and accomplice McAvoy were found guilty of murdering the father-of-two last September. Getaway driver Power pleaded guilty to manslaughter. Abell was sentenced in October to life imprisonment with no parole for at least 20 years. The sentencing hearing continues. EARLIER: Two people involved in the shooting of Gold Coast policeman Damian Leeding are due to be sentenced today. Detective Senior Constable Leeding was fatally shot in the head when called out to respond to an armed robbery at the Pacific Pines Tavern in May, 2011. The man who shot him, Phillip Abell, was last year sentenced to life for murder following a trial. Co-accused Donna Lee McAvoy was also found guilty of murder after trial and will this morning be sentenced in the Supreme Court in Brisbane on a number of charges the killing, deprivation of liberty and robbery with violence. Getaway driver Benjamin Ernest Power is also listed for sentence today on manslaughter and related armed robbery charges.

https://www.goldcoastbulletin.com.au/news/crime-court/donna-lee-mcavoy-found-guilty-of-the-murder-of-detective-senior-constable-damian-leeding-sentenced-to-life-in-prison/news-story/69d077f287f7cfa3dea6191a975c678e

John Smith wrote on Jul 8^th, 2022 at 11:22am:

Gnads wrote on Jul 8th, 2022 at 9:40am: These boys were guilty by association in that they aided & abetted the attack. What crap.

That's all you've got ....crap.

And had it been your sons life taken by a group? who confronted him - but only one killed him ... what then?

They were accessories to the fact.

Gnads wrote on Jul 9^th, 2022 at 3:40pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 8th, 2022 at 11:22am: Gnads wrote on Jul 8th, 2022 at 9:40am: These boys were guilty by association in that they aided & abetted the attack. What crap. That's all you've got ....crap. And had it been your sons life taken by a group? who confronted him - but only one killed him ... what then? They were accessories to the fact.

'Crap'  is all I need when your argument is crap . The kids whose blood you want didn't try to kill anyone. if your son went out with his mates and his mate did something stupid would you be happy for your son to go to jail for 20 yrs?

Copped for being there though..... need to know the full story.

John Smith wrote on Jul 9^th, 2022 at 9:18pm:

Gnads wrote on Jul 9th, 2022 at 3:40pm: John Smith wrote on Jul 8th, 2022 at 11:22am: Gnads wrote on Jul 8th, 2022 at 9:40am: These boys were guilty by association in that they aided & abetted the attack. What crap. That's all you've got ....crap. And had it been your sons life taken by a group? who confronted him - but only one killed him ... what then? They were accessories to the fact. 'Crap'  is all I need when your argument is crap . The kids whose blood you want didn't try to kill anyone. if your son went out with his mates and his mate did something stupid would you be happy for your son to go to jail for 20 yrs?

So you're comparing doing "something stupid" to being involved in a murder of one person & the grievous bodily harm to another?  ;D

Yeah righto Jack  ::)

And if you bothered to read that article I posted - the accomplices were given lesser sentences depending how they were involved.

If those other lads in the gang ran any sort of distraction(including the throwing of a plastic water bottle) that allowed their mate an easier opportunity to stab either of those boys ......

then they deserve some sort of punitive sentence for their part.

Gnads wrote on Jul 10^th, 2022 at 10:50am:

John Smith wrote on Jul 9th, 2022 at 9:18pm: Gnads wrote on Jul 9th, 2022 at 3:40pm: John Smith wrote on Jul 8th, 2022 at 11:22am: Gnads wrote on Jul 8th, 2022 at 9:40am: These boys were guilty by association in that they aided & abetted the attack. What crap. That's all you've got ....crap. And had it been your sons life taken by a group? who confronted him - but only one killed him ... what then? They were accessories to the fact. 'Crap'  is all I need when your argument is crap . The kids whose blood you want didn't try to kill anyone. if your son went out with his mates and his mate did something stupid would you be happy for your son to go to jail for 20 yrs? So you're comparing doing "something stupid" to being involved in a murder of one person & the grievous bodily harm to another?  ;D Yeah righto Jack  ::)

You didn't answer the question. Are we all to be held accountable for what our friends do?|

mothra wrote on Jul 10^th, 2022 at 10:53am:

Gnads wrote on Jul 10th, 2022 at 10:50am: John Smith wrote on Jul 9th, 2022 at 9:18pm: Gnads wrote on Jul 9th, 2022 at 3:40pm: John Smith wrote on Jul 8th, 2022 at 11:22am: Gnads wrote on Jul 8th, 2022 at 9:40am: These boys were guilty by association in that they aided & abetted the attack. What crap. That's all you've got ....crap. And had it been your sons life taken by a group? who confronted him - but only one killed him ... what then? They were accessories to the fact. 'Crap'  is all I need when your argument is crap . The kids whose blood you want didn't try to kill anyone. if your son went out with his mates and his mate did something stupid would you be happy for your son to go to jail for 20 yrs? So you're comparing doing "something stupid" to being involved in a murder of one person & the grievous bodily harm to another?  ;D Yeah righto Jack  ::) You didn't answer the question. Are we all to be held accountable for what our friends do?|

I edited my previous post re-read it.

And the answer to that is yes , we have some responsibility if we are in company & involved in what would be considered very anti-social behaviour with them.

Gnads wrote on Jul 10^th, 2022 at 10:58am:

mothra wrote on Jul 10th, 2022 at 10:53am: Gnads wrote on Jul 10th, 2022 at 10:50am: John Smith wrote on Jul 9th, 2022 at 9:18pm: Gnads wrote on Jul 9th, 2022 at 3:40pm: John Smith wrote on Jul 8th, 2022 at 11:22am: Gnads wrote on Jul 8th, 2022 at 9:40am: These boys were guilty by association in that they aided & abetted the attack. What crap. That's all you've got ....crap. And had it been your sons life taken by a group? who confronted him - but only one killed him ... what then? They were accessories to the fact. 'Crap'  is all I need when your argument is crap . The kids whose blood you want didn't try to kill anyone. if your son went out with his mates and his mate did something stupid would you be happy for your son to go to jail for 20 yrs? So you're comparing doing "something stupid" to being involved in a murder of one person & the grievous bodily harm to another?  ;D Yeah righto Jack  ::) You didn't answer the question. Are we all to be held accountable for what our friends do?| I edited my previous post re-read it. And the answer to that is yes , we have some responsibility if we are in company & involved in what would be considered very anti-social behaviour with them.

Define 'some'. It seems the court did just that and you are unhappy with the outcome.

You want full responsibility for unknowing actions of your friends across the board, no?

mothra wrote on Jul 10^th, 2022 at 11:00am:

Gnads wrote on Jul 10th, 2022 at 10:58am: mothra wrote on Jul 10th, 2022 at 10:53am: Gnads wrote on Jul 10th, 2022 at 10:50am: John Smith wrote on Jul 9th, 2022 at 9:18pm: Gnads wrote on Jul 9th, 2022 at 3:40pm: John Smith wrote on Jul 8th, 2022 at 11:22am: Gnads wrote on Jul 8th, 2022 at 9:40am: These boys were guilty by association in that they aided & abetted the attack. What crap. That's all you've got ....crap. And had it been your sons life taken by a group? who confronted him - but only one killed him ... what then? They were accessories to the fact. 'Crap'  is all I need when your argument is crap . The kids whose blood you want didn't try to kill anyone. if your son went out with his mates and his mate did something stupid would you be happy for your son to go to jail for 20 yrs? So you're comparing doing "something stupid" to being involved in a murder of one person & the grievous bodily harm to another?  ;D Yeah righto Jack  ::) You didn't answer the question. Are we all to be held accountable for what our friends do?| I edited my previous post re-read it. And the answer to that is yes , we have some responsibility if we are in company & involved in what would be considered very anti-social behaviour with them. Define 'some'. It seems the court did just that and you are unhappy with the outcome. You want full responsibility for unknowing actions of your friends across the board, no?

No they didn't ... acquittal is letting them off.

I'm not the only one unhappy they received no punishment.

So are the parents of the murdered lad & many others.

No .... don't make up BS.

Gnads wrote on Jul 10^th, 2022 at 11:10am:

mothra wrote on Jul 10th, 2022 at 11:00am: Gnads wrote on Jul 10th, 2022 at 10:58am: mothra wrote on Jul 10th, 2022 at 10:53am: Gnads wrote on Jul 10th, 2022 at 10:50am: John Smith wrote on Jul 9th, 2022 at 9:18pm: Gnads wrote on Jul 9th, 2022 at 3:40pm: John Smith wrote on Jul 8th, 2022 at 11:22am: Gnads wrote on Jul 8th, 2022 at 9:40am: These boys were guilty by association in that they aided & abetted the attack. What crap. That's all you've got ....crap. And had it been your sons life taken by a group? who confronted him - but only one killed him ... what then? They were accessories to the fact. 'Crap'  is all I need when your argument is crap . The kids whose blood you want didn't try to kill anyone. if your son went out with his mates and his mate did something stupid would you be happy for your son to go to jail for 20 yrs? So you're comparing doing "something stupid" to being involved in a murder of one person & the grievous bodily harm to another?  ;D Yeah righto Jack  ::) You didn't answer the question. Are we all to be held accountable for what our friends do?| I edited my previous post re-read it. And the answer to that is yes , we have some responsibility if we are in company & involved in what would be considered very anti-social behaviour with them. Define 'some'. It seems the court did just that and you are unhappy with the outcome. You want full responsibility for unknowing actions of your friends across the board, no? No they didn't ... acquittal is letting them off. I'm not the only one unhappy they received no punishment. So are the parents of the murdered lad & many others. No .... don't make up BS.

Yet a court of law found them non-complicit. You know, after hearing all of the evidence.

I'm sorry that that hurts your feelings but you're just going to have to accept that the people who make these decisions are more aware of the facts than you.

Quote:

So are the parents of the murdered

They are not supposed to be happy.

mothra wrote on Jul 10^th, 2022 at 11:24am:

Gnads wrote on Jul 10th, 2022 at 11:10am: mothra wrote on Jul 10th, 2022 at 11:00am: Gnads wrote on Jul 10th, 2022 at 10:58am: mothra wrote on Jul 10th, 2022 at 10:53am: Gnads wrote on Jul 10th, 2022 at 10:50am: John Smith wrote on Jul 9th, 2022 at 9:18pm: Gnads wrote on Jul 9th, 2022 at 3:40pm: John Smith wrote on Jul 8th, 2022 at 11:22am: Gnads wrote on Jul 8th, 2022 at 9:40am: These boys were guilty by association in that they aided & abetted the attack. What crap. That's all you've got ....crap. And had it been your sons life taken by a group? who confronted him - but only one killed him ... what then? They were accessories to the fact. 'Crap'  is all I need when your argument is crap . The kids whose blood you want didn't try to kill anyone. if your son went out with his mates and his mate did something stupid would you be happy for your son to go to jail for 20 yrs? So you're comparing doing "something stupid" to being involved in a murder of one person & the grievous bodily harm to another?  ;D Yeah righto Jack  ::) You didn't answer the question. Are we all to be held accountable for what our friends do?| I edited my previous post re-read it. And the answer to that is yes , we have some responsibility if we are in company & involved in what would be considered very anti-social behaviour with them. Define 'some'. It seems the court did just that and you are unhappy with the outcome. You want full responsibility for unknowing actions of your friends across the board, no? No they didn't ... acquittal is letting them off. I'm not the only one unhappy they received no punishment. So are the parents of the murdered lad & many others. No .... don't make up BS. Yet a court of law found them non-complicit. You know, after hearing all of the evidence. I'm sorry that that hurts your feelings but you're just going to have to accept that the people who make these decisions are more aware of the facts than you.

Would the same apply if they'd been found guilty?  Some here maintain that Cheers are found guilty as a matter of course...  we all know some Redneck Right Wing magistrates do that..... and not just to Cheers...

I guess these Islander lads were lucky....

It is times like these ^^^^^^ that I lose faith in the Jury system.  All the wankers suddenly become legal experts.

Aussie wrote on Jul 10^th, 2022 at 12:25pm:

It is times like these ^^^^^^ that I lose faith in the Jury system.  All the wankers suddenly become legal experts.

And the reason for your foibles is?

Gnads wrote on Jul 10^th, 2022 at 10:50am:

If those other lads in the gang ran any sort of distraction(including the throwing of a plastic water bottle) that allowed their mate an easier opportunity to stab either of those boys ...... then they deserve some sort of punitive sentence for their part.

So if you are walking along on the footpath and some driver is distracted by your choice of clothes, and leads to him crashing and killing a pedestrian, you agree you should also be found guilty as an accomplice?

John Smith wrote on Jul 10^th, 2022 at 4:11pm:

Gnads wrote on Jul 10th, 2022 at 10:50am: If those other lads in the gang ran any sort of distraction(including the throwing of a plastic water bottle) that allowed their mate an easier opportunity to stab either of those boys ...... then they deserve some sort of punitive sentence for their part. So if you are walking along on the footpath and some driver is distracted by your choice of clothes, and leads to him crashing and killing a pedestrian, you agree you should also be found guilty as an accomplice?

There is a difference between aiding in a criminal offence and an accident, you know.

::)  ::)  ::)  ::)  ::)

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 10^th, 2022 at 7:12pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 10th, 2022 at 4:11pm: Gnads wrote on Jul 10th, 2022 at 10:50am: If those other lads in the gang ran any sort of distraction(including the throwing of a plastic water bottle) that allowed their mate an easier opportunity to stab either of those boys ...... then they deserve some sort of punitive sentence for their part. So if you are walking along on the footpath and some driver is distracted by your choice of clothes, and leads to him crashing and killing a pedestrian, you agree you should also be found guilty as an accomplice? There is a difference between aiding in a criminal offence and an accident, you know. ::)  ::)  ::)  ::)  ::)

are you saying the courts don't know the difference?

John Smith wrote on Jul 10^th, 2022 at 7:31pm:

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 10th, 2022 at 7:12pm: John Smith wrote on Jul 10th, 2022 at 4:11pm: Gnads wrote on Jul 10th, 2022 at 10:50am: If those other lads in the gang ran any sort of distraction(including the throwing of a plastic water bottle) that allowed their mate an easier opportunity to stab either of those boys ...... then they deserve some sort of punitive sentence for their part. So if you are walking along on the footpath and some driver is distracted by your choice of clothes, and leads to him crashing and killing a pedestrian, you agree you should also be found guilty as an accomplice? There is a difference between aiding in a criminal offence and an accident, you know. ::)  ::)  ::)  ::)  ::) are you saying the courts don't know the difference?

Duh - your story up there shows you don't know the difference.  It's a Mimo thing.....

That's why it's called Orlovia, Don-keh!  Because this place is Orlovia!!

This is a classic case of the pathetic standards of the Australian judiciary.
Justice Soraya Ryan obviously erred in her acquittal of these three thugs.
As well as justice being done, it must be seen to have been done by the
community.   In this case, it hasn't been.

Hopefully the DPP will mount an appeal.

There are two ways about this - yes - justice must be seen to be done - but first there must be justice in the handling of all the available evidence by the court.

If a court wrongfully finds guilt on the facts presented to it - that is clear reason for appeal and dismissal of the charges and conviction.

Without clear evidence that the three actively participated in the crimes, they cannot be convicted, and the mere appearance of 'justice being done' is not sufficient.

That said - I doubt they will get a second chance.

AusGeoff wrote on Jul 10^th, 2022 at 10:58pm:

This is a classic case of the pathetic standards of the Australian judiciary. Justice Soraya Ryan obviously erred in her acquittal of these three thugs. As well as justice being done, it must be seen to have been done by the community.   In this case, it hasn't been. Hopefully the DPP will mount an appeal.

It looks like it was done from here. That principle is about transparency, not vengeance.

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 10^th, 2022 at 8:19pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 10th, 2022 at 7:31pm: Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 10th, 2022 at 7:12pm: John Smith wrote on Jul 10th, 2022 at 4:11pm: Gnads wrote on Jul 10th, 2022 at 10:50am: If those other lads in the gang ran any sort of distraction(including the throwing of a plastic water bottle) that allowed their mate an easier opportunity to stab either of those boys ...... then they deserve some sort of punitive sentence for their part. So if you are walking along on the footpath and some driver is distracted by your choice of clothes, and leads to him crashing and killing a pedestrian, you agree you should also be found guilty as an accomplice? There is a difference between aiding in a criminal offence and an accident, you know. ::)  ::)  ::)  ::)  ::) are you saying the courts don't know the difference? Duh - your story up there shows you don't know the difference.  It's a Mimo thing..... That's why it's called Orlovia, Don-keh!  Because this place is Orlovia!!

run into someone on a foot path and kill them because you're not paying attention behind the wheel and you'll likely face criminal charges crappler. Do you think the courts don't know the difference ?

John Smith wrote on Jul 11^th, 2022 at 9:31am:

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 10th, 2022 at 8:19pm: John Smith wrote on Jul 10th, 2022 at 7:31pm: Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 10th, 2022 at 7:12pm: John Smith wrote on Jul 10th, 2022 at 4:11pm: Gnads wrote on Jul 10th, 2022 at 10:50am: If those other lads in the gang ran any sort of distraction(including the throwing of a plastic water bottle) that allowed their mate an easier opportunity to stab either of those boys ...... then they deserve some sort of punitive sentence for their part. So if you are walking along on the footpath and some driver is distracted by your choice of clothes, and leads to him crashing and killing a pedestrian, you agree you should also be found guilty as an accomplice? There is a difference between aiding in a criminal offence and an accident, you know. ::)  ::)  ::)  ::)  ::) are you saying the courts don't know the difference? Duh - your story up there shows you don't know the difference.  It's a Mimo thing..... That's why it's called Orlovia, Don-keh!  Because this place is Orlovia!! run into someone on a foot path and kill them because you're not paying attention behind the wheel and you'll likely face criminal charges crappler. Do you think the courts don't know the difference ?

The person wearing clothing on the footpath which the driver finds distracting has zero part in it.  That person did nothing to contribute to the crime.  You can't equate that person with the driver.

DUH.   How you struggle in your perpetual victimhood.  They're all out to get you!!

Now come back with another silly comment.

So if you are walking along on the footpath and some driver is distracted by your choice of clothes, and leads to him crashing and killing a pedestrian, you agree you should also be found guilty as an accomplice?  Your statement.

The person walking didn't force the driver to be distracted.. grow up.  You're clearly becoming senile.

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 11^th, 2022 at 11:41am:

The person wearing clothing on the footpath which the driver finds distracting has zero part in it.  That person did nothing to contribute to the crime.  You can't equate that person with the driver.

just as the courts found that being mates with someone who stabbed someone else had no part in his killing

:D :D

way to shoot yourself in the foot crappler

John Smith wrote on Jul 11^th, 2022 at 12:40pm:

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 11th, 2022 at 11:41am: The person wearing clothing on the footpath which the driver finds distracting has zero part in it.  That person did nothing to contribute to the crime.  You can't equate that person with the driver. just as the courts found that being mates with someone who stabbed someone else had no part in his killing :D :D way to shoot yourself in the foot crappler

Don't be deliberately stupid, Smith - I already said that.  HOWEVER - if there was intent to engage in the criminal activity listed, there is guilt.  YOU were the one carrying on about the innocent passerby being guilty, so wake up and stop shooting yourself in the feet.

Now stop being stupid.

You next move - do a mothra and deny that's what you said:-

"So if you are walking along on the footpath and some driver is distracted by your choice of clothes, and leads to him crashing and killing a pedestrian, you agree you should also be found guilty as an accomplice?"  Your statement.

Deny you said that... it's all you've got left.  You DO understand English, don't you?

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 11^th, 2022 at 12:55pm:

I already said that

only after you embarressed yourself and realised your mistake




Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 11^th, 2022 at 12:55pm:

YOU were the one carrying on about the innocent passerby being guilty, so wake up and stop shooting yourself in the feet.

making crap up again crappler? Where did I say that?


Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 11^th, 2022 at 12:55pm:

"So if you are walking along on the footpath and some driver is distracted by your choice of clothes, and leads to him crashing and killing a pedestrian, you agree you should also be found guilty as an accomplice?"  Your statement.

no, that's not a statement, it's a question. The give away is the question mark at the end.

Do you fail English?

No such thing, Smith - here is my first comment on the issue:-

"Copped for being there though..... need to know the full story".

No mistake there in any way - now be a good boy and stop running in circles within your head and pretending that the other person is the one confused.

Clearly you are mistaking me for some other poster in this strand - now stop clogging up the discussion with your churlish childishness.

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 11^th, 2022 at 2:34pm:

No such thing, Smith - here is my first comment on the issue:- "Copped for being there though..... need to know the full story". No mistake there in any way - now be a good boy and stop running in circles within your head and pretending that the other person is the one confused. Clearly you are mistaking me for some other poster in this strand - now stop clogging up the discussion with your churlish childishness.

have you figured out the difference between a statement and a question yet crappler? or are you too busy playing the victim again?

:D :D

---

John Smith wrote on Jul 11^th, 2022 at 2:23pm:

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 11th, 2022 at 12:55pm: I already said that only after you embarressed yourself and realised your mistake Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 11th, 2022 at 12:55pm: YOU were the one carrying on about the innocent passerby being guilty, so wake up and stop shooting yourself in the feet. making crap up again crappler? Where did I say that? Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 11th, 2022 at 12:55pm: "So if you are walking along on the footpath and some driver is distracted by your choice of clothes, and leads to him crashing and killing a pedestrian, you agree you should also be found guilty as an accomplice?"  Your statement. no, that's not a statement, it's a question. The give away is the question mark at the end. Do you fail English?

"So if you are walking along on the footpath and some driver is distracted by your choice of clothes, and leads to him crashing and killing a pedestrian, you agree you should also be found guilty as an accomplice?"

Your comparison piece has zero association with the events.  No meaning to it at all.  Now stop wasting time and clogging up the strand with your nonsense.

I didn't agree to any of it... told you it didn't work that way and had no relevance to the issue under discussion.

Give it up.  You go over and over the same ground desperately trying to make some point that exists only in your own head.  You're like a schoolkid.

If these other guys went along with those found guilty, knowing what the intention was - to rob etc someone - they are guilty of a lesser offence.  Simple as that.  At no point did I say that the court was wrong or anything else - I said from the start that we needed the full story.  Simple enough for you?

Christ you waste time and energy on your ravings.

John Smith wrote on Jul 11^th, 2022 at 2:37pm:

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 11th, 2022 at 2:34pm: No such thing, Smith - here is my first comment on the issue:- "Copped for being there though..... need to know the full story". No mistake there in any way - now be a good boy and stop running in circles within your head and pretending that the other person is the one confused. Clearly you are mistaking me for some other poster in this strand - now stop clogging up the discussion with your churlish childishness. have you figured out the difference between a statement and a question yet crappler? or are you too busy playing the victim again? :D :D

You brought that totally irrelevant scenario into discussion - nothing to do with me in any way - and it has no place.  A passerby in the street is nowhere near in the same position as someone accompanying a person who carries out a crime.

Stop being your usual stupid self.

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 11^th, 2022 at 2:47pm:

You brought that totally irrelevant scenario into discussion

It was a scenario I put to gnads, not to you


Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 11^th, 2022 at 2:47pm:

nothing to do with me in any way -

and yet you had to jump in.... now you're crying it's got nothing to do with you?  ;D ;D ;D


Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 11^th, 2022 at 2:47pm:

A passerby in the street is nowhere near in the same position as someone accompanying a person who carries out a crime.

so your still arguing your stupidity despite crying it has nothing to do with you and it's irrelevant  ;D ;D ;D

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 11^th, 2022 at 2:39pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 11th, 2022 at 2:23pm: Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 11th, 2022 at 12:55pm: I already said that only after you embarressed yourself and realised your mistake Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 11th, 2022 at 12:55pm: YOU were the one carrying on about the innocent passerby being guilty, so wake up and stop shooting yourself in the feet. making crap up again crappler? Where did I say that? Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 11th, 2022 at 12:55pm: "So if you are walking along on the footpath and some driver is distracted by your choice of clothes, and leads to him crashing and killing a pedestrian, you agree you should also be found guilty as an accomplice?"  Your statement. no, that's not a statement, it's a question. The give away is the question mark at the end. Do you fail English? "So if you are walking along on the footpath and some driver is distracted by your choice of clothes, and leads to him crashing and killing a pedestrian, you agree you should also be found guilty as an accomplice?" Your comparison piece has zero association with the events.  No meaning to it at all.  Now stop wasting time and clogging up the strand with your nonsense. I didn't agree to any of it... told you it didn't work that way and had no relevance to the issue under discussion. Give it up.  You go over and over the same ground desperately trying to make some point that exists only in your own head.  You're like a schoolkid. If these other guys went along with those found guilty, knowing what the intention was - to rob etc someone - they are guilty of a lesser offence.  Simple as that.  At no point did I say that the court was wrong or anything else - I said from the start that we needed the full story.  Simple enough for you? Christ you waste time and energy on your ravings.

