Aussie wrote on Jun 17
th, 2024 at 6:25pm:
Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jun 17
th, 2024 at 6:05pm:
Aussie wrote on Jun 17
th, 2024 at 5:41pm:
Aussie wrote on Jun 17
th, 2024 at 5:38pm:
Justice blinded.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-06-17/bruce-lehrmann-rape-charges-tooowoomba-magistrates-court/103985466
Okay...so fair enough.
But if he is committed to stand trial, the details must be made public.
Why? I would have thought that such 'sensitive' matters should be done in a way to protect all parties. Fair's fair, innit? Oh - sorry - this is Australia - you're standing in it .... our 'jurisprudence' is still based on the Feudal system of prerogative for the 'better' types....so clearly the ruin of one person's reputation in entirety and for life is nothing compared to 'protecting' the right of some accuser to not be named.....
That's Smith kind of non-thinking ..... the accused has no rights at all.....
Is it his piggy eyes? Why did it take THIS sheila three weeks to work out that Bruce rooted her and therefore she could get five minutes of fame while remaining protected from scrutiny - even in a court so biased these days towards men accused of such things - not to mention her 'victim's compensation payment'.... worth a lot in Toowoomba...
I knew an Aboriginal guy - in the slammer for 'kidnapping some fifteen year old girl' who was clearly arm-in-arm with him but then figured she could get $50k from complaining... once someone explained it to her.
You don't pay much attention to anything anyone says other than yourself, right Grappler? Your transmit/receive ratio says you are deaf and blind. You just send out crap.
You are obviously not aware of the recent changes to the Law in Qld about naming people charged with rape before they have been committed for trial. I opposed the change.
But, once a person HAS been committed for trial, then, names should come out as well as the details.
Ah, yes - the old Law that is Not a Law because it is not applied equally... in this case, the accused can be named and ruined for life regardless of the outcome - the accuser can just waltz away regardless of the finding.... and suffer no consequences.
Back in the Dark Ages - the Overlord cannot be wrong! Even back in the dim days of the English Civil War, Parliament went to great lengths during the fighting to say that it was not the King at fault - it was his advisors.... Cromwell changed their minds at sword point though .... but Cromwell was a fanatic, no? and wanted blood ....???
Any of this ringing a bell for you yet?
I oppose unequal treatment in any situation.... well - at least the 'courts' have listened to what I've been posting here for ages - voice in the wilderness - and are stating PRECISELY what 'native title' means on the ground ...... what is permitted and what is not - instead of the open slather they created for so long with their vacuous 'findings' and statements.
'Ere ya go, me old Austareicher Camp Guard:-
https://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1684277855Now then - you agree that Smith should be convicted of punching a girl in the head even though it is not proven against him or his trial was abandoned, and should suffer punishment to character for life as a result.. carry the stigma for life?