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

[The Dark Knight]

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!

That's how it's always worked. The cops only charge someone if they believe that they have a case and can get a conviction. No point having a court case if even the police do not think they have a reasonable chance of winning.

Obviously the DPP can still proceed with the case if he disagrees with the police assessment or if there is pressure from above.

 

[LB 15]

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

They have both already been ridiculed in one.

 

[Ease the sheet.]

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?

I'm still wondering how the teacher who killed his wife and married the babysitter was found guilty.

Surely that deserves a day in front of the high court too.

 

[Goodvibes]

I'm still wondering how the teacher who killed his wife and married the babysitter was found guilty.

Surely that deserves a day in front of the high court too.

Yeah look, this one is good enough.

There are only two people who know what happened to Lynette Dawson, and one of them is dead. But he was convicted.

Even Pell had someone still alive to accuse him, but apparently His Word Against Hers is just not good enough.

BH said she was raped, witnesses saw them together, wintesses saw him race out, witnesses found her unconcious and naked. But is she going to see justice?

How dare a servant wench complain!

 

[Fah Kiew Tu]

They have both already been ridiculed in one.

I think, in Meli's case, doing a Mary Poppins segment when she's hanging out with the chimney sweep - Randumb - would work nicely.

For the life of me, I still can't understand how this Bruce clown is guilty on the say-so of a woman, without any evidence, and Bill Shorten is innocent of the same offence, despite the say-so of the woman concerned, with no evidence.

I'm sure there's a perfectly logical explanation though. It's just that I lack the sophisticated understanding and parsing of circumstance to see what it is.

FKT

 

[Goodvibes]

If there was an opportunity to have political interference, it would be to have the DPP decide not to proceed.

Victim credibility in adult sexual assault cases​

"As the decision to prosecute often involves evidential or legal issues that are matters of professional judgment and involve a degree of subjectivity, different prosecutors may take different perspectives on a matter (HM Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate (HMCPSI) 2002). Sexual assault cases involving adult victims often come down to the word of the victim against that of the defendant, with little or no corroborating evidence. As the probability of conviction relies on the victim's ability to articulate the events and convince a jury beyond reasonable doubt that a crime occurred, her credibility is integral to prosecutorial decisions. This is not inherently problematic, but overseas research has shown that prosecutors who become preoccupied with convictability may actively look for factors that discredit victims and provide a legal basis for rejecting or discontinuing cases. Factors that undermine credibility include personal characteristics relating to moral character or reputation; 'risk-taking' behaviour; discrepancies in the victim's accounts of the incident; and typifications about rape scenarios, rape reporting and post-assault behaviour (Frohmann 1991; HMCPSI 2002; Spohn, Beichner & Davis-Frenzel 2002). Some authors have expressed concern that prosecutors' appraisals of credibility may be filtered through prejudicial gender stereotypes and moral norms. They argue that discretionary decisions in sexual assault cases 'reflect a patriarchal foundation of reasoning and beliefs about gender roles in our present-day society' (Madigan & Gamble 1989: 130).

So it is common for rape cases to proceed with his word against hers. Nothing to see here.

But if you want an example of patriarchal legal system, note the "her" I have highlighted above. In a paper that warns against patriarchal systems, there is a presumption that the victim is a 'Her'!

So we have a legal system that uses a Jury to decide on guilt, but one man in each State decides whether to charge the accused at all. No wonder someone stepped in!

 

[Goodvibes]

I think, in Meli's case, doing a Mary Poppins segment when she's hanging out with the chimney sweep - Randumb - would work nicely.

For the life of me, I still can't understand how this Bruce clown is guilty on the say-so of a woman, without any evidence, and Bill Shorten is innocent of the same offence, despite the say-so of the woman concerned, with no evidence.

I'm sure there's a perfectly logical explanation though. It's just that I lack the sophisticated understanding and parsing of circumstance to see what it is.

FKT

And LB was concerned about people like me getting on a Jury!

YCMTSU

Imagine, just Imagine ... the ungrateful bitch complaining and have her word possibly convict him! What the fuck is happening, the bitches are taking over! What's wrong with a little bit of after work fun, everyone does it!"

 

[The Dark Knight]

If there was an opportunity to have political interference, it would be to have the DPP decide not to proceed.

​

How do you figure that out?

The ACT chief minister and his Government are Labor. It was always going to be a bonus for Federal Labor to have that case in the public eye.

 

[Ease the sheet.]

If there was an opportunity to have political interference, it would be to have the DPP decide not to proceed.

Victim credibility in adult sexual assault cases​

"As the decision to prosecute often involves evidential or legal issues that are matters of professional judgment and involve a degree of subjectivity, different prosecutors may take different perspectives on a matter (HM Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate (HMCPSI) 2002). Sexual assault cases involving adult victims often come down to the word of the victim against that of the defendant, with little or no corroborating evidence. As the probability of conviction relies on the victim's ability to articulate the events and convince a jury beyond reasonable doubt that a crime occurred, her credibility is integral to prosecutorial decisions. This is not inherently problematic, but overseas research has shown that prosecutors who become preoccupied with convictability may actively look for factors that discredit victims and provide a legal basis for rejecting or discontinuing cases. Factors that undermine credibility include personal characteristics relating to moral character or reputation; 'risk-taking' behaviour; discrepancies in the victim's accounts of the incident; and typifications about rape scenarios, rape reporting and post-assault behaviour (Frohmann 1991; HMCPSI 2002; Spohn, Beichner & Davis-Frenzel 2002). Some authors have expressed concern that prosecutors' appraisals of credibility may be filtered through prejudicial gender stereotypes and moral norms. They argue that discretionary decisions in sexual assault cases 'reflect a patriarchal foundation of reasoning and beliefs about gender roles in our present-day society' (Madigan & Gamble 1989: 130).

