Jdb case

[tumbidragon]

Wrong thread.

 

[goggles]

Inviting a handsome celebrity and another man back to your unit for 'coffee' is not a good idea; especially if you flirt with him/them before hand.

De Belin should have been smarter and politely said his partner is having a baby and so he needs to go home to be with her. De Belin should have had more sense. We will find out exactly what happened in the near future when both sides of the story is heard and when the court decides whether to proceed to trial.

Where is the NRL and our Club on this issue. Surely, there needs to be an announcement soon.

Possm, I don't know if she was flirting, I don't know if they went back to her unit and I don't know if a rape occurred, but this statement is wrong and needs to be called out!
Apportioning any amount of blame to the victim of an alleged sexual assault... because she was (so you say) 'flirting' with the alleged perpetrator??? That is disgusting and you should feel ashamed of yourself!
"No" means no! It doesn't matter how much 'flirting' has gone on, if someone is not interested in going further, the other party respects and accepts that decision and stops right there, end of story!

 

[epDragon62]

Possm, I don't know if she was flirting, I don't know if they went back to her unit and I don't know if a rape occurred, but this statement is wrong and needs to be called out!
Apportioning any amount of blame to the victim of an alleged sexual assault... because she was (so you say) 'flirting' with the alleged perpetrator??? That is disgusting and you should feel ashamed of yourself!
"No" means no! It doesn't matter how much 'flirting' has gone on, if someone is not interested in going further, the other party respects and accepts that decision and stops right there, end of story!

I agree but I also agree with Goggles’ statement that it is not a good idea. That does not apportion blame, it simply highlights that there is a risk and I would counsel my own daughter to avoid the situation.

When booze is involved people don’t think and undoubtedly there was plenty of not thinking going on, whatever the truth, otherwise Jack would not be in this situation.

Sad state of affairs all’round.

 

[ouryears]

Seriously, if you can't see anything wrong with what possm wrote, you have problems. The guy has a history of it - passively defending Hayne previously in a similar manner.

You don't add your own narrative to a sensitive situation just to support your own personal view.

My point was not to blame the girl, whatsoever, zilch, nil.
My point was quit laying any blame until we know whether the accusation is proven.
The entire thing may be untrue, it may not have happened.

If it is proven to be true in court, then you can lay blame at De Belin.

How the hell do you lay blame now until the court decides whether this is true.
No one did anything until the case is heard and decided.
Quit commenting until it’s decided, what will you say if it comes out that nothing happened......ohhh, sorry Jack?

 

[Miller was a legend]

Deleted

 

[Pablooo]

No one knows what happened but not every allegation made is always true or accurate. One thing in JDB’s favor, he has a witness and that person wasn’t charged which means he may be a reliable witness. The me2 campaign has spooked authorities into chasing every allegation and taking them on with the full weight of the law. They are under pressure to serve the public interest but like every organization that has been politicized, they can make mistakes and jump the gun.

 

[giboz71]

FMD there is some nonsense in here.

Regardless of what really happened that night, just because a female decides to invite a bloke home doesn’t mean she should expect to get assaulted FFS. That’s what some in here are implying.

I’m pretty sure blokes have a right to feel safe when they take a stranger home. So should females.

 

[St from the Gong]

No one knows what happened but not every allegation made is always true or accurate. One thing in JDB’s favor, he has a witness and that person wasn’t charged which means he may be a reliable witness. The me2 campaign has spooked authorities into chasing every allegation and taking them on with the full weight of the law. They are under pressure to serve the public interest but like every organization that has been politicized, they can make mistakes and jump the gun.

What do you mean "spooked"

I want to live in a country where every allegation receives the full weight of the law and if required the weight of the judicial system and full weight of punishment and justice.

I cannot align to your ideology and thoughts.

SFTG

 

[BLM01]

FMD there is some nonsense in here.

Regardless of what really happened that night, just because a female decides to invite a bloke home doesn’t mean she should expect to get assaulted FFS. That’s what some in here are implying.

I’m pretty sure blokes have a right to feel safe when they take a stranger home. So should females.

Not one person has implied your 1st sentence so that is nonsense in itself. That is you implying the same trying to interpret others comments.
At best for all we know (is absolutely nothing) ATM except media interpretation after the law has laid charges and 1 parties side of the story as translated to us by the same media.
I have already just seen on this forum different interpretations on how they came to be in a unit together and how the night unfolded.
That is where it borders on discrimatory and public being able to voice their strong opinion basically believing what they think is true socially dangerous.

 

[giboz71]

Not one person has implied your 1st sentence so that is nonsense in itself. That is you implying the same trying to interpret others comments.
At best for all we know (is absolutely nothing) ATM except media interpretation after the law has laid charges and 1 parties side of the story as translated to us by the same media.
I have already just seen on this forum different interpretations on how they came to be in a unit together and how the night unfolded.
That is where it borders on discrimatory and public being able to voice their strong opinion basically believing what they think is true socially dangerous.

Inviting a handsome celebrity and another man back to your unit for 'coffee' is not a good idea; especially if you flirt with him/them before hand.

So you think this statement is kosher do you?

What if the bloke was ugly....does this make it ok?

And for the record, what I stated had nothing to do with the JDB case.

FMD.

 

[BLM01]

So you think this statement is kosher do you?

What if the bloke was ugly....does this make it ok?

And for the record, what I stated had nothing to do with the JDB case.

FMD.

Sure you are generalising. But POSSM comments did not insinuate she is looking or should expect to get assaulted. He said what most commonsense people are thinking without knowing the facts. It is not a good idea for a multitude of reasons..and for the record it was not a good idea for that celebrity to be in that position either and a multitude of reasons for that
You just playing journo ATM and being the norm "outrage" society we are today. Overreading into and overblowing someone's comments. I would not of said publically but what Possm did and he did extras to it to spice the storey but he is purely making an opinion. If he had said what you insinuate then fair enough..outrage his comments

 

[giboz71]

Sure you are generalising. But POSSM comments did not insinuate she is looking or should expect to get assaulted. He said what most commonsense people are thinking without knowing the facts. It is not a good idea for a multitude of reasons..and for the record it was not a good idea for that celebrity to be in that position either and a multitude of reasons for that

Anyone apportioning or inferring any type of blame to a victim of sexual assault, no matter how tiny, is an idiot.

And that’s what that comment inferred, without it actually being said.

 

[BLM01]

Anyone apportioning or inferring any type of blame to a victim of sexual assault, no matter how tiny, is an idiot.

And that’s what that comment inferred, without it actually being said.

Of course but you forgot a key word "Alleged" victim. At this moment until I know more all parties could be to blame and plenty on here have done what you say Possm did by being an idiot...also blaming JDB.
He is only guilty ATM of should of known better to be in that position.

 

[Old Timer]

FMD why are people blowing up so hard about the concept that "common sense" should prevail in given circumstances.
If the young lady was with 2 men she did not know (in JDB's case other than from NRL media) of course she is fully entitled to be 100% safe and free from harassment etc etc etc.
Not withstanding that with all the poor publicity and offences in the news re NRL players behaviour especially in relation to women is it not a fair opinion to say "common sense" in relation to "stranger danger"?
Isn't that what we teach our children and let's face it at 19 are they that adult that they will always make correct decisions off their own bat?
If your young daughter came home and told you that she met up with 2 blokes she didn't know at a venue where everyone was drinking and decided to go off with them including going back to a flat without the company of a friend would you say "that's lovely darling" or would you say "that's not the best idea you ever came up with you and I suggest 1 girl with 2 men is not a good scenario"?
Possm didn't quite get his post correct but I believe that something like the above was his intent.
This is not apportioning blame in any way to the alleged victim it is about the process of placing yourself in a vulnerable position.
Yes I understand that she shouldn't be vulnerable but that is not being realistic in todays world as it is a dangerous place where you have to exercise good judgement at all times.
No substitute for good common sense.

 

[avocado]

FMD why are people blowing up so hard about the concept that "common sense" should prevail in given circumstances.
If the young lady was with 2 men she did not know (in JDB's case other than from NRL media) of course she is fully entitled to be 100% safe and free from harassment etc etc etc.
Not withstanding that with all the poor publicity and offences in the news re NRL players behaviour especially in relation to women is it not a fair opinion to say "common sense" in relation to "stranger danger"?
Isn't that what we teach our children and let's face it at 19 are they that adult that they will always make correct decisions off their own bat?
If your young daughter came home and told you that she met up with 2 blokes she didn't know at a venue where everyone was drinking and decided to go off with them including going back to a flat without the company of a friend would you say "that's lovely darling" or would you say "that's not the best idea you ever came up with you and I suggest 1 girl with 2 men is not a good scenario"?
Possm didn't quite get his post correct but I believe that something like the above was his intent.

Exactly. Saying that the girl was to blame is wrong, but saying she made a dumb decision is spot on.
JDB should have known better, so should she.
The truth will be revealed, just have to wait.

This is not apportioning blame in any way to the alleged victim it is about the process of placing yourself in a vulnerable position.
Yes I understand that she shouldn't be vulnerable but that is not being realistic in todays world as it is a dangerous place where you have to exercise good judgement at all times.
No substitute for good common sense.

Do I walk through Hyde Park at 3 in the morning? Hell no. I should have a right to do so but that's not how it works.

 

[giboz71]

FMD why are people blowing up so hard about the concept that "common sense" should prevail in given circumstances.
If the young lady was with 2 men she did not know (in JDB's case other than from NRL media) of course she is fully entitled to be 100% safe and free from harassment etc etc etc.
Not withstanding that with all the poor publicity and offences in the news re NRL players behaviour especially in relation to women is it not a fair opinion to say "common sense" in relation to "stranger danger"?
Isn't that what we teach our children and let's face it at 19 are they that adult that they will always make correct decisions off their own bat?
If your young daughter came home and told you that she met up with 2 blokes she didn't know at a venue where everyone was drinking and decided to go off with them including going back to a flat without the company of a friend would you say "that's lovely darling" or would you say "that's not the best idea you ever came up with you and I suggest 1 girl with 2 men is not a good scenario"?
Possm didn't quite get his post correct but I believe that something like the above was his intent.
This is not apportioning blame in any way to the alleged victim it is about the process of placing yourself in a vulnerable position.
Yes I understand that she shouldn't be vulnerable but that is not being realistic in todays world as it is a dangerous place where you have to exercise good judgement at all times.
No substitute for good common sense.

Yeh, nah mate. You're missing the point. If I decide to get in a car, which I do every day, and a drunk driver hits me and injures me, is it my fault for allowing myself to be on the road? Please.

What are the statistics for being involved in a car accident these days, I'd say a lot higher than being raped. So am I foolish just because I choose to drive my car? Perhaps I should spend 3 hours on the bus in the off chance some idiot hits me. We'd all never leave our homes if we thought like that.

And here's a newsflash for everyone. Women have just as much right to choose to go home with a stranger as do men. Most come out of that situation unscathed as not all men are rapists.

The unlucky few who come across scumbags who assault them are victims pure and simple. Just like any other victim of crime.

 

[Old Timer]

Yeh, nah mate. You're missing the point. If I decide to get in a car, which I do every day, and a drunk driver hits me and injures me, is it my fault for allowing myself to be on the road? Please.

What are the statistics for being involved in a car accident these days, I'd say a lot higher than being raped. So am I foolish just because I choose to drive my car? Perhaps I should spend 3 hours on the bus in the off chance some idiot hits me. We'd all never leave our homes if we thought like that.

And here's a newsflash for everyone. Women have just as much right to choose to go home with a stranger as do men. Most come out of that situation unscathed as not all men are rapists.

The unlucky few who come across scumbags who assault them are victims pure and simple. Just like any other victim of crime.

I am not missing any point whatsoever.
I am talking about the decision making process in light of evidence and I've seen the "old chestnut" re drink driving many times before.
That argument is flawed because when you get behind the wheel of the car you don't know whether "Mr Pissed" is out there or not but In this case the "Mr Pissed" is siting there right in front of you and you get to make decisions knowing that he is there.
I am not a social media person and abhor it in fact but I suspect almost all young people use it in one form or another.
Does JDB not have a profile on social media?
Is his partner and pending baby not in the full view of the public?
Is not the bad behaviour of some NRL men with women not common knowledge?
Many in here now saying that JDB has "form" where would that insinuation come from "social media"?
Is the girl entitled to be safe from predators no matter where she puts herself the answer is unequivocally yes but if you put your hand into a bag of snakes the chances are you will get bitten and that is where common sense and avoidance of situations is unfortunately very necessary.
People advocating that "you should be safe" are 100% correct but we all know that is not the real world and if you don't have a healthy sense of self preservation, life can go exceedingly wrong and very quickly because not everyone believes in following the rules.
If the alleged offences took place it is abhorrent and the perpetrators deserve everything they get and some but ask yourself could it have been avoided?
The answer to that is yes on 2 counts and that is not apportioning blame that is just being brutally honest.
Anyway I hope the truth comes out and that the innocent are vindicated and can make some sort of recovery (not easy for anyone) and that the guilty are dealt with swiftly & severely.

 

[Fat Tony Kandos]

I am not a social media person and abhor it

Since 1 May 2014 you have posted 7,853 messages (an average of 4.64 messages per day) to League Unlimited (i.e., a 'social media' platform). These facts suggest that you are a social media person and you do not abhor it.

Nonetheless, back on-topic.

Evidence of other sexual activity by or with the complainant

Evidence of the sexual reputation of the complaint is inadmissible and there are restrictions on the admissibility of evidence relating to the complainant’s sexual experience: Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW) (‘the Act’), s 293 Admissibility of evidence relating to sexual experience. However, evidence of other sexual activity between the complainant and the accused may be admissible as an exception under s 293(4) of the Act or as evidence of a relationship: see, generally, P. Berman’s ‘The Role of Victims in Sentence Proceedings’, (1997) 4 Crim LN [733].

 

[Old Timer]

Since 1 May 2014 you have posted 7,853 messages (an average of 4.64 messages per day) to League Unlimited (i.e., a 'social media' platform). These facts suggest that you are a social media person and you do not abhor it.

Nonetheless, back on-topic.

Evidence of other sexual activity by or with the complainant

Evidence of the sexual reputation of the complaint is inadmissible and there are restrictions on the admissibility of evidence relating to the complainant’s sexual experience: Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW) (‘the Act’), s 293 Admissibility of evidence relating to sexual experience. However, evidence of other sexual activity between the complainant and the accused may be admissible as an exception under s 293(4) of the Act or as evidence of a relationship: see, generally, P. Berman’s ‘The Role of Victims in Sentence Proceedings’, (1997) 4 Crim LN [733].

OK fair point I should have emphasised facebiok, instagram or the like which has lots of personal info, photos etc etc about people unlike here where you are anonymous.
Not sure why you put the rest of the “extract” in as the conversation is about decision making and the process thereof.

 

[Fat Tony Kandos]

Not sure why you put the rest of the “extract” in as the conversation is about decision making and the process thereof.

The reason I included the commentary on s 293 of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW) is because I am only interested in matters of fact and matters of law.

Possm's comment in post #143 "Inviting a handsome celebrity and another man back to your unit for 'coffee' is not a good idea; especially if you flirt with him/them before hand" is his opinion and opinion that he is entitled to express (one may even argue that his opinion is what has colloquially become known as the public policy of 'victim blaming' - I have no interest at all in debating that public policy).

Again, I am only interested in matters of fact and matters of law, and the only way I could link Possm's opinion to either of those matters was if he, by implication, was raising the issue of the complaint's sexual reputation.

Section 293 makes clear that evidence of the sexual reputation of the complaint is inadmissible.

Furthermore, section 293 links directly to your concerns regarding decision-making and 'process' (I'm assuming by the term 'process' you are referring to procedural fairness).