We don't have to "do" anything with Christian Porter. There is no "case". There has been an anonymous accusation. The NSW police have said there is no evidence; and Porter - and any other Australian citizen - is innocent until proven guilty. The witch-hunt against the man - purely political and vicious- shows that we have learned nothing from the ghastly corruption of our legal system that occurred in the Pell fiasco, which saw another innocent man jailed for 400 days.

We have to do none of the things Don Aitkin and other meddlers ramble about. We certainly do not know what happened 30 years ago and people should put their minds to the present and the future. Most of the people trying to dig up rumoured nastiness from the past totally reject history and proven facts when it suits them.

I don't care about Porter. But, the mob hysteria in the media and now on OLO, caused by an anonymous claim concerning maybe/maybe not events over a generation ago, is an indictment of the thorough going shites who are continually sniping at our system of justice, the rule of law, and everything about Western society that is fair and decent

Let him go, he's no asset to the Govt. He's got more money than most of us can only dream of to retire on.

Some people might be interested in an article available in Quadrant Online titled, "Accusations from the realm of madness".

This article refers to another woman suffering from a similar mental problem to the one who, the day before she killed herself, advised police that she wished to withdraw the complaint against Porter.

This other poor bipolar sufferer had dillusions of all sorts of terrible things happening to her, including rape, when she was dreaming and even when she was not.

There are so many things that the layperson is so ignorant of that would preclude them from pontificating on issues such as this if they knew how ignorant they really were.

Guilty, or not, Porter will go by falling on his sword. That's politics in the modern age.

Well, isn't HE in charge of the Law in Australia ?
Innocent or guilty is a dilemma of the countless loopholes created by our Laws so the corrupt can operate with impunity to protect the corrupt !

Put him in another portfolio? You have just got to be kidding. Worst idea ever.

At the top boys' school in Perth, Porter was specially trained to be unfit for public office. He showed his form early, demeaning and insulting UWA women for years. He has been a regressive and vindictive A-G, both for WA and Australia. He thought it was a joke, to step out on his second wife while she was stuck back in Perth.

Don, Morrison's continual disparagement of women - and the law - is not trivial, and seriously threatens his government. You are not getting the full import.

I can't wait until the movie comes out!

But while we are waiting for the movie we can always watch this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBe_guezGGc

And this year's Academy Award nominee is ..................

In all of this imbroglio, there is one thing missing- a standard of propriety. Porter and Morrison lack it. It's as simple as that. An honorable person would have resigned [Porter rejected it out of hand];Morrison for his political reasons, denied the correct course of an inquiry. Both are dishonorable men.

The woman who accused Porter is not given the opportunity for her case to be heard in public. Is that justice?

It is totally unreasonable to expect anybody, even a politician, to resign over an anonymous complaint that cannot be proved or disproved; a complaint that was withdrawn 30 plus years ago, at a time when Porter was a 17 year old boy nobody had heard of. Now that he is a high ranking politician, though, any excuse at all is reason for political ideologs to bay for his blood - even to have a go at the Prime Minister for doing his job to protect the integrity of the law against the mob.

And these critics have the gall to mention 'honour' and 'propriety' with the same breath they hurl their bile. How Australian society has fallen.

Stop Press !
A male friend of the lady was on TV last night, she apparently met
Porter some many years after the Debating Contest and had dinner with him as told to this friend.
It appears the ABC has had this for some time.

The police have reviewed the information and declared that there is no official complaint or evidence to take this to trial. The case is effectively closed.

The complainant who was certified psychotic is dead, the document she left behind was drafted when she was suffering from psychosis and is unsigned, there is no lodged complaint, no witnesses, no physical evidence, and no one that was informed of the supposed rape within decades of it supposedly happening.

The case is not only closed but non-existent. There is absolutely nothing an independent inquiry can work with, and the result is a foregone conclusion.

This is a pure lynching.

A lynching it is. An independent inquiry won't exonerate Porter, only find for or against him on the 'balance of probabilities'. Any smear is sufficient, it's totally political, and given the zeitgeist Porter will depart for the good of the Government.

Dear plantagenet,

As I'm fairly certain the dossier isn't public yet it would be interesting to know how these details have been released and by whom.

At a time when the lady of concern felt she was fully in touch with
her reality and was grounded she instructed the police to withdraw her complaint.

Surely that is enough to put all this BS to bed and give it a rest.

Dear Bazz,

You write: "At a time when the lady of concern felt she was fully in touch with her reality and was grounded she instructed the police to withdraw her complaint."

So the day before she commits suicide you have decided she was fully in touch with reality and grounded?

Whew!

Women, very early in life, learn to use the awesomely powerful tool they were gifted with:
Whereas, blokes on the other hand, never learn the dangers of their gifted tools, guided by the compass of Alcohol and other drugs.

My advice? Don’t drink!

Dan

Posted by individual

Well, isn't HE in charge of the Law in Australia ?
Innocent or guilty is a dilemma of the countless loopholes created by our Laws so the corrupt can operate with impunity to protect the corrupt !

Brilliant.

Dan

Dear SteeleRedux

I'll repeat "[There being no Court Case or Charges Laid to be Sub Judice about http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sub_judice ]" yet.

Where you ask above "As I'm fairly certain the dossier isn't public yet it would be interesting to know how these details have been released and by whom." SteeleRedux, Thursday, 11 March 2021 3:52:57 PM

It occurred to me (unlike typical OLO punters) to look at the comments Don had already received on his blog.

So I did - see http://donaitkin.com/what-to-do-with-christian-porter/#comments

revealing the details have now read at "Thursday, 11 March 2021 2:25:22 PM" above

By comparing http://donaitkin.com/what-to-do-with-christian-porter/#comments with "Thursday, 11 March 2021 2:25:22 PM" above, you will note I did not republish particularly objectional bits.

If you or others have problems you may want to ask Don to delete the comment in question from http://donaitkin.com/what-to-do-with-christian-porter/#comments

Then I'll ask Graham to delete my republished "comment" at "Thursday, 11 March 2021 2:25:22 PM" if Graham believes warranted.

Again "[There being no Court Case or Charges Laid to be Sub Judice about http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sub_judice ]" at this time.

Regards

Steeleredux has very clearly made the point that the alleged victim was clearly mentally unstable when topping herself and thus was not sufficiently sane to withdraw her complaint. The obvious conclusion would be that she was not lucid when making the complaint either.

I guess that any inquiry should include Bill Shorten for allegedly raping a Labor intern and Wong and SHY for their involvement in Kate's death.

Dear plantagenet,

All I am putting is that since the dossier has not been made public at least in my understanding the veracity of those publishing apparent details from it can not be checked.

If it is coming from Bolt then he is a serial offender in this regard and has been proven repeatedly to publish rubbish he is later forced to retract and apologise for.

Not to worry SteeleRedux

You were right in commenting on the sensitivity of the "dossier" that WAS in my "Thursday, 11 March 2021 2:25:22 PM".

Now my "Thursday, 11 March 2021 2:25:22 PM" has been DELETED at my request and Graham's agreement.

Info that was in my "Thursday, 11 March 2021 2:25:22 PM" WAS possibly privileged info, known to a small circle, with legal access.

Its up to Don whether he wants to keep the original commenter's "dossier" comment on Don's blog.

It think that "dossier", if it stays there, may cause distress to deceased's parents and friends - especially point "1."

Just look at it and you'll see why.
___________

Now, that is all I am saying on the matter.

Kind Regards

A reliable witness has come foreword, saying the alleged victim spoke to him in the 1990's about what took place with Porter in 1988, the witness approached Porter about the matter. The witness is willing to be involved in any independent enquiry. So much for Porters claim that he has no recollection of his behaviour in 1988.

Paul1405, I'm not sure who your "reliable" witness is, but the ABC have reported a fellow who at one time was in a relationship with the young lady has come forward and has indicated a willingness to assist with any inquiry.
At this point, we have no idea what he has to say about the events as claimed by his former partner or what he discussed with Christian Porter.
If this witness that you are referring to is the former partner, he was not, as far as details of the alleged assault is concerned, actually present at the time of the assault. As such he is not a "witness" to the event. But merely a person that the young lady included in her recall of the evening.
The actual alleged assault remains unverified.

Hi JCE,

Not in the sense of an eyewitness, but a person who can give enlightening evidence before an enquiry which is tasked with determining if Porter is a fit and proper person to hold the high position of Attorney-General.

Hi Paul

A layperson's (non lawyer's) view may be:

Unfortunately this whole matter seems to rest on HEARSAY "Evidence" which is often INADMISSABLE depending on the rules of evidence of the court location/system.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hearsay

"Hearsay evidence, in a legal forum, is testimony from a witness under oath who is reciting an out-of-court statement, content of which is being offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted.

In most courts, hearsay evidence is inadmissible (the "Hearsay Evidence Rule") unless an exception to the Hearsay Rule applies."
____________

Some parts of matter may rest on "Double hearsay"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hearsay

"Double hearsay is a hearsay statement that contains another hearsay statement itself. For example, a witness wants to testify that "a very reliable man informed me that Wools-Sampson told him"
_______________

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hearsay#Australia

"The rules of evidence differ among the states and the Commonwealth; the Commonwealth, Victoria, New South Wales, Tasmania, and the Australian Capital Territory all share similar hearsay provisions in their Uniform Evidence Acts;[8] the other states rely upon the common law. As elsewhere, hearsay is usually inadmissible, outside of interlocutory proceedings, unless it falls within one of the hearsay exceptions."
_________________

Much more at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hearsay#Uniform_Evidence_Act and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hearsay generally.

Regards

Come on people. Lets be a bit brutal about this.

A Liberal hating, man hating Labor polly of doubtful integrity & even less credibility has made a hearsay accusation against a male, liberal polly, with the only "evidence" that before she topped her self, some lady of doubtful mental stability, had claimed said liberal had raped her, back in her childhood.

For this the poor bloke is supposed to fall on his sword.

We have seen an increasing incidence of claims of long past rape by left leaning females against right pollies. It is perhaps following some predetermined script to snare a few votes, & divert interest from the glaring failures of the left.

Only a twit, or a lefty of doubtful integrity, would peddle this stuff.

Dear Hasbeen,

You write: "A Liberal hating, man hating Labor polly of doubtful integrity & even less credibility has made a hearsay accusation against a male, liberal polly, with the only "evidence" that before she topped her self, some lady of doubtful mental stability, had claimed said liberal had raped her, back in her childhood."

So true to form you are once again talking out of your backside. You do realise the material was sent to other people not just Penny Wong?

The victim had told others of the incident decades prior to talking to the police.

Why are you reducing this to pure politics?

SteeleRedux, it is very easy to see the whole situation as being of a purely political nature.
If the woman were alive today and be presented in Court and cross examined on her recollections of the event, she would be torn to shreds about her credibility.
Now she has committed suicide and we have no real idea why as no final note has been presented, this leaves her as a sacred totem that the people mentioned by Hasbeen are using as political lever against the AG.

Dear Jay Cee Ess,

And why do you think she would have been "torn to shreds"?

SteeleRedux, have you ever been under cross examination on the witness stand? Nothing that the witness has previously said is accepted and all will be cynically dismembered.
Especially when the events are from recall from years after the event.
The human memory is very imprecise and nothing is definite.
The woman in question was a known fantasist and her friends knew this.

Dear Jay Cee Ess,

You write: "The woman in question was a known fantasist and her friends knew this."

How do you know?

Depending on how she was coping at the time she may well have been able to give quite a comprehensible account of what occurred. We have had a person who has stepped forward who is apparently able to give accounts related to him by both Porter and the woman in question. Are these to be believed?

Only a twit, or a lefty of doubtful integrity, would peddle this stuff.

I would say that part of the reason this "Kate" killed herself is that she realised the information she'd passed to the police was fiction.

Any inquiry into Porter would be very short. Hearsay evidence is not admissible, and neither would an unsigned diatribe by a mentally retarded woman. The only potential evidence would be Porter's testimony which he would almost certainly refuse to give.

It was Turnbull who appointed Porter Attorney-General even though very loud alarm bells were ringing as to his suitability, based on his character and reputation. Only an independent enquiry can determine if Porter is a fit and proper person to hold such high office.

Paul1405,

You reckon "only an independent enquiry can determine if Porter is a fit and proper person to hold such high office."

Not from where I'm standing.

For me, the only question now is Who will be the bigger loser, Porter or Morrison?

And of course let's not forget that little honey Linda Reynolds. She's probably wondering if she will have anything to come back to once she runs out of sick leave. Maybe she can get a Soot's half price plane ticket to Hawaii and disappear down a volcano?

This is all just a failed Labor backed sabotage gone awry ! The woman probably realised she was being used as a pawn, couldn't see a way out & well ?

individual,

Are you talking about Linda Reynolds?

Albanese: "Linda, when you go to work tomorrow I want you to start calling a woman staffer a lying cow."

Linda: "Albo . . . . I thought you would never ask!"

MENTAL ILLNESS, EVIDENCE, POLITICALLY MOTIVATED INQUIRY

I reckon:

1. If "Kate" had a major mental illness (and was, for long periods, off her meds) she may have done her main Porter talking (to the police) in a phase of Mania.

In Mania people can exaggerate (make grandiose) an idea in their head, the more so with the telling, and with little grounding in reality.

2. She most probably topped herself in the depths of Depression, where reality is often also fairly distant.

3. Rules of HEARSAY "evidence" and Passage of Time would normally not satisfy a judge that a Court Case is justified.

4. To justify a case, a Court would ask for direct audio-visual recording of any "rape", failing that Bruising AND a DNA matched vaginal Swab-test within hours of alleged rape.

5. Putting an overlay of "Its all Porter's Fault" may speak more of today's politics than anything else. INCLUDING CALLS FOR WHAT WOULD BE A POLITICALLY MOTIVATED INQUIRY

STOP PRESS. STOP PRESS.

Six months from now Defence Minister Linda Reynolds answers a question from a reporter at the Canberra Press Club and someone in the back yells out "Lying cow!"

Somethings just won't go away.

Hi Pete,

We've never had a politically motivated enquiry in Aussie, never ever, so lets have our first. Lets get the dirt of this kid Porter. We could hold the enquiry in a Porta Loo, seems the appropriate place, given this blokes past form. It could be a traveling enquiry and anyone who wants to unload on Porter, could simply step into the mobile Porta Loo and do so.

None of this hearsay nonsense, we want direct lies written into evidence! No mucking around with the truth! Do you think Judge Jeffreys is still around to pass judgment, and his usual sentence on this bloke? .

shadowminister,

Once again with your slur of retarded. Why do you think you reserve it for women you think have wronged you in some fashion?

You state: "I would say that part of the reason this "Kate" killed herself is that she realised the information she'd passed to the police was fiction."

You would say that wouldn't you. Your victim shaming is really all you have isn't it. Utterly pathetic. You can't bring yourself to contemplate that an assault of any description took place. It was her word against his. Porter certainly has had a chequered past in his behaviour toward women. Yet to you he is absolutely incapable of being at fault while you were perfectly capable of hang Shorten out to dry.

There is enough of a stink around Porter to bring his suitability to hold the AG job into real question. I think he should go and Scomo will undoubtedly formally turf him soon.

Hi Paul14

Here's an article nicely comparing and contrasting allegations of Porter's and also the Shorten alleged rape http://www.smh.com.au/national/what-a-difference-a-decade-makes-to-reporting-claims-against-powerful-men-20210305-p57848.html

Yes, the god of politically motivated enquiries is 1st Baron Judge Jeffreys (1645–1689) to which you refer. This likable chap was known as "the Hanging Judge". He rose from Judge to Lord Chancellor under King James II. His conduct as a judge was to enforce royal policy, resulting in an historical reputation for severity and political bias. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Jeffreys,_1st_Baron_Jeffreys

The powers of a UK Lord Chancellor to prosecute politicians is interesting http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord_Chancellor

Hi SteeleRedux

Yes Porter may have done it.

Unfortunately it would take extraordinary bending of legal norms to bring him to trial.

Future remedies might be:

1. New Federal (and uniform State?) legislation lowering the bar on admissable evidence in rape trials.

2. A powerful Commonwealth Anti-Corruption Commission. Rape being conduct unbecoming. Such a Commission should have a wide remit, allowing public hearings, can take tip-offs from whistle blowers, and a moderate (rather than current high) burden of proof before an investigation can take place.

Mr Opinion, I'm wondering if you are aware of the context of the "lying cow" exclamation? It was not to do with the claims of sexual assault, but to do with the claims that no assistance was offered to the victim by the Minister. It would appear that assistance was offered, but it wasn't to the liking of the victim or didn't go as far as she wanted it to.

SR,

Firstly, you need a rap over the knuckles for recklessly hurling out false accusations of victim shaming firstly because I have not attributed any blame on Kate for causing a rape and secondly because my position is that I seriously doubt that any rape, intercourse etc. actually occurred on the night in question.

That you have clearly discounted the likelihood that no rape or sexual act occurred flys against the complete lack of evidence and has more religious overtones than rational.

Also, I didn't call Kate a "retard". However, she was severely psychotic, delusional and finally suicidal is not in debate. Her demented spiralling scribblings that formed part of the record of the alleged rape should raise red flags for anyone other than the rabid left whinge. That she was mentally crippled (or retarded) is beyond dispute.

The contrast to the way Shorten was treated is stark. Bill Shorten's accuser is lucid, cogent, has filed a formal complaint with the police and is prepared to testify. Reaction from left whingers? not a whisper. He was not hounded, no independent inquiry was called for etc.

The case against CP is an unsigned complaint to the police by a delusional woman at the urgings of Labor and green MPs that was withdrawn and the woman subsequently killed herself. There is zero admissible evidence and the woke left whingers are treating this as a slam dunk.

If there is an inquiry, Bill Shorten needs to be included. I know who is going to look worse.

Plant,

Your remedies would essentially overturn all the present rules of evidence to include hearsay, rumours etc.

Not to mention the star chamber where innocence is not presumed.

What's next? the death penalty for jaywalking?

Jay Cee Ess,

I think politicians are dishonest and untrustworthy so I would believe Brittany Higgins more than I would ever believe Linda Reynolds.

Linda Reynolds called Higgins a 'lying cow' and is now trying to come up with an excuse for saying it.

Sorry, doesn't sit with me: two wrongs don't make a right.

Reynolds should come out and say: "I said because I am a politician."

Now that we could all accept!

Well it seems we are going to have an inquiry of sorts after all.

Porter is suing the ABC and Louise Milligan for defamation. So a proper court with a rooly-trooly judge which will take evidence from both sides. Not at all what the get-the-Liberal-bastard crowd wanted.

Should be fun. There's little downside for the ABC since, even if they lose, they'll run a 4-Corners report explaining how they won and all the luvvies will, as usual, believe it. And then they'll run a Q&A programme explaining how their funding needs to be increased to cover the cost of lost lawsuits.

Louise Milligan (who after she crashed and burned over her Pell accusations is better known as Louise 7-nil-again) will likewise be protected by the left.

Still, it'd be fun if Porter is able to subpoena ABC documents about why they went so hard against him but utterly ignored the similar Shorten accusations.

Its always fun to raise Shorten. Whenever you do, Paul suddenly realises he has a prior appointment and absents himself until the conversation moves on.

As I said elsewhere, those who have differing reactions to Shorten and Porter prove their misogyny. For them its all about politics and the women involved are mere pawns to be used as required.

mhaze,

Maybe Porter can get a character reference from Bill Clinton telling the Court how people like them don't do things like that.

mhaze,

It's the vibe:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton%E2%80%93Lewinsky_scandal

Dear Mopi

Where you say "two wrongs don't make a right." at http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=21348&page=0#376941

You were really thinking of "two w-ngs don't make a w--te"

How dare you!

Penny just happens to be one of my bestest fiends and we used to pump iron together after a night on the turps at the Cross, chasing the gals.

Dear shaddowMuppetier and Mopi

Where you (Muppetier) suggest "What's next? the death penalty for jaywalking?"

Why not bwana!?

Malthus failed Uni Economics I when he theorised:

"populations would continue expanding until growth is stopped or reversed by disease, famine, war, or calamity"

http://www.investopedia.com/terms/t/thomas-malthus.asp#:~:text=Thomas%20Robert%20Malthus%20was%20a,famine%2C%20war%2C%20or%20calamity

So why not Death for minor traffic infractions?

As mentioned above, Porter has hired a bunch of top-notch defamation lawyers to sue the ABC and Louise Milligan. I'm not sure what the demand is but given the gravity of the accusations, the way it was introduced and the complete lack of evidence it probably will be for several $m and hopefully will end the careers of LM and a few other political opportunists at the ABC, put others on notice and finally settle the debate once and for all.

If the ABC is required to show that whatever it said is true than one way to do so must be to have Porter take a police polygraph test in order to show that whatever the ABC said is not false.

I suppose he will have to respond to a question such as "Did you have sexual relations with such and such?" If the answer is YES than I think case closed and the ABC walks.

Does anyone recall this famous case:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBe_guezGGc

Does anyone know if Clinton took the polygraph test?

"A French schoolgirl has admitted to spreading false claims about a teacher before he was murdered last year.

Samuel Paty was beheaded in October after showing students cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad.

The girl, whose complaints sparked an online campaign against Paty, has now admitted that she was not in the class."
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-56325254

and that shews what unsubstantiated accusations can do.

Opinion,

"In virtually every jurisdiction, the answer is a resounding no. Though called lie detectors, the reality is that a polygraph machine does not have any capacity for detecting the truth or falsity of a statement. Rather, it measures a person's biological processes to determine if they are experiencing a physiological event, such as an increase in blood pressure or heart rate. These conditions are considered to be indicators that someone may be lying, as the increased stress of telling a falsehood creates a subtle, but measurable change in one's vital readings.

Unfortunately, dozens of other factors can also affect the readings detected by a polygraph machine. For instance, nervousness of any kind could read with the same increase in activity as a lie. This nervousness could simply be caused by being concerned about the test giving a false positive, creating a self-fulfilling prophecy. In fact, some polygraph administrators, particularly in law enforcement, are given training on how to induce a false positive response or to ask questions in a fashion that makes them difficult to answer with a yes or no. On the other hand, those taking the test have reported being able to evade the detection of a lie by using various techniques such as faking a cold, squeezing the muscles of one's posterior, and so forth. These techniques would cause a reading on the polygraph that would show increased physiological activity even when the person is not lying, making it difficult to detect any variation when the person does tell a falsehood.

As a result, polygraphs have been successfully challenged on several occasions in various jurisdictions on the basis of their scientific uncertainty. Because the results of a polygraph test can mean many things and are so unreliable in detecting actual lies, they do not rise to the level of reliability required for scientific evidence in a courtroom and polygraph test results are usually inadmissible as evidence."
http://www.hg.org/legal-articles/is-a-polygraph-test-admissible-as-evidence-31737

Any more nonsensical ideas?

Mr uneducated.

Now with the court case, the ABC will have to prove that Kate was raped by Porter. Perhaps Louis Milligan should take the polygraph test.

PORTER SUING (FourCorners') LOUISE MILLIGAN AND ABC

Following up mhaze's tip.

ABC 15 March 2021 reports http://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-03-15/abc-christian-porter-sued-allegations-defamation/13248408

Attorney-General...Porter has launched defamation action against the ABC and journalist Louise Milligan. The proceedings relate to an article

[ABC published February 26 2021 http://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-02-26/pm-senators-afp-told-historical-rape-allegation-cabinet-minister/13197248 ]

that reported a letter had been sent to...Scott Morrison containing a historical allegation of rape against a serving Cabinet minister.

Mr Porter has denied the allegation and his lawyers said the article made false allegations against him. While the article did not name Mr Porter, his lawyers argue he was easily identifiable to many as the subject of the allegations. His lawyers said the Attorney-General had been subject to a "trial by media", which they said should now end with these proceedings.

They said Mr Porter would use the opportunity to give evidence under oath.

An ABC spokesperson said the ABC would be defending the action.
At a press conference two weeks ago, Mr Porter identified himself as the Cabinet minister referenced in the letter that made the historical allegation. The letter had formed the basis of an ABC story.

Mr Porter said he had known the woman who had made the allegation, but denied the allegation. "I can say categorically that what has been put in various forms and allegations simply did not happen," he said.

A statement of claim lodged in the Federal Court by the lawyers of Mr Porter set out their argument for aggravated damages. The document claims the ABC and Ms Milligan knew Mr Porter would be "readily identifiable" in the article, he would "ultimately be compelled to publicly respond", and they intended to harm him.

"Milligan acted with malice knowing of the impossibility of any finding of guilt or civil liability in the circumstances and believing that a public campaign designed to damage his reputation would be a more effective substitute against Porter in replacement of the process of the justice system," it states.

The woman who made the allegation took her own life last year.

Mr Porter is currently on medical leave. His office said he had nothing further to add."

I suppose much will hinge on the claim Porter was "readily identifiable", is his lawyer going to argue the line, as a well known sleaze bag PORTER was "readily identifiable". Interesting.

If Porter has to go on medical leave because of that situation, then how on Earth is he going to deal with real big issues concerning the whole Nation, not just himself ?
Btw, whatever happened to that alleged rape case involving a supposedly Labor MP some days/weeks back ?

Morrison's continual disparagement of women - and the law
Steve S,
What a stupid, nasty thing to say !

I think Porter's defamation claim against the ABC is just a sham to detract public attention away from the way LNP politicians treat women.

I think it is just a red herring but one that is likely to backfire on him.

Can someone explain to me exactly what the ABC did that Porter deems to be false? Because I don't think that the ABC reporting that Porter was named as a rapist in a police investigation is grounds for defamation.

what the ABC did that Porter deems to be false?
Mr Opinion,
I didn't see anything but my guess is that the ABC just did its ABC thing re Porter !

Interesting that people like Paul and indeed the ABC itself are asserting that their defence is that Porter was not identified in the article in question.

Nowhere have I seen anyone assert that their defence ought to be based on claims of 'truth'. There's no defamation if the claims are true, but no one seems to offering that as a defence. Says it all.

As an aside, polygraphs don't work and aren't even admissible evidence in many courts. They can be easily defeated. Indeed Christine Blassey Ford, another of those myriad women were are supposed to just believe, who you might remember from the Kavanaugh debacle, was schooled by an ex-FBI friend on how to beat the polygraph. Why she needed subterfuge to beat it was never explained!!

individual,

Which was?

mhaze,

I don't care!

I just want to see Porter take the polygraph test.

