- Jun 10, 2014
- 19,288
- 51,357
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
My understanding is he used it to convince the victim on matters of timing. Well before the charges were laid.
Feel free to come up with an alternative
-
Mobile App Discontinued
Due to a number of factors, support for the current BigFooty mobile app has been discontinued. Your BigFooty login will no longer work on the Tapatalk or the BigFooty App - which is based on Tapatalk.
Apologies for any inconvenience. We will try to find a replacement.
Scandal Tom Silvagni convicted of rape
- Thread starter parano1a
- Start date
- Tagged users None
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
Feel free to come up with an alternative
- Jun 10, 2014
- 19,288
- 51,357
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
To try to convince
- Jul 25, 2014
- 4,906
- 8,998
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
Yes indeed. The gaslighting began with the receipts it would seem.
H00t
Norm Smith Medallist
- Sep 28, 2019
- 6,552
- 12,087
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
It began from the moment he told the victim his friend missed his Uber and would be back up shortly. Then he pretended to be him.
It was one big gaslight attempt from the very start.
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
The lack of remorse will bump this sentence up. In all of the cases I've read that had a short non parole period the accused plead guilty and "showed remorse". Surely that's subjective but whatevs.
Most of the other cases with a singular charge of rape had a non parole period of 5 years.
Most of the other cases with a singular charge of rape had a non parole period of 5 years.
phantom13
Moderator
- Moderator
- #1,081
It feels like a pretty pointless piece of semantics to argue whether he doctored evidence or doctored something that became evidence.
He clearly knew it was incriminating and he attempted to change it to make it non incriminating.
Logic obviously dictates you’re right but I don’t think you can really put yourself in the mindset of Jo and Steve at the moment.
Logic and reason clearly aren’t a part of their thought process right now.
- Mar 9, 2024
- 1,057
- 3,171
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
I would argue the following:
In their conscious mind he is not guilty (denial).
Hidden away in their unconscious he is guilty AF and they are equal parts enraged with him and in despair for him.
god help us allHas anyone seen anything like this on a law firm's website
LIM & TNG ADVOCATES & SOLICITORS
limtng.com.au
I was reading through the suppression lifting case notes and thought I'd give the law firm a squiz.
Yep. Absolutely agreed
Any jail term is a very big deal
It's not something to be taken lightly.
Whether it's 4 or 5 years isn't really the point.
It's a big deal either way
Last edited:
Mindbogglingly inappropriate
KetamineKerr
Senior List
Why didn’t TS claim it was consensual? And the doctored receipt / claim it was his friend / lies was all an attempt to salvage the relationship with this gf / social circle?
The defence they ran with was terrible.
Obviously to them and his legal team it was better to just label her delusional and a liar, and judging from the comments on her social media the family has been doing just that for two years now.
Ummm sure. Obviously. That goes without saying. Doesn't mean he's going to get the maximum though.
You really want to have this discussion and lecture me about rape and appropriate sentences?
Maybe stop and think a bit before mouthing off.
Last edited:
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
1. Lack of remorse (I always find this a bit weird but that's how it is)
2. Elements of dishonesty
3. Elements of pre meditation
4 Lack of insight
All factors that will likely up the sentence
- Jun 10, 2014
- 19,288
- 51,357
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
Impossible to go with the defence of consent given the message exchanges, receipt, etc.
That’s a long time before any legal defence team got involved. Think again on terrible
- Jun 10, 2014
- 19,288
- 51,357
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
You need to re-think what was going on. He doctored the receipt in an effort to convince the victim her bf hadn’t left the house.
This was an attempt to trick her. It was a crucial piece of evidence for the prosecution.
phantom13
Moderator
- Moderator
- #1,098
I really don’t know what this has to do with my post.
My point was two fold.
1- who really cares about whether it was evidence or not when he doctored it.
2- his intention for doctoring it was to diminish or flat out lie about what he’d done.
As you note it became crucial to the prosecution for a whole host of reasons. The original point being discussed (which is still what I’m discussing) is whether him doing that will influence his sentencing (which it should) and you (I think?) noted he didn’t doctor “evidence” because he doctored it before it became evidence.
IMO that’s a pointless piece of semantic distinction to the discussion being had.
I'm old enough to have been threatened with being whooped by the belt, but I'm young enough to not actually have been whooped by it. I don't have kids, but a lot of modern parenting leaves me scratching my head.
I’d be expecting something like 5 and 2 and a bit.
Last edited: