Judge decides finding 12 impartial jurors won’t be a problem

This entry was posted in Legal affairs, Rule of law. Bookmark the permalink.

23 Responses to Judge decides finding 12 impartial jurors won’t be a problem

  1. Cassie of Sydney says:

    Thanks C.L. I am speechless. This young man has been and is being denied due process. It’s another Pell case. It will end up in the HC. There is no way, no way in the world that they’ll be able to find 12 impartial jurors.

    Regardless of what happens, this young man’s life is destroyed. I doubt he has the strength of faith that someone like Cardinal Pell was able to muster during his persecution and incarceration.

  2. Bruce of Newcastle says:

    There are probably more virginal nuns in Canberra than there are impartial jurors.

  3. Lee says:

    ScoMo probably sabotaged any chance of a fair trial.

  4. Rossini says:

    Judges sex have any bearing on the decision to go ahead?
    Just asking!

  5. Franx says:

    Perhaps – and despite existing prejudices and murky political horizons – due process in law will enable truth to come to light and justice will prevail.

  6. Entropy says:

    When will the trial start then? Or do we get the prosecution side in the middle of a federal election?

  7. Petros says:

    Sure Franx. I’ve got a bridge to sell you.

  8. Cassie of Sydney says:

    “Franx says:
    30 April, 2022 at 1:27 am
    Perhaps – and despite existing prejudices and murky political horizons – due process in law will enable truth to come to light and justice will prevail.”

    Franz, I admire your faith in the legal system but given the country we now live in, I don’t share that faith. Maybe once upon a time but most certainly not now. The muck that make up the left in this country have almost succeeded in their quest to destroy the presumption of innocence in order to suit their ideological narratives. Did you observe the Pell lynching? Did you see how due process was trashed and chucked out of the window to suit the progressive left?

    After two highly prejudiced trials, an appeal that has since shamed the Victorian judicial system, it took a unanimous decision by the High Court…7-0….to enable “light and justice” to prevail. But the damage was done. Until that momentous HC decision in April 2020, an innocent man, FOR YEARS, had been unfairly hounded, smeared, lied about, ridiculed and falsely accused by a phalanx of hostile scum, ranging from a grotesque MSM with the primary culprit being “our ABC” and that utter disgrace of a female, Louse Milligan, by various social media sewers, by despicable politicians, by Catholic haters, by progressives, even by the joke that is our current PM, all of them joined in the pile on of Pell for years, thus prejudicing any chance that he would receive a fair trial and the fact is that he didn’t. From the beginning, going back decades, until that morning on 6 April 2020, we witnessed a lynching in this country on a par with the Dreyfus Affair.

    I see exactly the same scenario with the Higgins accused, it’s another lynching, by the same phalanx of MSM, progressives, social media sewers, and once again, even by that disgraceful joke of a PM.

    Perhaps I’m being too harsh and forlorn. Maybe, as with the Rolfe case, “light and justice” will prevail. But don’t your breath, I certainly won’t be.

    As I’ve written before, this will end in the HC.

  9. Boambee John says:

    Rossini says:
    30 April, 2022 at 12:44 am
    Judges sex have any bearing on the decision to go ahead?
    Just asking!

    HOW DARE YOU assume its gender

  10. Riversutra says:

    Info on the judge.
    Volunteer at Redfern Legal Centre.
    Worked Pro Bono for refugees in detention.
    Worked Pro Bono for Environmental matters.
    In considering a sexual harassment claim brought by Brigette Styles against Clayton Utz, McCallum referred to emails by another solicitor as “no advertisement for male sensitivity; their author evidently no feminist.”
    This bloke has no hope.

  11. Adelagado says:

    Why is everyone here assuming all the jurors will be biased for Brittany? Brittany is going to get destroyed in court. There’s no way this guy can be found guilty.

  12. SydGal says:

    Thank you, Cassie. I share your fears in relation to the MSM and social media eroding our judicial system, presumption of innocence, right to a fair trial, due process etc. We have seen it in the Pell, Porter, Higgins and, to some extent, the Tudge cases (bit of a common link there – L Milligan? Although S Maiden/L Wilkinson are pre-eminent in the Higgins case. Maiden was even awarded a Gold Walkley for the Higgins story recently).

