Matthew Johns, the Media Rape Libel and the War Against Sport - Letter to Gus

[ramble_on]

do you think the police didn't rely on testimony from co-workers after the night in question..? or are you claiming they selectively chose to interpret those statements made?

 

[robertmorris]

OK ,I understand that you have a legal background but here are a few thoughts for you

-Feminist social theory always holds men guilty as oppressors of women, no matter the individual actions or culpability of individual men. Sorry ,but I think you need to research your topic a bit more.I'm not going to go through it all here but basically feminist theory does no such thing,It isi more about the structure which oppress women.It works to the advantage of both men and women to live just lives.

There is no winning option with radical feminism Well that presumes a degree of compitition in this-there is not.Feminism is NOT about us and them .It's just about ALL of us.It is a patriachal idea to put a competitive spin on everything.

Feminist Cultural Studies places no value on the virtues of sport and athleticism, it sees only wrongs. What the? Now you are just being silly

Courts will always be the judges on criminality. That may be true.But they are also structures within the context of the society in which they exist.They reflect the attitudes and prejudices of their community.Your example of the stripper in the US is an interesting one.There are many people and legal systems that believe that prostitutes can not be rapes.-funny that?
When a woman/man brings an allegation of sexual assault to the Police they are reliant on the Police to make an informed decision based on the evidence presented.As police forces are predominately male this tends to be interpreted for the male perspective-the male experience of life if you like.In this case the male experience/perspectives of group sex.I am in no way saying these Police acted in a less that competent way.I'm saying that they are what they are I guess.It does not mean it didnt happen just because the law says it didnt.
Are you aware of how many estimated incidents of sexual assault go unreported?
real victims of sexual assault. Again assuming that the Law is the definative/impartial/non gender baised knower of truth.

so what right does the NRL have to make rules as to what a player does in the bedroom?
I hope you aren't suggesting that all domestic matters are private and have no place being aired in the community.Sexual assualt is not private it is an expression of power it is not mutual pleasurable sexual encouters.

I am very sorry for the position that Mathew Johns finds himself in.I reckon the other guys have let him down. I don't think he is an evil man.

But I don't think an appropriate respoinse is to bag off the girl involved.That is what really does put back the cause of all real sexual assualt victims

And who builds, maintains and enforces the imaginary structures of feminist social theory? Who are its symbols? Men. Your distinction between social structures and the individuals that comprise them is completely false and disingenuous. There is no real difference between the two, in reality (if they existed) and in feminist social theory. Patriarchy, in feminist theory, is the structure of men as individuals and as a collective. The masculinity of sport, particularly the toughness of Rugby League, is a prime symbol of all that feminists hate about men, and they attack it relentlessly for it.

Police are not judges. Courts, judges and juries deicide. Yes they are the final arbitrators of truth and justice. If you do not like that, and think that the over one thousand year history of the common law and of English constitutionalism, then go off and start your revolution.

Do you believe sexual assault laws do not exist or are not enforced? Go to your local court, or look up the court listings, and see people sitting trial and being found guilty almost every sitting day.

If you feel that our justice system is so flawed, then go out and commit crimes, rape some people, tell your male friends to go and rape people, after all they should have nothing to fear, right? The mythical patriarchy will look after them, and maybe even you?

People who feel they have been wronged by the criminal justice system can take action in civil system, many people do and are successful, including rape victims. The victims of Aboriginal leader Geoff Clark took successful civil action against him for rape.

In all your defence of feminism you fail to defend the real victims of rape, can;t you see that by diluting the meaning of sexual assault to include weak and fictitious claims that are unproven and untested in court, you harm the credibility of real victims?

Please, take you misguided feminist sentiment and read the commentary of a real feminist and advocate of women, Pru Goward. Stop fighting ghosts of patriarchy and systemic oppression of women by men, and look at the real world. Justice in a society does not survive if vigilantism and disregard for the law and the courts runs rampart, which it what you suggest, that is fundamentally unjust, and what has happened to Matthew Johns.

You misread the last point, I was articulating the view presented in the SMH player interview; that they would continue to have group sex. I then went on the give an argument as to why it was wrong. And in no way, ever at all, did I suggest that crimes should not be investigated and prosecuted. Unlike you, I believe in our justice system, and that those accused of crimes should be brought before it.

 

[sportive cupid]

you are a f**ken merkin of a person. I would hate to know you as i would f**king smash you.

What makes you think you don't know him?This is the internet mate-it could be your boss.

 

[ramble_on]

black tip... Luckily for deluded pom you're as threatening as a fart in a cyclone... with as much substance...

 

[robertmorris]

Also not all legal systems include a definition of consent in sexual assault law.( not sure if we even have one in NSW)So in effect Police are left to decide whether they think that the person has consented or not based on their own assumptions.Now if the said policemen think like many here...well.. All I am saying is that you can't really say that if the police dont lay charges/if no crime is recorded- it does not necessarily mean than sexual assault did not occur.

