News Brittany Higgins enquiry

[CroydonDog]

You people have too much spare time on your hands.

 

[wendog33]

If it was in a charity box to be donated & she took it, it's stealing.

If Reynolds wanted her staff you have some of the clothing, she would have said before taking to be donated, take what you want.

Yes she's a thief as well in your eyes!

Maybe she used it that night to cover up when leaving and donated it herself at a later date with the rest of the items? Got any pics of her wearing Reynolds old jacket as well at another time?

Do you ever stop hounding and nit-picking every issue you can concerning Brittany.

 

[wendog33]

You people have too much spare time on your hands.

Sad hey

I just want to see a bit of even-handedness on here. Big ask. Never happens.

 

[Gene Krupa]

Yes she's a thief as well in your eyes!

Maybe she used it that night to cover up when leaving and donated it herself at a later date with the rest of the items? Got any pics of her wearing Reynolds old jacket as well at another time?

Do you ever stop hounding and nit-picking every issue you can concerning Brittany.

I just don't believe some of her BS.

Maybe she used it as underwear. As she wasn't wearing any that night.

 

[wendog33]

I just don't believe some of her BS.

Maybe she used it as underwear. As she wasn't wearing any that night.

I think I said on here in an earlier post....thank God you weren't on the Jury.

 

[Gene Krupa]

I think I said on here in an earlier post....thank God you weren't on the Jury.

As if you think.

Been on several juries.

I listen to the evidence & don't believe all, just cause they are the same sex as me.

 

[wendog33]

As if you think.

Been on several juries.

I listen to the evidence & don't believe all, just cause they are the same sex as me.

Ok that's fine. No problem Obvious that we won't find any concensus or sensible discussion on the issue, so not pursuing it further with you.

Expecting you to keep your word about the email address info I was fearful about you passing on. Glad that issue is on record here now so I guess I have to thank you for your outburst.

 

[TwinTurbo]

"Innocent" in the sense that she is still legally able to be believed until and unless he is acquitted. The allegation still stands and neither party can be adjudged "guilty".

We have had an overwhelming majority of posts on here prepared to believe BL and not apparently counternance any possibility that BH is telling the truth that BL sexually assaulted her whilst she was drunk and unable to give consent.

My view is they each have as much right as the other to be believed.

Majority on here via discussion have steadfastly made up their minds she is the guilty party.

Not me Wendy, I have no idea who to believe.

What I do know is the ACT DPP should never have prosecuted the case against BL, it was never going to succeed. And CH10 should never have broadcast the BH interview. They are relying on the "truth" defence and that shouldn't succeed either based on the same reasons.


Always a Bulldog

 

[wendog33]

Not me Wendy, I have no idea who to believe.

What I do know is the ACT DPP should never have prosecuted the case against BL, it was never going to succeed. And CH10 should never have broadcast the BH interview. They are relying on the "truth" defence and that shouldn't succeed either based on the same reasons.


Always a Bulldog

Many, many mistakes and dumb stuff done by so, so many in this case starting with Higgins, BL, the security staff, Reynolds and her COS, police, etc etc.

Both DPP and Sofronoff concurred that there was enough of a case to proceed with the accusation and that it should be prosecuted. Why?

But yeah impossible to succeed (if it's true) if no witnesses and it's a case of he said:: she said.

I said earlier, it's opened up many young womens eyes on how heavy a burden it is to get a conviction and many won't want to put themselves thru it. There's a huge backlash on socials and their responsibility to keep out of any perceivedharms way when getting wasted.

Anyway it is what it is. Hopefully they all pull through it. Bruce went to a Liberal Party event on the weekend so he will be welcomed back into the fold and Higgins has a job so can move on.... % believe him and % believe her and they can gravitate to their own sympathizers I guess. They'll be ok if/when it all dies down.

 

[TwinTurbo]

Many, many mistakes and dumb stuff done by so, so many in this case starting with Higgins, BL, the security staff, Reynolds and her COS, police, etc etc.

Both DPP and Sofronoff concurred that there was enough of a case to proceed with the accusation and that it should be prosecuted. Why?

But yeah impossible to succeed (if it's true) if no witnesses and it's a case of he said:: she said.

I said earlier, it's opened up many young womens eyes on how heavy a burden it is to get a conviction and many won't want to put themselves thru it. There's a huge backlash on socials and their responsibility to keep out of any perceived arms way when getting wasted.

Anyway it is what it is. Hopefully they all pull through it. Bruce went to a Liberal Party event on the weekend so he will be welcomed back into the fold and Higgins has a job so can move on.... % believe him and % believe her and they can gravitate to their own sympathizers I guess. They'll be ok if/when it all dies down.

The main issue with securing a conviction (or CH10 airing the story) as I see it is there are no forensics and no witnesses. Nothing to prove that anything actually occurred. In most cases one or both are available for the prosecution to succeed.


Always a Bulldog

 

[Gene Krupa]

Expecting you to keep your word about the email address info I was fearful about you passing on. Glad that issue is on record here now so I guess I have to thank you for your outburst.

I could be tortured & wouldn't give up secrets. Unless I was forced to watch Bulldogs games on loop & then I would spill my guts.

 

[wendog33]

I could be tortured & wouldn't give up secrets. Unless I was forced to watch Bulldogs games on loop & then I would spill my guts.

I think you've done enough damage in those threads you created with twisted half truths and bs you've sprouted already thanks.

 

[wendog33]

The main issue with securing a conviction (or CH10 airing the story) as I see it is there are no forensics and no witnesses. Nothing to prove that anything actually occurred. In most cases one or both are available for the prosecution to succeed.


Always a Bulldog

Their case is based about the law of probability isn't it that in his plying her with drinks. Signing her into PH. Spending 45? mins there giving 3 different reasons why he wanted access. Leaving without the drunk woman he escorted there. He wasn't actually named so that must help Ch 10? I don't know either how it will all play out.

If he is innocent, I feel sorry for him. He does have those other cases and women who have come forward accusing him so there's that. Be highly unlikely that of the 6 woman who are accusing him, that they are all lying. That goes to his truthfulness in this case I assume??

And if she is telling the truth, it's been a harrowing time for her. I really don't think the incidence of falsely accusing men if rape is that high a % by comparison to the amount of sexual assault that is prevalent in ourr society as per criminalogist stats...but it def does happen

The case has shined a light on lots of different issues in society for a lot of different reasons. Hope lessons are learnt.

 

[DinkumDog]

‘Unless he is acquitted’???
He’s SUING TEN in a CIVIL case.
Where does ‘acquittal’ even come in to it?
Far out .

 

[DinkumDog]

I just don't believe some of her BS.

She didn’t even leave ‘that night’.
She left at 10am the next morning.
Oh that’s right - Canberra is cold - need a jacket .

 

[wendog33]

Huh

 

[Gene Krupa]

Oh that’s right - Canberra is cold - need a jacket .

straitjacket.

Need several on here.

Let's just steal a donated jacket.

 

[Gene Krupa]

I think you've done enough damage in those threads you created with twisted half truths and bs you've sprouted already thanks.

Invite people to that conversation. Or does the conversation starter have to invite others.

There are some I left & I think you replied to it & I can't view it any more.

 

[wendog33]

Invite people to that conversation. Or does the conversation starter have to invite others.

There are some I left & I think you replied to it & I can't view it any more.

Just an example of the kind of tired and emotional stuff you do.
Over it all now.

 

[Doogie]

So lets get this straight.

Brucey:
- Fibbed about buying the chick drinks
- Fibbed about the trip into parliament house

Brittany:
- Fibbed about the state of her dress
- Don't care what anyone says but fibbed about her state of being drunk
- Fibbed about the trip to parliament house
- Wore the dress that she was 'raped' in again at of all things a parliamentary dinner
- Caught on camera about the Ch10 story and how they were going to milk it for all its worth
- whole range of deleted text messages shortly after
- this isn't the 70's. You get raped, you go see a doctor asap if for nothing else other than evidence. Yet Brittany didn't

Happy for anyone to add anything I missed but seriously?

Brucey comes across as that guy you allowed in the cricket team because he did all the admin but is otherwise a dick. Brittany did everything you are advised not to do after being raped, got paid, is on camera working out how she can screw someone (anyone) for extra cash.

I cannot prove shit - but if a duck quacks - its a fckng duck. To me the biggest piece of shit is the drunk. I've never seen a shattered chick who can stand and take off heels without falling on their face. And knowing a few rape victims, I can guarantee they all went to the doctor and police very shortly afterwards and did not do this 'reclaim the dress' shit with a happy smile. Apparently she wasn't traumatised enough to seek help but is now that her doctors have advised her not to retrial? WTF?

Just lol....