Payne Haas' family issues

[The Predictor]

And who here called for that?

Get rid of her Because she is a grub and a stain on society, her colour is irrelevant, evil is ….

 

[johns_reds]

"Allegedly driving with a suspended license"

You're journalists, research your story.

That one's a YES/NO. Don't piss about.

Not really, At the time of the story the police hadn’t spoke to her and hadn’t confirmed she was the driver.
She might claim someone else was driving and ran away?
now she is charged for manslaughter it is all alleged until they get a guilty verdict or an acknowledgment she was driving.

 

[borisdog]

Get rid of her Because she is a grub and a stain on society, her colour is irrelevant, evil is ….

Yep, racism.

No one called for her to be deported based on her race.

Not one post.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

 

[borisdog]

Not really, At the time of the story the police hadn’t spoke to her and hadn’t confirmed she was the driver.
She might claim someone else was driving and ran away?
now she is charged for manslaughter it is all alleged until they get a guilty verdict or an acknowledgment she was driving.

Nothing to do with Joan or the coppers.

The journo said she was “Allegedly driving with a suspended license”

She either is suspended or she isn’t. Yes/No. Capisce?

Don’t piss about. Report facts.

For example, Joan, whose license has been suspended, was alleged to be driving the vehicle……..

 

[Maximus]

Nothing to do with Joan or the coppers.

The journo said she was “Allegedly driving with a suspended license”

She either is suspended or she isn’t. Yes/No. Capisce?

Don’t piss about. Report facts.

Have you ever read a story about someone being arrested/charged with a crime? It always says allegedly, and for good reason.

The journo is 100% correct in their language

Why do media refer to ‘alleged’ crimes even if the crime seems clear?​

One of the fundamental tenets of our legal system is that people are presumed innocent until proven otherwise. In every case involving an allegation that a person has committed a crime, it poses a legal risk to assert they are guilty of that crime before a court has determined their guilt.

A media outlet might run the risk of being sued for defamation – which is a lawsuit seeking damages for publications that harm a person’s reputation – or being in contempt of court by influencing witnesses or people who may end up being on the jury in the case (see more on contempt below).

In crime reports, we make a clear distinction between a fact and an allegation. When a person is found dead, for example, it may be tempting to conclude they were murdered, and it may seem overly cautious to refer to an “alleged” murder. In almost all cases, however, it is not possible to say what crime has been committed until after a trial. There may be a death or even a killing, but was it murder, manslaughter, or neither?

Alleged crimes, obscured identities: how crime reports work

How do publishers decide when to name people accused of crimes? And why do journalists use the word “allegedly”?

www.smh.com.au

 

[Bazal]

Nothing to do with Joan or the coppers.

The journo said she was “Allegedly driving with a suspended license”

She either is suspended or she isn’t. Yes/No. Capisce?

Don’t piss about. Report facts.

For example, Joan, whose license has been suspended, was alleged to be driving the vehicle……..

Except that's not how the law, law reporting, or legal language works.

She was allegedly driving the vehicle with a suspended license. Those are the facts at hand. Simple really.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

Who largely make decisions, either innocence/guilt, or sentencing, or parole/release eligibility etc, based on parameters created by lawmakers (who are not just politicians) and evidence, precedent and arguments presented by lawyers.

If you want to pick 'the system' as the issue instead of the criminal, you're doing it wrong.

I don't know what point you're trying to make.

The sentence was handed down by a judge.

I don't know if it was the parole board or the judge who decided to let her out after serving just one month of a nine month sentence, but it was their decision and had nothing to do with QLD gov.

Are you arguing that the judge had no choice but to sentence her to nine months with a stipulation she must be released after serving just one month behind bars?

If she served the full nine months then three people would still be alive.

The cops refused to charge her a few years ago after she stalked a woman at a park, stole her phone then vandalised it by stomping on it.

She physically attacked a delivery driver and a woman at a Valleys Diehards juniors game.

This woman is a repeat offender and should never have been given leniency by the courts.

 

[Bazal]

I don't know what point you're trying to make.

The sentence was handed down by a judge.

I don't know if it was the parole board or the judge who decided to let her out after serving just one month of a nine month sentence, but it was their decision and had nothing to do with QLD gov.

Are you arguing that the judge had no choice but to sentence her to nine months with a stipulation she must be released after serving just one month behind bars?

If she served the full nine months then three people would still be alive.

The cops refused to charge her a few years ago after she stalked a woman at a park, stole her phone then vandalised it by stomping on it.

She physically attacked a delivery driver and a woman at a Valleys Diehards juniors game.

This woman is a repeat offender and should never have been given leniency by the courts.

I'm not arguing that at all.

I'm saying that any time anyone blames 'the system' for these things, they inevitably have absolutely no idea how 'the system' actually works - whether that be blaming the judge who sentenced a defendant at the sentencing hearing, the parole hearing who let someone out, the bail hearing who set bail, whatever.