That is completely wrong, police have nothing to do with laying charges and nothing to do with judging what it and is not consent.

You need to read up on what the common law is, how our criminal justice system works, and how to read statutes in light of common law (judicial case precedents).

Judges and juries make decisions about issues of law and issues of fact in a case.

A separate body to police , in NSW the DPP, lay charges and prosecute cases.

Most crimes, in common law states like NSW, the actus reus (physical elements) and mens rea (mental elements) are for the most part determined by the precedents set by earlier, or higher, judges in previous cases, rather then in laws passed by parliament. That is what the common law is.

 

[deluded pom?]

you are a f**ken merkin of a person. I would hate to know you as i would f**king smash you.

The Ocker is alive and well. I'm shaking in my boots reefy. A keyboard warrior who calls himself blacktip-reefy lol is threatening me :lol:. Isn't democracy a wonderful thing? It must be awful where you come from reefy where no one is allowed to disagree with you on threat of being "smashed". Get to bed now. It's school for you in the morning and no bullying the little kids now.

 

[sportive cupid]

"Your distinction between social structures and the individuals that comprise them is completely false and disingenuous. There is no real difference between the two, in reality (if they existed) and in feminist social theory. Patriarchy, in feminist theory, is the structure of men as individuals and as a collective. The masculinity of sport, particularly the toughness of Rugby League, is a prime symbol of all that feminists hate about men, and they attack it relentlessly for it."

Patriachy is NOT the men .It represents the whole society-men and women.It oppresses women.

 

[sportive cupid]

You are a f*cking simple idiot for thinking anything other than the woman is depraved con artist. You are the pin up person for "marks" that con people ripp off.
You stupid, stupid fool.

Thank you matee (I think you might be in my daughters class at school so I won't go any further)

 

[mongoose]

The media has gone way over the top with this scandal but there is not much johns can do about it. You can't apply the same legal arguments used in a criminal court to a war of opinions through the media.
Him claiming innocense and saying it was consentual is not going to help him or any of his teammates. To the media and a lot of the public he has stepped over a moral boundary.

 

[sportive cupid]

do you think the police didn't rely on testimony from co-workers after the night in question..? or are you claiming they selectively chose to interpret those statements made?

I'm saying no such thing.

 

[sportive cupid]

Blacktip if your not aware already do some research on Crystal Magnum and the Duke Lacrosse case in the United States.

There are very pertinent parallels with Matthew's current situation and the way the media are reporting it.

The same goes for everyone else, its a text book case of these incidents.

I'm pretty sure Reefy is very aware of that case.

 

[sportive cupid]

So are you implying that this girl is a stripper?

One case = proof that all women are liars...yes

 

[robertmorris]

"Your distinction between social structures and the individuals that comprise them is completely false and disingenuous. There is no real difference between the two, in reality (if they existed) and in feminist social theory. Patriarchy, in feminist theory, is the structure of men as individuals and as a collective. The masculinity of sport, particularly the toughness of Rugby League, is a prime symbol of all that feminists hate about men, and they attack it relentlessly for it."

Patriachy is NOT the men .It represents the whole society-men and women.It oppresses women.

Patriarchy means rule by men, literally, and substantially in feminist theory. Your attempt to distinguish between individual men and men collectively in feminist theory is wrong and disingenuous.

Its existence is also a myth and that myth oppresses nobody.

I would respectfully suggest that you do not understand feminist theory, in the same way you do not understand how the common law and our justice system work.

 

[blacktip-reefy]

excuse my theatre RM. I am enjoying your input tenfold.

 

[robertmorris]

Him claiming innocense and saying it was consentual is not going to help him or any of his teammates. To the media and a lot of the public he has stepped over a moral boundary.

His immorality does not make him a rapist and he does not deserve to be slurred as one. They are two completely different things and it is a disgusting libel to say they are equivalent. It is an all too easy train of thought to slip into, and one the media repeats over and over.

If you were to miss your kids weekend football game, one might say that that was immoral, you let your kid down, he was expecting you. It is a very different thing to that you are a child abuser guilty of heinous crimes that society despises as one of the worst a person could commit. That is what the rape libel is.

 

[ramble_on]

do you think the police didn't rely on testimony from co-workers after the night in question..? or are you claiming they selectively chose to interpret those statements made?

I'm saying no such thing.

So in effect Police are left to decide whether they think that the person has consented or not based on their own assumptions.Now if the said policemen think like many here...well.. All I am saying is that you can't really say that if the police dont lay charges/if no crime is recorded- it does not necessarily mean than sexual assault did not occur.

