- Jul 30, 2018
- 11,782
- 15,176
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Banned
- #951
Given Victoria’s record of letting violent rapists back on the streets, maybe their whole concept of what makes a “fair trial” should be revisited.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Well from adult/s anyway. I've heard from enough sources he's an utter campaigner by any metric but nothing about him being a rock spider.You do know that the leader of the opposition has similar accusations leveled against him, right?
MacMum, this is an issue close to my heart. I was abused by the notorious Ridsdale in 1982. The effects of that are still with me today and realistically always will be - there is no such thing as closure. I have lost a lot, virtually everything because of the psychological and behavioural effects the incident has had on me.It wasn't an editorial I read, it was telling the story. I will look again as I didn't see the editorial.. However, if they have told the truth of what happened then I have no issue with it.
Why was a suppression order put in place? ..because he's famous? That imo, becomes one rule for us and one rule for the rich and famous.
If he is guilty of these charges then we and the world should know about it.
Pretty much only in vic and to a degree sa. These two states make up 70% iirc of the suppression orders. NSW etc have reformed, Victoria has not , Andrew's is sitting on a review to reform. Admittedly this wouldn't be first priority of any government. As for SA they are waiting for the interweb to be turned on.Nope, standard practice for severed trials.
Suppression orders are pointless in the internet age.
Well said mate, it is a good day for justice.MacMum, this is an issue close to my heart. I was abused by the notorious Ridsdale in 1982. The effects of that are still with me today and realistically always will be - there is no such thing as closure. I have lost a lot, virtually everything because of the psychological and behavioural effects the incident has had on me.
The reason the suppression order was put in place (by the prosecution - OPP) was to prevent Pell's legal team led by the notorious Robert Richter QC, from running an argument than Pell was unable to receive a fair trial due to the huge media focus. I attend a group session in Ballarat once a month, although I have never had the misfortune of encountering Pell in person, there are fella's in my group involved in the cases. This is a nightmare for them. I agreed with the suppression order because the last thing I want is someone to walk free because of a technicality. It doesn't have anything to do with him getting preferential treatment, it was done to ensure he can be prosecuted fairly and any verdict untainted by public opinion. I am sure there will be consequences as a result of this breach, I just hope George is not he beneficiary of it, that wouldn't be justice and that's all we are after.
DPP asks for your details they'll get it. I'd be careful
MacMum, this is an issue close to my heart. I was abused by the notorious Ridsdale in 1982. The effects of that are still with me today and realistically always will be - there is no such thing as closure. I have lost a lot, virtually everything because of the psychological and behavioural effects the incident has had on me.
The reason the suppression order was put in place (by the prosecution - OPP) was to prevent Pell's legal team led by the notorious Robert Richter QC, from running an argument than Pell was unable to receive a fair trial due to the huge media focus. I attend a group session in Ballarat once a month, although I have never had the misfortune of encountering Pell in person, there are fella's in my group involved in the cases. This is a nightmare for them. I agreed with the suppression order because the last thing I want is someone to walk free because of a technicality. It doesn't have anything to do with him getting preferential treatment, it was done to ensure he can be prosecuted fairly and any verdict untainted by public opinion. I am sure there will be consequences as a result of this breach, I just hope George is not he beneficiary of it, that wouldn't be justice and that's all we are after.
(I've been saying for probably 30yrs that Pell gave me the creeps and looks like he's hiding something......and living up in Nth Central vic, rumours were always around. Hope he gets his whack. Would love to say a lot more, but better not)
NoLadies and Gents,
Are the laws crazy in this digital age? Yes.
Does the suppression order need to be obeyed. Yes.
I know but cannot say due to suppression ordersDoes anyone know when and where G Pell is to be garrotted and disembowed?
I’m after a family pass for 4.
It wasn't an editorial I read, it was telling the story. I will look again as I didn't see the editorial.. However, if they have told the truth of what happened then I have no issue with it.
Why was a suppression order put in place? ..because he's famous? That imo, becomes one rule for us and one rule for the rich and famous.
If he is guilty of these charges then we and the world should know about it.
the legal reality is that any accused should be protected from the danger their trial may be swayed by media coverage. the average Joe does not attract this attention therefore no suppression orders are usually necessary.
I agree with the suppression order in this case.
It would be a travesty if justice was skirted on the basis of a mistrial.
I can understand a suppression order being issued to ensure a fair trial, but a suppression order on a conviction seems a bit beyond the normal process, the public already knew he was being charged due to the public way he was asked to return and the way he fronted the media and was followed by the media into the court at the start of the trial.
Admitted to hospital