Rape trial dropped because attacks on the accuser endanger her health?

[Goodvibes]

Welllll, in theory, a barister is an officer of the court and required to uphold the law, and not lie.

But in reality, they do tend to look after each other so as to not rock the boat and interupt the gravy train. Not many complaints get made against QC / AC types by other barristers, no matter how badly they fuck up.

This is not about a fuckup.

This is about defense Lawyers or Barristers being paid to defend a someone. Some are innocent, some are guilty but they are paid to defend the guilty. For money they will argue that the person is not guilty even incircumstances where they know that they are.

It's not a fuckup, it's not illegal, it is how the legal system and the law is structured. For a fee, they will use their knowledge of the law in an attempt to free a guilty person! It's a fairly small variation on the theme to write an Op Ed piece on how innocent an alledged rapist is, for a fee.

 

[LB 15]

Oh deary me, looks like I have touched a bit of a raw nerve. You have been caught altering the facts to suit your narrative, so have now decided to revert back to the old “ pin the moustache on the walrus “ game.

I had moved on from discussing your embarrassment at the CLUB as I felt enough was enough and was starting to tire of your squirming, but hey I’m happy to continue.


Now, I would have thought you wouldn’t have to ask that question after all the experience you gained , highlighted in a couple of previous threads.

You seemed to be of the opinion at the time , one could be guilty ,of let’s say for arguments sake … ABUSE , but you weren’t really guilty if you fled the club like a coward rather than face your peers, admit your guilt and apologise.

There how’s that for a resumption of play.

Well well well , a tad triggered Santa? I knew seeing me invited back with open arms would drive you and the rest of yesterday’s men crazy. No guilt to admit, and it is me who has been apologised too you silly little twice bankrupt arse clown. The new board will be righting to wrongs of the past and at least one potential director has been making a list and checking it twice. And guess which column you are firmly in cupcake.

Revenge is indeed best eaten cold. And your fat useless protector is long gone.Anyway back to the subject at hand. Due process has never been your strongpoint has it?

 

[LB 15]

Perhaps he is a cunt, but luckily being a cunt is not against the law, otherwise half of SA would be posting from prison. You’d definitely be a lifer.

More than likely he would be on death row...with me.
Meli will not be happy either because they banned smoking in Prisons years ago.

 

[LB 15]

This is not about a fuckup.

This is about defense Lawyers or Barristers being paid to defend a someone. Some are innocent, some are guilty but they are paid to defend the guilty. For money they will argue that the person is not guilty even incircumstances where they know that they are.

It's not a fuckup, it's not illegal, it is how the legal system and the law is structured. For a fee, they will use their knowledge of the law in an attempt to free a guilty person! It's a fairly small variation on the theme to write an Op Ed piece on how innocent an alledged rapist is, for a fee.

Sooooooooooo this is bullshit then?

"This occurred against the backdrop of alleged “political interference” in the investigation stage of the Lehrmann case, according to the ACT police manager of criminal investigations, Detective Superintendent Scott Moller (who says he would not have charged Lehrmann, but the decision was apparently taken out of his hands)"

I know we are not supposed to bring outside documents into this jury room, but I will leave this academic paper in your folder and recommend you read it. Don't let the cleaner find it.

How cannabis causes paranoia​

How cannabis causes paranoia | University of Oxford

The largest study of the effects of the main ingredient of cannabis has shown definitively that it can cause short-term paranoia. The Oxford-led research also, for the first time, identifies psychological factors that can lead to feelings of paranoia in people who take cannabis.

www.ox.ac.uk

 

[LB 15]

Look at our resident little coward taking potshots at people she thinks can’t see what she posts. Why didn’t you just unblock me, quote and reply and then block me again like you did before.

Meli, short, fat, ugly and stupid with a cigarette hanging out of your mouth is no way of going through life.
You claimed he was guilty the minute you heard about this. Now he will have his day in court. Who knows, maybe you might make it onto his defo list as well.

‘BH - ‘I have the dress- I put it in a plastic bag under my bed and never wore it again’
Police - ‘here is a photo of you wearing it a few months later.’
BH - ‘oh I forgot, I have mental health issues.’


Police- ‘you claimed to your Boss you had been to the police.’
BH - ‘oh I forgot I hadn’t- I have mental health issues.’


Police- ‘You claimed you went and saw a doctor after that night.’
BH - ‘Oh I forgot I didn't- I have mental health issues.’

BH- ‘The police never looked at his phone’
Police - ‘ What the fuck? We seized his phone right after your complaint’
BH- ‘leave me alone -I have mental health issues.’

Looks to me like Linda Reynolds nailed her character assessment spot on.

 

[00seven]

Crazy.

 

[The Dark Knight]

This is not about a fuckup.

This is about defense Lawyers or Barristers being paid to defend a someone. Some are innocent, some are guilty but they are paid to defend the guilty. For money they will argue that the person is not guilty even incircumstances where they know that they are.

It's not a fuckup, it's not illegal, it is how the legal system and the law is structured. For a fee, they will use their knowledge of the law in an attempt to free a guilty person! It's a fairly small variation on the theme to write an Op Ed piece on how innocent an alledged rapist is, for a fee.

So pick apart his op ed piece and highlight the lies. Sounds like it shouldn’t be hard when much of the article was about the things that happens after the alleged incident and information that is in the public domain.


Try this juicy section



This occurred against the backdrop of alleged “political interference” in the investigation stage of the Lehrmann case, according to the ACT police manager of criminal investigations, Detective Superintendent Scott Moller (who says he would not have charged Lehrmann, but the decision was apparently taken out of his hands). This chilling allegation by a senior AFP officer warrants a full accounting of the “political interference” being referred to, particularly given the implicitly political context in which the trial unfolded.

 

[Fah Kiew Tu]

Look at our resident little coward taking potshots at people she thinks can’t see what she posts. Why didn’t you just unblock me, quote and reply and then block me again like you did before.

Meli, short, fat, ugly and stupid with a cigarette hanging out of your mouth is no way of going through life.

You should be highly familiar with the type - if she had tats she'd be a perfect fit for the bogan crowd hanging out in Wynnum.

Except most likely they're smarter and better educated. I THINK there was a library there, probably only stocked with 'graphic novels' though...

FKT

 

[LB 15]

You should be highly familiar with the type - if she had tats she'd be a perfect fit for the bogan crowd hanging out in Wynnum.

Except most likely they're smarter and better educated. I THINK there was a library there, probably only stocked with 'graphic novels' though...

FKT

They built us a shiny new one a few years back. It is upstairs from the new Woolies. I go there to use the toilets all the time.
We have just had the Wynnum Fringe festive complete with the Wynnum Eye. Its all happening up here mate. Don't you worry about that.

 

[spankoka]

If the Crown really wants to continue the prosecution, they can make her a hostile witness and keep her in jail until she testifies. There was a case in Canada where a rape victim was transported to court in the same van as the accused.

 

[ShortForBob]

I think it's time LB made a new "Hitler" clip.
Not very funny the 3rd or fourth time around, but it's about all he's got.

 

[hasher]

If the Crown really wants to continue the prosecution, they can make her a hostile witness and keep her in jail until she testifies. There was a case in Canada where a rape victim was transported to court in the same van as the accused.

I always explained to victims that they were merely witnesses. I would lock up witnesses (a material witness warrant)..

I am a mean motherfucker. I told them that. I just want to put the mutherfucker away. Excuse me. I don't apologize.

 

[LB 15]

Go you good thing!

EXCLUSIVE: Lisa Wilkinson in the firing line as Bruce Lehrmann considers suing Channel 10 and The Project star for defamation over interview where Brittany Higgins first broke her silence​

Bruce Lehrmann is considering suing Lisa Wilkinson and Channel 10 for defamation over the TV star's Logie-award winning interview where Brittany Higgins first accused him of rape.

Funny how you don't see any pics of them together any more. I hope she gets bankrupted AND has to give her little statue back. She will never work again thank fuck.

Bruce Lehrmann considers suing Lisa Wilkinson and Channel Ten

Mr Lehrmann, 27, is in discussions to launch legal action over the February 2021 Project with Lisa Wilkinson interview where Brittany Higgins went public with claims she was raped in Canberra.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[Se7en]

I think it's time LB made a new "Hitler" clip.
Not very funny the 3rd or fourth time around, but it's about all he's got.

If you're going to take potshots, probably best to take folks off ignore first. Otherwise. it seems like malicious gossip.

 

[Goodvibes]

So pick apart his op ed piece and highlight the lies. Sounds like it shouldn’t be hard when much of the article was about the things that happens after the alleged incident and information that is in the public domain.


Try this juicy section



This occurred against the backdrop of alleged “political interference” in the investigation stage of the Lehrmann case, according to the ACT police manager of criminal investigations, Detective Superintendent Scott Moller (who says he would not have charged Lehrmann, but the decision was apparently taken out of his hands). This chilling allegation by a senior AFP officer warrants a full accounting of the “political interference” being referred to, particularly given the implicitly political context in which the trial unfolded.

Oh Really?

So if someone is charged, a jury decides. But before that we have one copper make the call, nice. Looks like someone decided that Scott Moller needed some assistance, who knows, maybe he has form.

Lack of evidence does not mean that a crime was not commited. It means that the person who did it does not get convicted.

In the end though, half the jury thought he was guilty!

 

[Goodvibes]

@LB 15 so, you guys are saying what? That he did not rape her?

 

[LB 15]

@LB 15 so, you guys are saying what? That he did not rape her?

There are only 2 people on earth who know what happened that night and it ain't you and me. I don't know them or in fact give a flying fuck about either of them truth be told. From what I have read about them I wouldn't piss on either of them if their hair was on fire.


What does offend me is cunts like you and Meli who have zero interest in the rule of law, procedural fairness and truth. You only care about 'your side' winning, even if it meant an innocent man going to jail. That does not mean I think he is innocent? As I said how the fuck would I or anyone else but them know?

Take the Pell case, I would really like to see Pell and every other senior member of the catholic church be sodomized in a prison shower every day until eternity, but the manner in which he was first convicted was the most dangerous precedent in Australian legal history.

It would have opened the floodgates for anyone with a grudge against someone to have them jailed without any proof. You may not see that as a problem but remember just how many people out there might think you (and me for that matter) are cunts.

Even worse it may have nothing to do with personal animosity and everything to do with political gain. Rape is a horrific crime and our legal system should do all it can to work towards encouraging victims to feel safe about coming forward, while retaining natural justice for the accused. Much has been done already towards this. Victims can remain anonymous, they do not have to give evidence live in court and their past sexual history is inadmissible.

The person who did her the most damage, both to her mental health and her case, was a narcissistic far left wing Journalist, who used her for her own personal gain.

But what I do know from THE FACTS is the timing of her 'complaint', the people who were handling her and the amount of lies she told can only result in one thing. Reasonable doubt. Not finding him guilty because he is a white heterosexual male that worked for a Liberal minister and that is exactly what you and that gutless deranged book stacker want. So take your bullshit conspiracy theories, your fabricated drink spiking story, your knee slapping claim about being raped by a 13 year old girl and stick them in your bong and smoke it.

You see as long as cunts like you two fuckwits are eligible for jury duty, no one is safe. Now haven't you got another thread to start Meli?

 

[The Dark Knight]

@LB 15 so, you guys are saying what? That he did not rape her?

I guess "you guys" includes me.

FIIK... I was not there. It's a he says, she says case that needed to be heard by a jury that hopefully had no preconcived idea about the guilt or not of the defendant and the credibility of the complainant.

BH doing the interview, signing a book deal and the political storm that followed before going back to the police and finally asking them to pursue BL, ensured that it would be near impossible to get a fair trial.

So do you think he did rape her?

 

[The Dark Knight]

Now haven't you got another thread to start Meli?

It seems that she is waiting for you to make a Hitler video.

 

[LB 15]

In the end though, half the jury thought he was guilty!

Half the Jury? See this is exactly what I mean about you. You have zero understanding of the law. In ACT rape trials the verdict must be unanimous. That means it could well be that 11 members of the panel found that there was reasonable doubt, but there was someone like you and your fuckwit GF that don't care about any facts they wanted him hung for who he worked for.

In fact that is a far likely scenario and that person brought in some shit about false claims to try and sway the others. Reasonable doubt in this case means that he was never going to be found guilty no matter how many times they ran the trial.

Now might be a good time for you to either do some homework or shut the fuck up.