Well, it would seem that 'the mob' will have their day in court despite their hounding of the man which I for one thought may have prevented such an event from taking place. As always, I am happy to be proven wrong!

Now I ask the mob to make a clear and honest commitment, if they dare!

If and when this trial takes place, will the mob except the decision of the courts if the man is acquitted, either due to a non-trial due to insufficient evidence, or he is found not guilty of the crimes as accused?

In the event that he is acquitted, will the mob allow this man to resume a normal life without being heckled constantly?

I feel there is little gain to be had by going over old ground here so unless you are a poster who is prepared to 'move on' I would respectfully request that you reserve your comments for another thread.

Like you I am bothered by
• The mob intellect, willingness to dispense with the legal process based on irrationality.
• That the government is swayed by these empty vessels (intellectual, morally) that made the most sound.
• Most of all I am disgusted with the police not sanctioning that idiot that abused her profession’s integrity for what was a pathetic display. I worry that she may attend my house for some reason then God help me because I went public defending Fergusson’s right to the law.
Some people condemn me for my stance with calls of being UnAustralian. Strewth! sometimes I not sure I want to be a seen as a human,let alone an Australian.

She can have these views but showed clearly that she lacked the self control and reason expected as a police person. (She lived 14 k from where he was!).
One wonders what it says about us overseas especially when we get on our soap box and scream at other over human rights and the rule of law.
Where are all these ‘moral people when it comes to helping others? Say the 10k’s of children in Dafur

The main point is that the trial is to go ahead.

If conducted properly and Ferguson is proved innocent beyond a doubt (which I don't believe), he would best go for an ID change as he is too well known and many people would still find him repulsive as a neighbour.

To 'respectfully request' that adverse comments not be made is a bit rich after using inflammatory language by directing this post at 'the mob'. Maybe you could 'move on' from labelling those who oppose your views in this manner.

examinator, I missed what the 'idiot that abused her profession’s integrity ' did. What happened there? Can you point me to a link?

While I too have been bothered by the (media-fanned) hysterical 'mob' aspects of this case, I'm pleased that Ferguson will now answer to a court on these latest charges.

Having said that, I think that Austin Powerless demonstrates quite succinctly the ignorant 'mob' mentality that was responsible for the charges against him being set aside in the first place:

<< ...proved innocent beyond a doubt (which I don't believe) >>

Firstly, under Australian law a to be convicted for a crime a defendant must be found *guilty* beyond *reasonable* doubt, so Austin neatly reverses the onus of proof against this defendant. Powerless exacerbates the injustice by saying that s/he "doesn't believe" that Ferguson might be innocent (or rather, not guilty, which would be the finding if the charges are not proven).

On what basis can this prejudiced disbelief be formed, other than via sensationalist media reports? Is Austin Powerless privy to facts about the case that would reasonably lead him/her to believe the defendant to be guilty prior to the case being heard in court? For some reason, I "don't believe" that to be the case.

It is precisely this kind of literal prejudice that caused the charges against Ferguson to be set aside in the first place. I certainly hope that a jury can be found in Queensland that is of a better calibre than evident "mob" member Austin Powerless.

If we did not have such pathetically inadequate judges and laws we would not be having this discussion. How can any repeat child sex offender be given yet another chance to ruin more lives. The typical latte left are more interested in their own push on civil liberties than defending the lives of young kids. We saw the same people defending the right for artists photographing and publishing young kids nude in the name of 'art'. I did notice that OLO has been completely silent over the high profile artist who has been charged with molesting young kids. Had it been a member of the clergy we would of had another dozen posts by now.

To 'respectfully request' that adverse comments not be made is a bit rich after using inflammatory language by directing this post at 'the mob'. Maybe you could 'move on' from labelling those who oppose your views in this manner

Fair point AP, however I am not talking about adverse comments, however I will refrain from using these words again at your request.
Now having entered into this debate, how about you answer the questions that were followed by a clear message/request, they being(please don't go over old ground).

Finally, I am pleased that DF will face the music it is just that I do not pass judgment on someone without the facts and, if proven guilty I will be the first to oppose any future release for the man however, if acquitted I would also respect his rights as an innocent person. Can you?

How unsurprising that runner's a member of the mob.

rehctub makes a good point - what will the mob do if Ferguson's found not guilty? I understand that the case against him is quite weak, in evidentiary terms - but the mob have apparently decided he's guilty regardless of the evidence.

You don't have to be a member of the "latte left" to understand due process and the rule of law.

Good old CJ, you can always be trusted to make a stupid comment.

To state that I demonstrated "quite succinctly the ignorant 'mob' mentality" just because I expressed my belief that Ferguson was not innocent was typical of your bluster with no substance - as usual. I'm sure that I'm as 'privy to facts about the case ' as you are, and have based my belief on what I know. Just because you believe otherwise doesn't make me wrong. But there you go with your petty little jibes of 'mob' mentality and the like.
But that's just to be expected from someone whose debating skills consist of throwing silly insults and distorting other posters' on-line names for a cheap laugh. Then again, to oppose your views earns a label such as 'fruitloop'. What a distinguished debator!

rehctub, I can only speak for myself in that, if he was proven innocent beyond a doubt, I would have nothing else to say on the matter. My initial statement still stands that, if he was innocent, he would need an ID change as many people would never accept such a verdict. I can't speak for those others.

Austin Powerless - you most definitely display the 'mob' mentality in pre-judging Ferguson prior to the presentation of evidence against him. Apparently you are also unaware that it is impossible to be "proven innocent beyond a doubt" in an Australian court, where the onus is always upon the prosecution to prove *guilt* beyond *reasonable* doubt in criminal cases.

Or maybe you are just incapable of understanding the difference?

Hey Austin

En garde man - this is a set-up. The mob distracts you whilst nearing ever closer. They're over at "Marriage and Child abuse" lynching some poor bas*%@d named "Polycarp!"

Their Kangaroo Court has condemned him to summary execution.

Your next boy - flee while you're in one piece!

Austin Powerless
Wrong definition of the word 'abuse'

Consider what was her purpose in prefacing her absurd remarks with "I am a policewoman..."? Clearly she was hoping to trade on the authority of her being a member of the constabulary. Her opinion had nothing to do with the police. All she did was lessen the image of the police.

Then she screamed 'what am I going to tell my children" (both are under Five.) Good Grief as I parent of 4, I would never discuss those issues with a child that age simply because of their lack of understanding all that would do would be to frighten them.

In reality she is/was either a hysterical individual or someone who’s part of a campaign. She lives 14ks and her cerefully worded bit a couple of nights later on TV makes me favour an activist plant. As a police woman she could have access to more information on him and other “undesirables”. I’m NOT saying she did anything illegal but she is open to that sort of criticism.

The major issue wasn't if he got a trial it was the that the mob (with the help of the media and an MP stirring them all up for their own cynical reasons) sought to trash our legal system.

Keep in mind Ferguson was guarded 24/7 he didn’t have free reign. Paedophilia isn’t vectored by mosquitos or the wind.

Runner, Time for your pills……. The devil made me do it :-)

dickie: << En garde man - this is a set-up. The mob distracts you whilst nearing ever closer. They're over at "Marriage and Child abuse" lynching some poor bas*%@d named "Polycarp!" >>

Speaking of frootloops...

CJ, your greater knowledge of the legal system may be because you have been up in front of court officials while I haven't. I have a good idea what sort of charges you may have faced, considering who you are defending on this site. You should have stuck to playing in the dunny.
Again you bluster on about 'mobs' because I happen to have a differing opinion from yours. Ask yourself, what does the second 'O' stand for in 'OLO'? Is yours the only 'O' that should be expressed?

Dickie, I'm not too sure what you meant. If you mean they're coming to get me, I can't wait. I'll show them my collection of sharp things and things that go 'bang'. In self-defence, of course. Ha ha.

Examinator, the policewoman was out of order if she acted as you reported but the media was equally to blame by giving her air time.

Steady on, Austin - you've gone from displaying your ignorance to being downright offensive. How unsurprising that you have a "collection of sharp things and things that go 'bang'". You seem to be just the kind of boofhead who needs them.

CJ, that's a joke, you, of all people, calling me offensive.

The majority of your posts throw offensive remarks at posters who you disagree with. But we all know that that's your substitute for debate.

Psst Austin

Now you've done it - he's gawn orff sookin' though you're sure to find him on the "Naked Children" thread!

"Naked Children" thread eh? And why are we not surprised my dear Austin?

dickie: ""Naked Children" thread eh? And why are we not surprised my dear Austin?"

What a dirty-minded, disgusting piece of human trash you are. If you had a decent thought enter your head it'd run screaming.

Now poor old dickie's gone from being a sheep-hugging frootloop to acting as Mme La Farge for the mob. Of course, idiots like her and Powerless are exactly the reason that the current charges against Ferguson were stayed in the first place.

One hopes that the Queensland judicial system is robust enough to ensure that any prospective jurors of their ilk are rejected from deliberating on Ferguson's case.

Now now Antiseptic. Your ugly misogynistic vent has little to do with poor old dickie or even Mad Dog Morgs.

"What a dirty-minded, disgusting piece of human trash you are"

Ooh....you speak with forked tongue my friend.

"LOL. Have you stopped chatting up the choirboys? People will start to talk eventually, you know..." (Antiseptic)

What a "dirty-minded" self-righteous hypocrite you are Antiseptic and you with a VRO and all. Creepy!

Dear rehctub,

To me "a mob," is an emotionally aroused crowd
intent on violent or destructive action.
Their hostile outbursts posing a direct
challenge to social order and to
political authority. (I'm thinking of
the French Revolution, lynch mobs,
or the Ku Klux Klan).

And, being "a mob," as you state,
of course they are not going to accept
any court decision that will vindicate
Ferguson.

The question that should be asked is will
the man get a fair hearing with all the
media hype that's preceded this case?
How can he? And/or Does he deserve it?

Perhaps that's why this man was set free in
the first place.

The law does not guarantee that justice will be done.
The law is simply the law.
But " a mob," won't pay much attention to that.

Dickie:"Your ugly misogynistic vent"

Ugly? Yes Misogynistic? Not at all. I would have said the same regardless of the gender of the dirty-minded pervert that made the comment you did. I can hardly be held responsible for the fact that you're such a poor example of your gender.

Dickie:"What a "dirty-minded" self-righteous hypocrite you are Antiseptic"

Not I, Dickie, but you and your tiny-minded ilk. The quote you spent hours searching for from me was in response to a similar ad hominem attack on me. It was specifically and obviously ironic to those with an average IQ or better, so it's hardly surprising you missed it. Your own remark was a dirty-minded piece of innuendo with no other purpose than to try to poison the well.

As I said, you're a nasty, dirty-minded piece of crap, rarely producing anything other than mindless drivel.

My dear Antiseptic

And abuser of all things defenceless. You state: "The quote you spent hours searching for from me was in response to a similar ad hominem attack on me."

This is a typical cop-out of an abusive sicko who believes he can justify his own violent actions.

Incidentally, this is a public forum. Should I require information which is not on the public record, I would proceed in the normal manner for FOI.

Whatever information is volunteered on OLO is on the public record. In fact for dumbos like yourself, I guide you to the first icon under a poster's name which advises: "Find out more about this user."

"As I said, you're a nasty, dirty-minded piece of crap, rarely producing anything other than mindless drivel."

Oh dear. May I suggest then Antiseptic, that you refrain from debating with a "dirty-minded piece of crap?"

After all, I do not seek dialogue with you, nor have I ever instigated it. You are a scary creep who skulks around threads on paedophilia and animal welfare, intent on causing mischief.

And I care not for monsters who defend sadists. I care not for hypocrites like yourself who attack our justice system for slapping a violence restraining order on you. A justice system who saw fit to deny you access to your own children.

And the proof is in the pudding when one witnesses how you lose it. Reflect on your own vileness through your own sick language, Antiseptic. Like paedophiles, it's always someone elses fault eh!

You remain an abusive creep and a loser Antiseptic!

Yoo hoo... Austin. The mob's arrived man! Charmers eh?

Dickie: "A justice system who saw fit to deny you access to your own children."

Do try harder, dear. I had an INTERIM DVO applied with no evidence heard. The biased justice system denied my children the right to see their father for 7 months with no evidence.It's hardly surprising that a brainless twit such as you would see that as reasonable, given your empty-headed contributions here. Now off you go and see if you can find some paedophiles leafing through the KMart catalogue.

The level of discussion on this thread
has suddenly dropped way too low.

It's become too personal, and nasty.

This Forum is supposed to be about political
and social debate, not an attempt on
one-upmanship with vitriolic attacks.

Please stop it. You're adults, not
children.

All of you are better than this - and
are more than capable of making a point
without stooping to this kind of behaviour.

Foxy, wouldn't you counter a personal attack with more of the same? As for being nasty, some posters can't debate to save themselves and resort to abusive comments which only deserve abusive retorts.
I don't believe in turning the other cheek, rather hit back harder.

Dickie, if that's what I have to 'fear' from the mob arriving, I'm quaking in my GP boots...NOT!

Dear Austin,

Somebody has to take a rational, adult
stance, if the other party is behaving
like a child.

In this case - walk away.

I know what you're saying, Foxy, but shouldn't a naughty child be given a spanking?

Eeeeeeuuuuuuwwwwwww!

Dear Austin,

Naughty as he may be,
I'll leave the spanking
decision to his mummy.

However, in your case, I
did say that you were an
adult, not a child, but if
you want to be spanked -
that's an entirely different
scenario, one that's not
appropriate for me to answer
on this thread.