There is a whole series of events that goes into ANY legal decision, whatever law or Act it's made under, and there are a whole mess of people involved in the events leading up to that decision. Parole isn't chucked around like confetti, for eg, there is a hearing before whatever the relevant body is in each state or territory where the case must be made for release.

Are you suggesting that we do away with parole or 'good behaviour' entirely because a handful of offenders reoffend before their initial sentence is complete?

Who's to say they don't do the same or worse once it is anyway? Who's to blame then? Some people are just awful.

 

[The Predictor]

Yep, racism.

No one called for her to be deported based on her race.

Not one post.

Well I wasn’t one of them

 

[The Predictor]

I'm not arguing that at all.

I'm saying that any time anyone blames 'the system' for these things, they inevitably have absolutely no idea how 'the system' actually works - whether that be blaming the judge who sentenced a defendant at the sentencing hearing, the parole hearing who let someone out, the bail hearing who set bail, whatever.

There is a whole series of events that goes into ANY legal decision, whatever law or Act it's made under, and there are a whole mess of people involved in the events leading up to that decision. Parole isn't chucked around like confetti, for eg, there is a hearing before whatever the relevant body is in each state or territory where the case must be made for release.

Are you suggesting that we do away with parole or 'good behaviour' entirely because a handful of offenders reoffend before their initial sentence is complete?

Who's to say they don't do the same or worse once it is anyway? Who's to blame then? Some people are just awful.

Why don’t u post in the Parra forum?

 

[The Predictor]

Every boy loves his mum mate. Especially when they're in distress.

I would argue that , in this case and strongly disagree, there are some out and out shit parents out there!!

 

[blue bags]

Reports of 1,000s of residences lost electricity supply cause of electricity Poles damaged from accident this is an outrage, we need to keep burning coal

 

[Bazal]

Why don’t u post in the Parra forum?

Without taking the thread too far off topic or naming names...because it's become an echo chamber for a large group of unfailingly negative 'fans' who mostly take themselves way too seriously, shit on everything, and will literally stalk people with differing views around and off this site and into personal spaces...

 

[The Predictor]

Without taking the thread too far off topic or naming names...because it's become an echo chamber for a large group of unfailingly negative 'fans' who mostly take themselves way too seriously, shit on everything, and will literally stalk people with differing views around and off this site and into personal spaces...

Fair enough, can get personal

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

I'm not arguing that at all.

I'm saying that any time anyone blames 'the system' for these things, they inevitably have absolutely no idea how 'the system' actually works - whether that be blaming the judge who sentenced a defendant at the sentencing hearing, the parole hearing who let someone out, the bail hearing who set bail, whatever.

There is a whole series of events that goes into ANY legal decision, whatever law or Act it's made under, and there are a whole mess of people involved in the events leading up to that decision. Parole isn't chucked around like confetti, for eg, there is a hearing before whatever the relevant body is in each state or territory where the case must be made for release.

Are you suggesting that we do away with parole or 'good behaviour' entirely because a handful of offenders reoffend before their initial sentence is complete?

Who's to say they don't do the same or worse once it is anyway? Who's to blame then? Some people are just awful.

Joan Taufua has a long history of assaulting people. The fact she was let out of prison after serving just one month is a travesty of justice. She's assaulted delivery drivers, volunteers at junior football games, a woman at a park and security guards at a casino over the last four years. People have the right to expect recidivist offenders like Taufua to be kept off the street. Just last week a mother was stabbed to death by two violent thugs who have a history of committing violent crimes. I think they were on bail for similar assaults to the one they carried out on their murder victim. If the judges and parole board officers who presided over these cases cannot see that such people are a danger to society then they shouldn't work in the judicial system.

 

[johns_reds]

I want to know how she could afford a 120k+ car
Did Haas give it her or did she borrow it off him?

 

[SpaceMonkey]

And who here called for that?

If she was white and her name was Sharon Smith do you really think the subject of deportation would have even been raised?

 

[SpaceMonkey]

Joan Taufua has a long history of assaulting people. The fact she was let out of prison after serving just one month is a travesty of justice. She's assaulted delivery drivers, volunteers at junior football games, a woman at a park and security guards at a casino over the last four years. People have the right to expect recidivist offenders like Taufua to be kept off the street. Just last week a mother was stabbed to death by two violent thugs who have a history of committing violent crimes. I think they were on bail for similar assaults to the one they carried out on their murder victim. If the judges and parole board officers who presided over these cases cannot see that such people are a danger to society then they shouldn't work in the judicial system.

Sack Payne Haas

 

[SpaceMonkey]

I want to know how she could afford a 120k+ car
Did Haas give it her or did she borrow it off him?

Or maybe it had nothing to do with him?