‘ The Government is considering banning defence lawyers from cross-examining complainants in sexual violence cases, saying the courts can “further victimise” them.’
Because there are never false claims, because women always tell the truth. Because men are never victimised by women and the courts. Because the tooth fairy is real.
Creepy Porn Lawyer disagrees now that women must always be believed.
Nothing like a dose of reality to straighten the creeps up, is there?
”The process of evidence should not be so harrowing,”
That’s what of giving evidence in sex trials is, and there are others in which it is too, and is necessary for justice to be served.
Little is an idiot, like the majority of this illegitimate government.
“Little is an idiot, like the majority of this illegitimate government.”
Damn right, and they’re dangerous idiots.
*shakes head* I marvel at the level of stupidity exhibited by leftist politicians. Which begs the point at how stupid the leftist populace is for voting for them.
The polticians are largely evil and their supporters are useful idiots.
I may be wrong,but I don’t recall anyone on the right using false sex abuse claims to defame and destroy an innocent person.
I think this is being put forward to be used as a weapon by the left to destroy anyone they see fit while sheilding the accuser against perjury charges and compensation for damages.
Yup, this FB post provides proof as to why. Past “moderate” leftists laughed when cautious and sensible patriots pointed out the possibility of swine like Swalwell rising in government.
Here’s the link that post provides.
And now you have this thread’s threat to justice arising in NZ. See the connection Kiwis? Auzzies?
My law dictionary says the judge is the man on the bench who says “you pay up” and juries are the ones who make sure that the guilty party is guilty. By removing the juries, this means the judge says “you pay up” and that is that.
Yes it is dangerous, and its really just another way to collect from the rich, and use the excuse of we are helping victims.
There is a case here in Canberra at this very time where a woman accused her ex partner of raping her. The guy, who is a prison officer himself, was charged and spent four months in gaol on remand before the case came up for trial, and the dirty harlot admitted she made it all up, even fabricating a, “crime scene,” to support her story. If she had not owned up to her lies, and the case had gone to trial, this guy had every right to have her cross-examined relentlessly in court, but if cross examination of alleged victims in cases of sexual violence is barred, then men in his position would more than likely be found guilty of crimes they did not commit. Now the, “victim,” of the crime here in Canberra is facing court herself for making false accusations and the prosecution is pushing for gaol time, but I’ll be surprised if she gets a custodial sentence.
They seldom do time, Phil and of course that’s a huge part of the problem. Try that on in China, and the false accuser gets as harsh a penalty as the accused would have been given.
There’s really no need to go so far but there has to be a real and painful cost for these vindictive creeps. And it needs to happen fast – you know, while the guy is still wondering where his family, friends and property went…….
I was seated next to a police officer on the flight home today and mentioned this. He got the most shocked look on his face. He really couldn’t believe Little was pushing this.
This is another symptom of our intellectual and spiritual moral collapse in Western Society. You can pick who you would like as the next dominating social structure.
>Islam or > China or >Zionism. My pick is Zionism.
The bottom line to “believe all women” is that women are too fragile to engage in the process of justice. This, while also believing women can do anything and any disparity between men and women is automatically a function of sexism.