I read the news today oh boy! Page 1,294

Quote: Raymond Terrific @ September 7 2013, 12:20 AM BST

Would it be possible to anonymise the defendant while still letting in the public and press?

View original

Can't really see how. The jury have to be able to see the defendant's face, to hear his name. Part of the battle when you are defending is to turn the defendant into a person for the jury - it is much harder to convict someone once you feel that you know them and can empathise with them.

I suppose the secondary argument is to extend the anonymity given to complainants in sex cases (that their identities are not published, although anyone can walk into court and discover exactly who they are) to defendants.

The problem is, it is very unattractive. Censorship of the press is serious business. Unless it is a kid/complainant in a sex case, it is very difficult to get a judge to impose reporting restrictions, and rightly so.

Take the Huhne/Pryce affair. We have a right to know about that, and we had a right to know about it as it was happening. It is a slippery slope when we start restricting what our press tell us on the basis of what conclusions may or may not be drawn.

I agree the current situation is not ideal, but the alternative is far worse.

Quote: Jennie @ September 6 2013, 7:20 PM BST

Excellent idea. Don't let the press/public in. Trials are a private business. No need to worry Joe Public.

I hear it works like a charm in North Korea.

View original

I said the public don't need to know the names of defendants in cases that are being conducted not that they should never know or that no-one should examine the case before or during the court proceedings.

The press don't report on these cases to ensure they are properly conducted. The guiding principle is prurience and censoriousness. The recent reporting on sex cases has been shameful. And not just the historic ones.

What about the guy who got a suspended sentence for engaging in a sex act with a fifteen year old girl? Across the 'quality' press he was unfairly denounced as a paedophile. The fact that the act was consensual was glossed over, the fact that the girl came round to the man's house under her own agency and spontaneously performed the act (presumably fellatio) was glossed over and in every article she was presented as a child when in fact she was a teenager - and described as if she had no mind, no sexual desires and no ability to act autonomously whatsoever.

Rentaquote, coin-operated broadsheet journoslags with no knowledge of law were calling for him to be given a custodial sentence and for the prosecuting barrister to be disbarred. Only one account I read made anything of the fact that neither the girl nor man had gone to the police and that the prosecution had only taken place because someone had heard the girl boasting about the event.

The universal representation of the girl as a vessel of ethereal, blinding goodness being besmirched by an evil, calculating, animalistic male groomer was the sort of propagandist fantasy I would associate with North Korea.

Quote: Jennie @ September 6 2013, 7:20 PM BST

No you're right, I've changed my mind. That kind of comment is exactly on your level.

View original

Is that all you've got, sarcasm? Don't you want to be a comedy writer?

If you pm me your address I'll send you a giant papier mâché model of my balls and you can practise trying to bust them.

Get a room you guys.

Quote: Tim Azure @ September 7 2013, 7:44 AM BST

The trouble is that a man who has sex with a fifteen year old may not just stop there.

View original

Exactly.
He could end up marrying her.

Australia has a new Prime Minister. Think it is time for me to really look into a working holiday.

Uh oh, did the bloke win with the little pet pretty ladies following him about?

Quote: zooo @ September 7 2013, 11:31 AM BST

Uh oh, did the bloke win with the little pet pretty ladies following him about?

View original

If you mean the kinda bald one then yes. The little pretty ladies were his daughters. He likes to remind us he has two of them and a wife, so he is not a sexist person. Despite making comments this century about woman doing the ironing/cooking etc. He also think gay marriage is a "fashion of the moment"

#1950herewecome has been trending here tonight.

I wasn't overly impressed with the other guys (the ones who have been in for 3years) but prefered them by miles.

Still at least I got to cast my vote of my own free wiil, safe in the knowledge that whoever I did or did not vote for is not going to send the army around to do away with me.

Oh whoops! Sorry to his daughters. I thought he'd hired some fancy ladies.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2384988/Paedophile-spared-jail-13-year-old-victim-looked-older-sexual-predator-egging-on.html

She was 13 and he had a supply of child porn and bestiality films in his house.

If a man like that could be prosecuted than what hope is there for the rest of us?

Quote: reds @ September 7 2013, 12:09 PM BST

Despite making comments this century about woman doing the ironing/cooking etc. He also think gay marriage is a "fashion of the moment"

#1950herewecome has been trending here tonight.

View original

Evidently he's still a massive twat though. Shame.

Quote: zooo @ September 7 2013, 12:14 PM BST

Evidently he's still a massive twat though. Shame.

View original

I'm impressed you even knew who was in the running. Didn't think Aussie politics got reported on that much overseas.

Quote: reds @ September 7 2013, 12:09 PM BST

If you mean the kinda bald one then yes. The little pretty ladies were his daughters.

View original

He seems to have tapped into something of a sexist/homophobic/racist undercurrent to Australian society. (No offence Reds, it exists everywhere).

To top it all off, he wears Speedos.

Hopefully he'll make some gaff and disappear.

Too many posts to choose a quote from but it's back on the Levell trial. Btw has The Sun used that yet? The lack of hard physical evidence is a real shocker for me. He may be guilty, who knows, but the girl was examined and found to be considered a virgin still. She added new allegations two years after the first set, had talked of selling her story to the press, the bloke has money, is well known, and has slept around a bit. Isn't all of this also classic jealous vendetta material for actually not sleeping with her?

But my main alarm is with the savage prosecution barracking, 'Do you have dark secrets, are you weak, aren't you a promiscuous cheat and alcoholic?' What does this prove? Nothing! It's akin to forcing a confession from someone weak whether they're guilty or innocent, just to win a case. Law should be above this sort of nonsense by now shouldn't it? It's 800 years since Magna Carta was supposed to put an end to speculative prosecutions and it's still going on. How many high profile wrongly convicted unsavouries or shadies does it take to convince the CPS that merely hounding a dodgy looking character into the ground and in effect trialling them purely for their lifestyle does not equate to real justice if it turns out they didn't actually do what's alleged? He may turn out to be guilty of it, but if he's found guilty on such weak evidence and scattered allegations (we've so far seen) then it's another sham.

Quote: Alfred J Kipper @ September 7 2013, 12:23 PM BST

but the girl was examined and found to be considered a virgin still.

View original

Virginity is lost when an individual has penetrative sex for the first time. But the "neutral" medial evidence is a big point for the defence.

Quote: Alfred J Kipper @ September 7 2013, 12:23 PM BST

Isn't all of this also classic jealous vendetta material for actually not sleeping with her?

View original

She is 17 now and alleges she was raped for the first time aged 6.

Quote: Alfred J Kipper @ September 7 2013, 12:23 PM BST

But my main alarm is with the savage prosecution barracking, 'Do you have dark secrets, are you weak, aren't you a promiscuous cheat and alcoholic?' What does this prove? Nothing!

View original

To understand the relevance of this you need to know who the girl is. Which I can't tell you, because that's naughty naughty naughty. But it is fairly widely known.

I accept it is not central to the case, but the personal circs of the defendant are relevant here.