Hostage Situation - Martin Place, Sydney

Remove this Banner Ad

King Elvis said:
I half agree with him, but his reasoning is s**t.

He wanted a flag and a chat.

Small matter of it being an ISIS flag, the demand that it was announced as an attack by ISIS - and s**t knows what he wouldve done if he had gotten to speak to Abbott live on air.
Click to expand...

I don't trust him. Not only does he have a beard and a head covering, but he's an actor.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

King Elvis said:
Small matter of it being an ISIS flag, the demand that it was announced as an attack by ISIS - and s**t knows what he wouldve done if he had gotten to speak to Abbott live on air.
Click to expand...
A snowball has a greater chance in hell than that loony was of getting a flag and a chat with the PM.
 
camsmith said:
Yes. Started by a person who actually displays the same behavior that she denounces.
Click to expand...

That's some disturbing reading - on par with some of the deranged anti-muslim and other racist ramblibng we get in the SRP

I’m learning about hate because I am coming to hate you, white person. You have all the control, all the power, all the privilege, and there is nothing holding you accountable. I hate the double standards and hypocrisy you display, the rank dishonesty of your conduct. I hate that you can harm us, when we cannot harm you. Ihate that you have actually impacted on careers, multiple and not even directly, with your hypocrisy. I hate that you’re so dominant in the publishing industry there’s very few venues I’d consider safe to even submit to now. I hate what you have done to PoC I don’t know. I hate what you have done to PoC I do know. I hate what you have done to me, and I was not involved. [Emphasis by UMZ]
Click to expand...
 
SonOfReep said:
Are you insinuating there is something to be ashamed of in being a lawyer?
Click to expand...

In a way, I think there is. You work in, and believe in, a system that is pre-occupied with procedure to the detriment of natural justice. I understand where you're coming from as a lawyer, but as a layman with limited legal experience, there is no way this man should have been walking the streets, let alone hold a gun licence. If you took your lawyer's cap off and viewed it in the light of day, there is no way you could possibly think the system is satisfactory.

The system had enough opportunities to lock this guy up, and it failed. Trouble is, people such as Darryl Pearce are untouchable. They don't have to explain their decisions to anyone, and surely that is not a healthy thing in a democracy who looks to the legal system to protect us from undesirables such as Monis.

Common sense is the one ingredient our legal system is totally devoid of.
 
Peter Doherty said:
It is unclear how Monis filmed the videos. The quality of the footage is poor, and the sound is distorted in parts, but the camera is held steadily.

Some of those who have been forced to appear in front of Monis’s camera speak clearly and without hesitation. Others appear terrified, and nervously clench their fists."

Am I the only one that finds how this is written really interesting? Like it is alluding to the woman who helped film the videos. It's playing on my mind, I feel like there is more to this part of the story and clear Ben Doherty has spoken with the hostages...
Click to expand...

It definitely caught my attention in the sense he is posing questions and trying to allude to something without saying it. I agree it appears he has certainly spoken to at least 1 hostage (probably against police orders who would be trying to close communication/interviews until they finish investigating) who has said something.

Journalists get off the record briefs all the time. If something urgently needs to be communicated he should just say it rather than throwing conjecture on a situation and implying something that could have 4 + alternate explanations.
 
Adelaide Hawk said:
In a way, I think there is. You work in, and believe in, a system that is pre-occupied with procedure to the detriment of natural justice. I understand where you're coming from as a lawyer, but as a layman with limited legal experience, there is no way this man should have been walking the streets, let alone hold a gun licence. If you took your lawyer's cap off and viewed it in the light of day, there is no way you could possibly think the system is satisfactory.

The system had enough opportunities to lock this guy up, and it failed. Trouble is, people such as Darryl Pearce are untouchable. They don't have to explain their decisions to anyone, and surely that is not a healthy thing in a democracy who looks to the legal system to protect us from undesirables such as Monis.

Common sense is the one ingredient our legal system is totally devoid of.
Click to expand...

OK, who decides who should be locked up without being found guilty of an offence?

The "system" was in the midst of ascertaining whether Monis should be incarcerated for crimes he was alleged to have committed. He had not been found guilty of any of those crimes as at the date of his death.

As former NSW Director of Public Prosecutions Nicholas Cowdery said yesterday:

"With the benefit of hindsight all of us can be geniuses and make the right decisions.

But the fact is that when it comes to matters of bail or sentencing, or any orders that are made by a court in the course of a criminal justice process, the judicial officer can act only on the information of the evidence that is then known and made available for that purpose.

So it's a matter of a proper presentation of the facts and the evidence to the court, it's a matter of the court making, striking an appropriate balance between the freedom of the individual, which we do take very seriously in our society, and the protection of the community."

And calling the magistrate "untouchable", well that is exactly the point. In Australia, as a matter of constitutional law, the judiciary must be independent.

But I also feel you are alluding in some way to the "untouchable" judiciary not feeling a need to carry out their duties correctly, which is simply incorrect, and gravely insulting.

Natural justice and common sense underpin our legal system.
 
LicoriceAllsorts said:
Marcia Mikhael actually did state on social media that he had a shotgun and a bomb, so they all thought he had one
Click to expand...
She couldn't have said anything anyway, the bastard was holding a gun and watching what she was doing. Probably telling her the exact words to type.

It's not like the bastard let all the hostages do whatever they wanted on their phones.
 
Run n Spread said:
It definitely caught my attention in the sense he is posing questions and trying to allude to something without saying it. I agree it appears he has certainly spoken to at least 1 hostage (probably against police orders who would be trying to close communication/interviews until they finish investigating) who has said something.

Journalists get off the record briefs all the time. If something urgently needs to be communicated he should just say it rather than throwing conjecture on a situation and implying something that could have 4 + alternate explanations.
Click to expand...

Can I say, I have no theory on this. You put it well though, there is 4+ possibilities.

I'm hoping Ben Doherty will explore these possibilities further.
 
SonOfReep said:
OK, who decides who should be locked up without being found guilty of an offence?
Click to expand...

Abdul Nacer Benbrika and all his cronies were locked up on remand for 2 1/2 years before trial.

They're cut from the same cloth. Spent years in the country, leeching of the taxpayers and returning the favour with hate towards us.

One thing I will give the legal fraternity credit for, when they come under pressure, there's none better at circling the wagons and fending off the criticism.

They make the rules within the constraints provided to them by the Government and themselves. In that sense, they're no different to politicians and their granting themselves pay rises. They're virtually untouchable.
 
I've already seen some articles and opinions suggesting this is a feminist issue - if we took violence against women seriously it would never have happened. No shame
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Herne Hill Hammer said:
Abdul Nacer Benbrika and all his cronies were locked up on remand for 2 1/2 years before trial.

They're cut from the same cloth. Spent years in the country, leeching of the taxpayers and returning the favour with hate towards us.

One thing I will give the legal fraternity credit for, when they come under pressure, there's none better at circling the wagons and fending off the criticism.

They make the rules within the constraints provided to them by the Government and themselves. In that sense, they're no different to politicians and their granting themselves pay rises. They're virtually untouchable.
Click to expand...

Benbrika did not apply for bail, though his co-accuseds did, and it was refused. Notably, the prosecution case against the grant of bail included evidence that they were all actively planning a terrorist attack against Australians. So the circumstances between Benbrika's co-accuseds and Monis can clearly be distinguished. It was never once suggested by Monis' prosecutors that he was suspected of planning a terrorist attack, or indeed would be violent towards anyone apart from his (deceased) ex-wife.

And as to your third paragraph, I am not sure why the legal fraternity should come under any criticism at all? It's not a case of circling the wagons, all I've been doing is trying to inject a little fact into the hysterics. We don't make the rules, we interpret the rules made by your elected Government. And if you don't like the Government, you get a chance every few years to do something about it.

That's democracy!
 
FYI to those questioning #illridewithyou and it maybe being a bit unnecessary.

B5DT8QACMAAW0Bv.jpg
 
The same nutters that were at the police line preaching hate as well during the siege. These guys just want another Cronulla.

As tragic as the situation is, #illridewithyou shows the true Australian spirit that closes ranks and supports one another in a time of crisis/tragedy (we saw it to some extent with Philip Hughes' passing, we saw it en masse during the Queensland floods, and we often see it after a major bushfire).

Apologies if this sounds a little preachy but love will always win out over hate - as #illridewithyou shows.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top