Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 82

Thread: Dung Puncher in Cabinet

  1. #61
    Super Moderator
    enf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Canberra
    Age
    70
    Posts
    17,753
    Thanks
    16,819
    Thanked 34,964 Times in 9,060 Posts
    Rep Power
    13678
    Reputation
    644489

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RogerTheDoger View Post
    Let's have an inquiry as outlined by those legal minds who are more competent than you or I, and find out.

    Remember the NSW police said "There was insufficient admissible evidence for a conviction". However the truth is not looking for a conviction, under the circumstances it appears that it's not possible, but the truth can be arrived at on the balance of probabilities, like in any civil case.
    No, wrong. The police determined that there wasn't even enough evidence for an investigation. Completely different.

    The SA coroner may call for an investigation according to process, and all involved will co-operate I'm sure. Well, probably not the anonymous letter writer you seem to accept as a basis for an investigation.

    The alleged victim, who is sadly deceased, can provide no direct evidence. The only evidence relating to her is her withdrawal of the original complaint.

    As well her family twice asked the ABC to not proceed, and stated that they were concerned for her reliability as a witness due to her fragile mental state but apparently the ABC know (through Louise Milligan) better.
    The fact that there's a highway to hell and a stairway to heaven says a lot about the anticipated traffic flow.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to enf For This Useful Post:

    lsemmens (08-03-21)



  • #62
    Member
    RogerTheDoger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Location
    State of Despair
    Posts
    370
    Thanks
    288
    Thanked 395 Times in 146 Posts
    Rep Power
    228
    Reputation
    8064

    Default

    The anonymous letter writer was a friend of the deceased woman who wrote asking for an inquiry and attached a many page statement written by the deceased woman. The only reason the police stated that there was insufficient evidence was that this was an unsworn statement.

    Without a proper investigation this is going to hang around indefinitely and as the subject is Australia's attorney general many legal decisions from him will be thrown into doubt.

    I don't know why you are so opposed to holding an inquiry, obviously no criminal conviction can come out of one but clearing the air is important.

    To those who don't believe a civil inquiry is possible take a look back to the trial of O J Simpson, he was found not guilty of murdering his wife and her boyfriend in the criminal case against him, however he was found liable in the civil case of causing their deaths and ordered to pay many millions in damages to those who suffered loss from those death.

    I believe a properly constituted inquiry is the only way forwards.

  • #63
    Super Moderator
    enf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Canberra
    Age
    70
    Posts
    17,753
    Thanks
    16,819
    Thanked 34,964 Times in 9,060 Posts
    Rep Power
    13678
    Reputation
    644489

    Default

    Crap. There is no evidence that such an inquiry will clear anything. Why? Because the police examined everything, and came to a conclusion based on that. The cowards didn't get the lynching they wanted and so believe that the police didn't do their job. Experience tells me that the mob have made up their mind, and will ignore anything that doesn't fall their way. There were several friends of the deceased who penned the letter apparently, the one known was in chief lynching instigator louise Milligans wedding party I believe. Funny that wasn't declared.

    Oh, and speaking of the mob, Louise Milligan falsely accused George Pell as well I'm sure you remember, resulting in a previous violation of natural justice by another/the same lynch mob. So I'd hardly be taking ANYTHING she alleges as gospel or accurate.

    The deceased withdrew the complaint....before the tragedy. End of story.

    You are free to lynch away however.
    The fact that there's a highway to hell and a stairway to heaven says a lot about the anticipated traffic flow.

  • The Following User Says Thank You to enf For This Useful Post:

    VroomVroom (09-03-21)

  • #64
    Member
    RogerTheDoger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Location
    State of Despair
    Posts
    370
    Thanks
    288
    Thanked 395 Times in 146 Posts
    Rep Power
    228
    Reputation
    8064

    Default

    Not really sure why you are so intent in sweeping everything under the carpet. A woman is dead, the woman alleged she was brutally raped as a child, she had ongoing mental health problems, (perhaps due to the rape, who knows) and she spoke to others about this prior to her suicide as well as writing a detailed, but unsworn statement, about the events. Surely this should be investigated?

    The woman at the centre of the Christian Porter rape allegation spoke in detail to a sexual assault counsellor about her claim eight years ago, in what is believed to be the first time she ever disclosed the allegation.

    Four Corners has been told that the woman first sought help from the counsellor in about 2013 and saw her about six times. The rape is alleged to have occurred in 1988.

    The counsellor has told Four Corners that the woman disclosed to her an allegation about a boy she referred to by his first name as Christian.

