Remove this Banner Ad

Opinion Commentary & Media IX

  • Thread starter Thread starter zoomba23
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

WinterRoos said:
View attachment 2588360
I personally am fairly content to leave it down.
Click to expand...

I assume everyone is telling me the truth, I have no reason to expect otherwise. But everyone is considered innocent until proven guilty and the burden of proof lays with the prosecution to prove and that burden for any serious charge is beyond reasonable doubt. it is a pretty simple mechanic and unfortunately, the entire burden is on the accuser, sometimes we get a miscarriage of justice because there is no real evidence. It doesn't mean a crime wasn't committed.

i just don't think vigilante justice is the path we should go down where we decide who is guilty or innocent based on feelings.

We do have a lot of crazy people that make completely ****ed up accusations for what seems to be completely bullshit reasons so we have no way of telling who is telling the truth and who is a liar so we are totally reliant on evidence.

Society would be a complete shitshow if it functioned any other way, do you know how many famous people would be in jail if all you needed was an accusation to get a guilty verdict? All of them.

Did Baz do it? I don't know and it is not my job to be a vigilante judge, we have an imperfect court system but it is the only functional system we can come up with.

I don't think a prosecutor should bring cases to trial where they do not have any evidence other than an accusation, it was like that case against the Bishop a few years back, even if you get a conviction in the lower court, it is never going to survive a higher court appeal.

I think the wording by the judge is unfortunate, the prosecutor obviously didn't bring enough evidence to the table to satisfy the burden of proof, I think that should have been the extent of his opinion. The weasel words where he stated he thinks he likely did it without basing any reason for that conclusion just means people will justify treating Cable as a criminal regardless of the not guilty verdict. I think Cable should appeal the verdict and have a higher court reprimand that judge in this case, because I am sure the wording will be as harmful to Cable as a guilty verdict and can almost guarantee the next cab off the rank is a civil charge with a much lower burden of proof.

Imagine if you are Cable and you did nothing wrong, imagine just getting waterboarded like this in your later life, what a miserable existence.
 
Jeremy Jordan said:
Whenever I’m trying to get my girl in the mood, I use this simple trick:

1) let her watch the bounce as I make the same comment every 3 minutes “why the f*** would Jason Dunstall do this to himself”. Is he having money trouble? Have they kidnapped a family member? Makes no sense why he would go near that.

2) turn on first crack, and let her watch Jay Clarke’s opening first crack, especially this weeks one where he thinks given the Hollands issue Thursday night, we should now have a check in ‘buddy system’ or a councillor that speaks to every player as they walk into the change room and ask them ‘if they are ok’, to ensure no player goes out onto the field off their wheels.

3) watch Jack Reiwolt on the couch try to string a sentence together

Thank me later.
Click to expand...
If you threw Carro in that would get me over the line!
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Jeremy Jordan said:
Whenever I’m trying to get my girl in the mood, I use this simple trick:

1) let her watch the bounce as I make the same comment every 3 minutes “why the f*** would Jason Dunstall do this to himself”. Is he having money trouble? Have they kidnapped a family member? Makes no sense why he would go near that.

2) turn on first crack, and let her watch Jay Clarke’s opening first crack, especially this weeks one where he thinks given the Hollands issue Thursday night, we should now have a check in ‘buddy system’ or a councillor that speaks to every player as they walk into the change room and ask them ‘if they are ok’, to ensure no player goes out onto the field off their wheels.

3) watch Jack Reiwolt on the couch try to string a sentence together

Thank me later.
Click to expand...
world forum GIF
 
A few Roos make the early All-Australian Team after the first 6 rounds.

Our way too early All-Australian side after six rounds

Q1 All-Australian team ​

B: Tom Barrass, Cal Wilkie, Luke Parker
HB: Wayne Milera, Alex Pearce, Nick Blakey
C: Bailey Smith, Zak Butters, Justin McInerney
HF: Marcus Bontempelli, Josh Treacy, Isaac Heeney
F: Nick Watson, Ben King, Jack Gunston
Foll: Max Gawn, Caleb Serong, Nick Daicos
I/C: Kysaiah Pickett, Brodie Grundy, Luke Davies-Uniacke, Christian Petracca, Harry Sheezel
 
CURVE said:
A few Roos make the early All-Australian Team after the first 6 rounds.

Our way too early All-Australian side after six rounds

Q1 All-Australian team ​

B: Tom Barrass, Cal Wilkie, Luke Parker
HB: Wayne Milera, Alex Pearce, Nick Blakey
C: Bailey Smith, Zak Butters, Justin McInerney
HF: Marcus Bontempelli, Josh Treacy, Isaac Heeney
F: Nick Watson, Ben King, Jack Gunston
Foll: Max Gawn, Caleb Serong, Nick Daicos
I/C: Kysaiah Pickett, Brodie Grundy, Luke Davies-Uniacke, Christian Petracca, Harry Sheezel
Click to expand...
I'm super surprised they squeezed both sheezel and ldu in. It seems we just don't get our dues in the media.

On the other hand Sheezel is second for fantasy points, 8th for supercoach and has the most disposals.

Gee he is marked super hard
 
gokangas said:
Seems a curious thing for a judge to say. You are probably guilty but I can't find enough evidence to prove it.
Click to expand...
"Beyond reasonable doubt"
 
gokangas said:
Seems a curious thing for a judge to say. You are probably guilty but I can't find enough evidence to prove it.
Click to expand...

Not that curious. There's a huge difference between balance of probabilities and beyond reasonable doubt, especially in cases involving sex crimes, and the judge isn't compelled to spare Cable's feelings or reputation just because the weight of evidence falls in between those two pillars.
 
DocSholl said:
Not that curious. There's a huge difference between balance of probabilities and beyond reasonable doubt, especially in cases involving sex crimes, and the judge isn't compelled to spare Cable's feelings or reputation just because the weight of evidence falls in between those two pillars.
Click to expand...
The language was interesting. He effectively said I think you are guilty but the evidence isn't substantial enough to convict you. Amazing. Could just have said that the evidence is enough to convict. Why then speculate that he is probably guilty. Just reckon it's a bit unfair.
 
gokangas said:
The language was interesting. He effectively said I think you are guilty but the evidence isn't substantial enough to convict you. Amazing. Could just have said that the evidence is enough to convict. Why then speculate that he is probably guilty. Just reckon it's a bit unfair.
Click to expand...
"Such is life."
 

Remove this Banner Ad

gokangas said:
The language was interesting. He effectively said I think you are guilty but the evidence isn't substantial enough to convict you. Amazing. Could just have said that the evidence is enough to convict. Why then speculate that he is probably guilty. Just reckon it's a bit unfair.
Click to expand...

Not really.

Don't mind it.

A judge is still able to deliberate on the case and give their summary findings.

It's similar to the judgement made to Bruce Lehrmann over the rape of Brittany Higgins.
 
gokangas said:
The language was interesting. He effectively said I think you are guilty but the evidence isn't substantial enough to convict you. Amazing. Could just have said that the evidence is enough to convict. Why then speculate that he is probably guilty. Just reckon it's a bit unfair.
Click to expand...

I suspect the judge wanted to make it clear he didn't consider Cable innocent. I think that's important for thr victim.
 
gokangas said:
The language was interesting. He effectively said I think you are guilty but the evidence isn't substantial enough to convict you. Amazing. Could just have said that the evidence is enough to convict. Why then speculate that he is probably guilty. Just reckon it's a bit unfair.
Click to expand...
In Scotland, they had a third verdict which was Not Proven. This basically meant that the threshold hadn't been met for a guilty verdict but that the person clearly wasn't as innocent as a new born lamb.
The comments from the judge pretty much echo the spirit of this.
 
DocSholl said:
I suspect the judge wanted to make it clear he didn't consider Cable innocent. I think that's important for thr victim.
Click to expand...

Doesn't that undermine the entire system the judge is acting on behalf of?

"You've been cleared but my personal opinion is you're a dick".

Note: I don't care for Cable, he may well be guilty in reality although not in ruling. But this commentary seemed contradictory to the judicial process.
 
King Corey said:
Doesn't that undermine the entire system the judge is acting on behalf of?

"You've been cleared but my personal opinion is you're a dick".

Note: I don't care for Cable, he may well be guilty in reality although not in ruling. But this commentary seemed contradictory to the judicial process.
Click to expand...

Should.clarify I am talking in the context of there having already been a civil trial in which he was found guilty. Agree it would be problematic if that hadn't occurred.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

So does that mean Barry Cables awards and acknowledgments will be reinstated ?
 
Ashley B said:
So does that mean Barry Cables awards and acknowledgments will be reinstated ?
Click to expand...
That has been discussed over a couple of pages now. Given the judge’s comments and the existing conviction let’s say no.
 
SWMD said:
What's going on? North becoming something more than just watchable?

giantroo a compilation of classy moments, side steps, hangers from the last few weeks would be provocative. It would get the people going. 😁😅


Click to expand...


The NMFC love fest is a little worrying coming into the next 6. Hope we can keep it up but the media will be quick to turn if we don’t..
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Similar threads

Event Horizon
    • Like
Splitting social media notifications between AFL and AFLW
Replies
14
Views
1K
Only Forwards
Only Forwards
KillaKanga
    • Like
Media street
Replies
3
Views
782
Gasometer
Gasometer
D
    • Like
  • Locked
  • Poll Poll
Should ex club staffers and execs stop bagging us on social media?
2 3 4
Replies
87
Views
5K
Chadwiko
Chadwiko

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom