Lindor Posted December 17, 2014 Share Posted December 17, 2014 I must say.. The Australian media are doing a bloody good job of dramatising it! When I put the telly on this morning, Kylie and Larry were on, they kept saying, from the 7 studio in Martin Place! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeegieDave Posted December 17, 2014 Share Posted December 17, 2014 When I put the telly on this morning, Kylie and Larry were on, they kept saying, from the 7 studio in Martin Place! And no doubt some news hacks sticking a microphone in someone's unsuspecting persons face asking... "how do you feel?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Les Patterson Posted December 17, 2014 Share Posted December 17, 2014 When I put the telly on this morning, Kylie and Larry were on, they kept saying, from the 7 studio in Martin Place! I hate to burst your little conspiracy bubble @Lindor but Channel 7 have a studio in Martin Place Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quoll Posted December 17, 2014 Share Posted December 17, 2014 And no doubt some news hacks sticking a microphone in someone's unsuspecting persons face asking... "how do you feel?" LOL they dont have any other questions to ask! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lindor Posted December 17, 2014 Share Posted December 17, 2014 I hate to burst your little conspiracy bubble @Lindor but Channel 7 have a studio in Martin Place Conspiracy bubble? How TF do you get conspiracy bubble from my comment? I'm well aware that Channel 7 have a studio in Martin place! I hate to burst your big smug bubble @Sir Les Patterson but I was making the point that they don't usually give the address of the studio during programmes! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wakeboard1980 Posted December 17, 2014 Share Posted December 17, 2014 When I put the telly on this morning, Kylie and Larry were on, they kept saying, from the 7 studio in Martin Place! If you watched them on the day of the seige you would have seen the police outside their window. you could quite easily throw a rock from their studio to the coffee shop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lindor Posted December 17, 2014 Share Posted December 17, 2014 If you watched them on the day of the seige you would have seen the police outside their window.you could quite easily throw a rock from their studio to the coffee shop. I did! I watched Ann Saunders say they'd been evacuated from the studio and how she'd dropped her son off and how they'd almost gone to the Lindt Cafe for a coffee before work. I watched Chris Reason as the siege came to an end! I had the TV on all day which is how I knew their studio was in Martin Place. The point I was making, in response to a previous post commenting on how the media were dramatising an already dramatic situation, was that at every opportunity, Kylie and Larry were mentioning the fact that the studio was in Martin Place, when they don't usually mention that fact! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul1Perth Posted December 18, 2014 Share Posted December 18, 2014 Maybe it's a reason not to be worried. There are dozens of ways that our lives could be disrupted or catastrophes provoked. Yet it doesn't happen. This was, after all, someone on the wrong side of the law seeing their life about to implode and looking for someone to blame except themselves. Much in common with other isolated killing sprees. Everywhere has them from time to time. Australia had one in Tas, I think. The UK had a famous case in Hungerford. There's not much you can do about them and they are exceedingly rare. Far more to be worried about in Pakistan, where killings are far more common and relentlessly brutal. 130+ children dead and for what? No demands, no real political motive. Just to cause mayhem. Hopefully this last move by the Taliban will change the stance of the armed forces and political will in Pakistan. They have been turning a blind eye and in a lot of cases supporting terrorists. Let's hope there is a queue to get into the armed forces now and a solid effort made to fight against the Taliban. Would make a great change for one of those countries to get their own people to stand up and be counted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArthurPendragon Posted December 19, 2014 Share Posted December 19, 2014 Hopefully this last move by the Taliban will change the stance of the armed forces and political will in Pakistan. They have been turning a blind eye and in a lot of cases supporting terrorists. Let's hope there is a queue to get into the armed forces now and a solid effort made to fight against the Taliban. Would make a great change for one of those countries to get their own people to stand up and be counted. I don't think that will happen. They just released the main accused of the Mumbai Massacre on bail yesterday. he and his organization are already designated as terrorists by UN security council. http://tribune.com.pk/story/809259/alleged-mastermind-mumbai-attack-suspect-granted-bail/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul1Perth Posted December 19, 2014 Share Posted December 19, 2014 I don't think that will happen. They just released the main accused of the Mumbai Massacre on bail yesterday. he and his organization are already designated as terrorists by UN security council.http://tribune.com.pk/story/809259/alleged-mastermind-mumbai-attack-suspect-granted-bail/ That's a great pity Arthur. If they don't stand up I wouldn't want to be living in Pakistan in the next few years. If they do stand up it's got every chance of being a decent place to live. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArthurPendragon Posted December 20, 2014 Share Posted December 20, 2014 That's a great pity Arthur. If they don't stand up I wouldn't want to be living in Pakistan in the next few years. If they do stand up it's got every chance of being a decent place to live. Agreed. It has a lot of potential. Compared to the other islamic countries excluding Turkey, it still has a relatively free press, a civil society still opposing the extremists and its cities are still relatively good for educated women and has potential if it can clear up the mess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parley Posted December 22, 2014 Share Posted December 22, 2014 Good to see that Monis' partner has now had her bail revoked @mrsdawnrazor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rossmoyne Posted December 22, 2014 Share Posted December 22, 2014 Stable door and horse come to mind! She and that maniac should never have been on bail to start with!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 22, 2014 Share Posted December 22, 2014 Good to see that Monis' partner has now had her bail revoked @mrsdawnrazor Agreed but would it have been reconsidered without her partner being who he was. To me the justice system is working in a mysterious way. If she shouldn't have been on bail, which seems to be the consensus, then she shouldn't have been. So what has changed between then and now. Oh yes, her partner proved himself to be a nutter. Nothing about her case has changed. I am not condoning her actions, this is more a comment on the way the legal system is working. I have no idea if she is a threat to the community but you can bet that is she is, she was when she was bailed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny842003 Posted December 22, 2014 Share Posted December 22, 2014 Agreed but would it have been reconsidered without her partner being who he was. To me the justice system is working in a mysterious way. If she shouldn't have been on bail, which seems to be the consensus, then she shouldn't have been. So what has changed between then and now. Oh yes, her partner proved himself to be a nutter. Nothing about her case has changed.I am not condoning her actions, this is more a comment on the way the legal system is working. I have no idea if she is a threat to the community but you can bet that is she is, she was when she was bailed. seemingly at the hearing it is thought the original judge was unaware she was on a good behaviour order for sending letters to soldiers families. It also doesn't sound as though the case against the two is much more than circumstantial hence why they would be granted bail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parley Posted December 22, 2014 Share Posted December 22, 2014 Yes. She should never have been bailed in the first place. How do you get charged with murder, namely stabbing someone something like 50 times and then pouring flammable liquid on them and setting them alight, and then get bail. It beggars belief. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 22, 2014 Share Posted December 22, 2014 you get bailed if you are considered not to be at risk of harming anyone else, under the current NSW laws. As i stated in a n earlier post, the police did not convince the magistrate in either case that they would be a danger to the public. The magistrate was operating under recently changed laws that took away the automatic refusal of bail in serious crime cases and so made the decision that they had to make in the light of the laws they were operating under. It beggars belief that the bail laws were changed and there is a hasty back flip happening now in NSW to put them back into place Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parley Posted December 22, 2014 Share Posted December 22, 2014 I wonder how that magistrate is feeling now after deciding they weren't a threat ? I wouldn't like to be in his/her shoes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 22, 2014 Share Posted December 22, 2014 Its the police that should be feeling bad, after all they failed to present enough/appropriate evidence to keep them in. Plus the polies that changed the bail Edit - actually the police should not feel bad as they were working within the laws as they stand Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parley Posted December 22, 2014 Share Posted December 22, 2014 It is odd how you are defending these 2 murderers so strongly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xenon4017 Posted December 22, 2014 Share Posted December 22, 2014 It is odd how you are defending these 2 murderers so strongly. "Alleged" murderers, surely. The case against them for the killing of his wife hasn't come to court yet. And, as far as I know, it hasn't been established whether he actually fired the fatal shots in the cafe. Certainly guilty of attempted murder, but to prove murder, you have to show that he killed someone. The policeman who caught a blast in the face survived. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parley Posted December 22, 2014 Share Posted December 22, 2014 He murdered those 2 hostages. My god, I cannot believe this. This is sickening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 22, 2014 Share Posted December 22, 2014 And yet again you miss the point - that's why in almost every post I have felt compelled to say I ma NOT condoning what they did. I am arguing the point of law but I was fully expecting a number of people on here not to be able to see the difference and assume I am defending the individual. The facts as we know them. 1. The police failed to convince the magistrate that either of these people were a danger to the public 2. the magistrate was operating under new laws that took away the onus to not bail people accused of serious crimes 3. We have a presumption of innocent until proven guilty. The magistrate who bailed this guy and the guy's lawyer have received death threats for goodness sake. It is easy to judge after the fact, but all the magistrate can do is make a judgement on the evidence presented. I hope to god that if I am ever falsely accused of a crime you are not on my jury as you seem to have made up your mind without seeing any evidence. When the fact are presented to a jury, then a judgement of innocent or guilty can be made, until then, she is innocent in the eyes of the law. EDIT - I am referring in these comments to the case of Amirah Droudis and not what happened in the Cafe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parley Posted December 22, 2014 Share Posted December 22, 2014 Clearly now bail has been revoked by a more sensible magistrate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xenon4017 Posted December 22, 2014 Share Posted December 22, 2014 He murdered those 2 hostages. My god, I cannot believe this. This is sickening. Unfortunately, hostage resolutions rarely play out like a Hollywood action film, where the hero dives to the floor, grabs the perpetrators weapon and deals out justice with a clear moral justification. This one's a bit more complex. He certainly put these people in harms' way. He intended to kill all of them. But how many he actually killed reamins to be clarified. And clarification is curiously absent from police reports. He bears responsibility for creating the situation in which people died regardless if he pulled the trigger. But to prove murder, you have to show that he took action intending it to cause their death, and that action was likely to cause death. Using a human shield against an indiscriminate bomb would be one thing. Using a human shield to prevent the police from shooting is another, because he can't influence the police to force them to shoot. You might take the view that the police are beyond criticism. I don't, because if you don't examine these things they'll never improve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.