TOPIC:

I think you’ve lost the point DD.  You, like everyone else, doesn’t have any facts.  You can’t convict anyone by joining the dots.  Even Sherlock has to have facts.  All everyone here including you has, is only has an opinion, nothing more.

Didn’t I say that in a previous post? So there has never been anyone convicted of rape or sexual assault before without any physical evidence or witnesses? Same with murder? Many charges and cases are decided on circumstantial evidence alone.

Unfortunately for Brittany her credibility as a witness came into question due to her mental health and that post trial chat to the media. The judge decided there was little chance of a conviction in a retrial and she has lawyers. She is acting on legal advice.

For you blokes to suggest that she’s put herself through all of this purely motivated by money is laughable. The reported 3 million dollar compo is no way worth what she’s been through in the media alone. And I doubt she could ever profit from writing a book or interviews because she could be counter sued. Anyway put your blue ties on boys and back to the office.

DD wrote:

premiership hangover wrote:

Thats an interesting comment you made below DD and I'd like to understand more

"She fell asleep naked on the sofa" 

How did she end up naked on the sofa? Did she remove all her clothes before sleeping or did someone remove her clothes after she passed out (Fell Asleep)?

If no one knows the answer to that, how do we know if she was raped or if something else happened.

Lol I'll let you work it out Sherlock. A young woman who travels with a senior minister has got herself plastered and returns to the office unassisted, strips off and takes a nap on a sofa in the minister's office? 

Or scenario B? What sounds the most likely to you? Better ask Mrs Watson what she thinks.


DD - logic has taught me not to guess. Over the years i have been out with girls that when drunk strip naked to sleep and others that don't, so either scenario sounds likely to me, i think you have made your mind up though
 

The presumption of innocence until proven otherwise is not a big thing in DDs world.

BC wrote:

The presumption of innocence until proven otherwise is not a big thing in DDs world.

And a lot of cowards hide behind it BC. The assumption and accusation here that Brittany Higgins just made all this up to make 3 million bucks is laughable. Where is her presumption of innocence from you?

If the cops had the slightest hint that she just made all this up they would have thrown the book at her for making a false report which in this case would mean jail time for her.

I don't think she made everything up and let's face it pollies can be slimy buggers, but I'm also unsure if we have got all the truths in this situation. i don't know if that is because she got bad advice, if she felt she could scam 3 million or because there is some level of shit we don't know about, 

I will await until i get aoo the facts before i say he is guilty, she is dumd or there is some meeting point in the middle

DD wrote:

BC wrote:

The presumption of innocence until proven otherwise is not a big thing in DDs world.

And a lot of cowards hide behind it BC. The assumption and accusation here that Brittany Higgins just made all this up to make 3 million bucks is laughable. Where is her presumption of innocence from you?

If the cops had the slightest hint that she just made all this up they would have thrown the book at her for making a false report which in this case would mean jail time for her.

I never said she made it up to make money.  But I do think if you take his version of events and compare it to hers, I reckon the truth is somewhere in between.  As I said before, whilst I haven't got a clue what really took place, I think based on the evidence as we know it they did have sex on the sofa but there is some doubt on whether she had legal capacity to give consent as she could have been too drunk.  I believe that is why Lehrmann said it never happened because if he admitted it did, her ability to give consent comes into play.

In saying that, I'm not sure why taxpayers are stumping up millions in compensation when no offence has been proved in a court of law.  If it had, I believe she could have claimed victims compensation which I think is somewhere around $75k but certainly not in the millions $.   Good old Elbow likes to throw our money around like confetti when you also consider he paid the French $900m for our cancelled subs when contractually they were entitled to around a tenth of that.

Elbow gave her the thank you payment for helping labor out, 3 million if true is an utterly outrageous amount, based on something un proven, how that was assessed is highly questionable given she was a junior staffer being paid bugger all. Lets not forget some other disturbing facts about this, she was offered $250K by Lefty Fitz and crew for the book deal before the report, and she was also advised by the AFP not to talk to media before the investigation was complete which the AFP have now confirmed she completely ignored. But sure she wasnt motived by money and other factors.

There is now a shit mixer fight going in ACT between the AFP who clearly didnt want to prosecute due to the weak case and the highly political ACT DPP who was wanting to push ahead with it. The inquiry will be interesting.

DD wrote:

BC wrote:

The presumption of innocence until proven otherwise is not a big thing in DDs world.

And a lot of cowards hide behind it BC. The assumption and accusation here that Brittany Higgins just made all this up to make 3 million bucks is laughable. Where is her presumption of innocence from you?

If the cops had the slightest hint that she just made all this up they would have thrown the book at her for making a false report which in this case would mean jail time for her.

The Presumption of innocence isnt something anyone "hides behind" it's the bed rock of our legal system otherwise it all falls apart.

And we are now learning that the AFP did not want the charge to proceed due to her inconsistencies and weakness in the case but were ignored due to it being to political.

 

This issue has gone beyond outrageous, Tony Elbows has a lot to answer for.  Keep this crap up and he’ll lose the unloseable election….that’s if his party don’t do to him what they are very good at.  When does the piggy bank get empty??