- Joined
- 3 July 2009
- Posts
- 27,628
- Reactions
- 24,511
As per usual we see things differently, so be it.
As per usual we see things differently, so be it.The radio announcer made specific comments about Higgins which were not true, and made further inferences, including comments about rape.
Given the specific comments made, Higgins' circumstances are what are relevant. How is it risky to return to one of the most secure buildings in Australia where access to the room she was in was further restricted to people she had to have known?
It seems more the case that Higgins acted very responsibly by putting herself at least risk, irrespective of whether or not she was drunk.
That is your opinion, his comments haven't been tested.Cordeaux made comments which were factually false.
How do you construe false claims as mere "opinion"?
There are no reasonable measures that support Cordeaux's contentions that Higgins is silly, little, or a girl.That is your opinion, his comments haven't been tested.
Until something is tested it is only opinion, as was shown in the Israel Falou incident, when RA didn't want to test it and apologised with compensation.
Which by the way you were just as adamant about.
By her own admission that she was paralytic.There are no reasonable measures that support Cordeaux's contentions that Higgins is silly, little, or a girl.
Courts do not require the obvious to be tested.
Nevertheless, what evidence did Cordeaux rely on in making those statements such that they could be tested?
What are you suggesting?
Higgins is not "silly" and not "little". Nor is she a "girl". These are defamatory imputations.
Getting drunk is not of itself an offence, but getting raped is a crime.
Rapists are often opportunists and don't necessarily rely on their victims to be drunk in order to rape them.
You are falling into the same trap of victim blaming as Cordeaux.
Furthermore, what Cordeaux said is not speculative. His remarks are on the public record and were broadcast to tens of thousands.
Your opinion that a media circus is running the country is very much at odds with that very same media that regularly defames people and recants.
His former employer will have been advised of the legal liability of Cordeaux's commentary and acted accordingly.
You seem to think that hosting a talkback program indemnifies Cordeaux from the law.
She admits to being drunk - we have been over that many times.By her own admission that she was paralytic.
Silly: having or showing a lack of common sense or judgement.
little: is subjective, so therefore not quantifiable.
Girl: a young or relatively young woman. ( again subjective term).
Most rapes are perpetrated by someone known to the victim, this is a well known fact and obviously a reason people need to be vigilant.She admits to being drunk - we have been over that many times.
She returned to one of Australia's safest buildings, to a room further restricted to people she would have known and, presumably, trusted, thereby showing excellent judgement despite her state.
A 5'4" person is little compared to a 7' tall person, whereas the same 5'4" person is tall compared to a 3' tall person, therefore someone I call little may not be little in your eyes.Little is quantifiable as its very existence as a word implies smallness.
She is a 'little girl' in his eyes and unless there is a official standard for "little" and "girl", he has every right to use his judgement when allocating the terms as they are general in nature.Girl is ambiguous, except it also relies on context for meaning, and in in this case Cordeaux used the run on phrase "little girl", which she is not.
Cordeaux's sacking was well advised and it will be interesting to see if Higgins issues his former employer a concerns notice.
Cordeaux made comments which were factually false.
How do you construe false claims as mere "opinion"?
You are clutching at straws.Most rapes are perpetrated by someone known to the victim, this is a well known fact and obviously a reason people need to be vigilant.
From the report:
Most rapes are perpetrated by a person known to the victim; however, it is less likely to be reported than stranger rape and thus crime statistics often underestimate the prevalence of acquaintance rape compared to national surveys. The legal consequences of acquaintance rape are the same as for stranger rape.
A 5'4" person is little compared to a 7' tall person, whereas the same 5'4" person is tall compared to a 3' tall person, therefore someone I call little may not be little in your eyes.
So it isn't quantifiable it is subjective and up to the persons personal judgement and what they are personally comparing it to in their mental image.
Little is only quantifiable when the object it is being compared to is stated e.g a mouse is little compared to an elephant, bug huge when compared to an ant.
Therefore Cordeaux saying she is little, is his opinion and not quantifiable.
She is a 'little girl' in his eyes and unless there is a official standard for "little" and "girl", he has every right to use his judgement when allocating the terms as they are general in nature.
What will be of greater interest will be if Cordeaux decides to pursue it.IMO
If you want to keep claiming it's ok to regard Higgins as a little girl, then you are welcome to that baseless idea.
No reasonable person would regard Higgins as a " silly little girl" so in the context of Cordeaux's remarks it's a defamatory imputation.I'm certainly not saying that, I'm saying it's a matter of opinion and not defamatory.
I just don't think it's ok to wipe people out of employment for disagreeing with me, unlike some here.
Brittany Higgins could simply reply that Cordeaux was a silly old man.
Would that be defamatory ?
Well we shall have to wait and see if either party pursues for a settlement.You are clutching at straws.
If you are drunk and seek refuge in a very safe building with levels of restricted access and regular security patrols, then it's a nonsense to suggest that action was silly or irresponsible.
If you want to keep claiming it's ok to regard Higgins as a little girl, then you are welcome to that baseless idea. People on juries are ordinary citizens and have no difficulty differentiating between a little girl and a grown woman. They do not need "official standards" when exercising common sense.
No reasonable person would regard Higgins as a " silly little girl" so in the context of Cordeaux's remarks it's a defamatory imputation.
Moreover, Cordeaux's comments were wholly pointed and a slight on Higgins. His employer knew this and took immediate action.
Cordeaux has continued his victim shaming and this is a disgrace to broadcasting:
Cordeaux is welcome to give advice and provide opinions.
However, once he names a person whose circumstances are known and makes reckless commentary, then he leaves himself wide open. Higgins definitely did not "put <herself> in harms way" as Cordeaux continues to suggest was the case, and he thinks that comments which can be contradicted by facts still constitute "opinion". Raping a drunk woman who has sought refuge is not a matter that most people would find "controversial", as Cordeaux suggests. It's a crime. He seems not to grasp that fundamental aspect of the matter. Indeed, his focus seems to be about drunkenness as invitation to do as you please to another.
Is Cordeaux a "silly old man"?
After 58 years in broadcasting he failed to grasp that naming and shaming someone without appreciating the specific circumstances or correctly attributing the person's characteristics, can come at a cost. He remains unrepentant!
As usual it is 4 Corners that will be highlighting how instructions from the top in the NSW Police force stopped the rape victim from giving a formal statement.
New documents reveal detectives were denied trip to interview Christian Porter accuser
NSW detectives investigating the historical rape allegation against former attorney-general Christian Porter were denied permission to travel to South Australia to interview the complainant by the state's Police Deputy Commissioner David Hudson.www.abc.net.au
Reading through the articles on the internet, it sounds as though the alleged victim was interviewed on numerous occasions, by the S.A police.Why couldn't it have been done over Skype ?
Indeed. Or in South Australia as the South Australian police had offered.Why couldn't it have been done over Skype ?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?