The police ARE saying that no sexual assault occured.... they ARE basing this on evidence presented to them by numerous testimonies... but you're saying it does not necessarily mean that a sexual assault did not occur..!! so you're saying the police are making sh*t up..??

 

[sportive cupid]

I took your advice and sort the good word of Pru Goward.In Hansard no less
Ms PRU GOWARD (Goulburn) [9.48 p.m.]: I speak on the Crimes Amendment (Consent—Sexual Assault Offences) Bill 2007 and support the Government's decision to review the bill in four years time. I acknowledge also the presence in the gallery of Karen Willis from the New South Wales Rape Crisis Centre. I thank her for her advice and guidance. It stands as one of the few black marks against the status of women in Australia today that rape and sexual assault remain such unreported crimes and that there is a widespread view amongst women in this State that it is not worth reporting a crime that is so awful and destructive—a view that is often shared by husbands, fathers and male friends. In other words, there is a general view in the community that the reporting of sexual assault is not supported by the criminal justice system. The New South Wales Rape Crisis Centre has provided significant statistics regarding rape. The proportion of reported incidents that lead to convictions is currently around 1 per cent. About 90 per cent of sexual assault incidents reported to police are accepted for investigation. Of the 90 per cent of cases reported, only 65 per cent lead to a person being identified. In 20 per cent of cases investigated, legal proceedings are commenced by police. Where legal proceedings are commenced, 40 per cent of cases are withdrawn by the police prosecutor. Of the cases that proceed to court 80 per cent of defendants plead guilty, but usually to a lesser charge. The conviction rate at a trial is 35 per cent compared with over 70 per cent in all other criminal matters.
http://www.nswrapecrisis.com.au/LatestNews/Speeches/Pru_Goward-Crimes_Amendment_Bill_2007.pdf
Yep she speaks good.

 

[Pass the Ball]

His immorality does not make him a rapist and he does not deserve to be slurred as one. They are two completely different things and it is a disgusting libel to say they are equivalent. It is an all too easy train of thought to slip into, and one the media repeats over and over.

If you were to miss your kids weekend football game, one might say that that was immoral, you let your kid down, he was expecting you. It is a very different thing to that you are a child abuser guilty of heinous crimes that society despises as one of the worst a person could commit. That is what the rape libel is.

I don't think anyone has labelled him a rapist have they..??

 

[robertmorris]

So are you implying that this girl is a stripper?

One case = proof that all women are liars...yes

That is not the similarity and your are being disingenuous to suggest that it ever was.

Crystal Magnum demonstrates a scenario in which a mentally unstable liar and fantasist can manipulate an entire country into destroying innocent peoples lives. I raise the question of a possible similar situation with 'Clare', but I do not make the assertion.

The true similarity is not so much between Crystal and 'Clare', but how the media and the public (and over there prosecutors) could vilify and destroy perfectly innocent people. It is a text book case of how the media, and radical feminists, tried to destroy these young athletes lives, without caring for one moment about the facts, truth or veracity of Crystal's claims, which were all, and always lies.

We see the same media and feminist approach at work here, the rape libel that all footballers are habitual rapists, on Matthew Johns.

 

[blacktip-reefy]

I took your advice and sort the good word of Pru Goward.In Hansard no less
Ms PRU GOWARD (Goulburn) [9.48 p.m.]: I speak on the Crimes Amendment (Consent—Sexual Assault Offences) Bill 2007 and support the Government's decision to review the bill in four years time. I acknowledge also the presence in the gallery of Karen Willis from the New South Wales Rape Crisis Centre. I thank her for her advice and guidance. It stands as one of the few black marks against the status of women in Australia today that rape and sexual assault remain such unreported crimes and that there is a widespread view amongst women in this State that it is not worth reporting a crime that is so awful and destructive—a view that is often shared by husbands, fathers and male friends. In other words, there is a general view in the community that the reporting of sexual assault is not supported by the criminal justice system. The New South Wales Rape Crisis Centre has provided significant statistics regarding rape. The proportion of reported incidents that lead to convictions is currently around 1 per cent. About 90 per cent of sexual assault incidents reported to police are accepted for investigation. Of the 90 per cent of cases reported, only 65 per cent lead to a person being identified. In 20 per cent of cases investigated, legal proceedings are commenced by police. Where legal proceedings are commenced, 40 per cent of cases are withdrawn by the police prosecutor. Of the cases that proceed to court 80 per cent of defendants plead guilty, but usually to a lesser charge. The conviction rate at a trial is 35 per cent compared with over 70 per cent in all other criminal matters.
http://www.nswrapecrisis.com.au/LatestNews/Speeches/Pru_Goward-Crimes_Amendment_Bill_2007.pdf
Yep she speaks good.

is this the same Prue Goward that anticipated Rape charges were imminent against the Sharks players?
If I was her, I would be seeking legal council very soon.