stomping your feet and repeating yourself is not an argument  ::)

John Smith wrote on Jul 11^th, 2022 at 4:14pm:

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 11th, 2022 at 2:47pm: You brought that totally irrelevant scenario into discussion It was a scenario I put to gnads, not to you Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 11th, 2022 at 2:47pm: nothing to do with me in any way - and yet you had to jump in.... now you're crying it's got nothing to do with you?  ;D ;D ;D Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 11th, 2022 at 2:47pm: A passerby in the street is nowhere near in the same position as someone accompanying a person who carries out a crime. so your still arguing your stupidity despite crying it has nothing to do with you and it's irrelevant  ;D ;D ;D

You're flaming, Smith....  accept that your issue raised has nothing to do in any way with the crimes committed and being discussed here, and stop now.  You've been at this for hours now over you totally off the planet idea of some innocent pedestrian somehow having responsibility for some car accident... nothing at all to do with a person accompanying someone and setting out to do a crime.

Gnads got it right - "we have some responsibility if we are in company & involved in what would be considered very anti-social behaviour with them. "

If you go along willingly knowing a crime is to be committed, you are guilty of an offence.

More likely in this case, these guys got off because of their age.  As I said long, long ago - we need access to all the facts to say one way or the other, and all we have is media reports.

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 11^th, 2022 at 4:18pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 11th, 2022 at 4:14pm: Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 11th, 2022 at 2:47pm: You brought that totally irrelevant scenario into discussion It was a scenario I put to gnads, not to you Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 11th, 2022 at 2:47pm: nothing to do with me in any way - and yet you had to jump in.... now you're crying it's got nothing to do with you?  ;D ;D ;D Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 11th, 2022 at 2:47pm: A passerby in the street is nowhere near in the same position as someone accompanying a person who carries out a crime. so your still arguing your stupidity despite crying it has nothing to do with you and it's irrelevant  ;D ;D ;D You're flaming, Smith....  accept that your issue raised has nothing to do in any way with the crimes committed and being discussed here, and stop now.  You've been at this for hours now over you totally off the planet idea of some innocent pedestrian somehow having responsibility for some car accident... nothing at all to do with a person accompanying someone and setting out to do a crime.

you're a friggen moron. you don't even understand the posts you are whinging about. All you are interested in is making yourself out to be the victim.

---

John Smith wrote on Jul 11^th, 2022 at 5:26pm:

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 11th, 2022 at 4:18pm: John Smith wrote on Jul 11th, 2022 at 4:14pm: Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 11th, 2022 at 2:47pm: You brought that totally irrelevant scenario into discussion It was a scenario I put to gnads, not to you Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 11th, 2022 at 2:47pm: nothing to do with me in any way - and yet you had to jump in.... now you're crying it's got nothing to do with you?  ;D ;D ;D Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 11th, 2022 at 2:47pm: A passerby in the street is nowhere near in the same position as someone accompanying a person who carries out a crime. so your still arguing your stupidity despite crying it has nothing to do with you and it's irrelevant  ;D ;D ;D You're flaming, Smith....  accept that your issue raised has nothing to do in any way with the crimes committed and being discussed here, and stop now.  You've been at this for hours now over you totally off the planet idea of some innocent pedestrian somehow having responsibility for some car accident... nothing at all to do with a person accompanying someone and setting out to do a crime. you're a friggen moron. you don't even understand the posts you are whinging about. All you are interested in is making yourself out to be the victim.

Simple Smithy, threw a miffy
Made a silly post,
When he tried to twist it round
It turned into a roast..

He made a pyre, lit the fire,
Above a flaming pit,
Instead of roasting Grappler steaks
Smith spun upon the spit...

He turned and turned and twisted round
His fevered brain on fire
The flames he lit to make his point
Became his funeral pyre.

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 11^th, 2022 at 5:34pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 11th, 2022 at 5:26pm: Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 11th, 2022 at 4:18pm: John Smith wrote on Jul 11th, 2022 at 4:14pm: Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 11th, 2022 at 2:47pm: You brought that totally irrelevant scenario into discussion It was a scenario I put to gnads, not to you Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 11th, 2022 at 2:47pm: nothing to do with me in any way - and yet you had to jump in.... now you're crying it's got nothing to do with you?  ;D ;D ;D Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 11th, 2022 at 2:47pm: A passerby in the street is nowhere near in the same position as someone accompanying a person who carries out a crime. so your still arguing your stupidity despite crying it has nothing to do with you and it's irrelevant  ;D ;D ;D You're flaming, Smith....  accept that your issue raised has nothing to do in any way with the crimes committed and being discussed here, and stop now.  You've been at this for hours now over you totally off the planet idea of some innocent pedestrian somehow having responsibility for some car accident... nothing at all to do with a person accompanying someone and setting out to do a crime. you're a friggen moron. you don't even understand the posts you are whinging about. All you are interested in is making yourself out to be the victim. Simple Smithy, threw a miffy Made a silly post, When he tried to twist it round It turned into a roast.. He made a pyre, lit the fire, Above a flaming pit, Instead of roasting Grappler steaks Smith spun upon the spit... He turned and turned and twisted round His fevered brain on fire The flames he lit to make his point Became his funeral pyre.

---

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 11^th, 2022 at 4:21pm:

Gnads got it right - "we have some responsibility if we are in company & involved in what would be considered very anti-social behaviour with them. " If you go along willingly knowing a crime is to be committed, you are guilty of an offence. More likely in this case, these guys got off because of their age.  As I said long, long ago - we need access to all the facts to say one way or the other, and all we have is media reports.

No comparison whatsoever with your suggestion of a pedestrian's clothing distracting a driver who then kills someone.

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 11^th, 2022 at 5:39pm:

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 11th, 2022 at 4:21pm: Gnads got it right - "we have some responsibility if we are in company & involved in what would be considered very anti-social behaviour with them. " If you go along willingly knowing a crime is to be committed, you are guilty of an offence. More likely in this case, these guys got off because of their age.  As I said long, long ago - we need access to all the facts to say one way or the other, and all we have is media reports. No comparison whatsoever with your suggestion of a pedestrian's clothing distracting a driver who then kills someone.

---

John Smith wrote on Jul 10^th, 2022 at 4:11pm:

Gnads wrote on Jul 10th, 2022 at 10:50am: If those other lads in the gang ran any sort of distraction(including the throwing of a plastic water bottle) that allowed their mate an easier opportunity to stab either of those boys ...... then they deserve some sort of punitive sentence for their part. So if you are walking along on the footpath and some driver is distracted by your choice of clothes, and leads to him crashing and killing a pedestrian, you agree you should also be found guilty as an accomplice?

That would be the most lame & ridiculous comparison I have ever seen you make.

Take a bow Smithy ... you've outdone yourself with stupid & irrelevance.

Gnads wrote on Jul 11^th, 2022 at 5:47pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 10th, 2022 at 4:11pm: Gnads wrote on Jul 10th, 2022 at 10:50am: If those other lads in the gang ran any sort of distraction(including the throwing of a plastic water bottle) that allowed their mate an easier opportunity to stab either of those boys ...... then they deserve some sort of punitive sentence for their part. So if you are walking along on the footpath and some driver is distracted by your choice of clothes, and leads to him crashing and killing a pedestrian, you agree you should also be found guilty as an accomplice? That would be the most lame & ridiculous comparison I have ever seen you make. Take a bow Smithy ... you've outdone yourself with stupid & irrelevance.

I agree... but you were the one who thinks the kids should go to jail if they distracted the kid that got killed. Do you realise now just how ridiculous that argument is?

John Smith wrote on Jul 11^th, 2022 at 9:31am:

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 10th, 2022 at 8:19pm: John Smith wrote on Jul 10th, 2022 at 7:31pm: Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 10th, 2022 at 7:12pm: John Smith wrote on Jul 10th, 2022 at 4:11pm: Gnads wrote on Jul 10th, 2022 at 10:50am: If those other lads in the gang ran any sort of distraction(including the throwing of a plastic water bottle) that allowed their mate an easier opportunity to stab either of those boys ...... then they deserve some sort of punitive sentence for their part. So if you are walking along on the footpath and some driver is distracted by your choice of clothes, and leads to him crashing and killing a pedestrian, you agree you should also be found guilty as an accomplice? There is a difference between aiding in a criminal offence and an accident, you know. ::)  ::)  ::)  ::)  ::) are you saying the courts don't know the difference? Duh - your story up there shows you don't know the difference.  It's a Mimo thing..... That's why it's called Orlovia, Don-keh!  Because this place is Orlovia!! run into someone on a foot path and kill them because you're not paying attention behind the wheel and you'll likely face criminal charges crappler. Do you think the courts don't know the difference ?

Well truly ey?

And the judiciary is soft on that as well.

The juvenile scum that run over & killed the couple & their unborn child in Alexandra Hills in Brisbane got a lousy 10 years but will only serve 6. 6 years for 3 lives. >:(

There are quite a few other hit runs by juveniles that have either seriously injured or killed the victims. Those that survive have life long injuries/disabilities ......

and these bastards get bail & then receive piddling sentences that they only serve half of ...

they then get to go back to their normal life.

You're just an excuse maker for young crims.

Gnads wrote on Jul 11^th, 2022 at 6:02pm:

You're just an excuse maker for young crims.

what crim have i made excuses for? ::)

John Smith wrote on Jul 11^th, 2022 at 5:48pm:

Gnads wrote on Jul 11th, 2022 at 5:47pm: John Smith wrote on Jul 10th, 2022 at 4:11pm: Gnads wrote on Jul 10th, 2022 at 10:50am: If those other lads in the gang ran any sort of distraction(including the throwing of a plastic water bottle) that allowed their mate an easier opportunity to stab either of those boys ...... then they deserve some sort of punitive sentence for their part. So if you are walking along on the footpath and some driver is distracted by your choice of clothes, and leads to him crashing and killing a pedestrian, you agree you should also be found guilty as an accomplice? That would be the most lame & ridiculous comparison I have ever seen you make. Take a bow Smithy ... you've outdone yourself with stupid & irrelevance. I agree... but you were the one who thinks the kids should go to jail if they distracted the kid that got killed. Do you realise now just how ridiculous that argument is?

You've obviously never been in a situation where you were on your own & confronted by a group who intend to rough you up? Someone will distract you so you can be blindsided.

Ever seen dingoes, wolves, wild dogs, lions run decoy to pull down pray?

It's not ridiculous to suggest that what these blokes did for the stabber.

You are making excuses for young criminal thugs.

John Smith wrote on Jul 11^th, 2022 at 6:05pm:

Gnads wrote on Jul 11th, 2022 at 6:02pm: You're just an excuse maker for young crims. what crim have i made excuses for? ::)

The ones mentioned in the OP.

Those that were let off of charges of being accessories to murder/manslaughter & grievous bodily harm.

Simple Smithy, threw a miffy
Made a silly post,
When he tried to twist it round
It turned into a roast..

He made a pyre, lit the fire,
Above a flaming pit,
Instead of roasting Grappler steaks
Smith spun upon the spit...

He turned and turned and twisted round
His fevered brain on fire
The flames he lit to make his point
Became his funeral pyre.

Quote:

It's not ridiculous to suggest that what these blokes did for the stabber.

It would be ridiculous for the court to put any value in the suggestion.

freediver wrote on Jul 11^th, 2022 at 6:35pm:

Quote: It's not ridiculous to suggest that what these blokes did for the stabber. It would be ridiculous for the court to put any value in the suggestion.

Sadly it is evidence and not suggestions that are supposed to play a part in courts.... just because it could be done that way doesn't mean it was.

Wait until you see the one about the guy convicted of the murder of two Victorian police being released on re-trial after 24 years behind bars.

Quote:

Sadly it is evidence and not suggestions that are supposed to play a part in courts

Why is it sad? Would it make you happy to get locked up on mere suggestion?

freediver wrote on Jul 11^th, 2022 at 6:59pm:

Quote: Sadly it is evidence and not suggestions that are supposed to play a part in courts Why is it sad? Would it make you happy to get locked up on mere suggestion?

Sad for the suggestion that it be otherwise.... you took it the wrong way around ..... you know I oppose guilt by accusation and also other malfeasance in and by courts...

How about - 'sadly for that idea ...'

Righto.

My slip.. not clear enough.

Gnads wrote on Jul 11^th, 2022 at 6:06pm:

You've obviously never been in a situation where you were on your own & confronted by a group who intend to rough you up? Someone will distract you so you can be blindsided. Ever seen dingoes, wolves, wild dogs, lions run decoy to pull down pray? It's not ridiculous to suggest that what these blokes did for the stabber. You are making excuses for young criminal thugs.

Of course it's ridiculous to suggest it. I'm not sure you can actually get any more ridiculous if you tried.

It's one possible scenario - just a suggestion..... I wonder if it was pursued by the prosecution?

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 11^th, 2022 at 12:47am:

..Without clear evidence that the three actively participated in the crimes, they cannot be convicted, and the mere appearance of 'justice being done' is not sufficient.

I've presumed that the three were "actively" involved in the killing. 
CCTV shows them participating at the scene;  what more evidence
do we need of their involvement?

They were part of the affray, fighting with other youths—which led
ultimately to Beasley's stabbing.  They may not have held the killer
knife of course—that was another youth—but to let them walk away
scot-free is a miscarriage of justice.  It's yet another example of the
soft-cocks in our judiciary.

AusGeoff wrote on Jul 11^th, 2022 at 8:14pm:

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 11th, 2022 at 12:47am: ..Without clear evidence that the three actively participated in the crimes, they cannot be convicted, and the mere appearance of 'justice being done' is not sufficient. I've presumed that the three were "actively" involved in the killing.  CCTV shows them participating at the scene;  what more evidence do we need of their involvement? They were part of the affray, fighting with other youths—which led ultimately to Beasley's stabbing.  They may not have held the killer knife of course—that was another youth—but to let them walk away scot-free is a miscarriage of justice.  It's yet another example of the soft-cocks in our judiciary.

Perhaps you should lay blame on the prosecutor. Maybe if he'd stuck with charges of 'affray' or 'assault causing harm', they wouldn't have gotten away with it. The jury can only make a decision on the charges before the courts.

Can they still charge them with assault?

In any case, that is a fairly petty charge. I have no issue with the prosecutor having a go at a bigger charge.

AusGeoff wrote on Jul 11^th, 2022 at 8:14pm:

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 11th, 2022 at 12:47am: ..Without clear evidence that the three actively participated in the crimes, they cannot be convicted, and the mere appearance of 'justice being done' is not sufficient. I've presumed that the three were "actively" involved in the killing.  CCTV shows them participating at the scene;  what more evidence do we need of their involvement? They were part of the affray, fighting with other youths—which led ultimately to Beasley's stabbing.  They may not have held the killer knife of course—that was another youth—but to let them walk away scot-free is a miscarriage of justice.  It's yet another example of the soft-cocks in our judiciary.

Ah... I see.  Then they must have got a walk because of their youth... though how is beyond me.  If there was clear evidence they participated... hell.