So it is common for rape cases to proceed with his word against hers. Nothing to see here.

But if you want an example of patriarchal legal system, note the "her" I have highlighted above. In a paper that warns against patriarchal systems, there is a presumption that the victim is a 'Her'!

So we have a legal system that uses a Jury to decide on guilt, but one man in each State decides whether to charge the accused at all. No wonder someone stepped in!

As Pell showed, convincing a jury is still not enough.

The criminal justice system has big problems.

Compensation through the civil courts are the only way to effectively solve this issue.

If course, then you have the ridiculous situation where a person compensates another for an act that the criminal courts say didn't happen.

 

[ShortForBob]

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

Like LB's posts you mean?

I suppose the other 3 women who've come forward with rape or SA claims against the same man are all lying cows as well?
Funny how LB and DK don't want to talk about them. Not a word from them.

Without their accusations I would be inclined to say there is a reasonable doubt (but of course non of us has heard all the evidence)

 

[Goodvibes]

How do you figure that out?

The ACT chief minister and his Government are Labor. It was always going to be a bonus for Federal Labor to have that case in the public eye.

It matters not what brand they are, but someone who wanted to avoid a charge is free to use whatever influence they can muster right back to the old school. The person having final say on progressing could well hold similar views to you, others may have known that.

I have worked for the Cops in a consulting role and I can tell you that it is odds on that any senior people in any Service in Australia ... is a racist misogynist. Some are not, most are. That's just how it is, what you have to be to get promoted. You would have seen the latest happenings in Queensland.

Do we really need people who ignore the complaints of women about domestic violence till the women dies, making calls on whether to proceed on a rape case?

 

[Ease the sheet.]

It matters not what brand they are, but someone who wanted to avoid a charge is free to use whatever influence they can muster right back to the old school. The person having final say on progressing could well hold similar views to you, others may have known that.

I have worked for the Cops in a consulting role and I can tell you that it is odds on that any senior people in any Service in Australia ... is a racist misogynist. Some are not, most are. That's just how it is, what you have to be to get promoted. You would have seen the latest happenings in Queensland.

Do we really need people who ignore the complaints of women about domestic violence till the women dies, making calls on whether to proceed on a rape case?

Just look at NSW where the cops are complaining about having to deal with the investigation into gay hate crimes...

 

[Goodvibes]

Just look at NSW where the cops are complaining about having to deal with the investigation into gay hate crimes...

I had been there for a few months. They hated 'suits', only uniformed officers had any value. Any civilians just had to survive. Meetings were full of finger-pointing and foul language.

One ruddy faced pot-gutted senior sergeant was an extreme case. He had to walk by my desk when he arrived each morning. He used to put shit on me in a half joking way, I did not have the luxury of returning fire.

But one Monday morning he arrived with more capillaries than usual burst in his face and smelling of stale alcohol. He went to walk by but stopped, leaned one elbow over the low partition and said ...

"Are . you . still fucking here? Fucking consultants are fucking leaches on the system, bleeding us fucking dry when the money should be used to catch fucking robbers!"

Other cops and some consultants near-by found something really fascinating on their desks, heads down.

But I had had enough of his bullshit and in as friendly and non-confrontational way as possible said;

"So, what the fuck are you doing here ... all the robbers are out there."

I think I heard some chuckles. He left me alone after that.

The culture was poisonous, but not as bad as QLD Health, they ate people

 

[Goodvibes]

Higgins threatened the powerful, and criminal justice failures only partly explain her treatment​

Brittany Higgins posed a danger to those in high places. They responded with all the institutions at their disposal.

From the moment Higgins went public with her allegations of sexual assault and subsequent treatment by government ministers and staff, she was a direct challenge to the powerful — a challenge that became greater as she, along with a number of other brave women from a variety of backgrounds and for differing causes, became symbols and leaders of a groundswell of anger about gender and workplace issues.

Bernard Keane
Politics Editor @BernardKeane
Bernard Keane is Crikey's political editor. Before that he was Crikey's Canberra press gallery correspondent, covering politics, national security and economics.

 

[The Dark Knight]

Higgins threatened the powerful, and criminal justice failures only partly explain her treatment​

Brittany Higgins posed a danger to those in high places. They responded with all the institutions at their disposal.

From the moment Higgins went public with her allegations of sexual assault and subsequent treatment by government ministers and staff, she was a direct challenge to the powerful — a challenge that became greater as she, along with a number of other brave women from a variety of backgrounds and for differing causes, became symbols and leaders of a groundswell of anger about gender and workplace issues.

Bernard Keane
Politics Editor @BernardKeane
Bernard Keane is Crikey's political editor. Before that he was Crikey's Canberra press gallery correspondent, covering politics, national security and economics.

Sharing Crikey's opinion would be like sharing Meli's if she had an independant thought in her head.

and you had a go at LB for sharing an article from a Murdoch owned site. Hypocrite

 

[Goodvibes]

Sharing Crikey's opinion would be like sharing Meli's if she had an independant thought in her head.

and you had a go at LB for sharing an article from a Murdoch owned site. Hypocrite

Murdoch are full of paid for lies.

That Crikey article says what everyone is thinking and kinda knew already.

 

[00seven]

Murdoch are full of paid for lies.

That Crikey article says what everyone is thinking and kinda knew already in my bubble of three

 

[The Dark Knight]

Crikey are full of paid for lies.

That Murdoch article says what everyone is thinking and kinda knew already.

Fixed

 

[Goodvibes]

So I post something that says exactly what is happening and ..

 

[Goodvibes]

I wonder what the RWNJ's here are worried about ... did they do some bad things in the past that they are worried will get them charged?