What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Jack DeBelin

Status
Not open for further replies.

Willow

Assistant Moderator
Messages
108,129
Yet another heads up. Please remember that this case is still at the allegation stage. Due process must be observed.

Any poster who forgets this may have their post deleted. Any continuation will be seen as ignoring moderators and a suspension of forum membership may follow. This could be for 2 weeks or longer depending on the severity of the rule breach.

Please think before you post. If in doubt, feel free to contact me via the private conversation option or email forums@leagueunlimited.com

Cheers.
 
Messages
15,386
Some remarks on process ( nothing about guilt or innocence).

Well if the preliminary arguments have started, I’d think they’d be connected to the trial and are probably important in some way. This was pointed out by an early poster. So this description of delay doesn’t quite wash with me. Sounds a bit sensational.

True His Honour was a public defender once, meaning that he was amongst the very best and brightest defence barristers in nsw, but that mostly means he is a very clever person and there’s no way on earth this past position would influence his decision or disturb his reasoning. Everything would be fresh to him as it is to us. He just has to apply the law.

I understand it’s judge alone and there will be no jury. That is something that usually the defence has to consent to. That could be for many reasons, but it might not be unreasonable to guess ( just a guess) that the defence is looking to technical arguments that a judge might understand better than a jury. If that’s open to them, if that’s how they are thinking, all good. Plus sometimes jury’s are a bit off the rails (“ johs jury”) even if they are trying hard to do the right thing one way or the other.

Things that might encourage us to think a certain in the real world are sometimes not allowed in courts, because the law doesn’t allow certain types of evidence in. Things have to be relevant for example. Someone telling you something, just means they told you something, not that what they told you actually happened. There are some exceptions to this “ hearsay” rule. So it gets complex.

Now these rules apply to both sides, I think the prosecution can appeal judge alone on certain grounds. But they don’t seem to have. So they seem to have faith in him for fairness all around.

His Honour has an important job. He can’t consider emotions in the sense that some people would like jack to play and other people wouldn’t. That’s not the issue at all, that’s the last thing he’s interested in.

Hes going to consider the law and the evidence and be very careful with the process. If he errs, either side may be able to appeal.

So it’s a very difficult job. Big match for him!

And he wouldn’t care less what the media think. He’s a judge, not a pollie.

But it’s a case that’s needs a very straight decent person to bust the decision. I think he’s a good draw for justice.
 
Last edited:

Gardenia

Juniors
Messages
2,139
Yet another heads up. Please remember that this case is still at the allegation stage. Due process must be observed.

Any poster who forgets this may have their post deleted. Any continuation will be seen as ignoring moderators and a suspension of forum membership may follow. This could be for 2 weeks or longer depending on the severity of the rule breach.

Please think before you post. If in doubt, feel free to contact me via the private conversation option or email forums@leagueunlimited.com

Cheers.

Thank you this needed to be said .
 

BennyV

Referee
Messages
22,441
Some remarks on process ( nothing about guilt or innocence).

Well if the preliminary arguments have started, I’d think they’d be connected to the trial and are probably important in some way. This was pointed out by an early poster. So this description of delay doesn’t quite wash with me. Sounds a bit sensational.

True His Honour was a public defender once, meaning that he was amongst the very best and brightest defence barristers in nsw, but that mostly means he is a very clever person and there’s no way on earth this past position would influence his decision or disturb his reasoning. Everything would be fresh to him as it is to us. He just has to apply the law.

I understand it’s judge alone and there will be no jury. That is something that usually the defence has to consent to. That could be for many reasons, but it might not be unreasonable to guess ( just a guess) that the defence is looking to technical arguments that a judge might understand better than a jury. If that’s open to them, if that’s how they are thinking, all good. Plus sometimes jury’s are a bit off the rails (“ johs jury”) even if they are trying hard to do the right thing one way or the other.

Things that might encourage us to think a certain in the real world are sometimes not allowed in courts, because the law doesn’t allow certain types of evidence in. Things have to be relevant for example. Someone telling you something, just means they told you something, not that what they told you actually happened. There are some exceptions to this “ hearsay” rule. So it gets complex.

Now these rules apply to both sides, I think the prosecution can appeal judge alone on certain grounds. But they don’t seem to have. So they seem to have faith in him for fairness all around.

His Honour has an important job. He can’t consider emotions in the sense that some people would like jack to play and other people wouldn’t. That’s not the issue at all, that’s the last thing he’s interested in.

Hes going to consider the law and the evidence and be very careful with the process. If he errs, either side may be able to appeal.

So it’s a very difficult job. Big match for him!

And he wouldn’t care less what the media think. He’s a judge, not a pollie.

But it’s a case that’s needs a very straight decent person to bust the decision. I think he’s a good draw for justice.
Where did you read it was judge only? I was under the impression that it was full jury?
 

muzby

Village Idiot
Staff member
Messages
45,708
You really are an idiot.
Nobody makes jokes about such a case.
Read my comments, get a grip and stop making trying to make something out of nothing.
Again with an insult.

You’ve done the wrong thing, and are now just making it worse by being extra childish.

Don’t make jokes around a rape case.

It’s tasteless and offensive.
 

Old Kogarah Boy 1

First Grade
Messages
5,415
Again with an insult.

You’ve done the wrong thing, and are now just making it worse by being extra childish.

Don’t make jokes around a rape case.

It’s tasteless and offensive.

You really don’t get it.
I made a comment about BJ in a witness box, nothing more.
It is YOU who is making assumptions and accusations.

Give yourself an uppercut and get over it.

Stop dragging the change and trying start something out of nothing.

I’m sure you like to hear yourself talk.
Go along an annoy someone else.
 

muzby

Village Idiot
Staff member
Messages
45,708
You really don’t get it.
I made a comment about BJ in a witness box, nothing more.
It is YOU who is making assumptions and accusations.

Give yourself an uppercut and get over it.

Stop dragging the change and trying start something out of nothing.

I’m sure you like to hear yourself talk.
Go along an annoy someone else.
Read the room mate. No one else is making jokes about the case.

It’s a shit situation for all and making light of it is poor form.

Perhaps go tell your joke to people at the courthouse & see if they laugh. They could probably do with you lightening the mood.

But I’m done with it - you can carry on all you like.
 
Messages
15,386
Where did you read it was judge only? I was under the impression that it was full jury?

I picked it up in the press, but I’ve read otherwise now, so I am not sure. For safety, I will retract that observation but maintain the balance of the submission.

Jury’s are the finders of fact and I suppose both sides will be asking them to consider their witnesses as truthful and of credit.

I wonder if jack or the co-accused will give evidence. They can refuse. We saw Pell decline that opportunity and whilst every matter is different, that decision for pell did not appear to be a decision that was of any assistance in the outcome.

It’s not to say the reasoning for the decision wasn’t sound at the time. Everything is easy with hindsight!

I don’t think it is inappropriate for bj etc to attend as friends, I don’t think it adds or subtracts to the club image, as it is a pretty unusual event. If anybody draws comfort from their attendance that’s fine.
Simply the way it works, unless of course, they are giving evidence.

Obviously not on scene, they only know what they’ve been told, rightly or wrongly, for better or worse.
 
Last edited:
Messages
15,386
I understand that a jury is normally required when the accused plead not guilty as they have.

Provision exists for judge alone with the consent of the defence.

Technical arguments better run past a judge perhaps. Judges more observant than jurors and more experienced in the theatre of operations.
 
Messages
15,386
I enjoy young muz as much as any other poster, but my own view is that Old Kogarah Boy 1 appears to have won the day.

His remark was made in jest and can be seen as a well intended and wholesome attempt to add the bright light of humour into the darkness of this abominable, dank and very depressing occurrence.

Humour is often used to cope with loss.

Bj was a poor manager, that was his point. Few would disagree. At least he’s on his way, unlike our bloke.
 

Dragonsamy

Bench
Messages
2,882
I enjoy young muz as much as any other poster, but my own view is that Old Kogarah Boy 1 appears to have won the day.

His remark was made in jest and can be seen as a well intended and wholesome attempt to add the bright light of humour into the darkness of this abominable, dank and very depressing occurrence.

Humour is often used to cope with loss.

Bj was a poor manager, that was his point. Few would disagree. At least he’s on his way, unlike our bloke.

Agree 100%
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top