Shaun Kenny-Dowall not guilty of assaulting former partner Jess Peris

[Last Week]

Not really...but I'm not a lawyer.

Clearly. Lawyers have some level of education.

 

[Tommy Smith]

The Back Page have no problem with Majak Daw playing AFL though

The double standards are nothing short of remarkable.

The NRL is New Ltds punching bag. And the AFL are the good guys who can do no wrong.

What a joke.

 

[bedlam breakout]

he must be on his way to sl- where most women in Castleford and leigh would knock f**k out of any nrl player for forgetting to pick them some androtops n booze up from the shop on their way home

 

[Albert Rosenfeld]

SKD is the top try scorer for Sydney Roosters.

Brisbane and North Queensland are the two NRL clubs most likely to challenge the Sydney Roosters in the Grand Final on October 4th.

The Peris family has deep roots in Queensland.

What else do you need to know?

 

[darcy]

This beerhunter must be 16, cause he keeps mentioning 40 like it's some far off age.

Middle aged white men have it so hard!

They do.
Make the age 45 instead of 40 if you like.
The average marriage lasts 12 years, then the misery starts.
Divorce, property settlements, custody battles, fights over visitation etc.
Many of these men have been thru the "love and marriage/de facto relationship" wringer...and been squashed.
They ring the radio every Christmas in tears because their ex-partners won't let them see their kids at Christmas [psychological torture].
Some are distraught as their ex-partners have had the men's children's names changed to the name of their new husband/partner.
"It's what your children wanted".


For the record;

darcy was age 40 ... 28 years ago.
He has one desktop computer, one screen name here, and an opinion.
That should be all right, eh?

Oh, and he fought the good fight for "women's rights", "equality for women", "the right for married women to work"[which wasn't available to them when he started in the workforce in 1964.
He also fought the good fight for "sexual harassment" laws to protect women [refer the movie North Country starring Woody and the lovely Charlize].
So he feels entitled to comment.
Also, he doesn't like seeing these rights and liberties being abused.

darcy-ilk also had the death penalty abolished, and the flogging with canes of students in schools banned.

darcy-ilk also supported the "Freedom Ride" Sydney Uni students as they toured NSW in their bus and were abused/slapped around in towns...as they fought for equality for Aboriginal people.
We voted "yes" in the 1967 referendum ...the "yes" vote was carried 90% to make Aboriginal people equal and have rights and liberties.
When Arthur Beetson played at the SCG in 1966, Aboriginal people were still officially classed by the govt as "Flora and Fauna." Not after 1967!



One of the Freedom Riders, who was assaulted in a 'racist town', later became the Chief Justice of NSW.

As their bus left one town it was followed and run off the road. The cars left the scene.
Then more cars arrived. These cars surrounded the bus, headlights on.
"Girls to the back, girls to the back" was the cry, as the males looked for bottles or anything to use as weapons.
There was chivalry in those days. Seems these days chivalry will only see a man disadvantaged.
No need, it wasn't 'Mississippi'. The cars with their headlights shining were driven by Aboriginal people who'd come to protect them.

Google "Freedom Ride NSW".

 

[Tooooks]

The system is a farce. If a woman commits an act of violence against a man and then goes to police to make a complaint, the police WILL NOT lay charges against the woman. It's not even about the courts, the courts can only take action based on the charges in front of them. It's the police who are so afraid to look like they are going against the claims of an alleged female victim.

Sorry, but that is absolute bullshit. Women do get charged - more frequently than you'd think - with domestic violence offences. IF the man makes a complaint to police (and unfortunately, men are often reluctant to) and IF there is enough evidence, you bet your arse she'll be charged.

As far as false allegations go, it's almost impossible to prove.

 

[Shorty]

This idea that women can get police to lay multiple charges at the click of their fingers with zero evidence is farcical. This idea that white australians are the oppressed group is even more stupid. Nobody with any sense thinks those things.

Only people who are intentionally ignorant of the facts think men have it harder than women and whites have it harder than non whites.

So many legally illiterate people on this forum, willing to go on the defensive for some person they don't know about facts they don't understand...

Yes, an AVO does require evidence: http://www.legalaid.nsw.gov.au/publ...esources/is-someone-making-an-avo-against-you

If you want to get technical, testimony/allegations made by a complainant is evidence. While a sole witness' testimony is rarely enough to convict on a criminal trial, the purpose of an AVO is to reduce the standard of evidence as by their nature, AVO's tend to deal with "he said/she said" crimes which are very difficult to ascertain guilt in a criminal trial.

This is comparative to some forms of injunctions which can be granted at short notice and without the case of the other party being heard, but can be reversed through legal processes. It seems like a fair compromise to me, to impose some minor restrictions upon liberty without convicting while allowing an appellate process.

Also, I guess it's way off topic, but it's probably not that difficult being 40 + and male as you belong to a demographic that statistically have better experience and better qualifications...

Thank you!
I find the comments utterly disturbing, a lot of domestic violence goes unreported and I'd say probably because of attitudes like this.

Got to admit I'm pretty uncomfortable with some of the comments made about Peris (regardless her history). It seems all too often that the victim gets poor treatment at the hands of public opinion. No wonder so many cases go unreported. If all that's said about her is true then the law should act accordingly. Equally, SKD should be treated the same. Unlike previous cases, SKD has pleaded innocent and the NRL should stay out of it. It could be months before a decision is reached in court so missing a chunk of the season and possibly a grand final if your innocent is grossly unfair. Thought Paul Kent pretty much nailed it on NRL 360 tonight.

He's going to plead innocent regardless, he's a high profile football player with a strongly competing team.
His lawyers would be advising this anyway.

Either result, this is going to get messy.

 

[Canard]

This thread.

I'm out.

 

[firechild]

The people who decide this know their stuff, and don't waste their time and public money charging people with matters that don't have a reasonable likelihood of resulting in a conviction.

:lol:

I've seen a prosecutor use the Castle line "It's the spirit of..." because she had SFA evidence in the case. Despite letters being written to the prosecution, they refused to drop the charges then conceded to the magistrate that not only did they have no evidence but it was clear that no crime was committed.

 

[firechild]

Sorry, but that is absolute bullshit. Women do get charged - more frequently than you'd think - with domestic violence offences. IF the man makes a complaint to police (and unfortunately, men are often reluctant to) and IF there is enough evidence, you bet your arse she'll be charged.

As far as false allegations go, it's almost impossible to prove.

I think you missed my point. If a man makes the first complaint, yes, women do get charged (though as you say, most men are reluctant to do so). However, if the woman makes the first complaint and then it becomes clear that the woman was the instigator or even the only one legally at fault, she will not be charged. Once a woman speaks as a "victim" police tread very carefully.

 

[darcy]

That is why there are courts. The complainant can be cross-examined. Someone in this thread pointed out that very few domestic violence accusations turn out to be completely false but there are no doubt two sides to every story.

Nonetheless, a victim's signed statement to police would often be sufficient for charges to be laid. It would also depend what the accused person said when interviewed. The people who decide this know their stuff, and don't waste their time and public money charging people with matters that don't have a reasonable likelihood of resulting in a conviction.

You will recall that you said the police should not be able to charge people on the statement of a victim, but this is what happens all the time. If victim's statements are to be ignored as you suggest, it is pretty much open slather to beat the snot out of your wife every night with impunity.

Well a whole lot of people have lost all faith in "the cops", "victims", "juries" and "the courts".
They used to buy tickets to the "Policemen's ball", but now do not.
They used to believe the legal system was fair and just, but now they do not.

Is there a new 'racket' going on that "the cops", "the courts", and "juries" aren't aware of/haven't woken up to yet? ...........where people [falsely]claiming to be victims of child abuse are accusing people of having molested them as children...for revenge and/or to get a conviction then claim compensation?

Here is a perfect, crystal clear example why a whole lot of people no longer believe in our justice system. This time it's an innocent woman who was convicted and tossed in prison;

http://www.news.com.au/entertainmen...ys-wants-inquiry/story-e6frfmyi-1227388771229

Former teacher wrongly jailed for having sex with two eight year old boys wants inquiry

A RETIRED teacher wrongly jailed for having sex with two eight-year-old boys wants an investigation after spending more than two years in jail.
Josephine Greensill was jailed in 2010 over incidents that allegedly took place 30 years earlier — that she had sex, including full sexual intercourse, with two eight-year-old boys when she was their year three teacher at Bayswater Primary School, 28km east of Melbourne CBD.

After two-and-a-half years in prison she was finally acquitted, with the judgement concluding there was a ‘real likelihood’ that her accusers had collaborated, and a ‘real possibility’ that the evidence against her had been concocted.
ABC TV’s Australian Story told that Greensill still has not had an apology for being wrongfully convicted and jailed and is but a shell of the woman she once was.

Acquitted after two-and-a-half years in prison ... former teacher Josephine Greensill was jailed in 2010 after two former students accused her of sexual abuse. Picture: ABC Source: Supplied

Greensill was found guilty by a jury of nine of 20 sexual abuse charges after two men made police statements in 2007 accusing their former teacher of assaulting them in a tent in her backyard.
She was sentenced at the Victorian County Court to five years with a minimum of two years and eight months, with the judge saying her premeditated crime had ‘poisoned and eroded’ much of the victims’ lives.

Prominent criminal lawyer Rob Stary took on Greensill’s case after contact from her sisters.
“The evidence in this case just didn’t stack up. The complainants said that they stayed overnight at Ms Greensill’s house, they were subjected to trauma.
And yet as eight-year olds they said that they’d never discussed it between themselves - and that just didn’t ring true. There was no medical evidence, no forensic evidence and no eyewitnesses,” Stary said.

“There were inconsistent accounts provided by the accusers. It looked like there were possibly two motives. ........."
etc

#####

There have been, probably are, and probably will be similar cases in future.

If it can happen to her, it can happen to anyone...all it takes is for someone to accuse.
Everyone is at risk.

Time for change!!!

 

[Tooooks]

I think you missed my point. If a man makes the first complaint, yes, women do get charged (though as you say, most men are reluctant to do so). However, if the woman makes the first complaint and then it becomes clear that the woman was the instigator or even the only one legally at fault, she will not be charged. Once a woman speaks as a "victim" police tread very carefully.

Apologies mate, I did miss your point somewhat!

In most cases of DV though, it's a he said/she said situation. So it's very rarely the case where one version of events is 'clear'.

 

[darcy]

Here's another one;

Jennings claims he's a victim of 'black profiling'.

http://www.pressreader.com/australia/the-courier-mail/20150721/282561606862781/TextView

 

[Babyface O'reilly]

Here's another one;

Jennings claims he's a victim of 'black profiling'.

http://www.pressreader.com/australia/the-courier-mail/20150721/282561606862781/TextView

Not hard to believe when you see this sh1t

 

[Tooooks]

Here's another one;

Jennings claims he's a victim of 'black profiling'.

http://www.pressreader.com/australia/the-courier-mail/20150721/282561606862781/TextView

Yeah if only they were white and aggressively kicking a boomgate, cops wouldn't have even spoken to them :sarcasm:.

 

[Bobby DIGital]

My opinion is that SKD is innocent.

 

[Tooooks]

My opinion is that SKD is innocent.

Seen the full brief of evidence, I assume?

 

[Shorty]

Seen the full brief of evidence, I assume?

As you can see, most in this thread have also and apparently Peris is 'faking it'.

 

[Lambretta]

Yeah if only they were white and aggressively kicking a boomgate, cops wouldn't have even spoken to them :sarcasm:.

From what the media reported, it wasn't Michael Jennings that kicked the boomgate. The arrest was because of his attitude toward the Police once they came over to speak with them.

It will be interesting to hear what he said. "piss of you dickhead" ?

Talking with the Police 101 - sorry sir, yes sir, three bags full sir, going home quietly right now sir. Anything else you need us to do sir?

Anything else and you're being a smart arse and liable for arrest if they're seriously bored / need to up their arrest numbers.

I am assuming that Michael was suffering from a serious case of the stupid. ie having previously drunk too much alcohol.

 

[Tooooks]

From what the media reported, it wasn't Michael Jennings that kicked the boomgate. The arrest was because of his attitude toward the Police once they came over to speak with them.

It will be interesting to hear what he said. "piss of you dickhead" ?

Talking with the Police 101 - sorry sir, yes sir, three bags full sir, going home quietly right now sir. Anything else you need us to do sir?

Anything else and you're being a smart arse and liable for arrest if they're seriously bored / need to up their arrest numbers.

I am assuming that Michael was suffering from a serious case of the stupid. ie having previously drunk too much alcohol.

You don't need to call them sir. A bit of respect and manners will go a long way though.

Police don't need to up their arrest numbers because they don't have arrest quotas. My point was, black or white, if you behave like an idiot or are in the company of people who are behaving like idiots, then police are quite possibly going to come and have a chat.