    It was also incredible that books by Milligan and Morris-Marr on the Pell case were launched by Vic politicians and that the Vic Premier, former Vic A-G, Vic Health Minister and others tweeted/retweeted “We see you, we hear you, we believe you etc” the day of the HC decision. And that some leaders of the ALP and a former PM are patrons of a high profile victim support organisation whose current President commissioned and held up artwork posters of Cardinal Pell portrayed as the Devil, Prisoner 666, Justice for Witness J etc outside the Melb Courts. Those images got lots of coverage in the media!

    Prof J Gans tweeted about the Higgins case last night and included the following comments:
    “I’m all for the courts switching to the reality that public discussion of pending trials can no longer be stopped and must instead be managed.

    But that should occur alongside a recognition of the limited effects and complexities of contempt laws and jury directions too.
    ….
    But eventually, in some trial, maybe this one, the disjunction between uncontrolled pre-trial discussion and the ideal of a more controlled trial is going to break, and I just don’t think either contempt law or jury directions will do the trick then, absent a new court attitude.

    I’ve got little faith in jury directions or contempt law. What I do have faith in is juries and in appellate review, tricky and flawed as both are.

    But the question in my mind is whether others – jurors, lawyers, courts, the media and the public – will have faith in those.

    to which someone replies:
    Faith in Juries & in appellate review? Even after Pell? And after the mob justice that came for Porter on zero evidence & highly suspect hearsay?

    I have now have zero faith in juries in high-profile cases. Esp with narrative-setting style journalism in media today.

    Gans responds: Pell showcases the system, including its trickiness and flaws – there’s something for everyone there.

    Porter showcases what happens when you have none of the system, just the publicity.

    The Higgins case is different because of all the publicity over the last 15 months. She did the National Press Club address in March where she stated her case in her opening sentence. We’ve only heard her side of the story so perhaps the trial will allow the accused to present his version of events. And presumably the CCTV footage of various venues will be made available.

    Some people on twitter have been looking at the twitter account of Higgins’ partner, D Sharaz. Sharaz has posted a number of times about a female friend/minder/bodyguard who brought Higgins and Sharaz together, even helping Sharaz draft text messages to ask Higgins out. This person appears to be a Director of the ALP’s PR firm, and Sharaz says she drove up from Melb to Canberra to support Higgins at the March 4 Justice event. She also appears to have been at the National Press Club event (A Albanese and R Marles were in the NPC audience. And there are images of A Albanese, P Wong, K Keneally and R Marles standing under a big camera in the crowds of the March 4 Justice event).

    I also find the following heated exchange of P Wong and K Gallagher with L Reynolds on 7 June 2021 quite odd. Reynolds says she was told 2 weeks before about what they were “intending to do with the story in her office”. Perhaps this relates to more recent reports that K Kitching had spoken to L Reynolds about the Higgins case. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/video/2021/jun/07/linda-reynolds-claims-she-was-hospitalised-by-labors-questions-about-brittany-higgins-case-video

  13. SydGal says:

    Re Jo Dyer matters, Adelaide Advertiser reports this morning:

    Independent candidate for Boothby Jo Dyer is set to make a ‘major’ announcement about her campaign, likely to be related to her eligibility to stand at next month’s election.

    Ms Dyer will address reporters at 10.30am.

    We’ll be streaming the announcement live.

    Ms Dyer yesterday told The Advertiser she would “permanently suspend” her campaign on Wednesday if she cannot prove she is no longer a British citizen.

  14. C.L. says:

    The entire case will come down to what CCTV reveals and what those security guards saw. Obviously, there are no forensics involved.

    I am thoroughly sick and tired of ‘rape’ cases where both parties were utterly smashed/drunk. If a woman is not responsible for anything while inebriated, why is a man? Isn’t that… patronising? Isn’t that saying that the little lady can’t handle the drink like a man?

    What I find interesting is the accused’s claim – already flagged by his lawyer (a very smart bloke, by the way) – that no intercourse even occurred. You’d have to be very sure of what evidence could exist before you said that. He seems pretty confident. Then again, he may be a predator and a liar. I don’t know. The point is, without proof, he should not have been committed to trial.

    There is now a ‘process is the punishment’/spin the wheel mentality in these cases whereby a DPP decides – for cultural/political reasons – that it’s worth a punt with a jury even though the case is legally baseless. That’s what happened to George Pell and Zachary Rolfe. It is a Pontius Pilate jurisprudence: I can’t convict this bloke but maybe you can.

