This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Sexual harrassment

Jump to new
Now this surprises me.

The Federal Police are investigating the alleged rape of Brittany Higgins. However it seems that the alleged perp is under no obligation to even be interviewed. Does that make sense

The police deputy commissioner, Neil Gaughan, revealed the details on Wednesday but would not say whether the alleged perpetrator had been interviewed.

“Natural justice has to be held here in relation to this particular issue,” Gaughan told ABC radio on Wednesday.

“Of course, this person that has allegedly undertaken any crime is not obliged to be actually subjected to an interview, they have the right to remain silent. It’s up to them, it’s a matter for them, that’s the way our democracy is and the way our laws have been crafted.”

Brittany Higgins: federal police reveal five officers investigating rape allegation

AFP deputy commissioner says they will be ‘methodical’ with evidence but did not confirm whether the alleged perpetrator had been interviewed
www.theguardian.com
 
Answering my own query here. People can decline to be interviewed. In fact lawyers are at pains to say don't be interviewed.
The alleged perp is quite free to stay mum and see if there is sufficient evidence to actually charge him. That will be interesting.

And as Peter Dutton so elegantly put it. "It's back to He said, She said" (Good luck with that !)

Of course if he says nothing then......??
 
You have the right to remain silent. If you do say anything, what you say can be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to consult with a lawyer and have that lawyer present during any questioning. If you cannot afford a lawyer, one will be appointed for you if you so desire.
 

Quite true SP. I was simply noting that it seems as if the perp can simply refuse to be interviewed at all. Not even going through the processes of hearing the allegations and then offering a No Comment. I think there is a material difference between having to actually be interviewed even when you say nothing and not having to directly hear what the allegations are.
 
Probably best to say nothing until you are charged, then I think you have to answer questions. Whether you are guilty or innocent, I have never heard of a case where verbal diarrhea helped anyone.
 
Those who are doing this all are celebs like a famous face in this world. Shame
 
The issue of drink spiking of women. Almost always a precursor to an attempt to rape them while they are insensible.
So what happens if a woman who realises her drink has been spiked goes to hospitals or the police to take action ?
Sweet Fanny Adams.

When Prue tried to get a drug test after a suspected drink spiking, she was warned to 'think carefully' about the consequences

Prue McLardie-Hore was experiencing hallucinations and paranoia when her mother asked a hospital to drug test her. But she was cautioned against it, in a trend experts fear is undermining women's confidence to report drink spiking.
www.abc.net.au
 
sptrawler said:
Probably best to say nothing until you are charged, then I think you have to answer questions. Whether you are guilty or innocent, I have never heard of a case where verbal diarrhea helped anyone.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if you have to answer questions even if you have been charged.

You can make a statement, but I think the right to silence applies throughout the whole case , even in court.
 

Drink spiking isn't as prevalent as some would like to believe. Purely anecdotal but knew a nurse who told me that the majority of women that are tested are normally found to have high levels of alcohol in their system, in essence just drunk.
In Ireland I believe they actually rarely found cases of women having their drinks spiked when tested, if at all.
 

It seems Clansman that bartenders in Victoria would strongly disagree with that view. They recognise that there are a significant number of predators setting young women up and that currently official authorities - police ect - are just not taking the issue seriously.

So they are taking action themselves.

One observation however does bear out part of what you said. One of the tricks drink spikers are doing is buying drinks with double/triple shots of vodka for their targets.

Melbourne bartenders say drink spiking remains rife. Many are taking matters into their own hands

Melbourne bartenders say they know drink spiking is happening more frequently than it would seem. But, feeling left in the dark by authorities, they've started coming up with their own solutions.
www.abc.net.au
 
'What's the most alcoholic spirit you have?' - who asks that? really? who?

Ms Dowling says there is a "collective acknowledgement" that police are not doing enough, Nothing in the article substantiates that statement - What are police supposed to do? My tax dollars should not go to pay for police to be stationed at every bar and check every drink. People need to report things to the police immediately - and as we see - seems things don't get reported to police until 2 years or 30 years has passed. Give your name, your phone number, what bar, and that's about it. Police don't have the resources to send a swat team and DNA test everyone who was at a bar of a suspected drink spiking and spend hours checking CCTV footage.

So what actions have these bartenders taken? A private facebook group? Water taps are health & cost related - I don't buy that anyone put in a tap specifically looking to reduce drink spiking. And why are signs only put up in women's toilets? Drink spiking happens to men as well. Removing unattended drinks has been happening for as long as I can remember past about 8pm at most venues (other than a country pub). Do any of the bars offer the drink testing kits?

Once again the ABC cherry picking one or two random people to tell a story which seems to have limited facts, limited research, and limited value. The article was a mush of random quotes. De-fund the ABC!
 

If it's a common problem, what can women do to protect themselves.

Not going out at all would solve the problem, but they shouldn't have to do that.

To me it's up to the venues to see that things are in order. Like taking drinks directly to the recipient instead of giving them to another person to deliver.

Or maybe the girls buying the drinks themselves and not letting the blokes do it.

Other than that I can't think of much else.
 
I posted an article from the ABC a couple of days ago which went the heart of police down SFA regarding spiked drinks.
And the prevalence of what is happening ? From personal conversations with women and the observations of the bartenders in the article it is a problem.

Perhaps the bigger problem is people who just dismiss it out of hand.

When Prue tried to get a drug test after a suspected drink spiking, she was warned to 'think carefully' about the consequences

Prue McLardie-Hore was experiencing hallucinations and paranoia when her mother asked a hospital to drug test her. But she was cautioned against it, in a trend experts fear is undermining women's confidence to report drink spiking.
www.abc.net.au

'Our children are being put at risk': Parents warn about Chapel Street drink spiking

Several parents say their children have been the victims of drink spiking at a popular Melbourne nightclub strip, and Victoria Police's Chief Commissioner urges them to report incidents to police.
www.abc.net.au
 
I said. You said.

Ants are a problem, violence in Sydney is a problem, fires are a problem, covid is a problem, pollution is a problem, UV radiation is a problem, meth is a problem, poor quality ABC junk articles are a problem. Lots of problems out there.

The article(s) are awful. Go canvas 100 bars over 2 weeks, keep track of the stats and answers. Interview a few police officers, ask for their statistics, interview hospital administrators, paramedics, security guards. You know - do some actual research and journalism - then people might believe its a real problem that actually needs to be addressed.

The personal views/alleged experiences of 3-4 random people across two articles is poor quality journalism and does not help the cause. Its the same as when CNN or Fox interview one or two people to support a headline like 'Americans think XXX about XXX'

But I suppose articles are free to read for a reason. Usually have to pay for good content these days.
 
Just a question, how hard are these so called date rape drugs to purchase?
I would have thought they are schedule 8 drugs, that are monitored, I may be wrong, but it does seem logical.
I mean going into a chemist a nd asking for a packet of condoms and half a dozen rohiponol tablets cant be normal.
 

I don't know. Maybe you can get some on the "dark net" or your local bikie drug store.
 

I think that if you want to get any of these drugs it would be as easy as the "normal" range of illegal drugs. Probably start with any mates who also like to drug and rape women.
The net is dangerous like that.
 
Exceptionally powerful/troubling story on ABC website about the grooming and rape of 13 year old boy. The assailant had access to a DHHS data base (which he had no right to) . The most disturbing facts IMV were that when the rape case finally went to court a plea deal by the prosecution left out quite critical elements of the case. Well worth reading to the end.

A very detailed piece of investigative journalism.

Did Zack’s new friend know more than he should have?

When Zack met Alex Jones he saw him as a fellow car nut. The truth was something far more sinister.
www.abc.net.au
 

Personal conversations aren't tests. The bartenders in the article. So no concrete data from the esteemed bartender community?
 
Clansman said:
Personal conversations aren't tests. The bartenders in the article. So no concrete data from the esteemed bartender community?
Click to expand...
I agree, as I said earlier I would have thought "date rape" drugs are monitored closely and are a prescription drug.
So any doctor that was regularly prescribing them and or someone asking for them, on a regular basis would be ringing alarm bells.
The drugs in question are obviously extremely strong sedatives, so I would expect them to be on the monitored drugs list.
Only my thoughts, I may be wrong, but it makes sense to me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

C
West Papua
Replies
3
Views
4K
Odduna
O
R
IRAQ: the Big (neo) Con
Replies
1
Views
5K
basilio
R
The American use of War Pretext Incidents
Replies
6
Views
9K
sptrawler
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...