Remove this Banner Ad

No Oppo Supporters Tanner Bruhn - charges formally dropped

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Nobody bar those involved will ever know, either way.

Sexual assault trials are extremely difficult with a historically low conviction rate, because the issue isn't proving that sex happened - it's proving a lack of consent.

People aren't proven innocent - they are declared not guilty, and the difference matters. He now has to - and should rightly be - treated as innocent, but that is different to declaring that nothing was done wrong, and by consequence, the alleged victim must have been lying.
No they are not. They are presumed innocent until proven guilty, and the difference matters.

The presumption of Innocence is a principle that states the prosecution must prove guilt, and the accused is considered innocent until proven otherwise.

The presumption of innocence ensures individuals will be punished by a court, only in accordance with the law. Until a person is found guilty, they are known as the ‘accused’. An accused can be held on remand (in prison) while awaiting trial, but even if they are denied bail, they are considered innocent until proven otherwise.

The onus of proof of the guilt of the accused is on the prosecution. The prosecution must prove every element of the offence, rather than the burden shifting to the accused to prove their innocence. The standard of proof in criminal trials is beyond reasonable doubt. The prosecution must satisfy this high standard before a person can be found guilty. In criminal trials, judges or juries decide whether the prosecution has proven its case beyond a reasonable doubt.
https://www.ruleoflaw.org.au/principles/presumption-of-innocence/
 
Last edited:
Correct. He is presumed innocent - not proven innocent. Hence the grey
If the law considers that the Accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty and if the prosecution fails to prove guilt, then Accused maintains the presumption of innocence. It is not grey according to the law.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

I think we both understand each other’s points here.
When it comes to issues like this, I prefer to stick with the law.
People will always have their opinions. But as my late brother was fond of saying "Opinions are like anal apertures, every one has one".
 
The "doesn't mean he's innocent" argument makes sense when a person is found not guilty.

When a prosecution is abandoned at the pre-trial stage in the aftermath of multiple witnesses testifying the allegation is false?

This is about as close to "oh, that means he's innocent" as you're likely to get.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Who cares, he’s available to play. Get around him and ensure the boos don’t get through.
I was saying “BRU-EHN”

smithers GIF
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

This issue was likely hanging over his head the whole 2024 season, and had to have had some effect on his performance that season..
Hopefully, being clear of this issue now, he can get back to footy and trying to prove himself on the field.

Adding, Bruhn, Worpel and Marshall into the midfield next season will be a massive boost.
 
My opinion is it should be closed down. No benefit from my perspective but i guess others do.
My experience with BF is that shutting down a conversation results in it spilling over into other threads.

Kind of like the political backlash in the US at the moment - trying to shut down certain conversations just results in it hijacking other discussions.

Far better to treat posters like adults and let them talk things out provided it is done respectfully.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top