A few days ago I heard that the family where to have a private funeral for Jill and had asked for privacy at this difficult time. Why then have we had a blow by blow description of the funeral in every news bulliten today; mourners arrive for funeral, mourners given white ribbons, white doves released at the funeral etc. Surely the press she be well away from this? There is no way in the world this can be called news and the public has no right to know anything about this private funeral
The poor mother must want to tell them all to **** off and mind their own business.
Agree absolutely. So rude.A few days ago I heard that the family where to have a private funeral for Jill and had asked for privacy at this difficult time. Why then have we had a blow by blow description of the funeral in every news bulliten today; mourners arrive for funeral, mourners given white ribbons, white doves released at the funeral etc. Surely the press she be well away from this? There is no way in the world this can be called news and the public has no right to know anything about this private funeral
A couple of days ago the family did just that, politely of course. Along the lines of "we appreciate the concern but please now allow us to grieve in private."Exactly. And yet people on this thread, and all the losers on Facebook and all the peace marchers and all those who want to cure violence with more violence.... they're happy to trample all over the place like bulls in a china shop. The poor mother must want to tell them all to **** off and mind their own business.
I doubt that, they wanted privacy for the actual funeral but thats all.
You wont stop the media, forget it but the people (who you describe so generously) I'm sure would be welcome but not in the church or graveside.
I assume you and the others on here will be attending?
+1.You probably think I'm saying these things just to be cruel and insensitive.
There's three major things wrong with the huge public reaction:
--the idea that you can gather enough public support to march your way to safety. The world can be unsafe and that fact will never change. Demanding safety and sureness is a disastrous way to live because it actually elevates the level of fear and tension. Governments do this all the time. People who drive with their headlights on during daylight hours are a good example of this too.
--almost all compassion is self-concern in disguise. The tears and the flowers and the sadness are unfortunately a statement of one's own difficulty in comprehending the tragedy, and have nothing to do with the girl or her family. That being the case, all the tears and flowers and sadness will be of no help to the family. I'm not suggesting that people try to curb their natural behaviour.... if you feel sad, then crying is natural, but there's no need to make it public. Genuine support is one thing... maudlin self-pity is another.
--the value judgments embedded in the "missing white woman syndrome". The implication is that some people are worthy human beings, others are trash. The whiter, wealthier, better looking and younger you are, the more you should be protected and cried over. The ones who are marching to protest are probably on the anti racial discrimination marches the following week.... just to make it a full blown hypocrisy.
Thank god you and I don't have to deal with this ourselves. That's all that needed to be said.
You probably think I'm saying these things just to be cruel and insensitive.
There's three major things wrong with the huge public reaction:
--the idea that you can gather enough public support to march your way to safety. The world can be unsafe and that fact will never change. Demanding safety and sureness is a disastrous way to live because it actually elevates the level of fear and tension. Governments do this all the time. People who drive with their headlights on during daylight hours are a good example of this too.
--almost all compassion is self-concern in disguise. The tears and the flowers and the sadness are unfortunately a statement of one's own difficulty in comprehending the tragedy, and have nothing to do with the girl or her family. That being the case, all the tears and flowers and sadness will be of no help to the family. I'm not suggesting that people try to curb their natural behaviour.... if you feel sad, then crying is natural, but there's no need to make it public. Genuine support is one thing... maudlin self-pity is another.
--the value judgments embedded in the "missing white woman syndrome". The implication is that some people are worthy human beings, others are trash. The whiter, wealthier, better looking and younger you are, the more you should be protected and cried over. The ones who are marching to protest are probably on the anti racial discrimination marches the following week.... just to make it a full blown hypocrisy.
Thank god you and I don't have to deal with this ourselves. That's all that needed to be said.
I assume you and the others on here will be attending?
So much for the private funeral. Close-up in today's paper of the grieving family at the funeral.
Abbott promises $50m for security cameras
Federal Opposition Leader Tony Abbott says a Coalition government will spend $50 million installing CCTV cameras if it wins office.
Police say CCTV played a crucial role in the investigation into the murder of Melbourne woman Jill Meagher.
Mr Abbott made the announcement in Melbourne and says the money will be diverted from proceeds of crime.
"As the father of three daughters, I want our communities to be safe for our children to be there in the evening," he said.
"I think we ought to be able to enjoy our communities free from fear."
Mr Abbott says the money frozen in the Commonwealth victims of crime fund should be used to improve crime prevention.
"CCTV is an important part of ensuring that if crime takes place, it is detected and it is resolved," he said.
"CCTV is an important element in ensuring that our communities are much safer for the communities of this country."
Shouldn't this thread be closed down now re yesterdays' court ruling?
Question for the mods ...
Any prejudicial posts should be removed. Something like post #16 probably breaches the suppression order. If it was my forum, I'd err on the side of caution and delete the thread. IANAL.
Yes, I dont know how the courts will enforce this but if I were the mods here I would comply just in case.
Lots of luck with them controlling the rest of social media though.
I'd say it's more likely the defence will use the comments made on social media to argue that their client has lost the presumption of innocence and cannot have a fair trial. They will cite specific examples and it will then be up to the court to pursue those individuals for contempt. Of course if he pleads guilty it will be a moot point because at sentencing those prejudicial statements are fair game.
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?