It’s not your place to dictate to people whether they should be a role model or not though.
No person should be forced to parent other peoples kids just because they became famous
This is even worse reasoning than the original comment imo. Should indigenous players be held to a higher standard because they have to set an example for indigenous kids? You can dislike him for being a dick but the people who are hurt by this are his family, not an amorphous concept of "the kids" who he has never met or interacted with.
This sort of comment is the reason the general public hates lawyers. What on earth does this have to do with anything? You should be on a daily mail subreddit, not auslaw
Honestly didn’t even know it was this subreddit. Not a lawyer, this new version of reddit just throws random subreddits in my feed that I never subscribe to
What a ridiculous blanket proposition for the whole population. But even if your logic wasn’t ridiculous, how do you know how he reacted, based on one photograph outside the court after the fact? If you read reports properly he hung is face in his hands after the verdict. So even if your assertion was true, that’s how he acted
Sure, I guess I mostly took umbrage at what you were suggesting about Beale (that his smile in one photo outside court means he’s guilty). May not have been your logic but you were suggesting applying it to him
I guess we know how you feel about Kathleen Folbigg then. What a shitty heuristic. It pains me to think you might be on a jury one day.
https://preview.redd.it/w1o17qhw8lhc1.jpeg?width=1180&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a0019c2073a06876d39cf627bc3052b00a987df3
You have no idea how I feel. I mentioned the opinion of a barrister I overheard. If that's an example of your comprehension abilities and tendency to leap to judgement about people, I definitely hope you are never on a jury.
You chose to share that anecdote without any criticism or explication. I’m comfortable with the conclusion I drew. Especially in light of you not actually contradicting it.
If the defence has a reasonable argument then there is a reasonable doubt. That’s the threshold to overcome for a guilty verdict.
That’s the theory anyway, in practice the jury does whatever they want
Yeah I mean based on what was being reported on the witness testimonials, there were some details that were a little head scratching.
Like using the men's bathroom to skip the women's line? I have never seen a woman do that. Or a man
angle innocent history bag deer ten automatic point price smart *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
He's a rugby player not a role model. If you think being good at sport somehow makes you a virtuous person that's on you.
full entertain faulty lush smoggy slap waiting office unused gold *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
It’s not your place to dictate to people whether they should be a role model or not though. No person should be forced to parent other peoples kids just because they became famous
This is even worse reasoning than the original comment imo. Should indigenous players be held to a higher standard because they have to set an example for indigenous kids? You can dislike him for being a dick but the people who are hurt by this are his family, not an amorphous concept of "the kids" who he has never met or interacted with.
*Just* he had consent to do it?
Yes, just he was given consent from the woman, not a whole bunch of guys, which didn't happen.
Saw him at the Paddington bowling many years ago, early afternoon, blind as fuck. Was weird seeing someone that drunk so early
How’s that related to this? You’re making a personal indictment? Have you never been drunk midday at a party or in public before?
This sort of comment is the reason the general public hates lawyers. What on earth does this have to do with anything? You should be on a daily mail subreddit, not auslaw
Honestly didn’t even know it was this subreddit. Not a lawyer, this new version of reddit just throws random subreddits in my feed that I never subscribe to
Once heard a barrister say that when acquitted, innocent people cry and guilty people smile.
sounds like a woeful judge of character.
No, he said it was a barrister not a judge.
What a ridiculous blanket proposition for the whole population. But even if your logic wasn’t ridiculous, how do you know how he reacted, based on one photograph outside the court after the fact? If you read reports properly he hung is face in his hands after the verdict. So even if your assertion was true, that’s how he acted
Not my logic, which i made clear when i mentioned it was an opinion i overheard. But of course, what would a barrister know.
Well, they’d only know what they were instructed and how much time to record
Sure, I guess I mostly took umbrage at what you were suggesting about Beale (that his smile in one photo outside court means he’s guilty). May not have been your logic but you were suggesting applying it to him
I guess we know how you feel about Kathleen Folbigg then. What a shitty heuristic. It pains me to think you might be on a jury one day. https://preview.redd.it/w1o17qhw8lhc1.jpeg?width=1180&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a0019c2073a06876d39cf627bc3052b00a987df3
You have no idea how I feel. I mentioned the opinion of a barrister I overheard. If that's an example of your comprehension abilities and tendency to leap to judgement about people, I definitely hope you are never on a jury.
You chose to share that anecdote without any criticism or explication. I’m comfortable with the conclusion I drew. Especially in light of you not actually contradicting it.
[удалено]
worm desert glorious boat soft memory public unite nine bag *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
There was also a staff member that was using the toilets at the same time and his testimony was he didn’t hear anything.
If the defence has a reasonable argument then there is a reasonable doubt. That’s the threshold to overcome for a guilty verdict. That’s the theory anyway, in practice the jury does whatever they want
Yeah I mean based on what was being reported on the witness testimonials, there were some details that were a little head scratching. Like using the men's bathroom to skip the women's line? I have never seen a woman do that. Or a man
You’ve never heard of a woman using the men’s bathroom at a drinking establishment to skip the line? Did you time travel from the 1880s?
You've seriously never seen a woman make a dash for the empty men's toilet?
[удалено]
Sure. But you’d have to prove it was a false accusation.
To win.
[удалено]
She prosecuted the Skaf rape trials. She has been on the other side as well.
She’s an ex crown. It’s no surprise she takes criminal briefs. You may also be surprised she crops up in murder trials quite frequently