Liberty Quote
Anarchy is ideal for ideal men; passionate men must be reasonable.
— James Buchanan-
Recent Comments
- Mustapha Bunn on How public health would report this statistic
- Winston Smith on Open Forum: April 10, 2021
- Mother Lode on Open Forum: April 10, 2021
- wal1957 on How public health would report this statistic
- Geriatric Mayfly on Open Forum: April 10, 2021
- pete m on Open Forum: April 10, 2021
- Zulu Kilo Two Alpha on Open Forum: April 10, 2021
- Rex Anger on Open Forum: April 10, 2021
- Rex Anger on Open Forum: April 10, 2021
- wal1957 on How public health would report this statistic
- Lodger from Oz on Open Forum: April 10, 2021
- Rex Anger on Open Forum: April 10, 2021
- Adelagado on Biden obeys Trump
- Winston Smith on Open Forum: April 10, 2021
- Bons on Open Forum: April 10, 2021
- Geriatric Mayfly on Open Forum: April 10, 2021
- calli on Open Forum: April 10, 2021
- Shy Ted on Open Forum: April 10, 2021
- H B Bear on Open Forum: April 10, 2021
- thefrollickingmole on Open Forum: April 10, 2021
- Geriatric Mayfly on Open Forum: April 10, 2021
- H B Bear on Open Forum: April 10, 2021
- thefrollickingmole on Open Forum: April 10, 2021
- jupes on Open Forum: April 10, 2021
- Rex Anger on Open Forum: April 10, 2021
- miltonf on Biden obeys Trump
- jupes on Open Forum: April 10, 2021
- miltonf on Biden obeys Trump
- feelthebern on Open Forum: April 10, 2021
- Speedbox on Open Forum: April 10, 2021
-
Recent Posts
- How public health would report this statistic
- Biden obeys Trump
- Speedbox: Covid roulette – Australia lost
- Australia Post and Christine Holgate
- This is why Mount Isa roofers must continue to wear masks
- The vaccine: not only risky but it doesn’t actually work
- Luncheon of the Doting Party
- David Bidstrup guest post. Vaccinate or Perish!
- Noted sex kitten mocks Mrs M
- Queens of the Stoning Age
- Peter Campion guest post. A few plain words
- Into People’s Arms
- Returning Australia to sanity – the crucial importance of a sense of proportion
- Maybe Prince Philip did not want to come back as a deadly virus to kill people + Spectator tribute
- Jacinta is not for turning
- There ought to be a law
- Frank Brennan’s Offensive Defence
- Vikki Campion guest post. Ministry of tokenism
- How The End of History started … and how it’s going
- Democrat insurrectionists begin a long-expected siege
- Open Forum: April 10, 2021
- Philip Mountbatten 1921 – 2021
- Music Maestro: April 9, 2021
- Pyrmonter: Convince me it’s different here
- Peter Thiel on the Chinese Digital Currency
- “…we may never recover our standing as free citizens…”
- Left-wing women’s briefs
- Diggers must acknowledge ‘owners’ of the country they saved
- This is not a chicken and egg problem
- Let us give thanks to politicians for correcting our failings
Archives
Pages
Blogroll
- 38 South
- ABC The Drum
- AEI Ideas
- Alex
- all right, all right
- Andrew Bolt
- Andrew McIntyre
- Andrew Norton – New
- Andrew Norton – Old
- Arnold Kling
- Aussie Macro Moments
- Becker – Posner
- Bill Mitchell – billy blog
- Bob McGee
- Cafe Hayek
- Calculated Risk
- Calling Bullshit
- Captain Capitalism
- Carpe Diem (New)
- Carpe Diem (Old)
- Causes of the crisis
- Charles Richardson
- Chicago University – Pro Market
- Chris Snowdon
- Confessions of a College Professor
- Consumer Choice Center
- Continental Telegraph
- Conversable Economist
- Coordination Problem
- Cryptoeconomics
- Dan Wang
- Daniel Greenfield
- David Hart
- Diane Coyle
- Dick Puddlecote
- Econ Journal Watch
- EconAcademics
