Scandal Tom Silvagni convicted of rape

[Saint12]

And his grubby little Foxtel footy partner in crime..

I always wondered why he got off so lightly

 

[1970crow]

Tommy will be getting a big fat bag of sausage in prison.

The overwhelming majority of sex in prison is consensual. Very little rape, at least in SA prisons. And when there is, it’s most often reported and prosecuted. But the number of condoms that are used in prisons would astound you.

 

[Black Panther]

Got a link?

Login • Instagram

Welcome back to Instagram. Sign in to check out what your friends, family & interests have been capturing & sharing around the world.

www.instagram.com

She's also on that TikTok thing

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

Tom was footballer too, just didn't make it at the top level.

It's not just the crime, it's the cover-up. Stephen Silvagni was very much involved in keeping the case secret from the public. I'm positive there would be many other similar cases we don't know about covered up due to the supposed privilege of the rich and famous.

How can you possibly say that trying to keep a private matter private - is worse than rape?

Come on man.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

Not really.

Some people let their child be grown adults who look after themselves

As a parent, I often wonder how I would react in situations like this.

To be honest, I have enormous empathy for the Silvagni family. It must be absolutely awful for them. I can only assume they would devastated that their son did something like that, but at the same time devastated that their son is going to go to jail for the prime decade of his life.

I can't even comprehend what they'd be going through.

 

[beside the seaside]

Yep. Amazing how people don't realise what they're revealing beneath the surface with some of these messages.

I think there's just different perceptions of what a serious time spent in prison is..can you actually imagine 7-10 years in jail? That isn't getting off lightly in my eyes.

Don't think it's fair or helpful to suggest people are subconsciously saying rape isn't serious.

 

[Munich]

Login • Instagram

Welcome back to Instagram. Sign in to check out what your friends, family & interests have been capturing & sharing around the world.

www.instagram.com

She's also on that TikTok thing

"She" is allowed to be on and talk about whatever she wants.

Why do you have an issue with it?

 

[Munich]

I think there's just different perceptions of what a serious time spent in prison is..can you actually imagine 7-10 years in jail? That isn't getting off lightly in my eyes.

Don't think it's fair or helpful to suggest people are subconsciously saying rape isn't serious.

They said 7-10 is really long which suggests they think it should be less.

 

[beside the seaside]

They said 7-10 is really long which suggests they think it should be less.

Yes because in their eyes they have a different perception of what prison sentences should be and how they fit a crime. It doesn't mean they don't think it's a serious crime.

 

[420]

They said 7-10 is really long which suggests they think it should be less.

Relative to the lettuce leaf the Vic courts use to punish other acts of violence against humans, 7-25yrs is a long time

 

[10571z]

Really long?

The max term is 25 years. I can tell you don't see rape as serious however.

That’s an interesting conclusion.

I’m basing it off other sentences that people have received in this country.


The pedophile who was just killed in prison was given 4 years (which he only did 14 months) and then 2 years after reoffending..

Evil Australian paedophile beaten to death behind bars

Norgate was jailed in March 2020 in relation to five child offences, including the 2019 sexual assault of two young boys in a school bathroom while disguised as a security guard.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[The Feeder Club]

I don’t think it’s that big a deal. As long as it’s only suppressed until the outcome of the case. If they’re guilty, it comes off and if they’re innocent, probably a good thing. I definitely agree that continuing to argue for suppression after guilty finding is outrageous though, the jig is up then and whatever mental anguish may be caused, stem from your actions.

What's wrong with a suppression order DURING the trial? After he was guilty then his name was made public

Justice must not only be done, but sern to be done

The whole point of open justice is that the proceedings are public and transparent so as to inspire public confidence in the system. The history of it is that the rich and powerful were able to manipulate the justice system behind closed doors to escape punishments meted out to the plebs.

Of course there are sometimes good reasons e.g. national security to close courts, but as is now well established Victoria is way out of whack on failing to uphold the fundamental principle of open justice

 

[10571z]

Yep. Amazing how people don't realise what they're revealing beneath the surface with some of these messages.

Huh? I’m merely questioning the likely hood he actually receives 10 years.

 

[bresker]

Speaking as someone with a diagnosed mental health condition, i can assure you the cops and the courts are far more concerned with preserving community safety than protecting the identity of the offender.

AFAIK Tom Silvagni doesn't have a diagnosed mental health condition. I imagine that getting locked in prison for rape is bad for your mental health, much more than having your name in the papers.

The Silvagni family should make a payment to a rape crisis centre , rather than whatever obscene amount they paid to a lawyer to get their rich person privileges.

 

[Munich]

Relative to the lettuce leaf the Vic courts use to punish other acts of violence against humans, 7-25yrs is a long time

Yeah 25 is, your range is pretty big though.

I agree Vic sentencing is far too lenient majority of the time.

 

[Bedi]

Yeah 25 is, your range is pretty big though.

I agree Vic sentencing is far too lenient majority of the time.

3 years seems to be around the average for digital rape, which i believe is what the charge is? But convincted on two counts, so that might mean more

 

[Munich]

3 years seems to be around the average for digital rape, which i believe is what the charge is? But convincted on two counts, so that might mean more

The charge is rape. Which carries a maximum sentence of 25 years in Vic.

 

[10571z]

3 years seems to be around the average for digital rape, which i believe is what the charge is? But convincted on two counts, so that might mean more

After having a look through previous cases and sentences I’d be shocked if he received over 3 years.

 

[10571z]

The charge is rape. Which carries a maximum sentence of 25 years in Vic.

We are all aware. How often do people receive close to the maximum sentence for any crime?

 

[voorhees]

As a parent, I often wonder how I would react in situations like this.

To be honest, I have enormous empathy for the Silvagni family. It must be absolutely awful for them. I can only assume they would devastated that their son did something like that, but at the same time devastated that their son is going to go to jail for the prime decade of his life.

I can't even comprehend what they'd be going through.

definitely.. just terrible for the whole family, not just the family name being dragged through the muck.
Let alone what the women and her parents have gone through.

 

[Munich]

We are all aware. How often do people receive close to the maximum sentence for any crime?

The above poster seemed to think digital rape is a different charge. It's not.

 

[GoEaglesGoSGIO]

As a parent, I often wonder how I would react in situations like this.

To be honest, I have enormous empathy for the Silvagni family. It must be absolutely awful for them. I can only assume they would devastated that their son did something like that, but at the same time devastated that their son is going to go to jail for the prime decade of his life.

I can't even comprehend what they'd be going through.

Id honestly say if you have these thoughts in you, your children would never get in that situation ever as they understand the circumstances it would put you in

Its when you KNOW your parents will fix your mistakes that you make as many as you want

 

[kickazz]

Like the Geelong player case, it didn't take long for the usual people to again come out supporting suppression orders over the principle of open justice.
I hope this article by Justin Quill tonight gives them pause for thought, but I'm not holding my breath

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/commentary/how-tom-silvagni-used-wealth-to-fight-for-secrecy-and-why-its-good-he-lost/news-story/9326d777c13918b4e18efb5d014f808d?amp

As it might be behind a paywall and I believe we're not supposed to post the full articles anymore on BF, here's a few relevant snippets for them

To be fair JQ is on the Murdoch payroll so is always going to be in favour of publishing everything. He churns out one of these articles every year. Dismissing experts in the field and putting the word fact in quotation marks is very on brand (for the publication, not him). Opinion > evidence/data at News Ltd.

In this case I'd generally agree though, as it is not so much the publication that would cause the mental health impact, but rather the crime itself. Still, I can see how it makes sense to not have a media circus until the trial is over and he is found guilty - compare the Tanner Bruin situation.

But then again you could look at other cases like Erin Patterson and ask how is that any different.

The question should be is how is justice affected by publication/suppression. The public's "right to know" (or right to be entertained more like it) and the media's :right to sell newspapers" should be of secondary consideration.

 

[Munich]

After having a look through previous cases and sentences I’d be shocked if he received over 3 years.

No remorse, tried to cover up his crime with fake evidence. Both are aggravators for a longer sentence.

 

[kickazz]

As a parent, I often wonder how I would react in situations like this.

To be honest, I have enormous empathy for the Silvagni family. It must be absolutely awful for them. I can only assume they would devastated that their son did something like that, but at the same time devastated that their son is going to go to jail for the prime decade of his life.

I can't even comprehend what they'd be going through.

I hear you.

But read that again and replace 'son' with 'daughter' (though son is just as valid in this example) and replace 'did something like that' with 'was a victim of rape' and 'devastated that their son is going to go to jail for the prime decade of his life' with 'devastated that this may affect her mentally for the rest of her life'.


Our criminal justice system is way too focused on the criminal and not the victim.