A couple of weeks ago I wrote that I found the phrase, “not a hanging offence” rather absurd for the simple reason that there are no hanging offences in Australia so that even if a government MP committed murder or rape, he could keep his job because, well, they’re not hanging offences. You can check out what I wrote in; Note To Morrison: “You’re Going To Need A Bigger Carpet!”
I thought of this during question time at Morrison’s presser today, but before I deal with that I must say that the first part of the presser reminded me of Churchill. Something like: “Never have so many words been used by so few people to say so little.” Perhaps I missed it but it seemed another occasion where Morrison announced his intention to do something at some unspecific future date. Somebody suggested that he deserved an Oscar when he waved his hands and appeared to become emotional and, while I don’t think that Oscars are a true indicator of acting greatness, I thought his performance at that moment so wooden I doubt whether he’d be cast in Manangatang’s amateur theatre… That may be a little unfair! I have seen any productions at Manangatang and their acting may be quite good. Whatever, the Pro Moter wasn’t very convincing.
I must say that my mind began to wander when he started to talk about the legal process. At one point, our leader assured us that it was up to the police to determine the veracity of a complaint! Silly me, all this time I thought that it was the courts! But I guess you don’t have as much control over them because you don’t take their bins in.
In spite of the news conference being about the release of the report into Aged Care, journalists were more interested in other matters… possibly because the report was released just moments before and none of them had read it because they were all at the press conference. Anyway, when someone asked about the alleged rapist who’s allegedly in Cabinet although we’ve seen no evidence of that recently because he’s too busy allegedly changing his Wikipedia pages, Morrison was quite strong on correct legal procedure and this idea of innocent until proven guilty, which I’ll simply refer to as your Monopoly card because it’s the “Get Out Of Jail” free card.
David Hicks, you may remember, didn’t have this Monopoly card because “we knew he was guilty” according to John Howard. Of course, we were also told that he couldn’t be brought back to Australia because he hadn’t broken any Australian laws. Interesting to put the two ideas together.
Julia Gillard was leading an illegitimate government because she relied on the vote of Craig Thomson who was being investigated for fraud. At this stage he hadn’t been found guilty, or even charged with a crime, but Kathy Jackson said he was guilty so that should be enough, shouldn’t it?
Peter Slipper had to stand down as Speaker because he’d inappropriately charged less than a thousand dollars to the taxpayer. Or at least, he was accused of doing so and it’s not like he was using his home internet to run his business and charging thousands to the taxpayer.
But this case is completely different because the Prime Sinister asked the alleged rapist point blank: “Did you do it?” He apparently strongly denied it, because if you weakly deny it, you might still be guilty, but a strong denial is just fine. Much better than saying, “How can I remember every crime I’ve ever committed?”
Now I think that it’s important to remember that nobody should be presumed guilty without a proper process. However, I also think that people need to remember that presumption of innocence is not the same thing as the proof of innocence. It simply means that we can’t presume them guilty. If a financial advisor beats a fraud charge, I’d suggest that it may not be prudent to say, “Well, they’re ok then, I’ll trust them to invest my life savings and I’ll just check on how it’s all going in a year or so.”
Too often we say that someone was cleared of an offence when it was simply that there wasn’t enough proof to convict. O.J. Simpson was found “Not guilty” but I’d suggest that nobody would be prepared to say categorically that he was innocent of the crime.
So with no complainant and the police unlikely to proceed, exactly what can happen from here?
Mm, well I’m pretty sure the police won’t be proceeding, so we’re left with the Monopoly card. If nobody’s convicted then everyone’s not guilty and entitled to the presumption of innocence and that’s the way it should be, because under this government unless it’s a hanging offence you don’t resign – unless you’re a woman. And the PM asked the alleged man and he allegedly rejected the accusation and that should be enough.
I look forward to Martin Bryant’s release any day now…
[textblock style=”7″]
Like what we do at The AIMN?
You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.
Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!
Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.
You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969
[/textblock]
I guess the presumption of innocence doesn’t apply to people on Centrelink benefits. Think Robodebt and the Cashless Welfare Card.
Tina Clausen – yep, hypocrite scummo & co
Sometimes the government does presume innocence. Try Chris Corrigan.
That picture is repulsive.., you could mould a better face out of old hyena shit, a skull repulsive inside and out, for its arrogant ignorance, its oozing lying intolerance, stupidity and depravity. The deep filth of contrived superstition rots any hope of reason, leaving fascism to bubble, boil, burst and sneer at us as outsiders, the uncivilised self deluding bastard. Morrison is a boil on the bum of the nation…a carbuncular clot, clown, cretin.
The key remark states,
“presumption of innocence is not the same as the proof of innocence”.
For example, for a politician to acknowledge himself as being the subject of an inquiry is not necessarily an admission of guilt, merely the statement of a fact. In Bill’s case, it indicated circumstantially a lack of fear of consequences since likely there were none to fear.
If a federal cabinet minister is mentioned as a suspect, he would have no reason not to step aside for a little while, since no trial had taken place.
This would be to ensure that unfair speculations as to identity did fall upon colleagues.
But the pie looks nice, Phil.
It’s just bad luck for the pie that it ended up with the wrong person.
Michael, sorry if the above was a bit rubbish, I was trying an edit when the timer dumped the original back.
so I bonked a lass… “did anyone see you?” apart from the security guards and the CCTV … no one “good. we can fix that” ah great, btw, there are a few serial complaints about you know who surfacing again “got drunk again did he?” yeh, you know what he is like hahaha “hahahaha” so…? “no worries…. we will refer it to the AFP, alert the commissioner that his tenure is up for renewal soon, release a presser stating that an investigation is underway and commission a review to corroborate whatever we want them to say and then… release Barnaby and Craig and George and Matt and well, all the nats for starters that will take the heat off for a while”
Pies are nice at times, Michael, but not poo infiltrating a defective person…
No rubbish at all, paul. Except that you follow a crap football team. 😁
The F…. !!!
This can be a better season if they do to the rest of you what they did to a certain Saintish team over the weegend.
I thought you were a Crow.
Yeah, well the did St Kilda by eight goals or did I hear that wrong.
Any way, anything must be better than what happened last season.
It is true that I have a soft spot for Ports, which is atypical for someone here in Adelaide, but depends on the quality of the footy.
I knew there was a reason I liked you.
Can you please please not start the article with a picture of that revolting lying bastard. Please.
It has fast become Australia’s worst kept secret….. related, watching an old Have I Got News For You with Ian ‘allegedly’ Hyslop (Private Eye), well familiar with the legal system re. libel/slander, explaining how a gag order on a well known footballer’s shenanigans was (informally) broken.
In the Commons or Lords, where parliamentary privilege means freedom of speech without legal constraints e.g. libel action, every (unrelated) piece of business was met with random shouts from the back benches naming the footballer; very creative.
Issue for the LNP govt. now is the fact that they have been seen to actively ignore unseemly behaviour of their own rather than enforce any legal or ethical action, including their own supporters. This example of ‘leadership’ must piss off many rusted on Liberal voters, especially and including wives, girlfriends and daughters who have been watching this return to entitled male behaviour for a decade, but concerns are pushed away as being PC or simply blame victims cannot respond.
It’s difficult, but senior Liberal members, voters and MPs really need to raise the bar, as deflection and/or ‘whataboutery’ is transparently about avoiding concrete action on the ethics and morals the LNP claim to have, but do not practise; the same has often been used to support their case for election i.e. ‘values’ and ‘trust’.
What a pity they chose a failed pollie, warmed over for a Senate seat, to launch their “not just us” retaliation.
Noted Scummo’s somewhat convoluted response on the Aged Care report, namely there will be other opportunities to question me… yeah, if you actually make yourself available, and only if you can’t find a distraction elsewhere.
Oh and AFL supporters, it’s Carlton’s turn thank you.
By the way, Michael, have I ever mentioned that I taught Robbie Gray?
All right, not to play football… Year 12 English, but that surely inspired him to be the player that he is!
The closing words in the judgement over Julian Assange’s extradition trial in London were :
ORDERS
410. I order the discharge of Julian Paul Assange,pursuant to section 91(3) of the EA 2003
Guess what, Assange remains locked up in Belmarsh Prison. So much for the rule of law as currently applied in Britain.
It was ever thus : extract from Oliver Twist by Charles Dickens….
“for the law supposes that your wife acts under your direction.”
“If the law supposes that,” said Mr. Bumble, squeezing his hat emphatically in both hands, “the law is a ass — a idiot. If that’s the eye of the law, the law is a bachelor; and the worst I wish the law is, that his eye may be opened by experience — by experience.”
Perhaps the guilty and their enablers need to realise that it is not only the victim destroyed by the sexual assaults, the bullying, the mysoginy, it is their families as well. That you bunch of morally bankrupt arseholes, media included, seem to be content listening to rumours, even knowing some to be truthful and then maintaining silence, is a disgusting state of affairs.
Have any of you revolting bastards considered what if it was my daughter, my son, my wife, my husband having their lives destroyed and then scotty, I don’t hold their dicks, goes coverup, lies, deceives, bullshits. The spokethings dutifully read their lines, all on the same page of course, wafting their platitudes like a fart in an elevator, dream on dear citizens, we’ve got this.
Once more, as they say in the classics, go fuck yourselves.
It’s Catch 22.
While the “presumed innocent” Right Honorable Minister remains silent, we HAVE to presume his innocence. He may genuinely have no recollection of that specific alleged crime. There could be many reasons – recent head trauma, drunk or stoned at the time or something he always did, but then all the lads in the Young Libs did it that way too. So there’s no way he’s going to throw himself under the bus because he knows (as we all know) that the moment he gallantly puts his hand up (thus allowing at least 3 other drug raddled Right Honorable MInisters to breath a collective sigh of relief) he is effectively saying, “Yep, it was me – I done it; remember it as if it was yesterday.”
A case of damned if he did and damned if he didn’t.
Compare how the L/NP hide behind “natural justice” and “the presumption of innocence until proven guilty” for their colleague but never afforded “natural justice” and “presumption of innocence until proven guilty” for the over 2000 suicide victims and the many, many others victimised by the L/NP’s cruel Robodebt debacle. Also compare how Robodebt victims are treated compared to the millionaires and billionaires stealing from the flawed JobKeeper scheme.
The government of Australia is an evil cabal of criminally corrupt to the core and ethically and morally void disfunctional hypocrits.
So there we have it, nsw police drop case due to insufficient admissible evidence. What now, scotty, you reprehensible scum bag?
Geoff, British members and ministers use “right honourable” but we only abuse the term “honourable”. Meanwhile the NSW police rapidly put a full stop on the said case. leaving a nasty and guilty turd to join Attila and many others in getting away with…who knows what. Murdering, thieving, appropriating, justifiable homicide, assassination by drone, retaliation, it goes on and on, the self appointed gods of ultimate judgement…led by the USA which has probably killed several millions of innocents since peace in 1945, the collateral damage and unfortunate bystanders. And we get a special bonus, an endless flow of conservative corporate corruption in a diarrhoea like flow from the Morrison scummites, their allies in media muckraking, mining maladministration and some money manipulators…
yes ajogrady yes indeed!!! yes indeed. NSW police gang now are barristers and decide who will be indicted. of course. too busy strip ‘searching’ this: NSW police commissioner Mick Fuller has taken the unusual step of publicly advocating for the use of strip-search powers in the wake of high-profile criticism, saying in a separate interview on Monday that young people should have “a little bit of fear” of police and that questioning “the legitimacy of policing” had “a negative impact on public safety”. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/nov/19/nsw-police-commissioner-mick-fuller-says-strip-search-of-girl-at-festival-doesnt-make-me-happy then there’s 9/age/costello/murdererdoch chris uhlmann, a man for all the rulin class: But standing on the shoulders of Hesiod, Bolt made a compelling case on the lips of Thomas More as to why Satan deserved the protection of the law. gee whiz chris: smirkee as SATAN??? U doth hang yourself by your own petard fool!!! PS: with humble acknowledgement to the fervent BraveHeart Phil Pryor!!!!
and get this also from the rulin class debacle servant uhlmann:
Yes, I’d give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety’s sake!”
Doesn’t the lovely Gladys have any questions to clear up about her dalliance with the brilliant Dazza while lying on her back, staring up at the ceiling ? Of course not. The NSW police have the matter entirely in hand, sticky though it gets at times, they know how to ‘handle’ sensitive’ affairs. And how well they do it.
Whoever pays the piper, calls the tune.
“The Cabinet minister who is the subject of the historic rape allegations is planning to identify himself tomorrow. It is understood he will give a press statement addressing the claims now that the NSW Police investigation has closed.” says political drop box Sharri Markson.
The minister at the centre of the allegation of rape in 1988 has engaged the services of defamation lawyer Peter Bartlet
He may think it’s all over red rover…’.my bros” have said there is nothing to investigate.
But others may not agree petal. You may want this to go away easily. And may employ a bevy of defamation lawyers to try to intimidate us all.
But I ask again, why would an innocent man try to remove all reference to him being in the same place at the same time as the alleged rape took place?
I for one don’t want this to go away.
#IStandWithTheSisters
I may be wrong, but I doubt this one is going to go away Michael..This is actually a big, big, biggy. Just the allegation itself against one of the highest officials in Australia is enough to put this government in a compromising situation,. What decent person in Australia is going to overlook this one?
I doubt anyone who doesn’t know yet is going to be impressed when they hear who it is tomorrow, especially over here. It’s going to be interesting to hear what spin he’s going to put to it, to try and claim he’s innocent.
But seriously how can this government be tenable now?
Indeed, Kath. And it’s hard to comprehend that people will actually vote for him at the next election.
Oh no, he should be tossed out of the party altogether. I know, unlikely. But, if this government think that they can continue on like nothings happen, they best think twice. No-one is going to let this one rest.
I’m absolutely outraged and the implications keep running through my head. She was a minor so that is an even more serious crime. And then, If justice is not seen to be served what message does that send. That doing something like this is ok.
Then there’s Ms Higgins traumatic experience. Of all the places in this country where the security should be the best, where everyone in the building should feel safe, someone wasn’t safe.
It’s sickening.
Terry Mills, focal point you make.
Politicisation of the legal system ensure that the criminal is rewarded and the victim punished, the law is a tool to thwart justice.
Assange’s case certainly consolidated the notion of government by fiat through a perversion of the legal system and you suspect that under different circumstances the case involving a cabinet minister might have had a different outcome than the situation here so flippantly brushed off, had the identity, status and beliefs of the individual been different.
Don’t people know that wikipedia shows the edit history?
And having just looked at the page in question I see that it has been locked until Sept 2021
@Michael, the pie looks nice,, Not so if you are vegetarian and good ole scomoo would not give one toss about that.
It’s groundhog day !
The police commissioners in NSW and the AFP have closed their enquiries without having interviewed the main players : just as happened with the Angus Taylor forged documents scandal.
Kathy….. His likely defense is going to be, either, its was consentual, she was promiscuous, she wanted to experiment, she led him on, they were both young and excited…..anything but the fact that he was 18 and she was 14 at time, he was rising up the ranks, notching up conquests. Hallmarks of the male conservative frame of mind, the sense of entitlement, females are to be tolerated but not respected, express no regrets, offer no apologies.
Brittany Higgins can testify to that.
Unfortunately I fear, who ever he is, has already failed the pub test so he’s going to have to produce something extraordinary to get the drinkers to consider an appeal.
Henry, I think it’s going to have to be more extraordinary than any of those. It’ the “18 and she was 14” bit that’s the killer.
Phil, you may have missed it but it was a subtle acknowledgement of wam’s desire for capitalisation combined with a description of the gentleman’s political leanings, augmenting the already sarcastic “Honorable”. It’s complex, I know.
So what do we make of that? He has just given a press conference declaring that it never happened? Denial was expected, of course.
Sinister, the refusal of police across Australia to seriously investigate conservative politicians when allegation of misconduct arise..very slimy indeed.
The writer observes that a politician is taking health leave for overdue (?) treatment for mental health issues.
I wonder if/how they diagnose borderline personality disorder traits.
Indeed, what to make of Porters press conference ?
The allegations are he says wrong : nothing ever happened and he has never been questioned about the matter in the thirty three year intervening period.
They must have the wrong man in mind or the allegations are invented, spurious or even malicious.
He doesn’t want an enquiry, but why ? Were I in his position, I would demand an arms length enquiry to clear my name.
Arms length means a retired judge who will take evidence under oath and get to the bottom of this matter.
ROBODEBT victims and “comeuppance” also?
Could you imagine the irony if the individual WAS innocent?
How the worm turns…
Porter’s only defense and the one that he falls back on, without saying it out aloud, is that he’s still here and the other party is not. Nothing to see here, move on. And that’s his boss’s view too.
But the quote of the day is the one expressed by Grace Tame at the National Press Club, “Does it take a family to have a conscience ? But having a family does not mean you have a conscience”
Suck that one up Scummo !!!! Stop using Janette and the girls as your morality shield.
The whole thing continues to nauseate…next cab off the rank, how MSM deals with it given the past gormlessness of some sections of it.
Hi Kath. Porter lost me when he said that Bill Shorten didn’t receive the media and online scrutiny that he has. WTF!
He also said he’d been hearing rumours about the incident for a couple of months now. Why not address it then? Probably, I’m guessing, that he had nothing to prove the allegations as being wrong and he hoped they would go away.
And one other lie; he said that nobody in the media has put the allegations to him. The Kangaroo Court had, but Porter later corrected that to “no formidable media” (not his exact words, but I got his meaning).
I noticed he skirted around the question of defamation, only saying that all things are being considered.
Looking at Twitter, I’m yet to find one person who believed him. I see more anger. This isn’t going away.
And what a studied insult, the appointment of Michaelia Cash as acting A-G.
They tried to gang bang Shorten on the intricate unions raid hoax involving Cash also. Of course they did. Even the MSM in large spurned these behaviours seeing them for what they were.
Porter’s history in relation to women is very dodgy. Show him the door Sco-moo.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-11-10/four-corners-investigation-christian-porter-sexism-inappropriate/12862910
The ‘honourable’ Christian Porter, an accused rapist and the minister responsible for driving many people into penury and suicide through the robodebt programme (deemed illegitimate and illegal by supreme court ruling), will temporarily step down as attorney general ‘for reasons of mental health’.
He is to be temporarily replaced as AG by the ‘honourable’ Michaela Cash.
Ying tong iddle eye phuqqen po.
One of the sideshow points that seems to have escaped all commentators is that Morrison is said to have sought ‘Empathy lessons’. If that is true, the empathy tutor should send the money back. He even has trouble controlling his trademark smirk.
I think the fact that Porter was smoked out (Turnbull basically outed him anyway with his comments) might have something to do with the possibility of the ‘inadmissible evidence’ that the NSW Police mentioned being exploded in the inevitable senate debate that would have followed if Hanson Young had named him.
calculus,
It is, as you say, a deliberate studied insult to anyone who values decency or integrity.
The accused rapist who implemented a rapacious government programme that broke the law and caused deaths steps back from the role of chief political legal officer to be replaced by someone who abused federal police resource for political purpose then, when under subsequent parliamentary scrutiny, attempted to cover up serious misdeeds within her office by slinging sexual slurs based on rumour.
Michaelia Cash! You’ve gotta be effing kidding me.
I’d prefer Humphrey B Bear.
As far as I’m aware, Cash doesn’t even have a law degree.
Apparently she has a Honours Degree in Law from the University of London and a Graduate Diploma in Legal Practice from the University of WA.
MT,
Wiki says that Cash has an honours in law and has acted as a solicitor.
However, her track record in parliament shows that she displays total contempt for principles of law, proper procedure and basic honesty.
In a sane and decent society, someone who has provably lied about serious matters of misconduct within their ministry whilst under formal parliamentary inquiry should not be considered suitable to serve as attorney general.
Then again, the same society would not countenance a PM who embraces an accessory to serial pedophilia as his ‘spiritual advisor’.
Anyone ask why the fuck were staff beavering away over the weekend eradicating (yeah, I know, impossible) all of his Wikipedia entries? And now the screech who walks as it’s replacement. FFS. Rotten to the core, rotten from the head down.
Michael TaylorMarch 3, 2021 at 6:23 pm
As far as I’m aware, Cash doesn’t even have a law degree.
She’ll just go into harpy overdrive and ratchet up the screeching at anyone who dares to go against her until their eardrums burst.
Thanks, Kath. That’s what I get for listening to someone from the msm on Twitter.
The whole presumption of innocents routine has me gagging evertime its thrown up. It only seems to come up when somebody of note
has to defend him/herself. Its like the Nazi dick who “allegedly” tried to reduce the bouncer to a pound of flesh. Allegedly is pure bullshit, we all saw the video, fuck him. Its rank hypocrisy of convenience. The government seems to hide behind a veneer of ” nothing to see” or ” we have followed the rules”. If it smells, 99% of the time there is a damn good reason for the smell.
Cash is just a stupid wanna be. After her full endorsement of EVs ruining our weekends, one has to question how the hell she got so far in politics. Its obviously not intelligence or wanting to make a difference. She certainly is good at towing the party line and brown nosing. Hardly traits we expect of leaders