Site search

Blogroll

3000 Votes
Andrew Bartlett
Antony Loewenstein
Audrey of Adelaide
Australians All
Austrolabe
Balneus
Bitch Ph.D.
BoltWatch
Brian Flemming
Bush Telegraph
Catallaxy
Club Troppo
Counteract Now
Crazy Brave
David Jeffery
David Tiley
Deb Foskey
Denialism
Feminism 101
GrodsCorp
Human Rights Act
Irfan Yusuf
Jane Clark
Jeremy Sear
John Quiggin
Josh Wolf
Kalkadoon.org
Language Log
Larvatus Prodeo
LeftWrites
Legal Soap Box
Machine Gun Keyboard
Miss Politics Australia
New Int. Blogs
Nexus Six
Paradigm Oz
Peter Black
Peter Campbell
Peter Martin
Planet Irf
Polemica
Possums Pollytics
Reasons You Will Hate Me
Rodney Croome
Sauer-Thompson
South Sea Republic
Spinopsys
StinkyJournalism.org
Suki Has An Opinion
Talk it Out
Talk It Out
Tama Leaver
The Dogs Bollocks
The Indian Mutiny
The Partisan
The Poll Bludger
The Road to Surfdom
Thinkers Podium
Tim Dunlop
Tim Lambert
Tug Boat Potemkin
Typing is NOT Activism
Watermelon Rant
Webdiary
Woolly Days


Featured Content

Profile: Mick Towke
Profile: Greg Smith
Profile: Paul Gibson

Judging Maddy’s Parents

To quote some random idiot I ran into at the supermarket:

Yikes! I’m having a hard time believing that they are guilty of anything, but I haven’t been following as much.

*engage rant mode*

It’s a matter for the public prosecutor to investigate and see whether there is a case to answer. Then and only then, it will be a case for a court to decide.

It is not for people to read in the paper and then decide in some way for themselves the innocence or guilt of the people accused. That is called trial by media and something we can well live without. Particularly if we want our court systems to actually work. Yes we need to respect the process if it is to maintain any standard of natural justice.

Yes it sells dailies and television ‘current affairs’ show hold sick sms and phone in polls, dial xxxyyy if you think they did it or yyyxxx if you think they didn’t.

We’ll tell you the ‘decision’ after the break.

Give me a break.

You know I used the term ‘natural justice’ before, it means that victims should have their complaints taken seriously and not be subjected to character assassination and it also means that accused persons are tried speedily and by a COMPETENT court. The way the media presents crap for daily consumption and disposal, denies many people who have stood accused access to natural justice.

By the time many cases come to court the media saturation means ye canne find a jury that hasn’t already made up it’s mind about the guilt or innocence of the accused.


Stories the server thinks are related:
>>Smacking: it’s assault.
>>Underemployment rising
>>Bullies, citizens and private schools
>>QLB Lib Senate Vacancy Filled


Comments

resta suma Comment from brokenleftleg
Time: September 23, 2007, 8:18 pm

And people pay 55 cents to express their opinions via SMS. Part of which goes to the broadcaster. Who says you can’t make money out of stupid poor people.

resta suma Comment from BMSprint
Time: September 30, 2007, 9:29 am

55 cents… nothing. Here in America all our game shows have text in games that cost a dollar, more than a dollar in Australia.

But anyway… the people who “have a hard time believing they did anything” seriously bother me because… uggh… it’s just a tough situation. In fact, I don’t think I’m due the right to comment on it.

But Kate, we all do have the right to express our opinions.

resta suma Comment from Jody
Time: October 3, 2007, 4:50 pm

Where was Lindy Chamberlain the day Maddie went missing??

resta suma Comment from Kryptosporidian
Time: October 4, 2007, 4:42 pm

I bet ya ten bucks they did it.

resta suma Comment from Kate
Time: October 7, 2007, 9:30 am

Ta Jody, you might as well wonder where the local dingo pack was that day.

Write a comment





Close
E-mail It