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!

News JDB Trial

Messages
14,822
thats because you have a limited ability to form multiple possible rational ideas and conclusions lol.
Women need to be smarter and understand many blokes are shts, and if they are professional sportsmen be extra cautious. some Men need to stop being shts.
Big up to all the decent blokes in the world who don’t act like shts to women.
Bad blokes aren't going to stop being pricks. Bad broads aren't going to stop being bitches. The only solution is for people to be on their guard and not let these people take advantage of them.
 

SBD82

Coach
Messages
17,850
Maybe the hairy legged wilder beast women you hang around have it in for JP - but 90% of them haven't heard of him.
From the male perspective he talks intelligently about interesting stuff like evolutionary biology etc. He is a good dude unless you are a rabid left winger. Even if you are just in the middle he is worth listening to.
The thing that I like about him most is he hates mobs. I love people who hate mobs.
Oh please. He’s a quack who preys on the fears and vulnerabilities of men who feel alienated, and gives them targets to blame for their perceived inadequacies.
 

Mr Spock!

Referee
Messages
22,502
Maybe the hairy legged wilder beast women you hang around have it in for JP - but 90% of them haven't heard of him.
From the male perspective he talks intelligently about interesting stuff like evolutionary biology etc. He is a good dude unless you are a rabid left winger. Even if you are just in the middle he is worth listening to.
The thing that I like about him most is he hates mobs. I love people who hate mobs.
This is the same JP which became addicted to drugs, followed his grifter daughter to alternative treatments in Russia which nearly killed him then said covid 19 wasn't a big deal then went to a country which had no covid restrictions and his daughter promptly gave him covid 19 which nearly killed him.

Just goes to show he's a complete moron.
 

Mr Spock!

Referee
Messages
22,502
5 Scientific Reasons Why Women Just Won't Go For The Nice Guys
BY GIGI ENGLE
APRIL 15, 2015

Most women claim to want the guy who is sensitive, emotionally fluent and intimate. Yet, when it comes down to it, women consistently chase after the “bad boy," the guy who is narcissistic, self-absorbed and avoids all forms of intimacy as if they were infectious diseases.

A woman's dating preference is the ultimate paradox.

The thing is, while we're constantly on the lookout for that super sweet, caring guy who will make a great companion, we're actually attracted to the guy who ignites passion within us.

Nice guys are just boring.

It's a giant catch-22, isn't it? We want to have serious relationships with good, sweet guys, but we want to make babies with aggressive assh*les.

There's just something so satisfying about taking the jerk home from the bar who's spent most of the night intellectually challenging you in a heated verbal debate.

He needs to be brought down a notch. He's absolutely infuriating! And isn't that so f*cking sexy?

What it all comes down to is biology. We are literally, scientifically geared to want assh*les.

While women claim to want “the nice guy,” we're genetically hard-wired to want to procreate with the alpha male because he has stronger sperm.

There is an actual “Nice Guy Paradox"
In two studies highlighted in “Sex Roles, A Journal of Research,” the “nice guy paradox” is explored.

This nice guy stereotype contends that women often claim they want a nice guy, a man who is sweet, kind and sensitive, and yet, when it comes down to it, she rejects this man for one with “other salient characteristics” like a hot body or an ultra strong personality.

Both studies found that “nice” qualities were more desirable for long-term relationships while physical attractiveness prevailed in terms of sexual relationships:​

Niceness appeared to be the most salient factor when it came to desirability for more serious relationships, whereas physical attractiveness appeared more important in terms of desirability for more casual, sexual relationships.​

A study in the Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy focused on university women and their perception of the “nice guy” stereotype:​

More than one half of the women agreed that nice guys have fewer sexual partners, however, more than one half also reported a preference for a nice guy over a bad boy as a date.​

As hypothesized, women who placed a lesser emphasis on the importance of sex had fewer sexual partners, were less accepting of men who had many sexual partners and were more likely to choose the nice guy as a dating partner.

We just don't learn our lesson

A study from researchers at Hartpury College in England, of 146 British women, ages 18-24, found that even the most seasoned daters still tended to fall for men who expelled narcissistic qualities.

The narcissistic male does not make a good partner, but even experienced females do not realize this.

These women even often ended up married to narcissists. In a tragic twist of fate, the assh*les are now breeding assh*les. Oy vey.

The tests are tried and true; women habitually chase these d-bags, despite how many times they have their hearts broken.

It's like we just can't help ourselves. We want those arrogant dicks who make us somehow feel alive.

We love the danger

We choose assh*les because of the danger factor involved in dating guys who are strong and conceited.

We know they're wrong for us, they'll never treat us the way we think we deserve to be treated, and instead of running for the hills, we jump on for the ride. Damn you, biology!

Nice guys are boring

No woman wants to be with a man who doesn't know how to assert himself. Whether we want to admit it or not, we want excitement in our relationships. We want a powerful, aggressive man.

This can be a difficult thing to admit as a strong, independent female, but it is, nonetheless, true.

Women don't want to be with someone who is all calm seas and clear skies; we crave constant challenges in everything we do.

When it comes to love, we choose the guy who satisfies that desire. The nice guy may seem great on paper, but he turns out bland in real life.

We want a project

Women like to "fix men." A nice guy doesn't need any taming. He's already solid on the homefront. He isn't intense or severe.

As often as we ladies say those chaotic personality traits aren't what we're looking for in a boyfriend, they are. Just look at history.

When a woman is faced with a "bad boy," she automatically finds the challenge to tame him alluring.

His vanity is all at once angering and intoxicating. If she can bring him down to earth, it would be the ultimate accomplishment.

Our carnal wants will win out every time.

https://www.elitedaily.com/dating/science-women-nice-guys/1000116
So only arseholes have women while good guys are all single.

I think I see a flaw in that argument.
 

The_Frog

First Grade
Messages
6,390
If the lass needs to be in court and be cross examined still etc, then I don't see any need to replay her testimony via video then.
The alleged victim in the Pell case did not appear at the second trial. It seems reasonable to assume this is just as traumatic.
 
Messages
15,431
I wouldn't think that would be in her best interest. The Jury need to hear her, there at the trial. Their case is very reliant on the weight of her evidence and the strength of the witness which won't come across well on tape.

No cross examination by the prosecution and it already appears they have plugged holes in her story and proven she lied to the court., which I would think the defence would want another shot at.

The Just should have been given instructions that they are not there to judge a persons innocence, but their guilt beyond reasonable doubt. And if they can't be sure beyond reasonable doubt of their guilt, they must return a not guilty verdict.

For mine, the Jury in this case has sat on the fence not wanting to put in a verdict and this all parties have to go through another 12 months.

This has been one of the biggest areas of law reform. In cases of alleged sexual assault, many victims won't come forwards due to the trauma they experience in giving the testimony. Hence in 2009 legislation was passed which changed laws for giving of evidence by the alleged victims. In summary -

Improved court process for vIctims of sexual assault

Laws have changed to help victims of sexual assault who are going through court, particularly during the process of giving evidence. As a victim of sexual assault, here are some of the changes that may help.
  • You no longer have to face the accused person in court. You can now give evidence from a private room away from the courtroom, which is then transmitted to the courtroom via a television. Alternatively, you may wish to give evidence in the courtroom but, to ensure you don’t have to see the accused, request that a screen or partition be used
  • ŠYour case may now be heard in a closed court so members of the public cannot hear the evidence.Š
  • You may now have a support person with you during the court proceedings. This person can be a member of the family, friend, counsellor or professional court support officer (provided they are not a witness in the case).
  • ŠThe court now strictly limits what can be published about your case on the Internet and in the media. This means that your name or any information that identifies you must be kept confidential outside the court. This is called a ‘non-publication order’.
  • ŠMost accused people are legally represented. However, if the accused person is not legally represented they can no longer directly ask you questions in court. Prior to this change in the law an accused person who was representing themselves in court could directly ask you questions.
  • ŠNow the court may appoint an alternative person, if required.
  • You may not be asked improper questions, such as those which are humiliating, harassing, repetitive or insulting. In particular, improper questions should not be used by the lawyer representing the accused during a cross-examination.Š
  • Your evidence will be recorded so, if for any reason the trial needs to be re-heard, you may not need to give your evidence again.
Source: https://www.victimsservices.justice...lt/Documents/fs25_sex-assault-law-changes.pdf
 

Valheru

Coach
Messages
19,181
If that were to happen, Robert Xie would not be in prison for killing 6 people.

Yeah fair enough.

I guess what I am saying is I don't see why we need unanimity for verdicts, especially a not guilty verdict. The Xie trial you speak of the court accepted an 11-1 verdict.
 

Generalzod

Immortal
Messages
33,853
It’s just funny how society treats the sexes if a girl has sex she is classified as “dirty”. If it’s a guy he is sowing his wild oats!!
 
Messages
15,028
So only arseholes have women while good guys are all single.

I think I see a flaw in that argument.

“nice guys” are generally single because they are not nice, they just brand themselves that way and think that women owe them something. Generally good blokes don’t run around telling people they are good blokes, and if you have to tell people you fall into this category then you probably don’t.

it’s like a funny person doesn’t tell you they’re funny, they just make you laugh. If someone tells you they’re smart or gloats about their intelligence it’s usually a red flag. These base personality traits are exhibited through action not words.
 

shear_joy9

Coach
Messages
13,743
My advice to my daughter, if I had one, would be NEVER, under any circumstances, wink at a horny footballer in a nightclub. It may be taken as consent for all manner of sex with multiple men.

coming from Penrith she would probably already have a few kids in tow before she's old enough to visit a nightclub.


tenor.gif
 

Knight76

Juniors
Messages
2,045
Its not up to what the prosecutor's want. The NSW parliament has enacted laws saying that a complainant does not have to re-give evidence in these circumstances. Considering the laws were initiated by the Government at the time with little opposition it is how things stand.

So it is up to the complainant then I am guessing. And I expect the prosecutors would be having a chat to her about her options and what would work better for her at the next trial.
 

Latest posts

Top