Rumour Rumors of cat player in big trouble

[Senor M]

Except most other jurisdictions with comparable justice systems seem to manage just fine.

As has been well shown already in this thread, Victoria is an outlier in it's overuse of suppression orders

Other states use suppression orders regularly; especially when it involves vulnerable victims.

Queensland with the “Social media influencer who poisoned her daughter” is a great example of where the name of the accused is suppressed by the Queensland judiciary system.

 

[dmark]

It obviously helps the correct outcome to ultimately be achieved. If my in laws (passive AFL supporters in general) know his name, then most of the general public know his name.

The other party being named wasn't full front page news like this would be. I don't remember his name and I don't care. A senior AFL player is obviously a different situation: it increases the attention on the case a hundredfold and jeopardises the integrity of the legal process and outcome.

Mmmmmmmm
Not really, watch the news, people that have been charged with all sorts of horrendous crimes, have cameras shoved in there face, and their name spread all over the news and social media Prior to the court findings.

Most suppression order request come from the Alleged perpetrators.

 

[The Feeder Club]

Other states use suppression orders regularly; especially when it involves vulnerable victims.

Queensland with the “Social media influencer who poisoned her daughter” is a great example of where the name of the accused is suppressed by the Queensland judiciary system.

I said overuse. All jurisdictions in Aus use suppression orders, but Victoria uses them more liberally than others

Secret state: Victoria the suppression order capital of Australia

Accused sex offenders, killers and kidnappers have all used the court system to try to hide their identities, and it’s a balancing act some lawyers argue we don’t always get right.

www.theage.com.au

 

[Senor M]

I said overuse. All jurisdictions in Aus use suppression orders, but Victoria uses them more liberally than others

Secret state: Victoria the suppression order capital of Australia

Accused sex offenders, killers and kidnappers have all used the court system to try to hide their identities, and it’s a balancing act some lawyers argue we don’t always get right.

www.theage.com.au

Using your own article as evidence, that’s simply not true.

In 2023—South Australia had 308 suppression orders from a population of approximately 2 million people and Victoria had 521 for a population of approximately 7 million people.

That demonstrates that South Australia uses suppression orders more regularly than the Victorian system does.

In this case a suppression order makes sense— it protects the victim from a long, drawn out public attack on their character and it prevents the bias of a potential jury

 

[The Feeder Club]

Using your own article as evidence, that’s simply not true.

In 2023—South Australia had 308 suppression orders from a population of approximately 2 million people and Victoria had 521 for a population of approximately 7 million people.

That demonstrates that South Australia uses suppression orders more regularly than the Victorian system does.

In this case a suppression order makes sense— it protects the victim from a long, drawn out public attack on their character and it prevents the bias of a potential jury

Look I have already had these arguments with others in this thread, the principle of open justice which has it's history rooted in the manipulation of legal proceedings by the famous and poweful behind closed doors is progressively being eroded in this country, and Victoria is leading the way. If you don't want to believe me, believe Justice Lee by reading his speech he gave at a law conference last year.

Open justice: A national approach?

www.fedcourt.gov.au

Of course there will always be times, like on national security grounds, that orders are needed. But protecting famous people, and cloaking it in the rhetoric of protecting their alleged victims, isn't one of them, it is anathema to the principle of open justice. The last paragraph of his speech says

I am a judge, not a law reformer. But it seems to me stamping out vestiges of a culture of secrecy and promoting principles of open justice are indispensable for the optimal operation of our criminal and civil justice system. Lawyers are sometimes long on rhetoric but short on taking steps to make the reality match that rhetoric. If, as a democratic society operating under the rule of law, we truly believe that proceedings held in public and accessible to the public is the best security for public confidence in the impartiality and efficiency of the justice system, its protectors have a responsibility to do what we can to promote the principle of open justice.

 

[Senor M]

Look I have already had these arguments with others in this thread, the principle of open justice which has it's history rooted in the manipulation of legal proceedings by the famous and poweful behind closed doors is progressively being eroded in this country, and Victoria is leading the way. If you don't want to believe me, believe Justice Lee by reading his speech he gave at a law conference last year.

Open justice: A national approach?

www.fedcourt.gov.au

Of course there will always be times, like on national security grounds, that orders are needed. But protecting famous people, and cloaking it in the rhetoric of protecting their alleged victims, isn't one of them, it is anathema to the principle of open justice. The last paragraph of his speech says

Where in that speech does it suggest that this is only a Victorian problem?

Justice Lee acknowledges that similar things happen in South Australia; thus have I, mate.

Your “evidence” to suggest that this is a Victorian problem isn’t accurate.

 

[thegerman]

Look I have already had these arguments with others in this thread, the principle of open justice which has it's history rooted in the manipulation of legal proceedings by the famous and poweful behind closed doors is progressively being eroded in this country, and Victoria is leading the way. If you don't want to believe me, believe Justice Lee by reading his speech he gave at a law conference last year.

Open justice: A national approach?

www.fedcourt.gov.au

Of course there will always be times, like on national security grounds, that orders are needed. But protecting famous people, and cloaking it in the rhetoric of protecting their alleged victims, isn't one of them, it is anathema to the principle of open justice. The last paragraph of his speech says

You’ve had arguments, though that doesn’t make you right.

Suggest taking a break.

 

[The Feeder Club]

You’ve had arguments, though that doesn’t make you right.

Suggest taking a break.

What are you talking about? I was dragged back to this thread by someone quoting a post from over a month ago. Your gratuitious advice is misdirected

 

[74561347]

 

[Truetiger]

Any court date or update re cat player?

 

[thegerman]

Any court date or update re cat player?

Thursday there’s a date set for a general committal hearing I believe. No actual date set

 

[Perrip]

Is this about it? Can't read beyond the paywall

No Cookies | Geelong Advertiser

No Cookies

www.geelongadvertiser.com.au

 

[matthew_s]

Is this about it? Can't read beyond the paywall

No Cookies | Geelong Advertiser

No Cookies

www.geelongadvertiser.com.au

Paid for sex…was this previously known?

 

[darrenmorgan]

“A high-profile man charged with rape and other sex offences following a night out at a Geelong strip club had paid the complainant for “sexual services”, a court has heard.
Details have emerged for the first time about the allegations against the well-known man, who the Herald Sun cannot identify after he earlier successfully applied for a suppression order.
The man, and his co-accused, media marketer Patrick Sinnott, fronted Geelong Magistrates’ Court on Thursday for a contested hearing in which magistrate Kimberley Swadesir will determine if there is sufficient evidence for the pair to face trial in a higher court.
Witnesses testified in court how the woman was heavily intoxicated when she was last seen being “coaxed” or “forced” into a vehicle in the car park outside the Alley Cats strip club in February 2023.
The woman had been on a night out when one of her friends became concerned he could not find her.
Hours later she contacted that friend telling him she had been sexually assaulted.
The court heard she told this friend the men had been “rough” with her.
Police were called and met the woman as she arrived home at dawn, taking a detailed statement.
But barrister Moya O’Brien, for Mr Sinnott, said the complainant’s version of events was in question.
“The central issue in this case is the credibility of the complainant,” Ms O’Brien said.
The court heard about SnapChat messages between a circle of friends who had met the complainant inside the club that night, suggesting she had “lied to police about the events that took place” and that “the allegations of rape were false”.
One woman, giving evidence, said she had been told by a mutual friend that the two guys had offered to pay the woman in return for sexual services.
The complainant had allegedly confided in a friend that she had consensual sex with the pair which they paid for.
“But then she wanted more money,” the witness told the court.
When they refused to pay, “then she decided to accuse them of rape”, the witness said.
Mr Sinnott is facing four charges including digital rape and sexual touching without consent.
But his well-known co-accused is facing five charges, including oral and digital rape and sexual touching without consent.
Both men are yet to enter a formal plea, but their lawyers have previously indicated they maintain their innocence.
The hearing continues.”

 

[HairyO]

Nah, plenty in and outside Vic, here's some high profile ones off the top of my head; Lehrmenn second alleged rape (maybe even first?), Tie me kangaroo down sport pedo dude and old campaigner Pell...

Was there a suppression order? And this is the Townsville (or somewhere in QLD) charge? Because that was being openly discussed on BF every single day. Including by very active BF moderators.

 

[Mr Meow]

“A high-profile man charged with rape and other sex offences following a night out at a Geelong strip club had paid the complainant for “sexual services”, a court has heard.
Details have emerged for the first time about the allegations against the well-known man, who the Herald Sun cannot identify after he earlier successfully applied for a suppression order.
The man, and his co-accused, media marketer Patrick Sinnott, fronted Geelong Magistrates’ Court on Thursday for a contested hearing in which magistrate Kimberley Swadesir will determine if there is sufficient evidence for the pair to face trial in a higher court.
Witnesses testified in court how the woman was heavily intoxicated when she was last seen being “coaxed” or “forced” into a vehicle in the car park outside the Alley Cats strip club in February 2023.
The woman had been on a night out when one of her friends became concerned he could not find her.
Hours later she contacted that friend telling him she had been sexually assaulted.
The court heard she told this friend the men had been “rough” with her.
Police were called and met the woman as she arrived home at dawn, taking a detailed statement.
But barrister Moya O’Brien, for Mr Sinnott, said the complainant’s version of events was in question.
“The central issue in this case is the credibility of the complainant,” Ms O’Brien said.
The court heard about SnapChat messages between a circle of friends who had met the complainant inside the club that night, suggesting she had “lied to police about the events that took place” and that “the allegations of rape were false”.
One woman, giving evidence, said she had been told by a mutual friend that the two guys had offered to pay the woman in return for sexual services.
The complainant had allegedly confided in a friend that she had consensual sex with the pair which they paid for.
“But then she wanted more money,” the witness told the court.
When they refused to pay, “then she decided to accuse them of rape”, the witness said.
Mr Sinnott is facing four charges including digital rape and sexual touching without consent.
But his well-known co-accused is facing five charges, including oral and digital rape and sexual touching without consent.
Both men are yet to enter a formal plea, but their lawyers have previously indicated they maintain their innocence.
The hearing continues.”

Well no one is coming out of this one looking great. Probably not the smartest move to tell your friends about sex extortion scams though.

 

[Jim Cricket]

One of the big questions is was she actually drunk? Regardless of whether she was paid or not or said yes at the time, if she was drunk she's not in a position to legally consent to sex.

 

[blackey]

The only person that can say they were r*ped is the person that was r*ped .
No other opinion matters.

 

[callmeX]

The only person that can say they were r*ped is the person that was r*ped .
No other opinion matters.

no and no
the law says that
she can state whether she consented or not, and whether consent was withdrawn

her mate being asked to get legal advice is interesting

 

[thegerman]

no and no
the law says that
she can state whether she consented or not, and whether consent was withdrawn

her mate being asked to get legal advice is interesting

Me thinks he committed perjury given there is likely video footage of that entire area.

 

[Hamingja]

her mate being asked to get legal advice is interesting

The mate is definitely an interesting character. I wonder what his line of work is now

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Me thinks he committed perjury given there is likely video footage of that entire area.

Why would you not get legal advice before testifying though?

 

[callmeX]

Why would you not get legal advice before testifying though?

It feels like he imposed himself and has been warned

Just need the reference to aflw leaders to make comment

 

[Freddy Swift]

Find it interesting that it says he applied for the suppression order. So not really about the victim, just wanting to protect himself.

 

[TheEscapeClub]

One of the big questions is was she actually drunk? Regardless of whether she was paid or not or said yes at the time, if she was drunk she's not in a position to legally consent to sex.

..or allegedly take payment too I guess.