    The woman said that she and Christian had been debaters together.

    In an emotional press conference last week, Christian Porter strenuously denied the allegation against him, saying "it just didn't happen".

    "I was 17 years old and the other person was 16. We were both selected, with two others, on the Australian Schools Debating Team and we went to Sydney University for an international competition. It was a long time ago and I'd always remembered it as a happy time," Mr Porter said.

    "But I can say categorically that what has been put in various forms and allegations simply did not happen."

    There are no witnesses who can corroborate the woman's version of events.

    The counsellor said the woman had sought out her services because she specialised in sexual assault.

    The counsellor told Four Corners that the woman was "extremely articulate", "not delusional", and volunteered the allegation of her own volition.

    She said there was no discussion of repressed or recovered memories.

    "She told me she had always remembered it," the counsellor said.

    The counsellor has told Four Corners that the woman said she was torn about pursuing the matter knowing it could ruin the man's life.

    She also said that they discussed the pros and cons of seeking justice and whether it was worth it for the woman to have her day in court. The counsellor said the woman went away and "was going to sit on that. She obviously sat on it for about five years."

    The woman reported her allegation to NSW Police in 2020 and police had set up a strike force with a view to commencing an investigation into the historical allegation.

    However, in June that year the woman informed police she no longer wished to proceed with the investigation.

    The woman, who struggled with mental illness most of her adult life, took her own life the next day.

    NSW Police subsequently closed the case, stating that there was insufficient admissible evidence to proceed with the investigation.

    The former Law Council of Australia president, Arthur Moses, told Four Corners the allegation could never be proven because the police have no sworn statement from the woman.

    "So there is no record of interview, as we understand it, between the complainant and the police that could be the subject of admissible evidence," he said.

    "And there is no evidence from any third parties that they witnessed alleged sexual assault."

    The counsellor said that the woman spoke to her of how she was "patently aware" that she had not lived up to the promise that she had shown as a brilliant student and one of the country's best high-school debaters.

    "That was a really big part of the therapy," the counsellor said, "That her life had meaning, and she could go on to do more."

    Prime Minister Scott Morrison has given Mr Porter his full support and has refused to commission an independent inquiry.

    Last week, South Australia Police delivered their report on the woman's death to the state's coroner.

    The coroner released a statement saying that following media reporting he regarded the investigation as "incomplete" and has asked for further investigations, after which he will decide whether to hold an inquest into the circumstances of the woman's death.
    see
    Last edited by RogerTheDoger; 08-03-21 at 03:53 PM.

  • #65
    Premium Member
    wotnot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Location
    Scenic Rim, SE Qld
    Posts
    3,236
    Thanks
    1,462
    Thanked 2,934 Times in 1,510 Posts
    Rep Power
    1334
    Reputation
    58690

    Default

    Without a proper investigation this is going to hang around indefinitely
    Only wrt ABC news coverage, most of the others have moved onto more important {ahem} 'news'..like the Harry & Megham scandal =)

  • #66
    Banned

    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    still above ground level
    Posts
    1,779
    Thanks
    5,562
    Thanked 1,964 Times in 714 Posts
    Rep Power
    0
    Reputation
    35657

    Default

    this is not news only pom,s crap / there is NO evidence

  • #67
    Premium Member
    wotnot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Location
    Scenic Rim, SE Qld
    Posts
    3,236
    Thanks
    1,462
    Thanked 2,934 Times in 1,510 Posts
    Rep Power
    1334
    Reputation
    58690

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hinekadon View Post
    this is not news only pom,s crap / there is NO evidence
    Indeed / I'm still trying to figure out why the OP is accusing the member of cabinet, of being an active male homosexual =)

  • The Following User Says Thank You to wotnot For This Useful Post:

    VroomVroom (09-03-21)

  • #68
    Member
    RogerTheDoger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Location
    State of Despair
    Posts
    370
    Thanks
    288
    Thanked 395 Times in 146 Posts
    Rep Power
    228
    Reputation
    8064

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hinekadon View Post
    this is not news only pom,s crap / there is NO evidence
    What about her written account of the events and the disclosures to the counsellor? (unsworn written account, so not admissible in a criminal case, but an investigation would not be a criminal case)

    Quote Originally Posted by wotnot View Post
    Indeed / I'm still trying to figure out why the OP is accusing the member of cabinet, of being an active male homosexual =)
    The alleged victim was a female child who claims to have been brutally analy raped. (no lubricant, Hoe)

    Why is everyone so opposed to the investigation of historical rape matters? Did you not follow the Grace Tame case and her subsequent honours of being awarded Australian of the Year, this year, as well as her recent Address to the National Press Club. (have you watched it? it's still on iView) EDIT and YouTube see

    On average it takes around 25 years for child rape victims to come forward and report the matter, shame and horror being one of the main impediments. Many never repot what happened to them but continue to live shattered lives.
    Last edited by RogerTheDoger; 08-03-21 at 07:42 PM.

  • #69
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    1,703
    Thanks
    227
    Thanked 1,112 Times in 571 Posts
    Rep Power
    637
    Reputation
    20724

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RogerTheDoger View Post
    The alleged victim was a female child who claims to have been brutally analy raped.
    You continue to claim the complainant was a child.

    Has it not occurred to you that other party was therefore also, at the time, a child?

    If the victim is to be treated differently because she was a ‘child’, then the other party also needs to be treated differently because they were also, according to you, only a child.

  • #70
    LSemmens
    lsemmens's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Rural South OZ
    Posts
    10,585
    Thanks
    11,867
    Thanked 7,061 Times in 3,338 Posts
    Rep Power
    3153
    Reputation
    132592

    Default

    How is it that the so called "counsellor" who "counselled" the "victim" is at liberty to discuss her "confidential" counselling sessions with her "client" on national TV? Something doesn't sound right, here.
    I'm out of my mind, but feel free to leave a message...

  • #71
    Member
    RogerTheDoger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Location
    State of Despair
    Posts
    370
    Thanks
    288
    Thanked 395 Times in 146 Posts
    Rep Power
    228
    Reputation
    8064

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by peteramjet View Post
    Has it not occurred to you that other party was therefore also, at the time, a child?
    At no time have I stated that they were not, however they were of an age where criminal responsibility would apply if a case could have been brought, but that will not happen because no sworn statement was made before the victim died.

    Quote Originally Posted by lsemmens View Post
    How is it that the so called "counsellor" who "counselled" the "victim" is at liberty to discuss her "confidential" counselling sessions with her "client" on national TV? Something doesn't sound right, here.
    Confidentially dies with the client in a counselling session.

  • #72
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    1,703
    Thanks
    227
    Thanked 1,112 Times in 571 Posts
    Rep Power
    637
    Reputation
    20724

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RogerTheDoger View Post
    At no time have I stated that they were not, however they were of an age where criminal responsibility would apply if a case could have been brought, but that will not happen because no sworn statement was made before the victim died .
    If you accept that person is of an age where criminal responsible would apply, then you must also accept that the alleged victim was of an age in which they could consent to intercourse, and therefore they are not a ‘child’. You can’t have one but not the other.

    Continuing to refer to the alleged victim as a ‘child’, implying they were too young to have the ability to consent to any form of intercourse, is not correct.

  • #73
    Banned

    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    still above ground level
    Posts
    1,779
    Thanks
    5,562
    Thanked 1,964 Times in 714 Posts
    Rep Power
    0
    Reputation
    35657

    Default

    Lets GET real ! roger thinks this forum is facebook but its a tech forum ! hes a pom and we all know they are hard to get any thing in their thought that their ignorance doesnt want to accept , this is funny to him but in actual fact hes talking shit as usual and as normal

  • #74
    Member
    RogerTheDoger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Location
    State of Despair
    Posts
    370
    Thanks
    288
    Thanked 395 Times in 146 Posts
    Rep Power
    228
    Reputation
    8064

    Default

    Rape is rape there was no question of a consent. When asked by a reporter if he was claiming consent Porter said "No it never happened" The woman claimed in her written statement that forced anal rape had occurred. This is why I believe an inquiry is called for, two conflicting statements.

    A conviction can never happen the woman is dead, but her unsworn statement can be examined, people who were at the event can be questioned as to their recollections of events and any change in demeanor etc. the counselor can be questioned as to what was said in the six or so sessions, people who were around the woman at the time immediately before she took her own life can describe her state of mind and repeat anything she said, and so on. The police who received the report and then stated she withdrew her complaint could be examined as to what they actually did and said, especially in light of the fact that she apparently took her life right after talking to them. All this is relevant, all can be examined by qualified people.

    There are many here who seem to think I'm going off half cocked, to those I pose the following question, If your daughter, your sister, your wife or your mother took their own life after writing a detailed statement of the events from years ago, after going to the police and then withdrawing the complaint, and that statement gave details of a brutal rape, would you be happy to just accept the word of the person named in the detailed statement that "It just didn't happen" wouldn't you want some experts to carry out a proper examination of everything that caused this love one to die, even if you knew no prosecution could ever happen? I know I would.

  • #75
    Banned

    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    still above ground level
    Posts
    1,779
    Thanks
    5,562
    Thanked 1,964 Times in 714 Posts
    Rep Power
    0
    Reputation
    35657

    Default

    oh roger Wank Wank go back to face book ! you are obviously not a technical person I have never seen a technical response to anything from You. Only disgusting gossip ? the general chat section of Austech forums is for technical and non tech to talk about technical things and or problems and co operate in trials and tests of automotive or electronic devices . This is not coronation street, and I feel that you are degrading the site with this crap that you have delight in wasting server storage with it . Do you wipe your mouth with toilet paper after your diatribe , But dont bother to answer as Im not interested

  • #76
    Member
    RogerTheDoger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Location
    State of Despair
    Posts
    370
    Thanks
    288
    Thanked 395 Times in 146 Posts
    Rep Power
    228
    Reputation
    8064

    Default

    And thank you hinekadon for your usual warm greeting, which you posted while I was typing my previous post.

    I see the former Deputy Leader has been having something to say on the matter:
    see

    Former deputy Liberal leader Julie Bishop has backed an inquest into the death of the woman who accused federal Attorney-General Christian Porter of raping her in 1988 – a claim he vehemently denies. .....

    Ms Bishop said an inquest into the death of the South Australian woman who accused Mr Porter of the historical rape was a “next logical step”.

    “It’s within the criminal system, there are checks and balances, there are statutory powers, it has legal standing and so that is the next step and I understand from media reporting that that’s what the family would welcome,” Ms Bishop said.

    Mr Porter is on stress leave since the allegations emerged, via a letter sent to Labor Senator Penny Wong and the Greens Sarah Hanson-Young, which the two women forwarded to the Australian Federal Police. Prime Minister Scott Morrison is standing by Mr Porter, saying the rule of law must prevail.

    Police did not pursue the allegations against Mr Porter at the request of the woman just before she took her own life last year.

    Ms Bishop questioned why the Prime Minister and the Attorney-General had not read the letter, which contained the woman’s allegations, when it was sent to Mr Morrison’s office.

    “I wonder why they haven’t. I think in order to deny allegations you would need to know the substance of the allegations or at least the detail of the allegations,” she said.

  • #77
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    2,235
    Thanks
    2,822
    Thanked 1,514 Times in 835 Posts
    Rep Power
    795
    Reputation
    27703

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RogerTheDoger View Post
    Not really sure why you are so intent in sweeping everything under the carpet.
    Not really sure why you are so intent on dragging up muck from so long ago which cannot ever be proven in court ? The woman was a loser and a nut job...... Nut jobs specialise at making up false realities.

    dude , i really hope that some pathetic psycho never accuses you of doing something wrong while you were innocent .... Wake up to yourself !!

  • The Following User Says Thank You to VroomVroom For This Useful Post:

    wotnot (09-03-21)

  • #78
    Senior Member
    bob_m_54's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    2,093
    Thanks
    1,053
    Thanked 1,151 Times in 689 Posts
    Rep Power
    634
    Reputation
    20178

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hinekadon View Post
    Lets GET real ! roger thinks this forum is facebook but its a tech forum ! hes a pom and we all know they are hard to get any thing in their thought that their ignorance doesnt want to accept , this is funny to him but in actual fact hes talking shit as usual and as normal

  • #79
    Premium Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    3,688
    Thanks
    1,938
    Thanked 2,104 Times in 1,050 Posts
    Rep Power
    967
    Reputation
    32468

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wotnot View Post
    Only wrt ABC news coverage, most of the others have moved onto more important {ahem} 'news'..like the Harry & Megham scandal =)
    Do you mean the Murdoch Press?, the answer there would be obvious

    Don't forget Bill Shorten was accused of similar offenses and stood aside whilst said inquiry came to the decision of not guilty, why is Porter any different
    There is a fine line between "Hobby" and "Madness"

  • The Following User Says Thank You to allover For This Useful Post:

    RogerTheDoger (09-03-21)

  • #80
    Member
    RogerTheDoger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Location
    State of Despair
    Posts
    370
    Thanks
    288
    Thanked 395 Times in 146 Posts
    Rep Power
    228
    Reputation
    8064

    Default

    Sharona Coutts lawyer says:
    see

    I was a witness in the investigation into the allegations of sexual harassment against the former justice of the High Court of Australia Dyson Heydon.

    I won’t say much about that experience, except that when asked to participate in a process that sought to examine serious allegations, I ultimately decided that it was important to do so.

    It has given me an unusual perspective on the current debate over whether it would be appropriate to conduct an investigation into allegations against Christian Porter, because that inquiry provides a recent example of how another branch of the Australian government dealt with allegations of sexual misconduct, albeit of a different nature.

    Based on what I saw during that investigation, I feel compelled to make a few points about the current debate over how to deal with the allegations of rape and sexual misconduct in Australian politics, which are not unique to one political party.

    First, I disagree with the notion that conducting an investigation into the allegations against the Attorney-General would somehow destroy the rule of law.

    What does undermine the rule of law is when the public perceives that those in power can act with impunity and that different rules apply to them.

    A serious investigation actually strengthens the rule of law. The High Court investigation could not have been further from a “mob” process.

    The way Chief Justice Kiefel handled the Heydon allegations not only restored my confidence in the institution she leads but increased it. I heard the same from many who contacted me after that story broke.

    As others have pointed out, an independent investigation is perhaps the only way Porter, or someone in his position, could get natural justice in circumstances such as these.

    Porter has said that he doesn’t see what more he could say to an investigation. Be that as it may, the reality is that while some believed his denials, others did not. Everyone seems to agree that the current situation is deplorable. And it is difficult to see how can we have an inquiry into the general culture in Parliament without addressing the allegations against our top law officer.

    Second, we need to dispel the apparent confusion between criminal processes, and all the other ways that we can and should handle allegations of misconduct.

    The calls for an investigation are not about a criminal proceeding.

    No one is threatening to deprive Porter of his liberty, as is sometimes the case in a criminal trial.

    This is not about jail; it’s about a job.

    Let’s agree that no one has a “right” to hold public office. It is a privilege. The public deserves the best possible representation. That is why conduct that falls far short of a crime can still disqualify a person from public office.

    Yet when it comes to allegations of sexual misconduct, some apply the far higher standard of the criminal law, arguing that a person cannot lose their job unless it is proved that they have committed a crime.

    Allegations of sexual misconduct can be criminal matters, but they can also be professional, employment, and reputational issues — including the reputation of an institution.

    Many have echoed the Attorney-General’s fear that, if we establish an investigation into these claims, then anyone’s career could be destroyed by a mere allegation.

    It’s worth remembering that the Heydon investigation was not a public inquiry. An investigation does not have to be a show trial, as many seem to be suggesting. This appears to me to be a deliberate red herring.

    There is a lot of daylight between saying that the only way to deal with an allegation is to refer it to the police versus allowing trial by media. We have recent examples that give us some ideas for constructive ways to proceed, including from a co-equal branch of government. Why should we accept that our Parliament is held to lower standards than our courts or, indeed, the private sector?

    Also, this focus on how investigations could impact the subjects of allegations has overshadowed the important role investigations could play for the alleged victims.

    Porter may not have anything to add to his public comments, but that shouldn’t preclude others from having a responsible forum where they can have their say.

    In this case, an investigation would serve as the only way that the alleged victim’s story could be heard — albeit, tragically, in her absence.

    Being heard matters for her friends, family, and countless others. It mattered to me as a witness, in a different context.

    So much about sexual misconduct involves transferring shame and fear onto the victims instead of the perpetrators. We understand the importance of being heard when it comes to truth and reconciliation commissions, but we don’t yet seem to understand it in relation to sexual abuse.

    Of course, we can’t launch an investigation into every allegation. Unavoidably, a leader — be they a prime minister, a chief justice, or a corporate leader — must exercise judgment in deciding which allegations warrant an investigation.

    That leader must assess the type of allegations, the evidence presented, and the context. At a minimum, they must read any detailed reports of allegations. A leader can’t outsource that task to the police, because it goes to making judgments about the culture of an institution as well as to potential criminal matters.

    These are not easy decisions. That is why we need our leaders to truly understand the dynamics of sexual misconduct, ranging from harassment to rape. They need to understand that women are people in our own right, irrespective of our relationships to men, and that a mere denial does not end the matter.
    Last edited by RogerTheDoger; 09-03-21 at 03:20 PM.

  • The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to RogerTheDoger For This Useful Post:

    allover (09-03-21),lsemmens (09-03-21),macca (09-03-21)

  • Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

    Bookmarks

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •