The Law Cardinal Pell

Status
Not open for further replies.
So so true.

A site full of angry losers perpetually screaming the same thing regardless of the topic.
There will be an uncomfortable truth that many members of this government and media who stood shoulder to shoulder with certain individuals while lecturing us on public morality will be forced to live with.
 

Brunswick Trap King

Lord Mayor of Melbourne
Jun 1, 2009
14,719
20,721
Brunswick
AFL Club
West Coast
There will be an uncomfortable truth that many members of this government and media who stood shoulder to shoulder with certain individuals while lecturing us on public morality will be forced to live with.
I presume there'll be very little fall out or much in the way of admissions from them. We'll undoubtedly be disappointed.
 

its free real estate

it's free real estate
Jul 30, 2018
11,782
15,176
AFL Club
Fremantle
There will be an uncomfortable truth that many members of this government and media who stood shoulder to shoulder with certain individuals while lecturing us on public morality will be forced to live with.
You do know that the leader of the opposition has similar accusations leveled against him, right?
 
Nov 8, 2016
2,058
3,429
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/thre...hristopher-yaxley-aka-tommy-robinson.1195166/


And then the exact same mod posting this thread today clearly implying in the OP the individual that is subject to the suppression order.
https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/thre...media-unable-to-report.1210130/#post-59088073
I haven't personally been served a suppression order, unlike Tommy.

I suppose you'll be directing your anger towards the Catholic News Agency?

https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/...guilty-verdict-emerge-despite-gag-order-32220
 
Nov 8, 2016
2,058
3,429
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
I haven't personally been served a suppression order, unlike Tommy.

I suppose you'll be directing your anger towards the Catholic News Agency?

https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/...guilty-verdict-emerge-despite-gag-order-32220
I support the dissemination of this information online. Just pointing out your clear hypocrisy. That is some real mental gymnastics on display by you.

Heck even the heavily left leaning and anti religious r/australia page only has a locked thread about the suppression order with only one comment in it explaining the situation. You guys are trying your best to broadcast any information possible to allow people to piece it together. You know exactly what you are doing.
 
I support the dissemination of this information online. Just pointing out your clear hypocrisy. That is some real mental gymnastics on display by you.

Heck even the heavily left leaning and anti religious r/australia page only has a locked thread about the suppression order with only one comment in it explaining the situation. You guys are trying your best to broadcast any information possible to allow people to piece it together. You know exactly what you are doing.
No, you're having a tantrum across multiple threads because you think quoting an article is the equivalent of a xenophobe live-streaming a court room process after twice begin charged with contempt of court for doing the same thing previously.

Your desperation is obvious.

Comey and Pell, what a good day for justice :)
 
Nov 8, 2016
2,058
3,429
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
No, you're having a tantrum across multiple threads because you think quoting an article is the equivalent of a xenophobe live-streaming a court room process after twice begin charged with contempt of court for doing the same thing previously.

Your desperation is obvious.

Comey and Pell, what a good day for justice :)
No you are just a raging hypocrite and do not like it being pointed out.

There is a court ordered suppression relating the identity of a woman that murdered one child and left another permanently disabled.

Because the suppression was not directly on me do I have permission to create a thread with one link of the story about the murder and another link that clearly implies the exact individual that did it?

Is that the standard?

Believe me this is a person that saw no jail time and even has their reputation in tact (in beginning a new life) because of their identity being suppressed.

Do you approve of my supposed thread idea Mofra?
 
Nov 8, 2016
2,058
3,429
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
You have set the standard for court suppression orders and creating threads on big footy where you clearly imply the individual the suppression order relates to Mofra.

Will be an interesting slippery slope
 
No you are just a raging hypocrite and do not like it being pointed out.

There is a court ordered suppression relating the identity of a woman that murdered one child and left another permanently disabled.

Because the suppression was not directly on me do I have permission to create a thread with one link of the story about the murder and another link that clearly implies the exact individual that did it?

Is that the standard?

Believe me this is a person that saw no jail time and even has their reputation in tact (in beginning a new life) because of their identity being suppressed.

Do you approve of my supposed thread idea Mofra?
The tantrum continues.

You're aware The Age put the suppression order article and the Pell article on the same page right, and it's the biggest news story in most major publications across the country?
 
Nov 8, 2016
2,058
3,429
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
The tantrum continues.

You're aware The Age put the suppression order article and the Pell article on the same page right, and it's the biggest news story in most major publications across the country?
If you do not get it yet I support having information out there. The hypocrisy is what I am calling out.

Another person that drowned a child in the Murray had a court suppression order related to their identity recently. Their identity was widely shared on social media after the killing.

Am I allowed to start a thread about the store and share another link in the same post that clearly implies that identity?

That is the standard you have set now. I can only assume that is acceptable. Would definitely make this site more interesting.
 
Aug 21, 2016
15,609
24,569
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Oldham
I haven't personally been served a suppression order, unlike Tommy.

Suppression orders are not personally served so it doesn't even make sense that Tommy Robinson was served with one.

By implicitly naming the accused in the suppression order you are potentially jeopardising a future trial.
 
If you do not get it yet I support having information out there. The hypocrisy is what I am calling out.

Another person that drowned a child in the Murray had a court suppression order related to their identity recently. Their identity was widely shared on social media after the killing.

Am I allowed to start a thread about the store and share another link in the same post that clearly implies that identity?

That is the standard you have set now. I can only assume that is acceptable. Would definitely make this site more interesting.
Your false equivalence makes your point moot.
 
Suppression orders are not personally served so it doesn't even make sense that Tommy Robinson was served with one.

By implicitly naming the accused in the suppression order you are potentially jeopardising a future trial.
He was found in contempt of court more than once for live streaming a trial on youtube.
Your faux concern is noted.
 
Cowards reply. You have posted identification of something relating to a current suppression order. Can others do the same?

Simple question and a simple answer that can be given. So what is it?
I don't mod this board so next time you see a major publication with two articles side by side, go for your life.

I don't think you'll get a stalkish online tantrum following you though.
 

Sainteric

Cancelled
Aug 5, 2016
3,738
2,128
AFL Club
St Kilda
The CNA is based in Denver, they dont have to comply, as for posts here on bf if the servers and ownership structure are OS then possibly it doesnt have to comply either
Cheers.
Shows how well this particular suppression order is going when Fairfax are all but thumbing their nose at it and it takes all of 8 seconds to work out who the person is.
 
Nov 8, 2016
2,058
3,429
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
I don't mod this board so next time you see a major publication with two articles side by side, go for your life.

I don't think you'll get a stalkish online tantrum following you though.
Your offending post had one link from the age and another from sbs.

The format is therefore two separate sites with different pieces of information that allows any person to connect the dots with what is being implied thus clearly identifying the individual that is the subject of the suppression order.

Will see how long my threads last and whether I am punished for it.
 

TimmeT

Premiership Player
Mar 28, 2017
4,321
4,509
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
You do know that the leader of the opposition has similar accusations leveled against him, right?
The only thing Gough ever really seems keen on is attacking the Liberal Party any point possible. It is well known he won't criticise lefty parties in the same manner.
 

Sainteric

Cancelled
Aug 5, 2016
3,738
2,128
AFL Club
St Kilda
Suppression orders are not personally served so it doesn't even make sense that Tommy Robinson was served with one.

By implicitly naming the accused in the suppression order you are potentially jeopardising a future trial.
Breaking a suppression order is one of many ways to be in contempt. Tommy is in the uk, you are not allowed to film and distribute court proceedings. He did this a number of times iirc. It wasnt a suppression order as such but none the less contempt of court
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back