The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > General Discussion > Justice for Peter Ridd

Justice for Peter Ridd

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. ...
  9. 13
  10. 14
  11. 15
  12. All
runner,

We shall have to wait and see on those counts
what the courts end up deciding. Still early
days as yet.
Posted by Foxy, Wednesday, 17 April 2019 7:15:51 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"I think there is quite some difference in reporting news about the Peter Ridd case outcome, difference between ABC and SMH reporting.
The ABC seems to provide a balanced view".

The findings of a court are not subject to "balance" in reporting or opinions. The court found in favour of Peter Ridd. End of story.
Posted by ttbn, Wednesday, 17 April 2019 7:32:46 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
ttbn,

Surely media reporting of the court decision should be balanced. Or do you think such reporting can be spun and politicized to promote one thing or another? End of story?
Posted by JF Aus, Wednesday, 17 April 2019 7:53:57 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Hasbeen,

You write;

“I am heartened to see justice done in this case, although I'd say the judge has been removed from more than a few guest lists.”

Why? He did his job. The only ones who were not going to be happy with that outside those immediately impacted was your lot of anti-climate loons. The rest of us have enough confidence in the legal system to accept the judgement and move on. It is you and your small band of malcontents who were lining up to call him weak if he hadn't adjudicated the way you wanted.

Dear Big Nana,

You wrote;

“One would think that scientists, by their very nature, would be compelled to speak the true facts, not face dismissal for presenting data that may prove unpopular or embarrassing.”

He got sacked not for the content but in the accusatory and demeaning manner with which he delivered his assessment of other staff.
Posted by SteeleRedux, Wednesday, 17 April 2019 10:20:56 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
JF,

No mate. It's the decision that is the important thing - to me anyway. He was persecuted by the university hierarchy for contradicting the 'wisdom' of their official line on the GBR. Right or wrong, he was entitled to voice dissent; and the Federal Court agreed. What is there to report about that simple fact?
Posted by ttbn, Wednesday, 17 April 2019 11:10:01 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hasbeen and Big Nana,

Don't bother arguing with SR: it only encourages more of his rants. You are both made of better stuff than he is.
Posted by ttbn, Wednesday, 17 April 2019 11:14:48 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. ...
  9. 13
  10. 14
  11. 15
  12. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy