New from feminine jurisprudence: the somewhat credible bitch

She did not strike me as a witness motivated by a desire to give deliberately false evidence. However, there were occasions when I formed the impression that some of her evidence had the appearance of being motivated by a desire to paint the accused in an unfavourable light.”

– Judge Sarah Huggett has a dollar each way in the Downing Centre District Court
This entry was posted in Legal affairs, Rule of law. Bookmark the permalink.

19 Responses to New from feminine jurisprudence: the somewhat credible bitch

  1. Bruce of Newcastle says:

    So what penalty does she get for unjustly destroying a man’s life?
    Don’t bother replying, I know the answer already.

  2. Buccaneer says:

    to me, it seems like the Jarryd Hayne decision opened up this can of worms. Somewhat famous and maybe wealthy man, meets woman online. Goes and has what seems like consensual relations only to find out later from the police that it wasn’t so. Has life upended.

    Young fellas need to realise there is no such thing as a free ride, so to speak, unless of course, your name ends in Biden or Shorten, then there is totally nothing to see here.

  3. Rafiki says:

    So, she gave false evidence, but not deliberately? Yes, a witness can be mistaken, and judges have counselled against too readily finding that a witness lied. Being only mistaken does however affect adversely credibility. And in sexual assault cases it is wiser to attack a complainant in this way. OTOH, in some cases a strong allegation of lying might be necessary; such as in R v Lehrmann, and maybe it worked to prevent a conviction.
    It’s very much a matter of judgement of course. But I what the trial judge said here is not unreasonable on the face of it. It may be the the defence argued in this way.

  4. C.L. says:

    If the witness was dishonestly trying to create an evil caricature of the accused, she cannot be a credible witness.

    It’s one or the other.

  5. C.L. says:

    The right to anonymously accuse plus a malicious intent to inflict reputational damage (which the judge notes) sounds to me like a dangerous combination.

    I don’t have enough cases to prove it but my concern is that a tendency is emerging whereby failed complainants are being given a MeToo-fuelled consolation prize of having their credibility upheld even after their accusations have been obliterated in court. The logic being, apparently, that – hey – no harm has been done.

  6. Buccaneer says:

    One might hope that before pressing for a matter to go to trial a complainant might be encouraged to reflect adequately on whether or not there is a possibility they might be mistaken. One also might suggest that a prosecutor ask basic questions that might, upon being questioned in a court case invalidate the complainant’s argument, like was the consensual congress continuous, before proceeding to trial.

    Given the amount of money taxpayers stump up to ensure justice and the obvious problems caused to a now innocent defendent, whose ongoing living has been placed in jeopardy, just wiping this all off as a minor mistake with no consequence seems a little unfair.

    Of course, if the complainant were motivated by something other than actual justice, then it might be easy to see why these things were brushed aside.

  7. C.L. says:

    Police and DPPs are now advancing some cases to court regardless of their flimsiness because 1) they fear being MeTooed; or 2) they’re MeToo zealots themselves.

    Either way, the logic is this: ‘Let the jury/judge decide.’

  8. shatterzzz says:

    That summin gup doesn’t say much for plod professionalism …….!
    Not Guilty should also mean .. “How the hell did this reach a court?” ……

  9. Roger W says:

    I think what CL said at 11.45am is closer to the truth.
    This explains why the complainant is less forceful/sure in her evidence than one might expect, and also explains the relatively generous conclusions of the judge. If we consider the possibility that the complainant is bullied into firming up an issue she has by the police/prosecution to push the #metoo ideology a lot of the recent cases are explained.
    Big problem for our justice system, of course.

  10. Lee says:

    The logic being, apparently, that – hey – no harm has been done.

    Never mind the lasting reputational damage and that merely being accused (but not charged) is the punishment.

    A false accuser is a liar, and there is no fudging it.

  11. Tel says:

    … no such thing as a free ride, so to speak, unless of course, your name ends in Biden or Shorten …

    Those guys also had to pay … but decided it was easier to just pay with their souls and get the lifetime offer.

  12. Petros says:

    Maybe he did do something wrong but she tried to cover up other parts of the story that reflected poorly on her? Oh what a tangled web.

  13. John says:

    When are the State Libs going to go into an election promising to flush out Labor appointed Judges. They are causing big problems in the so called justice system. Especially in Queensland where young criminals are given open slather to commit car thefts with impunity.

  14. Mantaray says:

    No one commenting on the female copper throwing her interview notes in the bin?….

    “You recorded these notes on scrap pieces of paper,” he said.

    “That’s what I had in front of me,” Constable Lackerdis said.

    “You threw out the scrap pieces of paper,” Mr Thangaraj said.

    Constable Lackerdis replied: “I shouldn’t have, but I did.”

  15. Baba says:

    Not quite on topic but a very similar vibe. And much more common.

  16. C.L. says:

    Great piece by Arndt.
    As she says, it’s sailing though the parliament with no opposition whatsoever from the gutless LNP. Only Pauline Hanson has been fighting it.

    Very much on topic, Baba. The new feminist jurisprudence both encourages and legalises perjury.

  17. Lee says:

    Surely no woman would ever try to game the system.

    Just when you thought the #MeTooers had fatally damaged the “believe all women” meme.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *