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!