Dom Post on Labour
March 29th, 2011 at 1:00 pm by David FarrarThe Dom Post editorial today:
Mr Goff’s leadership should be over. The party he leads is bereft of energy and bereft of ideas. Instead of looking like a government in waiting it looks like a dysfunctional rabble. What confidence can the public have in its ability to manage the affairs of the country when it cannot manage its own?
Looking at how Goff has managed the last couple of weeks, you do have to wonder how he would have handled a global recession, finance company collapses, two earthquakes and Pike River.
However, speculation about a move to oust Mr Goff is just that – speculation. Labour has no obvious alternative. Shane Jones is still too closely linked to pornography in the public mind, David Cunliffe has had zero impact as finance spokesman, David Parker is unknown to the public, Mr Shearer is too inexperienced politically and so is another well-regarded newbie, Grant Robertson, about whom the party may have to consider another question at some point. Is New Zealand ready for its first gay prime minister?
For my money, I think Grant will become New Zealand’s first (openly) gay Prime Minister, and I don’t think his sexuality will be of relevance to most New Zealanders.
Related posts:
- iPredict on Labour Leader and PM
- Pressure on Shearer
- And the winner is David ……. Shearer
- Vance on Labour
March 29th, 2011 at 1:07 pm
Are you suggesting we’ve already had one?
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 1:08 pm
I just cant wait for hate speech laws the lowering of consent etc
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 1:15 pm
Seconded, Robertson is a stand-up guy but I don’t believe now is his time.
Reckon a few things would need to happen first:
(1) The union bloc needs to oust the remnants of the sisterhood, no-one else but them seems likely to have the power to do this.
(2) Labour with its new union bloc face on needs to be destroyed in the polls, this won’t happen any earlier than 2017 by the looks.
(3) Then it’s time for Robertson to step up for 2020, without looking like a relic of the sisterhood.
This leftie’s 2c
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 1:21 pm
We voters have elected and re-elected people of varying sexual preferences and I dont think people care. Robertson might be a nice guy and fun to have a drink with and talk policy with but I cant see him having much appeal outside of Wellington.
Vote:Having said that governments get voted out not in and given the current motley crew in the Labour party he might get to be leader by default, recent events suggest this to be the case where they only hold on to a hopeless leader because there are no alternatives.
March 29th, 2011 at 1:23 pm
2014 & 2017, not 2017 & 2020. FML
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 1:24 pm
Robertson seems like an ok bloke. ive heard a few soundbites of him lately though and he sounded like a typical labour idiot.
i dont think being gay is a barrier to being PM. the homophobes dont vote labour anyway.
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 1:29 pm
“For my money, I think Grant will become New Zealand’s first (openly) gay Prime Minister, and I don’t think his sexuality will be of relevance to most New Zealanders.”
For Robertson to become our first (openly) gay PM it would have to be a situation where he rolled the incumbent PM.
While I happen to agree that ones sexuality should not matter there is no chance at all that the people of NZ would vote for an openly gay man.
A lesbian yes…but not a gay man.
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 1:30 pm
“When you are down to your last option it had better be a good one ” ( no idea where I read that ). Fortunately for Labour Grant Robertson is just that.
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 1:31 pm
Minto
Hate speech laws will not work in NZ, for a law like that to be implemented you would have to apply it right across all races.
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 1:38 pm
I just don’t get why you think Robertson is so fantastic. In my opinion he has made absolutely no impact with his spokesmanship rolls at all.
Find me an area where he has scored a point against this govt. because for the life of me I can’t recall one.
[DPF: I don't think he has been particularly effective in his portfolio areas in attacking the Govt. But I do rate him, because he is very careful in his comments to not say much which will bite him in future - unlike most Labour MPs. Also I think he is a good networker in his areas]
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 1:39 pm
The sexuality question is, I think, overblown. There are some who will object greatly, but they will probably be matched equally by those who are strongly in favour. The great majority probably won’t care.
The more interesting question is whether New Zealand is ready for a Wellington-based professional politician as it prime minister. You have to go back to the 16 day term of Francis Bell in 1925 for the last time a Wellingtonian was PM, and he was a member of the Legislative Council, not the Legislative Assembly.
And so steeped is Robertson in the narrow world of politics, that his honours thesis studied the restructuring of the New Zealand University Students’ Association, of which he would become president in 1996, in the 1980s. Apart from a few years working for MFAT, during which he was mainly posted overseas, he has either been a national or student politician of worked for national or student politicians.
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 1:42 pm
Critic – Te Arohi https://www.facebook.com/critictearohi
BREAKING NEWS: After a meeting held in the Otago University’s Staff Club, the Labour MP front benchers have decided that Goff will remain the leader of the Labour party. Mallard said the MPs have given him “full and utter support” to continue as the leader, and they have confidence that he acted in good faith in his handling of the allegations against former MP Darren Hughes.
Critic – Te Arohi In the meeting, the Labour MPs also discussed the sale of state assets, and the earthquake recovery and the impact it will have on the forthcoming budget. Mallard noted his concern that that the earthquake would be used as a pretext to cut working for families and kiwisaver, things Key had promised to continue.
Cut ‘n pasted with full acknowledgements to Critic, the Otago Student’s newspaper, and with no statement of validity, except that the buggers are on campus.
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 1:48 pm
Goff’s leadership was never in doubt, but it will have been questioned. Any senior Labour MP would become leader in the hope of being PM. Taking the leadership at this time would be an act of political suicide. Any potential new leader is best served by letting Goff’s tenure come to a post election loss conclusion.
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 1:48 pm
I cannot see any of the current Labour MPs as PM material. Not saying they don’t have one, but if they do that person is not standing out at the moment.
I really want an opposition that challenges the current government – in a good way – not by lying – but by holding them to account for the lack of growth in NZ and about how we can move forward as a country to greater wealth and success.
What really annoys me is when they make stuff up, then criticise the government for what they invented. (Good example in Phil Goff’s interview with Larry Williams yesterday.) There’s enough they can have a go at National for without inventing stuff.
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 1:48 pm
georgebolwing –
Fair points.
Vote:But then, although I’ve never been in my clients’ shoes, I know how to listen to them and give them what they need.
March 29th, 2011 at 1:53 pm
Gutless wonders all of them.
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 1:56 pm
Dime, so you think someone is homophobic to be concerned about the disproportionate political power homosexuals have? Homosexuals make up about 3% of the population. What percentage of Labour MPs do you think are homosexual or bisexual?
Michael Coote is openly homosexual and he stood for ACT. I would like to see him come back to ACT and get a good list position. Coote is a homosexual but is not a gay activist as are most if not all homosexual Labour MPs.
When the homosexual heavy Labour Party were in power for 9 years they made a number of key appointment based the person’s sexual preferences. They certainly tried to ban things like a couple of videos that told the truth about homosexuals. Individuals like me had to put up money to fight the state to stop this form of censorship.
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 1:58 pm
I am suspicious as to whether people who bang on about how “ok” they are with a future male Prime Minister humping other dudes would actually carry through with their PC charade in the privacy of a polling booth.
The reality is that whilst not being extreme in our views, many New Zealanders are privately a weeny bit racist and not that big on gays.
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 1:59 pm
Robertson is a nonentity in the House. I can’t see him as a leader.
Vote:And we need leaders with an investment in the future. That means to me kids.
Helen Clark had no kids and cared only for her own career and ambitions – not us.
March 29th, 2011 at 2:12 pm
Has anyone asked Grant Robertson or Charles Chauvel what they think of Trevor Mallard and Clayton Cosgrove in the light of the SST’s piece on Kevin Hague at the weekend?
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 2:42 pm
Banned?
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 2:46 pm
oh – the link was just too long….
DPF:
Are you implying that there was a closeted PM? Am i right?
http://www.nzhistory.net.nz/media/photo/sir-keith-holyoake-masonic
[DPF: I'm thinking George Waterhouse and William Hall-Jones]
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 2:59 pm
“Has anyone asked Grant Robertson or Charles Chauvel what they think of Trevor Mallard and Clayton Cosgrove in the light of the SST’s piece on Kevin Hague at the weekend?”
The Left never have a problem with their hypocrisy. The Left MPs do not see a problem making fun of someone’s accent (Wong) or mental heath problems (Nick Smith). If is only a problem when it is done to them.
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 3:01 pm
The sexuality question may be an issue at the margins for some voters and in a finely balanced election it could be critical. But it suits the vanity of the Labour Party to have the first openly gay PM just as they were vain about Helen Clark as the first elected woman PM and on and on it goes.
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 4:25 pm
Grant Robertson won Wellington Central by just 1904 votes. He is therefore likely to be rejected by Wellington Central in all areas bar Aro Valley in November but will in all likelihood scrape in on the list. National announce their candidate to beat him on April 20th.
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 5:44 pm
Genuinely asking DPF: isnt there some suggestion Saint Mickey Savage was gay? Or was he just literally a “confirmed batchelor” who boarded rather than having a home of his own?
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 6:09 pm
@ David Garrett 5:44 pm
And WTF does that have to do with anything, David Garrett? I gave you the benefit of the doubt, because you were obviously pissed at the time, when you made those comments on Eye to Eye apparently equating homosexuality with paedophilia.
This comment suggests you actually are a homophobe. As I am sure you are aware, homophobic persecution in the 1930s meant the life of anyone openly gay would be made shit.
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 6:37 pm
It has “to do with” silly little leftie person, this particular thread, which is “Is NZ ready for its first openly gay PM?” which has morphed into “Have we already had one?”
But this is probably not the best of days to be a deluded leftie…it’s all strengthened Phil’s leadership I know, but…
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 6:42 pm
Don’t worry David, toad’s homophobic radar must be broken. He accused me of being one the other day, as well.
He’s so hysterical about it, I think personally, he might be undergoing some “personal confusion” as he grows up. (What’s that fluff down there? Why am I feeling like that toward those guys over there?…)
Is that it toad? Nothing to be ashamed of mate. You can tell us.
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 6:47 pm
ha ha…keep posting comments David, the fact that you get right under Toad’s skin makes it all the more enjoyable.
Thank fuck we will never have the Greens in a position of power, can you imagine the number of freedoms they would legislate away?
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 6:50 pm
Meanwhile….over at the sewer we have this little beauty.
Draco T Bastard 4
29 March 2011 at 4:51 pm
My reading on what happened to DH goes like this:
1.) Group goes out socialising
2.) Young guy makes social faux pas
3.) Other young guy makes mountain out of molehill
4.) MSM highlights non-existent mountain
The whole thing was a media beat up and nothing more.
According to the pinkos at the Standard a charge of sexual assault is making a “mountains out of a molehill”
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 7:01 pm
big bruv: You can’t be serious…some idiot has posted THAT at the sub-standard?
Mind you, I have just seen Phil saying on TV that it was all a set up by their oppenents…but it has backfired and made then stronger….As DPF says: somewhere on a galaxy far from here…
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 7:05 pm
So Michael Joseph Savage was not only a gutless contentious objector, he was also a homosexual?
Typical of a pinko, refuse to do the fighting yourself but send off other generations when there is no chance that you will have to face the bullets.
What a grubby little man he was.
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 7:10 pm
David Garrett
Deadly serious, if you have the stomach for it go and have a read, not one of them has mentioned the poor kid who was the recipient of Hughes unwanted attentions.
They are nothing but hypocrites, I don’t remember them cutting Richard Worth or Pansy Wong the same amount of slack.
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 7:14 pm
I have just seen Phil saying on TV that it was all a set up by their oppenents…but it has backfired and made then stronger
They just can’t stop themselves can they (from lying).
I wonder how Phil imagines someone got to Liarbore’s Chief Whip and convinced him to end his career + expose himself to a potential criminal charge.
I also wonder what Phil would say if National furiously rose to confront this blatant provocation and tore asunder the allegation, as would be so very easy to do.
He really doesn’t think at all, does he. As someone said, imagine him, as the PM. What sort of judgement, does this man have.
He’s not fit even to be the Parliamentary doorman and it shows just how utterly weak and threadbare Liarbore is, that such a poor quality thinker has lasted for so long, in that caucus. Let alone risen in it.
What a dick.
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 7:23 pm
@ Big Bruv/David Garrett – I’ve suggested to Draco T Bastard that he might like to wait until we know what the Police have to say. They are very quick to defend their bloke.
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 7:30 pm
David, I think you are more than 99% correct about Savage. Interesting too that it was well described that all the ladies used to be overcome in his presence. The description was that he would enter a room full of ladies and all he had to do was “well now’ or some such silly little saying and they would all swoon.
Used to stay in the Mother in Laws home as her father was a Labour MP in the first Govt. Wasn’t till she was getting on a bit that she declared that he really wasn’t a very nice man and that from a real full on Labour Lady.
He died of course from an ailment, possibly cancer.
He was not a nice man.
Interesting to note that many homosexual men (often considered good looking), have good relationships with women. No threat to them Never trying to get into their pants or any such behavoir. No doubt Hughes is like this as is Findlayson and probably a few more in both parties, including some undercover agents.
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 7:30 pm
Big Bruv: hold on tiger! I dont need Toad and his/her little mates firebombing my house for casting aspersions on Saint Michael…I dont KNOW what Savage’s orientation was…but I believe I have seen speculation, and I think it is also established that he never married, and while PM lived as a boarder in some couple’s house…as the hysterical toadie has noted, things were very different in the ’30′s (and much later) and often one needed to “join the dots” from such clues…
As an obit for Elizabeth Taylor noted recently, that Paul Newman’s character in “Cat on a hot tin roof” was gay could “only be hinted at” at the time, and even watching that movie today you can miss the clues (Did Rick have sex with Ilsa Lund in ‘Casablanca’ when she was trying to get the letters of transit? I think movie goers in the 40′s would have assumed so)
And I am pretty sure the pacifist who refused to fight in WW I and then introduced conscription in WW II was Savage’s successor, Peter Fraser and not Saint Michael…
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 7:37 pm
IV2
The fact that they are quick to defend their bloke is exactly the issue, well all know it is the height of hypocrisy.
Had any Nat or ACT mp been facing similar accusations then we both know they would be demanding the resignation of the entire government.
However, that is not what gets me, what really gets me is the total disregard for the welfare of the poor young boy who felt scared enough to run naked through Hataitai in the early hours of the morning.
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 7:41 pm
And I think its worth repeating that regardless of sexual orientation (or anything else for that matter) neither Savage nor Fraser would have recognised the travesty that is the “Labour” party today…Fraser apparently had a huge aversion to “shirkers and slackers”…which is what he would probably call the able bodied young males hanging about the cafes in my local rural town during the day when there is still the last of the hay to bring in..
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 7:41 pm
David
‘Saint Michael)’ was PM from 6 December 1935 – 27 March 1940.
Therefore, he was the one who sent men off to die when he refused to do the same thing himself when called.
Typical gutless socialist behaviour.
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 7:42 pm
@David Garrett 6:37 pm
…
No, in case you didn’t get it, it is all weakened by Phil’s lack of leadership. The only reason I would endorse him is that his continued hopeless leadership will result in more votes for the Greens at the next election.
Labour under Goff, the Nats, ACT, and even you with your hard-line Laura Norder line, are all closer together politically in support of neo-liberal economic theory and getting tough on criminals – rather than getting tough on the causes of crime – than any of you are to the Greens.
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 7:49 pm
Big Bruv: Savage certainly declared war on Germany (the day before the Brits did I think, because of the dateline!) but I am pretty certain it was Fraser who was the former pacifist who introduced conscription…some may think that somewhat hypocritical….
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 7:49 pm
Indeed. WWII conscription commenced from June 1940.
http://www.army.mil.nz/culture-and-history/nz-army-history/historical-chronology/1939.htm
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 7:54 pm
David…I stand corrected.
However, I am sure you will concede that it was an insult to all those fighting men to have a gutless little shit like Savage engage them in a war when he refused to do so himself.
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 7:59 pm
” rather than getting tough on the causes of crime – than any of you are to the Greens.”
Sigh!!..same old left wing bullshit from Toad.
Let me guess Toad….according to the Greens we can cure the causes of crime by…
1 Raising tax’s on all rich pricks (earning more than 40k a year)
Vote:2 Make Maori compulsory
3 Compulsory restorative justice programmes
4 More care for the criminals
5 Give Maori sovereignty over the entire country.
March 29th, 2011 at 8:02 pm
toad said “The only reason I would endorse him is that his continued hopeless leadership will result in more votes for the Greens at the next election”
How noble of the Greens to happily accept their place on the opposition benches. Long may they remain there.
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 8:04 pm
Bruv: at the risk of ruining my hard arse credentials…I am living proof that ones attitudes can change dramatically over 20 or 30 years…and even the most revisionist of historians would agree that WW II was a very different thing with very different stakes from WW I… In short one was a giant clusterfuck which acheived nothing; the other was about a meglamaniac’s desire to rule the world, including us…I learned at a school reunion recently that a U Boat entered GISBORNE harbour in WW II FFS!
But I am in danger of what they call “threadjacking” I think…
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 8:14 pm
David
I agree with you re the two WW’s, the example I used was more to highlight the total hypocrisy of the left.
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 8:17 pm
The war (i.e. WWII) on Germany was totally justified. Unfortunately, the rationale for it here at the time was Anglocentric, rather than human rights oriented.
The only other wars that is think have the same level of justification in human rights terms is the current one against the Gaddafi regime in Libya and the one against the Milosovic regime in the former Yugoslavia.
But the “West” missed many other opportunities to engage in defending human rights. Most notably, the total abrogation of any responsibility to stop the genocide in Rwanda, the support for pro-Western autocrats like Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah in the Middle-East, and the unwillingness to challenge Israel’s blockade of Gaza.
Hypocrisy rules!
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 8:17 pm
Frazer succeded Savage following his death from stomach cancer in March 1940, Conscription was enacted by the Frazer Government in June I think.
Vote:Best ask Kris Fafoi as he was probably there at the time.
March 29th, 2011 at 8:22 pm
@ David Garrett 8:04 pm
Not just you. Me too! We do get carried away sometimes. Best we cease and desist. Sorry, DPF.
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 8:25 pm
“Unfortunately, the rationale for it here at the time was Anglocentric, rather than human rights oriented.”
FFS Toad!
Why not go the whole hog and just apologise for being born white?
Who the fuck are you to apply todays value’s to a past generation?, who the fuck are you to tell people they were wrong?
The men who went to WW2 did so for the right reasons, they do not need a Pol Pot loving Green to tell them they were mistaken.
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 8:27 pm
To be fair bruv, toad was possibly alluding to Savage’s “Where she goes, we go; where she stands, we stand” speech?
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 8:33 pm
@ Toad (7.42pm) – are you guys looking forward to being the main opposition party in Parliament post-November? Much as it pains me to even suggest it, it could happen, unless McCarten/Bradford/Bradbury/Harawira cannibalise the left vote.
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 8:37 pm
Viking2>I think you are more than 99% correct about Savage.
My impression is that it was reasonably common for Labour supporters to have framed photos of Savage on their wall at home. In fact there was a news item on TV recently where I noticed the Labour drone still had a Savage picture hanging on their wall. Then we have Greg Presland, Labour Party Auckland councilor and Standard contributor styling himself as Micky Savage here on Kiwiblog.
It’s all a bit North Korea for me with too much personality cult. If someone showed up here with the nickname “George Forbes” (or even worse, a cutesy “Georgie Forbes”) then we’d assume they were a hopeless case. But it seems to be acceptable on the left.
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 8:53 pm
Is it possible that Tinkerbell has something to do with the police taking so long to do what they obviously should – that is charge Hughes? There have been hundreds if not thousands of men charged with sexual offenses against women with a lot less evidence. I wonder where Tinkerbell’s main loyalty lies besides himself – to his party, the country or his homosexual bed fellows.
[DPF: 30 demerits and get over your obsession]
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 8:57 pm
Chuck, Chris Finlayson may be not be the easiest person to like but do you really believe that he would grossly abuse his role of Attorney-General in that way?
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 9:04 pm
There have been hundreds if not thousands of men charged with sexual offenses against women with a lot less evidence.
??
Very little evidence has been made public so far. I can’t see them being anything other than thorough on this.
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 9:04 pm
Chuck; you’re really desperate tonight. For a start, the Attorney-General has NOTHING to do with police prosecutions. Secondly it would be political suicide to try and interfere. Lastly, why would Finlayson WANT to help Labour when he himself has been on the receiving end of homophobic taunts from Mallard and Cosgrove?
Suck it up Chuck; Act fought the Marine and Coastal Area Bill, and lost. To try and villify Finlayson is the kind of smear that one would expect from the left, not from an Act supporter.
PS – here’s the Attorney-General’s brief:
http://www.cabinetmanual.cabinetoffice.govt.nz/4.2
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 9:10 pm
“Unfortunately, the rationale for it here at the time was Anglocentric, rather than human rights oriented.”
Toad fits so nicely.
Oh My God to think that you pack of apologists for yourselves may be in a position of main opposition, given the Labour parties obvious lack of anything at all.
I may well have to read up on my art of war.
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 9:14 pm
Yeah Chuck, you have dropped to the bottom of the barrel tonight…whats up old fella?
Act is no better than it’s leftie roots, I remember the founders Chuck, Traitors Prebble & Douglas et al.
Act was born from Labour, lest we forget.
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 9:22 pm
The more interesting question is whether New Zealand is ready for a Wellington-based professional politician as it prime minister. You have to go back to the 16 day term of Francis Bell in 1925 for the last time a Wellingtonian was PM, and he was a member of the Legislative Council, not the Legislative Assembly.
Not true – John Marshall was a Wellingtonian. And the only truly worthwhile National Prime Minister, sadly hamstrung by being at the tail end of an eleven year old government and the odious Muldoon breathing down his neck.
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 9:31 pm
Sadly, in the last Clark government there has been too many MP commit serious crimes there has been a prima facie case yet charge have not been laid. Clark and Benson-Peep are two examples. Are you guys saying there was no political interference then?
If the same circumstances happened and it was a National MP and an 18 year old and Clark was in charge the MP would be in the cells awaiting trial.
Justice need to be seen to be done. In the case of MPs and judges there needs to be a special body perhaps of High Court Judges to decide if there is a prima facie case.
Do you not read the news? How many men have been charged on the basis of she said he said and nothing else. Clint Rickard had to face trail when there was little evidence. Does everyone not think politics played did not play a part in charging Rickard?
There is more than enough evidence to charge Hughes. I am not saying it was Tinkerbell but I smell a rat.
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 9:39 pm
There is no evidence publicly known. We can guess at a bit but have no idea if it is relevant to the case. So we don’t know if there is enough evidence. Or – do you have information from inside the inquiry?
Comparing it with hypothetical cases also with no evidence means nothing.
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 9:43 pm
Chuck;
You make some good points, however, an otherwise good comment is ruined by the use of the term ‘Tinkerbell’.
I am no fan of Finlayson but to be fair to the man his sexuality is not something that matters, nor does it influence his job.
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 9:44 pm
Chuck Bird said
Sorry Chuck, but you WERE saying that it was Christopher Finlayson ..
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 10:00 pm
“There is no evidence publicly known.”
It has been accepted that a complaint has been made. That is evidence. In many rape cases that is all the evidence needed to charge a man. That certainly was all the evidence that was presented in the case I was juror on. There was no allegation that the offender had an history.
There is the earlier incident involving an ACT staffer. There was no allegation of force but there were a lot of similarities. The man was much younger and alcohol was involved.
Most importantly, the man left Hughes residence naked. On the Standard it was suggested the young man may have wanted to experiment but changed his mind. There is no evidence of this but it is possible. It is also possible that Hughes offered him his bed and said he would sleep elsewhere and he may have taken off his clothes to have shower. This is all speculation but the fact remains he left Hughes residence naked. Why did not put on his clothes first? Can anyone suggest a serious explanation? In the absence of one I maintain that is strong evidence to support the victims complaint
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 10:05 pm
“You make some good points, however, an otherwise good comment is ruined by the use of the term ‘Tinkerbell’.”
BB. my main motivation was that is pissed Kevin Hague off.
Vote:March 29th, 2011 at 10:15 pm
Do you believe that Kevin Hague is reading this thread, so that he can be suitably offended?
Vote:March 31st, 2011 at 11:25 am
Nice to see big bruv back from his union meeting and showing his true colours. Obscene, ignorant, homophobic and frequently inaccurate.
Is there any limit to his talents?
Vote: