Australian Politics Forum - Baden Clay wins appeal.

Neferti

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 7965
Canberra
Gender: female

Re: Baden Clay wins appeal.
Reply #765 - Jan 12^th, 2016 at 3:41pm

Aussie wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 3:34pm:

Neferti wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 3:32pm:

Alinta wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 2:50pm:

At law, an accused is ALWAYS innocent until proven guilty.........

EVERYONE knows this. Roll Eyes

Wrong.

Quote:

in these cases is the accused always given the benefit of the doubt?

People who LIE and then lie again and again are deemed "innocent" in your book, arsie?

In MY world, anybody who lies to me has lost my support .. forever. I do NOT suffer liars.

Back to top

IP Logged

Neferti Gold Member Offline Posts: 7965 Canberra Gender:	Re: Baden Clay wins appeal. Reply #766 - Jan 12^th, 2016 at 3:45pm Neferti wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 3:32pm: Alinta wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 2:50pm: At law, an accused is ALWAYS innocent until proven guilty......... EVERYONE knows this. IF somebody murdered his favourite granddaughter, he would think the same way. It was her fault. The person who did it is INNOCENT. bump
Back to top	IP Logged

Neferti

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 7965
Canberra
Gender: female

Re: Baden Clay wins appeal.
Reply #767 - Jan 12^th, 2016 at 3:56pm

Neferti wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 3:32pm:

Alinta wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 2:50pm:

At law, an accused is ALWAYS innocent until proven guilty.........

EVERYONE knows this. Roll Eyes

IF somebody murdered your favourite granddaughter, would you think the same way. It was her fault. The person who did it is INNOCENT. UNTIL Proved GUILTY.

I reiterate!

Back to top

IP Logged

Neferti Gold Member Offline Posts: 7965 Canberra Gender:	Re: Baden Clay wins appeal. Reply #768 - Jan 12^th, 2016 at 3:58pm Neferti wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 3:32pm: Alinta wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 2:50pm: At law, an accused is ALWAYS innocent until proven guilty......... EVERYONE knows this. IF somebody murdered his favourite granddaughter, would he think the same way. It was her fault. The person who did it is INNOCENT. bump
Back to top	IP Logged

Neferti Gold Member Offline Posts: 7965 Canberra Gender:	Re: Baden Clay wins appeal. Reply #769 - Jan 12^th, 2016 at 3:59pm MURDER
Back to top	IP Logged

greggerypeccary Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 140108 Gender:	Re: Baden Clay wins appeal. Reply #770 - Jan 12^th, 2016 at 3:59pm Neferti wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 3:56pm: The person who did it is INNOCENT. UNTIL Proved GUILTY. We don't know who did it until someone is found guilty. Until then, everyone is innocent.
Back to top	« Last Edit: Jan 12^th, 2016 at 4:11pm by greggerypeccary » IP Logged

Neferti

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 7965
Canberra
Gender: female

Re: Baden Clay wins appeal.
Reply #771 - Jan 12^th, 2016 at 4:06pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 3:34pm:

Neferti wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 3:32pm:

Alinta wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 2:50pm:

At law, an accused is ALWAYS innocent until proven guilty.........

EVERYONE knows this. Roll Eyes

Except cods.

And Red Baron.

Sucking up to Arsie won't get you FREE legal advice, Gregg. Wink

Arsie only does Queensland Legal stuff.

Ask him about Federal LAW or WA Law and he has to Google, the same as the rest of us. I am (still) au fait with the ACT Law, for example. Arsie seemingly knows Queensland Law.

Back to top

IP Logged

Aussie

Gold Member

Online

OzPolitic

Posts: 38877
Gender: male

Re: Baden Clay wins appeal.
Reply #772 - Jan 12^th, 2016 at 4:10pm

Neferti wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 4:06pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 3:34pm:

Neferti wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 3:32pm:

Alinta wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 2:50pm:

At law, an accused is ALWAYS innocent until proven guilty.........

EVERYONE knows this. Roll Eyes

Except cods.

And Red Baron.

Sucking up to Arsie won't get you FREE legal advice, Gregg. Wink

Arsie only does Queensland Legal stuff.

Ask him about Federal LAW or WA Law and he has to Google, the same as the rest of us. I am (still) au fait with the ACT Law, for example. Arsie seemingly knows Queensland Law.

Yeah. you are the font of all knowledge. Tell us about the 'Lord's Prayer' and the Constitution again. That was a ripper example of you being 'au fait.'

Back to top

IP Logged

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 140108
Gender: male

Re: Baden Clay wins appeal.
Reply #773 - Jan 12^th, 2016 at 4:27pm

Aussie wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 4:10pm:

Neferti wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 4:06pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 3:34pm:

Neferti wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 3:32pm:

Alinta wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 2:50pm:

At law, an accused is ALWAYS innocent until proven guilty.........

EVERYONE knows this. Roll Eyes

Except cods.

And Red Baron.

Sucking up to Arsie won't get you FREE legal advice, Gregg. Wink

Arsie only does Queensland Legal stuff.

Ask him about Federal LAW or WA Law and he has to Google, the same as the rest of us. I am (still) au fait with the ACT Law, for example. Arsie seemingly knows Queensland Law.

Yeah. you are the font of all knowledge. Tell us about the 'Lord's Prayer' and the Constitution again. That was a ripper example of you being 'au fait.'

That sounds interesting.

Back to top

IP Logged

Neferti

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 7965
Canberra
Gender: female

Re: Baden Clay wins appeal.
Reply #774 - Jan 12^th, 2016 at 4:33pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 4:27pm:

Aussie wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 4:10pm:

Neferti wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 4:06pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 3:34pm:

Neferti wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 3:32pm:

Alinta wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 2:50pm:

At law, an accused is ALWAYS innocent until proven guilty.........

EVERYONE knows this. Roll Eyes

Except cods.

And Red Baron.

Sucking up to Arsie won't get you FREE legal advice, Gregg. Wink

Arsie only does Queensland Legal stuff.

Ask him about Federal LAW or WA Law and he has to Google, the same as the rest of us. I am (still) au fait with the ACT Law, for example. Arsie seemingly knows Queensland Law.

Yeah. you are the font of all knowledge. Tell us about the 'Lord's Prayer' and the Constitution again. That was a ripper example of you being 'au fait.'

That sounds interesting.

It was.

If I recall, arshole and I had a "discussion" about the Opening Of PARLIAMENT and I said that the "Lords Prayer" was part of the "pomp and ceremony" ... somehow the CONSTITUTION (which says eff-all) got into the "discussion". Instead of saying it was "in the Constitution" I should have said that the LORD's PRAYER for was part of TRADITION

Back to top

IP Logged

Aussie

Gold Member

Online

OzPolitic

Posts: 38877
Gender: male

Re: Baden Clay wins appeal.
Reply #775 - Jan 12^th, 2016 at 4:37pm

Neferti wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 4:33pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 4:27pm:

Aussie wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 4:10pm:

Neferti wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 4:06pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 3:34pm:

Neferti wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 3:32pm:

Alinta wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 2:50pm:

At law, an accused is ALWAYS innocent until proven guilty.........

EVERYONE knows this. Roll Eyes

Except cods.

And Red Baron.

Sucking up to Arsie won't get you FREE legal advice, Gregg. Wink

Arsie only does Queensland Legal stuff.

Ask him about Federal LAW or WA Law and he has to Google, the same as the rest of us. I am (still) au fait with the ACT Law, for example. Arsie seemingly knows Queensland Law.

Yeah. you are the font of all knowledge. Tell us about the 'Lord's Prayer' and the Constitution again. That was a ripper example of you being 'au fait.'

That sounds interesting.

It was.

If I recall, arshole and I had a "discussion" about the Opening Of PARLIAMENT and I said that the "Lords Prayer" was part of the "pomp and ceremony" ... somehow the CONSTITUTION (which says eff-all) got into the "discussion". Instead of saying it was "in the Constitution" I should have said that the LORD's PRAYER for was part of TRADITION

Oh yeas? You even referred to a Section of the Constitution (116 it was)......! That was how much you meant to refer to 'tradition' and not the Constitution.

Back to top

IP Logged

Neferti

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 7965
Canberra
Gender: female

Re: Baden Clay wins appeal.
Reply #776 - Jan 12^th, 2016 at 4:43pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 4:27pm:

Aussie wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 4:10pm:

Neferti wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 4:06pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 3:34pm:

Neferti wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 3:32pm:

Alinta wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 2:50pm:

At law, an accused is ALWAYS innocent until proven guilty.........

EVERYONE knows this. Roll Eyes

Except cods.

And Red Baron.

Sucking up to Arsie won't get you FREE legal advice, Gregg. Wink

Arsie only does Queensland Legal stuff.

Ask him about Federal LAW or WA Law and he has to Google, the same as the rest of us. I am (still) au fait with the ACT Law, for example. Arsie seemingly knows Queensland Law.

Yeah. you are the font of all knowledge. Tell us about the 'Lord's Prayer' and the Constitution again. That was a ripper example of you being 'au fait.'

That sounds interesting.

It was.

If I recall, Arshole and I had a "discussion" about the Opening Of PARLIAMENT and I said that the "Lords Prayer" was part of the "pomp and ceremony" ... somehow the CONSTITUTION (which says eff-all) got into the "discussion". Instead of saying it was "in the Constitution" I should have said that the LORD's PRAYER for was part of TRADITION.

Arsehole is fine when he thinks he knows it all ......... find/prove him wrong/out and then he will chase you around adding little digs to prove he is a great taxi driver.

His knowledge of The Law is contained to QUEENSLAND STATE LAW. He has no idea about Federal Law or the Law in other States or Territories.

Back to top

IP Logged

cods

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 88048

Re: Baden Clay wins appeal.
Reply #777 - Jan 12^th, 2016 at 5:26pm

Aussie wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 3:02pm:

I see Alinta has not responded to most of the questions posed by cods, so I'll try.

Quote:

thank you yes and no alinta...I know I am a bugger I see things from a different angle I have always been the same..things are never straight forward...

Correct.

Quote:

as you have said .. so many variations...and we all have one...but only the appeal court has any rights..

Correct.

Quote:

tell me this....having his sentence down graded.. sorry if thats the wrong thing but thats how all us upsetters see it..... why would they not.. tell him.. the accused..

Sound practical reasons. Say the Supreme Court gave him ten years for manslaughter...which is what he has now been found guilty of. Later, the High Court upholds the Appeal and say, re-instates the conviction for murder. He would then need to be re-sentenced. Better to leave it as it is until the Appeal is heard.

Quote:

that should we look at this appeal... should the accused not be required to tell us the real story of what took place....

He maintains he had nothing to do with it cods. He has sworn under oath he had nothing to do with it.

Quote:

no kidding... manslaughter still means she is dead...and he was there....and he did some terrible things after her death.. remember she has a family... as well as 3 girls...who deserve to know the truth............

I've seen far worse things done with a murder victim after their death.

Quote:

if he gets away with manslaughter he will still appeal that because he has never admitted anything...btw I didnt know about the outside part.. is that in the book???...

Nah. He cannot appeal the manslaughter conviction. For one thing, his own Lawyers conceded that a manslaughter conviction was open on the evidence. I disagree, but, as I have said, the Umpire has given his decision on that.

Quote:

in your case that you sent me... the autopsy showed pollen in the nose of the dead body...from her own front verge and she was buried under dirt......yet this autopsy on Allison gave us not one clue...her hair was full of debris which I thought was an amazing bit of forensics...how come the bloody autopsy showed nothing????????.....

From recollection, the pollen was consistent with vegetation where that woman was buried. Allison's autopsy demonstrated that at some point vegetation consistent with that outside her home got in her hair. Hence the theory that they argued and she fell with her head contacting that vegetation outside her home.

Quote:

if the only witness is the accused and he claims he wasnt there...how on earth can anyone PROVE what he was thinking???........men do snap you know.. look at the man whos just killed his two little boys... even his wife says he was the perfect father...........?????............would you like to prove what was going through HIS MIND?????....

If they had bullet holes in their head from the rifle found in the car and his prints are on the rifle, it is clear evidence of intent to kill.

Quote:

this business of PROOF beyond... needs looking at ...and I still dont know where the line in the sand is FOR PROOF?.. is it just conjuring a scenario that suits the appeal court judges...???

There is a clear line in the sand. The standard of proof is 'beyond reasonable doubt,' which is not a term of legal art. It means what it says in everyday speech.

Quote:

if as you say it took place outside the home.. and her hair was full of stuff she ended up on the ground....why couldnt he have throttled her on the ground....hand over nose and mouth... he is big enough...how do you prove he didnt???>..

He could have, but there was no proof that he did...even the autopsy demonstrates that.

alinta.. I will let you answer aussie he has a lot of respect for you and none for me....

I can also shoot holes through his clap trap but I cant be bothered....

Back to top

IP Logged

cods

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 88048

Re: Baden Clay wins appeal.
Reply #778 - Jan 12^th, 2016 at 5:27pm

Aussie wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 3:10pm:

red baron wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 3:02pm:

Blah...blah...blah Aussie. He murdered her out of GREED, are you as thick as you are demonstrating with your pointless word war?

I'm in very good company. Three Appeal Court Judges agree with me.

HILARIOUS...I am sure they read ozpol..

Back to top

IP Logged

Aussie

Gold Member

Online

OzPolitic

Posts: 38877
Gender: male

Re: Baden Clay wins appeal.
Reply #779 - Jan 12^th, 2016 at 5:32pm

cods wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 5:27pm:

Aussie wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 3:10pm:

red baron wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 3:02pm:

Blah...blah...blah Aussie. He murdered her out of GREED, are you as thick as you are demonstrating with your pointless word war?

I'm in very good company. Three Appeal Court Judges agree with me.

HILARIOUS...I am sure they read ozpol..

That's not the point. They and I have the same view.

Quote:

alinta.. I will let you answer aussie he has a lot of respect for you and none for me....

I can also shoot holes through his clap trap but I cant be bothered....

I do not know Alinta, but I do know she does not post garbage. If you can shoot holes through 'my clap trap' do it. "Not being bothered" suggests you can't do what you claim.

Back to top

IP Logged