Remove this Banner Ad

Moved Thread #1: Majak Daw -

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Regarding naming, given the complainant and the accused are now both adults the rules aren't the same as if one or both were still children. The recent Robert Hughes and Rolf Harris cases are examples where the accused was named.

Edit: The names of the victims in those other cases were suppressed. They weren't named as previously posted.
 
This comes from the site I quoted above.

VIC

Crimes Act 1958 (Section 45)

The age of consent for sexual interactions is 16 years.

If a person is charged with engaging in sexual activities with a person under the legal age, a legal defence is outlined in section 45(4). It states that:

Consent is not a defence to a charge unless at the time of the alleged offence the child was aged 12 or older and -

(a) the accused satisfies the court on the balance of probabilities that he or she believed on reasonable grounds that the child was aged 16 or older; or

(b) the accused was not more than 2 years older than the child; or

(c) the accused satisfies the court on the balance of probabilities that he or she believed on reasonable grounds that he or she was married to the child.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

This comes from the site I quoted above.

VIC

Crimes Act 1958 (Section 45)

The age of consent for sexual interactions is 16 years.

If a person is charged with engaging in sexual activities with a person under the legal age, a legal defence is outlined in section 45(4). It states that:

Consent is not a defence to a charge unless at the time of the alleged offence the child was aged 12 or older and -

(a) the accused satisfies the court on the balance of probabilities that he or she believed on reasonable grounds that the child was aged 16 or older; or

(b) the accused was not more than 2 years older than the child; or

(c) the accused satisfies the court on the balance of probabilities that he or she believed on reasonable grounds that he or she was married to the child
.

Definetly not trying to make light of this, because it is far from funny but WTF is (c)!!!!
 
Having sat on a jury for a sexual assault/rape case, I can say with at least a small level of authority that they are a horrible time for all involved.

Majak says that he is innocent and has earned my trust to this point. I hope that everyone involved on both sides of this case get the support they need through what will be pretty much a shit time for everyone.
 
This is not a culture thing.

Maj was 16 in school and at the Western Jets.
I know. I've just always thought we would be free of these sort of issues. I guess you could say I'm shocked to be sitting here :p

Sent from my Nokia 3210
 
I sincerely hope that both parties are handled by the Police, the courts and most especially the media (who have such an appalling track record with these matters) with respect and dignity.

Definetly not trying to make light of this, because it is far from funny but WTF is (c)!!!!

It recognises that immigrants coming here may have come from other countries with different laws and cultures regarding marriage, including marrying minors, and that a marriage that occurred elsewhere might only be provable here by the testimony of the people involved (eg no paperwork). E.g refugees from a part of the world where nothing is documented (or documents are lost in a flight risk scenario) and it is perfectly legal there (if morally questionable as far as I am concerned) to sell your 13 old daughter into marriage.
 
Can someone clear up Maj's age at the time of the "incident" on here it seems everyone is comfortable he was 16, all I hear on the news is that he was 17.... May or may not be important.
 
Can someone clear up Maj's age at the time of the "incident" on here it seems everyone is comfortable he was 16, all I hear on the news is that he was 17.... May or may not be important.
The club website says he was born in 1991, and the incident as reported in the news happened in 2007. He would have been 15 or 16, depending on the time of year. Those saying he was 17 are just idiots.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

"Buyers Remorse" refers to a victim having given or implied consent and then regretting their actions afterwards.

NB: I'm not in anyway implying that this is the case here.

I just don't understand why you felt the need to "put it out there". Just seems a gratuitous comment to me. Because even if you were only making a broad statement about the motivations of persons alleging rape, by implication you are inferring without any basis for doing so that this girl might have had those motivations.

Isn't it better to speculate or impugn the possible motives of the girl after the matter has gone to trial and guilt or innocence has been determined - or better yet, not at all?
 
I sincerely hope that both parties are handled by the Police, the courts and most especially the media (who have such an appalling track record with these matters) with respect and dignity.



It recognises that immigrants coming here may have come from other countries with different laws and cultures regarding marriage, including marrying minors, and that a marriage that occurred elsewhere might only be provable here by the testimony of the people involved (eg no paperwork). E.g refugees from a part of the world where nothing is documented (or documents are lost in a flight risk scenario) and it is perfectly legal there (if morally questionable as far as I am concerned) to sell your 13 old daughter into marriage.
Cheers mate...... But still wtf!!! This isn't the place for this discussion but that is mental.
 
why does it take 7 years to have someone charged with rape?

Does it matter?

Anyways, the below is taken from a paper written by a person in a far better position to address the issue than any of us knuckelheads:

Delayed reporting - The police often view a delay in reporting sexual assault offences as abnormal and
as a factor which reduces the victim’s credibility (Brownmiller, 1975; Bronitt, 1998; Freckelton, 1998;
Torrey, 1991). It is likely that less physical and forensic evidence is available, and it is believed that
victims will have more time to construct a fabricated account of events. Conversely, a rape victim will

typically tend to hesitate before involving the police, and may feel scared, shamed, and self-blaming in
the aftermath of rape. Often the victim has to reach a stage where she feels as if she has the right to
report the offender, and feels relatively safe and secure in doing so, before she can approach the police.
Besides, the majority of reports that are reported promptly result from a third party contacting the police,

not the victim herself (Burgess and Hazelwood, 1999; Jordan, 1998).

(Taken from http://www.aic.gov.au/media_library/conferences/policewomen3/jordan.pdf)
 
why does it take 7 years to have someone charged with rape?

Look, it is odd that it's taken until now for this to come out.

However, whilst it is odd, it's also not rare/unusual.

I don't have exact stats to back me up, as it's purely anecdotal, but when I was on a jury in a sexual assault/rape case, the prosecution did say something along the lines of "the longer people wait to report it, the rarer it is for a perpetrator to be found guilty".
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

He doesn't have to play at the moment with the club trialling Ben Brown. Let's not make a judgement about Daw .......... or the complainant. Daw will have a good defence.
 
Can someone clear up Maj's age at the time of the "incident" on here it seems everyone is comfortable he was 16, all I hear on the news is that he was 17.... May or may not be important.

Look, it is odd that it's taken until now for this to come out.

However, whilst it is odd, it's also not rare/unusual.

I don't have exact stats to back me up, as it's purely anecdotal, but when I was on a jury in a sexual assault/rape case, the prosecution did say something along the lines of "the longer people wait to report it, the rarer it is for a perpetrator to be found guilty".

It is actually not all that odd. The most recent report from the Royal Commission into Child Sex Abuse stated that the average time between the alleged event and the reporting of the alleged event is 22 years.

This is of course a very different situation but the reasons why people do not report as quickly as we might think/expect are spelt out very accurately in astrovic's post above.
 
Last edited:
Base


It is actually not all that odd. The most recent report from the Royal Commission into Child Sex Abuse stated that the average time between the alleged event and the reporting of the alleged event is 22 years.

This is of course a very different situation but the reasons why people do not report as quickly as we might think/expect are spelt out very accurately in astrovic's post above.
???
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top