I’ll clarify: a very grubby political stunt.
Yes Scomo's deflections and hypocrisy are very grubby.
I’ll clarify: a very grubby political stunt.
the lengths the woman went to for a political stunt are a bit extreme i think.I’ll clarify: a very grubby political stunt.
Scomo’s not a detective. It’s like calling the bank to say your electricity’s been disconnected.
“*smile* shitty banks. Always screwing people over!”
I’ll clarify: a very grubby political stunt.
Scomo’s not a detective. It’s like calling the bank to say your electricity’s been disconnected.
“*smile* shitty banks. Always screwing people over!”
Might've been better for her to keep it under her hat given her level of drunkenness. It will be difficult for her recollections to be treated credibly after security observed her on their rounds several times during the night in a state of "disarray".the lengths the woman went to for a political stunt are a bit extreme i think.
I can only assume that is a joke?Might've been better for her to keep it under her hat given her level of drunkenness.
You are not seriously suggesting that a woman who has been raped should keep it under her hat if she was drunk at the time are you?Might've been better for her to keep it under her hat given her level of drunkenness. It will be difficult for her recollections to be treated credibly after security observed her on their rounds several times during the night in a state of "disarray".
Might've been better for her to keep it under her hat given her level of drunkenness. It will be difficult for her recollections to be treated credibly after security observed her on their rounds several times during the night in a state of "disarray".
It's a matter for police investigation and not for Scomo to volunteer an opinion on anyone's guilt or otherwise. Grubs, crawl back to your gardens.
I know even less about the other case except that the woman had mental health issues, her memory of the time was obviously flawed and that she perceived some sort of romantic future with the accused even after the alleged assault. Good luck unravelling what happened there.
I said just a few posts back that women should be encouraged to go to the police.I understand you left v right guys have an ongoing sideshow in this forum and there is a fair bit of theatre involved a lot of the time, but this is pretty ordinary stuff.
Any suggestion that a person should stay silent about a sexual assault because they were drunk is reprehensible Lee, and I'd urge you to reconsider the post. I very much doubt it is what you truly believe.
Some of you are posting as though the sexual assaults definitely occurred and all that remains is to convict the men responsible. If you have information that should be in the hands of police, you'd better put up your hands. Did you learn nothing from the Pell frame-up?
There will always be a vocal minority on any issue. what most people want is the opportunity for the evidence to be tested. the police cant because the victim is no longer alive, and Morrison and Porter appear to not be very interested in anyone looking at the evidence.Porter may have committed these crimes (or not) but from what I’ve witnessed this week there will always be a vocal minority who will hang a man no matter whether there’s evidence or not & that’s wrong. Lot of anger out there that’s clouding logic.
1. If you look back at the appropriate thread, I said throughout that the evidence never sat right and to wait and see. Pell was ultimately cleared on appeal after serving time in jail that he shouldn't have. He was framed using dirty money from the Vatican.1. Pell wasn't framed and you know most don't believe he was you're just trolling.
2. The percentage of made up sexual assault reports is very small.
But you need to have your facts straight. Serious accusations call for strong evidence.
the men were probably drunk when they possibly conceived the child so they cant really complain.There are as many bad women as bad men, it ain't gender-specific. How many blokes do you reckon are unknowingly raising another man's child?
Which particular terrorists are we talking about here?at the risk of derailing this thread do the same rules apply to suspected terrorists?
because this government is pretty happy to punish them before their case has gone before a court.
Yes I have been following the news too. It’s a very unfortunate situation.There will always be a vocal minority on any issue. what most people want is the opportunity for the evidence to be tested. the police cant because the victim is no longer alive, and Morrison and Porter appear to not be very interested in anyone looking at the evidence.
As I understand it the deceased woman declined to proceed with the police investigation. Talk about raising zombies...3. People want legal processes to occur the anger is over how the victims have been treated and marginalised and alleged perpetrators protected from a legal process even beginning.