Parliament House sexual assault and harassment allegations

[think positive]

[5 from the wing on debut]

[5 from the wing on debut]

[watt price tully]

[5 from the wing on debut]

I am not so sure about that.
The story reminded me of the 1980's though when the Essendon players didn't like having "Don Smallgoods" advertising on their shorts. It gave their opponents some sledging material to work with.

[David]

That was probably the peak of comedy in the 1980s, to be fair.

[eddiesmith]

[David]

Whether the outcomes in each case were fair or not – hint: nobody here is in any position to say either way – it's simply absurd to suggest that one case was subject to political power or interests and the others weren't. Pell was an extraordinarily powerful figure with the backing of no less than former prime ministers, high-ranking media figures and one of the country's largest institutions, the Catholic Church. If you think he was still unfairly treated despite all that, then all that indicates is that influential interest groups and powerful individuals don't, in fact, always get their way.

Anyhow, unless you have access to documents that nobody else has, you simply can't know whether Victoria Police mishandled Sherriff's case or dealt with her complaint fairly and professionally (within the limitations of the law), and the same goes for the NSW Police Force's handling of the Porter allegation. Whether or not questions over hotel quarantine are outside their remit – I'll bow to informed views on that – it surely goes without saying that historical allegations of rape or sexual abuse are valid things for them to pursue.

[eddiesmith]

But it comes down to what power some people have in different places.

In Victoria having the support of Abbott and Howard is not a good thing, but have the support of John Setka and you're probably untouchable!

It's like how the ALP became the supporters of same sex marriage and LNP the evil party holding it back, when the 2 previous ALP governments opposed it because they wanted the support of the Catholic Church.

It's just like how the narrative in the left dominated world of social media is that Porter is guilty and the police force didn't do enough to prosecute him but Shorten was completely cleared and it's a completely different scenario.

[doriswilgus]

The big difference between the Shorten and Porter cases is that Shorten was subject to a ten month long investigation from the police,who subsequently decided there was not enough evidence to lay charges against him.Wheras in the Porter case,the police didn’t even bother to investigate because the poor woman who was allegedly raped had killed herself and was in no position to press charges.I don’t know why this is so hard for Liberal partisans to accept.Trying to conflate the two issues is clearly a partisan attempt on their part to muddy the waters,and to take the heat off Porter.

[5 from the wing on debut]

You are wrong on the facts of the Porter case.
The police did not investigate because after speaking to the police over many months, the woman did not make a statement to the police. Not only that, but before committing suicide she is reported to have advised the police that she would not be proceeding.
It wasn't that she was in no position to proceed, she could have, but chose not to.

[think positive]

[5 from the wing on debut]

As for heat being on Porter, it's done and dusted, except for his defamation case. He is the only one that will keep the issue alive, while the media move on to their next important issue for the day which will be forgotten about in another week.

[David]

[doriswilgus]