    Geoffrey Rush, Craig McLachlan, John Jarratt… the modus operandi is obvious.

    Jarryd Hayne is now facing a THIRD attempt to convict him. That’s banana republic stuff.

  15. Entropy says:

    And presumably the CCTV footage of various venues will be made available.

    Indeed. I look forward to the parliament house CCTV.

  16. SydGal says:

    CL – it just seems so odd that they both ended up in PH at 1am. I don’t understand why. They were young and presumably ambitious staffers who would have been aware of security etc. Perhaps details will be revealed during the trial. We don’t much about the employment record of the accused. Higgins’ record (incl working for QLD MP who has retired from politics) is on her linked in.

    Re Jo Dyer – renunciation of Brit Citizenship processed in Feb so her campaign will continue. Maybe yesterday was a PR stunt.

  17. Cassie of Sydney says:

    Great comment SydGal. I smelt from the beginning that the Higgins’ “wape” allegation was a political fix, quickly followed a few weeks later by the Porter fix. The Porter fix was first initiated by a hideous cabal of evil South Australian women, Wong, Dyer, Hanson-Dung, Crabb and Maiden and it was them who passed on the information to Milligan and Milligan, never one for facts and evidence, ran with it. The stench was obvious but our Billy Bunter of a PM fell for it hook line and sinker…happy to trash Porter, Tudge and the Higgins’ accused, just like he trashed Pell and our SAS soldiers. I’ve long said that a Liberal PM with a basic modicum of political acumen would have stood on the steps of parliament house and said that he and his government will be willing to discuss the Higgins and Porter allegations when the Labor Party is willing to discuss the Shorten allegation. But no, instead Morrison fell on his knees to placate the ideological enemy with the result…..appeasing the enemy doesn’t work, it just empowers them.

  18. SydGal says:

    Thanks, Cassie of Sydney. The interesting thing about the Porter case, was that in the Nov 2020 Canberra Bubble program, it was Jo Dyer who got the opening sentence on Milligan’s 4C program: All political parties need to think about the type of people that they have in positions of power and authority. And Australians need to think about the type of people that they want representing them. Porter seemed the target and this was confirmed in the March 2021 Canberra Bubble program.

    Milligan said in a zoom book launch with Annabel Crabb that she worked on the Nov program for 5 months so that would have been from the time Dyer’s “friend” Kate passed away. The SA links with Kate are interesting – P Wong said in a statement she “ran into her” and Maiden was at school with her.

    S Maiden’s book Party Animals, published in March 2020, is described as uncovering “the secret history of a Labor fiasco, the untold story behind Scott Morrison’s miracle.” Milligan and her husband are thanked in the acknowledgements. In a Chapter “The Politics of Rape”, Maiden references Kathy Sherriff matters. She write about a former Liberal staffer who was employed by a Liberal Cabinet Minister for several years and then “sick of the travel” returned to work for a senior Liberal Party MP at state level. Maiden said this person, reminiscent of Linda Tripp, was a “friend” of Kathy Sherriff but refused to tell Maiden how they connected. The “friend” demanded that Maiden never disclose her identity. Maiden also writes about a self-styled vigilante who had fought a brave crusade for KS. KS said he had been banned at PH for championing KS’s rape claims.

    A very strange account in light of events over the last 15 months. If this is all about trying to get the female vote, they’ve certainly lost mine!

  19. Ed Case says:

    The point is, without proof, he should not have been committed to trial.
    The Defence had no problems with Committal at the time, so they must accept there’s a prima facie case?

  20. Ed Case says:

    CL – it just seems so odd that they both ended up in PH at 1am. I don’t understand why.
    Higgins was so drunk she could barely stand, according to PH Security.

    We don’t much about the employment record of the accused.

    Worked for Senator George Brandis since he left School, by the looks.
    Brandis finished up as High Commissioner in London the other day, both Senators Payne and Wong declined to extend his Term to cover the post Election period.

  21. Old Lefty says:

    The real question about Jo Dyer, which none of the media is asking, is not about relinquishing her UK citizenship but when, and on what terms, she allegedly relinquished her longstanding SLP membership to become an ‘independent’.

  22. Old Lefty says:

    ‘ALP’, not ‘SLP’.

  23. Shy Ted says:

    Dear Bruce, just practise saying, “I did not have sex with that woman, Miss Lew, I mean, Higgins.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.