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

Ease the sheet.

ignoring stupid people is easy
Change of subject old boy. Looking to Ease the pain for a few posts.
But here you go mate...
As a former ad man you should know that only shallow brain dead imbeciles actually believe words over actions.

No compensation, no job, nationwide disgrace. Only Porter could see that as winning. Well, only Porter and his bullshitter elk.

Ps, Bill appreciates your Queensland tax dollars. And your Queensland women.
Last edited:


Super Anarchist
There's plenty of evidence here of the arrogance and the irrelevance of reality.
“It is not the most intellectual or the strongest species that survives, but the species that survives is the one that is able to adapt to or adjust best to the changing environment in which it finds itself.” — Charles Darwin

Fah Kiew Tu

Curmudgeon, First Rank
Tasmania, Australia
All we know was that it was a hung jury at the time because if they had a result, they would have returned you fucking idiot. It was heading for a hung jury at worse and that is an acquittal

Well not quite. If it's a hung jury the case *can* be re-prosecuted. As opposed to an aquittal, where it can't.

But, Meli, yeah. No doubt she thinks the jury stuffed up every time they fail to convict a person she personally knows is guilty. Really, I don't know why we have trials at all, when Meli (and ETs and Randumb) can determine guilt without one.

Meli is exactly the sort of person who'd have been drowning supposed witches back in the day.


The Dark Knight

Super Anarchist
Well well look who is back peddling now..
3 times she has posted categorially that he is a serial rapist. She must be getting tied of hiding inside with the curtains closed.

Are you expecting any consistancy from her?

We most certainly know it wasn't. It is inadmissible you dumb cunt.
Are you expecting an intelligent understanding by her?

Reasonable people do not still smoke in 2022. And no a reasonable person would judge the case on its merits not on hearsay, as the law requires. You are the least reasonable person I have ever come across. Probably why you get punted off forums. So how come he hasn't been charged with anything?
Are you expecting reason from her?

Circumstantial evidence and hearsay. You can't make this shit up. But of course Meli has posted that the accuser's character assessment should never be allowed. Even if that would include a minister of the crown giving evidence that she is a lying little cow with a book deal.
Do you expect any better from her?

Of course you don't!!!! 😜

Have fun!!

P.S. I hope the Albo Government's intellegence level is greater than that of it's LWNJ voters, otherwise we are fucked.


under the southern cross I stand ...
Obviously, while all Liberal men are paragons of virtue, truth and chivalry, all Liberal women that disagree are slags and lying cows that shouldn't be allowed to work in their MP's offices and will be shunned and hounded into the mental hospital if they make accusations of rape. (against Liberals)

And we have the hypocrite of the Century, what a cunt LB is ... proof that he changes his view depending on which party the accused belongs to.

"I hope one day to be on a jury hearing a case against Bill Shorten. Regardless of what the matter is, I am finding him guilty of rape."



Super Anarchist
As a former ad man you should know that only shallow brain dead imbeciles actually believe words over actions.

No compensation, no job, nationwide disgrace. Only Porter could see that as winning. Well, only Porter and his bullshitter elk.

Ps, Bill appreciates your Queensland tax dollars. And your Queensland women.
Well like Shorten, these historical claims are impossible to prove or disprove when the accuser is either dead or so damaged they can't testify.
But we'd all like to know who paid his legal fees. No shame, nothing to hide?


Super Anarchist
Here's an interesting perspective on the subject

What a difference a decade makes to reporting claims against powerful men​

Kathy Sherriff didn’t know the woman who claimed she was raped by Christian Porter. She hasn’t read the details of her allegations or listened to the Attorney-General’s denials. But she believes her, “without a shadow of a doubt”.

“I know for an absolute fact – as do [the] one-in-five women and one-in-20 men who have been raped – that this woman is telling the truth.”
Sherriff can’t know. Not for certain. Not when the woman is dead and the NSW Police has abandoned its investigation.
Her belief that victims should be listened to and believed is a catchcry of the #MeToo movement, a social, political and legal upheaval. In the short years between Sherriff accusing then Labor leader Bill Shorten of historical rape and the treatment of Porter’s accuser’s claims, there has been a seismic shift in how prominent men accused of rape are treated by the media and political class.

Depending on where you stand, it is cause for hope or deep unease.
Sherriff accused Shorten of raping her at a Labor Youth Camp in Portarlington in 1986 when she was 16 and he was 19. Victoria Police investigated her claims in 2013 and did not find sufficient evidence to support criminal charges against Shorten.
Sherriff has never understood why. At the time, journalists approached her story with a high degree of caution, as legally risky and politically fraught.
When The Australian newspaper first revealed in November 2013 that Victoria Police were investigating a historic rape allegations against a “senior Labor figure,” the report ran on the front page beneath the fold; a broadsheet spot reserved for good stories but not the most important news of the day.

There was little follow up, apart from some mentions on obscure websites. There was no demand for Shorten to out himself or to step aside while the matter was investigated. Nine months later, after Victoria Police informed him that no charges would be laid, Shorten identified himself as the Labor figure and said the allegations had been vigorously investigated and that there was “absolutely no basis” to them. Prime Minister Tony Abbott said the matter had been dealt with and “I don’t think there’s really anything more to say about it”. Shorten led Labor to the next election.
That response bears no resemblance to the convulsion in national affairs in the week since the ABC reported a cabinet minister was accused of a rape in an anonymous letter referred to the Australian Federal Police.
When Porter called a press conference on Wednesday to out himself as the cabinet minister, he compared his treatment with that of Shorten and vehemently denied the allegation against him.

“There weren’t any calls for him [Shorten] to stand down or public reporting of anonymous, unsourced, untested material designed to try somebody in public while they are duty-bound to remain silent,” Porter said.

“Indeed, when something similar happened to the former leader of the opposition, everyone followed the accepted process.”
The stories of these two women have similarities and differences. Both centre on allegations of crimes from more than 30 years ago, when they were 16 and those accused still teenagers.
Both women, for most of their lives, carried the burden of what they say was done to them while their alleged assailants went on to have prominent careers in politics.

Federal politics

What an inquiry into the Christian Porter allegations could look like

There are important differences. Sherriff’s claims were investigated by police. While Porter’s accuser met with police, she never made a formal statement which meant that a formal investigation could not proceed. The media coverage of Porter and Shorten, and the political response, could not have been more different.
Greg Barns, a barrister who advocates for the rights of asylum seekers, is no friend of Christian Porter. He is alarmed, however, at what he describes as a mindset that has taken hold in recent years which assumes all victims of sexual assault are telling the truth and of the zeal with which some journalists and lawyers are prosecuting their cases.
“In the Shorten case it was a very restrained atmosphere,” Barns says. “There was a reluctance to report it and the media was rightly circumspect, as one should be whenever serious criminal allegations are levelled against anyone. The difference now, in the case of Porter, it has been a relatively unrestrained attack on him with an implied reversal of the onus of proof.

Greg Barns SC says a ‘dangerous mindset’ has emerged which threatens the fundamental rights of people accused of a sex crime. CREDIT:EVE FISHER

“The #MeToo movement has done a very good job of making sure the legal system is more receptive of victims of sexual abuse. However, we must be careful that in doing that, we do not jettison very important protections that a person who is accused must have, should have and in any civilised legal system, does have.″⁣
Barns asks whether, in the summary justice meted out on social media, Porter is being condemned as much for who he represents – born-to-rule Tories who populate high school debating teams and government front benches – as what he did or didn’t do 33 years ago. In this, Barns sees traces of the campaign run against George Pell who was ultimately acquitted of historical sex offences.

Michael Gawenda, a respected former editor of The Age, is also troubled. He says there is a lack of care in much of the reporting about Porter and questions why important facts, such as Porter being only 17 at the time of the alleged rape, were downplayed or omitted.
“The reporting keeps referring to her being 16 and him being a cabinet minister. The fact is they were two school kids. Isn’t that relevant information? Why hasn’t that been made clear throughout all the reporting?

“Everyone, not just journalists, have accepted this mantra that victims have to be believed. Once you cross that Rubicon, there doesn’t even need to be a court case; the decision has been made. I think that is a huge problem. What has happened with Porter shows this is not where we can stay.”
Michael Bradley, the lawyer who helped Porter’s accuser in the months leading up to her death, sees things differently. He says the restraint adopted by the media and political class towards the Shorten allegations was part of the problem faced by sexual assault complainants.
“Things have changed dramatically since then,” he says. “There is the social media dynamic in that and the gloves coming off. There is very little restraint.
“The bigger shift is what used to underline most of that restraint; the victimisation and silencing of women. That is increasingly no longer being accepted, particularly by women and by society as a whole which is losing its tolerance for brushing these things under the carpet.”

The #MeToo push for all victims of sexual assault to be believed has been broadly adopted by all sides of politics. Scott Morrison’s use of it in 2019 has been played on a loop for the past three days. “It’s important that their stories are believed and that they that if they come forward their stories will be believed,” the Prime Minister said.
Bradley says if the notion was taken literally, the presumption of innocence would cease to exist and the onus of proof would be reversed in sex crimes. “That is not a tenable legal position and not really what anyone is sensibly advocating,” he says.
We have to remember where it is coming from, which is essentially a reaction to the systemic obstacles that victims have always faced and still face in bringing their complaint forward and trying to get justice.
“When we say ‘I believe you’, it is not literally ‘I believe a crime has been committed and the person you say did it should go to jail’. It is respecting the experience that this human person has had and what they feel or believe about it and starting from that standpoint rather than the one that says ‘well, prove it’.”
Porter is refusing to quit as Attorney-General and Morrison is refusing to commission an independent inquiry into his fitness to remain in the post on the grounds that to do so would undermine the rule of law.

Bradley, the managing partner of Marque Lawyers, says this conflates criminal law concepts with a matter that, following this week’s decision by NSW Police to close its investigation into Porter, no longer has any bearing on the criminal justice system.
For Kathy Sherriff, such arguments feel arcane and distant.
She trusted the justice system. She told her story to Victoria Police before it was reported in the media. She provided them with names of other witnesses who she said could support elements of her story. Her hopes rose when detectives interviewed Bill Shorten, then crashed when the Office of Public Prosecutions reviewed the evidence gathered by police and assessed it as unlikely to secure a conviction.
That decision was painful for her. Police have closed their investigation and refused a Freedom of Information request by Sherriff to access her file so she can prepare a civil claim.
When the story of Brittany Higgins broke two weeks ago, Sherriff was inspired to put her allegations forward again. She had previously petitioned senior Labor and Greens politicians. This time, she wrote to Liberal MP Sarah Henderson, recounting the harrowing details of what she says happened to her at a Young Labor camp in Portarlington a lifetime ago.

It will go nowhere.


Super Anarchist
I'm simply pointing out that this risks becoming a thing now this trial has been dropped and people realise it can be done.
People are not as honest as they used to be, boundaries are blurred if not broken and if there are no consequences for jurors disregarding judges instruction's, what's to be done?
Just because you had no idea about the concept of a mistrial, doesn't mean the rest of society didn't understand it. It's no more risk of being 'a thing' now than it ever was - except perhaps by the grossly uneducated who should be excluded from jury duty due to their lack of knowledge about, well, anything.

As for 'people are not as honest as they used to be'? Please, read some history. Maybe an actual librarian can help you find some. And as a hint, if the author is Dan Brown, it's not real history.


Super Anarchist
Just how long have you been reading Meli's posts?

Surely you know she's not at all bothered by FACTS. With her, it's all about 'the vibe'....

Weather is improving at last down here, you can come home now.

Big red boat on friday.
Amusingly, when I mentioned I am going to take our 15' beach cat from Anderson's bay through to Georges bay, the rest of my family all assumed I meant I was planning on sailing it through Banks Strait. I don't know whether to be humbled by their confidence, or dismayed by their inability to read a chart or remember anything anyone has ever said about that bit of water.


Super Anarchist
Thanks for posting - that is more detail than I had seen before.
In summary, one woman says she was sexually assaulted after a night drinking and another says she was raped after a dinner and drinks date with BL. Alleged to have occured after the incident with BH. No detail at all on the third.

And none of them have been willing to make a formal complaint to the police - correct?

How much weight are you proposing to give to accusations from people not willing to go to the police?