- Econbrowser
- EconLog
- Econofact
- Econometrics Beat
- Economic Education Initiative
- Essential Hayek
- Fault Lines
- Fiscal Times
- Foundation for Economic Education
- Freedom and Prosperity Academy
- Greg Mankiw
- Grey Enlightenment
- Guido Fawkes
- Head Rambles
- Homer Paxton
- How does your MP vote
- Institutional Economics
- International Liberty
- Islam and Liberty Network
- Jim Rose
- John Cochrane
- John Lott
- John Taylor
- Journal of Economic Perspectives
- Julie Borowski
- Keith Hennessey
- Legal Insurrection
- Liberty Law Blog
- Liberty Works
- Loaded Dogma
- Macrobusiness
- Mannkal Foundation
- Marginal Revolution
- Marius Kloppers
- Mark the Ballot
- Mark the Graph
- markedlymacrotoo
- Market Urbanism
- Master Resource
- Matt Ridley
- Menzies House
- Michael Oakeshott Association
- Michael Smith
- Michel Rauchs
- Miranda Devine
- Money Illusion
- MyGovCost
- Natural Order – Christopher Lingle
- New Economist
- Notes on Liberty
- Offsetting Behaviour
- Oliver Hartwich
- On Line Opinion
- Paul Johnson Archives
- Peter Fenwick
- Peter Martin
- Philippa Martyr
- Piled Higher and Deeper
- Pointman
- Political Calculations
- Potemkin's Village
- Poverty Cure
- Prick with a fork
- Principles of Forecasting
- Quadrant Online
- Queensland Economy Watch
- Quillette
- Raph Koster
- Reflections on Liberty and Power
- Retraction Watch
- Rhino economics
- ricardian ambivalence
- Robert Murphy
- Roger Kerr (archive)
- Rosemary Fryth
- Skepticlawyer
- Sound Money
- Spiked
- Sports Economist
- Statista
- Stop Gillard's Carbon Tax
- Streetwise Professor
- Stubborn Mule
- Taking Liberties (Simon Clark)
- Tax Foundation
- Tax Rambling
- TaxProf
- The Baseline Scenario
- The Black Steam Train
- The Marcus Review
- The Moronic Lodge
- The TaxPayers' Alliance
- The Visible Hand
- The Wentworth Report
- Think Markets
- Thomas the Think Engine
- Tim Blair
- Tim Worstall
- Truth on the Market
- Vox CEPR Policy Portal
- William Briggs – Statistician
Meta
Something very unnerving about those eyes.
Next time I catch a taxi, I must remember to take my trophies with me.
That “Press Freedom Medal” was specifically for her reporting on George Pell, btw.
Even Bob Brown has called the APC a “hollow vessel”.
It’s telling that they take those silly awards seriously.
There are very few awards left that are worth having. This is largely due to the type of people handing them out.
Which reminds me.
One year on, where are all those multiple civil cases that were going to be run on the back of “explosive redacted RC evidence”.
Crickets.
Milligan is a liar and her pursuit of Pell should have seen her sacked rather than awarded. A gutless and morally bankrupt ABC employs people of like character and uses taxpayers money to fund its disgraceful and vindictive programmes.
Why would the press council give a gong to a political activist whose only “talent” was using her media platform to help concoct the false prosecution of a man of God, then barracking for the wrong team in a 7-0 smashing of that evil injustice by the High Court?
The press council, when it is eventually disbanded, will be remembered only for its repeated wrongologies, like some irrelevant bureaucracy in the Soviet Union.
It is their substitute for achievement.
They can’t point to anything real – not to a bridge they built, or a disease they have cured, no business they have built up etc. So they create and collect post-nominals of no import (a PhD in Critical Studies on Race, Nutrition, and Toxic Male Culture), awards, trinkets, and baubles.
They come across as ridiculous as those North Korean generals for whom at the very least the medals might afford some function when they inevitably face firing squads.
“Leigh Lowe says:
April 7, 2021 at 9:39 am
Which reminds me.
One year on, where are all those multiple civil cases that were going to be run on the back of “explosive redacted RC evidence”.
Crickets.”
Ah yes and who rushed to release the redacted RC evidence?
Christian Porter.
The irony that Porter was then “Pelled” is exquisite.
Windschuttle p109….’Milligan doesn’t just report the views of her interviewees, she also gets deeply involved in their lives. Her prose reeks with self advertisements for the compassion she brings to her task’.
The irony that Porter was then “Pelled” is exquisite.
The man who pushed ahead with Robodebt despite being advised it was unlawful, who later discovered rule of law when he was the victim of an unfounded allegation. ’tis hoped some serious reflection on the right of citizens to be free from allegations without evidence is going on inside the Coalition.
& the people receiving them.
And her partner? None other than Nick Leys, TheirABC’s head of communications. Cosy conflict of interest that results in the trial by media of an innocent man and incurs untold damages for their employers….us.
“Infidel Tiger says:
April 7, 2021 at 10:07 am
The irony that Porter was then “Pelled” is exquisite.”
Yep.
It’s a Psakiesque “cycling back” situation. So we have:
Nilligan frames Pell
High Court absolves Pell 7-0
Porter attempts to maintain witch hunt against Pell
Nilligan attempts to frame Porter
Porter loses jerb and is demoted
Porter sues Nilligan for defamation
What next I wonder? You can guarantee that regardless of the defamation case result, Nilligan will continue to suckle on the bounteous taxpayer nourished teats of the ALPBC, while moving blithely on to her next preposterous fact and evidence free witch hunt against a prominent conservative.
Those j’ismists do love their baubles don’t they?
Have you noticed there is a direct inverse relationship between the value of an industry and its internal award process? For years we have heard about the AFI awards or whatever they are called now while the Australian film industry turned out whatever unwatched turkeys from whatever meagre cash producers could scrape together from taxpayers to fund. The Walkleys are now right up there with the Sydney Peace Prize and the Logies have joined the wannabe bikies and Russian mafiosos on the Gold Coast.
More than a touch of Sarah Hyphen-SeaPatrol.
Never a good thing.
Roger – you can practically be sure this is EXACTLY what isn’t happening.
Speechless. I would say “fuck me” but I don’t want to be on Four Corners.
OK.
But imagine the flip-side.
Imagine if Porter had sat on the redacted RC stuff.
The ABC would have been still running with “what are they hiding” and “why are ‘victims’ being denied justice”.
It is out there, it was a one day wonder, and it has now taken the wind out of the ambulance chasers sails.
Clearly a very well deserved award. Nobody has more clearly demonstrated the freedom the press has to print whatever rubbish & lies they feel like.
Only the ALPBC is allowed to do Fake News by omission.
None of this would have happened if Gillard had given us a proper press regulator.
“But imagine the flip-side.
Imagine if Porter had sat on the redacted RC stuff.
The ABC would have been still running with “what are they hiding” and “why are ‘victims’ being denied justice”.
It is out there, it was a one day wonder, and it has now taken the wind out of the ambulance chasers sails.”
True LL but I still find it disgraceful that Morrison and Porter (prior to his current woes) said NOTHING about the travesty done to Cardinal Pell. I also believe that the release of the redacted RC findings were deliberately designed to further humiliate Pell.
Nobody in the Morrison government has spoken up for Pell….many, including Scummo, were quick to denounce him in March 2019.
I also believe Morrison’s “National Apology to Victims and Survivors of Institutional Child Sexual Abuse” in 2018 helped prejudice any trial.
I’m a critic but George Pell really was treated unjustly: Frank Brennan
Pope John Paul II’s biographer George Weigel, writing the introduction to Cardinal George Pell’s Prison Journal, describes me as one who “had previously held no brief for Cardinal Pell (and) a severe critic”. I plead guilty.
Nevertheless, having attended parts of his two criminal trials and having studied all the publicly available transcript, I am convinced of Pell’s innocence of the criminal charges he faced. I am convinced the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child [email protected] Abuse failed to accord him natural justice in its pursuit of a necessary big scalp for media delectation.
Pell paid for these mistakes with 404 days of wrongful imprisonment, much of it in solitary confinement. The time has come to attest that Pell worked tirelessly and to the best of his ability from 1996 to put right the dreadful consequences of institutional child [email protected] abuse. Pell faced charges that should never have been brought, a prosecution that was malicious, a Victorian appeal court that got it very wrong, and a media campaign that was relentlessly prejudiced.
Catholics continue to be identified as pro-Pell or anti-Pell. Though convinced of his innocence, I still don’t subscribe to his culture wars. I’ve come to enjoy his company and admire his resolute courage. We will continue to disagree over matters such as the theological possibility of papal approval of women’s ordination and the jurisprudential justification for civil laws recognising the unions of same-sex couples and describing them as marriage.
Is everyone either related or married to each other in the ABC?
I would like to think that, if I was somehow offered and AO award or Australian of the Year, I would be able to resist having my head turned by the fussing remora seeking to co-opt whatever my supposed celebrity was for their own purpose and tell them to get stuffed.
Unless there was a money award as well, in which case I would take the money and use my newfound authority to dump on all the people I thought had been unworthy recipients of what was meant to represent preeminence.
Rich pickings.
I believe it is typical of cults to allow members to marry other members only.
If I has been awarded a prize, especially an unearned prize – I would be smiling like a Cheshire cat.
Rather she looks like she just stepped in dog leavings…
She must be all sorts of fun at parties & social gatherings.
Their ABC – where misery loves company!
Brennan falls at the final hurdle.
It leaves the impression that the Appeal Court simply made an honest mistake in good faith.
How about …
made even more worthless by the recipients thereof.
What Bar Beach Swimmer said. Am now scrolling up
It just could be the angle but in the photo above Ms Moonface Nilligan looks to have the makings of a rhinophymic proboscis
Nilligan has the kind of dead eyes that dolls have. If you turn her over and lift her top you’ll see the pull cord the progressive puppetmasters installed.
She’s the perfect Talky Tina.
April Quadrant. David Ward. ‘Errors made in good faith don’t threaten the integrity of the courts. If that’s all there was to it, so be it. Unfortunately the more scandalous possibility is all too realistic. The impression that Ferguson and Maxwell went to quite considerable lengths to uphold an unsafe jury verdict is surprisingly common, and not without foundation’.
Was the catastrophic error of Ferguson and Maxwell simply a result of legal ineptitude…
Neither of them specialises in criminal law.
Mind you, they’re suppossed to be at least competent at it.
Just back from a lecture by Dr Murray Green ex ABC who still thinks ABC is partisan and we reminded him that if it reflected the diversity of the street where were the 50% conservatives.
“Was the catastrophic error of Ferguson and Maxwell simply a result of legal ineptitude…
Neither of them specialises in criminal law.
Mind you, they’re suppossed to be at least competent at it.”
The Chief Justice in particular has the supervisory role over other judges and needs to be competent in all areas.It is apparent she is not.
Just another example of an over promoted female.
BTW-Of the women who have been prime ministers,governors,and justices,how many have outshone their male counterparts?To ask the question is to answer it.
The main area of incompetence seemed to be a reliance on “a reluctance to overturn jury verdicts”.
Helloooooo!
If a Court of Appeal’s guiding principle is the absolute sanctity of jury verdicts, then there is no need for a Court of Appeal.
Their “catastrophic error” struck me as inexcusable incompetence, driven by a vindictive desire to ensure Pell remained languishing in gaol. They also probably assumed that a high court challenge was unlikely.
The incompetence aspect was subsequently proven by the 7-0 high court decision (not to mention Weinberg’s dissenting decision).
Another “sinister” aspect is that neither Ferguson or Maxwell can be held accountable for such blatant dereliction of duty and the fact that their staggering incompetence and/or malice resulted in an innocent man spending 404 days behind bars.
“Was the catastrophic error of Ferguson and Maxwell simply a result of legal ineptitude,”
Maybe
or fear of the Pell lynch mob?
Maybe
Or something more sinister?””
Yes…..it was all politics.
Pell really needed to sue the stupid bint.
Apologies – not 404 days, but the additional period between the appeals court decision and the 7-0 nil high court decision.
Inbreeding may become an issue in 20 years time.
Agreed Harry, as Sinc said for the people without a voice, not for him. Donate proceeds to charity that will really piss off ABC.
She looks angry.
Was she expecting a bigger medal?
Cassie of Sydney says:
April 7, 2021 at 10:50 am
+1
Spurgeon and Cassie.
My point wasn’t so much the incompetence (or worse) which I don’t think is in dispute.
The question was why Brennan gave them a free pass in his op-ed.
Or maybe it was the News Ltd in-house lawyers, who seem to be remarkably timid (except when the wymminses at the Daily Tellygruff get on the warpath. Then they just wave it through).
Can they recognise the bleeding obvious?
In fact, that’s precisely what judges are supposed to get paid for. It isn’t for complicated rationalisations and sophistry. It’s because they need to be prepared to say the objective truth even when everybody is claiming the Emperor is wearing the finest clothes.
Unfortunately, many of them love their sophistry.
The dissenting judgement was written by a judge with criminal experience. It was open to one or both of them to adopt a joint judgement or a simple “I agree.” Neither chose to do so and will be condemned outside Victoriastan for all time because of it.
LL – judges (even Victoriastani ones) are still seen as a bit of a protected species. One might say something to a chap over lunch but one does not put it into print.
Father Frank Brennan’s column wasn’t as explicit on Pell as he could have been given his legal expertise, imho. Yes, he covered the impossibility of the accusation and yes, he covered his and the Cardinal’s history as theological rivals, thereby enabling a reference to his lack of partisanship in the case.
But those final paragraphs were somewhat bitchy, given what Pell had endured as an innocent captive.
To paraphrase: “in June he will be 80 and will no longer be able to participate/vote in a papal convocation. His time as a significant presence in the church will be ended”.
Am I being cynical and mean? It seems to me that in taking that tack Brennan, while upholding the basis of our legal system, which as a lawyer he should do, he manages possibility to retain his entree to all the right invitations, including the ABC.
Exactly HB.
I had an e-mail exchange with a Hun journo a few years back, giving him details of ridiculously contradictory sentencing remarks made by a judge in two separate cases.
(The judge had recently handed out a wet-lettuce sentence to a member of an “oppressed minority”)
He told me it was all good stuff but they couldn’t publish it, because “contempt”.
I asked him how quoting a judges own words directly could be contempt, in a case which was complete and not subject to appeal.
He called me the next day with no real answer and asked if I was a lawyer.
It seemed clear to me that his in-house eagle didn’t like being questioned and was keen to find out if the shit-stirrer could be leant on by other “sound chaps” in the perfession.
The only judicial officer I can recall being repeatedly referred to in the press was Sydney magistrate Pat O’Shane who was so far off with the fairies I suspect everyone except Sydney ruffians were sorry to see the back of. There are a few more others that would fall into that category.
LL – I think the broader faith in the justice system is better served if there is not widespread questioning of judges and their judgements – regardless of how sound/unsound they may be. People should have faith that the tiered appeal process will (eventually) see the correct legal determination made. You can argue that should not be put to the additional time and expense to reach a correct verdict and that is a valid criticism, particularly when you have to use the appeals process to go outside an individual State jurisdiction. Barristers, especially senior ones, usually know if there is likely to be a problem in a specific case,
HB, by that time plaintiffs may have, unless they’re extremely well off or are the recipients of pro bono legal representation, given up.
I’d prefer it if the properly qualified and experienced had the gig on the bench. And also this is another area for breath testing and drug testing before presiding.
Here she is with her cap on….https://alabamanewscenter.com/2016/02/08/40-years-after-making-oscars-history-birminghams-louise-fletcher-reflects-on-cuckoos-nest/
Evil is in the eyes I tells ya!
That is a vindictive look that says “I will get you, no matter what”. Straight out of a Stephen King movie.
“Is everyone either related or married to each other in the ABC?”
In other words; who’s up who and who’s paying the rent. The answer to the last question is you, dear reader.
True but we need to acknowledge the legal process is designed and populated by humans. I’d much rather go on trial in Australia than the US.
“H B Bear says:
April 7, 2021 at 1:31 pm
LL – I think the broader faith in the justice system is better served if there is not widespread questioning of judges and their judgements – regardless of how sound/unsound they may be. People should have faith that the tiered appeal process will (eventually) see the correct legal determination made. You can argue that should not be put to the additional time and expense to reach a correct verdict and that is a valid criticism, particularly when you have to use the appeals process to go outside an individual State jurisdiction. Barristers, especially senior ones, usually know if there is likely to be a problem in a specific case,”
I would agree with you except for the fact that we’re now living in an age where the rule of law and the presumption of innocence is being trashed daily by the progressive left….who will stop at nothing to enforce their ideology…and that includes contaminating the police and judiciary with political ideology.
She looks like she caught a whiff of her own vagina.
@ De Bunker
“Their ABC – where misery loves company!”
And Vice Versa.
Where the vice is really versa.
Not sure I’m following this comment.
Bunny boiler.
HB, now don’t go all soft on me!
btw that reminds me of something my Dad always says:
doctors, they bury their mistakes.
Given the subject matter I could add, judges, they gaol their’s.
Every time I see a picture of her, I do a double take to check that it’s not SHY.
I guess both are POSs in any case
BBS – apologies for the delay. I thought this thread died a while ago.
Not sure my view is soft, just a acknowledgement of human frailty. Fortunately I have never been personally involved in litigation (or criminal defence) and only saw it as an articled clerk/restricted practioner. As someone who sees the world in shades of grey I was totally unsuited and went and found something different to do with my time. In my very limited experience the best litigation clients were close to madness. The process didn’t seem to bother them as much.
I’m still laughing at that.
What’s that Noise?
SPLAT!
karma train, Porter, karma train…..
As for that thing in the photo with the permasneer, warthog-butt ugly dial and demented serial killer psycho eyes. That thing is the sort of vermin that used to write for the Völkischer Beobachter.
It is difficult to know how Cardinal Pell’s case got to trial based on the evidence. The complainant’s statement read out by police in the 2016 42 min Rome interview is that he found the wine in the wood panelled storage area immediately to the left of the door. Pell explained that the cupboard to the left of the door was used to store vestments. As Keith Windschuttle informs us in his book, the wood panelled storage area was built in about 2003/2004 – about 7/8 years after the alleged offence. So how could the complainant give a description of furniture which was not built until much later? And why did M Gibson, K Judd and others as reported in the media, in transcripts and the video on the HCA website refer to the complainant finding the wine in the alcove which is in the corner of the room? The wine issue is very confusing since K Judd provided information that it was found in the wood panelled cupboard to the left of the door, but some 20 mins or so later, said it was found in the alcove which is in the corner of the room. At the time, a legal commentator tweeted to a journalist that the Day 2 video might take longer to appear online as the transcript had a redaction where Judd read out “innocuous parts – describing the sacristy furniture” – of the suppressed evidence of the complainant. However, this section remains in the video.
Regarding the RC redacted reports, it was interesting that Milligan was tweeting 2 weeks after the HCA decision that Porter had to release the redacted findings: “It’s been 2 weeks, what’s the hold up?” to which L Turnbull replies to Milligan and Porter that the unredacted reports need to be released “to see justice done – and be seen to be done”.
However, some of the exhibits and transcripts in the RC reports are quite revealing. There is a missing VicPol exhibit for a 1970s offence, so how can a “finding” be made? Some key teacher and priest statements do not seem to have been included in the RC reports but are available online and one key witness never gave evidence due to a car accident the day he was scheduled to appear. And all the narratives by people who had a private session include: “Disclaimer: This is the story of a person who spoke with a Commissioner during a private session of the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse. Real names of individuals have not been used, except of public figures in a public context. The information the person provided was not evidence, the person was not a witness, and did not need to take an oath or affirmation, although they were expected to tell the truth. Nothing in this story is a finding of the Royal Commission and any views expressed are those of the person, not of the Commissioners”.
In recent weeks, there has been an historic CSA 1960s clergy trial in Sydney. I believe courts are still closed and the public are not permitted to attend. According to Broken Rites, the allegations were raised at the RC and the clergy member was charged in Dec 2017. After Pell’s case, one does start to wonder about some of the evidence in historic cases.
Thanks Syd Gal.
I really need to get into the Windshuttle book.
ac:
Don’t bother trying to work out a geneaolgy path, it’s got as much correlation with reality as my old cat fatso. It’s all about the feeding and the fucking.
A genetic trace of the staff will bring up a LOT of unpleasant surprises – like a camp dog bitch – the progeny line tracks well for the fastest in the pack.
Spurgeon Monkfish:
Yes.
And my money is the “vindictive desire” aspect.
They both should have been disbarred for their incompetence and their ideological corruption. Another example of Leftists who, on becoming employed in an institution, believe they themselves make up the policies and procedures.
The problem with racking or waterboarding ABC “journalists” is that they do not know what truth is. Much as it would be fun to do, you would never learn anything that was rational or true.
Figures:
Which is how we end up with rights being discovered in our Constitution. After all they are judges and therefore the “Smartest People in the Room.”
I thought I had a low opinion of the lady.
This is not a reason to withhold from giving any of them a full & earnest waterboarding.
Tinta, once again your descriptors win.
“rhinophymic proboscis.”
Brilliant.
Took me a while to get the joke in your title, CL. Good one.
Bar beach , I heard an old saying at Melboure Uni many years ago ,
A doctors mistakes are buried , a lawers mistakes are hanged but an architects mistakes are there for all to see for years .
Made me very carefull in all my work througout my career .
It is clear that Maxwell P and Ferguson CJ got it badly wrong when they asked whether it was possible that Pell did what was alleged. They should have asked, as Weinberg JA did, whether it was reasonably possible that he didn’t. But, as Weinberg said, they may have been mislead by Richter having put to them that it was impossible for Pell to have did what was alleged. He did not need to go so far.
Nevertheless, if they read Weinberg’s opinion before final delivery of their own, they should have realised their mistake.
That can’t be right, Winston. We all know that Kev & Mal are the smartest people in any room, even the ones they haven’t entered😁.
Prof Fred, clearly you and Dad received similar advice from your tutors, including realistic assessments of medicine and the law!
She looks scarily like Sarah Whale-Watcher. Have they ever been seen in the same place at the same time??
Meanwhile, congratulations to Jacinta Price for extracting an apology from the ABC – mo mean feat.
Gerard Henderson is still awaiting an apology from Milligan for calling him a bully ( presumably that’s anyone who disagrees with her) and a p3dof1le protector.
Jeremy Gans got an apology from them for calling him an apologist for the Catholic Church over the Pell case, but I suppose it helps if you are a professor of law.