If the Hon Christian Porter remains Attorney-General during the trial

The Attorney-General being "the minister responsible for legal affairs, national and public security...a general legal adviser to the Cabinet, and has carriage of legislation dealing with copyright, human rights and a range of other subjects."

see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attorney-General_of_Australia#Role_and_functions
________________________________

And continues to retain the three best defamation lawyers in the land. Namely:

- Rebekah Giles http://www.companygiles.com.au/about

- Sue Chrysanthou SC http://153phillip.com.au/barristers/sue-chrysanthou-sc/ and especially

- Bret Walker SC http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bret_Walker

(Bret appeared for Geoffrey Rush when he successfully sued the Daily Telegraph for defamation. Walker also acted for Cardinal George Pell, whose child sex abuse convictions were overturned in an appeal before the High Court.) see http://theconversation.com/christian-porter-sues-abc-and-reporter-louise-milligan-for-defamation-157140
_____________

Then?!

Mr Opinion, What possible benefit could there be in having Christian Porter undertake a polygraph test? Apart from wasting everyone's time, it would serve no purpose and prove nothing. You may as well have a physic run a oija board to determine guilt.
As far as Bill Clinton was concerned, it was all based on his definition of "sex" in that context. His definition was penis in vagina with ejaculation occurring within the vagina. He had refined this definition over several decades with countless partners.
With Mr Porter, unless there is a written diary from the young woman recorded at or about the time of the event, there are great doubts about the accuracy of the recollection as being presented now. As it is, we do not have any way of confirming that the letter as presented is an accurate account.
Does the term "recovered false memories" ring any bells?

According to this article below "The attorney-general's lawyers allege the story - which did not name him - was defamatory because it imputed he raped a 16-year-old girl in 1988 and that contributed to her taking her own life."

http://www.msn.com/en-au/news/australia/porter-s-ag-role-tweaked-amid-abc-lawsuit/ar-BB1eC3sc?ocid=msedgntp

I don't recall it being like that.

I thought the ABC said a woman had claimed that she had been raped by a man and that man was now a Cabinet minister. And I don't recall the ABC saying that the woman had committed suicide because she had been raped by that man.

We need to ask someone who is an expert on these matters. How about this guy:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBe_guezGGc

Opinion,

Polygraphs have no legal standing as I told you elsewhere.

One of the tricks to fool them is to contract the muscles of the anus.

No shi t!!

Hi Issy,

Is that why you haven't been winning any "Porky" awards lately? You've been contracting the muscles of your anus while banging on your keyboard! I say let it all out, let it flow, despite the mess the truth is best

Pauliar,

You have swept the floor of all the porkie awards.

Hi Pauly 04

Issy speakum truth.

After considerable torture (enforced viewing of "Married at First Sight") my Russian mole confessed.

In the real world double agent working for the KGB, Aldrich Ames, went through the CIA polygraph twice, and passed, even when working for the KGB.
( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aldrich_Ames )

People have claimed to have had training to beat the polygraph.

Everything from:

- concentrating on tightening your anus

- to establishing a high psychological baseline signal (eg. making the machine spike sharply upward from the simple initial questions (like "What is your name?) onwards.

Administering a polygraph is an ART, not a science. That's why it's not admissible as evidence in COURT.

Further secret special sauce details http://www.esquire.com/entertainment/tv/a28316/spy-on-the-americans/

Here's that interview with Turnbull on ABC where he seems to imply that there is something a bit suspect with the death of the woman who was raped in 1988:

http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/breakfast/calls-inquiry-into-death-of-woman-allegedly-raped-1988/13205762

It's quite an alarming interview and the inferences raised look like something out of a Who Dunnit movie.

Actually, I'm quite looking forward to the events that might unfold in Porter's defamation case.

I think there will be a lot of surprises coming out of the woodwork.

I have a feeling the police are going to reopen their investigation into the rape that took place in 1988.

And after hearing what Turnbull said in the interview above I think they might even open an investigation into her death.

I think we're in for an interesting series of events and I'm sure the news media will exploit it for all it is worth.

I imagine that during the defamation hearings Porter's entire life will be put on display for the entire world to see.

I assume his opponents will try to make him look like some deviant who has spent his entire life preying on women.

I really pity him. I definitely wouldn't like to be in his shoes when things start to heat up.

One can only speculate what cards the ABC has up its sleeve. Whatever they are I'm sure it won't be pretty.

Mr Opinion. the former PM has added nothing of merit to the discussion. As he himself says in the interview, he knows nothing at all about the case in real terms.
You may be obsessed with the Clintons, but this time, there were none involved so no suggestion of "assisted" suicide.
The woman in question was on record as having an unstable psychiatric history and in the absence of any public disclosure of any suicide notes or letters, the official finding of death by her own hand should be left to lie.

Mr O,

Interesting how some on here jump to Porter's defence, denigrating a deceased person, as someone who was mentally unstable and committed suicide, no inquest has determined thus. Just as no inquest has determined the merits of Porter's denial.

JCE

You say "the official finding of death by her own hand" As far as I'm aware the SA Coroner has told Police to continue an “incomplete” investigation into the death of an Adelaide woman who claimed she was raped by the federal Attorney-General."

Can you show where an official finding into the woman's death has been made?

Jay Cee Ess,

What do you think Turnbull was getting at in the interview?

I think he was implying that there are questions that need to be answered and that the police should conduct an investigation into the death of the woman because he felt things didn't make sense.

Anybody else see it like that?

Paul1405, I would've thought that the ABC, SBS, the commercial networks and the traditional print media have all repeated the official line that she committed suicide that we could all accept that as a probable truth.
Are you suggesting that they are all seeking to mislead their consumers?
One doesn't have to be a "supporter" of Christian Porter to observe that the attacks on him are not based on supportable evidence. Again, hearsay and random notes (unwitnessed by any independent third party) from the woman are not proof of any events alleged to have taken place over 30 years earlier.
Mr Opinion, the former PM is suffering from relevance deprivation. Did he call the ABC for that opinion piece, or did they call him? He still does not accept that he was replaced as PM at his initiation and it was a fair call. He has given little if any support to the present Liberal Coalition Government.
What he does is to suit his own agenda. Honesty and truth do not have to be part of his process.

Mr O,

Spot on there, Turnbull was hinting, all is not right concerning the woman's death.

Hi Issy,

I believe you are now conducting anus muscle contracting classes for would be spies, politicians, and catholic clergy, is this true?

BTW, what sort of contract does one have to sign to get into your class?

BBTW; another gunnie nutter has gone off in America.

THE ABC IS BLATANTLY BOOSTING FEMALE OUTRAGE

Behold Pauly4 (your new name btw :)

In a parallel Universe: The full force of female righteousness, shape-shifting to "The Ride of the Valkyries" http://youtu.be/PSuRJueqsQg?t=4m

Is crashing down upon Scottie's blokey band of brothers.

Another Universe sees perhaps only 1% of women in demos - and they being mainly young Greens-Labor - who would never vote for Scottie anyway - wish to further the Greens-Labor's position.
__________________

Where this is going is that the ABC (of course) is a political preacher.

See the ABC's 18 March comment at http://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-03-18/scott-morrison-doesnt-plan-sexual-harassment-women-fed-up/13255970

["Neutral" Title]: "Scott Morrison doesn't have a plan for dealing with sexual harassment, and women are fed up"

[Followed by "Neutral" ABC tone/sermon]

"...The great mystery of the past month is why the Prime Minister, for all his political strengths, has no plan to deal with a crisis gripping the nation's attention and eroding support for the government.

If Monday's historic March 4 Justice showed anything, it's that women are fed up. They want change. It's about more than dusting off and finally implementing recommendations from a report the government received 12 months ago, it's about taking the issues of sexual harassment and abuse far more seriously. It's about listening to women and leading cultural change..."
_____________________________________

COMMENT

So clearly the ABC hasn't lost its political partisanship. ABC realising its a dead duck anyway, in terms of funding, under the Coalition Government - so, for ABC, whats to lose?!

ABC in the end can gain, in terms of careers and budget, if the current outrage helps Labor get in at the next Federal Election.

As quoted:

"But the defamation law will ask the ABC to prove more than just what it actually reported. Porter’s lawyers say the story raised “imputations” – impressions in the minds of readers – well beyond those words. Imputations are the “vibe” of the story taken as a whole. In this story, the key impression Porter’s lawyers will argue was conveyed to readers is that he, as a matter of fact, “brutally raped a 16-year-old girl in 1988”, and that this contributed to her taking her own life.

Assuming the judge accepts these imputations, if it wants to defend itself on the basis that the article was true, the ABC will need to prove that the rape actually occurred. They will also need to prove that it contributed to the woman’s suicide. The police cannot prove these things. The ABC cannot prove these things. Nobody can.

Or, as The Australian’s Chris Merritt gleefully put it: “Milligan and the ABC are in a dreadful position. Their best option is a long, grovelling apology accompanied by a very large cheque. They have been snookered.”

I would think that there are a lot of puckered anuses at the ABC.

What do the Porter lawyers base their claim that the mere mention of rape and a unnamed cabinet minister automatically triggers the name Christian Porter in the minds of people, and no other, can they prove such a claim? Is the Porter mob admitting Porter has a reputation in this regard?

Hi Pauly4

1. Whole show maybe to put the frightners on the ABC. As:

2. Cost for ABC to hire lawyers to protect itself will run into $millions/year out of ABC's limited budget.

3. Meanwhile Gov can quietly hint it can always, 1/4 or halve ABC's annual funding.

Turnbull definitely asked in his above interview whether or not the woman took her own life.

Listen to it if you don't believe me.

If she didn't take her own life then who did?

I know it wasn't me. I wasn't even there when it happened.

Was it you? Come on, own up. Who was it?

. Meanwhile Gov can quietly hint it can always, 1/4 or halve ABC's annual funding.
Posted by plantagenet.

What fun if they actually did cut the ABC back a bit. Watching the cat fight over salaries, production costs & technology spending would offer more fun than a Cassius Clay fight.

Can you imagine the lovies claws & teeth out over who copped the greatest salary reduction, if any. The blood would run as deep as the current bulldust.

Hasbeen,

I bet a guy like you wouldn't get upset and go running to the ABC if a bloke called YOU a lying cow.

People can call me anything they like, as long as it is not late for lunch.

Better still, give me the job of running the ABC, & it would be fixed in 6 months.

I have turned around a couple of companies that were technically bankrupt when I started, it's mostly about cutting waste, bulldust & feather bedding.

Of course it would need a large fleet of D12 bulldozers to push the garbage & feathers out of the ABC.

I could just imagine an ABC run by Hassy, what a nightmare! Shows like 'The Hasbeen Hour' where Hassy tells all those fancy boys and girls out there exactly what he thinks of them, and how fantastic it would be if we wind back the clock to 1952. The weather presented by Hassy's old mate from up the road; : "Get that rubbish about climate nonsense out of ya heads, I recall the big wet back in 28! That's todays weather!"

Hasbeen: "Give me the ABC and in six months you won't recognize it."

Adolf Hitler: "Give me Germany and in four years you won't recognize it."

Hitler was true to his promise.

But can we trust Hasbeen to do to the ABC what Hitler did to Germany?

Let's ask this guy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBe_guezGGc

Hasbeen,

It would appear that Pauliar and Mr Odious are all about waste, bulldust, featherbedding and Adolf Hitler and would have been the first group of idle fokers to go if you restructured.

Perhaps you could get out your bulldozer and help the ABC restructure as it tries to find the $ms to payout Porter.

what Hitler did to Germany?
Mr Opinion,
Did he do it or those who opposed him ?

individual,

I think we can blame Hitler just as much as we can blame Hasbeen.

I watched The Insiders this morning, where Peter Hartcher thinks Porter having sick leave is actually his boss Soot giving him an opportunity to resign instead of being fired.

I think that might also be the case for Linda Reynolds.

Steelreflux
Disparaging everyone again, mostly ad hominem, why?

You pontificate on your astuteness, always ends up being an attack. This is especially true when people provide information you zealously guard against.

You obviously can’t comprehend and don’t understand the difference between my and others comments. OLO is primarily for article authors to submit articles. Remember it’s still their OPINION. One you need to consider and respond with cogent, factual comments. Secondly you are entitled to respond to comments by others.

Why does It always, always end up being an ad hominem attack...why, please explain?

You require additional education if you want any credibility. Perhaps it’s too late, you never learn. I think I might know why though! You are always right, right! Never wrong just right. Rarely do comments get rational non partisan, unbiased responses from you. Then again I must be wrong, sorry. Why? Because you’re always right, right? !-)

You’re the ignoramus. Your blatant reliance on personal attacks against anyone and everyone when they comment on this website is in the main, insulting. Can’t you see it? Guess not, I suppose you’re right, again!

I am unfortunately down in your sewer again, stooping to your level, obviously lower than a snakes arse...am I allowed to write that? Steelereflux will know, he’s always right you know!

Grow up Steel, Aluminium, Copper whatever you think you are? (Must be Copper, aren’t they policeman, they’re always right too, apparently). Geez that was low wasn’t it, How do I know?, because I stooped and I’m under that snake again with Copper. It’s getting monotonous and I don’t like the smell down here.

By the way Copper you are often WRONG. Yep I said it, loudly too, Got it yet? Of course not?

Ah to hell with this, I’m wasting my time...you win, you’re right of course.

Everyone, sorry that was a waste of your time wasn’t it? Mmm, I’m not sure now! I might be wrong, Oops look out, here comes Copper!

As for Porter, chill out, we will know soon enough.
Galen :-)

Steelreflux, I mean Copper, and please everyone else you must read my previous post.

Turns out I was wrong...again, I told everyone you were on your way, must have been someone else I spotted, maybe Aluminium, who knows? Wrong again, sorry, again.

Now I see Copper, uh oh it’s that snake again, i must be going blind and I’m always wrong, sorry. I’m outta here, again.

Could be wrong though! Yep now I’m sure of it. Why? Ask Copper, and not the snake

;-))
Galen

Dear Galen,

Why are you sooking? It seems I hadn't been speaking to you at all in this thread.

I'm really not sure what you have to complain about. It seems your problem is that I seem to be right most of the time. Sorry mate, you are going to have to live with that. I can't really go about being wrong just to please you now can I?

Have you just heard the latest about Soot not telling Parliament that Phil Gaetjens had told him the internal investigation had been postponed.

BATTLE STATIONS . . . . . BATTLE STATIONS

ENSIGN PORTER TO THE BRIDGE . . . . . CAPTAIN JOSH TO THE BRIDGE

THIS IS YOUR ADMIRAL SPEAKING . . . . ALL HANDS ON DECK

I assume we all saw Soot in tears on TV yesterday as he explained that the lewd and bizzare sexual deviancy that is being displayed within LNP ranks is really a UNIVERSAL PROBLEM.

Yes, that's right, it's a universal problem. And we're all the blame.

So stop focussing on the LNP and start looking at everyone else: You, me, the neighbour's cat, because it really has nothing to do with the LNP.

Good, we all now know who is at fault: it's us and everyone else . . . . definitely not people in the LNP ranks.

Thank God for that. Now we can put this all behind us and forget it ever happened and just move on and let Soot and the Boyz get back to doing what big blokes in the LNP do . . . . . even if it means masturbating over someone's desk and video recording it.

Mr O,

I think Soot ran that past Jen, the girls and dear old mum before he said it.

Anyway, that women's libber and tieless campaigner for women's rights the crusty old far right Liberal Senator Eric Abetz is accused of 'slut-shaming' Brittany Higgins. Did it come from Labor, no, it came from Tasmanian ex-Liberal MP Sue Hickey. Like all the other Liberals, Abetz is in denial.

Ms Hickey said the conversation went: "[Senator Abetz went on about Higgins], 'As for that Higgins girl, anybody so disgustingly drunk who would sleep with anybody could have slept with one of our spies and put the security of the nation at risk.'"

On the Porter matter according to Hickey Abetz told her; "yes … but not to worry, the woman is dead and the law will protect him, (Porter)" What is Abetz saying yes to.

Mr O,

I think as the ScumO' media conference went down like a lead balloon yesterday, he should try and warm the media up before hand, maybe with a joke, something like this;

"You chicks wont get this, especially you blonds, but the blokes will get a laugh."

"How many Sheila's does it take to change a light bulb?"
....."None, a bloke has to do it for them!" ha, ha, ha wasn't that a ripper. Don't worry girls I've got a bag full of blond jokes to finish off with later, ya gonna be impressed!" ScumO' couldn't do any worse than he did yesterday.

Paul1405,

I think I just found Soot a second banana for his upcoming vaudeville act:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9396543/NSW-politician-allegedly-raped-sex-worker-Blue-Mountains-lookout.html?ito=push-notification&ci=106772&si=28036895

"Hubba hubba hubba! An LNP MP walks into Parliament with a blond in his arm . . . . . . . . . . . ."

I'll let you finish it off; we all know the punch line.

Paul1405,

I just found Soot a second second banana just in case the first second banana has to go on forever never come back sick leave.

I think Porters being exiled, as predicted.

In this male only (except for Foxy) OLO-Commenter forum. Why so few wommen commenters on OLO?

ABC, 3 April 2021 reports http://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-04-03/misogyny-anti-women-terrorism-extremist-groups-online/100031678

"...some experts are arguing that in a "MANosphere" of online anti-women groups, methods of communication and organisation are becoming more sophisticated.

At the more serious end of the spectrum, these experts say, are operators that must be seen and named as "extremist" or "terrorist" groups – particularly if anything is to be done to stop them.

A 'grooming' of young men online UK author Laura Bates has spent most of the last decade educating school children about sexism.

She says in the last few years she's noted an increasing sense of hostility, aggression and anger in boys' attitudes towards women, and argues online hate groups are to blame.

"There [is] a kind of radicalisation, a kind of grooming happening online," Ms Bates tells RN's Life Matters.

She describes "a very gradual, slippery process" whereby young men's problems and insecurities are co-opted by organised online extremist groups.

In order to connect to young men, the groups cite real-world problems men are dealing with, such as workplace injuries, cancer, mental health and suicide.

But instead of tackling those issues, the groups reinforce "the stereotypes that are actually causing them", Ms Bates says.

"So they double down on the idea that men have to be tough and manly, that they have to be strong, not vulnerable, that they shouldn't share emotions, that exerting power and control over women and over societies is what it means to be a real man."

A woman with long fair hair and blue jacket stands smiling, turning side-on.

Ms Bates says anti-women rhetoric is so pervasive online that it's normalised.

In any other case, where somebody goes out and attacks a specific demographic group with the intent of causing enormous harm and fear in that group because of radicalisation, because of the fact that they've been explicitly groomed to hate that group, we would describe it as a form of terrorism," Ms Bates says..."

MORE at http://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-04-03/misogyny-anti-women-terrorism-extremist-groups-online/100031678

NO MENTION OF DR LAMING IN THIS THREAD - HOW MANY OLO 99% MALES WILL SUPPORT HIM?

Scottie's BlokOCKeracy (temporaraly feminized) is likely to be voted out in October 2021.

Meanwile a repeat offender in Scottie's rogues gallery is one Dr Laming MP, Liberal Member for Bowman, Queensland.

Whatever Lambing does, and he's done a lot http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Laming#Controversies Scottie can't sack him. This is because that would risk the FALL of Scottie's one-seat-House-of-Reps-Majority Government.

Check out Laming's latest trick, last para http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Laming#Controversies

"In March 2021, it was reported that Laming had repeatedly made abusive posts on Facebook targeting two women, with one of the women stating that he had been doing so for six years.

Prime Minister Scott Morrison told Laming to apologise for this in [Federal] Parliament before the story was broadcast, which [Laming] did. As part of his apology Laming stated that the women are "highly regarded individuals within our Redland community", though in a subsequent exchange he reportedly said that "In this climate – I willingly apologise – I didn't even know what for

at 4pm when I did it."

On 27 March, after a third woman accused him of misconduct, Laming issued a statement saying, "I will step down from all Parliamentary roles effective immediately and complete both the counselling courses I committed to; as well as additional clinical counselling." It was announced the following day that Laming would not stand for re-election."

So, however much Scottie Feminizes his Ministry (as a Woman's Vote Buying Gesture before the October 2021 Election) poor Scottie just can't keep down his Anti-Women-Blokies.

These blokes have thrived on PM Scottie's watch.

Plantagnent, thank you for the links to Wikipedia. They certainly confirm that there are a lot of "snowflakes" out there if they think that anything listed there about Dr Lamming is at all "controversial".
It appears that he has broken no Laws as such during his Parliamentary career.
What is missing is the detail of the alleged on-line abuse and in the absence of such incriminating content, it's simply a "he said, she said" argument with little to no substance.
What we have happening is an anti-coalition cabal digging for anything that they can throw at the sitting members. There doesn't have to be any substance to any of the claims, just an opportunity to screech about perceived wrongs against the "woke" community.

Hi Jay Cee Ess

Of course the alleged Porter historical rape is not relevant here.

But the Brittany Higgins allegations are http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_Australian_Parliament_House_sexual_misconduct_allegations#2019_rape_allegation_by_Brittany_Higgins

Yes I've been thinking on the reality that senior male politicians or senior male staffers

are so powerful and their junior female victims so genuinely frightened because victims know

that it is they, the victims who will, more often than not, slut-shamed, trashed in the media,

sacked, with their careers ruined.

When dealing with a politician, politics comes to the fore. Simply saying does he/she comply with the criminal code is not good enough for the community. Since community expectations translates into votes, and votes translates into power, any leader, Morrison included, is going to put party and self interest, one in the same, before all other considerations.

Paul1405,

I don't imagine too many women would feel comfortable engaging in casual conversation with a man who has been identified as an alleged rapist.

So I'm guessing someone's sex life must be suffering something terribly

Mr Opinion, when the alleged rape was more than 20 years ago and unsubstantiated, it is probable that the opinions of the women close to the alleged rapist couldn't care less. Besides, how many partners (and potential partners) does any man really need?
I can also assure you that in your everyday social and business encounters, you have many times interacted with people of all genders who have very interesting aspects of their sexual history that you have no idea about and in quite a few cases be shocked by and these people keep it all well hidden. Including often from their official social partners.

Jay Cee Ess,

You ask ". . . . how many partners (and potential partners) does any man really need?"

Myself personally, I would like several hundred. I'm not too particular who they are just as long as they are all as sexy looking as Sophia Loren and Gina Lollobrigida. Maybe a couple of Raquel Welch and Brigitte Bardot types thrown in for variety.

test1

test2

test3

test4

test 1,075,165

Hi Mopi

You have interesting tastes in women of Age.

Re your: "Myself personally, I would like several hundred. I'm not too particular who they are just as long as they are all as sexy looking as

Sophia Loren [86 not a day younger]

and Gina Lollobrigida. [93, though younger than the Queen]

"Maybe a couple of Raquel Welch [She scrubbed up well-ch http://i.pinimg.com/originals/b5/72/c0/b572c003ff2127987bfcd5dab13a67fd.jpg some years ago

and Brigitte Bardot [pretty good Then http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brigitte_Bardot

But Now?

Something about the French Mediterranean Sun didn't help: http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/10/28/article-2478566-01D175D9000004B0-278_640x618.jpg

She looks like a very bedraggled cat from "CATS" poor gal.
_____________________________________

mhaze (aka Crazy McHazy)

"test1 through to test4"?

These have gotta be The most intelligent, The most well argued and The most succinct 4 posts you've ever written. Well done!

mhaze did Mr O past the test?

plantagenet,

I only remember them from when I was a teenager and hubba hubba they were as hot as you can get them.

Do they make them like that any more?

Nowadays all the beautiful women are false boobs, false butts, inflated lips, pumped up cheeks, stretched skin . . . . . and when the surgery goes wrong they look like some hideous alien from a 1950s sci-fi movie.

Please don't tell me that's your sort of woman.

I stick with my memories thanks.

Hi Mopi

All in the eye of the beholder I reckon.

The idea of the most beautiful women being Latin Voluptuous existed in line with the the rise of Italian and French cinema. Resulting in:

- Italian (Loren and Lollobrigida)
- about 100% French (Brigitte Bardot though she was a bit more petite)
- half Bolivian Hispanic (Raquel Welch was born Jo Raquel Tejada)

Voluptuous beauty is now not as Latin with the near collapse of Italian and French cinema since the 60s.

Always Anglo-Big Curves in reserve thank God:

- Mae West
- Marilyn Monroe
- Angie Dickenson
- Pamela Anderson

- Dolly Parton (singing Jolene http://youtu.be/L0eeSoU35wM?t=50s)

- Madonna ( http://youtu.be/G333Is7VPOg )

Both my ex-Wives and numerous ex-Girlfriends have been/are Anglo, Dutch
or German Voluptuous.

Brains, class, but also quantity counts :)

[Deleted for abuse.]

PS. Mopi

Check the following out at http://www.intmath.com/blog/mathematics/is-she-beautiful-the-new-golden-ratio-4149

"Is she beautiful? The new Golden Ratio"

By Murray Bourne, 16 Feb 2010

Canadian and US researchers found there were certain facial proportions that made some women more beautiful than others.

In the SMH article Shania Twain more beautiful than Angelina Jolie? http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/beauty/shania-twain-more-beautiful-than-angelina-jolie-20091222-lb6h.html

CONCLUSION

While the above is interesting mathematically, I wouldn't take it too seriously...
_______________________

MY CONCLUSION

Character, brains and morality (eg. being a caring person) and NOT being concieted (as Shania Twain became) triumph over sheer looks any day.

PPS Mr Opinion

From your "You aren't by chance a member of the LNP Deviants Association?"

Clearly you're a brainless, unfunny, taker.

With nothing to contribute to OLO.

Have a nice life __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________(not).

"mhaze did Mr O past the test?"

Irrespective of what the test is, you can take it as a given that Mr O didn't pass it. That includes year 3 naplan.

I don't know if you've ever noticed, but Mr O and a few others are able to post more than the maximum 4 posts per thread in a 24hr period. I had a theory as to how that was happening and was testing it. My theory proved to be invalid. I have other theories which I'll test in a more surreptitious way.

[Deleted for abuse]

Hi mhaze,

"I don't know if you've ever noticed, but Mr O and a few others are able to post more than the maximum 4 posts per thread in a 24hr period"

This site does seem to do that at times, other times no, just a software bug I assume. What's your theory, not a conspiracy theory is it? Ha ha.

Paul1405,

Either

mhaze is just a troublemaker and looking to get rid of me because I have become a constant reminder that there are LNP deviants lurking in the shadows.

or

That or I'm really a Chinese agent who has hacked OLO and delivering subliminal messages aimed at setting up Australia for a takeover by Xi and the boyz in the CCP.

or

BOTH

Hi mhaze

The rules on posting frequency are Simple BUT can get Complex given 24 hour time limits.

For Article discussions:

"Maximum of 10 posts in any given 24 hour period.
No more than 4 posts per article in any given 24 hour period."
_________________

For General discussions:

"Maximum of 20 posts in any given 24 hour period.
No more than 8 posts per article in any given 24 hour period."
________________

I admit to occasional confusion when hitting the (no more comments for "xx hours") wall.

Especially when I'm commenting on (say) 2 Article discussions and 2 General discussions simultaneously in the same 24 hour period.

Regards

Pete